This game is all about PvP?

[Ronald Speirs]

Like i said before all that need to be done is the PvP players flag up in ports and sail around and fight, dont have any hostile zones that may restrict PvE players from going on about their business, then over time the PvE player might gain more confidence to try PvP, so all they need to do if flag themselves and have a go, if they dont like it then they just unflag and go back to doing what they want, both PvE and PvP need each other and this seems like the most simple way to make it work, it may not be historical accurate but it will work best and keep both parties happy in my opinion.

[LeBoiteux]

I agree heartily, but you are asking fot a huge suite of new features and content. For something is ultimately more suited to a SP spinoff RPG than a simple PvE server.

I get it  .

[Bis18marck70]

Pve server IS happening.

Despite the fact that all real captains fought against real people, many have no interest in PVP whatsoever.

 

I am extremely dissappointed to hear this. On Feb.3 of this year, you said: 'We are not planning to dumb down the game. We don't have plans to cater to millions. We need to sell 100,000 copies and have 10000 live players to be happy, providing good income for dev team. We know that niche products can make good money (Porsche).'

 

Ironically, this was posted in a thread entitled: 'When does a game in development lose its way?'

 

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/3353-when-does-a-game-in-development-lose-its-way/?p=69017

 

It seems we have found that point in time where the game lost its way. During the past months this title was always emphasized to be a niche product for a dedicated community with PvP being an intregal part of the game. Yes, there was talk about no-fire zones and port immunity etc, but it was always portrayed to be pure on PvP-only. There were even ideas to close down the PvE Sea Trial options to make it clear to everyone that this game was to be PvP.

 

If someone bought the game expecting PvE-only option, I do wonder where they got that idea from. I have not heard of Naval Action ever advertizing it as such. If you didn't do your research and bought it anyway, then sorry, but your fault. I have always advised people to not get this game if you don't like the idea of PvP because thats what it was supposed to be.

 

That being said, it seems the carebears have gotten their wish and a PvE-only option is coming to the game. Not only is this going to split the community, not only is this going to split development resources, not only is this going to make it tough on you for have to care for two seperate parts in the same game, but to me it is also going back on your promises and vision.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

A fine point Mr. Bismarck, however, when your point is coming from a group that advertises its intent as:  "To sweep the sea of care bears", and who's members have been alleged as using large fleets of frigates to chase down smaller ships, perhaps you can see why some contingent of the player base wants to avoid other players with such attitudes?  I'm not saying you're right, I'm not saying they're wrong, but unless mechanics are in place to allow everyone, including new players, a way to have fun (in Eve, this would be highsec, where one can be griefed with some difficulty and with a cost to the griefer, but it's not the wild west of lowsec or 0.0 and provides a place for less PvP oriented players to have fun without being destroyed over and over by a player in a larger ship), you're likely going to see those players demand a "safer" environment to operate in - in this case a PvE server.

 

It seems to me that if you want to avoid a separate PvE server, ensuring newly added players have a chance to be picked on by ships their own size for a while is in your best interest??

[admin]

I am extremely dissappointed to hear this. On Feb.3 of this year, you said: 'We are not planning to dumb down the game. We don't have plans to cater to millions. We need to sell 100,000 copies and have 10000 live players to be happy, providing good income for dev team. We know that niche products can make good money (Porsche).'

 

Ironically, this was posted in a thread entitled: 'When does a game in development lose its way?'

 

http://forum.game-labs.net/index.php?/topic/3353-when-does-a-game-in-development-lose-its-way/?p=69017

 

It seems we have found that point in time where the game lost its way. During the past months this title was always emphasized to be a niche product for a dedicated community with PvP being an intregal part of the game. Yes, there was talk about no-fire zones and port immunity etc, but it was always portrayed to be pure on PvP-only. There were even ideas to close down the PvE Sea Trial options to make it clear to everyone that this game was to be PvP.

 

 

Open world server can only support 3000 concurrent players online (needs testing) and that means that there will be multiple servers anyway.

There is a difference between dumbing down and providing options in the rules of engagement. 

All the points in that post are still valid. In fact the game became harder with new ballistics and dm. 

 

If you want PVP get to Cristiansted and sink those Swedes at last (in 1.5 weeks)

[RAMJB]

I share Bismarck's views on the matter, I'm not that hard on the devs tho. I had my fair time of POTBS playing and I know how deep the problem is. Some players simply shit themselves to the idea of sailing in a sea where other players can tag and engage them. THey're mentally hardwired that way - they WONT play if there's even the chance of that happening (no matter how common it is, and no matter they can defend themselves by sailing in a group, or applying good evasive tactics).

 

I symphatize with the wish of the devs to keep audiences happy and to make the game desirable to that kind of player aswell. I know they want a game that can be enjoyed by everyone. However I think splitting servers is a wrong approach. Is much much better than the utter retardness that POTBS turned itself into to limit PVP, but still is bad for many reasons. There are many drawbacks to it and I'm sure the game as a whole will hurt if going that way is decided.

 

Sometimes if you want to make the game you're dreaming off you're going to push some people who want some different away - and there's nothing wrong with that. This game has always been described by the admins as one for a target audience. Let's keep it that way. Separate servers is not right IMO, but at least I'm glad is still not a done deal and that they are still thinking about it before taking any decision. Hopefully they decide to keep everything in the same server with no limits. Those who don't like that...well, there are a lot of games out there for them to play. Keep this one as it should be

[RAMJB]

Open world server can only support 3000 concurrent players online (needs testing) and that means that there will be multiple servers anyway.

 

 

Thing is that is not as easy as putting up different servers and getting done with it. I for one from a personal perspective won't care - as a PVP server player, I won't see a difference between a policy of "no pve" where I won't see any pve players, and a policy of "pvp and pvp servers" where I won't see any pve players either.

 

But there's more into it and that's where at least I'm worried. This separation produces a community division between players who play PVP and those who won't get out of PVE. That kind of thing is kinda bad as it induces a lot of difference of opinions on what and how should be the game like. You will have two different sides pulling different ways and angry with each other as a result. Not to mention that the issues that need to be solved will be different in the PVP servers than in the PVE servers. Some things will need fixing, some things will need being changed or tuned. Which ones are you going to prioritize and work in first?. Also, some things that work in one server might not work well in the other. Are you going to make rules different between them (potentially creating two different games within one with all the inherent consequences- and we all only need to look at War Thunder to see the kind of problems it produces), or are you going to keep them the same (bar for the PVP rules of engagement), thus creating intrinsic problems in one of the two gamemodes?.

 

Finally, you guys are a small team (and hopefully will remain this way as I think is the reason why the game is shaping so well). You will have a limited ammount of resources to attend to problems. Different type of servers will raise different problems and will multiplicate the issues that need to be adressed by a big factor. Will a small team like yours be able to keep those issues at check, and work on fixing the game at the same time as producing new content on the long run?. I for one I know how hard you work for this game but there's a limit on how much hours you put into work. I say go for the route that will create the less problems for you in the long run- and that one means one style of server only.

 

 

As I say I symphatize with what you try to do with that measure - I just see a lot of downsides with it and most of them related with the massive increase of workload for you guys, which might hurt the game development in the long term. I know you're still undecided on this matter, and I trust you to do whatever's better. If you think you can deal with different server types, then well ,so be it. But I personally don't think it's a good idea.

[Bis18marck70]

A fine point Mr. Bismarck, however, when your point is coming from a group that advertises its intent as:  "To sweep the sea of care bears", and who's members have been alleged as using large fleets of frigates to chase down smaller ships, perhaps you can see why some contingent of the player base wants to avoid other players with such attitudes?  I'm not saying you're right, I'm not saying they're wrong, but unless mechanics are in place to allow everyone, including new players, a way to have fun (in Eve, this would be highsec, where one can be griefed with some difficulty and with a cost to the griefer, but it's not the wild west of lowsec or 0.0 and provides a place for less PvP oriented players to have fun without being destroyed over and over by a player in a larger ship), you're likely going to see those players demand a "safer" environment to operate in - in this case a PvE server.

 

It seems to me that if you want to avoid a separate PvE server, ensuring newly added players have a chance to be picked on by ships their own size for a while is in your best interest??

 

I have no access to Sea Trials, but from what I hear [from all sides not just from 'mine'], is that everyone alleges the other one to do the exact same thing as one is alleged to do oneself. From how I percieve it reading through the forums and hearing from people, every group is doing the exact same thing but runs wild when it happens to themselves. It obviously shows that the game still needs improvement to cut down on various issues and that both sides might have to reconsider and think about their own actions before alleging anything.

 

But that is not the issue here.

 

The issue is that the game was advertized to be niche, a product for like-minded and dedicated people that have a passion for an immersive title with all the dangers that it holds. PvP was an integral part to that, indeed it was the basis of it all. Now it seems that this basis is being smashed ashunder.

 

Does PvP bring with it some complications? Sure. Will it ever be possible to cut back fully on people hunting down small ships in their monsterly beefed up vessels? No. Those are realities we knew from the start. The present build (from what I hear, read and see) needs some definite improvement. Improvement that comes from dedicated development. A development that now no longer is dedicated to a single gameplay option but two.

 

No one disputes that new players shouldn't be able to have fun. Neither me nor 'my group' nor any other group/player in the game. But a PvE server is not the answer. Contrary to that, it is a detriment. The PvP server needs to see substantional improvement and the implementation of some sort of 'easing into' so that new players can build up an understanding of the game. Many ideas have been propsoed for this. No-fire-zones around a single port per nation, no rewards for the capture of a vastly inferior player ship (provided the captain of said vessel is truly new), a tolerance period of 15 (example) days for new players inwhich they can't be targeted unless they aquire a ship beyond a certain rank etc etc.  Every option has its negativities but implementing a PvE only server is not the solution. A fracture along gamemodes in the community has been to the detriment of many a game.

 

Buttom line is this. The game was set up with a vision, a vision which we all shared and cherish. That vision is why we are here. Now if somewhere along the way someone bought the game because he/she saw a 'cool YT video' by a content creator who did not inform his audience in the slightest and now sits here realizing that the vision the game had is not for him, then I am sorry but why is it that the developers now have to cater to such a player? Let's be real: If I want to buy myself an mircowave, go into a shop and end up buying an oven that I didn't want, whose fault is that? The shop? My girlfriends? No, it is my own. Inform yourself when you buy the game and if you didn't and it doesn't turn out the way you hoped, blame yourself.

 

Edit: Typos, I am sure there are still a few in there

Edited May 13, 2015 by Bis18marck70

[StaleMemes]

~snip~

Pretty much sums up my opinion as well. It's not hard to read up on the forums and website a bit before purchasing the game.

 

 

Might I also add "War Thunder" as example of what can happen when you fragment your playerbase?

Edited May 13, 2015 by Capt Aerobane

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

Leaving particular groups out of it (I used the Rakers only because their introduction post so perfectly fit into my point), the game currently allows a group to shut down a newbie port by sitting outside with a large group.  That new player now can't undock without getting ganked, and that's a problem.

 

Sailing around in a Privateer, I came across many players in 5th rates and up that simply "ignored" me and sailed on their way. I wasn't worth their time.  Then there were some groups that reveled in chasing you down with 4 or 5 5th Rates or Larger - I've seen videos of them baying happily at their glorious kill.  

 

In the future, friendly fleets will be dragged in, and if they're plentiful and powerful in the newbie areas, that may mitigate this activity significantly.  For now, though, I think it behooves all groups to cut folks in far smaller ships some slack. If people who are less PvP oriented encounter enemy players in ships that are somewhat similar to theirs, in numbers that aren't overwhelming, and who don't make it a point to pursue them and then sit outside the port they are in for an hour or more, they'll be more inclined to play on a PvP server.  If instead groups take every opportunity to attack new players who have zero chance of winning against them or evading them near their home ports and make their lives miserable, you're going to see these folks demand a PvE server and flee to it at their first opportunity.

[Kaos]

It's a sandbox. There are no classes. There will be no privateer fleet or a pirate fleet. It's just a player fleet. 

Because it's a sandbox you can go out and show them who is the boss if they are sailing ships you don't think they should be sailing.

 

Hunt them, sink them, burn their cities and hear lamentations of their women

[DeRuyter]

Pretty much sums up my opinion as well. It's not hard to read up on the forums and website a bit before purchasing the game.

 

 

Might I also add "War Thunder" as example of what can happen when you fragment your playerbase?

That's a different issue. WT is all PVP (with bots added in) and the fragmenting is over the different game modes. For me I don't usually have a problem with waiting an extra minute or two for a Sim or Realistic battle. I've been on WT lately b/c I am far away from unlocking the Santi!!

As a player new to MMOs I am looking for PVP, I mean for PVE I'll just play a different game entirely, like Ultimate General Gettysburg of course, or for a like comparison Sid Meir's Pirates.

I have read up on the forums about griefing, ganking and all those things, one reason why I have joined TDA, but to the point I can see how as Mr. Darby said it would be off-putting to new players to be unable to leave their home port due to some unsavory stat-padding characters!

Bottom line my choice would be to work on this problem and not have a separate PVE only server, just multiple PVP servers.

[MikedaBike]

Hmmm i just sent payment for a game called Naval action, now you are telling me it may have a server called trading book keeping?? I appreciate it is Alpha and things change but i just parted with cash based on all info available and that was an OW where pvp was a risk you took to do what ever else you wanted. You cannot please all of the people all of the time, but if you keep those who have passion for your passion (don't lose sight of that) you will have a better OW in the long run.

I hope you think very hard about where you take us, a few storms along the way is ok, but splitting a community that at present is mostly pulling together bound by the belief in the game (which now seems to be changing) may not be the best way to go.

[Kaos]

Leaving particular groups out of it (I used the Rakers only because their introduction post so perfectly fit into my point), the game currently allows a group to shut down a newbie port by sitting outside with a large group.  That new player now can't undock without getting ganked, and that's a problem.

 

Sailing around in a Privateer, I came across many players in 5th rates and up that simply "ignored" me and sailed on their way. I wasn't worth their time.  Then there were some groups that reveled in chasing you down with 4 or 5 5th Rates or Larger - I've seen videos of them baying happily at their glorious kill.  

 

In the future, friendly fleets will be dragged in, and if they're plentiful and powerful in the newbie areas, that may mitigate this activity significantly.  For now, though, I think it behooves all groups to cut folks in far smaller ships some slack. If people who are less PvP oriented encounter enemy players in ships that are somewhat similar to theirs, in numbers that aren't overwhelming, and who don't make it a point to pursue them and then sit outside the port they are in for an hour or more, they'll be more inclined to play on a PvP server.  If instead groups take every opportunity to attack new players who have zero chance of winning against them or evading them near their home ports and make their lives miserable, you're going to see these folks demand a PvE server and flee to it at their first opportunity.

 

 

There are no newbie areas

[admin]

 

Might I also add "War Thunder" as example of what can happen when you fragment your playerbase?

 

WT is a lobby based free to play shooter - which ultimate goal is to make you pay to suffer less. 

WT uses different physics on different game modes. Which does not happen in Naval Action.

 

 

Buttom line is this. The game was set up with a vision, a vision which we all shared and cherish. That vision is why we are here. 

 

The game was set up with the vision to provide authentic Age of Sail experience. 

 

This separation produces a community division between players who play PVP and those who won't get out of PVE. That kind of thing is kinda bad as it induces a lot of difference of opinions on what and how should be the game like. You will have two different sides pulling different ways and angry with each other as a result. Not to mention that the issues that need to be solved will be different in the PVP servers than in the PVE servers. Some things will need fixing, some things will need being changed or tuned. Which ones are you going to prioritize and work in first?. Also, some things that work in one server might not work well in the other. Are you going to make rules different between them (potentially creating two different games within one with all the inherent consequences- and we all only need to look at War Thunder to see the kind of problems it produces), or are you going to keep them the same (bar for the PVP rules of engagement), thus creating intrinsic problems in one of the two gamemodes?.

 

 

You are referring to non-existent issues. Lets clarify which things would need fixing or tuned etc.

If PVE server happens it will be exactly the same as existing one with one difference. You can't attack other players. 

 

We don't see audience getting fragmented. There are players who don't play PVP games and there are players who only want to play PVP games. They don't mix and will never find compromise - searching for common ground between them or something is actually going against the vision. 

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

Hmmm i just sent payment for a game called Naval action, now you are telling me it may have a server called trading book keeping?? I appreciate it is Alpha and things change but i just parted with cash based on all info available and that was an OW where pvp was a risk you took to do what ever else you wanted. You cannot please all of the people all of the time, but if you keep those who have passion for your passion (don't lose sight of that) you will have a better OW in the long run.

I hope you think very hard about where you take us, a few storms along the way is ok, but splitting a community that at present is mostly pulling together bound by the belief in the game (which now seems to be changing) may not be the best way to go.

 

I'm not sure why it matters so long as you can't transfer characters or assets between the two modes?  If those people don't want to deal with players attacking them, and they wouldn't have played in a PvP only game anyways, providing them a place where they can have fun doesn't cost you anything, and in fact, adds revenue to Game Labs to support and improve the game.  It's not like they're harming you by being on a PvE server or impacting your play in any way.  

 

 

 

 

Fine, but you'll need to spread out where new players first appear in the world so as to prevent the loss of every new player due to a bunch of guys that like to sit outside their port all day making it impossible for them to advance.    There's a giant hole here that may sound fun to you sir, but that will most assuredly reduce the number of people who play the game regularly.

[admin]

 OW where pvp was a risk you took to do what ever else you wanted. 

 

 

Yes it is like that on the Open world that is being tested. 

[nornica]

WoW, separate PVE servers?? Waat?

Thats the worst idea I've read on this forum.
The map is sooo big that if somebody want to do only PVE he will find his calm place.
I'm thinking if all this PVE nonsence went live after few topics about getting rekt on OW by attackers. It will be like playing against bots on Sea Trials.
I'm not good PVP player, but I still think that such thing is bad, baaad. Spliting community as some people already wrote it. Whats with all that protection options? About hiring friendly ships to be your bodyguards while you sail to some destination?
It will rip game from all the thrill, of suprise attacks, running away, fighting for life.
Damn, even playing as a trader will became simply boring.
3000 players limit? Okai, but we could at least populate one server to half.

You want to avoid PVP? Maybe you should not sail on the most obvious sail routes full of farming ships?

And this:
"the only difference will be in the rules of engagement."
What does it means? That player can attack another player when only two agree about it, they have the same ships, and same number of friend joining a battle? If You allow any pvp in PVE server it will be tragic option for PVP servers.
If you allow switching servers during play it will be not fair for full time PVP server players.
You want to play on PVE server? Then You wont do any PVP at all.

There was so much talking about not making this game a COD, it was suppose to be a Sea Dark Souls. And now we get an Easy Difficulty option? I dont remember Difficulty option in Dark Souls and yet people still play it. It's like all those people crying about Invasions in DkS.
PVP is a part of this game, get over it.
And no, new shooting mechanic is not more difficult, It's just new. I would even say it is easier by some aspects.

Raping new players? Give an option to chose a starting port.
Seriously I could spend few days sailing around some parts of a map, killing bots, and didnt see a single player.

Sorry for my little anger, it went with information on long Server Off. ;d

[Snoopy]

As long as game mechanics allow it "douchebaggery" is going to happen.

Nothing wrong with that. If "rakish" behaviour gets your blood boiling enough to cause a reaction it promotes PvP and that is a good thing for a PvP environment, yes?

To believe restraint and respite from "honourable" PvPers would be a solution for the PvE crowd is wrong, however. They just don't want to have any part in it.

[Bis18marck70]

Leaving particular groups out of it (I used the Rakers only because their introduction post so perfectly fit into my point), the game currently allows a group to shut down a newbie port by sitting outside with a large group.  That new player now can't undock without getting ganked, and that's a problem.

 

Sailing around in a Privateer, I came across many players in 5th rates and up that simply "ignored" me and sailed on their way. I wasn't worth their time.  Then there were some groups that reveled in chasing you down with 4 or 5 5th Rates or Larger - I've seen videos of them baying happily at their glorious kill.  

 

In the future, friendly fleets will be dragged in, and if they're plentiful and powerful in the newbie areas, that may mitigate this activity significantly.  For now, though, I think it behooves all groups to cut folks in far smaller ships some slack. If people who are less PvP oriented encounter enemy players in ships that are somewhat similar to theirs, in numbers that aren't overwhelming, and who don't make it a point to pursue them and then sit outside the port they are in for an hour or more, they'll be more inclined to play on a PvP server.  If instead groups take every opportunity to act like jerks, you're going to see these folks demand a PvE server and flee to it at their first opportunity.

 

The problem of ganking is not a PvE/PvP issue but a gameplay issue. Yes, PvP allows it but only if the gameplay is designed in such a way as to reward it. This reward is what actively pushes players to gank upon smaller vessels piloted by new players. Take that reward out (as an example), and you will see a stark decline in players actually caring about a litte Schooner of their larboard bow. Also, the small player numbers at the moment encourage you to sail with friends (so you actually see stuff) and to go to the places that yield the highest chances of finding some enemy. This you correctly point out. Higher player numbers will alleviate the problem.

 

Sure, it will not do away with it. For that, the gameplay needs to be set up properly (and this early in OW, I understand why things don't work perfectly). As examples, you can implement a grace period for new captains (let's say 2 weeks in which they are PvE only [on the PvP server] and cannot be targeted by other players unless they target one themselves, chosing to voluntarily rid themselves of their grace period or upgrade to a ship of a certain rank). Or you dimish the reward for taking a vastly inferior ship to next to nothing (or indeed, nothing). Or you chose to make any other adjustment to gameplay that you come up with.

 

All in all, there will always be cabin boys that seek out to troll and grief. But you will have those in PvE too, players that join a battle firing at team mates for the fun or it or ramming into them. Players like that exist and they always will. But for the majority of players, 'dishonourable' behaviour is only enticing because it is rewarded. Take that reward out, and a player who choses to run a small little vessel between ports will hardly ever be bothered unless he runs into a 'somewhat-similar' small vessel making, maybe, not for a fully fair fight, but one that is not lost before it started.

 

Take War Thunder for example.

If I were to kill someone on the runway, I get the same reward as I would when I shoot him down in the sky. That is why some players actively dive on landed enemies instead of engaging the bandit in the sky because its the easy way to get a reward. If the WT developers chose to take out a 'kill reward' as soon as a plane touches the ground, 90% of the players would no longer prioritize this landed plane. It doesn't mean that everyone would stop doing it, but the overwhelming majority will.

 

How the gameplay is designed ultimately influences how most players play it. A game that actively rewards spawn camping (example: Heroes and Generals) will have a tremendous amount of spawncamping. A game that rewards players for hunting down inferior enemies instead of something of their own size, will see a lot of players doing this. You can give new players (and those that wish to be largely left alone) a huge break of it all by designing the game in the right way while at all times keeping the core basis PvP as it was envisioned to be. The players can adapt to it and adopt strategies to 'mask' themselves from enemy player squadrons, either by making themselves not seem worth the trouble or sail in highly protected waters. Doesn't mean they will never run into trouble, but it will reward them for smart play and careful risk-analysis.

 

 

Off-topic:

New players =/= Carebears.

Edited May 13, 2015 by Bis18marck70

[LeBoiteux]

Come on, PVP server fans, don't be scared. I'm sure Devs will take care of you. 

In each forum of any MMO game, you can read terrified posts from this or that group of players after any devs' announcement. 

These players speak of promises, vision, limited amount of ressources or time and end of the world, if ever devs don't back off.

They try to lobby the devs with claims of catastrophism.

But I 'm sure that "Everything gonna be alright" 

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

*snip*

 

And there, you and I entirely agree sir!

[Kaos]

 

Fine, but you'll need to spread out where new players first appear in the world so as to prevent the loss of every new player due to a bunch of guys that like to sit outside their port all day making it impossible for them to advance.    There's a giant hole here that may sound fun to you sir, but that will most assuredly reduce the number of people who play the game regularly.

''making it impossible for them to advance...'' Can you clear up a bit around this or did you just pulled it out of your rear? I see you hear a lot of things and like to bring rakers and perhaps me as an example of a person who finds such activity fun but you should know better to not fall into such conclusions without any evidence, mr. moderator. 

I was talking about the nature of the game and it is amusing that the world is so big and yet you manage to stumble upon a mere handful of people.

[admin]

Why ganking is brought to this discussion? Attacking an enemy with overwhelming and/or organized force is working as in real life.

Get a friend, join a clan build a fleet, buy an escort, move to Mexico: multiple options exist, as a last resort you can almost always run. 

 

The question discussed is different.

There are players who have no interest whatsoever in pvp, but do want realistic age of sail experience - what we hear is that you guys want them to play windward, or ac4. That is not nice. They might upgrade or will want to try pvp some day.

[Adam Creutz]

This is only an idea I had: Maybe we could try to have something smiliar to GTA V online's passive mode. Where if you have that selected you cannot attack or be attacked. Just a thought.