yes, I've got all my crossable parts crossed in the hope that it pans out well!
Open-Only in PP2.0?
- Thread starter August Lagrange
- Start date
So if you are about to destroy a player with merits or is #1, how is that benefiting the feature if they quit as they are about to be destroyed? How is that fair to the other player?
Speaking as an Ultima Online veteran, there was no need to “balance” the two shards, because bizarrely Felucca was a much nicer place to play compared to Tramnel, despite it being an Open PvP environment. Between much less competition for limited resources, PvPers who were focused on fighting other PvPers, and the usual suspects fleeing to Trammel to to trick others into cooperating with their own death, it was simply my preferred place to hunt for tailoring supplies.
This guy is still fiddling with modules and engineering. 
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Since when did players need to take "fairness" into account in player encounters? Those inclined to target those disinterested in PvP and who pose no challenge at all certainly don't....
Because otherwise how is Open consistent given it requires a consistent outcome to make sense?
Powerplay provides context for killing in Open, complaining about being killed is silly and why other modes are there.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It seems that the consistency that is sought is not something that Open as implemented offers.
.... and complaining about a player choosing to leave the game at any time or blocking them is equally silly - as both are as much a part of Open as shooting at anything one instances with.
That's what Hitler said about Roosevelt?This guy is still fiddling with modules and engineering.
Players might have many reasons to engage with powerplay, there's no single ethos that everyone has to assent to in order to engage with it.
Players and player groups should be fully entitled to set their own rules of conduct, but I don't see how they can credibly demand adherence to them from others (within the standards set by FDev, that is). Who put them in charge?
But Powerplay in Open requires a logical outcome to be consistent- for example quitting out and surviving to deliver Powerplay cargo that would ordinarily be destroyed.
I may well get involved in espionage, and if I'm any good at it, my contact with the enemy will be limited; Ideally really quite the same in either open or solo mode.
No way should it be modes that regulate this, it should be inherent within the game mechanics.
Guy got blown up PvP ing the Mandalay and is wasting time in prison.
I almost want PvP removed now
I almost want PvP removed now
The same argument applies to modes:
Players might have many reasons to use the different game modes, there's no single ethos that everyone has to assent to in order to enter a particular mode.
Players and player groups should be fully entitled to set their own rules of conduct around mode usage, but I don't see how they can credibly demand adherence to them from others (within the standards set by FDev, that is).
Well, if a player group dictates their members must do all PowerPlay activity in Open, that's completely fine, and is an example of a rule superseding the rules of the feature, inasmuch as neither PowerPlay nor Open mandate such a rule.
If you mean "no rule outside the in-game mechanics (and FDev's strictures) should be (or indeed could be) forced on players if they don't wish to comply" then that's largely self-evident, and I'd agree.
Who is the Archer guy? I thought there was only 1 new Power, the Alliance person, Kaine.
Hudson is out, I think the new guy is the replacement
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... and what are the "rules" of the feature (that exists inside the framework of the game and modes which already have rules)?
Replacement for Hudson
You can't have a consistent experience if everyone has their own rules in a feature that is competitive.
I generally have no problem with modes in V2, what does irritate me is that there are too many loopholes to make PvP consistent.