Perhaps not everything is there for the reasons you think.
In any case, I'll continue to, as you put it "not understand", and yet somehow still have fun.
What do you guys think of a minimum timer locking you in for conflict zones and powerplay zones?
- Thread starter WorldsGreatestForumDad
- Start date
Perhaps not everything is there for the reasons you think.
In any case, I'll continue to, as you put it "not understand", and yet somehow still have fun.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Thats fine. Ill be here when youre ready and willing to accept help.
Fair enough, but um... Don't hold your breath.
I'd turn it on its head, and have it so you have a chain of POI zones harder than the last. So, you would start with one POI to defend a ship, the next destroy 3 transports, the next assault a cap ship, and so on. Each stage rewards you a scooby point but you can stop at any point when you feel its too much. You could have a mega reward for completing the chain (say, 10 POIs complete and won awards you extra points).
If done right you have it presented like a police APB where the war controller gives you missions via the message pop up, and you can accept the next one or refuse it.
If done right you have it presented like a police APB where the war controller gives you missions via the message pop up, and you can accept the next one or refuse it.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Hell yea. Im just lookng at what we have now. We have objectives spawning in those zones though. Those new ones adam showed us. you get a pretty big boost if you win them. They already exist. Just not like that. They spawn randomly.
Last edited:
If I remember (it's been a few years) Eve used to have something similar.
I don't understand your point. You win wars by avoiding having to face the rebuy screen (by retreating when heavily damaged) and by forcing your enemies to face the rebuy screen (by fetching more ammo).
You want to force me to fight inefficiently.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Yes. This is called trying, adjusting and working together to complete a goal.
Last edited:
Deleted member 110222
D
This is better. It retains the choice for the player to retreat when they need to, not when the clock says they can.
I had thought as much, I was wondering at what point we get to the stage where they fail to acknowledge everything that's already been said about multiple modes by Frontier. I think we're probably there at this point.
If your goal is winning the battle, you have made progress towards that end by chasing someone out of it. Maybe you should try, adjust, and work together to shut down some FSD's when people are trying to escape you, if it is a problem for you.
Quite. We could almost be looking at a second Hotel California situation.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Yes we can do that. But the point is for people to engage each other.
Not drop in and leave because someone else is there. Then go to a different one in the same system because it maybe empty.
Why not? Not everyone wants to fight other players.
Are you advocating against "play your own way"? Because if so, you might be in the wrong game.
Well, just as a basic premise, sometimes I get bored and want to do something else. Do I lose the right to change my mind?
What if log in thinking I fancy a bit of poopoo, drop into a crime sweep, then a nonPP mate mesages me and I would rather do stuff with her? Or, more realistically than me having mates who play ED, I drop into a military strike and heyho, there's 8 FDLs - I can't evaluate my situation and make a hasty retreat? How is that in any way a good mechanism?
As for mechanics, how do you envision locking someone in? Can they not low/hi wake? What's to stop them boosting away - will there be an invisible thunderdome sphere they bounce off of? If they log out, can they not then log back in until the timer runs down? What's the penalty for logging out?
Then there's the potential for balance / abuse. What's the maximum ship / instance allowed in ED? If one side ensures they always travel with more than 50% of what an instance can manage, what do the other side do?
Here's a silly tactic... your side has a crew of 8 ships that go around attacking military strikes in the system, always together, to ensure all 8 of you instance in the same zone together (let's call you guys Supper-Awesome-PvP-OpenOnly-Gods, or Sappoog for short). An opposing side (let's call them OMG-I'mSoSuperScared-PvE-Gods, or Omgissspeg for short) figures out your tactics, so they come at you with two 800m/s Couriers and 6 SuperFastkill PvE ships. They send their Couriers to find the zone you're in... effectively locking you in there while they do perma-boost laps around the edge of the zone, just wasting your time and avoiding you. The other 6 ships then pair up and demolish three other zones in the system vs NPCs. Congratulations, you've just PvPed your way to a hefty loss, because you're all locked into one zone.
Just to be clear, I have no issue with PvP or being killed in PP conflict, I have never played in any mode other than Open*, and I have openly supported OOPP (for more than simple PvP reasons). I will, however fight my battles on my terms, sometimes I may win the day by destroying my enemy(s), sometimes I may lose by dieing on the field of battle. Sometimes I may win by driving my enemies off, making them flee from my obvious superiority, and that is no less a win in my books. This 'locking in' concept is just completely daft.
*this may change during DW2 if everyone else is in the designated PG.
Last edited:
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
You can still play your own way. You can choose if you're there or not.
Like logging into open in general. You know the consequences already. No reason to complain about it.
I rarely do... At least, I rarely start threads to complain... Unlike some I could mention.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
All penalties are a loss to you and your team. You're only hurting yourselves if you dont fight for them.
Thats the point of wars and powerplay.
S
Sounds bad.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Why?