The fallacy of how PvP can protect your system from being undermined.
- Thread starter Agony_Aunt
- Start date
- Status
You're wasting your fingers. It's no use to keep explaining the obvious. They have long taken the blue pill.
In your opinion.
.
I don't think Frontier 'doesn't care' about PvP at all - they introduced CQC/Arena and PP, while focused on PvE mechanics, has a PvP tone underpinning it. They just didn't see PvP as the defining character of the game THEY wanted to develop and play. And still don't? The defining character is the galaxy itself - immensely vast - and reinforcing how small we are as individuals within that scope. PvP focused gameplay, alone, could never achieve that given the 1:1 scale simulation of the galaxy - the playerbase was always going to be too spread out for PvP alone to achieve that. Hence the PvE focus, with the freedom to engage in PvP if players choose to (in open or private group play).
NPC's do affect the BGS. Just look around at how many NPC Minor Factions have expanded beyond their original systems. NPC's have no affect on PP, but they are very much in the mix with the BGS.
To contact Adle's Armada:
Adlesarmada.com
http://inara.cz/wing/336
adlesarmada.teamspeak3.com / 3352
So when they add in passenger transport missions that connect to assassination missions as per the kickstarter vids, they will have to be open only.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Are you willing to place a small wager on that?
In this discussion 'undermining' is used as a general term for working against a minor faction, not in the PP understanding of the word. The idea is, if you are being acted upon by those in Solo/PG, your best defense is to gain am arm of your group that works in that fashion. Vertical integration of player groups should be the goal. Rather than trying to squeeze everything into some fruitless PvP only perspective.
To contact Adle's Armada:
Adlesarmada.com
http://inara.cz/wing/336
adlesarmada.teamspeak3.com / 3352
Last edited:
The risk they run is that they're countered by a bunch of carebears in their T-9s and Asps who actually like what they're doing, while the attackers just waste their time in a mode they don't really want to be in.
Defending Eravate against the unseen threat of Ninja Stealth Hampsters is not a waste of *my* time. I enjoy it and will keep doing it.
If there was no such attack, I probably wouldn't even bother with the system or try to move anything in the BGS on my own. It's just pointless as solo player. Diplomacy and politics give it a purpose.
no, i'm sorry, that's a difference. npc don't exist and don't do anything, if there is no player in system. they spawn, when a player comes into an instance, and they stop to exist, when the last player left the instance.
if you are not visiting a system, things will get back to normal over some time (like prices, supply, demand, so influence). if a npc minor faction expands, it is either an extreme effect of the simulation, or - most probably - an effect of a unintentional player action.
whether an npc kills another one in a RES has no influence effect.
I looked around and found that you are right. I was mistaken about influence through NPC MF's. Thanks for getting me to do some research on the matter. I have been trying to identify the forces arrayed against me, and it was suggested that the NPC Factions had an effect. See? You learn something new all of the time.
To contact Adle's Armada:
Adlesarmada.com
http://inara.cz/wing/336
adlesarmada.teamspeak3.com / 3352
This sums it up for me. The multiplayer aspect of ED is too fractured and feels like a missed opportunity and in that respect it's not quite the game I dreamed it could be all that time ago.
For my part, I have lost interest in the BGS and the whole PvP debate has become so balkanized it is absurd. If I were a new player, browsing these forums before I buy, I wonder what conclusion I would come too.
Their first mistake was trying to take the minor stations off the smaller groups, thus provoking the resistance - in any conflict, the outcome is the loss of the most valuable asset, so while taking secondary stations will allow for more influence to be gathered from random CMDRs bounty-hunting or trading, for example, it does nothing to make the faction stronger against a dedicated attack.
That's why first order of business should always be to expand your faction to another system and take that one over too. It's also the reason why some player groups choose to curate multiple factions within the same system.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
how so?
i take on a passenger mission to transport someone.
i then get attacked by another ship who has a counter mission to assassinate me. Sure this COULD be a player (assuming in open), but it could equally be an NPC if i was in solo.
i like the idea of optional missions which warn you that by taking on you may be putting a target on your back but i am not convinced they will work, after all a player could just stop playing making the mission to assassinate the player impossible
This is not a discussion about game mode. While non-open game modes are relevant, I feel you've missed the point.As someone who runs a group that works extremely hard on their BGS and has been constantly attacked by players in various modes (including a UA bombing of one of our stations), I would personally like for players who are CHOOSING to attack ME to be playing open. Realism is often brought up on these forums and TBH, it is completely unrealistic that someone can be at war with me while being 100% able to hide in a safe space and incur NO risk for attacking me. In E
As per the OP's hypothetical, even if all we had was Open mode, countering an attack on your player faction requires PvE action. You cannot hope to maintain control of a system under attack, even exclusively in Open, by PvP methods alone.
That is the point of the thread.
The only caveat I can conceive of regarding this is that so long as the system being defended is not anarchy or lawless, you can assume the attackers will be wanted (If their strategy is to undermine by destroying your factions NPC ships, or by some other means which will earn them wanted status). In that case, destroying them and turning in the bounty will have a positive effect on countering their undermining.
I have no idea if the two actions will be equal in magnitude of their effect on the BGS, of course.
Last edited:
This.
So much this.
So much wringing and whining by players who have no idea how this game works.
This is not CoD in space. But there is an element of the 'strong will survive', player groups who adopt this thinking will thrive in Elite Dangerous.
There is more to gaming than pure pvp. And ED has captured a way to allow many different playstyles to come together in one environment. It's truly beautiful to watch.
Skill is not just twitch gameplay.
Skill is manipulating the BGS.
Skill is using the player base.
Skill is influence.
Players often reference Eve Online. The strongest, most skilful, most deadliest players have never fired a shot. The minions do all the shooting.
Nobody is forcing PVE on you. It came with the game. It is the game.
The sooner player groups that have a pvp core realise this, and embrace it, and start utilising the skills of all the other non combatant non pvp players, the sooner they will start to rise and achieve their goals.
Immersive, emergent and creative gameplay...
... Gameplay that is inclusive of everybody.
As for a gang of 15 miscreant freelancing pirates trying to take over an Empire backed system. A busy Empire backed system with lots of Empire devoted ships and fire-power. I mean really, you actually thought you had a chance.
Muppets.
Last edited:
All this "FD don't care about PvP" is just so much fertilizer.
Yes, FD care about PvP - They made a game where there are no mechanics to turn off PvP, only groups where the only reason PvP doesn't happen is a sportsmanlike agreement between the players. They created an arena so that folks who want well-balanced PvP have a place they can find it without disrupting the wider game - yes, DISRUPTING. Because what they didn't want to do and absolutely did not do was to make a PvP-centered game, where the big dogs among the players are always the best PvP combat pilots.
They care about PvP - if you want it and find a like-minded opponent, have at it. If that encounter is unsatisfactory because of a problem with the mechanics of how combat between two willing and enthusiastic belligerent pilots works, you can bet FD will be looking at it.
It's just not ALL they care about, unlike some cmdrs.
Yes, FD care about PvP - They made a game where there are no mechanics to turn off PvP, only groups where the only reason PvP doesn't happen is a sportsmanlike agreement between the players. They created an arena so that folks who want well-balanced PvP have a place they can find it without disrupting the wider game - yes, DISRUPTING. Because what they didn't want to do and absolutely did not do was to make a PvP-centered game, where the big dogs among the players are always the best PvP combat pilots.
They care about PvP - if you want it and find a like-minded opponent, have at it. If that encounter is unsatisfactory because of a problem with the mechanics of how combat between two willing and enthusiastic belligerent pilots works, you can bet FD will be looking at it.
It's just not ALL they care about, unlike some cmdrs.
I play in Open, and work the BGS. You absolutely can change things, but you have to work the influence the way the game works, not how you like it to work. And frankly, it is extremely unlikely by now there was a concerted effort to damage your group, or it would have come out by now. A combination of a busy system, and your own misinterpretation of the BGS mechanics almost certainly caused you to lose the station.
Oh they definitely had a chance. They simply had to make sure that their 15 players were constantly doing things that would have propped up their faction via the BGS, and not, as it appears, doing everything they could possibly think of to achieve the exact opposite.
I have to think about this a bit more but on the face of it this would be a huge boost to the immersion in game.
- Status