Not IF but WHY discussion around modes in the BGS

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

That was done intentianally to hurt people out of game which is as toxic as it gets. As to normal day to day BGS activities, that is a completely different matter.


Yes, you seem to do this often.


The only people that were toxic were the perpetrators. Seems you are very defensive about there behaviour, anything you want to get off your chest?


The paranoia in this post is extreme. People are not against PvP, what they are against is PvP being forced on to them which you seem to be advocating and then removing reasons to do PvE gameplay for those in solo and private groups.


They are not attacking a player group, they are supporting a faction.


No one is saying you can't support your faction, do so with the tools available.

Ill do it when we have a level playing field. IF they add all this stuff to the game. Without giving the community the chance to defend themselves from other players trying to flip a system. Then its pointless.

There needs to be consequences for the attacker. And if there are none, the game is imbalanced and I will not play it. Nor will lots of other people.

Quarter 4 is do or die for a lot of player groups out there. A lot of people want this.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Thats sucks. But unfortunately yes.

You have had a considerable amount of time to use their player faction sign up sheets for your own system. Its been around for a very long time.

Thats something YOU didnt take advantage of and someone else did.

I understand it sucks. But yes, those actions are now against another group of players. And once that happens. Its PVP.

No. You are wrong. PMF's are not owned by anyone. You support them the same way as you support any other factions. Tough.

 

[MottiKhan]

Yep, killing all those faction ships does it. Didnt you tell me earlier I was wrong there too?

Each ship you kill in the game clean or wanted makes an impact to the BGS one way or another. Except during election states. There you have to drop data like crazy. Even explorers are PVPing here if its between 2 groups.

You're going back and forth with your arguments.

The conversation was about UA bombing. Killing faction ships has nothing to do with that.

Do you see where your confusion is confusing others?

There's a lack of coherency. How about stepping back and thinking before typing?

 

[Jane Turner]

Yep, killing all those faction ships does it. Didnt you tell me earlier I was wrong there too?

Each ship you kill in the game clean or wanted makes an impact to the BGS one way or another. Except during election states. There you have to drop data like crazy. Even explorers are PVPing here if its between 2 groups.

Killing wanted ships has no effect other than the bounty when you drop it
.

Give me an example system in game now - and say how many murders you are going to do... and I'll give an example of how I would achieve either the same effect more easily or counter it.


I don't know how many murders were committed here . it was a 150,000,000 Cr bounty.

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/385078471350812694/485064862553210903/unknown.png
it took 10 minutes to correct when we found out which of 50 systems the murder took place in - its a bit of a backwater

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

No. You are wrong. PMF's are not owned by anyone. You support them the same way as you support any other factions. Tough.

Telling me I am wrong. Doesn't make me wrong lol.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Ill do it when we have a level playing field.

You already do, you just choose not to use it.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

You're going back and forth with your arguments.

The conversation was about UA bombing. Killing faction ships has nothing to do with that.

Do you see where your confusion is confusing others?

There's a lack of coherency. How about stepping back and thinking before typing?

We were talking about the BGS. And how its affected by other player groups. UA bombing can be paired with lockdown as a tactic. Thats how this started. I was told otherwise. I explained how it could hurt or gimp that player faction from coming back influence wise.

Pretty simple.

You already do, you just choose not to use it.

We dont have a level playing field.

The attacker gets to choose the mode of play, the style of the attack and the way we farm and how long it lasts.

The defender has to put up with it or just ignore it and lose. There is a game to play here. But its very unbalanced and its heavily weighted for the attacker using the modes as a shield from being defended against.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Thats sucks. But unfortunately yes.

You have had a considerable amount of time to use their player faction sign up sheets for your own system. Its been around for a very long time.

Thats something YOU didnt take advantage of and someone else did.

I understand it sucks. But yes, those actions are now against another group of players. And once that happens. Its PVP.

Minimum PMF membership is 10 players, so no, I don't have the opportunity to have FDev put a label on something.

If they were 9 players, playing together in a group, but not in a PMF, would it still be PvP? Why should PMFs get special treatment?

Incidentally, I play in Open, but they're in a PG.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Minimum PMF membership is 10 players, so no, I don't have the opportunity to have FDev put a label on something.

If they were 9 players, playing together in a group, but not in a PMF, would it still be PvP? Why should PMFs get special treatment?

Incidentally, I play in Open, but they're in a PG.

Because they are promoting player groups and the multiplayer part of this game. Why doesnt the single player not in a raiding guild in WoW get access to Mythic raiding loot for free?

 

[kilvenny]

So often the argument boils down to it must be open or it must not be open, in my view the answer lies somewhere in between.

Players should be able to join a faction, powers should be formed from one or more factions. If players do not belong to a faction they should still be able to influence the BGS by doing missions etc. If players belong to a faction and do missions etc for it then the impact is greater than it would be if they were not a member by a factor. This factor to be determined by length of time belonging to a faction.

The BGS and PP should be changed so that when its apparent for example that a system is in danger of being flipped. A combat open only POI is formed with NPC's and is visible to all players in the competing powers/factions. Entry into that POI confers a bonus as do kills in that POI. The POI remains until in this example the system is flipped or avoided. Whilst the POI is open all normal activities continue.

Players could still do the 5C, hide in solo, avoid pvp entertainment, but there is an opportunity to defend it.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

That some players, who prefer PvP, want to restrict particular gameplay to their preferred game-mode is unsurprising - and unsupported by those who don't prefer PvP (and didn't buy a game that requires PvP).

and now we exchange PvP with PVE and we have that line standing too.
The game was supposed to be offline, so why should those that bought it for solo even be able to affect others?

there si as less sense in your words as in the reverting of those into the other view.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Because they are promoting player groups and the multiplayer part of this game. Why doesnt the single player not in a raiding guild in WoW get access to Mythic dungeon loot for free?

Indeed - and there are two multi-player game modes - no need to engage in PvP to play multi-player.

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Ill do it when we have a level playing field. IF they add all this stuff to the game. Without giving the community the chance to defend themselves from other players trying to flip a system. Then its pointless.

We do have a level playing field.

There needs to be consequences for the attacker. And if there are none, the game is imbalanced and I will not play it. Nor will lots of other people.

Consequences for doing nothing illegal. So in real life do you think it's acceptable to go and murder or attack people that belong to or support a different political party. That is what you are advocating in ED. If these ships do stuff that is illegal then there are consequences, it is called Crime and Punishment. If they are doing stuff that is completely legal then why should there be negative consequences. They are not doing anything wrong in the eyes of the law. Seems to me you just want an excuse to blow other peoples ships up.

Quarter 4 is do or die for a lot of player groups out there. A lot of people want this.

I am hoping for better PvE mechanics myself. If a tiny amount of PvP commanders go because they don't get what they want I doubt anyone would notice.

 

[MottiKhan]

We were talking about the BGS. And how its affected by other player groups. UA bombing can be paired with lockdown as a tactic. Thats how this started. I was told otherwise. I explained how it could hurt or gimp that player faction from coming back influence wise.

Pretty simple.

UA bombing doesn't cause lockdown. They have similar effects, but they're not the same. One is station damage and the other is a faction state. There are clear and easy counters to both, but they're different.

Killing clean NPCs can cause lockdown for a faction, but will have no effect on a UA bombed station. Conversely, a UA bombed station had no effect on lockdown.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Indeed - and there are two multi-player game modes - no need to engage in PvP to play multi-player.

Exactly, so you shouldnt get to fight over another person's objectives as a PVEer. You're not PVEing anymore are you?

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

Because they are promoting player groups and the multiplayer part of this game. Why doesnt the single player not in a raiding guild in WoW get access to Mythic raiding loot for free?

I didn't know that multiplayer meant PvP. You do know that many players play together in player groups.

 

[Robert Maynard]

and now we exchange PvP with PVE and we have that line standing too.
The game was supposed to be offline, so why should those that bought it for solo even be able to affect others?

there si as less sense in your words as in the reverting of those into the other view.

This game does require PvE - it's unavoidable....

.... so the substitution of PvE for PvP in the post you quoted does not quite work.

How many PvE players are trying to restrict affecting the BGS to Solo and Private Group players only?

The game was not "supposed to be offline" - as the three online game modes formed the initial pitch.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Because they are promoting player groups and the multiplayer part of this game. Why doesnt the single player not in a raiding guild in WoW get access to Mythic raiding loot for free?

Promoting something doesn't mean giving them special treatment.

If we're asking random questions about other games:
Why can knights jump over other pieces, but queens can't?

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

UA bombing doesn't cause lockdown. They have similar effects, but they're not the same. One is station damage and the other is a faction state. There are clear and easy counters to both, but they're different.

Killing clean NPCs can cause lockdown for a faction, but will have no effect on a UA bombed station. Conversely, a UA bombed station had no effect on lockdown.

OMG how many times do I have to say it. I AM AWARE IT DOESNT CAUSE LOCK DOWN <~ PLEASE READ THIS AND WRITE IT DOWN.

I am saying it can be paired with a lock down to halt the growth of that player faction in a system. They cannot run missions to drive the influence back up. While the person is killing ships to drive their influence DOWN.

Good god these forums.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Exactly, so you shouldnt get to fight over another person's objectives as a PVEer. You're not PVEing anymore are you?

The BGS is PvE driven - and all players affect it.

Whether PvE players should, or should not, affect the BGS is a matter of opinion - and Frontier seem to be of the opinion that they should, as they designed the game that way and, even during the Powerplay investigation, were clear that *only* Powerplay was being considered for Open Only.