Bloodless CG Opposition

IndigoWyrd · Jul 16, 2017

I've noticed recently that this should be entirely possible, and would only require a cooperative effort on behalf of those wishing to - for whatever reason, oppose a CG.
While I'll admit it's probably not the most exciting means, it is entirely possible to nearly halt a CG's progress simply by...

Filling up all the landing pads.

I noticed this during the current NULL CG - there are so many taking part in it that many times docking is denied as no pads are available, which made me realize that, if those pads were all occupied by commanders opposing the CG, the CG would be near impossible to complete - outside of solo play or PG, though I've been mostly playing this CG in a PG, and even there docking denials have been fairly commonplace.

But this method would allow for a no-shots-fired opposition to CG efforts for those who enjoy making the game harder on others.

Drelthar · Jul 16, 2017

I think it would be better to simply add an opposition CG for every CG.

Blocking pads will annoy people, and also doesn't work, as the game has multiple modes.

woodbane · Jul 16, 2017

IndigoWyrd said:
I've noticed recently that this should be entirely possible, and would only require a cooperative effort on behalf of those wishing to - for whatever reason, oppose a CG.
While I'll admit it's probably not the most exciting means, it is entirely possible to nearly halt a CG's progress simply by...

Filling up all the landing pads.

I noticed this during the current NULL CG - there are so many taking part in it that many times docking is denied as no pads are available, which made me realize that, if those pads were all occupied by commanders opposing the CG, the CG would be near impossible to complete - outside of solo play or PG, though I've been mostly playing this CG in a PG, and even there docking denials have been fairly commonplace.

But this method would allow for a no-shots-fired opposition to CG efforts for those who enjoy making the game harder on others.

Would people not just log in to Solo and complete the CG via that method instead?

CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost · Jul 16, 2017

IndigoWyrd said:
…
Filling up all the landing pads.
…

Hutton Orbital CG.

I think quite a few would disagree with your idea.

IndigoWyrd · Jul 17, 2017

Yes, people could potentially change modes, and some would. Others.. there are some who refuse to play in anything else.
But nothing is perfect - those who sit around stations blowing up everything that come in are also aware that more and more people switch to PG's and Solo for these, some just to make the approach to the station.
Just throwing this out there as another means.

friendship drive charging · Jul 17, 2017

IndigoWyrd said:
I've noticed recently that this should be entirely possible, and would only require a cooperative effort on behalf of those wishing to - for whatever reason, oppose a CG.
While I'll admit it's probably not the most exciting means, it is entirely possible to nearly halt a CG's progress simply by...

Filling up all the landing pads.

I noticed this during the current NULL CG - there are so many taking part in it that many times docking is denied as no pads are available, which made me realize that, if those pads were all occupied by commanders opposing the CG, the CG would be near impossible to complete - outside of solo play or PG, though I've been mostly playing this CG in a PG, and even there docking denials have been fairly commonplace.

But this method would allow for a no-shots-fired opposition to CG efforts for those who enjoy making the game harder on others.

its called UA bombing

jasonbarron · Jul 17, 2017

Wow, that sounds almost as fun as a gigantic group hug!

your mom · Jul 17, 2017

jasonbarron said:
Wow, that sounds almost as fun as a gigantic group hug!

Ah, but you wouldn't be able to bind "hugging" to a button, that would be boring... it'd be in the nav console!

joshman72nd · Jul 17, 2017

ua bomb's inbound

DNA-Decay · Jul 17, 2017

UA bombing requires a black market.

I've always thought that was a bit unfair on the Pirates and anarchsists, but it's the way things are.
And (as already pointed out) Hutton Orbital CG.

kofeyh · Jul 17, 2017

IndigoWyrd said:
But this method would allow for a no-shots-fired opposition to CG efforts for those who enjoy making the game harder on others.

Won't make any difference. Because a CG can always succeed because there is no stopping solo activities. They auto-succeed after the first tier. They are, literally, impossible to prevent succeeding. UA bombing can't happen fast enough and requires a black market. If there's no black market; the outcome is automatic success due to tier one being the only requirement.

This is a conscious decision to include solo and PG modes into community goals, and change the tier success occurs at. The consequences are that they can be slowed, if there's opportunity to blockade or UA bomb; but commanders can not essentially stop the freight train that is a CG. Be in via violent or peaceful means.

Whether or not that's an actual improvement, I'll leave up to other commanders, but I, personally, remain unconvinced. It's taken a lot of the excitement out, because virtually all CGs will succeed. It's like the entire point to work as a community (to either assist, or oppose) has been sucked out. YMMV.

StarfireIX · Jul 17, 2017

IndigoWyrd said:
I've noticed recently that this should be entirely possible, and would only require a cooperative effort on behalf of those wishing to - for whatever reason, oppose a CG.
While I'll admit it's probably not the most exciting means, it is entirely possible to nearly halt a CG's progress simply by...

Filling up all the landing pads.

I noticed this during the current NULL CG - there are so many taking part in it that many times docking is denied as no pads are available, which made me realize that, if those pads were all occupied by commanders opposing the CG, the CG would be near impossible to complete - outside of solo play or PG, though I've been mostly playing this CG in a PG, and even there docking denials have been fairly commonplace.

But this method would allow for a no-shots-fired opposition to CG efforts for those who enjoy making the game harder on others.

I wish that could happen, too. Hundreds of CMDRs opposed the Fed expansion CG as we all know that PRE has been secret over much of their operations in the Pleiades. Unfortunately, the backlash from supporters calling us "griefers", " idiots", or worse is pretty disappointing to say the least (even Ollo is hated on many factions for his work, but everything he does is legitimate gameplay).

No matter what you do, though, CGs will succeed regardless if the tier hasn't been reached, etc. Even if it effects lore, players will still support it only for the cash. Considering CGs give a decent payout, FD will need to do the same for the mission boards as they pay pretty low in some areas. That way, perhaps not everyone has to constantly rely on CG payouts as their only income.

smiths121 · Jul 17, 2017

Rawner135 said:
I wish that could happen, too. Hundreds of CMDRs opposed the Fed expansion CG as we all know that PRE has been secret over much of their operations in the Pleiades. Unfortunately, the backlash from supporters calling us "griefers", " idiots", or worse is pretty disappointing to say the least (even Ollo is hated on many factions for his work, but everything he does is legitimate gameplay).

No matter what you do, though, CGs will succeed regardless if the tier hasn't been reached, etc. Even if it effects lore, players will still support it only for the cash. Considering CGs give a decent payout, FD will need to do the same for the mission boards as they pay pretty low in some areas. That way, perhaps not everyone has to constantly rely on CG payouts as their only income.

Only bad thing Empire players did against a Fed CG, was the Morbius invasion - must be getting on for a year ago. To be fair to the Empire mob (whatever the collective term), that CG was memorable for the use of Lockdown to almost make th CG fail, took a nerf by FD to allow it to succeed. Personally I think there should be a state based approach to blocking CGs, as there is only really griefing to slow it down these days, a situation that is not in anyone's interest.

Simon

StarfireIX · Jul 17, 2017

smiths121 said:
Only bad thing Empire players did against a Fed CG, was the Morbius invasion - must be getting on for a year ago. To be fair to the Empire mob (whatever the collective term), that CG was memorable for the use of Lockdown to almost make th CG fail, took a nerf by FD to allow it to succeed. Personally I think there should be a state based approach to blocking CGs, as there is only really griefing to slow it down these days, a situation that is not in anyone's interest.

Simon

Well yeah, it is griefing (sort-of) if you're ruining it for other players. But in a way it's pure opposition for a group/side that think their motive is not in the right way for the community. So far every CG has been on rails, except for Conflict CGs though. Then again, so far every CG around this season has been primarily Fed-focused.

kofeyh · Jul 17, 2017

Rawner135 said:
Well yeah, it is griefing (sort-of) if you're ruining it for other players. But in a way it's pure opposition for a group/side that think their motive is not in the right way for the community. So far every CG has been on rails, except for Conflict CGs though. Then again, so far every CG around this season has been primarily Fed-focused.

The assumption has been that all CGs should succeed. And the idea that they may not seems to cause huge angst and a lot of whining. And I don't think they always should, without that big community effort. That's the point. A community goal. That's how they started out, and didn't always succeed. When they did, it was amazing. Because it meant something. Now? Who cares. It's just a bit of cash and nothing else.

Can't oppose. Can't fight to succeed because it's just going to anyway. It's as lifeless as a brick. In pandering to a percentage of the player base, the entire thing is just soul-less credit farming. And it's not like we don't have enough of that already.

Cmnd Fulsom · Jul 17, 2017

I do think that tier one is too low a breakpoint for success, but I also think that tier 8 is probably too high a bar. Somewhere in the middle. Tier 6? I've so rarely seen any CG reach tier 8.

Stay frosty

Cmnd Fulsom

Becks · Jul 17, 2017

DNA-Decay said:
UA bombing requires a black market.

I've always thought that was a bit unfair on the Pirates and anarchsists, but it's the way things are.
And (as already pointed out) Hutton Orbital CG.

The black market mechanics in ED make fairly little sense anyways.

Cmnd Fulsom · Jul 17, 2017

I remember a time when you would access the black market you would send out a message in all caps. I WOULD LIKE TO SELL ILLEGAL GOODS. I always thought it was hilarious. Like a cop going to to the slums. "Hello citizen, would you like to purchase illegal firearms? I am willing to accept illicit drugs as payment." I'm actually kind of sad they changed it.

Stay frosty

Cmnd Fulsom