What gets me about stacking massacre missions... is that it actually makes sense.

[ShimEnki]

These missions obviously bring value to many and do not impact anyone else negatively, nor do we have to engage them specifically for game developments ---in contrast to engineer requirements that impose many avenues of gameplay for in game progress that many prefer not to do.

Why do many keep complaining about positive game rewards that they have choice in not receiving without personal in game demerit?

 

[Weps]

Why do many keep complaining about positive game rewards that they have choice in not receiving without personal in game demerit?

Because this is a multiplayer online-only game with a shared persistent universe. Quite astonishing that people fail to remember that, or choose to ignore that, when we hear the old "but muh game doesn't impact your game bruh!".

You see, if this were a single player game where you could just select a difficulty level, or enter a cheat code, or simply have to worry about just besting the computer instead of other players, we'd be fine. But in this game, people PvP with other people. People BGS against other people. People Powerplay against other people. CG's have a competitive rewards structure. Competitive multiplayer is built into the game, and a good deal of people bought the game because of that, and in order to keep up with the competition, they are pressured into doing a specific task which promotes not only lobotomizing repetition but also inappropriate mechanics like mode hopping and staring at menu screens.

Or to put it bluntly, if one does it, so must the others.

 

[Tentacle Love]

I understand completely what you are saying. I think your explanation is not very good.

I can agree with that.

The way I see it, the npc corporations in game are limited to only a few ways that they can interact with us, and sometimes that means offering stacking bounties on pirates' heads. Basically, we get to determine when the bounties become worth it.

In that sense, it's perfectly understandable.

But obviously the in game mechanics don't really word themselves to match that. That's mostly from the game trying to make the act of "kill ten rats" seem more interesting than "kill ten rats."

 

[ShimEnki]

Because this is a multiplayer online-only game with a shared persistent universe. Quite astonishing that people fail to remember that, or choose to ignore that, when we hear the old "but muh game doesn't impact your game bruh!".

You see, if this were a single player game where you could just select a difficulty level, or enter a cheat code, or simply have to worry about just besting the computer instead of other players, we'd be fine. But in this game, people PvP with other people. People BGS against other people. People Powerplay against other people. CG's have a competitive rewards structure. Competitive multiplayer is built into the game, and a good deal of people bought the game because of that, and in order to keep up with the competition, they are pressured into doing a specific task which promotes not only lobotomizing repetition but also inappropriate mechanics like mode hopping and staring at menu screens.

Or to put it bluntly, if one does it, so must the others.

It is a single player game regardless how it technically reels out sounding otherwise to be

 

[RamirezKurita]

I just don't see it as either an exploit or a cheat. I do see it as a whole lot of time spent logging in and logging out.
Going with the example we've been using here, if Bob wants some pirates dead and posts a job notice, and I come along and take that notice, but have not yet killed those pirates, Bob may post another notice.
If I happen to take that notice, but have not yet killed those pirates, Bob may post yet another notice, and I may very well take that notice as well.

And I don't have to log out to do this - I could just as easily sit around in the lounge, watch Bob post notices and keep collecting them. It takes longer, but I don't have to log out to do it.

Once I have all the notices I can handle, I set off and kill some pirates, then return to Bob.

"Bob, you posted you want these guys dead, right? They are." Bob pays up.
"Bob, you posted you want these guys dead, right? They are." Bob pays up.
"Bob, you posted you want these guys dead, right? They are." Bob pays up.
"Bob, you posted you want these guys dead, right? They are." Bob pays up.
"Bob, you posted you want these guys dead, right? They are." Bob pays up.

Since these notices are legal contracts, Bob is obligated to continue to pay up as long as I have contracts.

And then Bob either loses his job or his very life because he has been mishandling funds and not getting things done within budget. Bob's boss then installs a more intelligent and able individual with a much greater understanding of legal contracts and notifies all friendly powers to check their contracts to stop them getting scammed out of billions of credits.

It might make sense for the contracts as-written, however no self respecting organisation would continue to offer such contracts due to their potential for abuse. Such contracts really should never make it out of an important figure's mouth, let alone make it past the legal teams and be declared ready for offering to outsiders.

 

[KR4K40]

All I know is that CZ mission stacking is the very last decent money maker in this game. One that is difficult, risky and requires the player to put in HOURS to achieve. And bonus, it is fun and can be done in wings!

If FD nerfs it, I'm dropping this game harder than Trump dropped the TPP. Literally gg no re

 

[VR StarLightPL]

PLOT TWIST! Just for mental exercise I will throw you another (skewed) perspective of that game mechanics:

Bob has a contract for "kill 8 pirates" - difficulty level: beginner, pay 10kCr.
Bob also has a contract "kill 32 pirates" - difficulty level: intermediate, pay 400kCr
Bob ultimately has a contract "kill 104 pirates" - difficulty level: engineered terminator, pay: 12mlnCr.

I can accept all three and cash the ones which I was able to fulfill and pay the fines for the ones I didn't.

</mind exercise>

I would rather be interested why people are doing these things. Is is, perhaps, for the fact that without using them Elite the GAME turns into Elite the JOB and you have to SAVE credits over a long period of time to be able to buy and kit out your preferred ship? That's not how GAMES should work, that is IRL JOB. Games in the end exists for pleasure. Be it instant gratification or masochistic. If a game starts to feel like a chore/grind, then you either uninstall the game or try to exploit it to skip the chore/grind part and continue to ENJOY the game.

And to answer Weps:
PvP vs other people is not credits based, it's timesink-based (engi material/unlock grind)
People BGS against other people? I have seen that in powerplay to lower/rise the UM triggers, very rarely seen outside of PP. Also full of bugs and more horrible exploits like "sell at a loss hurts the controlling faction".
People Powerplay against other People? Okay, still credits play rather small part in that play, unless you're staring at a rebuy screen every 5 minutes.
CGs have competitive rewards structure? What has that to do with anything? If I do CGs I do it for the story or goal, not for the non-proportionally small to time invested.

Also, if you want to stay competitive, you have to... well... compete?

 

[CylonSurfer]

Does anyone actually know how this exploit effects the BGS? I mean, you stack these missions to kill 30 NPCs for a particular faction in conflict zone during a war - If you stacked 4 x 30 kills missions for the same faction, does the BGS see 120 NPCs killed when you hand in the mission? Would that not be breaking the BGS by unfairly counting kills towards a factions kill count in the conflict?

 

[tomalus]

It has been like that since I started playing in 2014, one kill counted for all missions, since fdev didnt change it until now its obviously fine.

 

[Ben Ryder]

So here's the deal.

There's a faction named "Bob's outhouse" in a system.

Bob's outhouse has a problem with the pirates.
The pirates are all of the faction "Steve's grill."

Bob's outhouse hires some people to advertise that they want pirates dead. Bob's outhouse sets aside a bunch of cash for the endeavor.
Bob's outhouse hires Joe, Randall, and Jimmyjimbobob. Those three go out to spread the word of the bounties.

You go to Joe, Joe says there's a bounty. Joe gives you the info, and jots down your ship's kill logger identification code.
You go to Randall, Randall says there's a bounty. Randall gives you the info, and jots down your ship's kill logger identification code.
You go to Jimmyjimbobob, Jimmyjimbobob says there's a bounty. Jimmyjimbobob gives you the info, and jots down your ship's kill logger identification code.

You kill 25 pirates.

You head back to Joe, Joe says "good job, here's your pay."
You head back to Randall, Randall says "good job, here's your pay."
You head back to Jimmyjimbobob, Jimmyjimbobob says "good job, here's your pay."

You wish them good day, and head on your way.

A few weeks later, Bob's outhouse goes through their accounting records and gets ticked off at Joe, Randall, and Jimmyjimbobob.

You can't tell me pilots wouldn't be abusing the hell out of the bureaucracy working in their favor.


To Frontier:
I just wanna say, if you ever decide to change the way these missions work in the future, put an event in game FIRST where players who do the mission stacking get called out on it when cashing in the missions. Even if it's just the guy behind the register saying something like "good job, I don't think they're onto us."
There should be a grace period where the bureaucracy slowly wakes up to the realization of what players are doing.

Nice way of thinking aout it but the missions are not from diffenet peopel in ED. IN ED they all come from the same person.

Secondly, why od massacre missions exist at all? Don't you gte paid combat bonds by teh faction anyway? Isn't that the reward for fightingin the conflict. FD have already made an error by having the missions in the firts place... I think.. we'll I try to. I need a cuppa.

 

[Kyokushin]

Reloging is a cancer.

 

[StiTch]

Exploit? *shrugs* perhaps. I can fill out my missions in perhaps 2/3 refreshes of the board.

Is it wrong? Well, I've spent 5 mins gathering missions to get out into a warzone and fight for the faction. I exploited server mechanics to refresh my missions a couple of times and then spend an hour/two honing my skills and earning the pay associated with the missions. I then run back when I've gotten into a nasty PvP scrape or in my iCourier when I'm out of everything that needs restocking, turn in what I have completed, and pick up more missions from the board without switching.

So all in all 5 mins of "exploit" for an evening of earning my pay.

Meanwhile, people seem to have next to zero issue with spending half an hour stacking poo hauling missions so that they can travel 300 LY and hit "turn in" for the same massive credits. In fact they'll actively attack any disagreement with "well it's my game so you aren't allowed to care about it".

"Exploits" live everywhere in ED. It's what you make of them and the game as a whole. If you live the game off the back of exploits to watch your credit counter go up I will actively dismiss said CMDR's opinion on anything to do with combat, unless they show a miraculous moment of insight that goes beyond their general play habits. But I am happy to spend 5 mins populating my missions at the start of an evening of warfare, sometimes not even spending the whole evening in the one ship.

I will care about my initial CZ mission stacking when FD prove they can implement a sensible missions and method of naval ranking otherwise.

 

[Weps]

Does anyone actually know how this exploit effects the BGS? I mean, you stack these missions to kill 30 NPCs for a particular faction in conflict zone during a war - If you stacked 4 x 30 kills missions for the same faction, does the BGS see 120 NPCs killed when you hand in the mission? Would that not be breaking the BGS by unfairly counting kills towards a factions kill count in the conflict?

I'd assume the influence and reputation counters from each mission gets applied accordingly. This happens when you turn in the mission.

Meaning that if you take 30 identical missions, you will affect the BGS with 30 times the influence amount of one mission of that type.

Because this is a multiplayer online-only game with a shared persistent universe.

It is a single player game regardless how it technically reels out sounding otherwise to be

Your argument is so flawless it must be true. Which must mean that I was imagining things last, night when I was playing with some friends and going together against a group of other people.

 

[CylonSurfer]

I'd assume the influence and reputation counters from each mission gets applied accordingly. This happens when you turn in the mission.

Meaning that if you take 30 identical missions, you will affect the BGS with 30 times the influence amount of one mission of that type.

So its hardly something that is harmless and has no effect on other players. If a group is playing the BGS for a faction, their hard work could be undone by player using such an exploit?

 

[TheDarkLord]

Does anyone actually know how this exploit effects the BGS? I mean, you stack these missions to kill 30 NPCs for a particular faction in conflict zone during a war - If you stacked 4 x 30 kills missions for the same faction, does the BGS see 120 NPCs killed when you hand in the mission? Would that not be breaking the BGS by unfairly counting kills towards a factions kill count in the conflict?

The research groups that I'm connected with are of the opinion that civil wars are all about the number & value of combat bonds that you hand in. Taking (and stacking) massacre missions only affects you (the player) and your reputation with the local factions. This is because when a faction goes into war, mission completion no longer affects that faction's influence in the system. (As far as I'm aware - but am too preoccupied to look up at the minute - this has been confirmed by the devs). You cannot, for example, help your faction of choice to win a civil war by taking a delivery mission. You must kill their wartime opponents.

So, in your scenario, taking one mission to kill 30 enemies will have the same effect on the BGS as taking 20 missions to kill 1-30 enemies. Only the 30 enemies that you kill will count towards the faction's progress in the war. However, the additional 19 missions that you also take will help your credit balance and your own reputation with the faction.

 

[KR4K40]

The research groups that I'm connected with are of the opinion that civil wars are all about the number & value of combat bonds that you hand in. Taking (and stacking) massacre missions only affects you (the player) and your reputation with the local factions. This is because when a faction goes into war, mission completion no longer affects that faction's influence in the system. (As far as I'm aware - but am too preoccupied to look up at the minute - this has been confirmed by the devs). You cannot, for example, help your faction of choice to win a civil war by taking a delivery mission. You must kill their wartime opponents.

So, in your scenario, taking one mission to kill 30 enemies will have the same effect on the BGS as taking 20 missions to kill 1-30 enemies. Only the 30 enemies that you kill will count towards the faction's progress in the war. However, the additional 19 missions that you also take will help your credit balance and your own reputation with the faction.

If I understand this right then the only arguments against CZ stacking are "Bob's manager is a dumb moron to give several missions of the same type to the same guy" which can be seen through different angles and justified differently through the lore and the whole "wave of migratory players that follow wars and """ruin""" the BGS manipulation for everyone trying to play it" despite the fact that this kind of behavior is both realistic (private contractors do basically the same thing today) and has actually no unfair impact on the BGS at the individual level (i.e. one player stacking 20 missions does not have the influence 20 players with only 1 mission each would have)