Which is basically my natural habitat. I knew I belonged here
Code action against CoR
- Thread starter riceak
- Start date
I would hope that at some point all users will be in a fully shared universe where they can interact with everybody. But if technology limitations don't allow for this, no they shouldn't be excluded. If a subscription was required on top of game purchase to interact, no they shouldn't be excluded.
But that's a lot different than choosing to effect others by clicking a button to say they can't effect you.
Well I had a look at their BGS and my opinion is that their time would be definitely better spent getting good rather than chasing ghosts
You are right that groups get judged by a minority. While true, that doesn't make it right. Nor does it justify taking any action one feels like against them.
If I don't want PvP I go solo or PG. I would prefer a dedicated PvE mode but they are sufficient. But if I decide that I will initiate a form of conflict with another group, I will play as they do.
If that means going into open, I do it. If I'm not willing to do that, I won't initiate conflict with them. And if they initiate conflict with me, I'll play wherever I want.
And I say this as a person killed by a griefer invading Mobius. I have no respect for that person, but will not blame a whole section of the community for the actions of 1.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
out of curiosity... do you know if they are all in open whilst doing this.... because if not they are kind of breaking their own rules are they not. it would be a bit like Rolf Harris Condemning Gary Glitter. <possibly a bit much that comparison>
I do think we are closer to agreement than some may think..... we are close to the crux of the issue for me.
in Mobius... if a player is proven to be breaking any rules they are banned.
in Code... All i asked would be the same because you realistically CANT expect to never have people breaking rules of your group.
the judgement then lies with what happens when folk are deemed to be acting in a manner contrary to your own groups rules... and here in lies the rub where i have an issue with Code, NOT that some of their members acted in a certain way
but because they were allowed to brag about it for the longest of times afterwards and NOT get banned for their actions.
Last edited:
True and I've run through blockaded systems in open with nobody in them. Whether that's not enough numbers to maintain 24/7 blockades or instancing doesn't concern me. It is what it is and I'll carry on with my business. But it does mean even with a blockade PvE is still possible as is fighting back or taking avoidance tactics in game rather than picking "you can't stop me" mode.
The BGS may mainly be PvE as is the game. But the game does allow PvP which should be able to do such simple things as defending your home.
Before you waste your time "defending your home" : I recommend to learn how2BGS first.
You are right that alone it can't solve it, but as my example noted it could greatly influence the outcome which is a valid tactic and one any defending force would logically use, but can't where PG/Solo is used
It doesn't matter if it's a valid tactic. It's a less effective (if effective at all) tactic. Even if everybody is playing in the same mode, trying to PvP is the less effective method and can have negative side effects.
We could start discussing if the way the BGS works should be changed to incorporate PvP at an meaningful and effective way to influence the BGS, but in the current system PvP is simply not the best choice to influence or defend the BGS.
To be honest here Harley it can't if the game were open only either, there is a perception from some that it would be 'fairer' - I get that, but we would be having exactly the same discussion regarding instancing, when people are playing, where they are playing from etc etc as we are now. Due to Frontiers chosen infrastructure, the matchmaking system and more besides attempting to blockade a CG or BGS state in a single mode of this game would still be like throwing a twig into the Amazon and calling it a dam. The best any group who do not want to PVE much can hope for in terms of PVP blockading is to stem the tide slightly, nothing more, unless they are willing to PVE, or as Ziggy suggests and may already be happening, get folk to PVE for them.
The Code members should stop mentioning the BGS if they want a thread to be about them and not about everything else.
By the way, is this such a terrible suggestion or is one-uppery more important at the moment?
Not bad, and in fact necessary in some way as pointed out.
My problem with it though and the PG/Solo attacks is that it's insisting PvP players only fight back with PvE.
Would anybody think it's fair to say that if a PvP group invades your system you may only fight back in PvP?
I think the answer to that question in no, and for me it is applying dual standards to use PG/Solo in reverse to insist a PvP group can only use PvE tactics to defend.
I accept that I might be in the minority here, but I can't see a reason why "you can't force me to play your way, but I can force you to play mine" in either direction is right or fair, and by deciding to attack another player group in PG/Solo to negate any PvP consequences is exactly what this is.
If they wouldn't attack without the protection granted by PG/Solo, they shouldn't attack. And if they are willing to do it without the protection, why aren't they?
Defending is different than attacking in my opinion on this point though.
Isn't this just Elite's version of a good old fashioned invitation to rumble?
Meet us here, at this time, bring all your mates and see how you get on.
Now - just form a wing one system away and jump in (hope your wing and some of the code are in the same instance). See who wins.
Meet us here, at this time, bring all your mates and see how you get on.
Now - just form a wing one system away and jump in (hope your wing and some of the code are in the same instance). See who wins.
Which is basically my natural habitat. I knew I belonged here
Getting your application form sorted for Code then Ziggy?
Player 'controlled' factions are not PvP or PvE. They are just in the game. If you want to help them, you have to use the tools you have. Combat in general is a quite effective BGS tool but if you limit your self to shooting other players, you come up short. The players aren't part of any faction.
You can play the game your way, but it doesn't mean you win. If you want to win, you need to play it the ED way.
This isn't your typical game though.
If you want to "win" the BGS (whatever that means) you have to blend a mixture of PvE and PvP in order to attain the results you want.
This game caters to:
- Different social filters
- Solo
- Private Groups
- Open
- Different platforms
- PC / MAC
- XBox
- Soon PS4
and any one of those platforms / filters could be working the BGS against you ... ergo - adapt or die - accept the fact that on PC you're never, ever going to meet the XBox players or PS4 (never mind the others with different social filters) so embrace the game for what it is and engage in PvP (to counter those in open) and PvE (to counter those in PG/Solo/Other platform)
Whinging that it isn't fair kind of misses the point ...
Not sure how much use an Exploration Department is in the Code and my cheerleading skills are already pledged to the Fuel Rats.
Well I had a look at their BGS and my opinion is that their time would be definitely better spent getting good rather than chasing ghosts
Wait! Did you just suggest the Code needed to Git Gud at PvE?