Modes These arguments are tedious.

[Robert Maynard]

Maybe, If I were them. Id just tell people they are doing it. And give them no chance to complain. This is about balancing PVP activity after all. And removing the toxicity behind griefing by giving basic PVP a purpose for what you're fighting for in the first place.

PVP literally has no definition here as its not needed as part of adversarial game-play.(something Ed said on stream they are working on by the way).

They are aware of the imbalance as admitted in 2016. So if they knew about it then. And they are working on the multiplayer aspects of the game anyways.

Common sense tells me and everyone else that wants change its gonna happen anyways.

They may not tell us any of this on the 8th. They could tell us many other things though,

Shooting from the hip here, stuff like guild banks, Guild Markers, Message of the day. Guild Ships and their capabilities there is so much more they could be going over here. And its really early.

They have 2 choices, tell us now its going to change and give people the time to prep and engineer their ships. Or dont say anything and just announce they are doing it later.

So who knows whats going to happen as far as that goes. We seen what happened last time they mentioned anything changing about risk and reward. People threw a fit and needed a diaper change.

I dont think they are going to give people the option this time. This time I think they are going to put their foot down and tell some of ya'll to suck it up.

What Frontier choose to do and how they choose to inform the player-base are their decisions.

While this discussion may be about PvP balancing, as you acknowledge, PvP is not needed as part of adversarial gameplay. How Frontier choose to address that, given that they have also indicated that they are well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP will be interesting to discover.

Sandro's musings in 2016 would have applied to PowerPlay only - specifically not the BGS - and came to nothing at that time. Time will tell if they are revisited.

We'll see if Squadrons introduce Guild trope features such as banks, etc.. However, given Frontier's apparent concern regarding player to player credit transfer, it'll be interesting to see if Squadrons do get a banking facility and, if so, whether it allows a player to withdraw more than they have deposited.

As to which way Frontier will bring their foot down and who will end up ruing their decision - we'll see, in time (which there is plenty of).

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

What Frontier choose to do and how they choose to inform the player-base are their decisions.

While this discussion may be about PvP balancing, as you acknowledge, PvP is not needed as part of adversarial gameplay. How Frontier choose to address that, given that they have also indicated that they are well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP will be interesting to discover.

Sandro's musings in 2016 would have applied to PowerPlay only - specifically not the BGS - and came to nothing at that time. Time will tell if they are revisited.

We'll see if Squadrons introduce Guild trope features such as banks, etc.. However, given Frontier's apparent concern regarding player to player credit transfer, it'll be interesting to see if Squadrons do get a banking facility and, if so, whether it allows a player to withdraw more than they have deposited.

As to which way Frontier will bring their foot down and who will end up ruing their decision - we'll see, in time (which there is plenty of).

8 months I reckon. I dont see them releasing a fat multiplayer update like they did with powerplay. Just to make the same mistake again.

Fool me once sort of thing. They already seen what happened and how it failed. Its no joke PP failed because of one reason. And one reason only. And thats the modes.

They wont do it again. Its like grabbing your moms curling iron. You're only going to do it once.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

[haha]

Why did multicrew fail? The modes!
Why did CQC fail? The modes!
Why was Trump elected? The modes!
I stubbed my toe! Damn those modes!
Why are 90s claims repeated but unsupported? The modes!

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

[haha]

Why did multicrew fail? The modes!
Why did CQC fail? The modes!
Why was Trump elected? The modes!
I stubbed my toe! Damn those modes!
Why are 90s claims repeated but unsupported? The modes!

1) Beatiful way to multiply time you need to achieve something by number of participants.
2)

Actually, let me explain why this instance of Quake 3 Arena in spessheeps is unpopular.

It requires some recent history knowledge.

All currently successful competitive games take their beginning from exactly two sources: Doom and arguably Starcraft.
Which similarities CQC bears to each of them? Pew-pew and that's it. And bonuses like DD directly from Q3.

While such arcade can be fun, competitive players simply do not have a set of skills which they can transfer.
And it is way easier for any beginner to just do the same thing their fathers/elder brothers did.

Arguably no competitive games so far required you to "fly your damn ship". So there is no serious player base for that stuff.

Futhermore, imagine how would arena in WoW would fare without world PvP? (Not to mention how would WoW fare without PvP whatsoever).

3) Same reasons DDF failed the game. For some people, of course.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

[haha]

Why did multicrew fail? The modes!
Why did CQC fail? The modes!
Why was Trump elected? The modes!
I stubbed my toe! Damn those modes!
Why are 90s claims repeated but unsupported? The modes!

Multicrew had problems because of server connections. It didnt fail, It just has connection issues. And it could be expanded on later if we ever get space legs right?

CQC failed because of Server Connections. Hm, crazy thats 2 for 2. Oh and Bots would help of course.

Trump was elected because Hillary screwed her own party to win and was outed in public about it. Trump didnt win because hes Trump. Trump won because of what Hillary did. True story.

Good news is. There is hope for everything listed above Trump.

Games upgrade their servers all the time. Thats why I got excited about the Tencent stuff when they announced their stake. Because I know what they are capable of. As Ive tried to show you guys. But ya'll are caught up in how much control or how much stake they have in the company. Which is really stupid to sell yourselves short just because you guys dont want change. They did it for league of legends and many other games. I have faith they will do it here too.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Multicrew had problems because of server connections. It didnt fail, It just has connection issues. And it could be expanded on later if we ever get space legs right?

CQC failed because of Server Connections. Hm, crazy thats 2 for 2. Oh and Bots would help of course.

Trump was elected because Hillary screwed her own party to win and was outed in public about it. Trump didnt win because hes Trump. Trump won because of what Hillary did. True story.

Good news is. There is hope for everything listed above Trump.

Games upgrade their servers all the time. Thats why I got excited about the Tencent stuff when they announced their stake. Because I know what they are capable of. As Ive tried to show you guys. But ya'll are caught up in how much control or how much stake they have in the company. Which is really stupid to sell yourselves short just because you guys dont want change. They did it for league of legends and many other games. I have faith they will do it here too.

By the way, if they move at least SC movement to dedicated server, which would turn in at populated systems, overall load would be worthy of a browser flash game.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

By the way, if they move at least SC movement to dedicated server, which would turn in at populated systems, overall load would be worthy of a browser flash game.

The Salome Event was pretty dang awesome. We had over 500LY blockaded and 1000's of people working together in tandem.

So far it was the greatest event that was held in Elite Dangerous. Thank you Drew Wager.

I only DC'd once, I was able to meet up against my opponents from all over the world. Everything just worked that day. I dunno if it was a fluke or what.

But It was awesome. And what we are asking for is easily doable.

Frontier just needs to follow through and do it.

Edit: Oh and I killed a paper thin vette in under 15 seconds. That was nice.

 

[Stigbob]

I've always assumed the whole Salmoe betrayal thing was exactly what everyone was expecting to happen.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I've always assumed the whole Salmoe betrayal thing was exactly what everyone was expecting to happen.

Yeah man, It wasnt staged. They had to work for it.

But Every PVPer that wanted to stop it from happening. Knew there was a time it was going to happen.

Timing was the key thing here. There was a small window to stop potter. People were on their way to go kill him after the 3rd part member got landed.

They sent everyone to Sol in the pac discord. But the PVPers that wanted to stop potter. Started heading to his direction. I was 2 systems away when I heard she got killed.

But we couldnt just take him out up front. It had to be at the right time, because of re-spawns or whatever.

I just wish all the toxicity behind it didnt fall out of the game.

Drew even wrote a small piece on that.

Like the Dove Enigma thing. That guy was toxic AF.

But the UA Bombing brought a lot of the community together, and a lot of people wouldnt have known about the event otherwise.

This community is strange sometimes. They take things way too personal. And get way too personal over PVP events in the game. Its a shame because its supposed to be fun.

I hate the world Griefer. I make fun of it. I use it on my streams as a joke. Because everything is a damn grief now a days.

Its a shame

 

[Agony_Aunt]

By denying my values for the sake of yours, and yours being in advantage, you are forcing me to play a game YOU like.

This can be easily changed, but no, you can't stand even 1% of oppotunity cost. What is to even speak about other changes which will not benefit YOU directly and entierly. Wasted effort of developers, nonono.

Better make all PvP players leave than accept the disbalance of current situation. So noble.

And there are no other games like ED. So select me a direction first before telling me to get away from your cute little swamp.

Can't speak for Robert, but I don't think he is against changes which don't benefit him. I mean, i've never heard Rob say he does mining, but I don't believe he is against the mining updates coming.

As far as i'm aware, he is only against changes that would negativly impact on him, and this is not an unusual situation. I mean, we've seen before when FD considered changes that would negatively impact on PvP the PvP community were very vocal against those changes.

If you stick to proposing solutions which don't negatively impact on those who don't partake in PvP, then i'm sure we could all get along a lot better. Problem is, here we don't seem to be discussing specifics, just random arguments against each other with very little substance. ie: "this can easily be changed" without referring to what exactly, and you can't assume readers will know which changes you are talking about. Therefore many will just presume you are refferring to something like an open only bonus.

 

[Sylveria]

CIf you stick to proposing solutions which don't negatively impact on those who don't partake in PvP, then i'm sure we could all get along a lot better. Problem is, here we don't seem to be discussing specifics, just random arguments against each other with very little substance. ie: "this can easily be changed" without referring to what exactly, and you can't assume readers will know which changes you are talking about. Therefore many will just presume you are refferring to something like an open only bonus.

Can't rep you for this... but I would easily give it 1000+ if I could.

This really is the core of the "Open bonus!" discussions, because almost every proposal made has been detrimental to those who do not choose to participate in direct PvP.
(for whatever reason)

As to the lots of things "can easily be changed"- here's a specific example...

I've suggested the implementation of Open PvE utilizing the existing friendly fire mechanic used in Wings, and changing the threshold to -100%.

That's not something FD would need to spend massive amounts of development time, finances, or anything else. Go into the existing framework, modify a number, kick out the build- and voila!

That's simple, cost-effective, and alleviates future need to cater to specific (mainly PvP) play styles.

For a lot of the suggestions some are proposing... it's very different in terms of development time, resources, etc. Dedicated servers, reworking the "3 mode system" so that only one of them gains a specific bonus, splitting the BGS (which is inherently tied to all "modes" because it's all really one mode with filters), doing away with the P2P network code, etc... I really believe some people really aren't using the right "head" when thinking of these proposals here.

FD isn't going to all of a sudden uproot core mechanics and do so at the whim of a few extreme players who think everyone else should be playing like they do.

That's reality.

Dollar for dollar though, I know where my money would be if I were betting on which way they'd go- given the costs associated with such radical changes... and it wouldn't be to a complete revamp of the existing systems to cater to extreme play styles.

 

[Robert Maynard]

8 months I reckon. I dont see them releasing a fat multiplayer update like they did with powerplay. Just to make the same mistake again.

Fool me once sort of thing. They already seen what happened and how it failed. Its no joke PP failed because of one reason. And one reason only. And thats the modes.

They wont do it again. Its like grabbing your moms curling iron. You're only going to do it once.

There seems to be an assumption that the pan-modal implementation of PowerPlay was a mistake to be corrected. Opinions on that naturally vary.

It'll be interesting to find out, what, if anything, Sandro says regarding the modes in relation to Squadrons - almost as much as what the scope of Squadrons actually is.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Its a shame because its supposed to be fun.

People have different definitions of "fun".

 

[Dietger]

8 months I reckon. I dont see them releasing a fat multiplayer update like they did with powerplay. Just to make the same mistake again.

Fool me once sort of thing. They already seen what happened and how it failed. Its no joke PP failed because of one reason. And one reason only. And thats the modes.

They wont do it again. Its like grabbing your moms curling iron. You're only going to do it once.

Maynard believes, all is well.

Frontier obviously doesn't want a competitive game. Modes provide you, God like powers.



Sandro Sammarco battling an uphill fight, fails, for now. Once SC goes live, Elite becomes more of a hassle for our beloved PvE friends. Competition.
Frontier being a Game Company, is and remains a Company! Never the 2 man show it started. All depends on money made in time.

Not a vision, not any more.



The Dilemma?

If we all are just a few, PvPers, harassing a community united, by, fear and slackness, fancy advertising a at large boring game, what will ever change? Why should it?
Dilemma for them is us. How to make us work for them? Why would anyone play this game, excuses provided at an instant, by design?

Frontier, in a sense made Open, their worst decision, antagonistic.

Antagonist is your name if you're a PvPer.

The brand, Elite Dangerous, a money generating engine will have its lifetime and usefulness, anyway.

 

[Dietger]

Elite Dangerous, for now lucrative failure is, Modes.

 

[Jockey79]

In around doesnt count.
Go to CG, fly in SC for few hours and make a video, otherwise your claim is like that friend request I am still waiting on for a month.

Aww, claiming it doesn't count because it proves you wrong.

Been in Open a month, seen a few folks doing the same runs as me and we are all just fine.

Also told you, you're not my friend so you're not getting added to my list.
Why should I give your lazy backside a marker on the map and a free pass in the matchmaker, you want to kill me - earn it.

The reason you wont do it is the same reason your whole "blockade" / "meaningful PvP" arguments fall down - without rigging the matchmaker, you're powerless and have to rely on dumb luck.

I have power over people everyday in this game. I dont think you know what you are taking about.

Only those who let you. You're not able to do a thing to stop me.
And I keep telling you were I am. Repeatedly.

Elite Dangerous, for now lucrative failure is, Modes.

Plenty of games have modes and are going well, the only failure here is those who bought the game by mistake - the EVE ganker squads.

 

[Dietger]

We are not here for a plenty of games. But one.

 

[Jockey79]

We are note here for a plenty of games. But one.

One that was made with modes, advertised with modes and sold with modes.

 

[Sylveria]

Frontier obviously doesn't want a competitive game. Modes provide you, God like powers.

Sandro Sammarco battling an uphill fight, fails, for now. Once SC goes live, Elite becomes more of a hassle for our beloved PvE friends. Competition.
Frontier being a Game Company, is and remains a Company! Never the 2 man show it started. All depends on money made in time.

ED was never intended to be a purely competitive game. If it was, it would have never released with the 3 modes to begin with.

This alone proves the fallacy of such arguments as "ED is a multiplayer/PvP game at its core!", because in reality one of the "modes" excludes all forms of multiplayer interaction (save for the passive BGS) which is Solo.

As to the SC hype... I really do hope SC does well. At least then people can stop demanding that ED be the game they wish it was, instead of enjoying it for what it actually is.

I have doubts that it will really be "all that and a bag of chips" like some claim it will be- or that it will even release within my lifetime, the way the development schedule looks. With every iteration, people claim it's going to knock ED to the ground (SC 3.0 for example), and they release another horribly performing alpha- which has underwhelming features.

 

[Dietger]

One that was made with modes, advertised with modes and sold with modes.

Why would I ever contradict you ?