This game owns the flight model-period and end of story P.
BUT...I found there is far far more to enjoy in gameplay than a flight model. Microsoft 2020 will have quite the flight model but I so far have no motivation to engage it
Why is being a "prey" of a pirate in open a bad game design...
- Thread starter Alsteif
- Start date
This game owns the flight model-period and end of story P.
BUT...I found there is far far more to enjoy in gameplay than a flight model. Microsoft 2020 will have quite the flight model but I so far have no motivation to engage it
Well I pirate as you described, and if you go to a high sell price system for LTDs you are almost guaranteed to find a pirate, plus unfortunately a ganker is a distinct possibility. It only takes a small number of them to get themselves noticed. However I should add that they can be evaded fairly easily and could even make fun of them
The problem with this is that it then limits the licence to advanced and experienced players. New players who cannot afford the licence are unable to make the choice.
But thats sensible precautions though. A lot of traders fly the bare minimum (at NPC level).
Trader hulls were upped not so long ago, but it should have been that way (as well as delicate thrusters) to make it so its easy to disable- and that repair was also possible at the same time for those who were disabled.
If traders had to venture into pirate space to score big, then you'd have that specialisation- i.e, dangerous places ramp up the profit (and set natural places to pirate). The scores come to the pirates, driven by the BGS / CGs. Its a better place than now where everyone mines to make money, gets top end ships with unending rebuys, and ganks in them because they are disposable.
Indeed, its what was wrong to begin with- stopping a trader was hitting engines but the hull went pop beforehand.
In an ideal world pirate tools would indicate intention, just as seeing a prowling FdL with an interdictor spells trouble. Seeing a pirate with cytos, hatchbreakers etc is at least a sign its a pirate and not someone out to kill them for no reason- not that it stops people logging anyway.
NPCs don't work throughout the game anyway
As you know NPCs are window dressing for the abstracted BGS. The biggest change would be having NPCs that are actually outfitted to be pirates- cytos, hatchbreakers etc, fast ships and are prevalent all over based on sec level (much more than now, surrounding stations etc for a sneaky theft, that is, if drop zones were pathetically short, another mistake). Its far too late sadly, which is a shame. The problem is under equipping and making credits scarce drives innovation, guile and teamwork. Pirates should be parasites that leech from greedy traders, the median pirate ship being something cheap to run and fuel (and fast).
There is none. It's literal point-and-click.
Is there something wrong with that?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
They try to be that already - however this thread seems to revolve around the fact that they're not much fun to play with for a not insignificant number of players - as being subjected to a parasitical encounter is not every players idea of "fun", more of an acquired taste.
The safest outcome for piracy should be the mark dropping cargo to placate the pirate. If you can't get that (i.e. traders see logging as the safest outcome) then the design is a failure.
Indeed they can, such as mining now. But to have actual 24:7 careers you need to establish workable game loops. A thrifty pirate who knows his ship and mark (that does not magic out of existence) should be able to prosper.
Pirate encounters should mean something- if a pirate player loses for out of game reasons, thats silly. The pirate won and did things right, but lost. Thats rewarding bad habits and punishing playing.
Yes and no- for generic open play I agree, Powerplay however in an open context would be 100% full fat. The main thing is that once this is decided pre game, you can't alter your choices and for that session have to abide by them.
I just want Open to be what was envisioned, a dangerous place that if you fly right is just about survivable and grows with you. Do you score large by flying into hostile space full of gangs, or keep to safe places with the occasional weak pirate? That simply does not exist in ED, its all topsy turvy.
Quit trying to gank/murderhobo and it won't be a problem
Not that I was aware of, why? Are you trying to put words into my mouth?
The only OPEN ONLY mode we should have is an Iron man mode. That would shut gankers up real fast as they lose all their creds and precious g5 engineering
And for some occasions I don't mind the block- however in certain features its misused (Powerplay) and distorts a mode.
Having too many rules means every player plays to a different game, and when those collide we get these well trodden problems.
If ED had an ecosystem that encouraged co-op play like convoys for protection, hired wing members etc being in a herd would not be a death sentence.
This is firstly high subjective and secondly for old geezers like me impossible unless it also grows backwards, if you see what I mean.
Well you said it as if it were
Too bad, other players don't like playing with you. I'm sure there's players that don't like playing with me, tough. It's a game, don't take it so seriously
No, good design is good design. Look at Powerplay, within five minutes people saw the blatant problems that can be ironed out if only the designers sat down and thought about it. People predicted 5C, collusion piracy, foretold the future Powerplay we live in.
They be like "Oh I regret open-only please take it back!" (non-gankers should also fall under iron man mode, it's fair.)There is that. I can hear the howls of anguish right now!
Nope, you wanted this.
I agree. This is a problem. We need to think about how to solve this. You can implement an increase in the price of the "license" depending on the growth of the "combat rank". (this is for example and there are other possible solutions)
No, that's your interpretation.
Despite having finished my coffee today, I'm having some difficulty in understanding quite what it is that MadSinUN is getting at and I thought that this time I understood, thanks to him simplifying it for me.