Depends on how it's implemented surely?
If you have a good idea put it in the suggestions forum & if it's solid & workable I'm sure FD would appreciate your idea
I think Neil's trying to 'fix' it for all of us. Are you?
The problem with the new C&P improvements
- Thread starter Earth Ultimatum IV.
- Start date
Depends on how it's implemented surely?
If you have a good idea put it in the suggestions forum & if it's solid & workable I'm sure FD would appreciate your idea
I think Neil's trying to 'fix' it for all of us. Are you?
I guess you're ok then Jack? Shall we pull the ladder up?
Last edited:
![[Diplomacy] Carnegie](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/123/123809.jpg?1553527149){kind=avatar}
That's an argument for FDev making important content available in non-Anarchy systems.
I mean, where are you gonna stop policing systems? Beagle Point?
If the offensive offender tries to flee there, the Marshall NPC will hunt him down there until ...... there is ....nowhere.... else .... to go
If the offensive offender tries to flee there, the Marshall NPC will hunt him down there until ...... there is ....nowhere.... else .... to go
Somebody has been watching too many Tommy Lee Jones movies
But seriously, if another Commander blows me away at Beagle Point, I really don't expect him to get a bounty or a black mark.
At some point, you have to say "Here be Dragons".
My feeling on this is that FDev intend for us (the player population) to police a system like this. Looking around an interesting new feature in solo is cool, but not as cool as doing it while laser fire flickers through the sky above you
Collecting an urn or an egg not being sure what the NPC response will be is cool the first time, mundane every subsequent time. Not knowing how safe it is to even recall your ship is just better.
However it gets taken too far, there are more attackers than defenders, and certain failure is just as boring as certain success. Risk is good, but there is too often no risk, only certain failure. I'm in favour of a system that attempts to redress that balance.
Somebody has been watching too many Tommy Lee Jones movies
But seriously, if another Commander blows me away at Beagle Point, I really don't expect him to get a bounty or a black mark.
At some point, you have to say "Here be Dragons".
Oddly enough I prepared for just that. I'm on my way back out again from Beagle point, but I went there in a fully equipped Corvette. Took 7 months.
Kudos on the insanity
I'm on my way to Sag A* - give me a wave as you pass by.
I'm on an anti-clockwise tour of the galaxy. Meta ships are dull
I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy
My (10yo) son is rather more dastardly than me. He kept reminding me how another Cmdr would react if they met me this far out. I hung around on Beagle 3 figuring if I would meet someone it would be here, but nothing.
I found a tourist beacon a few systems over (where someone got rescued), there were three NPC haulers in the beacon instance when I arrived. First thing I've shot at this year
ETA for clarity I would never fire the first shot. But I like to think that this far out, I would fire the last
Last edited:
A proper beta testing of this would take FOOOOORRRRREEEEEEVVVVEEERRRRR. Several months at least for the effects to settle and adjust the behavior of the players. Which is why it'll either never happen, or be a train wreck
Players behave differently in beta from live. I don't see why they couldn't implement the background stat gathering on a live build & compare who it flags with manually gathered data.
It can stay hidden from the players, possibly used for gathering info for situation like the 5 for 1 cheat. The first version we see is unlikely to be it's first implementation.
If it can't be made reliably automatic it may never be more than an assistant to manual intervention.
I hope they're already gathering the metrics for the Karma system so they can at least see how that works prior to implementing the punishment side of things.
<semi ninja'd>
That said, it'll be a trainwreck either way because the players will make it one - no matter what FDev do the toys are going to flying out of the pram in all directions.
Sad, but true.[yesnod]
I think the potential is there for the biggest trainwreck ED has seen to date. I mean, Fdev can't even follow through with shield value changes or the gimbal nerf, and those items are grains of sand on a beach compared to c&p and karma.
My bet is that Fdev will walk right up to the brink with something, then table it indefinitely for further revision.@Riverside, to answer your question from earlier about making suggestions to improve on the concept of a "law and order system." I'm already 100% comfortable with the way things work, and if all people on this forum can think to add to the discussion is running the gankers out of the game, then I think it's for the best if the proposal just dies the final death as it's a bad idea in the context of a "game." Further, my strong belief is that the conversation should not be about clipping "gankers" wings, but rather including proper PvP in all of it's various, good & bad, incarnations into the game. How about a conversation where everybody is included, not just a bunch of players who don't even play in Open in the first place screeching names and making obscene value judgments on people who's playstyle they disagree with? Wouldn't that be a day?
Last edited:
Sadly, I think you're right.
However, I still have enough positivity left to think that maybe they'll have learnt from previous episodes and do it better this time. Or at least keep the whole debacle hidden from the players
A conversation where everyone is included... as long as their in-game experience meets your criteria?
I'd settle for a conversation where all the participants discussed the posts instead of the posters. There does seem to be a trend on this board towards trying to get a ban, presumably for cool points with their buddies.
I appreciate that some are happy as-is, I'm tempted to include myself in this sub-set, but I can appreciate that the playstyles of some frustrate the playstyle of some others. It would be nice if they could get along but they are playing their own way. I would like to see some consequence to that, whether it be (for example) ganking or combat logging. Wheaton's law applies to both.
I also think that much of what I just wrote really should be self evident, nevertheless I felt it necessary to spell it out for all to read, because clearly in some cases, it isn't.
I've lost track of how many times people have referred to PvPers as "idiots" or similar in this thread. If PvPers have responded in kind I've missed it.
Also, to the point "A conversation where everyone is included... as long as their in-game experience meets your criteria?"
My philosophy is inclusive to everybody as it's only criteria is that you don't complain about how other people play the game and try to get them booted out. This, as opposed to the driving philosophy behind "PvPers who are karmically ran to financial ruin and thusly removed from the game." Do you see the difference? One philosophy includes all playstyles, one only includes playstyles that fall strictly in line with its narrow-minded confines.
I don't want anybody to not be able to play the game how they want to play it because an arbitrary ruleset tells them what they can and cannot do.
Last edited: