Wing fights in a lightning cloud

Riverside

Riverside
Morbad said:
While I can certainly see the positives, I am rather dismayed by the further trivialization of logistical concerns.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but you don't have to use them and as far as friendly fights like the one in the OP are concerned it also removes issues with local law enforcement by allowing fights to happen in any empty system (and with a cool backdrop too :)) rather than relying on any particular system to remain lawless so players can practice unhindered.
 

Morbad

Morbad
Riverside said:
Agreed, but you don't have to use them and as far as friendly fights like the one in the OP are concerned it also removes issues with local law enforcement by allowing fights to happen in any empty system (and with a cool backdrop too :)) rather than relying on any particular system to remain lawless so players can practice unhindered.
Click to expand...

I fully recognize that this helps organized PvP.

The issue isn't with being able to opt out, it's that having the option renders some forms of gameplay I'd have liked to see more of moot. If you can put a portable full-service station anywhere, all of that stuff that one would need to be self-sufficient when in the middle of nowhere doesn't make any sense anymore, thus eliminating a set of constraints that drove certain kinds of gameplay. Admittedly, this gameplay was already rare, but it wasn't completely absent, with DW2/DG2 being a semi-recent example. That experience would have been very different if there were a string of FCs along the entire route and thus little potential for attrition and less need for redundancy or compromise.
 

Riverside

Riverside
All I see is racing drivers excuses Morbad, sorry.

We could use a mutual friend's carrier & I'll happily transfer enough funds to you so you can buy your own. I think a static, secret pirate's cove would be right up your street ;)

But I also know you wouldn't accept the cash.
 

Morbad

Morbad
Riverside said:
All I see is racing drivers excuses Morbad, sorry.

We could use a mutual friend's carrier & I'll happily transfer enough funds to you so you can buy your own. I think a static, secret pirate's cove would be right up your street ;)

But I also know you wouldn't accept the cash.
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you think I've said, because there is no scenario where my CMDR having or using a carrier would result in the gameplay I just expressed desire for.

I would love an organic conflict, with organic incentives, where even reaching the theater of war was an uncertainty, an adventure. The faster and easier it is to travel and resupply, the harder it is for this to happen, or for it make any sense.

DW2 was a bit contrived, and even then travel was a bit too easy, but I used it as an example as there were meaningful trade-offs...the more combat capable I made my ship, the more difficult it was to get around and keep up. My CMDR's opponents were operating under similar constraints, which increased the depth of the challenge as this wasn't a series of pitch battle with carefully balance ships, but a testament to the creativity and hardship the combatants were willing to go through before battle was even joined.

Organized fights, while interesting from time to time, are generally not the challenges I enjoy most. A fleet carrier is a great platform to take those organized fights to interesting new venues, as Barnard's example shows, but their very existence is another nail in the coffin for what I was referring to.
 

Riverside

Riverside
Morbad said:
I fully recognize that this helps organized PvP.
Click to expand...

Much as you stated here, I can reciprocate Morbad. We both understand the pros & cons, and neither of us owns a carrier (although I may get one), more or less by choice rather than because they are out of reach.

We both also share the same basic view that the sense of achievement is generally diminished, but that Carriers also allow different emergent scenarios.

If I am in competition with another player or group of players, I can choose to use tools available to me to my advantage. Playing in group or solo is an option, using a carrier either simply for bulk transport or as a way to evade a blockade is also an option. Like you, they are options I choose not to make use of (usually, for now, other caveats are available) which allows the racing drivers excuse (if I lose) that my opposition only won because X (implying they are lesser mortals as a result).

So emergent interactions can still happen between those that are looking for it (and I would include myself in this category).
 

Deleted member 192138

D
Morbad said:
I would love an organic conflict, with organic incentives, where even reaching the theater of war was an uncertainty, an adventure. The faster and easier it is to travel and resupply, the harder it is for this to happen, or for it make any sense.
Click to expand...
This game has never really supported organic conflict very well unfortunately. Due to timezones, instancing and sheer space/quantity of numbers. In the big bubble at least, the chances of two player factions entering into conflict, both focused on the same system, both being in open, both being on the same platform, both being in the same timezone and both being up for a fight is a pretty unusual occurrence. When organic conflicts do happen the circumstances usually end up contrived or agreed upon in advance. Then after that the conflict between players is meaningless for winning as it doesn't prevent the real push on the conflict zones happening in a private group.

The only really organic conflict is around natural player hubs, in which the conflict itself is meaningless but at least the footfall in the area makes fights possible.

In the absence of anything else, I'll take the bonus for being able to at least have aesthetically pleasing fights made easier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom