Unless they retaliate with their private group shock troops.
Big groups are gonna have to up their game - start recruiting in all modes.
It's the future of gaming!
Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
- Status
Unless they retaliate with their private group shock troops.
Big groups are gonna have to up their game - start recruiting in all modes.
It's the future of gaming!
At home now, but a few posts back my sig is not there - though it is on the rest of my posts.
Very odd.
It will definitely get more interesting....particularly trying to recruit from the private modes for players to PvP with!
It's a paradigm shift! You have to go with flow, grab the low hanging fruit and get all your modes singing from the same hymn sheet!
It's an armchair General's wet dream. They send their PVP squadrons out to annihilate all opposition in open, the private group wings mow down NPCs with no mercy and the solo specialists grind the trade routes and/or smash NPCs - all marching in glorious unison to victory or death!
This was always the intent, for the side with the most players supporting to win. Go look at old posts and dev diaries if you doubt.
So, that isn't really news.
- - - Updated - - -
There's more to that (or at least it did so at the start).
The game is supposed to have two kinds of instances, the fixed ones (think stations) and the temporary ones (think supercruise). The fixed ones will really work the way you described, apart from the fact the PvP slider won't work on them; on the other hand, in places where PvP is supposed to be rare, the idea is to have brutally efficient police forces that will atomize any attacker with the power of a small sun.
For the temporary ones, they are supposed to have effective matchmaking, based on a number of variables: the PvP slider, the system the player is in (which might override the PvP slider), the latency the player is experiencing, the number of players and the ships they are in, the skill of the players, etc. The idea is that one-sided encounters should be fairly rare, with most encounters being evenly balanced.
Of course, that bit about PvP always being possible, with no way to opt out, is exactly why I disregard the very existence of official servers in SC. One way or another, no one will ever be able to attack me unless I'm actually looking for a fight; if the way to do that is by not playing multiplayer, so be it.
The original number was 64, with more tests to determine if they could bump that to a cool hundred, but I stopped following the development a long time ago. Sincerely, with no way to completely opt out of PvP, I couldn't care less for how SC's official servers will work.
One caveat, though: limiting the number of players in most encounters isn't just for performance reasons, but also because a too large furball becomes too confusing and frustrating. Dogfights tend to be more fun with a relatively small number of players; this, after all, is not EVE, where combat is slow and you pick your target by clicking on it.
And another reason: contrary to the early days of UO, players now have options. If a game forces the sheep to play with the wolves, the sheep will instead leave and find another game to play. Which is why so many games that attempted it crashed and burned, they underestimate how much many players hate having PvP forced on them.
To keep in tone with the rest of the post, I actually expect most Star Citizen players to not play in the official servers exactly due to that. And because mods will not be available on official servers. But I could be wrong, of course.
I agree - I'm being slightly tongue in cheek - it's probably the anticipation of forthcoming beer that's tipped me over the edge after a long stressful week!
But as far as I can see that is exactly how it's designed to work - I genuinely wonder which big group (even though they aren't supported in game as such) will make it happen and get people on board from all modes, it seems an obvious thing to do if you're big group minded - work with the game instead of trying to rail against it.
The Powers should be able to attract their own followers. There's a definite "guild" slant to this line of thinking that one group of players undo the work of another group of players. It's Powers against Powers, not group against group. We are all just pieces on their political chess board.
Last edited:
This would mean a total annihilation of these forums and all biased ideologies within them. Can't wait. 
I agree it will be guilds working for powers - not the other way around. It will be very interesting to see how this powers thing plays out.
Ref the guild thing we know they will carry on doing their thing regardless I'm just surprised that given the win at all costs attitude some of them have they don't seem to have adapted their methods to include all modes (perhaps some have..) - even if it seems fruitless from a non-guild point of view.
Last edited:
You can'tbullycontrolmanage people if you can'tattackthreateninteract with them.
but they will get bullied from us lol ;p would be fun to see 'guilds' get bullied
Last edited:
atak2
A
Such a wonderful example of a Solo/Group advocate behaviour. What a fantastic human being...
I refer you to the first 70 pages of the old thread, where open advocates behaved so badly, people quit the forums to never post again - down to the direct insults and personal attacks Open advocates got away with.
And as you're not paying attention, that is satire - something Dave and I both do. Again, something Open advocates did early on in the old thread.
Last edited:
Well it seems they've run out of ways to pick fault with the game, so anyone who defended the status quo becomes a target - just like in the old thread.
Wonder how long we will have to wait for the "I didn't serve in the [insert armed forces] for you to hide in Solo" statement to pop up.
Everyone that has been playing the BGS understands that they do not 'control' their system. Most have not really been playing these systems to 'win'...but to see how the system works by stating a goal and attempting to reach it. Which has had mixed reviews...with repairs and bug fixes it stands heads and shoulders over what was originally released.
Lugh was able to fight to free their system (their stated goal), Mikunn was able to expand theirs and enlist help to improve theirs. All these groups are aware of those that were working in private and accept this is a game play opportunity for everyone, although there is a discussion about the equity of these interactions, in very specific cases. For the war in Lugh, I personally tried to reach out to as many groups as possible, public and private to come to Lugh to play. Check these forums, reddit, ask players running groups, etc.
We all do realize that if people really start to play the BGS game, it will be very challenging to do what we've been doing from the start, as it becomes a true numbers game...IF the community (or another group) takes interest in the systems we are working in. As others point out, this might not occur, since so many just want to trade and pew pew and have no interest or care for factional control, etc. Powerplay should create an increased interest (there definitely has been an increase of players asking how things work)...but how this will impact established player groups remains to be seen.
atak2
A
lol, I refer you to the 10,000 page thread of Solo/Group advocates behaving badly so people quit the thread and never post again. Its not satire - its passive-aggressive insults.
I think that might be a teensy exaggeration
atak2
A
Read through the previous Solo Vs Open Vs Group thread that closed down because it had reached 10,000 pages.
- Status