No, if the solution to your problem or the problem of a group of players does not affect the interests of those for whom it is not a problem, then those for whom the specified problem does not matter are unlikely to be against your decision. The "player lock" function in open mode was also not a common problem, but nevertheless it was introduced and even upgraded. If players didn't ask for the introduction and upgrade of this feature, then no one would have done it.
Why is being a "prey" of a pirate in open a bad game design...
- Thread starter Alsteif
- Start date
No, if the solution to your problem or the problem of a group of players does not affect the interests of those for whom it is not a problem, then those for whom the specified problem does not matter are unlikely to be against your decision. The "player lock" function in open mode was also not a common problem, but nevertheless it was introduced and even upgraded. If players didn't ask for the introduction and upgrade of this feature, then no one would have done it.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Except for the fact that many of the solutions to a perceived problem experienced by some players would affect the interests of players for whom it is not a problem, e.g. "all players affect the shared galaxy state" is a problem for some players and changing it so that only players in Open would affect the galaxy state would affect those who choose not to play in Open.
Frontier seems to have made improvements to the block feature over time unilaterally - I don't remember a Dev response to a suggestion to strengthen it.
I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
But those who want to fully engage in Pvp games in open mode are not able to do this (CQC is not an open game). The only way to exercise your right to do this is by arranging a meeting with other Pvp players. Looks depressing doesn't it? Also because of this, some variants of piracy, bounty hunting, and even race\griferstvo are excluded (these styles also have the right to exist). We need to find a solution so that nothing changes for Pve players in open mode, so that they still remain absolutely safe from Pvp-style players. However, it is necessary that the Pvp players can fully exercise their right to the Pvp style in open mode.
Specify. I suggest that we find a solution that does not affect the interests of those for whom this is not a problem.
If your playing style doesn't change because some feature is added to improve my playing style, will you be against it? Will your tea turn salty if I drink lemonade? I don't think so) And if in fact, then no one personally owes me anything)
There are no "rights" in this game and to think so is a fallacy.
Someone who doesn't want to be prey shouldn't be prey, right?
Fear is the best motivator for preparation.
The two things are not connected. Your drinking lemonade is not connected to me drinking tea. We both, however play elite and are therefore connected, whether we wish to be or not.
However, as for the first part of your post, you would first have to prove to me that the change in no way negatively affected me in my play style and then my answer would be "not for, not against".
This is what we do when we live on the same planet and at the same time. But it is quite true that your tea has nothing to do with my lemonade. A decision that doesn't affect your interests just like my lemonade won't change your tea.
Those that want to engage in PvP games are perfectly able to do so. The only caveat is, they can only pursue that with other Commanders that want to join in. PvP players have no claim over the game's mechanics, they belong to everyone who bought the game. PvP in open is available to anyone and everyone at any time.
Excluding some players from your open experience is the same as excluding them all by playing in Solo. PvP should not be able to hold player-interaction hostage. For the players that seek co-op game play, or simply new friends shouldn't have to sacrifice their game time to anyone, or any purpose. Specifically, because that is how the game is designed. This design decision has been emphasized by FD when they made the Block function more powerful, and easier to use. Take the hint, already.
All of page 18-21 until your post none made any attempt to keep the discussion on topic.
This thread isn't about "PvE vs PvP" it's about feeling like a prey to pirates and why that would be bad game design (or not). It's not about PvE vs PvP. Please don't make me have to report pages upon pages for being off-topic.
I guess if this was a true statement, we wouldn't be discussing this now, and this issue wouldn't have been raised so often in the past.
Feeling like a "prey" and a "victim" where something is taken from you is all about perspective. I don't feel like anything is taken from me if I'm interdicted and attacked - gameplay is given to me. If a pirate didn't attack me, I would be doing less. The pirate add gameplay, and make a session more dynamic. That is positive.
If you disagree, please argue why it's bad game design.
If you disagree, please argue why it's bad game design.
You may have to explain that post. It doesn't seem connected to my comment.
Anyone not interested in that type of play, can avoid it completely. If it is good game play for some, that is enough.
Sorry, I took a break just there, I needed a fresh cup of tea. These philosophical discussions always make me thirsty.
