- Status
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behaviorism. Sorry, but it is a valid science.
If it's truly advanced, no it absolutely isn't
Yeah, every Solo hauler is able to hack Brexit.
Advanced in that one means that you have to know at least how to console input your router.
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Oh look, what's this?
A thread in the PVP forum, mostly filled with people who don't PVP?
Shocking...
A thread in the PVP forum, mostly filled with people who don't PVP?
Shocking...
What would be the purpose of asking those who do like PvP, why it isn't popular? The PvP Sub-Forum is not the property of PvPers, it's a location to discuss PvP. All aspects of it, including how it may effect the game in general. Preserving a bubble isn't it's purpose, and there are plenty posters that are self identifying as PvPers.
Certainly, Behaviorism is a real science. Dig up some research on why players choose Solo/PG over open. I'm certain you want to just support your myths with a generalized connection to behavior, and the study of it. That's the pseudo-science I was suggesting.
Play to have fun?
Play to be best PVP?
Play to be min/max trade god?
And everyone has the ability to affect all parts of the game?
Game is advertised to 'play your own way in one galaxy where your choices matter'...seems everyone is getting what they paid for. Seems some people didn't buy the game for their own enjoyment.
Isn't all I said about it just plain obvious, science or no? Do I have to create a ton of polls to prove that every risk of doing almost anything open is absolutely unecessary at the moment, thus avoided by 99% of players?
You are right that the majority will not abuse router settings or manipulate instancing. The majority will play fair as they do now.
I was thinking of players and groups that already actively use modes or instancing tricks to gain advantage in conflict. Fifth columns i PP. Solo UA bombers. Players like that will get away.
I thought those were the once you wanted to stop?
Make the NPCs mean enough and the players weak enough and they will flokk to open to get fewer NPCs.
Make the NPCs mean enough and the players weak enough and they will flokk to open to get fewer NPCs.
Solo/PG are exactly the same as open where NPC's are concerned. There are no fewer NPC's in open. The differences between the modes is completely a player matchmaking issue.
I know. It was a joke. You probably on average get more in open/PG, If you are instaced with players that spawn mission specific NPCs.
Because of all the - well - "Router Jiggering"
Such a system (that I would support BTW if done well) would require a lot more than 'just' a reward for being in Open. Because that would immediately support/handicap players under certain network conditions they even can't do can't do about. But yeah, router jiggering.. [haha]
I've yet to see a convincing proposal for such a system that wouldn't open just another can of cheats and exploits!
QUOTE=Egy Ace Fyke;6656217Where pirate is, there bounty hunters and protection appears. And what is meaningless about cargo?
And, to think about it, creating a sort of visible crime and trader layers of activity is not too hard. PvP crime commited - meter goes up, so does trade markup, up to 300%. Cargo bought/sold - trade meter goes up, thus pirates appear. And with meter prices and CG contribution do increase. Some might say that no layers needed in the light of CG existance, but it is not entirely true, as you usually CGs make you sell some underpriced stuff.
And there is a rares trade, and some pirates know trade lines there as well. But this knowledge is meaningless at the moment. Who would haul rares in Open? Right?
And for fk sakes, leave that technical problem alone. It is invalid. Solution for Clogging is in this thread as well, but I have no time atm to do research for it. Advanced p2p hacking is traceable and reportable.
/QUOTE
Much exploits?
To add up to it, uPNP is as evil as stuff you keep in your network. So I belive a lot of people have it on.
Risk of Open is PvP activity exclusively, nothing else. Then, as long as there are some people with combat ships, risk does persist. So should the potential reward.
Last edited:
What's "disrespectful" is the amount of obfuscation that goes on in this sub by people who have no knowledge of PvP and who's only interest in it is to subvert each and every conversation that comes up about it.
Most people turn on their computers and they work as intended with the mmo they're trying to play, router and all. The small handful of people who either know how to tinker with their network settings for the express purpose to avoid other players or who it would even occur to are in a minority, and probably mostly contributing to this thread. Which means it's just throwing up mud to cloud the water.
To add to that, I belive we had already discussed the nature of progression in ED. There no stuff like in WoW, which like 5% of all players ever see in drops, and even less do posess.
This is straight progress bar filling, to catch up to people only as max level is standartized and never resets. So if they can at least pass the computer science test, good for them.
Last edited:
So you are assembling a list of potential pros and cons, and going some way towards offering your personal insight into how much of a factor each pro & con is. If FDev read your proposal they will be able to make a better informed decision on how to prioritise is (or indeed whether to implement it at all) based on your more complete proposal. You will essentially be making it easier for them to make their decision, by presenting a complete argument.
Bear in mind too, that regardless of popularity or even the number of opponents to a proposal, if they like the idea they might want to do it anyway. But don't be afraid to try and fail. It doesn't need to be perfect.
Who said its no popular though? Popularity and content are different aspects.
I PvP 100% of my play time, so how can you tell me its not popular?
Can you give some idea of the number of fellow PvPers you see compared to the number of 'clearly not proper PvPers' you destroy? Rough estimates would be okay.
I disagree with any incentivising of Open, and that particular debate is best left for the appropriate "Hotel California" thread. FD have made their case clear - all modes and platforms are equal in their eyes.
As for the disincentives, deal with the idiots is my answer - it is the idiots that make at least some not want to play in Open.
[EDIT]By "deal with" I do not mean reward nor change the game to suit them either - I mean make clear their behaviour is beyond the bounds of acceptability and effectively control/contain them.
Besides which if "PvP is sufficiently popular", it should not matter what mode others choose to play in.
[/EDIT]
Last edited:
Black is white as long as developers say it?
Taking risk of Open is simply not rational at the moment, and the risk is present. So modes being equal is pure bull.
Sure, some people are too sensitive to play with any risk from the beginning. For the rest, one unsuccessful for his cargo pirate experience is enough to see that this simply does not worth it, no matter how fun and satisfying outplaying pirates is.
Taking risk of Open is simply not rational at the moment, and the risk is present. So modes being equal is pure bull.
Sure, some people are too sensitive to play with any risk from the beginning. For the rest, one unsuccessful for his cargo pirate experience is enough to see that this simply does not worth it, no matter how fun and satisfying outplaying pirates is.
Last edited:
*world's tiniest violin*
Mode choice is mostly moot where the topic of this thread is concerned, though it is clear that some PvPers are perhaps getting upset because people are making the choice not to play with them.
I'm sure there are some players too 'sensitive' to play in open, there is a perception, perpetuated by some that Open is a dangerous place. Certain players are dangerous to be around in a boringly predictable way, but fortunately experience suggests it is a manageable risk. I would not put my hand into a blender & turn it on. Not because I am scared, but because I am not stupid. If I had an armoured gauntlet known to be strong enough, I would not be brave to put my hand in, I would be mitigating the risk to a manageable level.
You seem to have formed enough of an opinion on how you would like the game to be played, the only information missing is approximate numbers that would be influenced by your proposal. However if you are unable (or unwilling) to take a guess, you should not worry too much - FDev have these numbers and can base any decision they make on their own figures & estimates of popularity. It is their game after all.
*world's tiniest violin*
Mode choice is mostly moot where the topic of this thread is concerned, though it is clear that some PvPers are perhaps getting upset because people are making the choice not to play with them.
I do agree that arguing the merits of mode choice is related but independent of player interaction. Players can interact in any way they wish in group mode too, depending only on the agreed rules of the group and not by any limitation the game imposes.
Last edited:
- Status