Complaining about topside is cool
But topside is too soft and you're doing it wrong!

I acknowledge that my frustration here is likely greatly enhanced by what's been happening around here lately and may need to take a step back. But I do still want to express my frustration ...

The feedback and suggestions on how to improve the game are not personal. Some of us might think, "Hey. I resemble that comment!" That recognition is just an affirmation that the dynamic being spoken about exists. Nobody is a bad person for playing the game a certain way. Similarly, just because there are some people who are saying, "This way that the game is being played could be improved." That does not mean that those people are personally attacking anyone who happens to enjoy a particular style of game play.

The reality of topside is that ruthlessness unchecked and laid out for all to see demands people get pulled out of topside. This is a positive thing, in my view, and incredibly themely. A -lot- of dirty deals go down. A -lot- of mix oppression and manipulation takes place. A -ton- of corpies are cultivating mixers like pawns, some even willing ones. Why don't you hear about them? Likely because what you do hear about means that someone somewhere failed, possibly exposing themselves or their Corps. Or because your alt hasn't yet done the social engineering required (as a part of social PvP) to get invited into this world.

The perception is that there is a lack of combat topside. (At least, that is my take away from the topics in the last week.) Put another way, in the Mix there is a lot of obvious violent conflict and red text. There is also a lot of social conflict.

The perception, or even reality is that once characters "go topside" , the violent conflict more or less disappears. We don't have VS chemists shooting NLM stars outside of KMB. We don't even have PRI CorpSec shooting it out with VS CorpSec outside of SenseNet. We do not even have CorpSec shooting it out in the Mix.

There is the perception that "a lot of" combat characters are sitting topside not doing "combat" on anything close to a regular basis. Those characters are mechanically (skill / stat wise, cyber / nano wise, gear wise) the top tier combat characters in the game. The fact that they're sitting on the bench, scheming behind the scenes instead of leaning into their roles as combat machines rubs a portion of the playerbase the wrong way.

... topside is boring. It -is- boring on the surface level.

Also, its only fair to say that topside conflict is like playing chess. It can be a slow game.

The build up can take ages. It can also all fall apart, leaving you to rebuild.

This is the crux of the issue. Everything noted here is also available in the Mix. There's nothing magical about topside being like chess. There are factions in the Mix playing chess with each other. Factions trying to make their rivals look bad to their bosses. Factions tearing down people's reputation and making them socially radioactive to the point where "nobody" wants to RP with them.

To reiterate. That "social conflict" seems to be the only conflict topside. CorpSec is sitting on the bench. Corpos are "cultivating Mixers like pawns". (conflict through proxy, not direct conflict). Also "A -lot- of mix oppression and manipulation takes place. (the conflict is in the Mix, it's a byproduct of the social scheming. It is not topside.)

If there's a part of topside theme you want to see pushed then push it. You can do this whether or not you're topside.

This is contradictory. The issue that people are raising is that there is not enough combat / kinetic conflict affecting sectors other than Red.

One part of the player base is saying, "The lack of combat outside of Red is a feature. It's always been that way. That's the way "we" like it."

Another part of the player base is saying, "The lack of combat outside of Red is a bug. Direct corp on corp violent conflict is a key element of cyberpunk theme."

@papertiger suggests (paraphrasing)

If you want to see more violent conflict topside, then push that conflict. At the same time, it was also stated, Why don't you hear about them? Likely because what you do hear about means that someone somewhere failed, possibly exposing themselves or their Corps.

Does everyone see the contradiction there?

Go push what you want (violent conflict) top side.

vs

If anyone hears about the conflict, it's because the people doing the conflict failed.

My personal take on it is this.

Nobody gets a free ride in Withmore. Nobody is ever safe in Withmore. Right now it seems like once a character leaves the Mix and heads topside, they leave behind 99% of the violence. They trade the risk of violent death for the risk of losing their job, and being cast down to the Mix where violent death awaits them.

Nobody is suggesting that topside players can stop scheming, using Mixers as pawns, and being pricks to each other in an attempt to get people fired / force their fall from topside.

What I see in the various topics is the suggestion that we all (players and staff alike) take a long hard look at the shared agreement that "topside is safe from violence" because "that's the way it's always been." A key element of that is finding ways to get CorpSec engaged in combat more frequently.

Papertiger's complaint is far more about than only the complaints about lack of violence or actions for corporate security to take, it's about the general sentiment from players overall. If they cannot see if, they don't think it's happening. And that isn't true - just because your character isn't involved in a plot, conflict, tension, etc doesn't mean others aren't doing it. There are many topside characters moving around pieces topside and in the Mix. Funding people in both sectors. Mentoring people in both sectors.

The playstyles from mix to topside aren't the same and the aesthetics are also different. It's an important understanding when leveling out constructive criticism.

The reality is both sectors benefit players with different playstyles. If you're a person who thrives off being able to respond to visible stuff going on, something you can run to immediately, some random event of chaos - the Mix is a great playstyle for you.

But you if you need others to start something for you for you to keep interest in the game and playing, topside probably isn't 100% the best for you because it isn't going to be as visible, as in your face, and it isn't something you can run towards to watch all the time. You'll get bored and restless.

Naturally there's people of both playstyles who are outliers who do great in either sector, but like most things in games - everything is what you make of it. And it's vital to be honest with yourself about how you like to play and where you can thrive and if a role is actually bad or if it's just bad for -you-. That doesn't make you a bad person or a bad player, it just means you play a different way.

Which is precisely the point papertiger is making - people play different ways. THey play in their own unique ways which work for them and they try to involve others - it may not always work. But let people play the way they want to play. Just because a person is playing in a way that doesn't involve you or you don't know about doesn't mean it's a bad playstyle. Or that the players playing those way aren't doing anything.

Quiet doesn't mean inactive. And loud doesn't mean master of the plots and RP. Both can be intricately involved, or both could be doing nothing.

Some of the best corporate players in the last handful of years have been deemed as 'quiet' or 'do nothing', when they have done the most for mentoring and getting others involved and wanting people to have fun. Corporate play is generally a longer play, a longer journey. It takes a while to earn some trust and move into circles. That's the nature of politicking. Or in some cases, as they might say on The Challenge: polidicking.

I know I played topside many years ago, hated it, left and then came back a year later and absolutely blown away by the development in the meantime, even though I decided it wasn't for me personally. There is a ton of talent there, the best talent, it has a lot of important functions in the game in terms of serving playstyles, schedules, and personalities that the rest of the game really doesn't cater to at all. Especially, especially in terms of technical and creative and social/political archetypes which otherwise would have very little support.

And although I didn't personally like it, I actually think topside is superior to the Mix in design and mechanical implementation, superior in distinct faction design, superior in balance, and superior in making non-standard roles possible. I go on a lot about improving the Mix, but part of that is seeing what lessons were learned from topside and seeing which of those could be applied.

It was very cool. I did quit for about six months though, and just missed logging in by a couple of days. Character was reaped.

And now? I've learned ways to play this kind of chess game between mix/topside too. It's very very doable and yes, it often takes months to see the desired end result for a specific goal. And it can all fall apart too.

The play exists in and from any sector. If you're looking to play this way? I suggest pick an overarching goal. A broad target. Something like, "I want to convince as many mixers as possible that working for corporations without leaving the mix is flash money.".

Then break it down with smaller goals to achieve it. It's called reverse planning. Focus on individuals as targeted for good or bad biz. Avoid targeting entire entities (I.E. I'm going to destroy VS-999. Not, I'm going to bring down VS). Reach out to relevant topsiders. Build trust, eventually lay out the idea to your new chum. See how they can help and what you can both gain from it. Branch out. Let your rep with that person connect you to others. And remember that youre ultimately out for yourself. If you are.

Social maneuvering can involve a lot of things. Different approaches. Maybe you're openly sleazy with biz, but people work with you because you get results. Maybe you play bottom on the surface, accommodating and subservient, but scheme behind the mask. Dig for data and favors and work in ways that sound like you're doing -them- a favor. Figure out -how- your goal might benefit someone else and pitch it.

And above all else, remember that while corporate citizens might see a mixer as a tool and a pawn, they are no less of a disposable tool to you, whether they think it or not. They will absolutely seek to use you like a nice can of Osakasama before pitching you in the trash when your usefulness runs dry. But at the end of the day, a corporate citizen is just expensive beer to a lot of mixers.

But yeah, it exists. It's social intrigue and underhanded, shady, under the table biz. It's politicking and maneuvering and socially destroying or building someone up with knives in the back. Only your tongue is the sam sword that cleaves someone in two with some patsy's sword arm.

It took me years to start getting the hand of it, and requires a ton of patience and care, but it can be just as so so satisfying as sic prepping and taking gangers on rival turf.

As far as combat with corpsec...

I tend to see them as more like the KGB or Gestapo. Aside from typical violent crime against their corporation, their job isn't reeeally to fight.

Their primary task is to prevent violent action in the first place. Data sleuthing, detective work and preventative measures.

If they have to resort to violence as a defensive measure, then they've failed at their job somewhere.

Unless it was they that arranged the violence to come to them. Maybe for a show of force, etc.

I like the kidnapping thoughts, etc. That's very secret police of them too. And without being provoked first is even better. For the mentioned reasons.

Ideally, violence is a by product of corpsec scheming. For example, arrange a plot that targets a rival corporation and forces -them- to defend themselves, showing a lack of effective vigilance on their part.

If you find days suggesting a pending attack on your corporation, work to direct it elsewhere. Or to profit from it instead. The best violence is done on -your- terms, and that holds true for every sector.

Don't stop plots you uncover. Manipulate them to your advantage.

But my beef isn't with people who just want more combat. More combat, sure. If that's what interests people. My beef is with people who say topside players do nothing and that they aren't actually playing the game. Those who make blanket statements that topside is just dress up and moosex.

Only thing I'd suggest is that there's nothing wrong with NPCs guiding plot, but don't expect it. We all know our GMs are understaffed and overworked. But hey, if you want to work on a plot that they can jump on board and get the community involved in, there's a handy dandy submission right here...

https://www.sindome.org/bgbb/open-discussion/anything-really/player-plot-suggestion-form-1228/

In fact, @staff can we pin this one pls?

All I'm saying is people with combat sheets, and combat gear... Aren't stopped from doing combat. They're not doing combat because they don't want to do combat. They want to roleplay... And occasionally do combat or have the threat of combat there. No offense to anyone, but Sindome's combat isn't exactly riveting. It's usually one-sided and quite uninteractive, I think you'd be surprised at how many combat characters you'll find actually don't care for combat that much. You've got the Hall, you've got corpsec, security positions at businesses, there's plenty of room for combat. But the mix is right there, if you just want to throw UE at each other and kill people for loot. That's what it's there for. You have corp projects, stock market, lowered prices all around the game, more incentive than ever for corporate conflict, if people aren't doing it, it's because they don't want to do it, it really is quite as simple as that. And as I've stated, people do conflict, it just doesn't get physical all the while and that fine. It's designed that way.

And for the record, I don't think the mix is dull, I was just parroting what I've seen people say in these threads. I think ganging is the best designed system in the game, going as far as to say that if you're playing in the mix and not ganging, you're essentially kneecapping yourself. Do I think a ganging-like system topside is wanted, though? Not at all. Homogenization is a dangerous thing and the mix/topside should never work similarly. If corpsec are bored and feel like they have nothing to do or they want to get into combat or conflict, they should seek tutoring. The opportunities are there. What I will say is that topside suffers a lot from a lack of mentors. But if the drive was there, you wouldn't need mentors, the truth is, most of topside likes the status quo, the stability, the lack of violence. That's why they're there to begin with. This is where we disagree. This obsession with combat and redtext isn't nearly as widespread as you're making it out to be, and pushing topside into that (even at no 'expense of other content', which I think we both know is an impossibility) would just drive people away from it, just the same as making the mix more safe and peaceful would drive the players there away from it.