Poll regarding group policy.

[Wolf]

I'm on the fence regarding the bounty, I'm fine either way. It would take a lot to get a 100k bounty

It's surprisingly easy to rack up a +100K bounty. I got Interdicted by a System Authority Vessel with some Battle weapons for cargo. I'd already checked the System info and it didn't list them as prohibited and was an Independent system so didn't think it'd be a problem but ended up with a 500K bounty because of it.

^This. Happened to me, too. And any limit would be arbitrary anyway.

[Vikinger]

This is the votes from Sweden.

1 point goes to,,,,

Oh wrong..


Ive casted my vote and I have to tell the reason why I did the choices I did.

Can players on opposing factions attack each other in warzones/yes

Reason is, its after all I combat zone and it could be so that you need to dispose all targets to get a win.
This is the only area I think pvp should be allowed. You play for a faction and everyone els is enemy.
You choose if you want to participate in a conflict zone, its not necessary to do to be able to play the game.
But sometimes it can also be fun to do some pvp and I think a restricted zone would serve that purpose good.


Can players accept missions to attack another player/No

Any interaction that could cause another player problem, that is around pvp, should not be allowed outside a conflict zone. iam sure there is NPC that is also trying to bounty hunting and that's enough.

Can players attack another player with a bounty over 100,000 credits/No

Same as above. And to be greedy and attack another player is just silly.

Can Players Interdict another player/No

You never know the intention for an interdiction. And the player might be on a mission that is real narrow in time so an interdiction could make so the player miss the deadline and get a loads of fine and even get wanted status for carrying illegal goods.


Final Question: should this group take on the policy of absolute zero negative interaction with another player/No

I didn't quite understood this question but I voted No

[Barns]

Just cast my votes. Pretty simple for me, I want to play in a "pure" PvE group, that is, zero PvP of any sort under any circumstances. I can see that many think it'd be ok to attack players on the opposing side in a warzone - however I just dislike any PvP of any sort so this would preclude me from visiting a warzone and doing those missions other than in solo; thus not being able to co-op. Which I think would be a shame.

I can see the rules getting unwieldy and hard to police with potential grey areas quite easily unless it's 100% zero PvP at all. It's just a shame the game doesn't make it easy to achieve this; I've not really tried yet but how easy is it to mistakenly take on a player in a warzone in the heat of battle, or interdict one if you're being a (PvE) pirate - how obvious is it really just from blips on a sometimes crowded and fast-changing scanner? Lots of mistakes are going to be made, will we be zero tolerance first strike and you're out, or will it be nuanced in enforcement?

Regardless of the voting outcome and Mobius' final decision on policies, this group is still the next best thing to a proper PvE "All" group for me!

[CMDR_COENEN]

Can Players Interdict another player/No

Tough one. I voted "no", but I have a "but..." too.

I'm against interdicting another player because he has a bounty or some nice goods on board. Or even random interdiction because it's fun or you have nothing useful to do. On the other hand, I had one encounter with a fellow group player floating around a station and we had a chat on the new features of beta 3. He asked if he could try it out. So we agreed on a route and he would try to interdict and "shoot" me. The first interdiction I escaped, the second I didn't try to go away so he was successful and had "parked" in front of me (and told me to surrender or die so I offered him a hamburger ). We had some fun and that was it. I picked up some cargo and went on doing my own business. In this case I would not see any harm.

[Skywatcher]

I joined the group because it's PvE oriented, meaning to me that anything hostile towards another player is considered pvp for me. I'm fine interacting with players, like grouping and working together in a co-op experience, but that's all.

Totally agree with that.

[Cmdr A von Uberwald]

More people need to vote on this please.

[Wolf]

Extended the voting period one week until Sunday 30th 1:00 am GMT(UTC) to give more members the chance to vote.
So, please vote!

[Nomadski]

I think most of the options are a no brainer for a PvE group. All bar the conflict zone option. That's a definite grey area that needs to be clarified one way or the other.

My personal take is it should be free for all. If I jump into a warzone and I don't notice another player, and join one of the factions, then spot another player as red it's a bit of a strange situation. One of us would either have to jump out and back in again, ignore each other (tentative gameplay if the other person hasn't read the rules) or we fight.

The default standpoint from within the gamerules is we fight, the default logical standpoint from a PvE viewpoint is we ignore or we jump out and back in again.

We may end up with a lot of threads about so & so attacking another player within one of these conflict zones, or events as they appear.

It's tricky, but I would personally think we go with the default in game concept of what a warzone is - try and pick the same faction, but failing that, fight.

Having said that, I will be aware of the rules as and when they get clarified, and if its standoff, I'm cool with that - so long as its clearly stated as a rule within the group.

[Jockgit64]

I think if you feel the need for a scrap in a warzone, against real people and not just AI, you could always start the game in "Open", no need to do it in the Mobius Group Server.

If, however, you just want a bit of a "training skirmish" with a friend, that can be done in any bit of empty space as long as it's between 2 concenting adults....

[Amatyr]

The warzone question is a hard one. I think that I would like it to be discouraged, but also accepted that accidents can happen in warzones because if two commanders are on opposing sides you could easily end up in the fight against each other even with best intentions.

Which means you can't easily ban it. Every other possible PvP action is a lot more avoidable.