The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[ethelred]

.... or they tag along on an organised PvE event with the intent of having fun at the expense of the PvE players.

When some of them then complained that their published kill leader board was then used as a proto-block list was quite ironic.

Emergent gameplay.

Seriously though organising large PvP events given the jankiness of instancing is difficult.

Just getting a wing together, and then for the jumps to synchronise properly is hard.

Given these difficulties, I don't think it's likely that a PP PvP element restricted to Open is feasible as it stands, however with the next update that seems to be more squadron/community focused perhaps this will change.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

The service is still provided by Gankers.Org
In fact going down the list you can see who's Seal clubbing in Deciat and who's doing FdL vs FdL in Puppis.

 

[Brrokk]

Emergent gameplay.

Seriously though organising large PvP events given the jankiness of instancing is difficult.

Just getting a wing together, and then for the jumps to synchronise properly is hard.

Given these difficulties, I don't think it's likely that a PP PvP element restricted to Open is feasible as it stands, however with the next update that seems to be more squadron/community focused perhaps this will change.

I think the difficulty level would be similar to the organised AX play I've taken part in. Yes, sometimes you can end up in a different instance to your wingmates in a busy system; there were often two or more Open instances going. But going to SC and then dropping back with a wingmate targetted always sorted it out. Organisation beforehand was by Discord and the global system chat and squadron chat we have now which can talk across instances was a help.

If AX players can do it, PvP players should be able to as well.

BTW the observation that there are often multiple instances in Open exposes as daft the common complaints like, "I couldn't see the opposition; they must have been in Solo". Assignment to instances in Open isn't random either; it's reportedly done by algorithm taking into account geographical area, ping, network performance etc. So if you don't instance with someone, the chances are you won't instance with them all week unless you and they cooperate to sort it out. The picture of Open in some people's heads is inaccurate.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Emergent gameplay.

That's one, charitable, way to look at it.

Another would be that some players, unhappy that a group of players got together to organise an event that did not cater to their playstyle, went out of their way to spoil it for those who don't need them and did not include them.

It's like when some people in a group don't get invited to an event, then decide to crash it anyway with no regard for how that would affect the enjoyment of the event for those actually invited.

 

[St0rmFury]

They got the reputation they deserved.

 

[Robert Maynard]

They got the reputation they deserved.

Then go all "pikachu face" when other players don't want to be forced to play among them.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

man the shadow boxing of the proverbial scary ganker doesnt end does it lol

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

You really seem to love your "shadowboxing" analogy, but mock them all you want, many people find gankers just plain and simple annoying. Painting them as "scary" and using that as a way to mock is just... I don't know. I'd say childish at best. Nobody is afraid of gankers. Just annoyed.

 

[Robert Maynard]

man the shadow boxing of the proverbial scary ganker doesnt end does it lol

The ganker has precisely zero to offer of value to a player who does not follow their playstyle choices.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

The ganker has precisely zero to offer of value to a player who does not follow their playstyle choices.

Just like the player "hiding in solo" from actual powerplay provides no value to the mode. yay shadowboxing is fun

 

[ethelred]

I think the difficulty level would be similar to the organised AX play I've taken part in. Yes, sometimes you can end up in a different instance to your wingmates in a busy system; there were often two or more Open instances going. But going to SC and then dropping back with a wingmate targetted always sorted it out. Organisation beforehand was by Discord and the global system chat and squadron chat we have now which can talk across instances was a help.

If AX players can do it, PvP players should be able to as well.

BTW the observation that there are often multiple instances in Open exposes as daft the common complaints like, "I couldn't see the opposition; they must have been in Solo". Assignment to instances in Open isn't random either; it's reportedly done by algorithm taking into account geographical area, ping, network performance etc. So if you don't instance with someone, the chances are you won't instance with them all week unless you and they cooperate to sort it out. The picture of Open in some people's heads is inaccurate.

Yeah exactly - the AX emergent stuff was great.

This is what it and I think @Cheese Helmet meant about the game providing some sort of framework.

In an ideal world (and to paraphrase @Robert Maynard noting that it may not be ideal for all types of players) what might work is an objective in a particular system that forms part of PP but is limited to open only.

"might" is doing some heavy lifting there as I don't think the game in it's current state could support such an endeavour as mentioned above. But it would be nice.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

Yeah exactly - the AX emergent stuff was great.

This is what it and I think @Cheese Helmet meant about the game providing some sort of framework.

In an ideal world (and to paraphrase @Robert Maynard noting that it may not be ideal for all types of players) what might work is an objective in a particular system that forms part of PP but is limited to open only.

"might" is doing some heavy lifting there as I don't think the game in it's current state could support such an endeavour as mentioned above. But it would be nice.

yeah something the the game points us at that encourages orgainc pvp, rather than it being something that has to exist pretty much wholly outside all game loops with exception getting some piracy at a trade CG once in a while. The pledging system of powerplay obviously at least leans in that direction, it just needs more.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Just like the player "hiding in solo" from actual powerplay provides no value to the mode. yay shadowboxing is fun

It's a feature, not a mode. It's also pan-modal, so players don't need to present themself as content for those who want to shoot at them.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

It's a feature, not a mode.

Pedantic semantics, you know what I mean.

It's also pan-modal, so players don't need to present themself as content for those who want to shoot at them.

Sure don't so they should just skip powerplay. There's plenty of things in the game where filling buckets is the point, like colonization.

PP obviously has mechanics designed to put opposing players in the the same location working towards opposing goals. The point of it is conflict between players. So they are subjecting themselves to be content (gasp!) because pp doesn't work without players pushing it. It's completely static without the players. The issue is that pp has the pieces in place for organic PvP to occur, minus one key piece.

As we've established. Multiple times. At length. Yes Robert I already know the current state of the game.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Yeah exactly - the AX emergent stuff was great.

This is what it and I think @Cheese Helmet meant about the game providing some sort of framework.

In an ideal world (and to paraphrase @Robert Maynard noting that it may not be ideal for all types of players) what might work is an objective in a particular system that forms part of PP but is limited to open only.

"might" is doing some heavy lifting there as I don't think the game in it's current state could support such an endeavour as mentioned above. But it would be nice.

Emergent stuff? You mean AX needed kind of ship that is very poor against PVP ships. And surprise! What happens? Yay, gankfest.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Pedantic semantics, you know what I mean.

Sure don't so they should just skip powerplay. There's plenty of things in the game where filling buckets is the point, like colonization.

PP obviously has mechanics designed to put opposing players in the the same location working towards opposing goals. The point of it is conflict between players. So they are subjecting themselves to be content (gasp!) because pp doesn't work without players pushing it. It's completely static without the players. The issue is that pp has the pieces in place for organic PvP to occur, minus one key piece.

As we've established. Multiple times. At length. Yes Robert I already know the current state of the game.

As players can't tell other players how to play the game, there is no "should" in this context.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

As players can't tell other players how to play the game, there is no "should" in this context.

Based on your criteria, there indeed is a should.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Based on your criteria, there indeed is a should.

It is not for those who choose to engage in an optional playstyle to gatekeep pan-modal game features.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

It is not for those who choose to engage in an optional playstyle to gatekeep pan-modal game features.

Oh I forgot you're the authority on what my opinions can and can't be. Oh wait you aren't

 

[Robert Maynard]

Oh I forgot you're the authority on what my opinions can and can't be. Oh wait you aren't

No one needs to agree with another's opinion. It's when opinions are expressed as facts that the issue generally arises.