Elite not very dangerous ?

[Robert Maynard]

CGs and PowerPlay should be Open-only (and I said this even last year when I was stuck in Solo).

Other opinions, naturally, vary.

 

[Brrokk]

CGs and PowerPlay should be Open-only (and I said this even last year when I was stuck in Solo).

It's CGs now? Even PP wouldn't be enough? 8-0

 

[Rubbernuke]

That might be what you want - however the PKers did the possibility of effective piracy tools a great disservice back in the day - as "real pirates" were found to be in very short supply compared to those who just like to watch player ships go "boom".

Any features that facilitate "real" piracy will be used by those who just want explosions - which is probably why PvP piracy has suffered.

If you want to run round with pants on your head being told to dance the Hornpipe, go to Shin Dez. Outside the main areas of lunacy its all about the shiny.

So hand them over, real nice now.

 

[Drelthar]

That might be what you want - however the PKers did the possibility of effective piracy tools a great disservice back in the day - as "real pirates" were found to be in very short supply compared to those who just like to watch player ships go "boom".

Any features that facilitate "real" piracy will be used by those who just want explosions - which is probably why PvP piracy has suffered.

Here's an idea for a feature pirates could use, but pew pew boomers might not have as much fun with.

A weapon system (or two) that does no damage to hull, but can damage modules (another that can only damage shields technically exists, but it's locked behind powerplay and kinda... isn't very useful - but still a good start)

That weapons system doesn't even have to do extra damage to modules, as long as it means I can KNOW I'm not going to accidentally destroy the mark. It's a real problem for me, I've accidentally destroyed over 12 ships now (since 2014) and that's way too many for my liking.

 

[Old Duck]

It's CGs now? Even PP wouldn't be enough? 8-0

It's called a COMMUNITY Goal, not a Solo Goal, LOL.

On a serious note, I'm not saying make CGs Open-only (and if I did, that's a grammatical error on my part), I'm saying make Open-only CGs. Do you see the difference? The folks in Colonia will appreciate the nuance.

* edit - yes, I did make that grammatical error. Ooops!

 

[Robert Maynard]

Here's an idea for a feature pirates could use, but pew pew boomers might not have as much fun with.

A weapon system (or two) that does no damage to hull, but can damage modules (another that can only damage shields technically exists, but it's locked behind powerplay and kinda... isn't very useful - but still a good start)

That weapons system doesn't even have to do extra damage to modules, as long as it means I can KNOW I'm not going to accidentally destroy the mark. It's a real problem for me, I've accidentally destroyed over 12 ships now (since 2014) and that's way too many for my liking.

Anything that can disable a target can and will be used by those who are not going to engage in piracy.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's called a COMMUNITY Goal, not a Solo Goal, LOL.

Indeed - and every player is a member of the community - regardless of their preferred game mode.

 

[Old Duck]

Indeed - and every player is a member of the community - regardless of their preferred game mode.

Even the bots?

 

[Drelthar]

Anything that can disable a target can and will be used by those who are not going to engage in piracy.

I mean, sure, but it would be a total waste of a hard-point for pew pew boomers, if it did the same amount of damage to modules as any other module destroying weapon, but none to the hull. It's literally a downgrade of another more powerful weapon. It's only useful to someone who doesn't want to destroy the hull, and gives no advantage to someone who does.

If it did more damage to modules, then yes, it would likely be another one of the tools used by killspurts - like the FSD disrupter, and the others.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Even the bots?

Bots are bots, not players. They're also cheating.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I mean, sure, but it would be a total waste of a hard-point for pew pew boomers, if it did the same amount of damage to modules as any other module destroying weapon, but none to the hull. It's literally a downgrade of another more powerful weapon. It's only useful to someone who doesn't want to destroy the hull, and gives no advantage to someone who does.

If it did more damage to modules, then yes, it would likely be another one of the tools used by killspurts - like the FSD disrupter, and the others.

Not a total waste - if they could keep a ship from escaping indefinitely without the possibility of accidentally destroying it - I'm pretty sure that some would find that ability very appealing indeed - and not for piracy.

 

[Drelthar]

Not a total waste - if they could keep a ship from escaping indefinitely without the possibility of accidentally destroying it - I'm pretty sure that some would find that ability very appealing indeed - and not for piracy.

You could already keep people in that state for a rather long time by using missiles to destroy the thrusters, then tickling the thrusters with a weak laser if they ever rebooted.

I see your point though, stabmonkeys will always find a way.

 

[Drelthar]

I still want that weapon system though!

 

[Old Duck]

Bots are bots, not players. They're also cheating.

In Solo.

 

[Cmdr Nemo]

I'm not a pirate nor will I ever be one. Thus I don't know the difference between interdicting a human vs an NPC in regards to obtaining anything even if for the sole purpose of watching their ship go boom. In as much as human's have the ability to "Combat Log" which by any other name is the same, and doing so upsets one, and NPC's don't have the ability to CL; Why bother to interdict humans and just stick to interdicting NPC's.

I'd concur that just like it's ones choice to Combat Log or any other version of the meaning "CL" It's ones choice to hunt humans vs NPC. Except an NPC will never ever throw salt about their being interdicted or being destroyed like humans do.

 

[Robert Maynard]

In Solo.

In any game mode.

 

[Old Duck]

Except an NPC will never ever throw salt about their being interdicted or being destroyed like humans do.

They should. Somebody write an app for this!

 

[IndigoWyrd]

Good question, what is the point of the pirate interdicting another player? It's not lucrative, it's not guaranteed to provide "fun" for both parties.

Unless it's about making another player dance to the tune of the interdictor?

In my Private Group we play a little game we call "Interdiction Tag", wherein groups of players wing together, with one player being designated at "It", who then attempts to interdict anyone else in the group. If they are successful, the interdicted player becomes "It". Rinse and repeat until Fun is depleted. Turns out it's not just a fun little thing to do, but it also helps people become better at evading interdictions, as well as performing interdictions. Learn to evade another player, and no NPC will ever stop you again. You'll also surprise a few players when they think of you as an easy mark and leave them spinning in the distance.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Against a wing ?.

Its possible to have the cooldown effect the whole wing, although i would say that's a natural advantage of being in a wing and it shouldn't, it should just be on a per ship basis.

All depends on how meta they want to get with any sort of restriction.

 

[Stigbob]

Its possible to have the cooldown effect the whole wing, although i would say that's a natural advantage of being in a wing and it shouldn't, it should just be on a per ship basis.

All depends on how meta they want to get with any sort of restriction.

People would bypass the cooldown by flying together but not winged.