And the game will die if that happens. The BGS will become a ghost town with no movement apart from the player factions.
That would be a travesty.
And the game will die if that happens. The BGS will become a ghost town with no movement apart from the player factions.
That would be a travesty.
I'd be all for upping the npc difficulty to balance out the solo PP'rs, but, I think one of the dev remarks on that were that it wouldn't just up the difficulty in solo but all around as well and that wouldn't be good. However my remark to that would be, people in OPEN are all about being the best and and telling others to "Git Gud" so why not let them git gud against tougher NPC's. So what if they start to complain that NPS are too tough....GIT GUD!!!!
Goose4291
Banned
I'd be all for upping the npc difficulty to balance out the solo PP'rs, but, I think one of the dev remarks on that were that it wouldn't just up the difficulty in solo but all around as well and that wouldn't be good. However my remark to that would be, people in OPEN are all about being the best and and telling others to "Git Gud" so why not let them git gud against tougher NPC's. So what if they start to complain that NPS are too tough....GIT GUD!!!!
Open Mode players had no issues with the increased difficulty that SJAs improved AI offered. It was welcomed pretty much universally (apart from the bugged Engineer weapons that needed taking out of the equation)
I was yessing the meme. It gave me a good laugh and I imagine FDEV just banning everybody to open. I definitely don't agree with anything in this thread.
Oh I'm sure it wouldn't bother you guys...i was mentioning that because of this little nugget
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...s-PvP-Piracy?p=5693111&viewfull=1#post5693111
(summary of the part I'm taking about)
However, cranking up difficulty will not make Open more enticing. Conflict between actual people, even within a game, is a very different matter to taking on NPC ships. It has many psychological and social elements that would otherwise not be present. Incidentally, increasing the difficulty of NPC engagements would also make Open harder rather than fairer, so there's also that.
that's why I said what I said. Personally I think if upping the difficulty could help solve this issue then do it. Or at least find a way to up the difficulty of those pledged...I don't know. I'm more for finding a balance than restriction
It is actually the Mahon PowerPlay community that raised the issue of bots because it affects their PowerPlay...
More to the point, BGS is entirely driven by player action. Only players can drop trade, bounties, bonds, exploration data, run missions for factions, and if none such get done in a particular 24 hr cycle in a particular system, the system doesn't move. Both PP and BGS only move on player actions.
Where I agree there is a difference is that PP is meant to be direct PvP, whereas BGS is PvEvP, i.e. you by definition play other groups not by attacking them directly, but through the environment. PvP has no value for the BGS (but still can be a lot of fun!)
I agree entirely with this. This was a pretty brave move - and while it doesn't affect me in the slightest, it makes me hopeful again for the future and other features.
True.
But negated by a single bounty drop, or something like 2-3 systems of exploration.
In the time you kill one clean PvP ship, I'd have run missions, dumped explo, bounties, etc. and on next tick you'll be well behind.
Those who put artificial limits on themselves for RP or honor reasons, lose in the BGS. If you can't beat my transaction volume, you lose. It is really that simple.
No. It really doesn't
The not-dying instruction is so you can deliver your bonds and cash them. No bonds cached, no gain.
There is no loss transaction in the CZ on a killed ship.
Rafe Zetter
Banned
That's twice you have assumed I've not got integrity, yet you know NOTHING about me, except what I post in this forum, and now you're saying I'm being condescending when you have no idea of what I'm feeling when I'm writing.
Who's the one doing the projecting here mate?
If the best argument you have is "you have no integrity", which you also can't justify or prove, you'd best step aside and let the big boys talk. <<<< that was an example of me being condescending just so you know what it looks like.
Err I'm pretty sure that is what YOU are doing too, assuming that EVERY SINGLE ONE of your faction members are 100% upstanding honest etc etc players who would never cut a corner here or there for a quick gain that harms no-one; and you can beleive that all day long, but as I said unless you WERE THERE for every action, you can PROVE nothing.
It's all talk and no proof. There is no other answer available, the rest is just an opinion - just as mine is, except for one factor, my opinion is based on KNOWN HUMAN BEHAVIOUR, in a game where undercutting is both easy to do and availaible to all.
Basically what you are claiming is that your faction was the ONLY ONE, that was 100% honorable, honest and played by the rules of agreed engagement, even when you have already admitted the opposing faction did not - give me a break, this is gaming on the internet, look around.
We are not talking about Knights of the realm when chivalry, piety and honour was just as much the currency of life as money - we are talking about ANONYMOUS GAME PLAYERS, on the INTERNET..... do you TRULY think you KNOW THEM?
Among any group of internet game players (or in sports, business or pretty much anything else), when there are situations for cutting corners that will give an advantage, some WILL do it.
That's not a projection of lack of integrity or being condescending, that's just a fact of human nature, and on the internet where it's anonymous, doubly so.
THIS ^^^^ is EXACTLY what I'm talking about. You're trying to claim that players would INTENTIONALLY lose in order to save "RP honour" in a game that DOES NOT REWARD HONOR.
You say you were a MID LEVEL leader - how do you know what was going on when you were not online - history often shows that "top brass" don't tell the lower ranks 100% of EVERYTHING that goes on, because they don't NEED to know and in some cases it might hurt moral if they did know.
If you want to beleve all this time you've been part of a 100% honest and upstanding faction, with no members cutting corners here or there on occasion - whether sanctioned or not - so it doesn't shake your faith and helps you sleep at night, so be it, but you still can't PROVE IT. <<<< that's ANOTHER example of my being condescending.
Edit - here's a question - how do you know that the enemy factions response of undercutting, despite agreeing not to, was not a retaliation response to members of your faction undercutting first?
You don't, do you, only what the leadership tells you, a mid level leader. You think you were 100% clued in on everything? You weren't.
Last edited:
Why would they? This isn't something to gloat. It's something to recognise as a challenge that the developer has to solve. We all want a great game, we're not all ever going to get what we want. For the record, I don't believe Sandro's changes should extend this change to anything other than powerplay. The end. They meant well, man, they did. Sometimes it doesn't work out.
BGS stays as it is; that's a pretty seperate beast and and an entirely different challenge.
The developer has recognised a flaw, Mike; we can't tell them "no" at times just becase it may not be great. I have concerns, too, and I fly in open pretty much 24/7. But there is nothing gained by refusing this outright.
Modules need to be available at an additional source (that is available via solo) imho; this removes quite a bit of module tourism. Which leaves really, those who actually want to fight for a cause, in whichever fashion suits them. With the rest of the changes proposed, PP gains some serious replay and engagement factors it's never, ever had.
Citation needed.
Last edited:
Elite: My Side, Your Side
It's the only way that will ever really work. A complete split of Open mode into its own realm. Accounts in Open do not transfer out of Open. Accounts made in Solo/PG do not transfer out of Solo/PG. BGS for Open is only affected by Open. Power Standings in Open are only effected by Open. Power Standings and BGS of Solo/PG are only effected by Solo/PG.
Probably much easier to implement that trying to pry an integrated component out of the game as it is, and won't mean 1.25 years of fixing all the bugs that crawl out, so win-win-win.
They are not going to split the universe in this fashion; that's essentially offline 2.0 and it's been five years.
Citation needed. How do you know that's easier, than simply defining where actions can occur?
Yes it is about PvE. Player help create a Dynamic and moving environment for other players. It's a very clever system. Just needs some refining.
Not as much impact if you concentrate on NPCs were you know exactly what faction they are working for. The best way to combat people doing missions is by doing missions, not PvP. Also it is impossible to know if someone is doing a mission or not against your faction. Going to a res site, it is much more effective killing the wanted NPC's then spending 30 minute or so trying to kill a commander in with their Uber shielded and Uber hull ships, or they are so fast you can't catch them.
NPC's and missions is by far the best way to manipulate the BGS and that is PvE or PwPvE with other players making dynamic changes to the BGS as they play and interact with it.
Because large area will become static and a large population will just go. Like everyone in mobius for instance. It would be a disaster. The BGS needs all the modes to thrive and change and be dynamic.
From what I can tell people kill other ships in open at CGs just because they can. They are not necessarily against the CG, they just want to kill other commanders. Community goals are about people working together as a community to achieve a goal using the environment. How is that not PvE or PwPvE. If people want the spice of being hunted by a bunch of nutters, thats up to them. I have done so in an unshielded T6. It was fun.
The point is, is that the BGS is not about player factions or controlling factions, even though we can do that.
That may come and you are assuming that everyone will have those tags. They may not.
I don't need to. I have been doing the BGS since the game has launched and know exactly what it is about and what it is meant for. You obviously do not.
The BGS is not about player factions. If you want that gameplay, powerplay is the way to go. It's mechanics are especially designed for PvP.
The BGS is all about players creating a moving and dynamic galaxy for other players to enjoy. Whether you are in open, a PG or solo or a member of a player faction is irrelevant.
Last edited:
I was reading this thread and the BGS and PVP came up and BGS and people, I know it happens in some parts of the bubble, but I play it when Im in the bubble. In fact Im nearly back in the bubble thus will be doing it again. Its about the only thing keeping me playing the game.
My last stint I saw one person, over a three week peroid of being in open (yes I tend to play solo or PG, even in PG I see none) just to see what the fuss was about. No PMF are near by as I play the BGS with the intention of moving a NPC faction, and not stepping on anyones eles turf. thus for me the BGS is all about pve.
My last stint I saw one person, over a three week peroid of being in open (yes I tend to play solo or PG, even in PG I see none) just to see what the fuss was about. No PMF are near by as I play the BGS with the intention of moving a NPC faction, and not stepping on anyones eles turf. thus for me the BGS is all about pve.
Last edited:
It's already "out there" so to speak that ED has/is taking its 1st step toward going PVP open mode only. One step tends always to lead to the next.
This should be fun to watch
Last edited:
