What do you guys think of a minimum timer locking you in for conflict zones and powerplay zones?

WorldsGreatestForumDad

Banned
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Nadreck said:
I can think of at least two problems:

1. Immersion/realism. Retreating is a part of warfare, and if it's for repairs and re-arming, it isn't "losing": it's part of winning. What's being suggested is a sort of tournament, not a battle. Who is judging the tournament, who decides the "winner, and why should the loser abide by that decision? If my side whupped more of your ships than you whupped of ours because we ran away and got repaired/rearmed and you didn't, then you lost. Who has the authority to say otherwise?

2. Real life. You can't force players to commit to playing for a set duration, some people have other things to do. And who decrees the duration?
Click to expand...

Conceding can be tactical IRL and in this game yes.

To your second point there are plenty of people that play this game for hours on end. There are other games exist out there where you are locked to a game to 30-45 mins. League of Legends is one of them. They are very strict in people leaving their games and are punished for doing so. Thats one of the highest played games ever made.(just using this as an example).

Being locked to an instance for lets say 5 mins is nothing.

Especially if you know what you're doing and choose to be there.
 
Last edited:

Siobhan

Siobhan
Even in RL fighters bug out when they're obviously taking more damage than they can dish out, or, more often I suppose when their ammo supply is depleted...

Same is the case here in Elite... A timer might force a ship which has depleted their primary ammo to sit around helpless to be picked off... And nobody in this forum would wish that on anyone... Well... Except a certain subset of PvPers who just love it if they can find an unarmed and undefended victim opponent and hit them with FSD scramblers or whatever they're called.
 

WorldsGreatestForumDad

Banned
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Siobhan said:
Even in RL fighters bug out when they're obviously taking more damage than they can dish out, or, more often I suppose when their ammo supply is depleted...

Same is the case here in Elite... A timer might force a ship which has depleted their primary ammo to sit around helpless to be picked off... And nobody in this forum would wish that on anyone... Well... Except a certain subset of PvPers who just love it if they can find an unarmed and undefended victim opponent and hit them with FSD scramblers or whatever they're called.
Click to expand...

Bring reloads. Adjust your builds and use TOT lasers. Heavy DPS Kinetics when you need them.

Next!
 
Last edited:

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Not a fan of locking into the instance Logically why would that mechanically be a thing? However I do think once we pledge to 1 side we should be locked to that side for the whole conflict and be considered an enemy by the opposing faction (where ever we are) for the period of the war.
 
Last edited:

Nadreck

N
Still no explanation of what in-game phenomenon would cause this "lock" effect.

If it's a physical thing (mass FSD jammer), then can I shoot it?

If it's some referee sitting around judging the conflict, is he in a ship that I can shoot?
 

Siobhan

Siobhan
Mad Mike said:
Not a fan of locking into the instance Logically why would that mechanically be a thing? However I do think once we pledge to 1 side we should be locked to that side for the whole conflict and be considered an enemy by the opposing faction for the period of the war.
Click to expand...

Agreed on this point... At least without some penalties for surrender and coat-turning.
 

Morbad

Morbad
I wouldn't mind seeing capital ships with masslock/FSD suppression fields that could fill a large area, but I'm not in favor of arbitrarily locking combatants into an instance as I can't see any good in-game justification for it.

A more pressing change would be further limiting the ability to switch sides in a conflict.
 

Vasious

Vasious
Even NPCs flee given the chance from CZs
But players should be forbidden to?
Even if damaged or out of ammo, they should be forced to stay about?
That makes a lot of great game play ��
 

WorldsGreatestForumDad

Banned
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Mad Mike said:
Not a fan of locking into the instance Logically why would that mechanically be a thing? However I do think once we pledge to 1 side we should be locked to that side for the whole conflict and be considered an enemy by the opposing faction (where ever we are) for the period of the war.
Click to expand...

At some point. Some parts of the game need to break away from "immersion".

Like Ryan M_17 says, do we really want to spend 3 hours while some dude on a forklift loads cargo?

Some parts of the game need basic mechanics behind them for interaction. Not everything needs to have an immersive standpoint.

We do need to just have things done at some point. We dont need an explanation for EVERYTHING that happens in this game.

TBH, needing an immersive standpoint for everything is kind of tiresome. It can be there for some things. But not everything.
 
Last edited:

da_wae

da_wae
WorldsGreatestForumDad said:
At some point. Some parts of the game need to break away from "immersion".

Like Ryan M_17 says, do we really want to spend 3 hours while some dude on a forklift loads cargo?

Some parts of the game need basic mechanics behind them for interaction. Not everything needs to have an immersive standpoint.

We do need to just have things done at some point. We dont need an explanation for EVERYTHING that happens in this game.

TBH, needing an immersive standpoint for everything is kind of tiresome. It can be there for some things. But not everything.
Click to expand...

Locked in timers.... Sounds familiar. Oh wait, you're looking for CQC.
 

JetsonRING

JetsonRING
WorldsGreatestForumDad said:
Basically what happens is you are locked to the instance for a minimum amount of time. Lets say you were in a power play zone with people on each side. Where you farm and work against each other at the same time. Except you cant leave until the zone is won, or a timer expires. This would promote friendly competition, working together, wing comps and more. People usually spend a considerable amount of time in them anyways. How do you guys feel about it? What would be a good time to set if any?
Click to expand...

Ridiculous. It would not promote "friendly competition" only seal clubbing. A huge part of Elite Dangerous is knowing when to run away and you want to trap people even though according to you "People usually spend a considerable amount of time in them anyways".
 

[VR] Mad Mike

[VR] Mad Mike
Regardless i still don't like it. whilst I am not saying there is never a time to put gameplay in front of immersion, invisible walls forcing an inescapable fight for me is neither immersive OR good gameplay. Just my opinion , :)

In fairness it possibly isn't even an immersion issue if you read Michael Brookes' book. Whilst running away would still be an option, completely blocking the FSD is in lore. Personally i still don't like it tho.
 
Last edited:

Nadreck

N
I'll just turn up, join the side I actually don't support, then run away, helping "my" side to lose.

Who or what could stop that?
 

WorldsGreatestForumDad

Banned
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Nadreck said:
I'll just turn up, join the side I actually don't support, then run away, helping "my" side to lose.

Who or what could stop that?
Click to expand...

This actually accomplishes nothing but wasting your own time lol.
Its not like there is a limited amount of players here. There is not a sign up screen and a queue to get in them.

Youd just be impacting your own time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom