So you want to play in Open, eh?

[Vindris]

Sorry, but I'll have to pull you up on that as so unfair, it's verging on a strawman TBH

If we just consider just my posts in just this thread... can you see why I may consider your accusation as rather unfounded? Here's three pulled at random... See anything unfair or irrational regarding OPEN here? Or are you suggesting OPEN is currently problem free and I shouldn't even be daring to suggest where I think problem lie and where it could be improved?

I'd ask you either be more specific in your accusations/facts, or accept you've mis-read or mis-understood something? At the moment you're coming across like someone whose quicker to pull out a pitchfork (for a fight), than a pen (for a discussion). I'd prefer the "pen" please...



https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=181909&p=2803106&viewfull=1#post2803106



https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=181909&p=2803322&viewfull=1#post2803322



https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=181909&page=20&p=2802882#post2802882

Maybe it was a bit unfounded. It's just a vibe I got. Apologies if I am in fact wrong in my assumption. Sometimes I just say things.

And I agree with some of your points, but I'm biased. I've always been a hardcore PvPer, in any game I've played.

I don't want PvP oriented players to be too restricted either.

 

[NeilF]

Cheers Neil.

Drive-by posting, duck!

No reference to Code's presence or intention to disrupt the CG. Can we finally accept this *removes sunglasses and stares into the distance, squints in pain as the sun appears* as 'proof-positive'* that Code were not 'out-of-order' for blockading, that like-it-or-not FD are happy with the idea of what Code did?

*Been watching too many procedurals on the tv.

I have mixed feelings about Codes antics... I think my fist post to them still sums up my thoughts - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=181909&p=2802882&viewfull=1#post2802882

Kudos for trying to group togethor and do something "interesting"... The game in truth needs more of this. But it's a shame the mechanics don't support it very well, or in some areas, at all.

I'd love to see more varied and deeper mechanics in the game to allow groups to actually try and do "other things" - let's call it emergent gameplay... But I'd suggest at the moment, the mechanics are so simplistic and minimal that it looks nigh on impossible IMHO.

It would be brilliant to actually see some well thought out blockage mechanic introduced into the game, at the very least as a Community Goal. But if it proved effective it could even be used with Powerplay possibly to resolve appropriate situations.

<snip>

And finally onto the nature of the tactics being used. While some were in keeping with the game - ie: interdiction and the like - some were, to be frank, simply "trolling" IMHO. Blocking a pad for hours simply because of a loophole in the game mechanics? It achieves nothing in truth other than annoying folks (who duck into SOLO) and wastes hours of your time. Or ramming ships outside the platform? Again, another example of the shallow mechanics in the game which desperately need attention...

I'm sure some of the individuals were trying to "play fair," but I have to suggest some others just came across as griefers to be honest. I mean why repeatedly take down the HuttonOrbital.com live Twitch feed ship? All it achieved was grief to its CMDR, and annoyance to the dozens of people enjoying the feed from it... But that said, I actually hope, given another CG akin to this one, you pull exactly the same (loop-hole) tricks again TBH! Because if FD don't improve these areas it would be a sad reflection IMHO.

But anyway, thanks for highlighting flaws and weakness in the current mechanics

If FD do nothing to improve the exploits, crime punishment and the game policy itself, before the next similar CG, so the same sort of nonsense happens again... That to me would be as worrying and sad for the game as Powerplay's design.

 

[Eros]

hmmmm well, what i saw was organization on the mug side, I also saw a complete failure to stop the CG from succeeding... soooo sounds to me like patting yourself on the back and convincing yourself that it was a victorious effort when it quite clearly wasn't. What I personally saw was that you was not able to organize a response until the goal was already achieved... sooo.. yeah...? well done? errrm...

People do know a lot about the points you made out, and by knowing these points you should also understand that many traders got through the blockade extremely easily. Personally, I just find some of the justifications extremely funny, along with the arrogance and also ignorance. kind of like "We are against the goal because we personally dont like it...because its not near our home... well suck it up princess! There are a lot of things not on your door step. The origin of the rare item not being on your door step is good right? I mean... the further away the trader is the more value it has...to quoteth OP

You know this right?

Still, was fun to watch, fun to take part in, and even more fun to see the fox news style arguments being made. No skin of my back, nose or whatever. The game mechanics exist as they are, and thus we may all do what we like.

Well done the hutton mug CG team for succeeding valiantly, and well done CODE for the effort

 

[Vindris]

hmmmm well, what i saw was organization on the mug side, I also saw a complete failure to stop the CG from succeeding... soooo sounds to me like patting yourself on the back and convincing yourself that it was a victorious effort when it quite clearly wasn't. What I personally saw was that you was not able to organize a response until the goal was already achieved... sooo.. yeah...? well done? errrm...

People do know a lot about the points you made out, and by knowing these points you should also understand that many traders got through the blockade extremely easily. Personally, I just find some of the justifications extremely funny, along with the arrogance and also ignorance. kind of like "We are against the goal because we personally dont like it...because its not near our home... well suck it up princess! There are a lot of things not on your door step. The origin of the rare item not being on your door step is good right? I mean... the further away the trader is the more value it has...to quoteth OP

You know this right?

Still, was fun to watch, fun to take part in, and even more fun to see the fox news style arguments being made. No skin of my back, nose or whatever. The game mechanics exist as they are, and thus we may all do what we like.

Well done the hutton mug CG team for succeeding valiantly, and well done CODE for the effort

Kind of impossible to completely stop when players can just hop over to Solo play. (Don't worry, we're all guilty of it)

 

[NeilF]

Maybe it was a bit unfounded. It's just a vibe I got. Apologies if I am in fact wrong in my assumption. Sometimes I just say things.

And I agree with some of your points, but I'm biased. I've always been a hardcore PvPer, in any game I've played.

I don't want PvP oriented players to be too restricted either.

First... Thanks... Glad we defused all that

Anyway, back on topic... I think OPEN and PvP needs attention. If anything, Hutton has helped bring this to the front...

• IMHO obviously exploits (like we've witness at Hutton for example) need addressing.
• The game needs to better police itself. Individuals can quite literally get away with murder, in the same areas over and over and over, and the game mechanics ignore it.
• Murder probably needs a harsher penalty/outcome.
• Piracy needs a bucket load of love thrown at it. It's just limping along at the moment IMHO. It needs to be made a more viable occupation without any related PvP combat coming down on it too unfairly.
• The game needs more dedicated PvP mechanics introduced. Community Goal Combat Zones. Dedicated PvP zones for TV. Blockade mechanics (for CGs and Powerplay?). Convoy escorting and attacking mechanics.. Anything... Because at the moment, if individuals want the challenge of fighting other players, the game just doesn't really offer it very easily. And you have to wonder if this is why some individuals will go to "great lengths" to find it no matter "how unsociable".

Anyway... Just my opinion...

BTW what is concerning is there's not the slightest indication FD are looking or concerned about any of the above. Hence the worry come the next CG like Hutton, the same nonsense will just kick off again, with the game not promoting and generating good/interesting gameplay, but instead allowing uncontrolled gameplay.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Fold

Hello,

As you can see I am breaking my fingers by just trying to respond to everyone, I apologize if it seems that I ignored your post (I don't think I did). The Code is open to criticisms that are relatively detached from emotions.

Thank you for your feedback on this post.

Sincerely,

Glutony Fang

 

[askavir]

Hello,

As you can see I am breaking my fingers by just trying to respond to everyone, I apologize if it seems that I ignored your post (I don't think I did). The Code is open to criticisms that are relatively detached from emotions.

Thank you for your feedback on this post.

Sincerely,

Glutony Fang

I could see you had your hands full with responding to everyone. By the way, kudos for you for taking the time to do it.

 

[GluttonyFang]

I could see you had your hands full with responding to everyone. By the way, kudos for you for taking the time to do it.

Much appreciated.

 

[CMDR Ellegon]

(NOTE: the following public service announcement is Nonya's opinion only and is not an official communication from Code itself)

Seems like the blockade of the Hutton Orbital CG has angered a lot of players who thought the CG would be a 1.5 hour "cakewalk" for them and a lot of ideas about how to "fix" such a thing are being floated around, all of which can be subverted and used against the very players who suggest them.

Here's one reason why Code was so successful against the CG participants - organization and coordination. The CG players had none, Code has it in spades.
Here's another reason - knowledge of the in-game mechanics. Code members have spent considerable time and in-game credit expense in working out the different play factors of the game.

1. Did you know that if you kill enough system police in an instance that no more will spawn in that instance? Nope, you didn't. We did though. But we didn't do it in this case because we were much too busy chasing you all out of the system, and quite frankly we had a much easier way to tie up the system po-po and make them ineffective.

2. Did you know that if a commander sits on a pad they're invincible to attack? You should know since a lot of you suggested that happen because during the early betas prior to game release players were able to be killed on pads and the uproar against that was right here in these very forums.

3. Did you also know that once a wanted commander is scanned prior to docking their docking privs are immediately revoked and they cannot dock?

4. Did you know what once a wanted commander is docked and then scanned by system security forces the sec forces IMMEDIATELY open fire on them on the dock until the commander is destroyed?

5. Did you know said commander cannot be destroyed because YOU didn't want to be vulnerable on the docking pad to attack so you had FD make it so.

6. Did you also know that when said forces are firing on said commander on the docking pad that they also ignore all other wanted players - including YOU if you accidentally fire at the station - and remain fixated on the docked wanted commander?

7. Did you know about anchor wings?

8. Do you know about exactly how instancing works?

9. Do you know the real difference between a combat log and regular save-and-quit?

<snip>

1. through 9. - I don't give a hoot.

However:

10. I do know about Mobius. End of story. CODE can go and do an act to themselves which is typically associated with human procreation

BTW: I would like to get a list of forum names of the CODE guys, that would allow sanitation of my forum view.

 

[Zulu Romeo]

The only thing I got from the OP is that the OP knows how to play the current gameplay mechanics to their advantage in ways that were not intended by the game devs.

Some might call this exploiting the game.

It is also often said, and frequently observed, that such players playing like this keep saying to themselves that what they are doing is not exploiting, as it is all in the game so therefore it has to be legit.

They often also confuse such twisting of the game mechanics with the term "emergent gameplay" which is the using of the established game environment to create new and positive content that could benefit the community as a whole, and therefore distinct from exploiting, and use this banner to justify their continued behaviour.

 

[Archeus]

Just back to this thread reading all the way through. *phew*

So I understand what an Anchor wing is now. I can see how that might be useful for large X vs Y battles. But is it not just stacking the game in your favour from the get go at the blockade?

I get pulled into 1 vs 1, 4 vs 1 or 4 vs 4, you might have a chance if you are combat ready. But 15 vs 1 or 15 vs 4 is just suicide. You could turn any ship to mush in seconds with 15 ships attacking it. The opposing team would never be able to anchor wing in time to pull in similar forces.

Maybe a timer on new wing formation to prevent this. And have something like a "Cry Baby" beacon that allows you to bring in X amount of players in one go. This way it's a bit more fair for those who come late.


....

I learnt from an earlier incident that if you put a griefer on ignore, it prevents you or them from appearing in your instance. So you can play open with people who do play fair. Better solution then going solo.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Hello Ziggy,

Well Guilds are already here - as CODE as shown (you should see reddit when groups make temporary peace treaties on behalf of a power - the uproar by the non group members!). Might as well improve their tools as this also helps smaller groups of friends in PvE/Open such as improved comms (text channels) and even tagging.

I think we can expect more of the CODE type of behavior if guild ownership is added, I think that would be when things get messy. Really hope this is not done, but guilds exist and life goes on.


Simon

Hi,

I might have phrased it inadequately, when I said 'supporting actual guilds', I was referring to giving guilds the opportunity to own game content in the form of bases and such. The proponents of this plan always claim it won't affect those who do not care for guilds in the game. I was pointing out how that line of reasoning can quickly go to: if you have an issue with a guild, you should form one to stop it.

Cheerio.

 

[NeilF]

What happened at Hutton was important. It was a group - sometimes using questionable methods maybe - trying to achieve something outside the remit of a community goal. They tried blockading a Community Goal.... We want this and need this in the game! We need the game to offer us the mechanics and an environment so gameplay can flurish, ideally giving birth to emergent gameplay.

Ignoring some of the "questionable" antics going on, I suspect for some of those involved, this was their true attempt to make the game into something bigger/grander; To take the existing pick up X and take it Y mechanics and bend it using Z!

Ultimately I'd have to say their efforts failed IMHO. Why?:-

• Did the security force step in and take action against them? Did wings of security vessels flood the station and neighbouring area in Super Cruise to address the carnage and murder? Alas no. The game seemingly took little/no action against much of what was going on.
• Did the community's efforts to self police work? While plenty of ships were destroyed on both sides, was anything actually achieved? Individuals simply respawned, rebuy costs paid, small fines/bounties imposed where applicable. Often "instances" wouldn't even permit individuals to find/see each other.
• Was there any political or financial aspect changed? No. 50,000 ships could be destroyed in a system and it make not a jot of difference.

So what might we learn from last weeks events?

• There are some simple yet fundamental flaws in the game's self policing mechanics:-
  • Individuals can commits crime over and over again in an area and the game doesn't take any steps to address this. No (additional) security vessels appeared at the platform or surrounding area (in SC) even with huge amounts of crime/murder taking place, often within meters of the platform.
  • Even though some were committing murder over and over, the penalties were not enough to change this.
• There's some loop-holes and abuses of the mechanics that need closing. eg: Sitting on a platform (in OPEN) for hours. Ramming ships to death just meters away from supposed safety.
• The current mechanics are too rigid and simplistic to allow anything like what was being attempted. These individuals tried giving birth to some emergent gameplay, but the game would even let them get to "first base" in truth!

IMHO, all this is very important. We're basically a year into the game, and we have lots of features being added (Powerplay, CQC, Horizons), yet some of the core gameplay is in desperate need of attention. And I'd suggest this is why we have had a large number of threads popping up about this matter, be they addressing Hutton specifically, or "Crime and Punishment"... I think they all point to a number of issues that need addressing:-

• There are loop-holes/abuses in the current mechanics that need attention.
• Crime and punishment needs attention. It seems you can get away with murder... and get away with it again and again and again, with little or no deterrent.
• Piracy needs some attention. Piracy is at logger-heads with crime and punishment, yet it's (supposedly) a corner-stone occupation of ED. Personally I think it needs reworking so Piracy has slicker mechanics that are not underpinned by "Murder". If a Pirate steals your cargo, they will also damage your ship, so the outcome is purely financial. But murder is not part of it (typically).
• Alternative/new mechanics to offer PvP and new gameplay. Clearly some folk are interested in the challenge of PvP, so lets offer it. At the moment it's hardly surprising individuals who want PvP may jump on anyone they find in OPEN as there's really no alternative.
  • Let's have logical Community Goal Combat Zones.
  • Let's have blockade mechanics introduced for a Community Goal, and if proves effective consider using it in Powerplay where it's a fitting task. In an ideal world they would become dynamic somehow such that the blockage mechanic could kick into effect given the right situation.
  • Convoy attack & defend type missions. Or similar attack/defend tasks such as going to a derelict platform to return an item, all offering the possibility for PvP.
  • Let's have dedicated PvP zones in the core game. Bring in some of the CQC backdrops and run them as TV events. CR rewards for kills, and rebuy costs partially covered.
• Combat logging to be addressed, if only to help Piracy.
• Bigger/better mechanics. I don't know what the answer here is, but at the moment the game offers no real cause and effect. Let's pretent the entire CG had somehow failed because of the blockade and not a single mug produced, and thousands of ships destroyed... What would have changed at all in the game in reality?

So where does all this leave us? Hopefully with some/all of the issues above getting addressed, because IMHO they need to be for ED to continue to grow and improve; We want emergent gameplay, or at least more varied and interesting gameplay.

If they are not, I suspect come the next Community Goal like Hutton we'll most likely see even more of the same antics, if only because yet more players are attempting to find depth in the mechanics, or simply showing their frustration at the lack of them.


ps: Add more depth/content to exploration too for those non-PvP folks

 

[Unfluffydave]

I learnt from an earlier incident that if you put a griefer on ignore, it prevents you or them from appearing in your instance. So you can play open with people who do play fair. Better solution then going solo.

Thats probably why they try and keep their member lists private.

 

[ianw]

I learnt from an earlier incident that if you put a griefer on ignore, it prevents you or them from appearing in your instance. So you can play open with people who do play fair. Better solution then going solo.

That's interesting - the devs originally said it was comms ignore and might influence matching slightly.

I wonder if it really made a huge difference or if it was just general matchmaking and instancing.

You have to friend someone first to ignore no?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Thats probably why they try and keep their member lists private.

So another way to declaw CODE is to get their member list and distribute it. Knowledge is power.

- - - Updated - - -

Let's have dedicated PvP zones in the core game. Bring in some of the CQC backdrops and run them as TV events.

Hang big screens in the hangar when you're docked with a random CQC game on it.

 

[Lucifer Hate]

I learnt from an earlier incident that if you put a griefer on ignore, it prevents you or them from appearing in your instance. So you can play open with people who do play fair. Better solution then going solo.

Actually it has been confirmed I believe from a Dev that the ignore feature does NOT keep you from being instanced together just from seeing their chat. That will just hurt you against a pirate you have on ignore as you won't see the warning to stop for cargo scan, they will take it as non-compliance, they will kill you, and then you will accuse them of griefing when they tried to send a warning.

 

[KevinMillican]

I am certainly no fan of CODE and their constant justification of being simple chevos BUT anyone who plays in Open should not complain if they get shot at by another player. We have a choice in this game, we can group together and fight back, stay solo but in open and accept that you might get shot, play in solo mode, play in group mode etc etc. There is no need for FD to step in to "fix" anything because they already have.

Not sure I agree with your last point there. The OP mentioned the ineffectiveness of the authority ships, and I think this is a weakness in ED at the moment. If you've destroyed several ships in a particular (non-anarchy) system, there is little consequence; at most they're a hindrance to you that might cause you to leave a REZ or select a different station.

In strong government systems, the authority ships should be actively seeking out people with large bounties, and should be reinforcing themselves when encountering strong resistance instead of just disappearing.

 

[ianw]

So another way to declaw CODE is to get their member list and distribute it. Knowledge is power.

- - - Updated - - -
If the ignore function blocks players as effectively as people think (I doubt it but you never know) and if you can add someone without friending them it could be a faffy but no dev cost way of enabling people to effectively opt out of non consensual PVP in open. Those lists would grow fast off the forums..

Hang big screens in the hangar when you're docked with a random CQC game on it.

It would be great to have access to debug cams positioned at various spots in the different arena's - could become a spectator event too.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

- - - Updated - - -
If the ignore function blocks players as effectively as people think (I doubt it but you never know) and if you can add someone without friending them it could be a faffy but no dev cost way of enabling people to effectively opt out of non consensual PVP in open. Those lists would grow fast off the forums..

Shouldn't be that effective. Just lowering the chance would be good (if indeed this is the effect, and not just limited to comms)

At least they will end up on my RoS (Ridicule on Sight) list