The repair of Obsidian Orbital and The Oracle etc - I might actually bust a gut laughing?

sure, i was only going from my perspecive. yes i know some want to be able to defend the station, and indeed i am not against the idea of smaller skirmishes that are defendable if FD want to go that way.\

but, given FD clearly have certain events set in stone personally i just want to see that, even if it is overwhelming odds that would surely be certain death if i dared try to stop,

For me it is the shut down servers, and restart to have changes made that i hate. i remember looking forward to seeing Jacques powering up the big engines on his station and jumping to hyperspace .... and was dissapointed then for exactly the same reason.
 
"Power to turn the Thargoids into just NPCs with different ships" - Really?

I think the major complaints are two fold:-
1) Having little/no logical input into the gameplay. Can't scout them out, prevent, defend, reduce or die trying to stop station attacts.
2) Knowing that what's being offered is in effect just switches being flicked and cut scene gameplay practically offered.

Ultimately here we are at the much lauded and anticipated first hostile attacks by an alien race, with FD having had years to line up their dominoes to give us some gameplay to make the best of the situation, and we've got...? Docking with a heat sink...


ie: In answer to the OP, we of course know that once the station(s) in question are fixed they will never be attacked again. Because FD knowing (1) above, won't want to annoy the community with another repair due to a Thargoid fleet attacking in SOLO during a server tick.

Reminds me of televised Wrestling back in the days.
Everyone knows it's fake and orchestrated, but makes themselves believe something is really happening.
 
You say all that as if it's the only possible scenario or, at least, the best one.

I think it's the intended scenario.
Establishing the Thargoids as a threat to humanity and humanity not having that much chances against them. Showing the superiority of the Thargoids and the weakness of humanity.

Why would it be a bad thing if it was possible to defeat a Thargoid attack?

It would change what the Thargoids are. Being able to defeat a Thargoid attack would make them less threatening to humanity. It would change the "mood" from helpless and inferior to "let's get this done".

If the outcome is fixed - Thargoids destroying a station - all FDev can do is to make it more visual appealing or giving players a false sense of being able to change something - but players would quickly realize that "lie".
The result will be "station destroyed with players not being able to do anything about it". If that result is happening on a "server tick" or if players are able to witness it happening in-game won't change that the players are not able to change anything.

Why would you want to implement attacks which were overwhelming?

I think it makes the Thargoids more interesting, but it doesn't matter what I want. It's FDevs story, they decide.

Would it not be better if, for example, Thargoids started showing up more frequently in systems they planned to attack?
That way, you'd get people making the effort to organise a "'goid-watch" to raise the alert when an attack was thought to be due.

It would be different.


I agree that a lot can be done to make the Thargoid story arc more interesting, more fun, allow more player involvement. Apparently "station attacks" is not part of what FDev intends to be direct player content.
To me it looks like background events - like those TV sets showing some news about cases of a serious flue in the background of a zombie apocalypse movie while in the foreground the single dad has problems with his teenage daughter and is talking to his ex (who obviously still loves him) on the phone. Things that establish the mood of the story.
 
I suspect that at least some of the reason that the outcome of station attacks isn't going to be player influenced is that you end up with a hot mess of instancing. If players in instance 1 manage to repulse that attack but players in instance 2 fail, which is the true outcome ? Do we take the average outcome from all instances involved or do we have different outcomes depending which instance you were in?
 
I suspect that at least some of the reason that the outcome of station attacks isn't going to be player influenced is that you end up with a hot mess of instancing. If players in instance 1 manage to repulse that attack but players in instance 2 fail, which is the true outcome ? Do we take the average outcome from all instances involved or do we have different outcomes depending which instance you were in?

That's a fair point... BUT, doesn't mitigate the total lack of any seemingly any effort to make some use out of gameplay that could be offered?

eg: Initially after an attack, Thargoids being common around stations, and therefore CMDRs being needed for defense.

Or if a year ago, convoy missions had been added to escort ships through an asteroid field from A to B... and now that was leveraged to evacuate civilians to asteroid bases etc etc...

It just seems after years of building up to this, and the myriad of potential gameplay elements that seemed an obvious addition to such events, we seem to end up with very little being made of it... Indeed, to some degree, the passing of a server tick.

Anyhoo...
 
Last edited:
I suspect that at least some of the reason that the outcome of station attacks isn't going to be player influenced is that you end up with a hot mess of instancing. If players in instance 1 manage to repulse that attack but players in instance 2 fail, which is the true outcome ? Do we take the average outcome from all instances involved or do we have different outcomes depending which instance you were in?

Definitely a good point.

I guess it'd require more data being punted around but perhaps it'd be possible to aggregate the results of activity in all instances?
As long as the basics were similar (proportionally similar amounts of 'goids in each instance) and the battle was reasonably lively, people probably wouldn't notice the station and/or attackers "magically" gaining/losing health as a result of stuff happening in other instances.

Also, I'd hope the problem could be mitigated at a basic level by, for example, ensuring that the 'goids spawned proportionally to the population of an instance.
So, if you had 8 people in one instance, it'd spawn 3 'goids whereas if there were only 2 people there'd be 1 'goid.

I guess the main issue, though, is that we're talking about it on an internet forum, 3 months after release, when it's a conversation that should really have happened 18 months ago, in FDev's office.
 
I suspect that at least some of the reason that the outcome of station attacks isn't going to be player influenced is that you end up with a hot mess of instancing. If players in instance 1 manage to repulse that attack but players in instance 2 fail, which is the true outcome ? Do we take the average outcome from all instances involved or do we have different outcomes depending which instance you were in?

Instancing means that any approach to this is somewhat flawed, so you need to think of it on the basis of waves of attacks.

In terms of making the Thargoid attacks more interactive, I'd suggest something like the following:

Embed the stations under attack in special Thargoid CZs.
Send an alert to all pilots through their message tab and Galnet that stations are under attack.
Thargoids periodically spawn in waves.
These waves will preferentially engage defending ships for a period of time before conducting their station attack and then disengaging.

Over the week, if sufficient waves are destroyed, the station does not go into the Damaged State, but instead directly to the Repair State (if any wave attacks were successful).

The waves destroyed stat is key because it does a few things:
- If enough capable pilots engage over the week, then sufficient waves will be destroyed to avoid the Damaged State.
- This can be done regardless of how many less capable pilots attempt to take them on, regardless of the mode used, and regardless of how many waves succeed.
- If insufficient pilots show up to spawn the required number of waves to destroy, then other waves will be assumed to have successfully attacked the station unopposed and put it in a Damaged State.

For a successful defence, the amount of goods required for Repairs can be generated based on looking at a ratio of the successful waves v total waves spawned.

It's not ideal, but because of the way instancing works I think this kind of approach is needed.
 
Last edited:
FDev knows how much work is being put into getting The Oracle and Obsidian Orbital back online. Operation IDA was mentioned in the latest newsletter. The point is, the developer may not always agree with player feedback, but they're not about pointless trolling.
 
1) Is requesting the power to prevent, defend or reduce the effect of station attacks. This is asking for making the Thargoids easier, much easier and them having less effect on the galaxy.
If they are extremely powerful, then dying trying to stop station attacks would be futile and result in a lot of frustration/whine.

2) What would be the difference if 10 Meduas and 40 Basilisks attack a station, focus firing on all CMDRs with AX gear and them destroying the station? All happening in 10 minutes.
It would be interesting to see once. And then the complains would start that the players have no chance to prevent it. Players would demand that the Thargoids get nerfed. Players would complain that they weren't there to see it.

The station attacks are not meant to be something players can affect.
Not being able to influence the attacks is exactly the purpose of these attacks - in my opinion.

And if players aren't able to affect the outcome it doesn't really matter if it's a switch that gets flicked or a cut scene or a scripted event or incredibly advanced AI stuff.

Except that we, as players, are still only minor cogs in the war machine that is Aegis. Even if we are able to have a direct influence on their encroachment on the galaxy, we would only be the supporters and not the prime movers.

Would it be unreasonable that scanning sufficient Thargoid ships and their corroded victims could give us insight into their plans? If sufficient players contribute enough sensor data and Thargoid communications to the effort, we could find where they will be striking next.

More importantly, every trustworthy military officer in humanity's ranks would also be aware of what is going down, so for every player ship that move in to defend the targeted stations there would likely be 1000+ NPC ships as Aegis (and, by extension, the three superpowers) begin to marshal their forces. Suddenly, those 50+ Thargoid ships seem a lot less threatening when each and every single one of them becomes the focal point of a whole fleet. This could easily be implemented in-game by a series of "interdiction pickets" or something like that, which would basically be a reskinned conflict zone with a continual stream of NPC ships moving in to defeat a constant trickle of Thargoid ships.

This would then work into a CG like event that would continue for 24 hours to give everyone in the world a chance to participate. If the players contribute enough in that period to defeating Thargoids, then the station remains safe, while close battles result in a damaged station that requires a small amount of resources to repair.

The CG could even be made easier or harder depending on the amount of funding that Aegis has, so they could even calculate Aegis's contribution by looking at the systems controlled by the superpowers, their populations and their economic states to determine their taxes and tithes paid. That way everyone can contribute. Explorers would scout and harass Thargoids out in the black to gather intel, combat pilots would obviously join the defence fleets while traders could work towards strengthening humanity from the economy upwards.

There, a brief suggestion on how to allow gameplay around the Thargoid attacks for all professions, while requiring the bare minimum of extra stuff to be added (most of the gameplay components are already there, just need assembling together into a new way), and would ultimately let us play a game rather than a script.
 
If the Thargoid attacks are to reclaim the artefacts held in the Aegis Labs once located at those stations then if the labs themselves are not rebuild and stocked full of Thargoid sensors probes links resins bological samples etc, would they have reason to attack again.

I am sure the Attacks are not aimed at the station, rather just the side effect of the Flower ships coming to get their stuff and cracking open the station was their way of doing it.

I have to confess that I may, at least in some small part at least in relation to OO, be responsible for the stockpiling of Goid Gear down there...

I did many hundreds of runs for Palin, amassing well in excess of 10 Bn credits for my efforts (I didn't keep count after 10 Bn). Hence, if they should see my scrawny backside down that way, I suspect they may want a rather big chunk of it! :eek:

I think I'll lay low somewhere quiet until the heat cools off a little... :p
 
Last edited:
The way I seet it, the first attacks could be 'invisible' because of the element of surprise, but the next ones not so much.

What if the Thargoids were a new special faction in the BGS which expands very agressively but does not 'take control' of the system, they just become 'present', then we would not have to worry about instancing. They could even be simulated as being a wave, first their percentages rise to signal their increasing presence, then a critical phase of attacks on players and NPCs, then they leave abandoning the system and many wrecks behind.

The attacks would be overwhelming for now (no salt allowed for losing ships), what players could do was just stall them enough for evacuation and damage mitigation.
 
The way I seet it, the first attacks could be 'invisible' because of the element of surprise, but the next ones not so much.

What if the Thargoids were a new special faction in the BGS which expands very agressively but does not 'take control' of the system, they just become 'present', then we would not have to worry about instancing. They could even be simulated as being a wave, first their percentages rise to signal their increasing presence, then a critical phase of attacks on players and NPCs, then they leave abandoning the system and many wrecks behind.

The attacks would be overwhelming for now (no salt allowed for losing ships), what players could do was just stall them enough for evacuation and damage mitigation.

Are you saying we should take inspiration from the mongols/timiruids in warhammer medieval 2?
 
Are you saying we should take inspiration from the mongols/timiruids in warhammer medieval 2?

I was going more for an Attila flair.

Though we don't have a Space Pope, or do we?

hqdefault.jpg
 
Considering how onerous the repair is in terms of materials needed and CMDR participation, I don't think we should be repairing them until we can be sure that we can hold the space they are in from the Thargoids.

Who says the Thargs don't have a sense of humour?

I mean they get angry every Thursday so presumably they have other emotions too...

It's Thargoid Thursday. Tharday?
 
At least thargoids can't get to Sol, they'd have to rank up with the federation first. Permits are a pain...

If you look at their flight path of destroyed stations, you might be proven incorrect.....

When Sol burns, I'll be laughing in my nice cosy apartment in the Empire.
 
Back
Top Bottom