Did you uninstall Elite?
- Status
Did you uninstall Elite?
![Afterglow [SecB]](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/38/38904.jpg?1659821716){kind=avatar}
"true, but its not how progress working.[/QUOTE]"
what should be progressive about PvP? People could do that thousands of years ago.[wacko]
what should be progressive about PvP? People could do that thousands of years ago.[wacko]
I will enjoy the game, I have always enjoyed the game, but I realise that the game is not for everyone.
Bye.
Well ... not really .... just haven't fired it up for some time, so I guess I'm running a couple of updates behind.
I'll tell you why (IMO) :
TBH, it's a tall order for FD to tackle. But it's doable.
Unless one is speaking of the other type of PvP, in which case the game is well
built to support it by stacking the deck in favor of the pirates so much that every draw
is a royal flush in their favor.
Let's be real, if solo/group did not exist, FDev would have taken action quite fast ^^
- Lack of meaningfull context and consequences for PvP
- Lack of gameplay mechanics to matchup the Trader - Pirate - BHers trifecta
- High cost of entry (credits & time for engineering)
- Lack of PvP piracy gameplay supporting mechanics
- Lack of PvP Bounty hunting gameplay supporting mechanics
- Lack of invectives for traders to play in open (riskier, same gain)
TBH, it's a tall order for FD to tackle. But it's doable.
Unless one is speaking of the other type of PvP, in which case the game is well
built to support it by stacking the deck in favor of the pirates so much that every draw
is a royal flush in their favor.
Let's be real, if solo/group did not exist, FDev would have taken action quite fast ^^
Last edited:
I get like that at times. Real-life gets in the way and I don't have time. Like now. Major works on the railway from here mean an hour trek in the morning to take my wife to the next station that is open and then the same in the evening, we get done around 8pm and still the normal evening things to get done. Elite is not a priority right now.
[EDIT] I did play the last beta for a bit.
Last edited:
So you're trying to make out all the problems are old players trying to force the status quo on new players as if there's some horrible process of oppression of new and wise ideas that'd make the game better...
But you're an old player who only pops in now and then to see if they've made the game how you want it now....
Yet you say the game is for you even though you just said it's not for you....
This is an oft repeated pattern. Old players - RefugEvEs mostly - come and see it has some superficial similarities (ooh space! must be just the same) and try and demand the whole game gets redesigned around their dreams for First Person Action that never materialised in EvE then proceed to tell the devs and everyone else what matters and what's actually worth development time despite all the evidence to the contrary, steadily engaging in more and more dramatic language and claims of imminent game death or utter breakage to try and manipulate people into making the game of their dreams.
The game isn't broken. It's just not for you.
Hear, hear!
The problem isn't the "old guard". It's that the game itself was introduced without consequences for certain actions, "murder without cause" specifically.
Because of this, and FD's willful decision not to interfere (for whatever reason), it was allowed to snowball into an eventual avalanche where Open became a toxic playground for MOBA-style pew-pew. Some PvP players who wished for more meaningful interaction instead of arcade-style MOBA tried to keep it clean, but with FD's lack of interference in any way it became impossible to do so. This was a problem that was caused by a few players in Open but exasperated itself over time. While FD certainly contributed to the problem because they chose to do nothing (reasons for which can only be speculated- but amounts to "It's nothing personal, it's just good business.") the responsibility lies with those who urinated in the sandbox. Period.
I've personally no "problem" whatsoever with PvP players in general. Hell, I've done much PvP over the years in many games- but I didn't personally buy ED as a MOBA game in cockpits. That said, I don't imagine there were a lot of players that did, either. Most PvP players I'd speculate actually bought the game with more meaningful interaction in mind- you know, not just destroying space pixels because they pop up on the screen, but actual purpose. (wars, RP professions, etc.) Personally, I bought this game for the PvE features themselves- and perhaps to be able to play some co-op with friends on occasion. That said, I'd probably be interested in more "pvp" features of this game if it didn't amount to just a MOBA FFA slugfest.
The implementation of Open without restriction to murder without cause was the single-most underlying cause for why Open is what it is today. IMO it was a huge mistake not to have a proper C&P implementation alongside it- for which 3.0 is "supposed" to help with countering.
Will this stop those who don't care? Nope. They're going to continue (albeit now with a bit more caution) to do what they have since the beginning.
For those who don't want to engage in PvP, the choices are quite simple- either PG's or Solo, or "you pays your money, you takes your chances" Open.
We'll see how the changes for 3.0 actually affect MOBA-style gameplay in ED throughout time, as this problem wasn't created in a day- it was created over years. It won't take that long (years) to see the outcome, but we'll definitely need at least 3-6 months of gradual interaction of people in Open to see how the changes affect everyone before FD can really determine whether the changes were effective enough or need adjustment.
Note: that this does not in any way affect much-needed changes to professions (which are now just "activities") in game and actually fleshing those out a bit. This is another issue entirely which contributes to less-meaningful interaction as well. I completely agree that the C&P changes alone will not "magically make Open better", and I'd encourage those who want to do so to continue to urge FD to introduce more depth to the game in this regard.
Because of this, and FD's willful decision not to interfere (for whatever reason), it was allowed to snowball into an eventual avalanche where Open became a toxic playground for MOBA-style pew-pew. Some PvP players who wished for more meaningful interaction instead of arcade-style MOBA tried to keep it clean, but with FD's lack of interference in any way it became impossible to do so. This was a problem that was caused by a few players in Open but exasperated itself over time. While FD certainly contributed to the problem because they chose to do nothing (reasons for which can only be speculated- but amounts to "It's nothing personal, it's just good business.") the responsibility lies with those who urinated in the sandbox. Period.
I've personally no "problem" whatsoever with PvP players in general. Hell, I've done much PvP over the years in many games- but I didn't personally buy ED as a MOBA game in cockpits. That said, I don't imagine there were a lot of players that did, either. Most PvP players I'd speculate actually bought the game with more meaningful interaction in mind- you know, not just destroying space pixels because they pop up on the screen, but actual purpose. (wars, RP professions, etc.) Personally, I bought this game for the PvE features themselves- and perhaps to be able to play some co-op with friends on occasion. That said, I'd probably be interested in more "pvp" features of this game if it didn't amount to just a MOBA FFA slugfest.
The implementation of Open without restriction to murder without cause was the single-most underlying cause for why Open is what it is today. IMO it was a huge mistake not to have a proper C&P implementation alongside it- for which 3.0 is "supposed" to help with countering.
Will this stop those who don't care? Nope. They're going to continue (albeit now with a bit more caution) to do what they have since the beginning.
For those who don't want to engage in PvP, the choices are quite simple- either PG's or Solo, or "you pays your money, you takes your chances" Open.
We'll see how the changes for 3.0 actually affect MOBA-style gameplay in ED throughout time, as this problem wasn't created in a day- it was created over years. It won't take that long (years) to see the outcome, but we'll definitely need at least 3-6 months of gradual interaction of people in Open to see how the changes affect everyone before FD can really determine whether the changes were effective enough or need adjustment.
Note: that this does not in any way affect much-needed changes to professions (which are now just "activities") in game and actually fleshing those out a bit. This is another issue entirely which contributes to less-meaningful interaction as well. I completely agree that the C&P changes alone will not "magically make Open better", and I'd encourage those who want to do so to continue to urge FD to introduce more depth to the game in this regard.
And therein lies the real issues.
They hadn't a clue how to build an MMO, either technically or in any form of 'game' sense. And if we're honest, they still don't. The best that be said for ED is that it is a graphical masterpiece, with the gameplay depth of a leaking puddle.
PvP will never be good on ED. And, consequentially, it'll continue to be a gank fest in open.
If FDev were hoping to draw solo/private players into open, they're in for a rude education in how not to build a Multiplayer game.
It can be good, but it's not going to be so as an implementation of a consequence-free pew-pew arcade simulation.
In that, I do completely agree that more "depth" needs to be added to gameplay. For those who play in Solo/PG's there's already enough "depth" to engage them.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
balance is only a problem in PvP forcussed games. in PvE focussed games it is the norm to have increasing power with increasing time put into the game (take the game Darkstar one, by the end of that you are a monster!)
the issue isint the lack of balance, it is the lack of reason to use the "weaker" ships (other than for fun) once you are onto a "better" ship (ie what can an eagle do that a vulture cant? what can an asp scout do that an asp ex cant?)
the fix isnt to balance the ships, it is to give the weaker ships ingame purpose (not related to PvP)
for me new ships and improved planet surfaces is massive, and far more important than /pv/p balance. i agree with you about money exploits etc.. i too want a logical and complex economy etc... so we are not totally at odds with each other.
Eh?
This bit in bold is a total non-sequitur. PvP is GREAT in ED that's WHY it's a gank fest - people LOVE the PvP side and want more people to join in and have more PvP
It's just incredible to me how much upside-down inside-out nonsense reasoning is brought out to try and influence FD's design direction.
It just doesn't mix with those for whom MMO's are all about gang wars and territorial control as it's not intended to be that sort of game. HUGE amounts of the grief is all about people buying a game where you play an independent pilot who's a member of the Pilot's Federation then immediately try to not be an independent pilot and instead be a member of some other faction, then get frustrated at the lack of empire building potential. Then the antisocial behaviour to try and force the issue starts - ganking noobs, disrupting charity events and streams, dragging the gaming press into it.... all horrible manipulative deceptive nonsense to try and force their way via forumPvP rather than anything positive.
Needs to be burnt out with holy fire. They'll cry that it'll drive away players - but that's only if you ignore the VAST VAST number of players who have been driven away precisely because of all this toxicity and unpleasantness, all those who give up after being ganked back to a sidewinder many times as their first experience of playing, all those who get bored in solo/PG where they're forced to play if they don't want to be involved in all this unpleasantness.
I'd suggest the people in need of a rude education aren't the big professional gaming company who are doing very well with a bunch of successful titles under their belts - but the handful of noisy players throwing a tantrum and trying to spoil other people's game as they demand they get their way after leaving another game that didn't fully satisfy them from another company that's doing just fine. At some point someone has to accept it's not all these successful games and companies that are wrong - it's you.
Last edited:
The ship balance issues are a completely different (but contributing issue) problem in and of themselves, IMO.
Even excluding "game play style" (PvP/PvE) the ship problem still exists. You're entirely accurate in this regard, that all the purpose smaller ships really serve is to be a "stepping stone" to bigger ships because of the way FD has introduced the entire line of ships.
Had they taken a cue from others who've already made these mistakes previously, they'd know that given the choice people will almost always move to the "bigger is better" advantage purely based on projection of power. That's why EVE did it a bit differently- flying a Capital Ship in EVE sounds like a great plan, until you're swarmed with smaller ships that are much harder to hit and eventually it just becomes a nice big expensive coffin. This game doesn't have the same mechanics, it also doesn't really differentiate ship types so that there's a purpose in them- it just tries to make all ships "generally focused" because all game activities are designed as such. With no profession system in existence, there's no real reason to differentiate ship types other than pure size and power.
Arguably, this is also why I see the introduction of "capital ships" in ED as an exercise in futility... because as long as the mechanics of ED allow for huge expensive ships to have the same speed/agility of smaller ones, they will eventually just keep the same trend of "bigger is better" rather than defining purpose.
Last edited:
Like the other cmdra who quoted my post, your respond is based on whether or not Solo & Combat logging is good or not, which, true or false, is kind of irrelevant to the thread's question. Would you say that PvP will become more popular if there was only Open and if Combat logging was somehow out of the picture?
I'd say the game itself would become less popular. Not everyone bought ED for pew-pew... so if there were no choices except for pew-pew whether PvP would become more popular or not would become irrelevant as a question as well.
Ganking is not really pvp though is it, PvP requires some form of challenge or any pvp'er worth the name would get bored very fast.
Combat is fun in ED, i assume you mean.
ED is just not a good platform for PvP or even designed to be. The game doesn't count PvP in anyway... rep, influence, credits, its just not supported properly in the game.
The netcode is unreliable at best and has been since release. Spending hours looking for fights in open and not even being able to instance etc is not conducive to a fun PvP environment.
That is why the PvP hub exists after all since the game just doesn't support PvP at all.
The official Fdev PvP event should be coming soon though....
Last edited:
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Sandro said on stream Powerplay is the consensual PVP program made for elite dangerous.
AND GUESS WHAT, It doesnt work like it should because of the options with the modes.
So the players created their own outlet instead of using what they built because of the imbalances. Very few people use powerplay comparatively.
Not to mention combat logging.
So, the reason ED doesnt support PVP. Is because of "all modes are equal".
So instead we have griefing and ganking because there no definition. Same thing with the BGS and player groups. I could kill you on your way to transport cargo or what ever. You lose influence rebuy and time. And you dont get to boost your %'s with that run.
PVP does have a place. But the modes stopped all that.
So there are two options to stop all the toxicity. Fix it so certain activities are limited to open only. Or remove the ability to shoot one another.
Guess which one they will probably go with? Since BALANCE THE GAME AROUND PVP with ships, modules, BGS movement all of it was made for player interactions.
This is not hard to figure out. This is not rocket science.
Ya'll think they wont fix this? Thats crazy.
And here you are- still trying to blame PvE players who choose to play in Solo/PG's for Open's woes... still trying to blame the existence of the mode system.
Why am I not surprised?
- Status