Operation Enigma, breaking the code!

[GluttonyFang]

I must admit - I'm still confused as to why Code would ask of goodwill from a purely PvE group who maintain their own rules and keep themselves to themselves when playing in their PvE group.

It's not like there is any possibility of the Code (in Open) interacting with anybody in Mobius (in Mobius Private Group) unless a Code member is in Mobius Private Group (in which case they are a Mobius member and bound by their rules) or both are in a different Private Group (which will have it's own rules), or both are in Open (which has no rules).

Please explain to me what is meant to be achieved by a memorandum of understanding here?

Not all mobius members play strictly in mobius and should be respected (not hunted down like some special target), and there's some Code members sometimes do enjoy playing in Mobius and follow its rules (not instantly banned just because the said individual is from Code). Basically we are asking for mutual respect in the sense that our members that genuinely enjoy playing in Mobius while respecting its rules to be respected by the Mobius community without bias and that Mobius understand that while some of our members have grudges against Mobius, it is a very small, contained portion of our members. So from now on, we no longer seriously point at a group of people and exercise stereotypes of any sort. (No more Mobius are "carebears," Code are "grievers." However, more "Cmdr xxx doesn't like this, doesn't like that.")

It's basically my attempt of solving this "race war" between the two groups.

 

[Asp Explorer]

It's basically my attempt of solving this "race war" between the two groups.

So, you are basically saying that all players are equal and should be respected equally no matter what gaming mode or group they choose to spend their game-time in.

I thought that was a basic right and expectation granted to everybody who chooses to spend their game-time with anyone.

More to the point - why Mobius especially? As a PvE group - their concerns are not PvP related, and until individual Mobius Group CMDR's play in Open for a bit of PvP you'll not hear a squeak out of them. You'll also not hear a squeak out of any other Private Group (or anyone else) until you meet them in Open. Mobius is also not a cohesive "unit" for lack of a better word, it's not like there is a bunch of CMDR's all sitting around waiting for Mobius to issue commands. They are not out to take over the PvP world.

So why do you fear them?

Please don't misunderstand me - I in absolutely no way represent Mobius or the group.

 

[Falcon_D]

I'm not sure how in-depth you understand the Power Play mechanic, but here:

Isn't this how player factions are supposed to work? I.e. exactly like how Power Play works at the moment.

The larger the committed, organized group getting the upper hand at undermining/fortifying/expanding.

Have fun, fly safe.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Fold

I don't know how do we "fear" them in anyway, but rather we are expressing our respect.

Mobius and Code had bad history, and I'm preventing that from spreading any further.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I don't know how do we "fear" them in anyway, but rather we are expressing our respect.

Mobius and Code had bad history, and I'm preventing that from spreading any further.

So, please look back a little through the forum posts on many threads - you'll find many members from Code and other PvP centric groups containing the word "fear" with regard to PvE play and Mobius in particular.

You'll even find posts from members of Code relishing in slaughtering PvE players as they are clueless noobs. Is that respectful?

Code makes it's own history. So does every player in Elite. Forget about this whole "Facebook Gangs in Space" mentality and let each CMDR be judged on his or her own merits, and not the group they belong to. CMDR's can belong to many groups simultaneously. Judge the player, not the associations.

 

[GluttonyFang]

The larger the committed, organized group getting the upper hand at undermining/fortifying/expanding.

That's a very shallow understanding, there are many questionable mechanics in PP that will cause some major issues if they are not rectified when introducing things to minor factions.

But in general, I believe that is the case.

- - - Updated - - -

Code makes it's own history. So does every player in Elite. Forget about this whole "Facebook Gangs in Space" mentality and let each CMDR be judged on his or her own merits, and not the group they belong to. CMDR's can belong to many groups simultaneously. Judge the player, not the associations.

I think that's the point I'm trying to make, but I suppose re-stating it is helpful.

 

[relayer]

Code makes it's own history. So does every player in Elite. Forget about this whole "Facebook Gangs in Space" mentality and let each CMDR be judged on his or her own merits, and not the group they belong to. CMDR's can belong to many groups simultaneously. Judge the player, not the associations.

out of rep so I had to comment; nicely put. We've had an ample demonstration in code's representative poster here of the root behaviors that cause people to mistrust whatever code is pushing and to dislike in the extreme code's modus operandi; to wit, the disconnect between code's words and code's actions. Which is definitely on-topic for this thread.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I was going to quote some Reddit stuff, but that would be cherry picking I suppose. It's easy enough to find.

 

[GluttonyFang]

I was going to quote some Reddit stuff, but that would be cherry picking I suppose. It's easy enough to find.

I would agree with you.

 

[Falcon_D]

That's a very shallow understanding, there are many questionable mechanics in PP that will cause some major issues if they are not rectified when introducing things to minor factions.

Hello,

As I'm new to PP and only been playing ED for the last 2months or so, I'm really curious as to what these "questionable mechanics" are. Especially, as how they would affect Player factions. I'm sure I could do alot of research on the forums as, there seem to be many, many threads expressing concerns regarding PP.

I would really appreciate it if you could give an example.

Thank you very much and best regards.

Have fun, fly safe.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Hello,

As I'm new to PP and only been playing ED for the last 2months or so, I'm really curious as to what these "questionable mechanics" are. Especially, as how they would affect Player factions. I'm sure I could do alot of research on the forums as, there seem to be many, many threads expressing concerns regarding PP.

I would really appreciate it if you could give an example.

Thank you very much and best regards.

Have fun, fly safe.

Okay the most prominent thing is probably 5th column. Like the name itself, players would intentionally join a faction they oppose and wreck havoc from the inside. There's basically no way to counter this method. (Expand toward the wrong systems/areas)

Say that the faction and its supporters want to expand into system A, however, the available resource (CC-Command Capital) only allows one expansion. The 5th-column people will make the faction expand into system B, despite that expanding to system B actually hinders the faction. This leads to the genuine supporters of the faction in question putting in perhaps twice or much more effort than necessary to expand into a desired system.

Now if the 5th-column people are diligent enough and have enough people, small factions will eventually become unable to expand at all or get stuck in a stalemate.

This is my primary concern. Of course undermining/fortification is another area but more forgiving when compared to 5th column considering there's way to counter undermining/fortification.

Edit:

Also, your signature, it's not showing up properly. Not sure if that's how you want it to be, but just a reminder.

 

[Yaffle]

All

A reminder to debate the topic, not each other, and not each other's discursive techniques.

 

[nexxo]

Okay the most prominent thing is probably 5th column. Like the name itself, players would intentionally join a faction they oppose and wreck havoc from the inside. There's basically no way to counter this method. (Expand toward the wrong systems/areas)

Say that the faction and its supporters want to expand into system A, however, the available resource (CC-Command Capital) only allows one expansion. The 5th-column people will make the faction expand into system B, despite that expanding to system B actually hinders the faction. This leads to the genuine supporters of the faction in question putting in perhaps twice or much more effort than necessary to expand into a desired system.

Now if the 5th-column people are diligent enough and have enough people, small factions will eventually become unable to expand at all or get stuck in a stalemate.

This is my primary concern. Of course undermining/fortification is another area but more forgiving when compared to 5th column considering there's way to counter undermining/fortification.

Edit:

Also, your signature, it's not showing up properly. Not sure if that's how you want it to be, but just a reminder.

If blockading a CG is a valid gameplay mechanic (which I think it is), then how is a 5th column not just another valid gameplay mechanic?

 

[GluttonyFang]

If blockading a CG is a valid gameplay mechanic (which I think it is), then how is a 5th column not just another valid gameplay mechanic?

It is a valid game play mechanic, but also questionable mechanic (I didn't call it an invalid gameplay mechanic, at least I don't think so), since the community has been surrounding it as the hot topic lately.

 

[SNaomiScott]

As a reminder, FD made it very clear that they will be adjusting the mechanic to prevent solo/group/open underming causing players to not be able to do anything to stop undermining efforts.

Apologies if this is going off-topic, but could you possibly provide a link to the source for this as I don't seem to be able to find it myself?

Thanks muchly.

Edited:

Apologies again - I just spotted that somebody else already asked the same question and you replied. That's what I get for posting before reading the rest of the thread.

 

[bitstorm]

Interesting. I know of one Code CMDR who attacked a friend in Mobius ~4-5 weeks ago, around the time of the Bast plague CG, and (I think) the attack occurred in Bast, not 100% sure on that though.

I believe he was reported to Mobius along with video footage and was subsequently removed, I do not know if the Code association was passed on to Mobius. I assumed he was reported to Code but thinking about it now why bother? Might as well just report to Mobius and move on.

Oh, if that is the case do PM me about the details and perhaps file a formal complaint on our forum. We will be happy to look into that.

Hi, in the end it's not really for me to report anything since I wasn't affected. I've pm'd the CMDR that was attacked in Mobius to make him aware of your post.

If he wants to report it he can do so but if he didn't back then then I doubt he'll bother now, strictly speaking it's not Code's responsibility to manage this, rather Mobius'. Unless Code have an ethical code they follow but that's another matter. If it were me I'd honestly just do the same, report to Mobius, make a mental note Code do this sort of thing and move on. There is also the angle of reporting it to Code and making yourself a target. This may or may not be the case but I can certainly understand people reporting to Mobius and not Code. It is also possible that CMDR was not aware the Code CMDR was from Code.

FWIW the affected CMDR and the Code CMDR had no interactions previously, the Code CMDR was vocal at the plague CG of what he was doing there (blockading). My assumption from that is (and it is an assumption) the Code CMDR dropped into Mobius Plague CG literally because it was seen as fair game. I can honestly think of no other reason you'd drop into Mobius to attack players at a CG you're actively opposing when you've had no history with that CMDR.


ON the flipside, I also want to say I was at the plague CG hunting Uknown Artefacts and not participating in the CG. I think the increased player population was making UAs more likely. Seeing Code there I announced I was on a scientific mission not involved in the CG, had a bit of an interaction with the above Code CMDR (questioned a bit) and was left well alone as an "independent" to do my spawn camp thing which was really cool.

But then later more of Code turned up and it turned into KoS every non-Code CMDR without warning, despite me multiple times trying to explain I wasn't even there for the CG - this wasn't so cool.

Of course Code can play how they want within the rules of the game (as can anyone), but I don't think you should underestimate just how much "playing fair" helps. Do the right thing and I honestly feel players will have a lot of respect for "piracy groups" and accept them in the spirit of the game. Go around ganking in Mobius or mass ganking CMDRs and there will be backlash.

It's a difficult topic to be honest, but to paint a scenario if a group announces a blockade for legit reasons and CMDRs are aware then it can add to the whole fabric of ED. I wouldn't want to see every CG ever blockaded but one's that make sense yeah (Hutton? Christ no). I think I'd almost want to see tools in game to support this, broadcast beacons which affect the players bottom left panel "blockade in place" or similar. What smuggler doesn't want to be Han Solo! =p

 

[Deathwatch]

It is a valid game play mechanic, but also questionable mechanic (I didn't call it an invalid gameplay mechanic, at least I don't think so), since the community has been surrounding it as the hot topic lately.

I may hate to admit but i have to agree with Gluttony on this one 5 columning is just scummy as all hell, we may all hate the code but i have to admit they do make the game more fun for us pvper's, crushing someones faction because you can doesn't sound right, think about your characters point of view, these guys are a pirate group you screw with them they will find you and kill you literally kill you, you wouldn't reappear back at your last station or they would kill your family... etc etc....

 

[SNaomiScott]

I'm not sure how in-depth you understand the Power Play mechanic, but here:

Will Minor Factions/ Powers have alternate methods of expansion than the current Top 10 Powers? Say, Anarchists spreading through cop-killing, Democrats via elections, etc.

The mechanisms will be the same as the current powers.

This to me doesn't suggest a change to the undermining mechanic. Rather it suggests that the undermining mechanic is going to stay exactly the same as it is now.

In addition, the mechanisms in place for undermining a minor faction are very different to those in place for undermining a Power. In the case of the former, undermining a minor faction is enacted by bolstering the influence of the other local minor factions at a cost to the influence of the targeted minor faction, usually through the auspices of a bulletin board mission, or more directly by choosing the opposing side in a CZ (if one exists).

For now, player minor factions are going to be just that, minor factions. When and if they become Powers will be determined at a later date, and as yet I've not seen anything from the Community Team or the Devs to suggest what mechanism will be in place to allow for minor factions to be upgraded to Powers (though obviously, if someone else has that information it would be appreciated).

Within the context of this thread, Dave1235's suggestion basically relies on CMDRs undertaking missions for any and all factions other than the Code's minor faction in their home system, effectively raising the other factions' influence and thereby reducing the Code's. This sort of pseudo-guerilla warfare can be just as effectively achieved in Open, Group or Solo modes with little or no chance of opposition other than Code going out of their way to do every single mission they can find posted to the bulletin boards in support of their own minor faction.

(Just as an aside, I may be wrong but if IIRC then accepting a mission and then abandoning it uncompleted also reduces the minor faction's influence - I'm not in game right now so can't check - if anyone else is willing and able to check this then clarification would be appreciated).

With regards to eradicating a minor faction completely, I'm not sure if this is actually possible, and even if it is there's no guarantee that it will work against a player minor faction, given that these will be minor factions effectively created by the player base - I'd hope that FDev have taken into account how important these minor factions are going to be to the players aligned to them and would therefore make them in some way hardier than normal in-game minor factions.

Personally, while I do have some issues with the way that Code and their allies enacted the Hutton blockade, and while I do have very serious issues with out-and-out griefing for the sake of it, I do feel that there should be some way for all of us to co-exist in the same Open space if we so choose, without fear of being subjected to unwarranted PvP (i.e. motiveless murder). But that's just my opinion. I'll also freely admit that I spend most of my time in Group these days simply because I know I can't afford to lose my ship too many times to unwanted griefing.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

It is a valid game play mechanic, but also questionable mechanic (I didn't call it an invalid gameplay mechanic, at least I don't think so), since the community has been surrounding it as the hot topic lately.

Not sure if you were aware of it, I just found it myself:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=182952&p=2816304#post2816304

 

[Vandaahl]

I can apply that concept to a lot of things. Racial differences in the end share equivalence in being human, yet they are free agents and mostly choose to do different things.

And therefore the principle of equivalence is not applicable in this case mate, really

But enough about that. As Dave mentioned, lets keep this thread on topic.