Not IF but WHY discussion around modes in the BGS

[Sylveria]

You said the same about powerplay. Comical.

I said many things... as well as Frontier should have done a preliminary investigation as to the causes of 5C interference and other issues that have been raised... BEFORE making a proposal that changes the nature of this game that affect everyone who play it.

After all- people who have nothing to hide, have nothing to fear.

Guess what? I don't have a single worry- because I've done nothing to be worried about.

 

[Whitehair]

Lets go through this post.

Then you're intentionally not getting it. Ive went through great detail to explain it. This is not rocket science.

If you explain something repeatedly and the audience does not understand what you are talking about, the problem does not lie with the audience but with the communicator, who needs to find a better way to explain their point(s) so that they are understood.

If you attack another player faction. The player faction you are attacking should be able to stop you from attacking them.

Pardon? How are you going to do that? Send a stiffly worded letter telling them to take it back?
A better formulation could be:

If you attack another player faction. The player faction you are attacking should be able to take action to counter the attack.

Note.
You cannot prevent an attack, as by definition it has already started.
You can do something to counter the effects of the attack, which is not the same as stopping the attack.

They should not be able to opt out of being attacked themselves while attacking your minor faction your player faction is attached to.

Thats a simple point. The faction cannot opt out of being attacked themselves.

If your goal is to affect another player base, then you should have no issues being shot at by the player base you are intentionally trying to affect.

Subterfuge does not entail standing on top of a hill waving a flag to gets the enemies attention. It is up to the enemy to detect the actions affecting them and then to deal with the consequences. See the point about being unable to prevent an attack.
This sentence of yours mixes Faction actions and individual player actions. Until you are able to properly separate the two in your thinking, you won't be able to formulate the problem correctly.

If you dont understand that. God help us all.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

You said the same about powerplay. Comical.

This is players affecting other players. Not the game itself.

There are no consequences for the player group that attacks your systems. You have to suck it up and farm back because thats what they chose to do. And if you dont they win you lose. You get bored of trying to maintain. You lose. However give the god damn players the chance to defend themselves from an attack. Like a system flip or a UA bombing. Then the defend is no longer at a disadvantage.

The attacker gets to chose the method of attack and the defender has to counter with grind for that specific attack.

If you could kill them and drive them out. Removing the option to just switch modes after their precious spaceship blows up. They will eat rebuys, time lost, rep lost, influence gains stalled. All sorts of real gameplay.

But the defend is at a major disadvantage here.

All because the people get to use the mode called "solo" to affect the multiplayer experience and take the objectives of another player group.

No speculation at all. It happens everyday within the BGS and Powerplay.

The BGS is fine for that as that is what it was designed for, PvE gameplay. If you don't like PvE gameplay then I am sorry but you seem to be playing the wrong game. I would very much like powerplay to be open only so you can get your PvP kicks there. Leave the BGS as for the PvE players that like that kind of thing.

 

[Jane Turner]

Ive explained it jane. Even the other guy explained it.

You're not going to randomly drop influence anywhere else that you dont intend on affecting another player somewhere else. You may expand in a random spot within your own home system. But that is where you live, youre not going to go jumping around dropping influence around the bubble just because. Thats not what its for.

And if it is attached to a reward, you're not going to stay in that random system for over 1 week and a half trying to flip it now are you? Unless its powerplay related, then I can understand. But we are talking about player groups here.

Cmon Jane. Get with the program.

I really do not know what you are saying/asking - are there words missing? Take me through it a line at a time - I can't see what it has to to with Why open only is attractive beyond your points I hope I already pulled out

• you want to have engineered ships have more effect
• you want to be able to shoot more players
• you don't want any BGS influence possible outside open

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Lets go through this post.


If you explain something repeatedly and the audience does not understand what you are talking about, the problem does not lie with the audience but with the communucator, who needs to find a better way to explain their point(s) so that it they are understood.



Pardon? How are you going to do that? Send a stiffly worded letter telling them to take it back?
A better formulation could be:


Note.
You cannot prevent an attack, as by definition it has already started.
You can do something to counter the effects of the attack, which is not the same as stopping the attack.



Thats a simple point. The faction cannot opt out of being attacked themselves.



Subterfuge does not entail standing on top of a hill waving a flag to gets the enemies attention. It is up to the enemy to detect the actions affecting them and then to deal with the consequences. See the point about being unable to prevent an attack.
This sentence of yours mixes Faction actions and individual player actions. Until you are able to properly separate the two in your thinking, you won't be able to formulate the problem correctly.

Now say all that and think about the word PVP. Would that be something that can counter an attack?

If I kill a ship with 400 UA bombs on it. Would that not benefit our stations from being disabled during a lockdown? Stopping the guys causing a lockdown by killing them and driving them out before the lockdown happens as we bounty hunt? They would be wanted right? Have a bounty on the bounty board? Wouldnt that be a counter.

Yeah lets comb through your post instead. How about that smart guy.

I really do not know what you are saying/asking - are there words missing? Take me through it a line at a time - I can't see what it has to to with Why open only is attractive beyond your points I hope I already pulled out

• you want to have engineered ships have more effect
• you want to be able to shoot more players
• you don't want any BGS influence possible outside open

I WANT TO DEFEND OUR PLAYER FACTION IF OTHER PLAYER FACTIONS OR PEOPLE ARE RUNNING MISSIONS TO FLIP THAT SYSTEM.

ON THE SAME PLAYING FIELD.

NOT AN OPTIONAL ONE THAT BENEFITS THE ATTACKER.

PLEASE GO BACK TO SCHOOL.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Now say all that and think about the word PVP.

Sure, providing you prefix it with the word 'optional'.

 

[Sylveria]

Now say all that and think about the word PVP.

PVP isn't a word. It's an acronym.

PLEASE GO BACK TO SCHOOL.

Looks like someone else needs to go back to school.

How about turning it down a notch, instead of the attempted badgering?

 

[Stigbob]

It would only slow me down if I was carrying data, and if I was carrying data I wouldn't hand around long enough to let someone help me lose it. In fact the same argument applies to missions. The only ships you are going to get hanging around to indulge in PvP are ones that are ready for it.

Carrying 20 missions at once would have to be data ones and they will be there in the rebuy ship - so at worst you cost me 5 minutes

The best data running ship is a speed build, they are absolutely immune to PVP. Unless you choose to have at it of course.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

PVP isn't a word. It's an acronym.



Looks like someone else needs to go back to school.

How about turning it down a notch, instead of the attempted badgering?

its not badgering, they understand it.

We all know they understand it.

Im not buying the playing dumb thing. Not with you or anyone else.

Players affecting other players.

If someone has intentions of affecting another group of players. Then they shouldnt have an issue getting shot as an act of defense in a god damn video game. Give me a break.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

Ah I see - thanks for the clarification. So its a probably good thing that the BGS is designed to reduce the impact of BUGs (Background Sim Unaware Grinders - stolen with pride from a source I cannot credit since I forgot who it was).

What I still can't see is why that is relvant to this discussion. Oh and....CZ missions, stackable or not, don't affect influence btw. Just credits and rep.

the discussion if it didn't already took an off route is about the modes and WHY it should be open mode or not.


lets stick with this example, while the stacking itself is not affecting anything, its shooting down the ships of a specific faction. Many people do this (or did depending on how FD rebalancs missions) because of the money not caring about the BGS.

and its should be open because:

only then a faction attached group can even see who is doing what.
only then can this grooup influence thes people doing it.
only then can they ither shoot them, tell them what their actions do, or even ask them for help. In most cases when those people are after money they dont care for which faction they stack those missions. And if someone nicely aks, they even may simply choose the one working for the BGS.

But as long as this is hidden in PvE no oen knows who does what for which reason. And those working in defense of someonn can only act reactionary. You do not see if some people delivered waste, you cannot see how many ships in a CZ were shot down. You can also not see if someoen just destroyed 150 Systems ecurity vessels.
And even less can these people influence anything, because they don't even know who does what, nor who to talk with and take dimplomatic actions. The worst case is the BGS has made a step (like expanding to the wrong System) and the PvE crowd makes that expansion happen, even if its unwanted.

major reason for this is, that FD never made real playermader goups, and they are just handpicked minor factiosn with a player decided nametag floating in the BGS isntead of being controlled by a player group. Putting this BGS into the solo and PVE mode is just giving massively powerfull tools into the hands of ninjas and dedicated trolls in an environment that affects everyone. And especially in terms of PMF is this not good as the point why FD made those groups is that Players play with the BGS and their PMF. But what hapens is basically playing a game with dices where the rolls stay are hidden.

In open people of both sides can at least observe and estimate whats going on and reason with others up until of course the last option of murdering.


And then we come to the other why's:
Why is it not in open mode where both, PvE and PvP can happen.
Why are PVP people not allowed to force others to PvP in terms of BGS?
Why are PvE people allowed to force others to PvE in terms of BGS?

It just seems not to be desigend well that way. And either both should be allowed to force others to their plytsyle, or none of both. Anything else isn't exactly fair in my opinion.

 

[Whitehair]

Yeah lets comb through your post instead. How about that smart guy.

Be my guest. I await your analysis with bated breath, but please don't shout when you do reply. It looks like you have nothing to say and have to resort to volume to get your point across.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

The best data running ship is a speed build, they are absolutely immune to PVP. Unless you choose to have at it of course.

This. If you are in a fast courier or Viper then no ship will be able to catch you and as you are doing nothing illegal all they will do is get a bounty when firing on you and then possibly be driven out of their own system by their own security forces.

its not badgering, they understand it.

We all know they understand it.

Im not buying the playing dumb thing. Not with you or anyone else.

Players affecting other players.

If someone has intentions of affecting another group of players. Then they shouldnt have an issue getting shot at in a god damn video game. Give me a break.

Players do not effect other players unless it is forced PvP. Players effect the BGS in the way it was designed to.

 

[Jane Turner]

Now say all that and think about the word PVP. Would that be something that can counter an attack?

If I kill a ship with 400 UA bombs on it. Would that not benefit our stations from being disabled during a lockdown? Stopping the guys causing a lockdown by killing them and driving them out before the lockdown happens as we bounty hunt? They would be wanted right? Have a bounty on the bounty board? Wouldnt that be a counter.

Yeah lets comb through your post instead. How about that smart guy.



I WANT TO DEFEND OUR PLAYER FACTION IF OTHER PLAYER FACTIONS OR PEOPLE ARE RUNNING MISSIONS TO FLIP THAT SYSTEM.

ON THE SAME PLAYING FIELD.

NOT AN OPTIONAL ONE THAT BENEFITS THE ATTACKER.

PLEASE GO BACK TO SCHOOL.

But you can very very easily. What I think you mean its that you want to be able to shoot people as easy an alternative to strategy and affort. And furthemore you think that open only will make that certain

I don't agree that the first is desirable - I can see a benefit in making PvP actiion more relevant than their current level of not at all if it can be done in a way that doesn't compromise the playing experience of people who don't want PvP or can't play in open.

Your second point is just plain wrong - see Lucius Darcia's last post. We did get into the same instance briefly becuase we had two players in the same region as the wing we ended up fighting briefly. Most of the time we are like ships that pass in the night.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

This. If you are in a fast courier or Viper then no ship will be able to catch you and as you are doing nothing illegal all they will do is get a bounty when firing on you and then possibly be driven out of their own system by their own security forces.



Players do not effect other players unless it is forced PvP. Players effect the BGS in the way it was designed to.

You clearly know what you're talking about.

Lets go back to that toxic disaster the the Dove Engima was. Someone UA bombed it right. Perfectly good game mechanics.

Did you see how toxic the community was after it happened?

Or are we just going to forget about that.

Yeah these arguments with this stuff is pretty one sided and situational when you guys want them to be.

Again, not buying it.

 

[MottiKhan]

Now say all that and think about the word PVP. Would that be something that can counter an attack?

If I kill a ship with 400 UA bombs on it. Would that not benefit our stations from being disabled during a lockdown? Stopping the guys causing a lockdown by killing them and driving them out before the lockdown happens as we bounty hunt? They would be wanted right? Have a bounty on the bounty board? Wouldnt that be a counter.

Yeah lets comb through your post instead. How about that smart guy.



I WANT TO DEFEND OUR PLAYER FACTION IF OTHER PLAYER FACTIONS OR PEOPLE ARE RUNNING MISSIONS TO FLIP THAT SYSTEM.

ON THE SAME PLAYING FIELD.

NOT AN OPTIONAL ONE THAT BENEFITS THE ATTACKER.

PLEASE GO BACK TO SCHOOL.

UAs/TSs don't cause lockdowns.

For your second rant, you have the same opportunity to defend against a BGS attack as the attackers have. It's on the same level playing field already. There are balance issues, but you have equal ability.

You evidently have a lot of misconceptions on the BGS. Your arguments make little sense to those of us who have some understanding of it. Perhaps, if you calmed down, you could put a more coherent argument together. As it is, you seem to be screaming nonsense and random words. It's not helping your cause.

 

[Stigbob]

You clearly know what you're talking about.

Lets go back to that toxic disaster the the Dove Engima was. Someone UA bombed it right. Perfectly good game mechanics.

Did you see how toxic the community was after it happened?

Or are we just going to forget about that.

Yeah these arguments with this stuff is pretty one sided and situational when you guys want them to be.

Again, not buying it.

The community came together to fix it, no toxicity there.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

But you can very very easily. What I think you mean its that you want to be able to shoot people as easy an alternative to strategy and affort. And furthemore you think that open only will make that easier. I don't agree that the first is desirable - I can see a benefit in making PvP actiion more relvant than their current level of not at all if it can be done in a way that doesn't compromise the playing experience of people who don't want PvP or can't play in open. Your second point is just plain wrong - see Lucius Darcia's last post. We did get into the same instance briefly becuase we had two players in the same region as the wing we ended up fighting briefly. Most of the time we are like ships that pass in the night.

If you are BGSing in concentrated area's then you're going to run into people. I play with people from all over the world. Some people VPN in and what not.


Honestly thats Dav's problem. As it is a server problem, but I can tell you this. In other games I play with people from all over the world that doesnt have to VPN in. And we play games just fine, even shooters. So the technology exists. Its up to Fdev to go get it.

However, I implore you to watch this video. I know its a Meme video, but you can run into your attackers in the systems you are fighting over.

Sad thing is I had to go into the Mobius PG to find them. I could have easily attacked the guy, and stopped their progression. They were running passenger missions at the time, which has been phased out and it doesnt work the same as it used to.

Anyways, the capabilities are there.

So is the understanding. As a BGSer you SHOULD UNDERSTAND this video, even if it is a meme.

[video=youtube;9tobMVjSMnQ]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tobMVjSMnQ[/video]

Get out the popcorn.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

The community came together to fix it, no toxicity there.

In fairness there was a huge outcry about the facts surrounding it. However, unless the people that did the UA bombing announced they were going to ahead of time then 90's point is utterly, utterly moot.

 

[Sylveria]

In fairness there was a huge outcry about the facts surrounding it. However, unless the people that did the UA bombing announced they were going to ahead of time then 90's point is utterly, utterly moot.

As far as I'm concerned, Frontier should investigate the causes- as this could have been just as easily fabricated to make a talking point such as scenarios such as these.

Again- those who have nothing to hide, have nothing to fear.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

You clearly know what you're talking about.

Lets go back to that toxic disaster the the Dove Engima was. Someone UA bombed it right. Perfectly good game mechanics.

Did you see how toxic the community was after it happened?

Or are we just going to forget about that.

Yeah these arguments with this stuff is pretty one sided and situational when you guys want them to be.

Again, not buying it.

And what has that got to do with anything. Unless they publicy shout out that is what they intend to do then there would be no way of stopping them regardless. The public outcry was not that there was a UA bombing it was because of what the Dove Enigma represented.