But then by making the default mode Solo (because Open is optional right now), you make Powerplay grindy.
PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"
- Thread starter CMDR KOBAL
- Start date
But then by making the default mode Solo (because Open is optional right now), you make Powerplay grindy.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's a consequence of buying a game with entirely optional PvP (apart from CQC/Arena) - which everyone has done.
But out in space, Pranavs childhood spent gardening is not going to help me, not unless his turnips are explosive.
And thats why so many people come onto the forums asking the same questions. And none of that actually joins things up like this does: http://hosting.zaonce.net/elite/website/assets/ELITE-DANGEROUS-GAME-MANUAL.pdf
Except the coloured overview does not actually provide much information, and is inaccurate. A PMF attacked Utopia because the spacial coloured map showed they were 'in' Utopias domain- but when they applied the control filter the PMFs system was outside and not affected. If you don't know the subtle differences, it can cause a lot of problems.
Perhaps forced is the wrong term, and with the number of balance passes FD have done on shields and weapons I think it is fair to say that the wider community have had more than a fair say in how things are balanced currently.
Which FD are trying to keep popular by continually looking for new opportunities.
Unless these god ship NPCs fly like players they'll be no real difference for the reasons I outlined earlier with NPCs. I regularly tangle with ATR, and even they are predictable and easily avoided.
If you run away in a straight line, you are dead. If you keep close and keep out of your attackers LOS it gives you enough time (or more time) to HW.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed - and they reaffirmed their unchanged stance on the BGS later last year in the BGS & Scenarios stream.
Just because Open only has been put forward as a potential change as part of an investigation does not mean that it will happen.
Reading a 3D map is rarely an easy thing - there is no getting around that - ultimately, the situation is easy to confirm one-way or another. You fly to the system of interest and review the local faction information (or use the filters of course).
Overall though, the manual is still readily available and the level of guidance we have in game is not that unreasonable. If individuals fail to RTFM then the fault is with them - it is not exactly hidden and is readily available to anyone with an internet connection.
So, what i'm hearing is they need to be even more dangerous than ATR! Noted! They should be tenacious, make serial interdictions, fly in groups of big ships for mass lock and fast ships for damage dealing. They should have PvP like meta loadouts as well! And of course, god like aiming skills.
Good enough? Or do you need even tougher? I'm sure MoM is up to the challenge!
In your opinion - not everyone may feel the same way. If you find PP in Open provides the best experience for you then fair enough, just don't expect everyone else to agree with your perspective.
While not mentioning the P word.
True, but considering the BGS and other features has taken a giant chunk of Powerplays thunder (example- check out the Powerplay Promo video- it has a Squadrons style interface) FD can't overlap features and Powerplay needs to define its place. Until they post something new, I'll debate whats on the table.
Like I said, NPCs would have to fight like players- i.e. fight dirty, not respect NFZs, have engineered weapons / ships, fight intelligently, be unpredictable. ED so far has not achieved seamless NPC pursuit like that. If they do, fantastic!
The other is to stop NPCs cheating- jumping with no FSD, jumping through planets etc, ships that magically restore themselves, and so on at the same time.
Why not? That is essentially where PP is currently. If you want something that is not overlapped then we are talking new mechanics which takes us back to the squadron based proposal in essence.
But if PP is a competitive feature, it creates pressure to pretty much do things the easy way. This is where weighted merits helps, as it rewards taking the riskier path. The only way that would make everyone happy is if FD made a system that quantified that encounter- I have ideas using passenger mechanics that could help in hauling, but it requires having a record of your opponents ship (like DPS etc). And even then its complicating things- really it should be you won by delivering your cargo, or lost because you were shot down.
Powerplay is a rehash of CGs, basic hauling and basic shooting. It needs to step out from the areas of the game that overshadow it- and if FD are not going make something new, they have to achieve that with what they have.
I don't see PP as a "competitive" feature, and I am sure many others feel the same way. Sure there is an element of competition (same can be said of many elements of ED) but it is far from being the same thing as "competitive" in true PvP terms and was never designed that way. The barn door is open and horse has long since bolted on that one.
Not entirely true, CGs/IAs are different from PP in both approach and intent. Any similarities are superficial in nature.
OK, what I am saying is this: Back in the day, if I was in my Cobra or Clipper and saw a Fed ship, any Fed built ship, pulling me from super-cruise. I knew that I would not have to high-wake, all I had to do was keep running and they would fall behind. I did not have to worry about leaving the system and I could just carry on to my own destination. Back in the day, before engineers, the only ships that could keep up with a cobra, was another cobra or Clipper.
Now, because a key aspect of this game; is decisiveness, thinking on your feet and just getting on with it. These days, we have no idea, of the potential speed of another player's ship; it is only when we 'see' them keeping up with you, that you know, High waking, is the only option; however: By then it is too late, as you are already dead. There used to be a speed pecking order of ships, now that has gone out of the window; due to engineers.
So my options then become limited. High wake 'every time', thus wasting time. Or go to the engineers and increase the speed of my ship. Thus, I am forced to go to the engineers, if I wish to play in open; unless I can handle the loses. I started a thread a few months back; asking, does open play now require the use of engineers and the general consensus was: That it is stupid to fly in open, without engerneering your ship first. I still play in open, because I can afford the loses to other players.
I understand how to use my thrusters, one of the things I like with this game, over the 84 game; are the extra thruster options. out runing them, is out ranging them. Most engineered ships will do over 500ms, all the dodging etc, in a Clipper that tops out at 440ms, is going to die; especially if the guy doing the chasing, has also engineered their weapons.
Not entirely true but I get where you are coming from
Is that necessarily a bad thing? I agree that some take engineering too far resulting in ganker builds but ultimately it is the players that are the problem not the engineers themselves.
Even pre-engineers Open was still vulnerable to ganking behaviours, but ultimately the problem is less with the range of options and threat identification but more to do with the behaviours of individuals.