So you want to play in Open, eh?

[ianw]

I don't get 1 :/

If 1 means that it should be possible to successfully have an airtight blockade on a system, I disagree wholeheartedly. Lets say PP goal says blockade system X. I don't do PP, I just want to shift some goods in X. All of a sudden that's impossible for me. So now PP is interfering with my game, while the statement of Frontier was: if you don't engage in it, it won't bother you. If the blockade is subject to instancing and increases the chance of an encounter, while still providing the opportunity to get through unscathed, than the harm is reduced to the possibility it interferes with my game.

It's already bad enough that I can encounter wings, I'd rather not add blockades to that.

What I have read is that a lot of people had a lot of fun at Hutton. I have read about people doing ad-hoc co-operation with complete strangers.

I'd say Hutton is an example where there was emergent gameplay, instigated by the players themselves.

That's not a bad idea - instance people in CGs & PP together, and have a PP on/off option. If it's off you don't see the gaily coloured frogspawn in the map or the mugshots and other info in the interface!

Hutton was quite unique - had the website, the radio station and the long drive for convoys. Had a lot of fun with it.

 

[NeilF]

I don't get 1 :/

If 1 means that it should be possible to successfully have an airtight blockade on a system, I disagree wholeheartedly. Lets say PP goal says blockade system X. I don't do PP, I just want to shift some goods in X. All of a sudden that's impossible for me. So now PP is interfering with my game, while the statement of Frontier was: if you don't engage in it, it won't bother you. If the blockade is subject to instancing and increases the chance of an encounter, while still providing the opportunity to get through unscathed, than the harm is reduced to the possibility it interferes with my game.

Airtight? No... But a mechanic that a station can undergo a blockage such that players have the choice to then try and support it, or get through it, with all the new gameplay this would offer? Yes!:-

• The risk of getting there under attack.
• The fun of enforcing it.
• The fun of getting through it.
• Working in OPEN to better enforce it/get through it.
• High prices if you sell good there.
• etc...

If this is only instigated as part of a Community Goal once in a while fine! But if the mechanic proves viable/fun, why not if a station/system ticks the right boxes, a station could be blockaded for a period, with how effective it is determining an outcome. ie: Enough ships get through it fails... Not enough it works... And a political outcome determined etc.

And seriously, "I'd rather not add blockades to that," shouldn't the ED Universe be more dynamic? Wouldn't it be nice to find your usual trade route disrupted for a week or so due to a situation there? Or for you to spot a potential huge profit to be made by supplying goods to a station being blockaded? Do you really want the ED universe to be that static (simplistic)?


But ultimately you're fixating on a single example I made, "blockades," when the bigger picture is the mechanics are simplistic and rigid, and it would be nice for them to expand to offer more variety and depth, be it the game offering it, or CMDRs making it.

I'd say Hutton is an example where there was emergent gameplay, instigated by the players themselves.

I would say it was little more than CMDRs doing the best could within very limited game mechanics. Nothing could be affected other than CMDRs simply doing what they're already permitted to within very limited mechanics.

 

[askavir]

What I have read is that a lot of people had a lot of fun at Hutton. I have read about people doing ad-hoc co-operation with complete strangers.

I'd say Hutton is an example where there was emergent gameplay, instigated by the players themselves.

Completely true.

I'm probably forgetting stuff, but I've seen with my own eyes:

People in large ships who could not even dock at Hutton making the trip to drop cargo to others AND taking limpets to help others collect the gargo faster.
People handling docking permission queues.
Physical queues, respected by all.
People policing the station.
People policing supercruise around the station.
People setting up video streams, and a CG website with radio and news.
People rallying on Readdy Gateway, to form convoys and wings to depart togheter to Hutton, most of the times they were complete strangers. The feeling of being there, seen all these ships and all kinds of ships, people self-forming wigs with strangers, and seeing them depart for the long trip ahead to face possible danger, was something unique. And being part of it even more.
People picking up lone voyagers on the way into their wings, to add strenght in numbers.
"Bromances" forged that were completely impossible in the usual 3 minute trips.
Pirates attacking at the main star, and around the station in supercruise.
Pirates attacking the station itself.
Players counter-attacking the pirates attacking the station.
Pirate blockade.
Camaderie and hate, death and glory.

Sorry for the things I missed mentioning, I'm sure there were more.

Now this was pure emergent gameplay, with the mechanics currently available. And it was incredible.

The only real problem with the Hutton CG, is that it set the bar so high, that now all these new CGs feel too casual...

People can make a lot of things, without the game needing to tell us what or how to do it.

Of course, the more possibilities the better, and if the game supports more possibilities in the future great. But it is not currently shallow or devoid os possibilities for emergent gameplay. Hutton proved that.

 

[Jacob Marshall]

...What I have read is that a lot of people had a lot of fun at Hutton. I have read about people doing ad-hoc co-operation with complete strangers.

I'd say Hutton is an example where there was emergent gameplay, instigated by the players themselves.

...Hutton was quite unique - had the website, the radio station and the long drive for convoys. Had a lot of fun with it.

I've no interest in CGs...Hutton is the only time I've regretted not keeping up with the developments of a CG...bit gutted to be honest; wish I'd been there.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Airtight? No... But a mechanic that a station can undergo a blockage such that players have the choice to then try and support it, or get through it, with all the new gameplay this would offer? Yes!:-

• The risk of getting there under attack.
• The fun of enforcing it.
• The fun of getting through it.
• Working in OPEN to better enforce it/get through it.
• High prices if you sell good there.
• etc...

Might be fun for you, it's not for me.

Sucks to be me?

And seriously, "I'd rather not add blockades to that," shouldn't the ED Universe be more dynamic? Wouldn't it be nice to find your usual trade route disrupted for a week or so due to a situation there? Or for you to spot a potential huge profit to be made by supplying goods to a station being blockaded? Do you really want the ED universe to be that static (simplistic)?

Strawman. If I don't support blockades, I must be in favour of a static universe.

I just don't support blockades. I don't want a large group of people dictating the way I play. I want the odds to be even when I encounter other players. Have their 1 ship try to stop my 1 ship from entering a system, fine. Have multiple wings pounce on me so I don't stand a chance not fine. Forcing me into groups to be able to withstand groups, not fine.

I would say it was little more than CMDRs doing the best could within very limited game mechanics. Nothing could be affected other than CMDRs simply doing what they're already permitted to within very limited mechanics.

I'd still say Hutton is an example where there was emergent gameplay, instigated by the players themselves.

 

[withnail]

I completely agree with the OP.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Hey... at least the CG was successful and the blockade didn't stop us hitting our tiers!

Cheers for the info. The Hutton Truckers are in training for our next group convoy.... anyone who wants to join in, find us on FB under Hutton Orbital Radio truckers or at www.huttonorbital.com

Oh and make sure no one leaks our route to the pirates. Loose lips destroy ships!

We have a team researching a route and destination at the moment as well as a group honing their skills for cqc.

All whilst listening live on the radio!

We won't let their limpets steal our cargo this time!

Hey Vingetun,

You inspired me to create this, and a new topic for it! ...

​

 

[NeilF]

I just don't support blockades. I don't want a large group of people dictating the way I play. I want the odds to be even when I encounter other players. Have their 1 ship try to stop my 1 ship from entering a system, fine. Have multiple wings pounce on me so I don't stand a chance not fine. Forcing me into groups to be able to withstand groups, not fine.

I'm not sure what you're envisaging exactly?

But to me, the idea of (even just as one off Community Goals) a completely new mechanics and task to participate in (or not), seems better than not offering it.

If this one system (picked for a CG) is on your trading route, you can simply skip it. Find somewhere else to trade for a week or two.

Alternatively, given such a rare even, get involved with it! Fight for a side to try and decide an outcome. Try and get goods though to try and make a mint. Get other CMDRs to try and help protect you as you do this? Use (the non existant) mechanics to pay others to help you to share in the profit. etc etc...

^ How is that anything other than more interesting than keeping things simple and static?

We need more variety and mechanics, not for the game to sit on its hands.


And if these mechanics can be kicked off by other statistic, and these statistics can be affected by players, and etc etc etc, we finally get to where mechanics become more and more interdepent and hope more interesting. A place wher eemergent gameplay can finally be born...

 

[kepler84]

Mobius.
11,500 Cmdr's all in one PvE group.
URL: http://elitepve.com/

Oh, didn't know about that.

I heard about them but I thought they were just a forum to have people developing their own community events.

Sounds cool, count me in.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Alternatively, given such a rare even, get involved with it! Fight for a side to try and decide an outcome. Try and get goods though to try and make a mint. Get other CMDRs to try and help protect you as you do this? Use (the non existant) mechanics to pay others to help you to share in the profit. etc etc...

^ How is that anything other than more interesting than keeping things simple and static?

Right, once can be a mistake, twice means I lose the incentive to communicate.

 

[NeilF]

Right, once can be a mistake, twice means I lose the incentive to communicate.

OK... Given your current somewhat "sharp" mood, maybe opt for the latter? Catch up with you on another day maybe...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

OK... Given your current somewhat "sharp" mood, maybe opt for the latter? Catch up with you on another day maybe...

Dude,

I just told you that I don't want to group up, and you suggest grouping up as a viable solution for me.
I just told you that claiming I'd rather see a static universe, based solely on my sentiments towards blockades is a strawman, and as a response you ask me "How is that anything other than more interesting than keeping things simple and static?"

What am I to think? Not that you're reading the arguments I put forward.

I'm in quite a good mood actually. But whatever mood I'm in, if I'm in a discussion where information only flows one way, I'd rather bow out.

 

[NeilF]

Dude,

I just told you that I don't want to group up, and you suggest grouping up as a viable solution for me.
I just told you that claiming I'd rather see a static universe, based solely on my sentiments towards blockades is a strawman, and as a response you ask me "How is that anything other than more interesting than keeping things simple and static?"

What am I to think? Not that you're reading the arguments I put forward.

I'm in quite a good mood actually. But whatever mood I'm in, if I'm in a discussion where information only flows one way, I'd rather bow out.

I'm totally confused... I think we talking at cross-purposes?

I'm suggesting a mechanic whereby...

Mr You(?) not wishing to play in Open or with others at least, at the very most finds a station they wish to travel to is being blockaded (in SOLO via NPCs) as part of a Community Goal (or a Powerplay mechanic?) and you have the choice to fly off and wait for the blockade to finish (eg: a week or two later), or take part in any/all of the mechanics described...

And for those that prefer OPEN, the same applies except now they can work in groups and do PvP with those mechanics too.


So I'm confused by you pushing back on it. If you wish to not take part in this suggested blockage mechanic at all (if one can even be implemented), all you need do it not go to the station for a short period of time And in the meantime others can participate in the various aspects that do/don't appeal to them...

• The risk of getting there under attack.
• The fun of enforcing it.
• The fun of getting through it.
• Working in OPEN to better enforce it/get through it.
• High prices if you sell good there.
• etc...

I suspect we're simply misunderstanding each other... And most importantly I fear we're at risk of fixating on my (potentially stupid) blockade example when there's bigger issues afoot

 

[Harland White]

I don't play open. Also, CODE is just remnants of a group of trolls/griefers from EVE Online. They think they're crunk, but they're just sad kids with no jobs and need to feel important in a video game. Don't give them attention, don't give them the time of day...they will slowly dissipate. Like kids.

 

[Cody]

Is this garbage thread still going? Jeez!

 

[NeilF]

Is this garbage thread still going? Jeez!

...there's actually some astute/important points in it IMHO.

 

[Futuristic Kung Fu]

...there's actually some astute/important points in it IMHO.

Like? Examples please.

 

[NeilF]

Like? Examples please.

...there clearly a lot of black and white opinions on last weeks antics at Hutton, but there a big important grey area in the middle IMHO. And while I found some of the antics going on "painful" what I've taken from it all is:-
- When players try to, or are force to, work together to achieve something. It can lead to a good outcome. Was Hutton made more or less interesting by the attempted blockade (if we try to ignore some of the exploits be used)? Did players trying to work together to get scrap there instead of individually improve the gameplay?
- There are holes in the mechanics such that people can exploit them for what I'd suggest are negative outcomes. Some of these are now better understood.
- The game cannot police itself very well in some areas. It would be nice if this was addressed.
- Some players would like bigger/broader mechanics to allow them to do bigger/broader things in the ED Universe, and I'd say its questionable if the mechanics are clever enough, deep enough, and most importantly interdependent enough to have any real chance of achieving this. ie: The blockade had no hope really of ever achieving much, because all that could be done was interdict people, destroy them, or take some cargo. Nothing more than that could be achieve. Not a single security ship could be moved, no security rating dropped, no political outcome changed. Nothing...

I said something similar to all that in my first post on the thread I guess - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=181909&p=2802882&viewfull=1#post2802882


There's plenty of other points even down to criminality and punishment... and indeed threads have even popped up specifically for those.

In summary, some folks may not have appreciated what happened at Hutton, and indeed some of it was troll like. But, some of it is exactly what we want to happen in the game, but it shows at the moment, IMHO, the game unfortunately is to simplistic and rigid to allow it

 

[NeoRacer]

Just a bunch of loud mouth griefers. Its why I will NEVER play in open and let these guys get off on messing with me. They have psychological issues I think (in general

 

[KellyR]

Y"Chain Wing" might describe it better.

A wing of four drop into normal space and disband. They are then each separately invited by 4 wings of 3. The original 4 drop their beacons for the new players. 1 wing becomes 4 wings, each in the same instance.

This sounds like an exploit. If each of the original 4 are still able to see their former wingmates' nav beacon, then it is definitely an exploit as I'm sure FD didn't mean for this to happen.