Avoiding Group Control...

[Andrew Sayers]

How would you like to end up on a few thousand ignore lists in a week because Goons posted your name in their "Boot this player to antisocial!" thread? And then FD acting on it?

A recommender system would be much harder to game than a simple voting system. The technology is pretty mature now and there are off-the-shelf packages Frontier could just pick up and use. To see how that might work, imagine you ignore your arch-enemy for throwing open his cloak and exposing himself whenever he's about to do his special move, and the game tells you "players that ignored Mumm-Ra also ignored Slithe and Jackalman, click to ignore them as well". That gives you the convenience you want, and doesn't pollute your ignore list with people randomly ignoring anyone they're told to dislike.

Incidentally, reading through this thread it feels like there's an elephant in the room. Sorry for the personal question, but could I ask about how you play in EVE? It sounds like you're interested in the challenge of the high-level rules lawyering side of the game, and I think uncertainty about that is raising a few hackles. Letting everyone know where they stand might help smooth out the conversation

 

[Meritz]

It is mentioned that there will be an expansion that will allow the building of small inflatable asteroid stations, but not the big stations. The grouping system would make it unlikely that a system could be owned by players.

It can and will be possible to own a turf though. All you need to be able to do is enforce it. I expect that will be possible only in far frontier systems with no real police presence. Depending on how much lucrative stuff can be found there (rare minerals, great black market deals etc.) these systems may be hotly contested between player groups.

Or not, if they all go to their private instances.

 

[VR Mr Teatime]

'How can we stop monopolies that have little to no chance of being broken from without from forming?'

By alerting the community (and FDEV) to attempts at changing the mechanics in the game, which currently prevent group control from happening in the first place. The core IMO is preserving the roadmap from misguided (or malicious) attempts to persuade FDEV that certain features are desirable (or not desirable) by the majority of the player base (compounded in Eve by the subscription model).

 

[Joe Spivey]

It can and will be possible to own a turf though. All you need to be able to do is enforce it. I expect that will be possible only in far frontier systems with no real police presence. Depending on how much lucrative stuff can be found there (rare minerals, great black market deals etc.) these systems may be hotly contested between player groups.

Or not, if they all go to their private instances.

'Own' it? No. Occupy it? Yes. Occupy it to the exclusion of any player not in the guild? Maybe, but not likely. But again, the very size of the galaxy makes it irrelevant if that system is being occupied or not. Even if there is this super rare commodity found there the background simulation will have one or more of the main factions moving in with all the firepower they would need to secure the system and open it up for trade.

 

[Adept]

This is the basic Goon tactic. If it's possible, even if it's mean as hell. We'll do it. And you can't hit back at us because it's mechanically possible ingame. If it wasn't meant to be possible. It wouldn't be.

Meritz does write like he's citing things from the Balloon handbook, doesn't he?

 

[JeffRyan]

Meritz does write like he's citing things from the Balloon handbook, doesn't he?

Possibly, or he just understands their tactics and high level lawyering quite well. I might have been annoyed to begin with but his arguments are actually great for the thread and the discussion as a whole and the sort of thing we can expect to hear from GS. Assuming he isn't he makes a great devil's advocate.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Meritz does write like he's citing things from the Balloon handbook, doesn't he?

Naah - he's simply taking dictation from his boss

That's something else we can look forward to, manifesto from the guildie bosses about what they are going to do to us, and all those lovely little guild rule books and internal laws that always crop up. They do make for good reading though.

 

[JeffRyan]

Naah - he's simply taking dictation from his boss

That's something else we can look forward to, manifesto from the guildie bosses about what they are going to do to us, and all those lovely little guild rule books and internal laws that always crop up. They do make for good reading though.

Someone arguing this way here and now this way is actually a boon.

 

[Im_Lost]

The multiplayer mechanics don't really allow for this kind of thing. Instances are limited to 32 players and you can always switch to a private instance where they can't interfere with you at all.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Someone arguing this way here and now this way is actually a boon.

Oh I completely agree, I'm enjoying the discussion and banter and hope it continues!

 

[Adept]

Yeah, as forum metagame it lacks subtlety, but then I've never found the Balloons to be particularly clever, they are just numerous and persistent.

 

[Space_Killer69]

The multiplayer mechanics don't really allow for this kind of thing. Instances are limited to 32 players and you can always switch to a private instance where they can't interfere with you at all.

Hence the sudden increase in threads/posts calling to "lock down groups and prevent switching."

Coincidence?

 

[Seonid]

Once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action.
To be fair, they do plan things in an open forum, bless their little cotton socks.

 

[JeffRyan]

To be fair, they do plan things in an open forum.

Amusingly their thread has been quoted and linked here and this thread has been quoted and linked there. So they're watching us watching them watching us.

 

[JeffRyan]

But who watches the watchers watching the watching watchers?

The Watching Watcher's Watcher.

PS. Are you Mr Sanders or Mrs Anders?

 

[Cody]

Are you Mr Sanders or Mrs Anders?

<chortles> This has been puzzling me too.

 

[Jorlin]

what watch?
ten watch...
oh, such much!

 

[Seonid]

Amusingly their thread has been quoted and linked here and this thread has been quoted and linked there. So they're watching us watching them watching us.

Indeed, kudos to the OP of their thread for their entertaining username.

 

[Rog]

Indeed, kudos to the OP of their thread for their entertaining username.

Who is apparently a member of FD staff.

 

[Meritz]

Incidentally, reading through this thread it feels like there's an elephant in the room. Sorry for the personal question, but could I ask about how you play in EVE? It sounds like you're interested in the challenge of the high-level rules lawyering side of the game, and I think uncertainty about that is raising a few hackles. Letting everyone know where they stand might help smooth out the conversation

I played mostly as a solo explorer. Used to run with a roleplaying alliance liberating slaves from Amarr for a few years, which sums about 99% of my PvP encounters. I also did a bit of station trading, so by no means was I ever a "contender" when it comes to PvP - I prefer exploration and trading, and was never that big on the huge alliance business and pointless turf wars. Personally I find it boring if there is no lore/story reason to do that sort of stuff.

A solid, unfragmented community, however... that's something special. Few games have that.