General Remove private Lobby and single Player

[CMDR Correa]

That's why in the past we have had threads about making it impossible to wake out while being engaged by another player!

Also threads about making it impossible to menu log out while being engaged.

We have threads about making the game Open only so other players can't hide in solo/pg.

We starting to see a pattern here?

To be honest a wake disruptor doesn't seem so bad if it were a module. But there should also be a counter module for it, maybe an extension of EMP functionality could be disabling certain modules temporarily?
But then again we already have the containment missile. So IDK.....

 

[varonica]

To be honest a wake disruptor doesn't seem so bad if it were a module. But there should also be a counter module for it, maybe an extension of EMP functionality could be disabling certain modules temporarily?
But then again we already have the containment missile. So IDK.....

No, no, you don't understand, they wanted the ability to wake out or menu log removed entirely while in combat (ie: while being ganked) not disrupted, so that all players were forced to fight until they either win or were destroyed. We already have FSD disupters, that's essentially a wake disruptor, but they want the ability to wake out removed entirely from combat scenarios.

 

[CMDR Correa]

No, no, you don't understand, they wanted the ability to wake out or menu log removed entirely while in combat (ie: while being ganked) not disrupted, so that all players were forced to fight until they either win or were destroyed. We already have FSD disupters, that's essentially a wake disruptor, but they want the ability to wake out removed entirely from combat scenarios.

Oh...
Yeah that no good.

 

[Brrokk]

No, no, you don't understand, they wanted the ability to wake out or menu log removed entirely while in combat (ie: while being ganked) not disrupted, so that all players were forced to fight until they either win or were destroyed. We already have FSD disupters, that's essentially a wake disruptor, but they want the ability to wake out removed entirely from combat scenarios.

That's it. I've also seen running away in normal space, when your ship is faster than the attacker's, described as an exploit!

Another part of the pattern is the thing about nerfing shield boosters to reduce TTK. I found that one quite ironic. For a long time we've been seeing advice to "not fly paper ships in Open" from the PvP crowd. But when traders take that advice and engineer the shields and stacked boosters, they still don't like it.

It's all tedious. Luckily it can be disregarded, apart from occasionally rubbishing it in the forum so that FD don't get the idea that it's what "the community" want.

 

[Brrokk]

Oh, and there was the time another player turned into a triangle and looped around to get behind my unarmed Asp Explorer. Luckily my FSD was already charging and I high-jumped before he started interdiction. The next day in the forum there was a suggestion that, when trying to follow a scanned high wake, ships with lower jump range should be able to jump as far as the ship they wanted to follow.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Second: to my records, a BGS war conducted by grind takes a lot of time (as well as frustration to fight invisible enemies) vs. a straight confrontation where the weaker side is being wiped out or surrenders because isn't strong enough to fight.

But a straight confrontation won't solve anything BGS wise. If people have report crimes on, it will lower the security of the controlling faction a little bit and someone (whoever fires first) will get a bounty. That's about it.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

....... and whatever happened to Smiling Dog Crew?

They mainly moved over to playing Store Citizen. Small play area, choke points, always plenty of easy targets to kill. It must be like a playground for them.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Oh, and there was the time another player turned into a triangle and looped around to get behind my unarmed Asp Explorer. Luckily my FSD was already charging and I high-jumped before he started interdiction. The next day in the forum there was a suggestion that, when trying to follow a scanned high wake, ships with lower jump range should be able to jump as far as the ship they wanted to follow.

LOL, that's a good one.

 

[Rebel Yell]

You do get that whilst you waste time fighting one target, there could easily be another three flying unobstructed? In Open.

Mate, PowerPlay is PvP, but it is not direct PvP. It's a big numbers pushing game.

Blockades and such do not work in ED, so you can forget that. Again, that is in Open they don't even work.

It's just not that kind of world space I'm afraid.

Worse... There is nothing stopping your opponents loading up a ship, then taking a taxi to their destination, then transferring their ship over.

Yep, Open mode, and zero risk. Just credits to spend.

...still better than nothing really, we all know it's tough. Credits to spend, that's it

 

[Rebel Yell]

That's it. I've also seen running away in normal space, when your ship is faster than the attacker's, described as an exploit!

Another part of the pattern is the thing about nerfing shield boosters to reduce TTK. I found that one quite ironic. For a long time we've been seeing advice to "not fly paper ships in Open" from the PvP crowd. But when traders take that advice and engineer the shields and stacked boosters, they still don't like it.

It's all tedious. Luckily it can be disregarded, apart from occasionally rubbishing it in the forum so that FD don't get the idea that it's what "the community" want.

Never say never, go figure what's going to happen if they found something interesting in what I've said so far...

But a straight confrontation won't solve anything BGS wise. If people have report crimes on, it will lower the security of the controlling faction a little bit and someone (whoever fires first) will get a bounty. That's about it.

Bounties, crimes and security ships may be or may not be part of the equation (i.e. if system is anarchy, Delaine space for rank 5 pledged to the Archon or even folks flying with "crimes off" as most of the CMDRs in combat ships do), as I've said before when there's a BGS war between player factions, whatever eventually happens in open does count.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

You do get that whilst you waste time fighting one target, there could easily be another three flying unobstructed? In Open.

Mate, PowerPlay is PvP, but it is not direct PvP. It's a big numbers pushing game.

Blockades and such do not work in ED, so you can forget that. Again, that is in Open they don't even work.

It's just not that kind of world space I'm afraid.

Worse... There is nothing stopping your opponents loading up a ship, then taking a taxi to their destination, then transferring their ship over.

Yep, Open mode, and zero risk. Just credits to spend.

This is bull, with respect. Blockades do work if the sides agree not to block each other (or if FDev were to neutralise block between PP opponents), and the blockader gains system supremacy. My wing was unable to deliver cargo for 2.5hrs in a recent cycle where our overwatch were overstretched, and we suffered rebuys from trying. For a wing of 4 with 15 minute trip out and back, that's 4x10x700 = 28000 merits blocked. All the while, the blockaders' colleagues were undermining and racking up further opposition merits. We lost the expansion. A few deliveries got through by doing coordinated jumps so it was less than that, but still.

Doing the taxi thing, if indeed that is possible with powerplay cargo, still takes probably twice as long, so the blockade would cut out 14000 merits, which is still huge. And that's just for one wing. Same is true for using carriers - if you have to resort to these things and slow down deliveries then the blockade can be called a resounding success. You know this has all been said 5000000 times already, but the cloth remains wedged over all ears. That's the simple reason we have these threads over and over.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

This is bull, with respect. Blockades do work if the sides agree not to block each other (or if FDev were to neutralise block between PP opponents), and the blockader gains system supremacy. My wing was unable to deliver cargo for 2.5hrs in a recent cycle where our overwatch were overstretched, and we suffered rebuys from trying. For a wing of 4 with 15 minute trip out and back, that's 4x10x700 = 28000 merits blocked. All the while, the blockaders' colleagues were undermining and racking up further opposition merits. We lost the expansion. A few deliveries got through by doing coordinated jumps so it was less than that, but still.

Doing the taxi thing, if indeed that is possible with powerplay cargo, still takes probably twice as long, so the blockade would cut out 14000 merits, which is still huge. And that's just for one wing. Same is true for using carriers - if you have to resort to these things and slow down deliveries then the blockade can be called a resounding success. You know this has all been said 5000000 times already, but the cloth remains wedged over all ears. That's the simple reason we have these threads over and over.

Alright, let's say that hypothetically, blockades work. (They don't because of FD's design intentions)

Even then, it has been seven years

Why are people unable to get that the modes are not up for debate.

No amount of screaming is going to remove them, or change what can be done in them.

Frontier's silence is the polite way of telling you to give up, as your opinions are not important to them on this.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Never say never, go figure what's going to happen if they found something interesting in what I've said so far...


Bounties, crimes and security ships may be or may not be part of the equation (i.e. if system is anarchy, Delaine space for rank 5 pledged to the Archon or even folks flying with "crimes off" as most of the CMDRs in combat ships do), as I've said before when there's a BGS war between player factions, whatever eventually happens in open does count.

In an anarchy system (which are few and far between) things are a little different, but as far as i'm aware, killing of ships still lowers the security of the leading faction, even if they are anarchy.

Anyway, what would be the point of a head to head conflict even in anarchy space? It doesn't resolve anything BGS wise.

In a BGS war its all about doing those missions for max INF or other INF affecting activities.

 

[Brrokk]

In an anarchy system (which are few and far between) things are a little different, but as far as i'm aware, killing of ships still lowers the security of the leading faction, even if they are anarchy.

Anyway, what would be the point of a head to head conflict even in anarchy space? It doesn't resolve anything BGS wise.

In a BGS war its all about doing those missions for max INF or other INF affecting activities.

That's right. In a BGS conflict, as soon as you launch from the station in a combat ship with tiny cargo space and short jump range, you start losing.

As for blockading a solar system, I don't have direct experience of whether it's possible or not in ED, but in any reasonable SF game it should be impossible.

 

[varonica]

That's right. In a BGS conflict, as soon as you launch from the station in a combat ship with tiny cargo space and short jump range, you start losing.

As for blockading a solar system, I don't have direct experience of whether it's possible or not in ED, but in any reasonable SF game it should be impossible.

Artificial choke points in games are common because of this issue, in a space game unless you force players into one location artificially they aren't going to gather into large combat situations.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Artificial choke points in games are common because of this issue, in a space game unless you force players into one location artificially they aren't going to gather into large combat situations.

Space is big, and we literally have the entire galaxy.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This is bull, with respect. Blockades do work if the sides agree not to block each other (or if FDev were to neutralise block between PP opponents), and the blockader gains system supremacy.

They only work because players agree to out of game rules to make them possible, e.g. only play in Open, no block....

Quite like PvE Private Groups in that respect, where members also agree to out of game rules to make them possible.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

They only work because players agree to out of game rules to make them possible, e.g. only play in Open, no block....

This. Seriously, expecting everyone to abide by honour rules is ridiculous.

 

[Misty_Dark]

That's right. In a BGS conflict, as soon as you launch from the station in a combat ship with tiny cargo space and short jump range, you start losing.

As for blockading a solar system, I don't have direct experience of whether it's possible or not in ED, but in any reasonable SF game it should be impossible.

So you want to blockade a system with 2 stations... so where do you place yourself? the logical place should probably be flying back and forth between the main star and the station, this way, you will encounter all ships that take the "fastest" route to the station

Now, if you are the ship entering the system, you can now figure this one out, and avoid this obvious bad route to the station, so instead you can now leg it out in the black, and do a big curvy loop to the destination, and now for the attack to catch up with you, they have will have a hard time, as then have to get behind you, to interdict you... so you loose a little time, and that is just about it.

So this leaves the attacker to actually have to blockade near the station to block you, and now you only need to service some 10km gauntlet to the station.. and it should be obvious, that the blockade runners, are going to have report crimes on, so that the station and local authority ships will come to the aide to defend the blockade runner.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

So you want to blockade a system with 2 stations... so where do you place yourself? the logical place should probably be flying back and forth between the main star and the station, this way, you will encounter all ships that take the "fastest" route to the station

Now, if you are the ship entering the system, you can now figure this one out, and avoid this obvious bad route to the station, so instead you can now leg it out in the black, and do a big curvy loop to the destination, and now for the attack to catch up with you, they have will have a hard time, as then have to get behind you, to interdict you... so you loose a little time, and that is just about it.

So this leaves the attacker to actually have to blockade near the station to block you, and now you only need to service some 10km gauntlet to the station.. and it should be obvious, that the blockade runners, are going to have report crimes on, so that the station and local authority ships will come to the aide to defend the blockade runner.

Also this.

And no, nobody gets to demand other players have report crimes off.

It's a legitimate game mechanic.