We all know what FDEV stated, there's no reason for you to repeat it every time someone disagrees with it.
My point is there are many unintended and mostly unpleasant consequences of that FDEV decision
Modes An old gripe, revisited... [apologies]
- Thread starter RevCaoticFox
- Start date
We all know what FDEV stated, there's no reason for you to repeat it every time someone disagrees with it.
My point is there are many unintended and mostly unpleasant consequences of that FDEV decision
How are they "unintended"?
Frontier told us people in other modes or on other platforms can influence the same BGS.
So a BGS war has nothing to do with blowing up other players ships. This was intentional.
So people on XBox can have BGS fights with people on PC or PS4.
It was a very clever move by Frontier.
As for the offensive ship name, you should report them for it.
Trying to chase after them only gives them the attention they crave.
Just pop them on your block list, report them to Frontier and carry on playing.
For someone who types as much as you do, you have a problem reading and comprehending.
I'm pretty sure FDEV did not intend medium to large player BGS conflicts, but here we are.
I'm pretty sure they did not intend player BGS competition to be such a miserable grind-fest. So much so, that people automated playing it using scripts and bot programs, forcing others to just give up on the whole broken system.
Indeed. Brilliant design.
Block list won't remove a hate slur from your local bounty board, and getting FDEV to act on something like that is slow and difficult. The point that person was trying to make was to bully a group of people because of their personal lifestyle. If the person wanted the attention of being chased off so badly, he never would have run to solo that fast.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Forcing PvP on players who don't want to engage in it would be worse, in my opinion. Thankfully, Frontier give us all the choice of three game modes to allow us to pick one that best suits our play-style preference (but we can't force anyone to play our way, if that way is optional).
In-game harassment should be reported accordingly, as should inappropriate CMDR names.
I read your drivel just fine thanks, doesn't change the fact you're wrong and neither does a personal attack on me.
And I'm pretty sure you've not read a single thing from the Kickstarter or Design Discussions
As these decisions were made on purpose after some very long talks with the community.
Just because you don't like it, doesn't make it their mistake. It was your mistake for not looking into what you were buying.
As this information has been publically available sine 2012 onwards.
I don't agree with all the choices made (like CMDRs showing different to NPCs on the scanner)
But I accept the fact these choices were made before the game was even for sale.
If I really disliked the choices that much, I've have bought another game and not this one.
Perhaps you should pop over and have a read of the choices made.
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php/292-Dangerous-Discussion-Archives
Well if you're not enjoying the game that was sold to you, perhaps you shouldn't keep playing it.
I didn't enjoy EVE-Online and found that was a "grind fest", so I left to play a game I enjoy.
This is a really simple concept.
And for the record, plenty of us enjoy the game.
So the problem isn't with the game, it's with what you want from it.
People cheat in all games, this has nothing to do with Elite.
There isn't a cheat proof game.
The only way to deal with hate speech and bullying (which is against the T&Cs / EULA and FDev do act on those reports) is to report it.
If you're too lazy to report it, then that person gets away with it and you're partly to blame for them being able to continue bullying people.
Frontier customer support has always been held in high regard, there are always new pictures floating about Reddit from folks who screenshot their interactions with them due to being impressed with them.
So if you won't give them a chance to deal with this issue, that's on you for allowing a bully to upset people.
Last edited:
Elite: Dangerous appealed to me because I could influence the game from solo.
Imagine a competitive job interview with a test. I can prepare for the exam on my own without threat of physical violence, even though I'm affecting other candidates. Frontier have done a decent job of coding this real world concept into the game.
If you don't want me to come top on the test; study harder than me. If you don't fancy studying the subject this isn't the job for you.
Not all games will appeal to all people; I've tried other games and stopped playing those which didn't appeal.
Cheers, Phos.
Imagine a competitive job interview with a test. I can prepare for the exam on my own without threat of physical violence, even though I'm affecting other candidates. Frontier have done a decent job of coding this real world concept into the game.
If you don't want me to come top on the test; study harder than me. If you don't fancy studying the subject this isn't the job for you.
Not all games will appeal to all people; I've tried other games and stopped playing those which didn't appeal.
Cheers, Phos.
Think of it from a role play perspective - what do you expect to get out of pvp apart from shot?
There used to be no rewards for exploring in the original elite or Elite 2 (iirc) but many people just went on cruise anyway.
BGS competition from solo is like one of those side-by-side basketball arcade games where both people keep taking shots for points.
Except, I have the ability to set 30 robots loose on my side scoring points, and you cannot stop it no matter how hard you try. It's a game that you can never ever win against me, so how does that sound? Want to play BGS war basketball?
All I'm asking is to be able to walk over and kick the bots or anyone else from doing that. Or put in a PVP game mode that can't be accessed, influenced, or played from solo or PG.
Last edited:
Your argument is circular. FDEV said such and such, and you keep repeating the same dogma like the teacher's pet. It's okay to have my own contrary opinion on the matter, and it isn't wrong.
Perhaps you should read what Sandro had planned for power play before he was reassigned. It was absolutely brilliant.
PS: EVE is a boring spreadsheet in space, this game you actually pilot a ship.
Last edited by a moderator:
I believe BGS competition from solo is more like studying for a competitive exam or job interview where your opponents can't use physical violence to stop you studying. Don't assume you can use assault to stop anything you dislike.
If we are going to embrace your metaphor I could argue for having 30 robots on my side to balance things up. We'd have a very different game but things would be level. If you think solo gives me advantages you can play in solo. If solo doesn't appeal to you Elite: Dangerous may not be the right game for you.
Cheers, Phos.
Jockey's logic nor argument is circular and I love how you try to insult him and calling him the "teacher's pet" when all he's doing is reciting FACTS... vs as you claim you are citing... your opinion.
And Sandro's plan for Power play was "brilliant"? I mean wow.. it was so brilliant that it was shelved and he was transferred to a different project. That just shines of brilliance doesn't it?
As you sure you understand what brilliant means?
Speculatively... it could be said that's evidentiary of a mistake being made within a company... usually they ask you to (or force you to) resign.
The nature of the proposal was so divisive it's no wonder they received the amount of blacklash they did from the playerbase. And Sandro had to do a lot of backpedaling in order to put out the flames from the incident. It was indeed a big blunder, considering it was pandering to and favoring a selective group of players, rather than giving everyone something equally. Every person who bought this game is a customer, not some are better than others and "deserve more" because of their playstyles, after all.
Considering there's been no further attempts to rekindle it, I'd have to say that it likely wasn't as "well received" as some would like to believe.
To the OP, what do you do to stop the BGS players who use open from doing what they do? I don't play the BGS, so it's a genuine question. I imagine not all BGS players do it in Solo, as you don't, actually here's another question - as you do play the BGS in Open, what are others doing to stop you? How often are [BGS] players, in Open, thwarting your efforts?
As much as I am not a fan of how the BGS works, especially with powerplay.. anyone thinking that the only way to counter the BGS is to force everyone into open, really dosent understand how the BGS works. While this system is imperfect, it makes the most sense, is less complicated to maintain (from frontiers perspective) and allows all commanders to participate in equally.
Having player ships go boom in open is a very very VERY small part of the BGS...
Having player ships go boom in open is a very very VERY small part of the BGS...
We'll see what they do with power play this year, but a lot of things need to change to make interesting or playable. Its my understanding that Sandro just went to work on another project, that's how companies work, they shift resources to meet deadlines and make money. To suggest anything else is just malicious speculation.
I still think the answer is to split open mode off into another instance of BGS and power play control¹, so that solo and PG players aren't affected by the 'minority' and vice versa.
Yes we've read the design docs from four years ago, but that doesn't mean that things can't change. Sandro's contraversy was evidence that they were considering something that would make a feature available in open. That was flawed obviously, but how bad would it be to make a separate open instance? You'd lose nothing. The rowdy kids get a sandbox to play together in where there's no cheating.
I think that's impossible. The BGSs would diverge. Factions could control different systems in different modes. Thargoids could burn a station in one mode but not another. Prices of void opals would be different; there would be exploits involving shopping around between modes. Galnet would have to be duplicated. A CG could be possible in one mode but not another. The extra work for FD would be immense.