And that's the key point. If you won't defend your possesion and openly state you don't care if it goes you lose the right to complain when it's taken away.
Great New Article About Elite Dangerous
- Thread starter Brimstone
- Start date
- Status
And that's the key point. If you won't defend your possesion and openly state you don't care if it goes you lose the right to complain when it's taken away.
I have pleanty of empathy, but it's in limited supply for people who get emotionally charged up over losing a space ship in a video game where combat is heavily advertised. Have you seen all of the advertisements for Elite? It's pew-pew city.
Your life shouldn't hinge on your video game assets. There is absolutely no direct connection between your real life and what you have in the video game aside from time invested.
Sure, you can be emotionally tied to the accomplishment of these things, but if it goes beyond that, then perhaps you need some type of help.
To be perfectly honest, I used to be like that for a period of time. Life was pretty crappy and I'd gotten deep into video games. Then one day I woke up and realized it was just silly, then I saw people talking like this on silly video game forums and I thought, " Wow, that's just so completely silly. I can't believe I used to be like that."
You are totally besides the point.
See their abandoning of Wolfberg as a "sit-in",
stating they won't work to keep it, if it can be attacked/harassed/affected
by players they cannot counter by oppositional forces(Solo/PG).
I think it should rather be referenced to as a demonstration against the influence of solo/PG into the open
BGS.
Last edited:
That's pretty much the main problem with PvP at the moment - it has no impact on any of the BGS and such. Aside for pew-pewing other people it serves no purpose. How to make it meaningful though without too much rejiggling everything else while at it?
Last edited:
That is not the only problem with the BGS.
I can totally understand the point of people abandoning playing the BGS in open,
stating they cannot counter solo and pg influence.
Yet to fix this issue it is a rather grim choice in my opinion:
Either split galaxies apart (open // solo // pg) resulting in a total desync of every CMDRS work regarding the BGS,
and resulting especially in a big problematic galnet wise, since posts there have to be stated to which "galaxy" they are tied.
I rather not like this.
Or you find suitable tie-ins for PvP into the BGS as you stated,
that however is a lot of work and will require some very good designs.
I like this because this will spice up a lot in the general sense of gameplay.
Or the social behaviour just changes and everybody turns nice,
and nothing ever again will happen without being staged,
equalizing the effect of solo/pg/open just by staging the events and regulating player participation.
ED allows piracy and murder, but the consequences of those actions amount to little more than a slap on the wrist, particularly if you are winged up in a decent ship. In the real world pirates were chased down and killed or imprisoned ending their piracy for ever. In ED even if you die, you just re-spawn in, so death is just a matter of credits and if you have plenty of credits its of little impact. I also have little sympathy with traders who maximise their cargo and fly without shields. Personally I would add a pilot federation ranking. Committing murder and piracy lowers your ranking, the severity of the penalty based on whether its piracy/murder and the differential in commander rankings/wings and ships involved. As the ranking lowers the consequences become more severe. eg Unable to dock at stations/outposts/wanted status carrying across systems. Opportunity to raise ranking via missions to include destroying low ranked pilot federation players.
Goose4291
Banned
Well that's not true PvP has an effect on the BGS but in a roundabout way.
Let's say for example you're backing faction A in a war and I'm backing faction B. We're in the same CZ and have both accrued the same number of combat bonds.
I kill you then head home to hand my bonds in, thereby limiting your impact on the BGS by stopping you handing bonds in to improve your factions influence whilst improving my factions influence with my own bonds
Let's say for example you're backing faction A in a war and I'm backing faction B. We're in the same CZ and have both accrued the same number of combat bonds.
I kill you then head home to hand my bonds in, thereby limiting your impact on the BGS by stopping you handing bonds in to improve your factions influence whilst improving my factions influence with my own bonds
There is that, indeed. But I'd like to see PvP having a bit more profound effect than what it has/lacks at the moment.
Something that occured to me.yesterday was that an open PvE mode might be the closest thing they can get to actually solving the combat logging issue, because how can one combat log against a player if PvE isn't allowed? Therefore all quits (in that mode) would be legal.
Of course that's just me playing devil's advocate.
People also combat log against NPC's. It's depressing.
While that is true,
it is bad design.
This way every effective and meaningful means to use
PvP to affect the BGS leaves a sour taste.
If there just could be group or fleet battles affecting the BGS with their results
we are a quantum leap ahead of the grim medieval gameplay times we now have.
Well there are some edge cases where PvP against a clean player helps the faction you are supporting - for example when you are trying to lower the influence of your faction to match with another faction to start a conflict for other stations.
I do think PvP in Open should count more towards your goals, more then any other scenario in PP - not sure if or how you could map the same concept onto the BGS. I think this would help the PvPer player groups in PP. I am not convinced that changing PP or even BGS would change the behavior of SDC or those like them. Better they just go forth and multiply in another game (not SC, I bought that!).
Simon
I do think PvP in Open should count more towards your goals, more then any other scenario in PP - not sure if or how you could map the same concept onto the BGS. I think this would help the PvPer player groups in PP. I am not convinced that changing PP or even BGS would change the behavior of SDC or those like them. Better they just go forth and multiply in another game (not SC, I bought that!).
Simon
You know perfectly we weren't talking about video game losses. Stop playing the innocent, it doesn't fit you.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Oh well, tough. That's not the way the game works and we've known that since the kickstarter. Learn to pick your battles.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
I don't think anyone said pvp had NO effect, we've been careful to say "close to zero" to make allowances for incredibly indirect stretches of imagination like this.
Goose4291
Banned
Yep totally agree with you and Mirfanar on this, however we can only play with the toys we have at present.
Actually, it is the issue. Those that are saying that playing the BGS in open is broken because you can not counter those playing in solo/group are wrong. If you play the BGS in open, you have exactly the same ability to affect the BGS as those in solo/group. It is EXACTLY the same for everyone.
The one thing you can not do, an any of the modes, is effectively counter the BGS by shooting at people and that is because the BGS is not particularly affected by people shooting at people.
What some people seem to be complaining about is not what they actually mean. They seem to be saying they want a gameplay that allows them to use weapons to protect assets that they own which, if it were possible at all, WOULD be adversely affected by people just jumping into solo.
I have no problem with people wanting this but I play Elite, partly because it doesn't allow it. There are many games that do for those that like that kind of thing.
Well it did turn out for them didn't it?
Publicity? Check
Storm of Arguments? Check
The way the game works is unnecessary for posting a statement,
on what is wrong with the game now.
I'd say they picked a fight, knowing they cannot win,
yet they raised a lot of heat.
Fair enough, but please consider that opposing BGS processes even with a feature allowing combat and player destruction,
wouldn't necessary get into shooting only.
It would also include the possibility of threatening to engage, preparing to mobilize a strikeforce etc.
To be fair i cannot emphasize on people solely tying PvP to "kill players",
picking fights, preparation, knowledge of terrain and contacts/backup also are a part of the competitive nature.
The lack of severe punishments for death, ease of flight from combat and lack of RPing your pilot
simply cater to the big "pew-pew", other than having pilot fly like his life would be endangered.
I'd go so far as that the picture of PvP is quite a prejudice.
Last edited:
See, this is a complete misrepresentation. The ONLY way you can counter BGS gameplay is with BGS gameplay... in short PvE. The ONLY thing that having BGS players in open does is allow you to shoot.them which has close to ZERO bgs impact in the long run. "We can't counter BGS in solo/group" actually means "we have no intereset in BGS play, we just want to shoot players and we think if we can stop them enjoying being in solo/group they'll come to open so we can shoot them".
If you want to counter BGS play you HAVE to do PvE, and it makes no difference which mode you're in.
All player factions have a single home system to start with and this system cannot be captured. If they want to expand they have to play open, once open is elected for the player group they cannot go back to solo until they only own their home system. ie system conquest only occurs in open. Solo player factions influence in systems is capped at say twenty percent.
I think you'll find that they wanted a faction for their egos, but had no intention of actually playing it, and.quite probably no real knowledge of how the BGS even works or interest in finding out. I doubt it even occured to them that it could be taken off them, and when they realised they were left with no way to save face wuthout going back on everything they'd said and so decided to cut their losses and put in a huge effort to convince people that they didn't care. In fact they tried so hard to convince us of it that they got a whole thread closed down.
They don't play this game. They're not interested in the game or the community. Not in PvP or pve.
That's all just excuses for their weird little agenda. All that blaming the game and FD and whatnot .. bla bla
- Status