Goose4291
Banned
It always amused me that a few months later, it turned out we'd usually been hitting the same targets.
Remember the Mockrage this caused?
News Removal of 'UA Bombing'
- Thread starter Edward Lewis
- Start date
It always amused me that a few months later, it turned out we'd usually been hitting the same targets.
Remember the Mockrage this caused?
Uh huh, sure pal. I see you missed the sarcasm about anarchies in every system based on the comment I was replying to. Outside of that, it’s useful for more than you seem to understand.
Maybe your GG approach to those you replied to about the BGS would carry more weight if you hadn’t admitted on discord to having little to no understanding of UA bombing. You make a lot of huff about self proclaimed criminals without any real footing to stand on. UA bombing is a much different element of the game than lockdown, they operate in different manners as well and require different play styles to make them happen.
No. Illogical mechanic detected. Mechanic nerfed.
If you look at that objectively, that's coming off as mocking and spiteful - and personal - and is likely to be one of the factors involved in deciding to end UA bombing.
So for the players who genuinely liked the mechanic and treated it as part of their fun gaming in the spirit it was intended (i.e. not personal/spiteful/mocking), then have all my sympathies. But instead of having a go at those who support the mechanic's removal, perhaps blame those players who used UA bombing in this more personal/micking/spiteful way?
The entire BGS is like that, though.
I saw a case - which I will slightly anonymise to protect the guilty - where a player was convinced that Frontier had manually intervened to nerf their trade route after they'd talked about it on the forums. They hadn't at all, of course - it was just how BGS states had interacted in their standard fashion with the local markets - in this case causing a good that they were trading to disappear entirely (though temporarily) from the supplied list. That was an extreme case, but I've seen rather more cases of normal behaviour being bug reported, or otherwise complained about.
The way the markets work in Elite Dangerous is not particularly complicated. But it's got far more depth and detail to it than 99%+ of players understand, nonetheless. And because the markets respond to player actions (in several different ways), often the reason for "why can't I do X it worked yesterday?" is "other players, none of whom will face any consequences for buying the last Palladium / starting a War in the next system over / putting a Theocracy in charge of this station".
There certainly are players who would be much happier with a fully static galaxy, but that's generally not the design direction Frontier has taken.
I am well aware of the difference. UA bombing affected one Station, Lockdown affects all Stations in all Systems a (P)MF owns.
Simply because I never UA bombed myself or had it happen to us (except due to faulty BMs that weren't supposed to be operational) doesn't mean I don't grasp the overall mechanic.
UA bombing is gone and Lockdown needs to be done separately for each System soon.
Let's see how much serious criminals are left once the Update goes live shall we?
Last edited:
You keep insisting criminals, in what realm is this just a criminal element? Or is any faction that kills innocents or system security or UA bombs criminals in your eyes? There are many people/groups/factions that have used these mechanics that would consider themselves white knights or do gooders. It’s not like people are going to suddenly stop playing the game. If anything this will make the games easier for criminals to manipulate the BGS of different systems at once.
The complaint about removing UA bombing is that it was another tool in any groups arsenal and the auto waving of removing and fixing starports is utter ridiculous. If you remove it then you should at least allow cmdrs to direct goid incursions with dropping the UAs still but it doesn’t cause a bombing it attracts the goids. Then again you’d have to remove the BM aspect so those without them would have the ability to be impacted.
Hi, Ed.
Can you tell us, when will the ‘stolen’ indicator be removed from the values of the targoid probes, which can be found in USS signals threat 2 in the orbits of ammonia planets?
It's very strange that the removal of probes from thargoids concerned the jurisdiction of the people, while the same probes free-flying in non-human signals do not bear such label.
Can you tell us, when will the ‘stolen’ indicator be removed from the values of the targoid probes, which can be found in USS signals threat 2 in the orbits of ammonia planets?
It's very strange that the removal of probes from thargoids concerned the jurisdiction of the people, while the same probes free-flying in non-human signals do not bear such label.
MA is also a product of the growth around Thargoid planetary sites, I suppose you could go and shoot all of those too...
Getting rid of UA bombing makes sense in the unfolding storyline, so well done Devs
Anyway, back to manipulation of BGS - in solo, of course
Well, the second half of that is in - "Along with these changes, you will now be able to sell Thargoid items legally rather than via the black market."
And given the number of damaged megaships with "we never thought carrying Thargoid items would attract their attention" log messages, it would be entirely unsurprising if the first half was also in. But it would be understandable if they didn't mention that up front
That's the question isn't it. What causes Tharg Incursions in 3.3?
(Genuine question, not doing Beta).
As long as players can cause an Incursion (which is going to disrupt local faction activities surely) through one action or another, then nothing should be lost, apart from the quite nuclear OP-ness of a UA Bomb.
I agree. I hope players can as well. It would be nice if we were told. But the UA bombing hasn’t been OP for awhile. It was severely nerfed and as long as you payed attention to the Brinks report you could go grab MAs at a barnacle near by and easily stop shutdown. It just usually took a few doing it.
Yes, but not on the same scale. Any reasonable person would surely agree that changes in the BGS are, for a new player, not even remotely as invasive as UA bombing starter systems, for example. And I am reasonably confident LHS3447 wont be the target of an incursion any time soon.
This is a good decision. Well done Fdev. As mentioned this ties in nicely with on going lore.
The only people who are going to be upset by this are the griefers who get a kick out of UA bombing.
The only people who are going to be upset by this are the griefers who get a kick out of UA bombing.
From what I was told (no first hand experience) Commanders were able to change where Thargoids would go. Scouts are the first to arrive. Kill enough and the Thargs would move to another System.
Also having Ammonia Worlds might be what attracts them. And last but not least the negative trait of humanity as a whole - to perceive everything alien as a threat and pull the trigger instead of trying to communicate peacefully first.
But we can't go on without conflict it seems. Neanderthal through and through.
Also having Ammonia Worlds might be what attracts them. And last but not least the negative trait of humanity as a whole - to perceive everything alien as a threat and pull the trigger instead of trying to communicate peacefully first.
But we can't go on without conflict it seems. Neanderthal through and through.
Damning humanity on the incorrect rumours of someone else.
What you heard is wrong.
And damning Neanderthals as savages too even thought that is wrong also, really?
Prove us all wrong and go communicate peacefully with some scouts.
Last edited:
I have to say that this is a good change.
While the idea of players being able to cause major disruption is interesting, it was handled in a really bad way.
Exploits were found for even individual players to (relatively) easily take down stations, while there was no actual way to counter the players themselves do this, other than ship in meta alloys, because of instancing and solo play.
It was a very two dimensional and bad form of interaction.
While the idea of players being able to cause major disruption is interesting, it was handled in a really bad way.
Exploits were found for even individual players to (relatively) easily take down stations, while there was no actual way to counter the players themselves do this, other than ship in meta alloys, because of instancing and solo play.
It was a very two dimensional and bad form of interaction.
Why? Players have little enough agency in the game as it is. On the face of it this seems like a disappointing and surprisingly unnecessary change.
No chance for that anymore since the damage was done when the first numbskulls started shooting at the Thargoids. They didn't get hostile until after that (well, yeah, disabling our ships and scanning us was so threatening!)
Incorrect rumours of someone else? Let me mix text with picture and that hopefully will drive the point home:
Not damning the original Homo neanderthalensis, because they didn't know better. We're supposed to be Homo sapiens, more evolved and advanced. Seeing the state of this planet I'm not really buying that, sorry.