Let's be fair though, it's easy to see their thinking on the basic level. Show FD that people operating in solo/pg can take the jewel from the most loved and famous player faction. They probably even anticipated the backlash, just weren't ready for the sheer numbers. It. Was. Incredible.
EDIT: The war for Fuelum is over! Well done everyone, our ratty friends prevailed.
- Thread starter Aashenfox
- Start date
Ha Ha you twits, i will not say who but i can say its all being done in private group just to prove a point to fd that bgs should be in open and not private or solo, because i mean how you gonna protect your fuelum system when you cant even see us, hahaahah should be in lockdown soon enough.
The BGS gameplay, in this instance was PVP....it was one player group vs another player group. This is a form of PVP...consider it 'indirect'. To fight against it you have to move more PVE tokens than your PVP attacker. Rather than shooting someone in the face, you are undermining their influence. This is not some underhanded move, this is the conflict design of the game.
Seems by playing the game...and moving more PVE trophies than you did! HHAHAHA!
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Is that meant to be in quotation marks as if said by another?
If not then it ignores the basic nature of the BGS - we all affect it, regardless of game mode. No point has been proven - other than the fact that the BGS is working.
I don’t buy the SDC.
I don’t believe they have the capacity or the will.
And if they did have the will - they’d be waving their flag.
The joy of SDC operations is the publicity.
SDC have done some amazing demonstrations of game breaking mechanics.
“Healies 4 Feelies”, anyone?
But they always take responsibility for their actions.
They have a kind of e-bushido that they stick to.
I don’t believe this is SDC.
I don’t believe they have the capacity or the will.
And if they did have the will - they’d be waving their flag.
The joy of SDC operations is the publicity.
SDC have done some amazing demonstrations of game breaking mechanics.
“Healies 4 Feelies”, anyone?
But they always take responsibility for their actions.
They have a kind of e-bushido that they stick to.
I don’t believe this is SDC.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
There are threads elsewhere that might change your opinion.
If they had won, we could have expected much trollery.
I was careful to say it wasn't SDC, or at least, not an organised SDC op, as far as the picture has been painted to me. It's an offshoot, let's say 'some of them, acting independently, under this fuelum fallacy thing or other. So don't paint this with SDC's usual MO, I agree it doesn't match.
And come on, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing that some of them would love to do. Attack the carebeary fuel rats? Are you kidding? That would be one ultimate victory for them, you don't think?
Ah, ok.
I don't call that PvP, but that doesn't matter - just semantics. The important part is understanding what is meant. Thanks for your clarification.
I understand what you say and probably agree. Some antagonistic gameplay can result in a lot of fun for everybody.
I don't think that the Fuel Rats could be described as carebears - maybe more like don'tcarebear. True they care about others, but apparently they don't care that much about themselves.
But maybe I'm idealizing them …
Player vs Player does not have to be pew pew in nature. Thinking that way closes a lot of interesting options for game play...this game exemplifies that idea. Pew pew PVP is allowed in the game, but has no bucket in the BGS, so remains a sideshow....by design. The attack on the Fuel Rats is a wonderful example of the success of this design choice. It provided an emergent reason for players to get together and fight against one another, albeit through PVE token movement. The players rallied and actually dug the Rat's out of a pretty big hole they found themselves in. Congrats to the attackers and defenders...the game works brilliantly!
Well, it's all PvP... technically... Haulage/bounty hunting/etc. for BGS influence/control is Player(s) vs Player(s), just indirect non-combat, and by all accounts far more effective within the context of the BGS. EDIT: ninja'd whike I made coffee!
What I find more confusing is by choosing solo/PG to do this from, they seem to be hurting their case from multiple fronts - we know doing the PvE activities is more effective (and both sides are helping demonstrate that); the call for aid has galvanised different parts of the community to come and play together against a common enemy with absolutely no complaints about how/where the attack came from (people are just getting on with it); it has created great opportunities for players interaction, cooperative work and crowded CZs (in open no less!) all to a far greater level than any pure combat PvP iniative would have... and to top it off, even if they had based their attack from open, are the FRats the type group that would have dropped everything, jumped in their uber combat ships, and patrolled their system?
Last edited:
Something that came across my desk today...makes a whole lot of sense in this discussion:
If they had won, we could have expected much trollery.
I was careful to say it wasn't SDC, or at least, not an organised SDC op, as far as the picture has been painted to me. It's an offshoot, let's say 'some of them, acting independently, under this fuelum fallacy thing or other. So don't paint this with SDC's usual MO, I agree it doesn't match.
And come on, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing that some of them would love to do. Attack the carebeary fuel rats? Are you kidding? That would be one ultimate victory for them, you don't think?
Who ever it is who is trying to undermine the push to protect the Fuel Rats in this war is a coward and should be ashamed of themselves.
After all and at the end of the day. Should they ever be stranded in the black and out of fuel, they would have the knowledge that the Fuel Rats would endevour to do their best to get to them. So why attack a Wing that is the most NEUTRAL in the whole universe by trying to undermine their home system.
I myself on a personal level will always answer the call to protect the Fuel Rats should they request it as they do not discriminate in there quest to help others.
Fly safe Cmdr's
o7
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
To try to elicit a response from the community - in the hope that the community would rail against the "injustice of players in Solo / PGs affecting the BGS where they can't be shot at".
They haven’t lost yet.
And come on, this is EXACTLY the kind of thing that some of them would love to do. Attack the carebeary fuel rats? Are you kidding? That would be one ultimate victory for them, you don't think?
SDC hate the solo mechanic, but they operate through publicity.
And they’re full of folks who only play to fight other CMDRs.
The whole notion of “kill minimum chips and cash in - do it in solo, rinse and repeat” I don’t think they would be able to convince enough of their cohort to care. To stay out of open. To put in enough effort, when there is a system full of hollow squares to pew pew.
Not without a big PR campaign. An announcement.
Remember “spicy bois”
There’s an announce and then an operation.
They’re not shy, and they love to kick the hornet’s nest.
It depends on the definition used. I prefer a definition that PvP is "pew pew". Personally I prefer narrow definitions of words that allow for more precise explanations. This makes it usually easier to express more complex thoughts.
But I don't have a problem if others use a different definition like you do. I just need to know what definition is used, and then adapt accordingly.
Not sure about that. I'm not a big fan of the idea that words shape the concept they symbolize. (Probably to off topic.)
I agree though that thinking to narrowly about things can result in not realizing that there are other options/things, but I don't think that the usage of words results in narrow thinking.
Completely agree.
I agree with everything you said, and that's why I'm saying this isn't SDC (from the beginning of the thread), but an off-shoot of players with a specific agenda. To say this is unlikely is to handwave a large number of personal accounts (which I can't share, how can I share word of mouth?)
I'm not Anti-SDC, by the way. Not in any way, shape or form. I respect them for being true to themselves and creating certain types of emergent content. I fly in Open.
Last edited:
Well, the problem will correct itself nicely won't it. Just give them the BGS then all people not playing in Open will be left with no game and leave, the game will die at which point no one will have a BGS.
Problem solved.
Or FD can kill off this "Open only" madness by stating there will be No Open Anything and be done with it.
Of course all of that invalidates the "Open Only" argument since it proves no PvP is necessary to fight a BGS battle, all it takes is PvE and that can be done from every mode and you don't need to see anyone to know it's happening.
I'd say well done attackers you've proven our point, you can stop now before you embarrass yourselves any further.