Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: The blocking feature shouldn't have effect if the blocked person is from an enemy Power

  1. #1

    The blocking feature shouldn't have effect if the blocked person is from an enemy Power

    If everyone playing PP in Open blocks every single enemy they see, they're essentially creating their own Solo.

    I'm hoping Frontier doesn't allow for this.

    I'm also hoping the karma system arrives with the PP changes, otherwise people will combat log even more.

  2. #2
    Then if players really want to play PP on their own they will block other player connections via their router.

    There has to be an easy way to block the odd bad player.

  3. #3
    This is an example of why Open Only power play is not going to create what some people think it will. Yes, there may be a few extra freighters blown blown up, but in the grand scheme of powers moving humbreds of thousands into the multi millions of materials every cycle, the ability to blow up more freighter due to them all in open is not going make much of a difference. There may be a few more PvP combat battles, but like it is now, virtually all undermining will be still be NPC farming.

    As extraordinarily unlikely as it is that they would do it, even if they removed the blocking function for PP pledged players, router/firewall blocking, 15 second timer logging, combat logging, powers creating safe schedules for moving stuff, powers figuring out the schedule of other powers, instance stuffing with wings, multicrew destabilizing wings.

    The irony of all of this is...If Power Play goes open only, the new Power Play meta will be tailored to avoiding other powers in Open.

  4. #4
    Originally Posted by straha20 View Post (Source)
    This is an example of why Open Only power play is not going to create what some people think it will. Yes, there may be a few extra freighters blown blown up, but in the grand scheme of powers moving humbreds of thousands into the multi millions of materials every cycle, the ability to blow up more freighter due to them all in open is not going make much of a difference. There may be a few more PvP combat battles, but like it is now, virtually all undermining will be still be NPC farming.

    As extraordinarily unlikely as it is that they would do it, even if they removed the blocking function for PP pledged players, router/firewall blocking, 15 second timer logging, combat logging, powers creating safe schedules for moving stuff, powers figuring out the schedule of other powers, instance stuffing with wings, multicrew destabilizing wings.

    The irony of all of this is...If Power Play goes open only, the new Power Play meta will be tailored to avoiding other powers in Open.
    Geez. Maybe they should just shut down the entire game, because there's no possible way to fix things. And every attempt to do so is doomed to fail.

    You know what? Making mistakes and analysing them is how a lot of people learn. You can plan only so much on paper before you have to conduct at least some field tests where further phenomena you didn't account for may emerge from. Then you'll have to deal with them and find solutions. That's just how development works.

  5. #5
    Originally Posted by Kee View Post (Source)
    Geez. Maybe they should just shut down the entire game, because there's no possible way to fix things. And every attempt to do so is doomed to fail.

    You know what? Making mistakes and analysing them is how a lot of people learn. You can plan only so much on paper before you have to conduct at least some field tests where further phenomena you didn't account for may emerge from. Then you'll have to deal with them and find solutions. That's just how development works.
    The open/pg/solo debate has been perhaps the most contentious and heated and long standing debate within this community. This is not an issue to be making development experiments with.

    The problem FD faces is that they continually take the utopian vision which is fine, but they fail to take into account, even with player input during testing, the absolute lengths some players will go to to be disruptive to other players for the sole intent of being disruptive. It's all about Happy Path with little consideration for how players will manipulate, exploit, abuse everything in game and out of game.

  6. #6
    Originally Posted by Nick Sticks View Post (Source)
    Then if players really want to play PP on their own they will block other player connections via their router.
    I've seen this mentioned a lot, in light of the PP Open-only proposal. I admit I have no clue in regards to these methods... but, theoretically, shouldn't FDEV be able to track this sort of behavior via their telemetry and eventually take action against repeat offenders circumventing game rules, possibly with a ban?

    Not saying that this will necessarily happen, we had two big CLogging scandals not so long ago and frankly I don't trust FDEV like I used to anymore, but I'm asking if the above is technically possible.

  7. #7
    Ever since release, cascading the cheapest, nastiest, RAM-starved consumer gateway with the CPU from a Casio calculator and the fabric from tramps pants has been weaponized by players determined to do so.

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by Cocalarix View Post (Source)
    If everyone playing PP in Open blocks every single enemy they see, they're essentially creating their own Solo.

    I'm hoping Frontier doesn't allow for this.
    I don't see an issue.

    Blocking players is essential to prevent griefing. Now you say griefers should have access to a player just because the player has pledged to a power?
    That's mixing up vital out-of-game mechanics with ingame stuff. It will have a negative effect to those players playing in open.

    Therefore, the blocklist should be left as it is.

  9. #9
    I think the blocklist could stay as it is.. I mean, a person would have to go through a tremendous amount of effort to block every opponent they could face, and would be a real sisyphean task because they'd always encounter new players. It's probably a non-issue in this regard, at least not a big enough issue that the block tool should be changed so that it wouldn't provide intended protection to someone just because of fringe cases.

    Anyway, is the blocklist even large enough for this to be feasible?

    If block lists don't have limits then I could imagine that having a really large block list could probably cause the system to break down after a while, and either start dumping you into instances with people whom you've blocked anyway just because it couldn't resolve your outlandish blacklist, or have you sit inside every blue 'immersion tunnel' for five minutes while the game works thru your mile-long list on every wake change. If that's the case I could see this being a self-correcting issue.

  10. #10
    Blocking should be reverted back to just dealing with comms, not instancing. This should be the case in every mode as it is too easy to exploit.

  11. #11
    Nevermind, i decided to create whole thread about this...

  12. #12
    Originally Posted by straha20 View Post (Source)
    The open/pg/solo debate has been perhaps the most contentious and heated and long standing debate within this community. This is not an issue to be making development experiments with.

    The problem FD faces is that they continually take the utopian vision which is fine, but they fail to take into account, even with player input during testing, the absolute lengths some players will go to to be disruptive to other players for the sole intent of being disruptive. It's all about Happy Path with little consideration for how players will manipulate, exploit, abuse everything in game and out of game.
    If there's an inability to learn from mistakes, yes, there are things that should better not be tried.

    But personally I'm at a point in this game (played thousands of hours since the beta), where I would not mind chaos if it leads to some actual prospects for the future of this game. And the sooner they break the game, the better are the opportunities to fix it before we head even further down this one way road. Because we are direly in need of more dynamics in the game, that is what keeps people interested in the longer term according to empirical evidence from other multiplayer games. Of course the alternative is hand tailored content that's released on regular basis by the developers. But I don't know a single online game where this worked out for more than a year or so until they had to resort to some kind of grindy soft caps to keep those that are sensitive to the Skinner box busy until their next expansion is ready.

  13. #13
    Being able to remove asshats from my gaming experience is essential.

    If players feel the need to misuse that function, maybe they're asshats.

  14. #14
    Originally Posted by Pheerasink View Post (Source)
    In a few words - forced Open is currently just technically impossible. Explanation is here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...on-to-LOVE-you
    Well yeah. We need a stronger dependence on a client-server network in this case.
    The big question is whether Frontier wants to or not. Because putting more workload on the servers will drive up the costs on their side. And they way they've set up the game so far indicates that they want to keep costs as possible.