News Removal of 'UA Bombing'

[Robert Maynard]

But then your reason to remove UA bombing wouldn't hold anymore.

What reason?

 

[bigity]

There are, or soon we can say were some people notorious for complaining about the very existence of solo and private group modes, and kept using UA bombing as a means of metagaming trolling in an attempt to push their agenda.

I don't really count ollowbrains and his followers as a rational voice for any side.

 

[QBit4D]

What reason?

Uh... read up on your own posts? Just follow the quotation trail.

 

[Deareim]

The modes would seem to work as Frontier intended (given the fact that we have recently been reminded that Frontier's stance on the BGS remains unchanged after over six years since the design information was published).

Someone is going to have a bad wake up call in few months...

FD has already started his journey towards open, that you want it or not. CZ thargoid are one example, carrier a second one. Just need time.

 

[bigity]

The modes would seem to work as Frontier intended (given the fact that we have recently been reminded that Frontier's stance on the BGS remains unchanged after over six years since the design information was published).

Once again you equate 'this is how it has been' with 'this is how it should be'. Because it is currently this way is not a very good argument for WHY it should stay that way.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm curious as to why UA meets the criteria of being removed from the game entirely, when the solo/PG treatment is still left to ravage PP. If they don't want PP, they should say so and remove it. Else, work on fixing it.

What I'm hearing here is:

UA bombing from solo isn't fair!
But PP from solo is fine!

UA bombing worked in any mode - some even boasted of carrying out deliveries in Open. Yet it has been removed from all game modes - Frontier's decision.

Powerplay (and the BGS) are affected by players in any mode - Frontier has recently reaffirmed their stance on the BGS, i.e. every player affects it regardless of platform or game mode. They have not mentioned any decision on Powerplay since the pair of Flash Topics - it seems to have gone quiet again (as it did after the "hand grenade" of March'16).

 

[rootsrat]

I no longer have to worry about my favourite station getting bombed. That's a win in my book.

Also I know what I'm talking about. CMDRs can no longer shut down stations by selling UA. That's the dream baby.

Sure, if you think so...

But yes, I am also happy this has happened.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Uh... read up on your own posts? Just follow the quotation trail.

Frontier decided to removed it - for their own reasons.

I'm content that it has been removed - as it means that some players have less to complain about with regard to players who don't share their enjoyment of an optional play-style - whether or not the complaints change Frontier's stance (which they would seem to have not over the last six years or so).

 

[bigity]

UA bombing worked in any mode - some even boasted of carrying out deliveries in Open. Yet it has been removed from all game modes - Frontier's decision.

Powerplay (and the BGS) are affected by players in any mode - Frontier has recently reaffirmed their stance on the BGS, i.e. every player affects it regardless of platform or game mode. They have not mentioned any decision on Powerplay since the pair of Flash Topics - it seems to have gone quiet again (as it did after the "hand grenade" of March'16).

BUT BUT it was in the game, so they must have wanted it. I mean, that is how you talk about the lack of OOPP, so you must think FDev had it exactly right to start with, and can't entertain changing things?

 

[Curvemn17]

The modes would seem to work as Frontier intended (given the fact that we have recently been reminded that Frontier's stance on the BGS remains unchanged after over six years since the design information was published).

If that’s your stance then how can you possibly use that quote from some rando as justification for removing UA bombing?

 

[Dutchman141]

Good decision, I always found UA bombing a useless thing.

 

[Deareim]

Frontier decided to removed it - for their own reasons.

I'm content that it has been removed - as it means that some players have less to complain about with regard to players who don't share their enjoyment of an optional play-style - whether or not the complaints change Frontier's stance (which they would seem to have not over the last six years or so).

It is quite selfish to see it that way. Me first, I don t care about others. The game is suppose to be for all, not just you.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Once again you equate 'this is how it has been' with 'this is how it should be'. Because it is currently this way is not a very good argument for WHY it should stay that way.

Neither, in my opinion, is the argument of the subset of the community seeking to change it "because it's the way we like to play".

Frontier are well aware of the PvP / PvE fracture in the community - I expect that there are three game modes and a single shared galaxy state because they were aware that it was pretty much an inevitability before they even published their game design in Nov'12.

 

[withnail]

One less reason for players who prefer an optional play-style to complain about players "hiding" in other modes affecting "their" game from where they cannot shoot at them....

This is not excellent news.

That's just another milestone in your neverending internet battle.

 

[bigity]

Neither, in my opinion, is the argument of the subset of the community seeking to change it "because it's the way we like to play".

Frontier are well aware of the PvP / PvE fracture in the community - I expect that there are three game modes and a single shared galaxy state because they were aware that it was pretty much an inevitability before they even published their game design in Nov'12.

Not 'because its the way we like to play', rather 'this makes the game better, AND makes more sense' - especially given FDev's stance that PP is a consensual pvp system of Elite.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It is quite selfish to see it that way. Me first, I don t care about others. The game is suppose to be for all, not just you.

My preference had no bearing on Frontier's decision.

Indeed the game is for all players, not just those who prefer this or that play-style. Frontier are well aware that two play-styles in particular are fundamentally opposed - and they choose not to force these players to mix - one game for all is what we have.

 

[Screemonster]

It is quite selfish to see it that way. Me first, I don t care about others. The game is suppose to be for all, not just you.

It's quite selfish to insist that single players or small groups should be able to disrupt things for the all, too. I don't want your "emergent content". What gives you the right to impose it on me?

 

[Harfang]

This brings to me Nostalgy... I remember when I was a White Templars and we were the first to use this Weapon of Massive Destruction against Harma, the Kumo Crew capital. That was an epic moment of the Pegasis War. Hail to the other veterans that still play this game and keep the fort of Imperial prosperity. o7

 

[Robert Maynard]

Not 'because its the way we like to play', rather 'this makes the game better, AND makes more sense' - especially given FDev's stance that PP is a consensual pvp system of Elite.

Better for whom? All players? .... or just the subset of players who enjoy a currently entirely optional play-style?

Powerplay is currently entirely consensual PvP, i.e. if you don't consent to PvP you can engage in it in either Solo or Private Groups. If it was meant to be required PvP if pledged then it should never have been implemented in all three game modes - yet DBOBE spoke of players in Solo affecting Powerplay around the time of its launch - so I doubt that the pan-modal implementation was an accident. It would seem that there are mixed messages from Frontier between Powerplay's design intent and implementation.

 

[Curvemn17]

It's quite selfish to insist that single players or small groups should be able to disrupt things for the all, too. I don't want your "emergent content". What gives you the right to impose it on me?

Please explain how it disrupted the game? There was a brinks report, you see a station on it or rather your station on it and you go pick up MAs and sell them to counter it. It was rather easy. He is allowed to impose that upon you because it’s a shared universe? What gives you the right to impose a govt type of a faction on my playstyle? I want anarchy in every system.