Players can run all the missions they like. The BGS takes them all into account.
In Elite - a valid defence is exactly the same as a valid offence, and that is running MOAR BGS for your faction than everybody else.
Code action against CoR
- Thread starter riceak
- Start date
Players can run all the missions they like. The BGS takes them all into account.
In Elite - a valid defence is exactly the same as a valid offence, and that is running MOAR BGS for your faction than everybody else.
Deleted member 38366
D
Noone is saying that, if you *magically* were able to
- provide global 24/7 coverage
- across all platforms
- identify every singe Traffic and *magically* determine the Intention of that Traffic
- always and at all times intervene with every single Traffic
...you could have a medium impact by investing an insane amount of effort. It'll work to some extent, it'll just be terribly ineffective compared to your efforts put in.
Thing is... you're quite ineffective. You might get quite a few, keep others out... But a single CMDR will easily be able to outdo your entire effort (assuming approx. 100-200 CMDRs on your side, 24/7, nonstop).
That one "leaker" might manage to drop off 2-3 Missions. You did none. You lose.
See it this way (Hypothetical PvP mindset) :
BGS guy : Sees a leaking Faucet. Reads up on it, gets the right tools for the job. Good chances to fix it. Smart BGS guys will keep track of leakages and plan ahead to prevent it in the future.
PvP guy : Sees a leaking Faucet. Shoots it with a Desert Eagle. Very low chances to fix it.
BGS guy : Needs to play "Symphony in D Minor" in the BGS concert hall. Makes caluclations, assesses records & writes musical score, trying to get "as close as possible" to the ideal tune the Audience wants to hear. Solid chances."
PvP guy : Needs to play "Symphony in D Minor" in the BGS concert hall. Grabs a Machine gun and empties several belts upon the Audience. Extremely poor reception, zero chances."
BGS guy : Needs to program the VCR. Reads up on Manual, gives the inputs and completes the programming according best knowledge. Very good chances of getting things right."
PvP guy : Needs to program the VCR. Grabs the M82 and fires several .50cal Armour Piercing rounds at it. Called Technician (VCR failed to program) will later have a talk... very similar to the discussion we have right here now
"See a pattern developing?
The BGS Mechanics don't work to the "I only do my Playstyle - everything has to bow to it!". Doesn't work.
Rule of the road : BGS doesn't adopt to Players nor their Playstyle. Players need to adopt to the BGS.
That's all there is to it really.
PS.
How would one ever win an Election with PvP? Combat activities don't count during Election phases.
What if there's actually noone to fight you? Noone to kill - zero progress. You'd be doomed xD
Last edited by a moderator:
IMO you have the right attitude, and I understand exactly where you are coming from, BUT if you will allow me........
It makes no difference to the BGS if they were able to PvP them and explode them, The missions would still be valid, the worst is they have to go and buy the stuff again to complete the mission. Truth is, No PvP action will stop BGS action. At best, It can reduce it. Because the PvP crowd got into this galaxy assuming that force alone will win the day, As it has done in most other galaxies (games), Finding that the depth is there, And they have no knowledge of how that part of the game works, They cry foul.
+1
Noone is saying that, if you *magically* were able to
- provide global 24/7 coverage
- across all platforms
- identify every singe Traffic and *magically* determine the Intention of that Traffic
- always and at all times intervene with every single Traffic
...you could have a medium impact by investing an insane amount of effort. It'll work to some extent, it'll just be terribly ineffective compared to your efforts put in.
Thing is... you're quite ineffective. You might get quite a few, keep others out... But a single CMDR will easily be able to outdo your entire effort (assuming approx. 100-200 CMDRs on your side, 24/7, nonstop).
That one "leaker" might manage to drop off 2-3 Missions. You did none. You lose.
See it this way (Hypothetical PvP mindset) :
BGS guy : Sees a leaking Faucet. Reads up on it, gets the right tools for the job. Good chances to fix it. Smart BGS guys will keep track of leakages and plan ahead to prevent it in the future.
PvP guy : Sees a leaking Faucet. Shoots it with a Desert Eagle. Very low chances to fix it.
BGS guy : Needs to play "Symphony in D Minor" in the BGS concert hall. Makes caluclations, assesses records & writes musical score, trying to get "as close as possible" to the ideal tune the Audience wants to hear. Solid chances."
PvP guy : Needs to play "Symphony in D Minor" in the BGS concert hall. Grabs a Machine gun and empties several belts upon the Audience. Extremely poor reception, zero chances."
BGS guy : Needs to program the VCR. Reads up on Manual, gives the inputs and completes the programming according best knowledge. Very good chances of getting things right."
PvP guy : Needs to program the VCR. Grabs the M82 and fires several .50cal Armour Piercing rounds at it. Called Technician (VCR failed to program) will later have a talk... very similar to the discussion we have right here now
See a pattern developing?
The BGS Mechanics don't work to the "I only do my Playstyle - everything has to bow to it!". Doesn't work.
Rule of the road : BGS doesn't adopt to Players nor their Playstyle. Players need to adopt to the BGS.
That's all there is to it really.
PS.
How would one ever win an Election with PvP? Combat activities don't count during Election phases.
What if there's actually noone to fight you? Noone to kill - zero progress. You'd be doomed xD
Last edited:
Good subtitle for this forum.
Last edited:
For arguments sake I'll just assume that the game or the BGS is meant to be PvP centric (it's not). The only solution(s) to your problem would be to:
a) limit BGS influence to Open
b) remove Solo and PG (can't happen because Solo is there for the lack of singleplayer)
c) create a BGS for each mode (can't happen because of potential spoilers in the story for the other modes and server costs)
So your only option is to limit the BGS influence to Open, just because you could HYPOTHETICALLY defend your system against other players attacking it by threatening them to never enter your system. Because you don't know their intentions this would require a total blockade against any player. You'll need a lot of people playing 24/7 to achieve that and these people can't influence the BGS themselves during that time (which is contrary to your goal). I can see how this would be good for someone who bought the wrong game because he wanted to play Battlefield instead of Elite.
BUT
How do you counter instancing? How do you counter people messing with their router settings? It's impossible for you to stop me messing with your BGS. You are demanding something that will change the game drastically for many people who don't even care about your problems (removing their access to the BGS, including PvE orientated factions and stuff) for something that doesn't even efficently tackle your problem. I can't see how this would be any good.
The no effect argument depends.
If say 30 players v another 30 and they all managed the same missions they would pretty much cancel each other out.
If that 30v30 involved a PvP group and all 30 took PvP actions only while the other 30 continued no matter how many times they were destroyed, the PvE 30 win.
If that 30v30 had 25 of the PvP players hunting and 5 running missions, and the 25 were successful in stopping the 30 from ever docking to accept or deliver missions in system and ramped the rebuys up so much that the 30 had to stop trying, the 5 running missions win.
Now these are simplistic examples to demonstrate the point. Instancing/platforms will mean the 100% is probably impossible although fear can play a part. Popping them into war in another system would impact as well and spread their coverage giving more holes to fly through.
But PvP is a valid defence and can make a difference.
Now anybody can disagree with me and say it wouldn't and if they are doing such things in open against a PvP group and winning I would be interested in knowing the details for both sides, although I think a smaller group of a few dedicated players who understand the BGS would likely be the best for such work taking advantage of instancing and platforms.
But I know of groups that have clicked Solo/PG to do this for the reason that they don't want to run the risk of being blown up, and if forced to take that risk wouldn't have tried. That I will always think is wrong when used for attack purposes.
Can't counter instancing but that's a technical issue which impacts on many parts of the game. I would want FD to fix that and allow cross platform play for everything but while the problem exists, I can't do anything about it.
I'm not demanding anything though. I have said what I would like which is a full open PvE and PMFs with system control deciding what mode BGS is limited to in their systems. That is all
I do not want PG/Solo removed. I do not want CGs as open only. I just hold that if you are choosing to attack another group, you should not be using an option that automatically allows you to hide and remain anonymous while being safe from reprisals.
So the big major change that you said would effect everybody would be that while you can work your Rep, run missions and pop NPCs anywhere in any mode, in certain PMF systems this will only effect the BGS in open as you are attacking an open PvP group, while in these others as you are attacking a PvE open group it will only effect BGS in that mode.
It's not perfect and yes people on both sides will moan that they can't attack their way, but it would always allow them to defend their way while for any player not playing the BGS, they would likely see no difference to their game.
But that is a wish, not a demand.
The nearest I get to a demand is saying that using a "I'm safe from you and you can't see me button" to attack another group is wrong in my opinion.
Because the laws of reality. Unless you have total air (space) supremacy and can stop 100% of the enemy 100% of the time 24/7/365, the enemy will get through and make substantial damage. You lose. You can't stop all the enemies, not even a significant part of them, therefore you are just wasting time and resources that could be spent contrasting enemy actions instead.
Unless you are running a mixed bag of reaction where this may not be 100% but still have an effect.
But I'm more than happy to see it tried and for those that believe this to not click that Solo/PG button and prove me wrong. After all if this is the case they don't need to use that option do they?
To be clear as this may read wrong, I'm not accusing you, anybody else on this thread or any particular group of using that button. I know some groups that have but will not name and shame. In the case of 1 of those groups they used many of these arguments to claim it would make no difference but when challenged to do it in open then they wouldn't. Lost a few people off my friends list with that argument but the fact they wouldn't stop using PG/Solo to attack another group kind of undermined every argument they had that it would make no difference to me.
I think that a pretty reasonable test of this are CGs, there are PvPers in open for the majority of the time. If the forum is a good judge of player preference (which has been proven with previous polls), I would suggest that PG/solo is the preferred mode of play. To me that speaks volumes about how effective a player base could be at stopping a BGS attack if everyone was in open
I'm not sure this is relevant to the OP topic, but I've just read the last couple of pages about the BGS and the complaint that adversaries are able to covertly affect a system's politics by 'manipulation' of the BGS. As I see it, this is a simple but very good allegory of the effects of diplomatic activity in real life.
Many years ago, in a previous employment during the Cold War, I was peripherally involved in the kind of activities that were intended to undermine or change the effect of other countries' policies where my country felt that those policies were against our interests, whether commercial, political or military. This goes on all the time, and is by far the most important and effective part of projection of power. The BGS allows exactly this activity. The people involved in this, in both RL and the BGS, never meet their enemies, are never under threat of harm, but inflict and suffer very real consequences by their activities and those who work against them.
It's a fascinating subject, and one which - almost uniquely - this game allows to a degree that makes it interesting.
Edit to add: the military, both in Real Life and in the game, hate these covert activities, and wish they weren't part of the deal. But they'll never go away IRL, and I hope they don't in the game.
Many years ago, in a previous employment during the Cold War, I was peripherally involved in the kind of activities that were intended to undermine or change the effect of other countries' policies where my country felt that those policies were against our interests, whether commercial, political or military. This goes on all the time, and is by far the most important and effective part of projection of power. The BGS allows exactly this activity. The people involved in this, in both RL and the BGS, never meet their enemies, are never under threat of harm, but inflict and suffer very real consequences by their activities and those who work against them.
It's a fascinating subject, and one which - almost uniquely - this game allows to a degree that makes it interesting.
Edit to add: the military, both in Real Life and in the game, hate these covert activities, and wish they weren't part of the deal. But they'll never go away IRL, and I hope they don't in the game.
Last edited:
Covert both militarily and economically is no bad thing in the game. If we had a system for doing it as well as proper smuggling it would make me happy. But such activities as in RL should have the risk of being caught and countered when discovered. Solo/PG with no risk of being discovered or stopped and requiring all the skill level of pressing a button is no substitute for me.
I have heard that RP justification for its use more than once but I can't see how pressing a button for 100% covert guaranteed is fair, demonstrates any skill or cunning, or creates any form of challenge to meet the covert goal. It's just a win button for being covert.
The thing with this stuff is that everyone knows it goes on, but no-one ever gets caught doing it! The counter is to know the system well enough that your covert activities outplay your enemy's covert activities. I think that works pretty well in-game (though I don't indulge in this stuff); if you know the system well enough, you can spot what's going on and make moves to counter it. Not by direct action against someone, but by neutralising their efforts through counter-play. It's painstaking, frustrating work (and, to most I suspect, boring gameplay), but it's pretty true-to-life. Of course, it introduces the concept that your efforts to bolster a faction can be undermined by people you can't see - and you don't know who they're working for. And that's absolutely realistic! Your chosen society needs constant maintenance, or you'll lose it. I can see that, for game purposes, it could be made a little more easy to see who's doing what so you can target your counteractions, but I don't think it needs to be removed from Solo or PG. But perhaps it needs to be explicit that in order to work against a faction, you should be representing a faction yourself, even if it's a faction of anarchic outlaws, and therefore you - or your faction - can be targetted.