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

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Oh, I expect we'll hear about it sooner and possibly see sneak peeks of the work in progress (of features / elements that have been judged to be absolutely definitely included in the release) - just that I'm not expecting it to release for about nine months (or possibly more).

There was a comment in a stream quite some time ago that one Dev had been working on an underlying aspect of the game for quite some time as part of a future development. Two candidates for possible "beyond Beyond" content, that are already on the list of things that Frontier have said they'd like to do are atmospheric planets and "space legs". Given the more realistic nature of the JWE environment compared to Planet Coaster, it's possible that there's some cross-over to E: D from changes to COBRA required to implement these features in both games.

Yes it seems like game engine changes is something thats in the works.

 

[SubitusNex]

Having said that, the complaints about the BGS often have an element of an unbalanced mechanic, be it murder or exploration data, or the way either is resolved, or how UA bombings can impact a station. These are balancing issues unrelated to the modes. Point being, it's good we can't control what happens in the background. It's good the background throws us some curveballs. But we should always have the possibility to be able to react on those curveballs.

Love these rare moments when I agree with you.

 

[SubitusNex]

This is how BGS conflicts happen. Nothing to do with Open.



This, too, is how BGS conflicts work.



It is an assumption they were in PG or Solo. Maybe were on PS4 in Open, and complaining on reddit at the same time that you weren't playing open.



And now you not only accept at face value that Open Only works (it doesnt) plus complain people are against PvP. But why should someone engage in PvP when PvP is not part of a BGS conflict?

That is like playing a game of chess and complain that your opponent does not like to face you in a wrestling match.

Exactly, I remember in last year's Ross 128 conflict that both of the groups were flying around in open all the time trying to find eachother for that sweet personal narrative (fun) and both were complaining the other was poaying solo. I distincly remember roaming around for hours looking for some feds who said they were in open looking for us. The combat would have been fun and appreciated.

Maybe instead of making bgs open only they need to focus on open working better in the first place. Instancing is extremely problematic and non-scalable. And I that is a specific engineering problem they can address. After all most people play in open (this has been demonstrated by devs before). And then there are certain balancing issues that ziggy, me, and a bunch of others mention that need to be taken care of.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Love these rare moments when I agree with you.

Evil

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

Exactly, I remember in last year's Ross 128 conflict that both of the groups were flying around in open all the time trying to find eachother for that sweet personal narrative (fun) and both were complaining the other was poaying solo. I distincly remember roaming around for hours looking for some feds who said they were in open looking for us. The combat would have been fun and appreciated.

Maybe instead of making bgs open only they need to focus on open working better in the first place. Instancing is extremely problematic and non-scalable. And I that is a specific engineering problem they can address. After all most people play in open (this has been demonstrated by devs before). And then there are certain balancing issues that ziggy, me, and a bunch of others mention that need to be taken care of.

So we need an "open conflict" mode in which the game on purpose tries to put people together that are pledged on different factions

 

[SubitusNex]

So we need an "open conflict" mode in which the game on purpose tries to put people together that are pledged on different factions

You are funny. Thanks for the humour.
Wanna bet that when squadrons arrive they are going to make instancing easier for ppl in squad but not even going to bother about conflict? I would hope your idea would be how they make open work eventually, but I am not convinced they can or are willing to invest the time needed.

 

[Chrystoph]

Pretty safe to say you're reaching quite a bit.

Speaking of inconvenient facts. Let me lay a couple on you.

Here someone combat logs goes into solo and private. Uses the modes, then goes back into open and offers to allow me to blow him up now that hes turned in his merits:


Here someone is deliberately using the modes to attack a player faction when they know we can stop them, just like everyone else:




These are facts. The fact is people are gaming the system and opting out of being defended against.

If you deny or stick up for this type of unbalanced gameplay or behavior in ANY GAME.

Then you are the griefer.

Ah, yes, an intentional misdirect when you cannot rebut the position presented. You know that the points I was referring to are platforms and timing, yet you try to dismiss me and make griefing accusations when you aren't actually addressing the points that I said you were ignoring.

I'll concede your points here, although trying to make a statistical universe of two examples is also less than compelling especially when you are using PowerPlay examples to argue the BGS.

 

[SubitusNex]

Ah, yes, an intentional misdirect when you cannot rebut the position presented.

Also known as doing the Conway. *snickers*

 

[The Replicated Man]

Oh don't!
He'll just come back with:

"If you try sometimes you get what you need"

and then feel like he's won the argument.

Funny thing is, he won a good while ago, all you pve boys are just spinning your wheels

 

[The Replicated Man]

What am I even doing in this toxic thread?

So when people come together to discuss varying opinions on a topic, you consider the conversation to be toxic?

I think not sir, I think not

 

[Robert Maynard]

Funny thing is, he won a good while ago, all you pve boys are just spinning your wheels

What was the "win" condition?

 

[The Replicated Man]

What was the "win" condition?

I'll leave that to you and your moderating skills, to figure it out.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

I'll leave that to you and your moderating skills, to figure it out.

I would prefer you spell it out, so simple folk, like myself, can understand it.

Either that or just give me the # of the message where he 'won'.

Thank you in advance.

 

[UmbraRex]

What am I even doing in this toxic thread?

Masochist?

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'll leave that to you and your moderating skills, to figure it out.

As a participant, I'm not Moderating this thread.

So, please, enlighten me....

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I would prefer you spell it out, so simple folk, like myself, can understand it.

Either that or just give me the # of the message where he 'won'.

Thank you in advance.

I'm betting it was when he called everyone else 'griefers'

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Funny thing is, he won a good while ago, all you pve boys are just spinning your wheels

So when people come together to discuss varying opinions on a topic, you consider the conversation to be toxic?

Some people seem to think discussing varying opinions on a topic results in a win lose situation.

I think not sir, I think not

Me neither good Sir!

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I havnt won yet. Just need one more name.

Getting close though.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I havnt won yet. Just need one more name.

Getting close though.

Oh - we're playing forum bingo?

I must dig out the "other" card and see if I've won....

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Oh - we're playing forum bingo?

I must dig out the "other" card and see if I've won....

By all means, either way Im doing the same thing. Its hilarious at this point.