Elite IS too easy

Deleted member 121570

D
There’s a group of people on this forum who no matter what, argue improvement is divergent the dream of elite. Nothing can be changed, improved, and if you suggest it, you’re wrong for doing so. For years, the same people saying that same thing. Engaging with that is as useful as engaging with a flat earther on the Scientific method

I get that's the opposite position from yours. I also imagine (perhaps wrongly!) that you're probably seeing yourself as a proponent of much-needed change.
Tactics might require some work though, given the absence of any actual change based on any of the suggestions or discussion they've stimulated. I have no suggestions though as to what those might be, to improve the effectiveness of what you're seeking to achieve.

They are good fun to participate in though! Keep up the good work :)
 
Well, the only solution I see would what many players have already asked FDEV to do: to give meaning to anarchies and core sectors. The latter, for instance, should be so safe that not even the most hardened PVP murderboat would be safe. Anybody going weapons hot without a VERY good reason should be staring down the guns of at least half a dozen fully engineered top-of-the-line combat vessels, and see a rebuy screen forthwith.

Anarchies, on the other hand, would, by necessity, be a totally different kettle of fish. HOWEVER, I'd like everybody to remember what anarchy means, what it really is. Anarchy does NOT mean that everybody can commit all kinds of crime, or is encouraged to. Originally, it was envisioned as a society where morality (and common sense) would make intervention by authorities superfluous.

In ED, of course, this need not be the case. They would be lawless. HOWEVER, even in such sectors (especially in such sectors!), certain transports would be expected to go unmolested. Not nearly every system is self-sufficient. If no food gets through, the people starve. Even die-hard anarchists want to eat. Without medical supplies, more people get sick and die. Even the most wild-eyed anarchist would not want to die from an otherwise easily curable disease.

So, certain commodities would be considered very important, and their bearers would likely be encouraged to come (admittedly at their own risk). I do see, however, groups in anarchies setting out to curb excessive violence, at least when directed at those delivering stuff vital for the continued existence of socity in that sector. In other words, PVP murder boats duking it out with one another -- no problem. Nothing to see here. Burning down the umpteenth supplier of grain -- not so great (unless a famine is called for).

I KNOW, the counter argument is, of course, "It's a game!" Of course it is. However, a game is meant to be fun, for all customers, not just a minority who think that ED is way too soft on players.

As I said, I could live with anarchies being made considerably tougher (as long as core sectors were made considerably safer -- as logic would dictate).

However, that is ultimately FDEV's choice, and I kinda doubt they listen to my whining (or anybody else's, at that).

I hope I didn't step on your toes (or anybody elses), given I didn't have my clown shoes on. ;)
That doesnt really fit with the lore. The police are supposed to be ineffective.
 
And you think making a thread in Dangerous Discussion is going to be useful?

Dude, all what we're doing here is academic. Just discussing ideas. Your or my opinion won't mean a lick of difference in anything Frontier does.

And for your info, all involved have been regurgitating the same old for 5 years. So don't act as if there's a differnce
Do I think this thread will change the game? Absolutely not. I just like to see if what I’m seeing is what others are seeing, as well as work being slow so i got free time to discuss this stuff. It’s purely for my own interest.

so will I engage with bad arguments? Yep see reasons above. do I think the bad arguments provide value or require serious consideration? No.
 
You aren't the only one to say this, I have said the same many times and I would go as far to say that there is quite a broad consensus. The main problem is to convince first the forum daddies and then fdev that we are not a bunch of murder hobos trying to force our way of playing the game on the rest of the community (I'll bet now that one of the forum moderators will show up within the next 10 minutes ... )
I'm convinced. It would be great if "Anarchy" was the scary thing which caused adrenaline in the 80s game, and "Corporate State" was when you could go and put the kettle on. That would give a layer of meaning to the system states which is missing ATM.

But do you mean me with "forum daddies"? If so, I'm suddenly unconvinced again. ;-)
 
Do I think this thread will change the game? Absolutely not. I just like to see if what I’m seeing is what others are seeing, as well as work being slow so i got free time to discuss this stuff. It’s purely for my own interest.

so will I engage with bad arguments? Yep see reasons above. do I think the bad arguments provide value or require serious consideration? No.
Ah ok. Just wondering about effective.

If your aim is to waste time, (in the it's friday afternoon and work is slow good kind of wasting time meaning) any argument is effective.

Look, we just wasted a couple of minutes, and we're closer to the weekend
 
I'm convinced. It would be great if "Anarchy" was the scary thing which caused adrenaline in the 80s game, and "Corporate State" was when you could go and put the kettle on. That would give a layer of meaning to the system states which is missing ATM.

But do you mean me with "forum daddies"? If so, I'm suddenly unconvinced again. ;-)
Don't worry and stick to your convintions! :)
 
The fact that elite places danger where you have to seek it is not an opinion friendo.
Meaby for you its not an option.

The point of a sandbox is to have meaningful tools to manipulate the sandbox into castles and stuff. We can’t make castles and stuff, we can just look at the sand currently

Oh you have all tools you need to make nice castle - castle of danger and doom - jump in unengineered ship and go to deicat. Or pick 1 ton of gold and fly around. Did you know if u have stuff in cargo NPC will hunt you? (idk what is threshold, having 100t of LTD surely will attract NPCs) or go 1000 ly with equipped D-class thrusters and some large-size ship and try to land on high G planet with FAOFF.

I remember how once I tried to recover from freefall (thrusters offline) to 6g planet :0 Turned out that it's (almost) impossible with FAOFF - You are flying 600 or 800 (i dont remember) m/s so game wont let you apply thrust cause, unless you are perfectly aligned, it will increase your speed. That's my assumption only, ofc, havent tested it further. Broken canopy and 9% hull was enough for me, for that time.

@EDIT: typos
 
Last edited:
There are so many whiners on here that complain about nothing, and this guy is complaining about stuff that is kinda important. Youre just mad because this guy happens to be a gweefer
Lot's and lot's of whining about Elite being too safe......almost as regular as the other topics that crop up every so often.
 
yes, which is why we have this unending whine in the forum at the moment. People have had it too easy for too long. Here’s finally something that will be a challenge to make work, and people lose their minds over it...

:D S
I don't mind a challenge IN the game WHEN I am PLAYING, but once that game is shut down I do not want upkeep. It's not just whining for easy mode fer gawds sake.
 
Last edited:
There’s a group of people on this forum who no matter what, argue improvement is divergent the dream of elite. Nothing can be changed, improved, and if you suggest it, you’re wrong for doing so. For years, the same people saying that same thing. Engaging with that is as useful as engaging with a flat earther on the Scientific method

Thing is many have suggested being a criminal in the game should be hard mode, strange that I never see support of that sort of difficulty increase from a "certain" subsection of the player base.....and coincidentally that same subsection seem to want the game to be harder all the time.

In the main I think most people would agree that the game needs a common sense approach to how hard things are.
 
I dreamt of a punishing survival game where ships could be stolen and cargo had to be loaded. Of the placeholders, like outfitting, becoming more sophisticated. Engineering that would be worse overall than stock but would yield the specific benefits for a specific task. With no telelpresence spoiling the 70s retro-future verisimilitude. Where credits were difficult to get, meant something and it would indeed take you a year to acquire a Conda (unless you stole it, which you'd need a team for etc.). Mandatory crew for the medium and especially large ships or at least scaling penalties in functionality. Hunger, sleep, water and use of a few commodities on a personal level. No combat shields but radiation shields are (almost) mandatory for jumping, scooping or other extremes. Heat management is too easy.

Problem is people are spoiled because we needed to load and unload cargo before space legs was a part so no animation. Now we don't need ground crew. We don't even need autoloaders (all easier for the developers). Instant button press and you can't put that back in the bottle. Extrapolate this to everything. Can't change engineering because of all the grind. People would have a fit. Can't change the weight of a Conda because people are used to it or would get stuck in the black due to a sudden change in jump range. All the placeholders are foundation blocks now.

This game seemed like the opposite of an instant gratification game when I bought it. It was promising with a good development plan. I was ready for the long haul. Once you figure out how to land your ship and evade predators (for the life of me, I barely even see anyone at Diaguandri) open's as easy as solo.

TL;DR: It's easy because too many people "depend" on the broken mechanics, like 20min shields. The game adopted too many people that have different ideas of what they want the game to be. Different world views and values and all that through the lense of a video game. The potential is why we talk about this game at all instead of going to play something else that doesn't exist.
 
Meaby for you its not an option.



Oh you have all tools you need to make nice castle - castle of danger and doom - jump in unengineered ship and go to deicat. Or pick 1 ton of gold and fly around. Did you know if u have stuff in cargo NPC will hunt you? (idk what is threshold, having 100t of LTD surely will attract NPCs) or go 1000 ly with equipped D-class thrusters and some large-size ship and try to land on high G planet with FAOFF.

I remember tried to recover from freefall (thrusters offline) to 6g planet :0 Turned out that its (almost) impossible with FAOFF - You are flying 600 or 800 (i dont remember) m/s so game wont let you apply thrust cause unless you are perfectly aligned it will increase your speed. Thats my assumption, only ofc, havent tested it. Broken canopy and 9% hull was enough for me, for that time.
But you just say "WEE WANTZ MOAR DIFICULTZ"....which is not organic, DANGER where appropriate and SAFE where appropriate.
i do in fact state that. safety/danger should be attached to the state of a system like in the OP, a system under thargoid attack being dangerous vs one that isn’t, and extending it to the various states and security levels. It’s exactly what I’m asking for. That change would make the game more difficult than the current situation where totally ignore security, and state.

you could take it even further and have population/economic/government factors affect what ships are in the security forces, preferred loadouts, Avg combat ratings etc.

Any change that means the current inconsequential decision on where you’re going becomes a determining factor on what choices you need to make to go those places, route around them, ship choice and loadout, do you want to seek a wing, etc would be a good change, and also broadly speaking add a layer of difficulty not currently present. In addition to making bgs much more impactful and less so power play.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom