General Hide 'player' ship on scanner and on the description - additional option

That is also not true. :)
That was also suggested some time ago by other users (what i missed) and even discussed by devs, even in this topic you may see the support to idea.

you may not like it, but projecting your thoughs as reality surely will not help you in the discission.

i have answered to all doubts presented in this topic.

idea will bring more people to open because simply anyone will be able to hide for anyone :) you cant shoot something when its very rare to find something :)

But you have not addressed the inherent flaws of that logic, you are NOT hidden. and it would not promote Open, This is more and more looking a like a ganker trying to lure people into open.
 
And the purpose of this suggestion is to mask a differences - a choice for people who want to play in open, but not show as a human.

For anyone concerned - i am not suggesting to remove group or solo at now, however these modes should be separated somehow.

But you have not addressed the inherent flaws of that logic, you are NOT hidden. and it would not promote Open, This is more and more looking a like a ganker trying to lure people into open.

If you hide, then you will, at now you cannot. Luring people to open and give them possibility to hide? Listen to yourself... :ROFLMAO:
 
And the purpose of this suggestion is to mask a differences - a choice for people who want to play in open, but not show as a human.

For anyone concerned - i am not suggesting to remove group or solo at now, however these modes should be separated somehow.

and here it is, ANOTHER suggestion going for Open ONLY!!!
 
and here it is, ANOTHER suggestion going for Open ONLY!!!

I would like that suggestion too. I was in gorup and solo few times where i was unable to log in to open somehow.
However we're not discussing it at now - the topic is about giving a possibility to people to hide their human id in open, not changing game modes.

If you like to raise that suggestion in different topic, please feel free.
 
No surprise that a ganker like that...
Have you something more to add than personal attacks?
If you are solo player then this idea is not for you, if you're playing in open then will not influe your gameplay. You have presented your statement and now you can leave :)
 
Have you something more to add than personal attacks?
If you are solo player then this idea is not for you, if you're playing in open then will not influe your gameplay. You have presented your statement and now you can leave :)

And you are back to lying again. this will definitely have an impact on me in Open... as gankers can now hide in plain sight... and if I do not choose to hide, then I am even easier to find...
 
Nope it wont, just some players will be shown as NPC's and you will have harder to kill them. Please do not accuse anyone else of lying. Its not kind. I would like to ask you for keeping higher level of discussion.
 
Nope it wont, just some players will be shown as NPC's and you will have harder to kill them. Please do not accuse anyone else of lying. Its not kind. I would like to ask you for keeping higher level of discussion.

It’s not really a discussion though is it, it sounds more like you’re looking for agreement. No offence intended, of course.

The original suggestion discussed would appear to cause more issues than it fixed. I think I would like if there was less information about a target’s loadout and hull class visible upon initial scanning, certainly in supercruise; perhaps that would make your choice of targets more considered before engaging.
 
Seems someone is such a poor ganker that the need to hide amongst the NPCs just to get near their target!
 
There is potential for Elite to have interesting stealth mechanics added, but it would surely be better if those were actual mechanics not an absence of them. An advantage like this should involve some skill or cost. Also the game is lonely enough as it is in open without removing the principle way of spotting peers, tbqh, CG systems notwithstanding.

If the objective is simply to make open more survivable then addressing the absurdly wide power spectrum between ships should be priority #1 (it would also be generally good for PvE balancing). Narrowing the band of defensive and offensive capability that players can operate in and making the game more didactic when it comes to outfitting and evasion would do significantly more for the game's health than filling in rectangles would.
 
There is potential for Elite to have interesting stealth mechanics added, but it would surely be better if those were actual mechanics not an absence of them. An advantage like this should involve some skill or cost. Also the game is lonely enough as it is in open without removing the principle way of spotting peers, tbqh, CG systems notwithstanding.

If the objective is simply to make open more survivable then addressing the absurdly wide power spectrum between ships should be priority #1 (it would also be generally good for PvE balancing). Narrowing the band of defensive and offensive capability that players can operate in and making the game more didactic when it comes to outfitting and evasion would do significantly more for the game's health than filling in rectangles would.
Do we really want combat specific ships have their abilities reduced to match a trade cow? Do we want our pure cargo ships hobbled to match a fighter ship?

One of the aspects of FD I enjoy is the freedom to design a ship and use it in any role for any function I choose. If I want to turn an FdL into an explorer, I can. If I want to use a T7 as a fighter, I can. The thing is the choice is solely mine, likewise if it doesn't work out and I get stopped on in combat, for find myself stuck between stars out of fuel, the onus of responsibility and blame is again solely mine.

If FD made all the ships similar so no one would feel 'left out' then we might was well get rid of all the ships except one and have everyone fly that.
 
It’s not really a discussion though is it, it sounds more like you’re looking for agreement. No offence intended, of course.

The original suggestion discussed would appear to cause more issues than it fixed. I think I would like if there was less information about a target’s loadout and hull class visible upon initial scanning, certainly in supercruise; perhaps that would make your choice of targets more considered before engaging.

I am just looking for the discussion, started with few suggestions and a lot of opinions and suggestion from the others are presented here.
 
Do we really want combat specific ships have their abilities reduced to match a trade cow?

No, obviously not. But "balancing" in the context of game design obviously doesn't mean "making all ships literally the same".

Here's a quick snip demonstrating the width of the health spectrum. If you can look at this and tell me there's nothing wrong with it... well, frankly I won't believe you.

1610964323754.png

Of course it's expected that different hulls and builds will have different strengths, this needs to be brought into a manageable ecosystem.
 
Nope it wont, just some players will be shown as NPC's and you will have harder to kill them. Please do not accuse anyone else of lying. Its not kind. I would like to ask you for keeping higher level of discussion.

what kind of discussion is this? you have NOT engaged in discussion, you are looking for validation that your idea is good one, and everyone that points out flaws only get some some variants of you are wrong, you or you simply ignore what they say....

So before you start to try to appear as the victim, you should start with yourself and your actions, before you get upset that you are being called out for your own behaviour.

Since you have not really given any reason to refute arguments why this would have the effect you claim it to be, then there is no discussion
 
I presented the suggestion and what it will cause. If someone questioned something then i responded - that is called the discussion.
Nobody presented logical arguments against the idea. The point of idea is to hide the 'player id' and that is all, if is not influing anyone else gameplay except player who will hide his id.

Now youre trying to discuss me instead of topic. Please avoid that.
 
Do we really want combat specific ships have their abilities reduced to match a trade cow? Do we want our pure cargo ships hobbled to match a fighter ship?

One of the aspects of FD I enjoy is the freedom to design a ship and use it in any role for any function I choose. If I want to turn an FdL into an explorer, I can. If I want to use a T7 as a fighter, I can. The thing is the choice is solely mine, likewise if it doesn't work out and I get stopped on in combat, for find myself stuck between stars out of fuel, the onus of responsibility and blame is again solely mine.

If FD made all the ships similar so no one would feel 'left out' then we might was well get rid of all the ships except one and have everyone fly that.

I am not sure this could work, but what if we changed the "trade cows" defence stats. They are not made of the same handvavium like the Anaconda is, but bulk stuff, you make everything a bit bigger and sturdier, etc, so can take quite alot more damage before failling, so I would expect a Type 9 should have the highest defence stats of all the ships in the game, with weak offense stats, and this would also work with their poor handling.. Combat ships want more handling, so they have to use the optional internal slots to get their defence up.. So this works great for Trader ships and Combat ships, but the problem starts with the ships inbetween these two edge cases.

So by giving extra defence to type 9, would now make it to be able to take much more damage, and thus harder to kill, but make it easier to try and pirate from it. as you are less likely to accidentally destroy it...

Anyway, that is just some thought on how this could be solved without having to nerf combat ships into the ground. But as always, the problem with this approach lies in the details...
 
I presented the suggestion and what it will cause. If someone questioned something then i responded - that is called the discussion.
Nobody presented logical arguments against the idea. The point of idea is to hide the 'player id' and that is all, if is not influing anyone else gameplay except player who will hide his id.

Now youre trying to discuss me instead of topic. Please avoid that.
Plenty of people have presented arguments against them, you've just ignored them.
You claimed that gankers can't gank in non-meta ships, I showed you three videos of me killing people in a T7 of all things - a T7 that, I might add, I specifically chose to fly because the miners wouldn't be able to immediately suspect it was a pirate ship.
Your response? Oh, no, there wasn't a response. You didn't respond at all. You just kept arguing as if that inconvenient little piece of evidence didn't exist.
 
I presented the suggestion and what it will cause. If someone questioned something then i responded - that is called the discussion.
Nobody presented logical arguments against the idea. The point of idea is to hide the 'player id' and that is all, if is not influing anyone else gameplay except player who will hide his id.

Now youre trying to discuss me instead of topic. Please avoid that.

but you have more or less totally ignored all the arguments against your suggestion...
 
Back
Top Bottom