Nav Points should also be the Player Warp in Points.

[DaveB]

...I think you all can stop the ''Ermagerd is spawncamp like Eve'' argument now, unless you find a reason for why it would apply to anything other than the specific way you had in mind for how this feature would be implemented...

Disregarding the hyperbole, this reasoning for not dropping out at the nav point, to avoid an arrival chokepoint, was also stated by FD staff on here during the first iteration of this discussion I witnessed, back in premium beta. You may disagree with it and feel that it is an incorrect conclusion but FD do not apparently agree with you and they make the decisions.

As it stands right now, a nav point is simply a place where lots of NPCs spawn. I can see your ideas for enhancements to the encounters available there as a very good thing and on their own those additions would increase player traffic through the nav points and make them mirror the general activity. You don't have to drop out of hyperspace there for this to happen. If they are worth visiting for more than boiling wanted ships, they will be visited more.

 

[Midnight_Wyvern]

It honestly makes me kind of sad that at the first mention of any addition of risk to the gameplay to make it more exciting, the first words in the dicussion are words like "griefing" and "spawncamping".

Did most of the people playing this game have a bad run in EVE Online or something? I don't understand this all-encompassing fear of the possibility for people to be "mean" to you in a video game.

 

[DaveB]

It honestly makes me kind of sad that at the first mention of any addition of risk to the gameplay to make it more exciting, the first words in the dicussion are words like "griefing" and "spawncamping".

Did most of the people playing this game have a bad run in EVE Online or something? I don't understand this all-encompassing fear of the possibility for people to be "mean" to you in a video game.

It's not that. Most of the gamers I know who value PvP look down on those who seek out "cheap kills" or "no-skill kills". It's the reason setting up a sniper perch and firing into the other teams base for cheap "headshot-on-spawn" kills will get you banned from most Battlefield servers. They want the challenge and they respect those who seek it out or give a good fight even if they lose.

The lack of campable chokepoints in ED was not designed in by FD because of fear of griefers, it is one of the many layers of design intended to make player control of territory impossible.

 

[Dogoncrook]

It's not that. Most of the gamers I know who value PvP look down on those who seek out "cheap kills" or "no-skill kills". It's the reason setting up a sniper perch and firing into the other teams base for cheap "headshot-on-spawn" kills will get you banned from most Battlefield servers. They want the challenge and they respect those who seek it out or give a good fight even if they lose.

The lack of campable chokepoints in ED was not designed in by FD because of fear of griefers, it is one of the many layers of design intended to make player control of territory impossible.

Yeah but FD are a bit too cautious I think. You can choose modes, the universe is easy to hide in, and there were plans for, or supposedly will be griefer instances. They added shield cells, decreased drop range to stations, and a host of other nerfs like missile/torps. Seems a bit much.

 

[DaveB]

Yeah but FD are a bit too cautious I think. You can choose modes, the universe is easy to hide in, and there were plans for, or supposedly will be griefer instances. They added shield cells, decreased drop range to stations, and a host of other nerfs like missile/torps. Seems a bit much.

True, but "campers" have been despised ever since I started online multiplayer in Doom2 - way to get a whole map full of combatants forgetting their differences and concentrating on killing that one guy until he gives up and leaves... TBH I am not surprised FD shares that view and won't introduce any mechanism to enable them if they have any choice in the matter.

 

[Dogoncrook]

True, but "campers" have been despised ever since I started online multiplayer in Doom2 - way to get a whole map full of combatants forgetting their differences and concentrating on killing that one guy until he gives up and leaves... TBH I am not surprised FD shares that view and won't introduce any mechanism to enable them if they have any choice in the matter.

Fair enough, Ambushes take the game out of most games i guess. Nav points do need a purpose though, every time i hunt there I'm asking myself "what the hell are we doing here guys?". Id give it a pass if they put a gigantic porch with a bug zapper in its place.

 

[Celeste]

It occurred to me today that while the Nav points maybe the warp in point for NPC's that it should be the same for Players too. You warp in wait for FSD coldown then have to fly to a HUd escape vector before you can spool up in SC. That make life more exciting especially in populated systems. Dodging pirates, cops, anyone else too! (Depending on system authority type!)

Brilliant idea! make the game 'truly dangerous'

No thanks. It would make traveling long distances especially annoying.

 

[DaveB]

Fair enough, Ambushes take the game out of most games i guess. Nav points do need a purpose though, every time i hunt there I'm asking myself "what the hell are we doing here guys?". Id give it a pass if they put a gigantic porch with a bug zapper in its place.

I agree with you there. More variety of interations at nav points other than waiting for wanted pilots and boiling them would be good. Wandering merchants, guys offering cheap (and low quality) fuel, smugglers offering to take illegal cargo off your hands... anything to make them more "visitable" rather than being "a persistent USS for bounty hunters" would be good. Other than that, though, they don't need changing - certainly not to be a mandatory arrival point where anyone and their parrot can be lurking waiting for you.