What do we learn from Lugh?

[Daffan]

Elaborate.

He's saying people that only play for money will run out of things to do.

Which is true, because once you kill 10 AI your a god and trading is easy to be a pro at. No skill required in this game other than PVP and pvp is completely meaningless. Anyone looking for a challenge will get bored.

 

[Kaeldian]

I can't believe there's still small-minded people calling out those who choose the path of least resistance as "having no integrity".

In any progression-based environment, players are always going to maximize their efficiency with the time they have available.

No matter which game you play. there will always be a capital ship, there will always be a loot cave, there will always be a Viver. It's not up to you or me to judge and damn these people, it's the responsibility of the developer to decide if this is what they meant to happen, then act accordingly.

BTW - I'm up to 5 mil now contributing to the cause and just now hitting the top 15 percent. Given there's about 3k contributers to the cause, this suggests to me that a MAJORITY of the fed players are not using the capital ship advantage despite what a few would suggest. There's just simply more of us at it.

But to sit there and beat your chest and declare how you have "more integrity" because you decide to live by invisible rules that you impose on yourself within the game world? Give me a break...... Next thing you'll be telling us is how we must be bad people in real life.

 

[obliterator]

He's saying people that only play for money will run out of things to do.

Which is true, because once you kill 10 AI your a god and trading is easy to be a pro at. No skill required in this game other than PVP and pvp is completely meaningless. Anyone looking for a challenge will get bored.

Calling what is meaningful and what is not is extremely presumptuous. The use of the term "meaning" in a videogame is totally arbitrary. Pvp is meaningful for those who enjoy pvp. Even if there is no goal, competition is the goal itself, and it can go on forever as long as there are people to challenge you. That's why fps, rts and mobas are so damn popular. Just because YOU don't find any meaning to it doesn't mean nobody does.

 

[Simi Kusoni]

Calling what is meaningful and what is not is extremely presumptuous. The use of the term "meaning" in a videogame is totally arbitrary. Pvp is meaningful for those who enjoy pvp. Even if there is no goal, competition is the goal itself, and it can go on forever as long as there are people to challenge you. That's why fps, rts and mobas are so damn popular. Just because YOU don't find any meaning to it doesn't mean nobody does.

From the perspective of a sandbox game, PvP is meaningless.

In most sandbox games, and especially MMOs, there is some kind of clear progression. Whether it's territorial control, asset accumulation or character development it is inevitably still there. ED has this in the form of assets/credits, which can be increased solely through PvE grinding.

So yes, in that sense PvP in ED is meaningless.

 

[obliterator]

From the perspective of a sandbox game, PvP is meaningless.

In most sandbox games, and especially MMOs, there is some kind of clear progression. Whether it's territorial control, asset accumulation or character development it is inevitably still there. ED has this in the form of assets/credits, which can be increased solely through PvE grinding.

So yes, in that sense PvP in ED is meaningless.

Your argument relies on the fact that the only valid goal of the game is to make credits. But that notion is against the very mentality that comes with sandbox games. The true essence of a sandbox game is that you do whatever you want. If you want to progress, fine, but that's not the official point of the game. So yeah, pvp is meaningless if you only care about progression, but to many of us, progression are not the goal here.

 

[Simi Kusoni]

Your argument relies on the fact that the only valid goal of the game is to make credits. But that notion is against the very mentality that comes with sandbox games. The true essence of a sandbox game is that you do whatever you want. If you want to progress, fine, but that's not the official point of the game. So yeah, pvp is meaningless if you only care about progression, but to many of us, progression are not the goal here.

True, usually as I said credits are a means to an end. Players focus on territorial control, character development, empire/group building, individual kill/skill rankings... ED has literally none of that.

Your goal is essentially to PvP with other players. You have no evidence that you have achieved this goal, nor have you managed to gain anything by doing so if you have, hence "meaningless". Most sandbox games that feature PvP feature PvP for a reason, it's a means to an end, not instanced/artifical PvP that could have been pulled from an arcade game and is done purely for personal gratification.

And yes, in a sandbox game you can typically do whatever you want. That does not usually mean that there isn't anything to do.

 

[emacinnes]

Personally, Lugh is too far away. It would take me 30-35 jumps. I'd have to rebalance the entire ship to get a bigger FSD drive, I'm already 2MW over power budget with an 8LY range (I'm bounty hunting, don't really need range, just firepower and shields).

The game needs "fast travel" for these community goals. It was the same the last few CGs, just too far away to bother.

 

[Simi Kusoni]

Personally, Lugh is too far away. It would take me 30-35 jumps. I'd have to rebalance the entire ship to get a bigger FSD drive, I'm already 2MW over power budget with an 8LY range (I'm bounty hunting, don't really need range, just firepower and shields).

The game needs "fast travel" for these community goals. It was the same the last few CGs, just too far away to bother.

Just stick an A class FSD on there, set it to priority three so it turns off when hardpoints are out.

 

[Morbad]

From the perspective of a sandbox game, PvP is meaningless.

In most sandbox games, and especially MMOs, there is some kind of clear progression. Whether it's territorial control, asset accumulation or character development it is inevitably still there. ED has this in the form of assets/credits, which can be increased solely through PvE grinding.

So yes, in that sense PvP in ED is meaningless.

Completely disagree.

 

[Red Fox Four]

In my opinion the war in Lugh is one of the best events to date and shows lots of promises, but also lots of flaws in the system. I think this is a great thing, because FD will learn so much from this and can improve upon the game in different ways.

Only thing I learned is that trying to participate in a legit way is a wasted effort.

The capital ship exploit using turrets to AFK farm combat bonds proved as much.

Lugh had promise.

It got ruined by exploits.

I will most likely not participate actively in next community goal.

 

[Distance]

What I've learned in the last couple of days in Lugh :

- The majority of the top tier players are in solo which kind of makes it anti community.
- Don't go in to a combat zone without a wing. Best case scenario there are other players on your side but one bit of friendly fire and the players who were on your side kill you instead of the enemy. Worst case scenario an enemy wing will enter (or already be operating within the instance) and clear out any enemy players and try to hold the instance.
- The T9 goal doesn't work too well in open. As soon as the T9 appears everyone targets the cargo hatch and it goes to 0 pretty much instantly.

Ways to improve :

- Blockade or combat goal should be set to open only. The T9 goal should be countered by Fed players in supercruise or at the station interdicting and taking out Lugh cmdrs before they smuggle the goods in the station. Right now you can slip in solo and make a ton of cash with no consequences.
- Players shouldn't be able to switch sides, once you sign up for a Lugh or Fed goal you're locked in to it. This will automatically lock you in to that faction when you enter a combat zone.

I've had a ton of fun running wings for Lugh in the combat zones though. Most fun I've had in ED so far so I'm not ragging on the intentions of FD just the execution of the community goals. Bear in mind this is the first time they've tried these type of goals so they're using this as a learning experiment.

They should also sort out or remove the "military interdictions". I'm sick of getting pulled over by a military ship that does nothing except inconvenience me. If we were locked in to factions and I've picked Lugh and I'm pulled over by the Feds then they should attack and visa versa. Right now it adds nothing to the gameplay at all.

 

[Red Fox Four]

What I've learned in the last couple of days in Lugh :

- The majority of the top tier players are in solo which kind of makes it anti community.

Not sure I agree with this. Not because I dislike open play, but because it will alienate a large portion of the Elite community.

It would be better if there was a separate sign-on for the community goal, e.g. you can sign up for Open Play 'version' or the Private / Solo 'version'.

Open play could then offer improved / higher combat bonds on enemy players, thus giving extra reward if willing to take the extra risk (or other types of bonuses to weigh up for the added risk involved, depending on what type community goal it is).

People have a tendency to become polarized when discussing Open vs Solo/Private and then fight for their 'side'. We have to keep in mind that Elite is both a game for both Open and Private/Solo. There should be no "this gameplay feature is only for this side, or that side", e.g. only for Open Play or only for Solo play.

The solutions have to fit both ways of playing. E.g. open play is more risk, therefore you get improved reward while in Open Play. Solo/private is less risk, the reward is a little lower, but you can fight or progress the community goal continuously without having to run away from enemies, return to repair and fix ship frequently or even pay for deaths.

 

[Balsbigbrother]

I tried to do this community goal in open and it was a giant fuster cluck.

It was a case of one side or the other dominating each combat zone I entered with no hope of balance. So you either had everyone trying to shoot one unfortunate NPC / player or you were that unfortunate player. Either way it was no fun. I don't care about realism or any of that bull this is a game and I am here to have fun in it, I personally found non in open

So I have gone back to solo to finish up this community event as I can at least find a little bit of fun spending an hour or so doing some pew pew.

 

[Distance]

Not sure I agree with this. Not because I dislike open play, but because it will alienate a large portion of the Elite community.

It would be better if there was a separate sign-on for the community goal, e.g. you can sign up for Open Play 'version' or the Private / Solo 'version'.

Open play could then offer improved / higher combat bonds on enemy players, thus giving extra reward if willing to take the extra risk (or other types of bonuses to weigh up for the added risk involved, depending on what type community goal it is).

People have a tendency to become polarized when discussing Open vs Solo/Private and then fight for their 'side'. We have to keep in mind that Elite is both a game for both Open and Private/Solo. There should be no "this gameplay feature is only for this side, or that side", e.g. only for Open Play or only for Solo play.

The solutions have to fit both ways of playing. E.g. open play is more risk, therefore you get improved reward while in Open Play. Solo/private is less risk, the reward is a little lower, but you can fight or progress the community goal continuously without having to run away from enemies, return to repair and fix ship frequently or even pay for deaths.

I've always been for mode switching and solo play but this is the only instance I'm against it. If you're going to have community goals that feature warring factions and blockades it then it should be confined to one mode. Maybe you could have separate goals for solo mode?

You must admit that if there's a blockade and people one one side have a massive advantage by going solo then it does affect the players in the other mode.

In the solo/open debate thread people always use the line "how does someone playing in solo affect your game if you don't know they're there?", they don't normally but in this instance, community goals they blatantly do.

Anyway those were just my thoughts and ideas so I'm not going to argue solo/open as there's another thread for that.

Both our opinions are just as valid

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

Combat zones need some end, I fully agree. Generic mode as it is now works, but it feels and looks a bit futile, even if whole thing contributes to background sim. I am sure FD already have some ideas.

I suspect that combat could start with arrival and departure of capital ship, but it doesn't happen that smoothly.

 

[CMDR Cillian Raynor]

I learned that i will grind conflict zones to make it in the top 5% of Spear of Lugh (which i have) even if i'm bored with combat now. I wish the thing could finish before the two weeks are up. I can't keep myself from grinding the thing but i kinda resent it. It's just..i dont want to now fall OFF the top 5%.

I also wish that, like with trading community goals, they would show the top 5. Because i want to know what i'm up against. I seriously doubt i'm even close to the top 5 players grinding Spear, but i'd like to know just how many millions they make still. Because if i felt like it's within reach, i might grind even more. I mean if i could see my name up there you know..that would be motivating.

 

[Red Fox Four]

I learned that i will grind conflict zones to make it in the top 5% of Spear of Lugh (which i have) even if i'm bored with combat now. I wish the thing could finish before the two weeks are up. I can't keep myself from grinding the thing but i kinda resent it. It's just..i dont want to now fall OFF the top 5%.

I also wish that, like with trading community goals, they would show the top 5. Because i want to know what i'm up against. I seriously doubt i'm even close to the top 5 players grinding Spear, but i'd like to know just how many millions they make still. Because if i felt like it's within reach, i might grind even more. I mean if i could see my name up there you know..that would be motivating.

At least you are able to stay in the top 5%.

In the Reclamation of Lugh for Fed side you have all the cap ship exploiters who propel themselves into top 5%, and then push out anyone who put in effort to get there in first place.

Completely discouraging to the point of forfeiting the community goal as a whole.

 

[Simi Kusoni]

Not sure I agree with this. Not because I dislike open play, but because it will alienate a large portion of the Elite community.

It would be better if there was a separate sign-on for the community goal, e.g. you can sign up for Open Play 'version' or the Private / Solo 'version'.

Open play could then offer improved / higher combat bonds on enemy players, thus giving extra reward if willing to take the extra risk (or other types of bonuses to weigh up for the added risk involved, depending on what type community goal it is).

People have a tendency to become polarized when discussing Open vs Solo/Private and then fight for their 'side'. We have to keep in mind that Elite is both a game for both Open and Private/Solo. There should be no "this gameplay feature is only for this side, or that side", e.g. only for Open Play or only for Solo play.

The solutions have to fit both ways of playing. E.g. open play is more risk, therefore you get improved reward while in Open Play. Solo/private is less risk, the reward is a little lower, but you can fight or progress the community goal continuously without having to run away from enemies, return to repair and fix ship frequently or even pay for deaths.

For this kind of event, war in which players can pick opposing factions, placing some value on a CMDR kill is almost instinctive. Awarding the same value to killing a CMDR as an NPC with the same hull...

I'm honestly not sure if FD even considered this, which is worrying. Is there something they are intentionally trying to avoid, and I'm just missing it?

It just makes no sense to me, a community goal event with combat areas that is best run in solo against NPCs.

You can't even make an argument that killing enemy commanders stops the opposing faction from farming: because most of the farming is going on in solo mode. Same thing with the trading goals.

Basic things like this, let alone the silly military interdictions and that battlecruiser conflict zone, just makes me wonder what on earth happened when these mechanics were being proposed. Is there some kind of underlying logic or defining vision to it all that FD just aren't sharing with us?

 

[Dominico]

I would add to this don't make competitive parts of the mission with massive high payout open to solo.

You have the frighter attack for crimson. Which has a massive payout and takes skill AND if i read it right has the potential to win the war (it captures a station?) This is a challenge and gives a fun chance for feds to defend. Some players are doing it in open (massive rep to you guys you get the gake spirit.

How3ver some are going to solo to do it. Now i guess we cannot stop this as the design of the game allows this hiding, but it should not count to the leaderboards. Also it should count only 1/4 to the goal. As its easy to do this. Its one aspect that is hugely broken.

There is a similqr less lucrative goal for feds to smuggle guns. Which also should be subject to the same rules. If i played solo i woild be happy with this as it is obvious there is no danger in thus aspect.

It might also have the positive effect of encouraging grouping and interaction.

This is a massive oversight. But will see how the mission goes.

 

[Red Fox Four]

You guys are missing the entire point of Solo mode.

If solo mode is too easily 'farmed' towards Community Goal then the solution is not to penalize Solo players, exclude them from the Community Goal as a whole, or force them into Open Play.

The solution is for Frontier to make the (currently) useless NPC's more of a challenge. Elite NPC ships should destroy the average Elite player (in similar ship as the NPC) 9 out of 10 times. The fact that Elite ships end up doing 'a little bit' more damage to your outer shield layer than anything lower than Elite is not a challenge.

It's not Elite Dangerous, it's Elite Useless-NPC's.

Optionally they can add Elite NPC ship wings that roam or spawn randomly in the Conflict Zones to represent the same threat as players might do in Open Play.

That said... I was in Open Play almost exclusively during the Conflict Zones in the Sorbago Slave Rebellion and a lot of the players I ran into (oh noes, an enemy player) were easier targets than the Competent+ NPC ships (I was flying a Viper at the time). So this whole idea that encountering other players means more risk and that you are in for a very tough time is completely exaggerated.

Players in an online game are nothing more than bots with varying levels of AI.

Some are good, most are OK and some are rubbish... just like NPCs.