Unfair to people RP in a game they paid for then.
Last edited:
So you want to play in Open, eh?
- Thread starter Nonya
- Start date
Unfair to people RP in a game they paid for then.
Yeah luv it -(my Solo), never lets the code bother me.
It's pretty clear to me that the reference to "the opposition!" at the end of this week's dev update is FD happily validating the "terrorise the CG" playstyle.
The Hutton folk should've hired mercenaries to protect the system, instead of crying for the game's mechanics to be altered to deter legitimate PvP.
The Hutton folk should've hired mercenaries to protect the system, instead of crying for the game's mechanics to be altered to deter legitimate PvP.
It would only be the death knell for non consensual PVP in the galaxy.
Are you going on record as saying that non combats should welcome bad things at the hands of others even if that doesn't suit them to play victim?
Are there really no other games where the sole purpose is to virtually beat the crap out of others - or is it just beating the crap out of others who are outgunned/outnumbered that particularly appeals about Elite?
I agree. Open should be an anything goes environment. What it shouldn't be is anything goes in policed space, without meaningful consequences. Ideally, players in policed space should expect to be able to operate in reasonable (not complete) safety knowing that if some criminal scum comes by there'll be adequate repercussions for that criminal. Like only being able to dock in pirate outposts in anarchic space for example. Pirates (and murderers), once they are renowned (read 'have a sufficiently large bounty' or piratical reputation) should basically only be able to operate freely in anarchic space, with forays into policed space carrying considerable risk commensurate with their bounty level or criminal status. Essentially, policed space shoud be relatively safe for clean CMDRs, or those with minor infractions, MOST of the time - but if that clean CMDR ventures into anarchic space it should come with the same high level of risk that policed space should pose for criminals.
Nope...Not unfair, and lets face it you 'pretend', RP.
As JosiahD said (paraphrased), all of us can't have everything we want in this game....I think that's good.
Last edited:
"and lets face it you 'pretend', RP. "
Me? I have nothing to do with this. I think you are confused
And if you agree we cannot have what we want, then perhaps traders in open just cannot have it their way
Last edited:
Yes JosiahD. -One thing I don't understand; in the single player Elite game of 1984 vintage, I remember being aware of the (special danger) of traveling in anarchic space, and security forces being very active in 'hisec' space...My suspicion is Multiplayer makes awkward player demands if this were to be similarly implemented...?
But then again, I know nothing...perhaps it's just a coding problem, and/or not seen as (their) priority.
Last edited:
Interesting. I'm always in open and while I can see why some are annoyed by this Eve-esque style of play I can also see your point. You have an organised group and you'd like to use group tactics for some good old in game mischief. This doesn't particularly bother me. Like you said, if my only goal was to get into Hutton I could have a second go at it in Solo.
To be honest, I also agree the fix is in the developers hands.
My suggestion would be that no band of individuals (even when working together) should have the power to hold a piece of ground for very long. I'm originally from Brazil (Rio). Criminals will often do something called an "Arrastao" which sort of loosely translates into "Big Drag". The find a stretch of road (often a tunnel or highway with no nearby exits) and they block off the road front and back and make a "Sweep", robbing everyone in their cars. They also do this at the beach. Point is they have a limited timeframe until the police arrive in order to conduct their business. The same should be done here. NPC government forces should move in with overwhelming force (Perhaps even a battleship?) and force the operation to move aside or be destroyed. A well organised group (such as yours?) should still be able to cause mischief to your hearts content, just not indefinitely. I would also suggest "State Trooper" NPC's that would try and hunt you down if the bounty on you is high enough. None of this is meant to stop you, just raise the stakes. What do you think?
"and lets face it you 'pretend', RP. "
Me? I have nothing to do with this. I think you are confused
Ohh,..we all have it our way a fair amount of time; (all) players just won't get everything they want.
Interesting and highly amusing thread. Some interesting points made on both sides. I play in open exclusively and personally love the existence of groups like Code, Triadius, etc: they provide content for me - by far the most enjoyable and memorable moments I have had in the game has been going toe-to-toe with these guys. It's usually pretty friendly and respectful to and now quite a few of them on my friends list. Dogfighting other CMDRs is actually a pretty good way of making in-game friends.
So, I'm firmly on the pro PvP side - I play games for the challenge of it, and dogfighting real players is far more challenging (and thus rewarding for me) than predictable AI. However some good points have been made, particularly with regards to missing features that would better help traders/CG players coordinate, communicate and prepare. FD need to look at this closely and find a way to give these guys a bit more of a fighting chance.
That said, I'm confused about calls for a PvE mode. Can someone please explain to me the difference between an 'open PvE mode' and Mobius? Isn't that essentially the same thing?
So, I'm firmly on the pro PvP side - I play games for the challenge of it, and dogfighting real players is far more challenging (and thus rewarding for me) than predictable AI. However some good points have been made, particularly with regards to missing features that would better help traders/CG players coordinate, communicate and prepare. FD need to look at this closely and find a way to give these guys a bit more of a fighting chance.
That said, I'm confused about calls for a PvE mode. Can someone please explain to me the difference between an 'open PvE mode' and Mobius? Isn't that essentially the same thing?
Last edited:
Apparently some Code infiltrators got into Moebius and traumatised a lot of people. From what was said, it sounded terribly unpleasant and unsportsmanlike. They should respect their privacy.
Mobius is a user like you or I..and not a paid employee of FDev. He did set the group up to create a PVE environment for folks. Which makes this, at best a workaround, at worst...the exploitation of a player by the devs. If this is the way PVE is to be handled by the devs, they need to assign a GM to the Mobius group and let Mobius have a new account.
I understand that the entire galaxy cant be client / server and needs to be P2P but its a real shame that certain core systems and CG systems couldn't be actual server hosted to allow greater client connection numbers.
Last edited:
Ah, OK. So is it confirmed that Code players did this?
In Mobius are 1.3% of the players organized. MANY players even don't know that Mobius is even existing....
Just think that PvP was in groups and Open would be only PvE.
Guys, I repeat:
This is not an official Code response to the situation at Hutton, but a member of Code voicing his opinion, stop confusing the two.
This is not an official Code response to the situation at Hutton, but a member of Code voicing his opinion, stop confusing the two.
Last edited:
I love this idea, -it makes perfect rl/virtual sense, although I don't think 'the Codies' will like it very much;...you see due to their game play they already have to put up with more boredom than the rest of us.
By the way I'm repping you.
Last edited: