If Combat Logging is a bad thing. Then why is it okay to attack a player faction without being seen?

[Robert Maynard]

Imagine this scenario - private group cutter hero with everything engineered and a second account/3rd account with healy beams putting an open relatively poor player faction into lockdown from the safety of a private group as they have sideys cobras and vipers and they cant do a thing about it.

Sure they might lose in open, but at least they can be the mosquitos which are quite annoying.

Edit: Thinking about it now, perhaps this could be a new campaign to highlight the issue. I'm not advocating for this to be used, but its a legit gameplay mechanic - it might drive the issue home to those who dont see it as a problem.

By all means, start a campaign that emphasises the over-powered nature of "healing beams" and the lack of ATR response to ships that sit stationary destroying NPCs.

That'd be good for everyone, regardless of game mode.

 

[Redomus]

In your scenario the poor player's faction is screwed either way.

Sure they might be the mosquitos in Open, but at least they get to pay a lot of rebuys. Hooray? I think they stand a better chance at working the BGS until that private group cutter hero loses interest.

Agree, however - blasting faction ships will drop influence faster than any mission running or data handing. From my eve experience, the people who enjoy doing this will keep doing it because they can and arent stopped and there will be no consequences.

If this wonderful mechanic was used tomorrow hammering everyones factions down, what would anyone do? Not a lot, but sit in lockdown scratching their heads. Im sure there would be questions as to who is locking down multiple systems though, everyone will feel powerless bar the perpetrators.

 

[MottiKhan]

I had never thought that I'd see the OP defending combat logging. Shame.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Agree, however - blasting faction ships will drop influence faster than any mission running or data handing. From my eve experience, the people who enjoy doing this will keep doing it because they can and arent stopped and there will be no consequences.

If this wonderful mechanic was used tomorrow hammering everyones factions down, what would anyone do? Not a lot, but sit in lockdown scratching their heads. Im sure there would be questions as to who is locking down multiple systems though, everyone will feel powerless bar the perpetrators.

Wasn't there a lot of criticism how blasting ships and data delivery are both overpowered? If that's the case, that is the issue here that needs to be resolved.

 

[Redomus]

Wasn't there a lot of criticism how blasting ships and data delivery are both overpowered? If that's the case, that is the issue here that needs to be resolved.

Indeed, but it still leaves a rather large exploitable feature and I'm not entirely sure on how to square the circle, but there has to be more to it than revenge trading/scanning. Thats a very regressive form of gameplay with no strategy other than barrel scraping.

It has potential, but I think where you have one side flat out denying the problem im not sure how it will ever be resolved until they are on the recieving end of it. Ultimately its Fdevs problem to solve I'm just picking out the problems. I think the OP's words have merit I see a lot of bashing on him but I get the point he was trying to make. I agree with it to an extent, but not because I'm a rapid pvper - just seeing an imbalance in gameplay.

Its bound to happen with the same sim being used for all three modes though.

 

[Powderpanic]

Wouldnt it be wonderful if FDEV actually managed its community.

As you were.

Powderpanic
The Voice of Griefing

 

[Robert Maynard]

It has potential, but I think where you have one side flat out denying the problem im not sure how it will ever be resolved until they are on the recieving end of it.

In a game where PvP is optional, by design, whether this, in and of itself, is a problem at all, or not, depends on one's opinion / preferred play-style.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Wouldnt it be wonderful if FDEV actually managed its community.

Management of community != control.

 

[Redomus]

In a game where PvP is optional, by design, whether this, in and of itself, is a problem at all, or not, depends on one's opinion / preferred play-style.

My playstyle is that of balanced gameplay. For one I would also like a cooldown on TLB effect in the name of balance, but thats another story.

 

[Robert Maynard]

My playstyle is that of balanced gameplay. For one I would also like a cooldown on TLB effect in the name of balance, but thats another story.

Balance is a great ideal to strive for.

In PvP / PvE terms there is no balance though - either PvP is mandatory (i.e. players must play among players who may engage them in PvP) or it is not. In this game, it is not (though players can choose to should they wish to).

 

[Redomus]

Balance is a great ideal to strive for.

In PvP / PvE terms there is no balance though - either PvP is mandatory (i.e. players must play among players who may engage them in PvP) or it is not. In this game, it is not (though players can choose to should they wish to).

A more simple solution would be to have solo/private group have an inherent lesser effect to the bgs. They can still work at it, but you get more bang for your buck in open. Due to the risks for those performing bgs work in open it would be a sensible short term solution until the issues are resolved properly in discussion for a new system encouraging those who want to get work done quickly on the BGS into open while taking that risk.

Give the right incentive and the problems sort themselves to an extent. Does that stop a super private group from running missions 24 hours a day in safety? no, but it will mitigate some of the exploits happening right now by these groups.

I still feel there is a rather large missing component from the game beyond spacelegs etc, but that is a seperate discussion.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Indeed, but it still leaves a rather large exploitable feature and I'm not entirely sure on how to square the circle, but there has to be more to it than revenge trading/scanning. Thats a very regressive form of gameplay with no strategy other than barrel scraping.

It has potential, but I think where you have one side flat out denying the problem im not sure how it will ever be resolved until they are on the recieving end of it. Ultimately its Fdevs problem to solve I'm just picking out the problems. I think the OP's words have merit I see a lot of bashing on him but I get the point he was trying to make. I agree with it to an extent, but not because I'm a rapid pvper - just seeing an imbalance in gameplay.

Its bound to happen with the same sim being used for all three modes though.

The problem I can see is that PvP doesn't have an outlet. The proposed solution to have a pure PvE mechanic to be used for this outlet to me is lacking. What first needs to happen is to implement OOPP. I am also very sceptical towards OOPP, but if a year after implementation it is still going strong, it could mean PvP got it's outlet. And that in turn will alleviate the grievances PvPers have. So while I expect a dud, I still hope for the best in OOPP, since that would improve the game all around.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

The problem I can see is that PvP doesn't have an outlet. The proposed solution to have a pure PvE mechanic to be used for this outlet to me is lacking. What first needs to happen is to implement OOPP. I am also very sceptical towards OOPP, but if a year after implementation it is still going strong, it could mean PvP got it's outlet. And that in turn will alleviate the grievances PvPers have. So while I expect a dud, I still hope for the best in OOPP, since that would improve the game all around.

OOPP isn't going to address any of the issues with PMFs and the BGS.
This isn't about PvP wanting something meaningful to do, it's about people wanting to use PvP to win BGS conflicts. Saying "You can do PP instead" isn't going to satisfy anyone.

 

[Robert Maynard]

A more simple solution would be to have solo/private group have an inherent lesser effect to the bgs. They can still work at it, but you get more bang for your buck in open. Due to the risks for those performing bgs work in open it would be a sensible short term solution until the issues are resolved properly in discussion for a new system encouraging those who want to get work done quickly on the BGS into open while taking that risk.

Give the right incentive and the problems sort themselves to an extent. Does that stop a super private group from running missions 24 hours a day in safety? no, but it will mitigate some of the exploits happening right now by these groups.

I still feel there is a rather large missing component from the game beyond spacelegs etc, but that is a seperate discussion.

Simple, yes.

What some players who prefer to play in the mode that has an effective bonus to their play (i.e. no penalty) would like? Probably - as it would be surprising for them not to want a bonus for their preferred play-style.

Fair, in terms of the fact that every player who has either bought or backed the game, regardless of preferred play-style, acquired when they did so? Not in my opinion - as we all paid "the same" for the game.

Again, there's yet another common conflation that players play in Solo / Private Groups for "safety" reasons. For some it would to be far from the case. However, there's no need whatsoever to justify mode choice - as every player (who can*) can select any of the three game modes each time they start a game session.

*: console players without premium platform access cannot play in either of the multi-player game modes - and they also bought a game where *every* player both experiences and affects the single galaxy state.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

It's "OK" simply because the game offers mandatory PvE and entirely optional PvP.

And in that case, combat logging should be defined as absolutely ok was well.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The problem I can see is that PvP doesn't have an outlet. The proposed solution to have a pure PvE mechanic to be used for this outlet to me is lacking. What first needs to happen is to implement OOPP. I am also very sceptical towards OOPP, but if a year after implementation it is still going strong, it could mean PvP got it's outlet. And that in turn will alleviate the grievances PvPers have. So while I expect a dud, I still hope for the best in OOPP, since that would improve the game all around.

If PowerPlay is indeed changed to become Open Only then, thrive or nay, it will have been transformed from an existing pan-modal feature into an Open Only feature to suit a play-style preference of a subset of the player-base - hence any complaints that there was no PvP dedicated feature would no longer ring true.

From Sandro's clear statements on the PowerPlay being a feature uniquely suited for the application (i.e. no other features are either suited or being considered), it would seem that PowerPlay is the sole candidate for such a change.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And in that case, combat logging should be defined as absolutely ok was well.

Frontier have stated that ungraceful exit from the game is not acceptable.

 

[Redomus]

The problem I can see is that PvP doesn't have an outlet. The proposed solution to have a pure PvE mechanic to be used for this outlet to me is lacking. What first needs to happen is to implement OOPP. I am also very sceptical towards OOPP, but if a year after implementation it is still going strong, it could mean PvP got it's outlet. And that in turn will alleviate the grievances PvPers have. So while I expect a dud, I still hope for the best in OOPP, since that would improve the game all around.

I agree that would be a start, but that doesnt really give any reward or incentive than just making things blow up - as long as is supported by other mechanics i'm all for it. Pvp can be fun, sure - but even some would mind having a proper cause to get behind however nefarious it might or might not be.

A few "simple" additions to core gameplay would make it more bearable for everyone while we wait for the big shiny features. I think part of the problem is they seem to be chasing tails over which super awesome cool mega feature should be added next when I am all for the probing and mining, those are sorely needed but simple things around economy would really be great.

Simple manufacture interfaces/base outpost storage/trade - give people proper agency than just personal (grind) narrative. They are probably fairly involved but considerably less than adding entirely new mechanics without simple gameplay structures underneath as history has shown. This is the sort of stuff I was hoping for with beyond, but it just got swept up into lofty goals as usual, running before walking.

 

[Lateralus]

We're back to Schrodinger's Open again.

On one hand, PvP players would be able to win BGS wars by destroying the other faction's ships.

Defensive wars, yes. That is a reasonable expectation.

On the other, PvE players wouldn't be affected, there's just more risk.

That's the goal isn't it? If general PvE BGS gameplay is not affected but attacking a PvP group from private modes becomes impossible then we would have a result would we not?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

OOPP isn't going to address any of the issues with PMFs and the BGS.
This isn't about PvP wanting something meaningful to do, it's about people wanting to use PvP to win BGS conflicts. Saying "You can do PP instead" isn't going to satisfy anyone.

True, for some it's just about the BGS. And for those there is no solution. As was pointed out (by you?) if they get OOBGS, the next complaint is instancing and not being able to effectively blockade. These people cannot be satisfied, so it's a waste of effort to try. However, lumped in with them are CMDRs who are looking for meaningful and challenging PvP. Can you blame them when they attach themselves to any cause that might further that goal?

For me, whenever I am in these discussions, the complaint: there are no inherent PvP mechanics is one I have no argument against. Because there aren't, and it's not that weird to expect there should be.