WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
They have fulfilled the kickstarter. That doesn't mean they cant make changes when they add other things to the game
A change they are clearly able to make.
Not IF but WHY discussion around modes in the BGS
- Thread starter Jane Turner
- Start date
They have fulfilled the kickstarter. That doesn't mean they cant make changes when they add other things to the game
A change they are clearly able to make.
They have fulfilled the kickstarter. That doesn't mean they cant make changes when they add other things to the game
I'm sure changes will happen and happen all the time. But I doubt they will change the fundamental principles of the game design for a few people that want it so.
Yes, it's been long enough to publish an anthology about it. "T.j. - how it all began"
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Aprospos dominant - wouldn't a forced open be dominated by the larger player groups executing station or system blockades? Stomping the small groups, killing the random captains on a course toward the "wrong" station?
And telling (or more like ordering with threat of death) the random captain to go somewhere else is no solution either, because most of the systems in the bubble, while sometimes not directly, usually still are in the influence zone of some player faction(s). And as you said, the whole Colonia is one big PMF war zone - whole Colonia off-limits for random commanders?!?!
Last edited:
For those who aren't familiar, The above picture was taken from an earlier proposal that went south and is presented out of context.
Here is the actual link,,,
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/426940-Powerplay-Proposal
It was updated with a watered down proposal...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/430713-Powerplay-Proposal-Part-2
TLDR: Nothing is happening.
Where does any of that change the fundamentals of the game. You really need to do better as I have been an active participant in those focus forums so I know that what you have there is not set in stone and may never happen.
So you understand the point?
With more of those meetings, it adds depth and variete to gameplay other than just grind.
Reason enough for me
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
Now things have calmed down a little, I'd like to go back to the OP.
@Jane Turner has added this suggestion:
I'm strongly against giving players the ability to track the activities of other players. What I do in game, and how I choose to do it, is nobody's business but my own and I see no reason why every other commander should have access to it.
Even if requested with the best of intentions, it's still open to abuse and would facilitate harassment.
I also believe the bounty board should be removed, as it serves no purpose other than naming-and-shaming.
@Jane Turner has added this suggestion:
- Augmented top 5 boards, eg name and locaition of hostile commanders or combined positive and negative effect
I'm strongly against giving players the ability to track the activities of other players. What I do in game, and how I choose to do it, is nobody's business but my own and I see no reason why every other commander should have access to it.
Even if requested with the best of intentions, it's still open to abuse and would facilitate harassment.
I also believe the bounty board should be removed, as it serves no purpose other than naming-and-shaming.
For example:
Faction X rules the system. Faction Y is boosted for taking over the system.
Pirating or (even better!) killing dozens of clean ships of faction Y in that system, will reduce the influence of faction Y MUCH more than for faction X through the crimes which results at the end in an indirect influence win for faction X.
But since we have system traffic of completely foreign factions not present in that system, it has gotten much harder to find those specific ships of faction Y which has ruined this kind of gameplay :|
Correct on all points.
All what we (open only crowd) are wishing for is, that private mode players have no impact on bgs.
They can play the same game with daily ticks and they should be able to do all the same stuff like open players. With ONE exception. Their actions don't count towards influence.
This way they can benefit from the living and breathing universe, staying private like they've chosen to do BUT don't disturb massively the PvP open crowd that use the BGS for more than just mission running.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's "all" is it?
Need it be restated that *every* player has purchased the right to affect the single shared galaxy state, not just those who prefer the optional play-style that is PvP?
Jane Turner
Volunteer Moderator
So you understand the point?
With more of those meetings, it adds depth and variete to gameplay other than just grind.
Reason enough for me
So they important thing to consider is how to increase the likelihood of that bearing in mind that there was no mode-related barrier operating on this occasion, yet we only encountered you once all war.
Last edited:
It does sort of mean everyone in solo or private - happy in solo or private can lose there home system.
I'd feel terrible if I was in that position.
By the way where is your home, I have just purchased an PS4account, need a target.
Simon
Yes once because i'm allied of spoken faction anf not always there as same as i was 2 months away from game (check my Inara credit grows
).Such things happen, but still i think that this would be a great solution.
To the topic of "attackers" and "defenders"
Usually a defender has 2 options to react to an attack.
1. Working to counter the results. or
2. Kill or push back the attacker.
In Elite there is at the moment just number 1 available if the attacker hides in solo. Doesn't sound right and makes conflicts tedious and grindy as hell since the attacker dictates the gameplay.
There would also be options to play hide and seek in open and also some other aspects, that prevent a meeting but THIS would be the fun part of it. Knowing that there is a chance to find the attacker and beat him out of system rather than just pure trade-grind or pirate-kill-turn-in-every-single-bounty-because-transactions-grind :|
Yes once because i'm allied of spoken faction anf not always there as same as i was 2 months away from game (check my Inara credit grows
Such things happen, but still i think that this would be a great solution.
To the topic of "attackers" and "defenders"
Usually a defender has 2 options to react to an attack.
1. Working to counter the results. or
2. Kill or push back the attacker.
In Elite there is at the moment just number 1 available if the attacker hides in solo. Doesn't sound right and makes conflicts tedious and grindy as hell since the attacker dictates the gameplay.
There would also be options to play hide and seek in open and also some other aspects, that prevent a meeting but THIS would be the fun part of it. Knowing that there is a chance to find the attacker and beat him out of system rather than just pure trade-grind or pirate-kill-turn-in-every-single-bounty-because-transactions-grind :|
Again, we can summarize this argument to "I want to shoot you".
Surely it's not beyond the wit of the PvP BGS crowd to come up with an idea that doesn't take away gameplay from everyone else.
It apparently is. But only because this all is just trolling.
This only happens when (and because) you have no friends.