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

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

And you seems to miss the point that players want different things, and some player do want to only be playing Co-op and not having to do PvP. and if you haven't got this yet, FDev have been pretty CLEAR about that this is also OK and have its places in this game.

If you dont want to PVP. You shouldn't get other player objectives to impact either. I dont care if its powerplay or player factions. Those are now other players you are screwing with.

And someone shouldnt be able to continuously attack your assets without being able to stop them or impact them at all. Sometimes those players dont have systems of their own.

Its malicious and people should be able to defend themselves.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

But you seem to be the only one who wants this, why are you trying to ruin the game?

Im not trying to ruin the game. Im trying to give meaningful conflict to the people in war with each other.

Other people with a bit of experience and a level head understands the goal here.

The idea has some merit. However, in your discussion there seems to be some subtle inflexion regarding the numbers of players / NPC involved in a conflict area. The OP is, in my mind, wanting to force PvP combat on other players at the indvidual player level.

The idea you have discussed seems to me to regard fleet or squadron level operations. Squadrons of players who are contesting systems could do combat in CZs. These squadrons could contain large ships that are like the The Interdictor-class Star Destroyer in Star Wars in that they could project a local gravity well that acts like a mass lock that cannot discriminate between adversaries: they will not have the ability to pull ships out of hyperspace or supercruise. One step at a time.

Only player squadrons would have this facility. If players really desire more PvP play then it would be up to them to organise themselves into squadrons and organise and arrange such fleet contests, given appropriate support in ED from FDev. The explorers have shown their commitment to their love of exploring together: DW and DW2 are shining examples of this.

The squadron players would have to develop strategies and tactics to contend with such ships as the Interdictors; fighters covering torpedoe bombers, the latter taking out designated ships such as the Interdictors. I hope you get my drift here.
The strategic result of losing a conflict? Losing influence, control of a system for a faction supported by a squadron?

Hopefully, it would promote some great furballs and awesome videos that I would love to watch. At least the players battle chatter would be authentic!
It would make for a more exciting and, dare I say, a more meaningful engagement of PvP combat.

It may be that scenarios could also be created to allow PvP squadron action. Let's say a faction's disabled capital ship needs to be resupplied and repaired at a certain location so it can escape an opposing faction's attempts to capture it. This is old hat; the vintage game Star Wars X-Wing game had excellent missions like this.

The trouble with this idea is that ED is fundamentally a solo game even for Open and has no squadron fleet mission system to speak of especially one to enable such imagined events described above. And then there is the instancing issues to contend with.

 

[aRJay]

Nah not missing the point.

I want gameplay in conflict zones. Not running at the first sign of danger.

People are in war to stay and fight. So they should be staying and fighting up to a certain point.

But that point is situational not some arbitrary time limit.

 

[aRJay]

Nah this would still be skill based while giving room for people to improve builds. Even tanks, and healers and DPS used against each other. There is plenty of room for everyone here including beginners. But this also makes people think about their engineering a reason to engineer and take part in the game they otherwise wouldnt.

They would have need to build them. A reason.

What part of bring reloads and use lasers if needed dont you guys understand?

The bit where you want to make playing your way compulsory.

What part of timer lock ins are a stupid idea don't you understand, apart from all of it that is?

 

[Bryan K]

But you seem to be the only one who wants this, why are you trying to ruin the game?

That’s pretty much the tune of all his threads. Just sit back and laugh like the rest of us.

 

[Mohrgan]

If you dont want to PVP. You shouldn't get other player objectives to impact either. I dont care if its powerplay or player factions. Those are now other players you are screwing with.

And someone shouldnt be able to continuously attack your assets without being able to stop them or impact them at all. Sometimes those players dont have systems of their own.

Its malicious and people should be able to defend themselves.

This entire assertion is false. Factions can only be attacked or defended through the BGS. So. any faction can be defended from any mode, at any time, through the BGS.

You mistakenly insist that the only way to fight back is through direct PvP. I suspect you know this isn't so, but you are trapped by this belief in order for your need to force PvP on people to have any foundation at all. Or, you really have no idea how the game operates.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

This entire assertion is false. Factions can only be attacked or defended through the BGS. So. any faction can be defended from any mode, at any time, through the BGS.

You mistakenly insist that the only way to fight back is through direct PvP. I suspect you know this isn't so, but you are trapped by this belief in order for your need to force PvP on people to have any foundation at all. Or, you really have no idea how the game operates.

You're right. I have no idea why PVP would be useful here in this game instead of the griefing and ganking we have today.

My apologies, you know everything.

Lets keep it the way it is. Im sure thats working out for all parties involved.

Conflict zones/powerplay zones are all great places to house PVP battles as they are objectives to fight over.

In Depth gameplay using team work and modules we dont use currently.

People are invested in expanding and working for their factions. This gives them a meaningful reason to engage in them and each other at the same time.

 

[aRJay]

That’s pretty much the tune of all his threads. Just sit back and laugh like the rest of us.

I see that now, I should add him to my list of posters to not read when sober.

 

[Grumpy181155]

Actually, thinking about it, I'm up for this - with one small change - the lock doesn't time out. Just leave all the PPers in there permanently

Now this an idea I can get behind.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

I see that now, I should add him to my list of posters to not read when sober.

Nah, just turn it into a drinking game.
Take a shot whenever he does one of the following:

Mentions 'defending territory'
Uses a completely different game as an example
Calls someone stupid
Tells you that he'll be proved right eventually
Calls people griefers

Of course, you might not get past the OP without alcohol poisoning.

 

[Mohrgan]

You're right. I have no idea why PVP would be useful here in this game instead of the griefing and ganking we have today.

My apologies, you know everything.

Lets keep it the way it is. Im sure thats working out for all parties involved.

Conflict zones/powerplay zones are all great places to house PVP battles as they are objectives to fight over.

In Depth gameplay using team work and modules we dont use currently.

People are invested in expanding and working for their factions. This gives them a meaningful reason to engage in them and each other at the same time.

It's working out fine for me. For me, the exact same rational you are using.

I don't believe anyone, but you, thinks that applying 'fly-paper' to a combat instance is depth. Integrating PvP into the game's mechanics is what will bring depth. Appropriately rewarding players for engaging in PvP will encourage participation. Forcing PvP on players is not going to do either of those things.

 

[ADAMtheWELSHMANz]

Just out of curiosity I had a little scroll through your post history and saw that roughly 146/391 of the posts on this thread are yours

Good ideas and discussions take off and evolve naturally when there's merit to them, without needing to be forced

But hey, maybe I just don't get it and need to read and use my brain more eh

 

[GraXXoR]

OP: wat? That makes no sense whatsoever.
My only gripe is you can leave a CZ and come back on the opposite side within minutes and swap back again as you see fit.

I find that to be nonsense. But a timer?

 

[Misty_Dark]

If you dont want to PVP. You shouldn't get other player objectives to impact either. I dont care if its powerplay or player factions. Those are now other players you are screwing with.

And someone shouldnt be able to continuously attack your assets without being able to stop them or impact them at all. Sometimes those players dont have systems of their own.

Its malicious and people should be able to defend themselves.

Now here it comes, the false logics to justify PvP...



If we disregard solo/private group modes, you can already today not be certain to even meet the other players. As you play on PC, and then the opposition is on Xbox or PS4.... Now all of your rant here is just that a rant. since there is no cross play. Then we have this pesky thing called time, and if your opposition is 12 hour away from when you normally play, then you will never see them aswell. So no amount of referencing other games with dedicated PvP zones/battles etc are going to change this. as you cannot be certain that will ever be able to face the opposition due to this design of the game, perhaps in a future, we will see cross play between PC/XBox/PS4...


With the exception of conflict zones, you have no idea of what player is working against or for your faction. Even if you know if a squadron is supporting a rival faction, you cannot be sure if the particular player is doing anything to undermine your factions status. And if your faction is in control, killing clean players actually hurts your faction.


So using PvP as a mechanics to influence BGS is very flawed logic to begin with. And with the way the game is designed and how BGS is implemented, relying on PvP to change BGS is very limited and in most case useless. And this without taking into the consideration that BGS is valid for Solo and Private groups modes...



And there is already today several options that is FAR MORE efficient to defend your faction than relying on PvP options. And nothing in your suggestion are going to change that. And those "fixes" you are expecting to be implemented, most of these are very unlikely to happen at all, based on statements made by FDev. Just as the many PvE only peoples wishes for "fixes" to remove PvP are as equally unlikely to be implemented.



This is not news, as you are fully aware about all these flaws in your logic, since this is not really bout BGS, since your goal is for more PvP and if not enough people sign up for PvP, you want to force it on them....

So why not take a note from those other games you referenced, dedicated battle zones, in Elite this could be whole dedicated systems, and since Power Play is the most opt in PvP mechanics we have, lets those system be fought over by Power Play players. So to enter you have to pledge which gives you permit to enter those system your Power is currently involved with. In those systems you have resources to fight over. No BGS to influence, here the Powers navy is controlling the assets, and what asset your power has dependings on how successful the players supporting that Power are, this would be an ongoing 24/7 fights. The only NPC's here should be the stationary defence force guarding key points, so there is some opposition of the other side is not there to defend their assets. If players are here, they can rush here to defend it.
Now this could be ALOT of engaging PvP, and since you basically joined the the Navy when entering these systems, we can lower the insurance costs, or even remove it (lore wise, it could be covered by the supporting Power), this would make it more accessible to player to actually join the fight if they do not need to worry about rebuys, But these system cannot rely on the P2P system we have today, and thus we could potentially have battles with more than 50 players.
There is no need for only 2 Powers be in the same system.
Instead of jumping to the main star, you jump directly to a station, that is the base of operations. This to avoid the ganking just getting there, there would be plenty of option for this when leaving the safety of the station to go the the objectives... There could be specific missions for objective to complete, or just plain conflict zones to be won, and then when enough victory points is gathered for a resource, you take it over, or you successfully defended it.

Why do you not spend your time thinking on and suggesting these kind of things instead?

 

[veryDead]

Nope. Terrible idea. One of the worst ever. I commend your courage for sharing such a stinker.

 

[EUS]

OP, you ask for opinions, but you dismiss all other opinions.
This is not a discussion, it's a lecture.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

OP, you ask for opinions, but you dismiss all other opinions.
This is not a discussion, it's a lecture.

Yes, well unfortunately this game has been out for a decent amount of time. When games like this are made, the game is built around the multiplayer interaction first and foremost. Why do you guys think thargoid weaponry is not as effective as the other tools we have in the game against each other? Otherwise we would have crazy diablo 3 skills and abilities with super scaling NPCS with the more experience you get in the game. Which is possible against thargoids but not each other, or the basic NPC's we interact with.

Crime and punishment/ATR is a great example of this and it all pertains to the BGS.

These NPC's are meant to be farmed and are basically mindless minions until aggro'd in these conflict zones by shooting other commanders or engaging them yourself.

Usually in other games after this amount of time. The general population of the community understands the games mechanics, picking sides, using the tools, working together.

Even last hitting them is a thing guys.

Instead this community cant get past the modes argument.

Only a handful of people understand what I am talking about here. They need to understand the mechanics of the game before these guys can understand why some sort of locking mechanism should be in place to encourage team fighting with each other. Instead of purposefully removing themselves from each other to complete the same goal. Removing the ability to win or lose against one another.

We need to remove these loopholes.

There is a whole game structure and parts of the game that exists already. But no one even knows about them because they limit themselves intentionally removing that risk, removing that gameplay and essentially breaking the game(looking at you powerplay/BGS player faction wars). They end up quitting the game before they understand it.

So over the years this becomes very frustrating when you see the same people limit themselves and then turn around and say this game is a mile wide and a inch deep.

How stupid is that?

 

[ADAMtheWELSHMANz]

One day maybe we'll all ascend to your level of enlightenment and understand what Elite Dangerous "really is" but thanks for the many posts attempting to explain it to us mere mortals

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

One day maybe we'll all ascend to your level of enlightenment and understand what Elite Dangerous "really is" but thanks for the many posts attempting to explain it to us mere mortals

Eventually you will. Regardless if you want to or not.

 

[Brrokk]

OP, you ask for opinions, but you dismiss all other opinions.
This is not a discussion, it's a lecture.

Good summary of the whole thread.

Give up now. The original idea has been exposed as a weird compulsory-PvP fantasy.