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

[Siobhan]

You have to keep people there first. Or its never going to work. They have to want to be there. And they have to have something to lose. Sometimes having another option is not viable.

If they want to be there, they wouldn't be trying to leave. The timed gate you propose is nothing to them...
But people who no longer want to be there? It is those who you'd be locking in.

Try again, padawan.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

If you have to trap people in order for your idea to work, that's not a selling point of your idea.

FSD interruptions? Failing an interdiction? Masslock. These things already exist.

Conflict zones are pretty basic. And its quite obvious people are just going to run anytime there is danger to them.

There could be depth to teamfighting here. Again, wing comps, engineering, utility. But the people have to stay and fight it out. Not run out of the instance.

 

[Brrokk]

I was struggling to understand the motivation at first, but after reading the discussion I think it's a very bad idea.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I was struggling to understand the motivation at first, but after reading the discussion I think it's a very bad idea.

Well yeah, you might get killed in a video game.

Cant have that.

 

[Tarman]

FSD interruptions? Failing an interdiction? Masslock. These things already exist.

Conflict zones are pretty basic. And its quite obvious people are just going to run anytime there is danger to them.

There could be depth to teamfighting here. Again, wing comps, engineering, utility. But the people have to stay and fight it out. Not run while they farm.

Forced corrals don't make teams, and doesn't bring as much depth to a team combat idea than say, a set of shared missions provided by a military superpower would add to the game.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

If they want to be there, they wouldn't be trying to leave. The timed gate you propose is nothing to them...
But people who no longer want to be there? It is those who you'd be locking in.

Try again, padawan.

Thats right, they would have to stay to a certain point. Win or lose. But after that point they are free to leave. Dont really understand why thats an issue here.

You should have to try.

 

[Arkadi]

Didn't read thread beyond page 1.

Fast response:

Running away should be an opiton but it should not be a winning option.

Holding on to merits and running is a winning option at the moment.

Any change to this "cowardize = win" gameplay is welcome for my taste.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Didn't read thread beyond page 1.

Fast response:

Running away should be an opiton but it should not be a winning option.

Holding on to merits and running is a winning option at the moment.

Any change to this "cowardize = win" gameplay is welcome for my taste.

That option would still be available. It was never off the table. Just only after a certain time period.

 

[Nagual]

I was going to try and say something funny, but nothing can compare to the logic of some of the thought processes going on in this thread.

 

[Siobhan]

Thats right, they would have to stay to a certain point. Win or lose. But after that point they are free to leave. Dont really understand why thats an issue here.

You should have to try.

In that event I'd rather not even start, and going by the responses here I'd not be alone in that. Intentionally or otherwise, you'd be driving people away from CZs and other PP scenarios.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

In that event I'd rather not even start, and going by the responses here I'd not be alone in that. Intentionally or otherwise, you'd be driving people away from CZs and other PP scenarios.

You wouldnt drive away people trying to win those scenarios or battles. They would be there to fight for them.

To be fair, again. You didnt know why these ships are being farmed. You didnt know why losses mean something. And you were hung up on this being a "stealth thread".

Im really not expecting the majority of the people here to understand it to begin with.

I really have tried to explain it. However, people purposefully refuse to see what happens in other games. And how they are relatable here.

Thats not my fault. Thats would be yours.

Did you know conflict zones have aggro tables when you attack people on the opposing side? Those NPCS if youre too deep will attack you and not the other ships if they are within a certain range.

 

[Siobhan]

You wouldnt drive away people trying to win those scenarios or battles. They would be there to fight for them.

To be fair, again. You didnt know why these ships are being farmed. You didnt know why losses mean something. And you were hung up on this being a "stealth thread".

Im really not expecting the majority of the people here to understand it to begin with.

I really have tried to explain it. However, people purposefully refuse to see what happens in other games. And how they are relatable here.

Thats not my fault. Thats would be yours.

Did you know conflict zones have aggro tables when you attack people on the opposing side? Those NPCS if youre too deep will attack you and not the other ships if they are within a certain range.

Again, you seem rather hung up on what you think I understand or not. Really my dear, I wouldn't worry your pretty little head about it... It isn't important.

But I will repeat... If they are there and are trying to win the scenario - ignoring for the moment that "winning" might mean getting away with whatever it is they've taken - then they wouldn't be trying to leave in the first place. For these people, your timed lock might as well not be there. It's only purpose is to prevent the escape of people who no longer want to be there, and are no longer trying to win, but rather to escape without dying/rebuying/whathaveyou...

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Again, you seem rather hung up on what you think I understand or not. Really my dear, I wouldn't worry your pretty little head about it... It isn't important.

But I will repeat... If they are there and are trying to win the scenario - ignoring for the moment that "winning" might mean getting away with whatever it is they've taken - then they wouldn't be trying to leave in the first place. For these people, your timed lock might as well not be there. It's only purpose is to prevent the escape of people no longer want to be there, and are no longer trying to win, but rather to escape without dying/rebuying/whathaveyou...

Thats right. They should have to stay and not leave at the first sign of danger. Otherwise whats the point. People will just highwake at the first sign of opposition instead of using skills and abilities.

Conflict zones, war zones, powerplay zones are basically a battle field. This would promote wingfights all while farming together.

But they have to be locked to fight. Instead of waking when another team comes in to fight against them right away.

Because if we dont get something like this. People will just concede the zone at the first sign of danger instead of working together to win it.

 

[Arkadi]

The few times I have experienced open pvp around powerplay centric events, it always was about one side trying to catch or chase away another side holding a bag full of merits. When I was in the position to have held a load of merits and being faced by enemy pvp players, shure as hell I should have chosen "run for the hills".

It's just the thing that it's really easy to escape and really hard to chase.

With some exceptions, like some players resembeling to me, who are willing to take unreasonable risks just for the fun of it.

But that's not anything about intended gameplay. This is about bored players willing to suffer ill consequences just for the fun of it. Sounds masochistic? There you have it... competitive gameplay is unreasonable in ED as it is.

 

[Siobhan]

Thats right. They should have to stay and not leave at the first sign of danger. Otherwise whats the point. People will just highwake at the first sign of opposition instead of using skills and abilities.

Why would they not run? If they've collected millions of credits in bonds/merits/whatever, and suddenly an overwhelming force drops in, to stay would be to risk what might be hours of work... To run means they can protect it to cash in, hence winning, unless said overwhelming force is able to give chase. Perhaps they could gain more by staying, but it'd be a huge gamble, whereas the newcomers, being fresh, undamaged and with their ammo bins full, risk little.

Don't you want a level playing field? (your words, not mine)

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Why would they not run? If they've collected millions of credits in bonds/merits/whatever, and suddenly an overwhelming force drops in, to stay would be to risk what might be hours of work... To run means they can protect it to cash in, hence winning, unless said overwhelming force is able to give chase. Perhaps they could gain more by staying, but it'd be a huge gamble, whereas the newcomers, being fresh, undamaged and with their ammo bins full, risk little.

Don't you want a level playing field? (your words, not mine)

Yeah there are points in the game when you should run. Im not saying that shouldnt ever happen.

New people just like of us PVPers started somewhere. Hardly an excuse here.

It makes people think about their builds, engineering, utility and again wing comps as they grow as a commander.

Whats the problem with losing? Its not that scary.

 

[Nadreck]

In every team combat game I've ever played, there have always been "He needs to pull out, he's badly wounded!" moments. Real-life armies have medics for this. In a team, you cover for incapacitated comrades and help them escape.

"Everyone stays until we're all dead!" is a form of team play that I'd rather not participate in.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

In every team combat game I've ever played, there have always been "He needs to pull out, he's badly wounded!" moments. Real-life armies have medics for this. In a team, you cover for incapacitated comrades and help them escape.

"Everyone stays until we're all dead!" is a form of team play that I'd rather not participate in.

Thats why I said time limit.

 

[M00ka]

Well now I am very happy I decided never to indulge in PP in any way shape or form if this is the mentality of it's participants.

Can't wait for the OP's next brilliant suggestion: Only non Engineered E rated ships can enter these zones (apart from his ship of course, got to gank, err farm those Commanders as expediently as possible).

 

[Siobhan]

Yeah there are points in the game when you should run. Im not saying that shouldnt ever happen.

New people just like of us PVPers started somewhere. Hardly an excuse here.

It makes people think about their builds, engineering, utility and again wing comps as they grow as a commander.

Whats the problem with losing? Its not that scary.

Not scary no, but it does set one back if one has been farming all day. And living to fight another day is a victory too, is it not?
Anyway, I've not much else to say on the matter and it seems most of the others have given up on the thread, so I guess I'll leave too. It's been entertaining and remained surprisingly civil, well most of the time, which is a pleasant change.

Have a good evening, anyone still reading...