The only thing either side risks, is Time. Just time. Filling buckets. That's it. Defenders can anticipate attacks, and monitor their Faction's numbers, and yup, you guessed it, fill buckets. When you are only at risk via the BGS, you can only defend via the BGS. Learn to BGS.
- Status
The only thing either side risks, is Time. Just time. Filling buckets. That's it. Defenders can anticipate attacks, and monitor their Faction's numbers, and yup, you guessed it, fill buckets. When you are only at risk via the BGS, you can only defend via the BGS. Learn to BGS.
@Ziggy
@Mohrgan
@etc
As a spectator I don't think you've engaged with Ziljan's point that within the current system he can't actually find out who's attacking his BGS.
Whether that's @Ziljan's main point, idk, but it's been in there at least twice and it seems to me to have gone unaddressed.
@Mohrgan
@etc
As a spectator I don't think you've engaged with Ziljan's point that within the current system he can't actually find out who's attacking his BGS.
Whether that's @Ziljan's main point, idk, but it's been in there at least twice and it seems to me to have gone unaddressed.
No risk in open either, If you don’t want it. Try to play in open with your phone as an access point. You want see many players.
If you happen to see one and they interdict you, they will end up in an empty instance.
If you want to be alone in open, you can.
I'm always in awe of your diplomatic skills, Truesilver. To me it just looked like they were doing their level best to obfuscate Ziljan's point(s) in a carefully crafted plot to deliberately misdirect as much as possible from the gist of his argument. And knowing me, I would probably just say that out loud instead of keeping it to myself...oops.
Why should we be able to?
Quite right.
I was limiting myself to arguing a point I made which was criticized. Not looking to branch of towards other lines of argument. And I acknowledged it here.
Yeah, I know.
I always does
Last edited:
Quite right.
I was limiting myself to arguing a point I made which was criticized. Not looking to branch of towards other lines of argument. And I acknowledged it here.
Yeah, I know.
I always does
You know I don't hold it against you, don't you? Also, I think you forgot the "t."
He can't engage with the main point of my argument because that would mean admitting that solo/PG players have an unfair advantage both in terms of risk and anonymity when attacking. He is entirely unwilling to concede the point. So instead he's moved his goalpost to an irrelevant semantic position and attempted to make a false equivalence between attack and defense in the BGS, hence ignoring all the history of effort that goes into those percentages for the defenders. The strength of anti-PVP bias is really so overwhelming in some people that it can overturn their objective reasoning entirely.
The lengths that people will go to in order to protect the Solo/PG BGS/PP advantage are really quite extraordinary, even throwing Open PVE factions under the bus in the process.
Last edited:
I agree in principal with you. Having a consistently poor connection is kind of inconsiderate, but not against the rules.
But I think a trap you are falling into here is to become frustrated that others don't follow the same self-imposed rules that you do.
As an example, I have a personal rule that I won't pop another Cmdr's ship without their permission (eg agreed fight to the end). I've done it twice, both asked me to kill them. Usually if I can get their shields down I'll retract hardpoints, and only begin firing again once their shields are back up.
But I don't expect the other player to follow the same rules. I try to make it clear what I'm doing and most get it, but some carry on. I remember losing my FDL to a Cobra once because they just continued to fire on me (it took a while).
If you truly have the killer instinct & are sufficiently motivated to win any engagement, you too will use any advantage within the rules, be it dropping to solo or whatever. If you draw a line you have to accept that someone will draw their line further than you.
I dont know if there is a point to be had. Does he mean if someone is killing security ships then it would be under top 5 bounties if not then is someone attacking or is it just random missions passing through. As a defender dont you have the advantage of owning a station, therefore have more ways of defending against attacks. Also if someone decides to attack a minor faction they have no way of knowing if someone is defending it either.
Okay look at it this way: If we assume it's being used as an exploit what advantage does it give over them just using a group, or blacklisting you? As far as the game is concerned there is nothing special about open, it's just a matchmaking rule.
Yeah, unless you have no alternative...
The matchmaking system works by taking your whitelist (mode select) as top priority, then your friendlist, then your blacklist. Somewhere in there it also tries to match you with players you have a decent connection to, but it's probably the lowest priority.
In theory you should never see another player with whom you have a poor connection (eg if you are in the US & they are in Australia) but sometimes there aren't enough players to choose from & you get lumped into their instance, or vice versa.
For a genuinely poor connection (eg satellite link or a mobile in the countryside) probably no one will be instanced with them, and this can be forged. It's probably the most solid argument against rewarding open play, or differentiating it in any way from the other modes. It's just too easy to bypass.
Exactly!
This looks pretty clear to me -
1. Multiplayer - players from around the world - check.
2. Connected all together via modes? - Check.
3. Bolded and underlined:
Experience the connected galaxy alone in Solo mode
or with players across the world in Open Play
Ayup, that's about right *spits* buncha jibber-jabberish, you ask me.
It's the Hotel California - PvP thread that does not end
It just goes on and on, my friend
somebody
started threading it not knowing what it was
and they'll continue posting it forever, just because
it is the thread that does not end...
One this one thing, we agree. I hate them.
At least ir would have been, if ED was open only. Now it’s just an example.
I have a cabin where ther used to be 2g(GPRS) only. Playing on that works impressively well as a single player. The multiplayer part will desync and is more or less non excistent.
There are tons of other ways to manipulate instancing. No one knows this better than the PvP groups.
If FD want PvP to be significant in BGS conflicts, they must introduce game mechanics for it. Open only is pointless.
It does not actually matter who, in terms of individuals, is directly affecting his BGS. There are going to be multiple influences both NPC and PC and the short answer is "everyone affects everyone else's BGS" because there is ONLY ONE UNIVERSE STATE and therefore only one BGS. If any of us can not accept the instanced but shared universe state of ED then the short answer is that ED will never be something the individual(s) in question will be able to accept.
In the current system, on a local focus basis we can identify the relative influence levels (percentage wise) of each faction and how they are changing (increasing or decreasing based on the triangles in the local faction information via the HUD). There are accepted ways to influence the BGS to change the way you want it to change but it is a long game to get a specific change to the universe state and PvP is not actually a significant factor in this area since the main point is we as individuals do not directly own or control any of the factions. We may be affiliated with them at some point which could allow us to exert greater influence in support of the faction we support but that will probably be the limit of it.
We as CMDRs are little more than tiny cogs in a very large machine and our individual level of influence on the machine is limited to how much we decide to engage with it. ED is not, and hopefully will never become, a title where individual players can exert an undue level of influence on the shared universe state. PvP is little more than a side show and not a significant factor where the overall universe state is concerned, and personally I hope this NEVER changes.
Fundamentally though, it is irrelevant to the general discussion about "direct PvP combat popularity" which is what this thread is actually about.
Last edited:
Indeed. Shared across Open, Private, Solo, PC&Mac, and PS4.
- Status