The Star Citizen Thread v5

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

dsmart

Banned
It's avoided simply due to the general suspicion we've had for a couple of decades that he googles himself every morning, finds his name, then completely takes over any thread in which he's mentioned. ;)

A "general suspicion" based on an urban legend doesn't make it fact.

Back in the day, just like present day, I only frequented specific forums where I am a member. I don't post anywhere else; other than on the occasional gaming news feed (e.g. PC Gamer, Polygon, RPS, IGN) if there is an interesting story (whether or not it's about me).

So it's a false narrative.

But God forbid that people on the Internet would be concerned about where and when someone posts; to the extent that they use it as a narrative.

FYI: You have heard of Google Alerts, right?
 
I just checked the script you are right, I was thinking of the "you'll not come back at all" line.

I blame Germans and their tasty nourishing wheat beer.

Amongst the best excuses :D

I love both films, but Krull has a particularly dear place in my heart as an underappreciated gem. Not many have dared scale that level of sci-fi fantasy since
 
Amongst the best excuses :D

I love both films, but Krull has a particularly dear place in my heart as an underappreciated gem. Not many have dared scale that level of sci-fi fantasy since

Hah - great film - reminds me of going to the video store to rent a video

Hmm, tonight I think I'll go for Sword and Scorcery!

Which in turn reminds me of this...

https://youtu.be/en5EBeHDdXA?t=44

(NSFW only if you watch from the start)

:D
 
I think lot of people, including devs at CIG, looks forward to see Crime And Punishment system FD works on in action. Because it is a bit of crux of such games as ED - at least of it's MP element - to see proper consequences of "jumping on" other players. If there's a bit of balance or path towards it, it is possible to carve out quite substantial Open universe where players don't have to switch between modes (unless they really just want to play PvE).

I really really hope it comes with 2.3. Would be nice important feature worth waiting for.

I think the key would ne

1.....meaningful consequences
2.....not locking "criminals out of the game"

By that I mean the consequences of griefing should be substantial and proportionate. A combateer going against a freighter risks a small fine; the trader stands to lose millions.

And that you can't lock players put of the game...instead, develop a criminal career path for them to exploit. Tortuga systems, titles and ranks, black market gear, criminal quests and missions for the local mob boss and more.

SC should develop such a system...as should Elite
 
Lysette Anthony was an early crush :)

Not even the right way around for me and I still would have taken the flame from her hand - proper fairytale stuff transcends all that.

I just love storytelling - sod the PU my interest was always Sq42 :/ Swashbuckling fun? In space? Sign me up! But it's never really panned out - I'm still waiting for that game.
 

It looks to me like that OP made some mistakes that didn't help himself. (quoting from Redthread):

I've been trying for hours to complete my first mission, a simple ICC probe mission.
I personally did that mission for the first time on Thursday night. It took about 15 minutes to succeed, not hours. So it sounds as if the player really isn't comfortable with game mechanics yet.

My first few deaths were to that Ninetails (NPC)
You don't have to engage any NPCs in that mission to succeed. Sneak to the probe slowly behind the asteroids. The NPCs are engaged in their own battle and will ignore you for a time. And again, see above.

Dying to griefing like that is just disheartening and turns people off to any game, especially one with controls as complicated as Star Citizen.
The PU is not where you go to get comfortable with the controls. That's exactly where you should NOT be. There are 6 other flight-related multiplayer modes, none of which require any insurance claims nor risk any credits. Some are co-op, some are free-for-all, etc.

If the overall goal is to bring more people into the game, I really think this (griefing) needs to be addressed so that new players don't have such an annoying obstacle preventing them from playing an otherwise fantastic looking game.
Again, see above. The PU is anything goes. If you want a "safer multiplayer space", those DO EXIST. Fly in those areas. Heck, there's even 3 different SOLO modes where you can learn to fly against NPCs, or just completely alone.

How are CIG going to deal with this sort of thing? Let it happen?

There is already a basic crime/rep system in place in SC - basically, it's like being a criminal @ Eravate (except you cannot jump from "Eravate"). Some stations will deny you landing, if you're wanted. NPCs will hunt you, and other players will as well. There's a station that doesn't care - just as in Elite (troublemakers in Eravate avoid Cleve Hub, but can dock at the other station with no problems.)

The part that I hope SC improves upon, is that the crime/rep will follow you around the entire galaxy. This is where Elite has completely dropped the ball. You can murder all night in Eravate, accrue a $700,000 bounty, then just use Neto as your home base and enjoy all the privileges of a clean record.

It's absurd. At times I believe that the reason Elite has NOT had a better Crime system is because it never occurred to DB that players would engage in so much PvP or crime - because HE doesn't like playing games like that. He just wants to fly around in his Asp and marvel at the sights, maybe trade a couple tons of Fruit on occasion. So perhaps he had a bit of a blind spot in this regard. Hopefully, this is changing very soon in Elite.

I think CIG is very aware of how other games have tried to succeed in this regard, or utterly failed, and if things go well then SC will find a decent balance there.

But there's one MP crime element that CIG (and Frontier) will never, never be able to solve: and that is, catering to player who just "want a relaxing night, doing some trucking" and can't deal with the reality of PvP-based losses. Nor should this problem be solved. That sort of gamer should just play some other game - I'd suggest finding one that doesn't feature loads of ships carrying loads of guns.
 
But there's one MP crime element that CIG (and Frontier) will never, never be able to solve: and that is, catering to player who just "want a relaxing night, doing some trucking" and can't deal with the reality of PvP-based losses. Nor should this problem be solved. That sort of gamer should just play some other game - I'd suggest finding one that doesn't feature loads of ships carrying loads of guns.

I don't know. It seems FDev has solved it: solo and group mode.
 
I don't know. It seems FDev has solved it: solo and group mode.

Yup, there are some problems with the system ED has in regards to group modes, and those are:

1) People who fly in Open who are not ready for PvP.

2) PvPers who don't like the fact that modes don't exist and therefore people can avoid them.

Both of those are people problems, not game problems.

Saying that, a better C&P system would be nice, but it will never solve the problem of the dedicated ganker, they will always find ways to have their fun. If a C&P system becomes too draconian, it will stop (let's call it valid) PvP. eg: Proper piracy, agreed upon PvP encounters, or conflict situations in line with the lore/game/RP.

From what I hear about SC's system, it sounds good so far on paper, although the gankers probably already have their plans about how to work around things.
 
I don't know. It seems FDev has solved it: solo and group mode.

It's solved it for some, and not for others. The problem FDev has with the multiple modes is that the BGS can be equally affected by both Open and Mobius (for example).

So if your goal in Elite is to flip a system (or stop a flip) - there are limits to what you can and can't do, in Open - because you cannot engage ALL the players making a dent in the CG from the safety of Private.

Heck, what was that one CG that ended in FDev invoking the "Hand of God", because the Open players resorted to UA bombing in order to counter Mobius? Which perfectly illustrates the problem that multiple modes has NOT solved the problem; it just shifts it around.
 
Last edited:
It's solved it for some, and not for others. The problem FDev has with the multiple modes is that the BGS can be equally affected by both Open and Mobius (for example).

So if your goal in Elite is to flip a system (or stop a flip) - there are limits to what you can and can't do, in Open - because you cannot engage ALL the players making a dent in the CG from the safety of Private.

Heck, what was that one CG that ended in FDev invoking the "Hand of God", because the Open players resorted to UA bombing in order to counter Mobius? Which perfectly illustrates the problem that multiple modes has NOT solved the problem; it just shifts it around.

Going well off topic now, but i've addressed this fallacy before, because you can barely affect BGS work with PvP. At best, you might slow it down, and only in war situations, instances permitting. The rest of the time you try and PvP with someone else working with the BGS and you will end up hurting your own faction more (push them into lockdown by shooting non-wanted ships in your own system, becoming wanted yourself, hindering your own efforts, and all the time you spend trying to defend your system or overtake another, with PvP, is time missed working faction influence).

Hate to use a large brush here, but it seems like people who make claims like this really don't understand how the BGS mechanics work, nor understand the implications of trying to kill players who are working against you when they are not wanted.
 
It's solved it for some, and not for others. The problem FDev has with the multiple modes is that the BGS can be equally affected by both Open and Mobius (for example).

[…]

Heck, what was that one CG that ended in FDev invoking the "Hand of God", because the Open players resorted to UA bombing in order to counter Mobius? Which perfectly illustrates the problem that multiple modes has NOT solved the problem; it just shifts it around.

But none of those have any effect on just “wanting a relaxing night, doing some trucking” and is wholly irrelevant to crime and unwanted PvP-related losses. Those problems are only problems for people who want the PvP, not for those who want to avoid it. So no, it's pretty much entirely solved aside from the people problem that Agony_Aunt mentioned.
 
Last edited:
But none of those have any effect on just “wanting a relaxing night, doing some trucking” and is wholly irrelevant to crime and unwanted PvP-related losses. Those problems are only problems for people who want the PvP, not for those who want to avoid it. So no, it's pretty much entirely solved aside from the people problem that Agony_Aunt mentioned.

Thorn-
54247.jpg
 
This video sums up why substance in a smaller world is more important then a huge universe full of nothing. SC if going the right route imo.

[video=youtube;efKxC0RgyV4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efKxC0RgyV4[/video]
 
Going well off topic now, but i've addressed this fallacy before, because you can barely affect BGS work with PvP.

I'm not trying to get into the minutiae of the Elite BGS. I'm simply trying to illustrate that having 3 separate modes in Elite creates a different problem for the game: the player population is segmented and fragmented, and this further leads to some players inferring (rightly or wrongly) that THEIR own playstyle is the "real" one intended by Frontier.

Note how many people say "Elite isn't a PvP game" or "If it wasn't, there would be no PvP opportunities."

The better option is to have ONE multiplayer mode, with a solid crime/stat system that allows EVERY style of gameplay, but also has serious repercussions for some playstyles.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom