Not IF but WHY discussion around modes in the BGS

[Mohrgan]

Hammers get the job done.

Just another threat to those nails...

The Bolts just don;t care.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

This is not that difficult to figure out.

If it were restricted to open, youd see people passing through, and you'd see people continuously being there.

The argument you are making here is no different than the argument you were making for powerplay. They are adding powerplay missions too.

Also, this from the focused feedback thread.

Squadrons and factions

We are aware that some groups will want to align their Squadron with a faction. We are currently looking at how we can make this work and allow Squadrons to ‘fly the flag’ of a faction. This is something we will be discussing during a latter Focused Feedback thread, so please avoid discussing this for now.

There are things in the game that does make this difficult. But we are looking at the future and how to balance that gameplay around whats happening now; changes to be made.

Player groups will have faction tags as well. And trust me I dont mind killing a lone wolf either.

Also, stop acting as if one person is doing all these things at once. This is about groups of people doing stuff. My group is so big that I can afford to sit at a star and wait if I really wanted to. While everyone else does some BGS work. It wouldnt be the first time I've ran escorts for my player faction that was getting attacked in open.

After the attacks though, they go into solo and private after their loss and continue attacking a player faction. Which is the whole issue here. Wins and losses mean nothing.

And they should.

Hey maybe a Blockade would actually mean something.

Your argument boils down to "I want to shoot you".
It's not compelling.

 

[Mohrgan]

Your argument boils down to "I want to shoot you".
It's not compelling.

I can do nothing about awarding you Rep. I tried.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Hammers get the job done.

Not when the job in question is brain surgery.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Not when the job in question is brain surgery.

Good thing this isint brain surgery. Its game with simple attack and defend scenarios. Which is why we are talking about this.

 

[Mohrgan]

Even John Henry, the most famous hammer-man ever, was advised by his father to learn to "Hoist a jack, learn to lay a track, Learn to pick, and learn to shovel too". A one dimensional approach is just weak.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Your argument boils down to "I want to shoot you".
It's not compelling.

Its I want to defend my player faction from others doing harm to it.

Very compelling. Especially since im not the one that was doing the attacking to begin with.

You are literally saying I shouldn't be able to defend myself.

Are you standing up for griefers here?

Also, id like to add its the same trolls adding nothing of value to this conversation, the same ones that come into every other conversation about this. Most of them with little to no experience.

Its k.

 

[Mohrgan]

Why squeeze the game down to fit your skill set, rather than learn new skills and have a wider experience? Shoot those that want that contest, and out play those that play a different game. Expand your mind, and see what else is out there.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Why squeeze the game down to fit your skill set, rather than learn new skills and have a wider experience? Shoot those that want that contest, and out play those that play a different game. Expand your mind, and see what else is out there.

We already have what you want in the game. It doesn't work and its clearly unbalanced.

Players affecting other players, should have consequences from the other players they are affecting. We're no longer playing against the game itself.

Its not about me or my skillset. Its about balance and consequences for peoples actions.

I wasnt the one that made these proposals, flash topic or the player group ones Jane and Roost put up.

I've just been one of the guys that recognized this years ago and has been speaking up about it.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Its I want to defend my player faction from others doing harm to it.

You want to stop people doing what they want to do, by shooting them.

Very compelling. Especially since im not the one that was doing the attacking to begin with.

Do you ever wonder why so many people want to attack your faction?

You are literally saying I shouldn't be able to defend myself.

You're not 'defending yourself'.
You're insisting that you be allowed to shoot other players to stop them playing the game the way they want to play it.

Are you standing up for griefers here?

Repeatedly destroying another player's ship because you don't like the way they play is the very definition of griefing.

Also, id like to add its the same trolls adding nothing of value to this conversation, the same ones that come into every other conversation about this. Most of them with little to no experience.

Right back at ya

Its k.

K.

 

[Mohrgan]

Its I want to defend my player faction from others doing harm to it.

Very compelling. Especially since im not the one that was doing the attacking to begin with.

You are literally saying I shouldn't be able to defend myself.

Are you standing up for griefers here?

Also, id like to add its the same trolls adding nothing of value to this conversation, the same ones that come into every other conversation about this. Most of them with little to no experience.

Its k.

I am saying: You have every means you need to defend yourself, you just insist on truncating the game down to make it all about pew pew.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I am saying: You have every means you need to defend yourself, you just insist on truncating the game down to make it all about pew pew.

pew pew is part of the game. Its time people start respecting it.

 

[Mohrgan]

We already have what you want in the game. It doesn't work and its clearly unbalanced.

Players affecting other players, should have consequences from the other players they are affecting. We're no longer playing against the game itself.

Its not about me or my skillset. Its about balance and consequences for peoples actions.

I wasnt the one that made these proposals, flash topic or the player group ones Jane and Roost put up.

I've just been one of the guys that recognized this years ago and has been speaking up about it.

The consequences faced by a group being attacked are the exact same consequences faced by the attacker. Losing the bucket filling race. All the tools you need to defend your PG are in effect already. You can even shoot up those that enjoy playing the way you do. You just somehow feel that everyone should play to your vision. That is not enough to ship my opinion. Put down the hammer, and have a look at a wrench for once.

pew pew is part of the game. Its time people start respecting it.

To paraphrase the above: I have a hammer and I mean to use it. Make everything a nail. Or else.....

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

The consequences faced by a group being attacked are the exact same consequences faced by the attacker. Losing the bucket filling race. All the tools you need to defend your PG are in effect already. You can even shoot up those that enjoy playing the way you do. You just somehow feel that everyone should play to your vision. That is not enough to ship my opinion. Put down the hammer, and have a look at a wrench for once.

This is how year and a half battles last and wins and losses dont mean anything.

At least in open you have the chance to defend yourself against the people doing things to your faction. This is what this is about. Im am completely aware just like the people that made the proposal about how the wrenches work.

Maybe you should learn how the rest of the game works and why people want these changes.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

You want to stop people doing what they want to do, by shooting them.


Do you ever wonder why so many people want to attack your faction?


You're not 'defending yourself'.
You're insisting that you be allowed to shoot other players to stop them playing the game the way they want to play it.


Repeatedly destroying another player's ship because you don't like the way they play is the very definition of griefing.



Right back at ya



K.

Yes by shooting them. They cant continue to work against me. If they are dead. If you can stop peoples progress, claim things off the bounty board and so on using modules like a FSD disruptor and other "greifer" tools they added to the game. We would be playing the game and PVPing with a purpose between two player factions. Instead of everything in Elite Dangerous being a grief with no context behind PVP.

Make Attacking and Defending part of the game. Its not that hard to figure out why changes need to be made.

Nothing wrong with shooting people in a video game over objectives.

This community needs to stop with whole playing a victim thing because they dont want to get shot at for attacking someone elses objectives.

 

[Mohrgan]

This is how year and a half battles last and wins and losses dont mean anything.

At least in open you have the chance to defend yourself against the people doing things to your faction. This is what this is about. Im am completely aware just like the people that made the proposal about how the wrenches work.

Maybe you should learn how the rest of the game works and why people want these changes.

Yet, the fact is there is absolutely no reason you and your group can't defend yourselves, as the game stands. I can see that the defenses currently available aren't to your taste, but insisting they aren't there just leaves your argument flat. I'm not the one calling for the game to be drawn down to just one facet of the whole gem. Use all of those tools you claim to grok, and you won't be lost trying to keep your influence. There is no good reason to have the game cut down to one process: Pew Pew.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Yet, the fact is there is absolutely no reason you and your group can't defend yourselves, as the game stands. I can see that the defenses currently available aren't to your taste, but insisting they aren't there just leaves your argument flat. I'm not the one calling for the game to be drawn down to just one facet of the whole gem. Use all of those tools you claim to grok, and you won't be lost trying to keep your influence. There is no good reason to have the game cut down to one process: Pew Pew.

Again, hate to be the bearer of bad news. Its not me that gave these proposals.

I've just been the one thats been speaking up about it for a long time. There are more people than just me that wants this. For a very very long time.

And I am still seeing the same 10-12 people against it. Because they dont want to be shot at(defended against) while they are in a BGS war against another group of people.

 

[Mohrgan]

Again, hate to be the bearer of bad news. Its not me that gave these proposals.

I've just been the one thats been speaking up about it for a long time. There are more people than just me that wants this. For a very very long time.

And I am still seeing the same 10-12 people against it. Because they dont want to be shot at(defended against) while they are in a BGS war against another group of people.

Well, we can see those that proposed the changes have already stepped back from them. I'd suggest there is just as many players not interested in those kinds of changes as there are interested in them. There aren't any more posters calling, repeatedly, for the changes as against them.

With that, if you look at the spurious nature of your argument, it seems the best path is to leave the game as it is. The best method available to FD is to add a layer of influence for PvP to the existing mechanics. Like minded players can pursue what aspects of the game they enjoy, and no one is put out. Widen your perspective some.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Well, we can see those that proposed the changes have already stepped back from them. I'd suggest there is just as many players not interested in those kinds of changes as there are interested in them. There aren't any more posters calling, repeatedly, for the changes as against them.

With that, if you look at the spurious nature of your argument, it seems the best path is to leave the game as it is. The best method available to FD is to add a layer of influence for PvP to the existing mechanics. Like minded players can pursue what aspects of the game they enjoy, and no one is put out. Widen your perspective some.

Are you high? They havnt stepped back from them. Please. Get a clue.

 

[Mohrgan]

Are you high? They havnt stepped back from them. Please. Get a clue.

Sure they have. Just after the notion of making PP open only, they insisted that the BGS wouldn't meet the same fate, then shortly after that they came back, again, with the idea of incentivizing PP in open. A major step back. Then Sandro went so far as to remind everyone that these are just ideas to be brain-stormed on and not to expect any changes in the near future. Backpedaling at it's finest.