Which is harder is kind of a ridiculous argument imo, it doesn't really matter, but the fun in being hopelessly outclassed is in picking your battles and being able to recognize it, which is a victory itself.
- Status
Which is harder is kind of a ridiculous argument imo, it doesn't really matter, but the fun in being hopelessly outclassed is in picking your battles and being able to recognize it, which is a victory itself.
I was talking about PvP at that point, so if you are also talking about PvP, then i have to disagree. Since in PvP situations there is no picking your fight unless you are in a faster ship than your opponent, and even then not always. Seen too many stories of someone getting interdicted by another player who has a railgun setup and manages to blast them before they can get their FSD charged.
""Electric, chéri! Bogged off my rocket, tu comprende?" We spoke French fluidly." - Vivian Stanshall, 'Big Shot'
I do understand this; it has been my argument about PowerPlay since its release: it is a game of politics, not open warfare. It is about "hearts and minds" and propaganda shuffling and manipulating of populations; it is psy-ops, not combat.
Otherwise, I can't see what you're proposing here that isnt... exactly what the game is now. And the argument used is exactly what solo/group players have been under from the "everything must be in and affect open" guns. It isn't us making the above argument you spell out. The amount of "I'm taking my ball and going home" posts is not from solo or group players.
I requote you for a purpose: ""If this one team of commandos can't face every opponent at the same time there's no point fighting." It just doesn't work that way." - that seems to be exactly the gist of most "open everything" posts (first sentence) against solo & group modes, and "it just doesn't work that way" is the usual reply to that position from solo & groups, as you will find below.
Past politics and opinions and passion, the networking model used just doesn't support huge instances with many players. You're not going to get effective blockades; you won't get 10 wings facing off against each other; you won't get every courier sneakily showering propaganda on whole systems; you won't get EvE-style hundred-ship battles. It just won't work.
I did ask, several pages back on this thread. Khelder even quoted you in his response to me, where I politely said I would listen but I'd really like an answer from the person I asked the question of (you)
Now you are replying to my own reply to Khelder's reply to a post directed at you with a question. No, I'm not going to read anything past this, as you're not answering the question I asked. You're quoting off a third-level post that wasn't directed at you. If you can't be bothered to look for the original post directed to you, that's fine with me.
Last edited:
Mange tout, mange tout, Rodney...
Lol. Well I answered you, but it's pretty clear attempts at having a discussion with you is a waste of time anyways. Stay classy champ.
- - - Updated - - -
I play exclusively in open, in populated areas, and I've only had one death to another cmdr since beta. I'm gonna have to disagree, I'm not even that good, and my most used ship is probably the eagle. Yes when you do get interdicted your done, but they can't really sneak up on you to do that.
They can if you are distracted, looking at other targets, unless you are super paranoid and drop out of SC every time you see a hollow blip, but then, what is the point of playing in open if you are going to avoid other players like the plague?
I change mode depending on my mood, level of inebriatedness, and what i'm doing. In open, i've been killed perhaps half a dozen times by other players. All but one of those i had a fighting chance. The others were either death by vastly superior ship (no idea about their skill level, when its sidewinder vs Anaconda, there is barely time to do anything) or where i had tried to start talking to ask what they wanted, and been blown to bits while typing a message.
Its something that turns me off from playing open a bit, but i do prefer to play open when in the mood because i've met a lot of good commanders there and had some good times winging up with people.
LHS 3447, when the game first came out was one of the main starting areas and full of new players.
People from the Gamma testing phase were able to keep what they had earned in Gamma and some went on newbie killing sprees.
Others who had built up a small fortune in Gamma flew to LHS 3447 to defend new players and took care of the problem.
All in Open.
And you do still get the odd person from time to time go looking for new players, as we get the threads on the forums about people getting killed as new players and they have a little grumble over it.
So you do get that type of game play, not very often any more - but it still happens.
FD have said they don't want player run blockades, as and when a blockade happens it will be by FD and it will be in all modes / instances.
People currently do trade in open, but yes the payment is awful and even I have said I'd like to be able to top up those vouchers.
This is not a mode issue though - which is one of the things I keep saying about most of the complaints in these mega threads, that they are not solved by messing with the BGS or modes but other systems.
This game was touted as a game with PvP, not a PvP game - so PvP related game play should be a secondary concern.
And now there is a PvP arena, I'd suggest FD ignore the screams of PvPers for a while and fix those systems / balance the problem areas that I keep saying are not mode/BGS related.
Also as a side note, part of the "Offline-gate" debates, some people who wanted an offline mode said they'd be happy to have a static BGS that is never updated or has once a month updates.
FD said they only want one BGS. That they can inject stories in to and they can try to author what happens (or react to the player choices and write stories to go with what players want).
What do you think would happen, if a second server with a new BGS were introduced ?
My guess is, those who wanted offline to start with would make a little bit of noise about FDs stance of 1 BGS is the reason there is no offline.
This nonsense again. B is not a support for A. Without people arguing against your point this thread would not have existed. If everyone went: yeah, it's going to be PvP, that would be end of thread.
Unfortunately for you, there are a lot of players who disagree with your baseless assessment, players who are arguing here as well, players you brush aside because their existence is detrimental to your argument.
You may have worked in gaming development, but you lack logical debating skills if you are going to claim B is a support for A. Because it obviously isn't.
You are sure are you? Brutally eh?
Well, if you'll excuse me, I'll chuckle at your certainty.
Oh grow up.
Last edited:
If they surveyed the playerbase (hey, we could ask admins for a poll), regarding people's need for PvP, i think you might be a little surprised.
Something like:
How important is PvP to your enjoyment of the game?
1) Essential
2) Adds enjoyment and I actively seek it.
3) Its ok, i take it when it happens
4) Not really bothered about it, tend to avoid it.
5) Actively avoid it.
6) I hate PvP.
Ok, now someone can tell me i'm missing a poll option
Squirrels!
I knew it!
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
There are no PwP options
If you wish:If they surveyed the playerbase (hey, we could ask admins for a poll), regarding people's need for PvP, i think you might be a little surprised.
Something like:
How important is PvP to your enjoyment of the game?
1) Essential
2) Adds enjoyment and I actively seek it.
3) Its ok, i take it when it happens
4) Not really bothered about it, tend to avoid it.
5) Actively avoid it.
6) I hate PvP.
Ok, now someone can tell me i'm missing a poll option
Adds enjoyment, i take it when it happens
Not really bothered about it, I actively seek it
Its ok, tend to avoid it
Adds enjoyment, tend to avoid it
Not really bothered about it, i take it when it happens
Now not all of these are perfectly logical, but I factored in the "playerbase" which doesn't seem logical at times either
Well, I tried to come up with a few possibilities of how a separate Open mode could develop. It's mostly PvP stuff as I said. Although I've had various thoughts about it, I'm not really as interested in the whole "separate Open or Open only would be more fun" argument. I can come up with theoretical scenarios, but I'm not sure if they would actually happen. I tend to wade into the modes-are-different-therefore-not-equal argument.
The lack of consistent story is a big reason why I wouldn't want to see a split BGS. It's a pretty big factor. And, yes, if you do it for one, then what other modes (including a potential offline mode) would you need to cater for.
If they surveyed the playerbase (hey, we could ask admins for a poll), regarding people's need for PvP, i think you might be a little surprised.
Something like:
How important is PvP to your enjoyment of the game?
1) Essential
2) Adds enjoyment and I actively seek it.
3) Its ok, i take it when it happens
4) Not really bothered about it, tend to avoid it.
5) Actively avoid it.
6) I hate PvP.
Ok, now someone can tell me i'm missing a poll option
Bacon. There should be bacon.
And cats... Mustn't forget the cats.
Never forget the cats.
- Status