Indeed Z, that will massively improve things (wings etc). Though atm its entirely feasible to call for help in a sector control change by posting here. Players may well want to try and band together to try and change it in the mean time. The simple fact is that its all there waiting for us, we just have to dive in.
Anarchy? Don't make me laugh.
- Thread starter DTAC
- Start date
Hey, I am working overtime getting my dear Federals up to speed
More seriously, for this kind of emergent playstyle to happen, we'll need two things. First, ownership of assets. Clans, guilds or whatever you want to call them actually owning a system or station(s) and governing it (them) as they very well please - with possible repercussions from our lords and masters should they step on some other factions toes. Second, plenty of players. That this game grows.
Imagine having player controlled federations of systems throwing their weight around... It'd be diplomacy on a galactic scale. Billions of credits won and lost. People in unison carving out a few systems not yet exploited for their own little multi-star kingdom. It'd be, nnngh, fantastic!
and this will never happen in this game... there will never be systems that are controlled by a group/clan like in eve.
mechanics like this were discarted by the devs long ago.
when i first flew into anarchy systems in beta, i had sweaty pawns, then i realized its no big deal. they are actualy no big difference to "normal" systems... sadly.
Yeah the clan / guild stuff and player owned systems isn't happening. Small wings are about the best you're going to get. The Elite franchise is at its core about 1 pilot vs the galaxy. The Anarchy systems can and should still be made more dangerous than they are, the Eve stuff isnt necessary for that.
There's currently four differences in Anarchy Nav point hunting compared to regular nav points
1. Factions will turn red now if you whack one of their own (This is new in 1.04, before the patch they turned red even if you whacked their wanted buddy, now they stay neutral or green)
2. You can loot the booty you come across. Slaves, Gold, Superconductors and all these mission items pay really well
3. That pair of revenge sidewinders won't even be worth the pittance assault bounty. They'll spawn clean and without any KWS bounties. God I hope FD does something about these, they're really annoying.
4. If you have a KWS bounty on yourself, bounty hunters will attack you and you won't get a reward for killing them whatsoever. So for Anarchy, never have a bounty anywhere.
1. Factions will turn red now if you whack one of their own (This is new in 1.04, before the patch they turned red even if you whacked their wanted buddy, now they stay neutral or green)
2. You can loot the booty you come across. Slaves, Gold, Superconductors and all these mission items pay really well
3. That pair of revenge sidewinders won't even be worth the pittance assault bounty. They'll spawn clean and without any KWS bounties. God I hope FD does something about these, they're really annoying.
4. If you have a KWS bounty on yourself, bounty hunters will attack you and you won't get a reward for killing them whatsoever. So for Anarchy, never have a bounty anywhere.
Last edited:
Local bounty in anarchy system is always clean as there is no one who would care to pay out bounties. Most ships in anarchy systems at the other hand have quite the nice bounty on their head elsewhere.
I still agree totally that anarchy systems should have a lot more dangerous people flying around.
The local criminal organisations don't like it when outsiders try to cut in on their business without paying their dues.
I've encountered the convoy where the 2 sidey escorts are clean (usually dangerous or better) and the transport is wanted. Attack the transport and you've got the 2 sideys all over you which isn't a lot of fun. I just tend to leave that alone now having been burnt by it a few times.
Deleted member 38366
D
-- Deleted --
Last edited by a moderator:
In elite Anarchy usually means that the system is normally in some state of civil war where there is no recognised government that has overall control (individual stations may be managed by different government factions though). It is still possible to have police fighters in these systems, however usually they will not respond to attacks made against players but are rather there just to enforce local station policies.
What I was laughing at was the alliance is "Pirate"....that was funny.
I know there is a lot of debate aver Anarchy....it gets boring debating it since some say it's complete chaos while others simply say it's a loose organization of individuals with no central authority.
Last edited:
From what I've seen I think FD have gone for Anarchy = "a lose organization of individuals with no central authority". In most cases it seems to be systems where there are severeal factions that are at war but none have overall control.
In farines this makes sense. It would seem to be logistically impossible for a populace in a state of government chaos to be able to build, run & maintain space stations. There must be some degree of organisation to support this, but in the case of Anarchic systems there simply isn't one single organisation that controls the system as a whole.
In farines this makes sense. It would seem to be logistically impossible for a populace in a state of government chaos to be able to build, run & maintain space stations. There must be some degree of organisation to support this, but in the case of Anarchic systems there simply isn't one single organisation that controls the system as a whole.
Last edited:
This isn't Galaga or some other arcade game lmao
I don't see how they could be much more dangerous, you carry cargo, you're likely to get interdicted. You are wanted somewhere you're going to get shot. You're not wanted anywhere? other players likely to shoot you anyway. So many people just want old timey arcade mechanics
The point is more that the game is big enough for there to be a spectrum between safe and suicidal (not that it is possible to die - it isn't, but you know what I mean), with everything in between, it would add to the game richness. At the moment the choice is really safe and mostly safe, with not much in-between.
"In the original Elite, the Anarchy systems were to be feared. The potential for profit was huge, but so was the danger. You'd need a strong ship, great piloting skills or a lot of luck just to make it to the station.....
Fast forward to 2015.... What happened with them in Elite: Dangerous?"
It got watered down.. A lot.
People used to embrace difficult games. Now in the era of aps people want something that they can click on and it does it all for them.
Fast forward to 2015.... What happened with them in Elite: Dangerous?"
It got watered down.. A lot.
People used to embrace difficult games. Now in the era of aps people want something that they can click on and it does it all for them.
It felt right in the first few days of gamma when you could not fly from the sun to your destination without fighting off three or four intidictions.
It should also work the same in highly secure space. Players with high bounties should be chased by the security forces. It comes back to that feeling that your actions should define how the game reacts to you. At the moment the consequences do not yet feel dangerous from NPC's at least.
It should also work the same in highly secure space. Players with high bounties should be chased by the security forces. It comes back to that feeling that your actions should define how the game reacts to you. At the moment the consequences do not yet feel dangerous from NPC's at least.
My impression of Anarchy systems is... it varies.
Anarchy isn't the same as anarchy. It basically means lawless. On earth, both columbia and greenland were lawless, but for VERY different reasons - in columbia the crime cartels took over and you could be killed for a chocolate bar or being slow to pay up for 'protection'. On greenland, there aren't anyone. And precious few want to be there, too.
Same in Elite - some anarchy systems are empty, some has several pirate outposts. Some even have a single federation/imperial/alliance base that actually manages to scare up some police craft. Guess which are the most dangerous to visit?
With that said, pirate systems could be more dangerous, I guess.
Anarchy isn't the same as anarchy. It basically means lawless. On earth, both columbia and greenland were lawless, but for VERY different reasons - in columbia the crime cartels took over and you could be killed for a chocolate bar or being slow to pay up for 'protection'. On greenland, there aren't anyone. And precious few want to be there, too.
Same in Elite - some anarchy systems are empty, some has several pirate outposts. Some even have a single federation/imperial/alliance base that actually manages to scare up some police craft. Guess which are the most dangerous to visit?
With that said, pirate systems could be more dangerous, I guess.
Spot on. It did feel good. All the upset players moaned then it all got easier.
When I get back from my honeymoon, I'll be buying an unarmed hauler, stripping it, painting 'all pirates are soft' on it and hauling gold around to see if it is at all dangerous out there still.
I think there should be scope for more npc piracy. Cargo scan on exit, chased through jump and interdicted at the end. Then cargo hatch shot off, or cargo lumper deployed.
Has anyone seen the npc scoop anything yet?
Last edited: