You and everyone else, including the coders. Next stage will be to allow PvP combat, and they want to make sure there are as few bugs as possible before complaints about loosing characters erupt.
As for ship v ship combat, that will be a fair while away. Couple of years most likely.
I assume it is meant that once creature combat and all associated features are properly tested including implementation of most items etc. Then next step is PvP. Really hope it is not intended to jump from todays creature combat to PvP.
"and they want to make sure there are as few bugs as possible before complaints about loosing characters erupt"
If it is pvp people are going to complain about their character loss anyway......
PvP =Player verses Player
Its not pvp now and there are alot of innocent people killed(and told not to complain),especially when the victem doesnt have the ability to A/E anyone.
Im not really understanding the whole logic in the statement made when compared to how it works now
PvV=Player verses Victem
There is losing your character because you picked the wrong fight, and then there is losing your character because a bug prevented you from returning fire/moving away/boarding a ship/etc. One of those is good, one of them is bad.
"There is losing your character because you picked the wrong fight, and then there is losing your character because a bug prevented you from returning fire/moving away/boarding a ship/etc. One of those is good, one of them is bad."
I see what you are trying to say for PvP.But in comparison to how SWC has it set now that makes no scince.
In PvP the players are fighting sounds fair if you get killed trying to escape or miss fire.
If your referinsing this "There is losing your character because you picked the wrong fight," for the system you got now A/E,(PvV) then you poorly judge the fact that more player that havent done crap get killed then those that pick the fight or cause lots of mischief,and then the victim is told to be quite your breakin ic rules.
It Honostly sounds like padding,taking something that is not so fair now and adjusting so that the would be winner form this system has away to get away from someone that would be at a disadvantage at this system but has a chance to fight back in the other system.
Example
Now Security guy comes aboard pilots ship (with/without a reason)and fails an A/E..Pilots response????all that is available is the pilot can run..
PvP System
Security guy comes aboard ship (with/without reason) and fails A/E and waits for cool down..Pilots response combat or run,,,,,,,
sounds like your giving the original guy (security) an easy way out of combat if he picked the wrong fight
I hope what I said makes scince.
Just from personal experience on this game thats what it sounds like.
Well, one could always hope, that they balance weapons, implement armour etc. before moving onto PvP.
PvP is the next logical step from a completed PvC, but PvC is by no means complete yet - the poor buggers should be able to fight back, which might need to wait for tiny details such as armour to be implemented...
I have no idea what you are trying to say Ray, and I feel that it likely has no effect on the argument.
Dying because you entered a combat, or a combat zone, aware of the consequences is fine. Dying because a bug caused you to enter such an area against your will, or modifying the rules of combat such that though you would of won or had a chance to escape you still died etc is not fine. I'm sure the ASims so not want to have to sift through hundreds of events and logs to check each person that cries foul of themselves dying just because there are potential bugs in the system.
Granted there will always be bugs, but clearing as much of them away now will alleviate things no end.