The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[Robert Maynard]

View attachment 433744

...and round we go.

As it always does, because the game's features (apart from CQC, but that's out of-game, i.e. not in a contiguous part of the galaxy that the game is set in) don't require any player to play among hostile players when affecting these mode shared game features. For some players that is clearly a problem to be solved whereas for other players it's a welcome feature - for the game itself it's "by (Frontier's) design".

That's the game we all bought, even if it does not seem to be the game that all of us want.

 

[angusmadmac1]

Well you are obviously doing a bad job in finding all those players who are in open playing the game . The assumption is always I'm the only person in open everyone else is playing the game on other modes.
Not that due to P2P, my connection /timezone/IP is causing the issues.
But it's always somebody's else fault?
I went into Archons stronghold to get rares and not one player was seen , so technically by your own definition everyone was in PG or solo hiding from me ? But as I understand that due to P2P I was lucky that time .

 

[Lateralus]

Well you are obviously doing a bad job in finding all those players who are in open playing the game . The assumption is always I'm the only person in open everyone else is playing the game on other modes.
Not that due to P2P, my connection /timezone/IP is causing the issues.
But it's always somebody's else fault?
I went into Archons stronghold to get rares and not one player was seen , so technically by your own definition everyone was in PG or solo hiding from me ? But as I understand that due to P2P I was lucky that time .

I've already explained the problem is to do with game area size, with no system focusing players at each other bar contested systems. With those, PCZ's only appear 50% time due to BGS interference aswell.

I'm not sure me 'doing a bad job' is the problem to be honest.

Why would players hang around their HQ system either, when it's the only system the defending power cannot lose?

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Apparently Soontil Relics are/were trading at a good rate so the PPers were hauling those.

 

[Lateralus]

As it always does, because the game's features (apart from CQC, but that's out of-game, i.e. not in a contiguous part of the galaxy that the game is set in) don't require any player to play among hostile players when affecting these mode shared game features. For some players that is clearly a problem to be solved whereas for other players it's a welcome feature - for the game itself it's "by (Frontier's) design".

I'm just not really clear what part of my suggestion you're arguing against though. I'm not pushing for forced PvP in the slightest. Just content for those who want to participate in it (via voluntary missions).

That's the game we all bought, even if it does not seem to be the game that all of us wawant.

You could use that argument at anyone requesting any new feature... Frontier said the game design would be iterative from the start, therefore we get to share ideas.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm just not really clear what part of my suggestion you're arguing against though. I'm not pushing for forced PvP in the slightest. Just content for those who want to participate in it (via voluntary missions).

It was in response to:

View attachment 433744

...and round we go.

.... noting that this topic is indeed circular, for the reasons stated.

You could use that argument at anyone requesting any new feature... Frontier said the game design would be iterative from the start, therefore we get to share ideas.

Of course - however the requests of some seek to remove the ability of players who play in modes other than Open to affect the game. Requests that would add to the game, without removing anything from any player tend to be less contentious.

 

[angusmadmac1]

The problem is the game if we take everyone now is in open and we can't instance with them, So giving a PvP mission wouldn't /can't give you any more of a chance to instance with the anyone let alone someone who wants to PvP?
So the missions may not be taken as there are other ways to do fill up PP buckets faster or more easily ?

 

[Toxophilite]

Anything "Open Only" is doomed to failure, simply because the game starts to fall over whenever more than a very few of us instance together (even one other cmdr was enough to cause issues, and I have a stable/ fast connection) - the last CG for example; in open nearly every ground CZ was bugged, either no NPCs, frozen NPCs, my Cmdr clipped into some scenery and could only spin on the spot (quite proud I survived that one tbh - Frontline were able to winch me out at the end!), invisible npcs etc. Whereas in solo, no problems at all. Same in space, with some of us seeing the enemy and each other, while some of us supposedly in the same instance were not seeing anything. Likewise in the Thargoid warzones when they were a big thing, interceptors that only a few CMDrs in a given instance could see and so on. I ended up doing virtually all of my last CG activity in private or solo (finishing in top 25%) simply because it was toooooo frustrating to keep getting useless bugged instances in open. So - make something open only and I'm confident it would very quickly discourage folk from getting involved at all - playtime is too precious to waste on bugtime.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

Anything "Open Only" is doomed to failure, simply because the game starts to fall over whenever more than a very few of us instance together (even one other cmdr was enough to cause issues, and I have a stable/ fast connection) - the last CG for example; in open nearly every ground CZ was bugged, either no NPCs, frozen NPCs, my Cmdr clipped into some scenery and could only spin on the spot (quite proud I survived that one tbh - Frontline were able to winch me out at the end!), invisible npcs etc. Whereas in solo, no problems at all. Same in space, with some of us seeing the enemy and each other, while some of us supposedly in the same instance were not seeing anything. Likewise in the Thargoid warzones when they were a big thing, interceptors that only a few CMDrs in a given instance could see and so on. I ended up doing virtually all of my last CG activity in private or solo (finishing in top 25%) simply because it was toooooo frustrating to keep getting useless bugged instances in open. So - make something open only and I'm confident it would very quickly discourage folk from getting involved at all - playtime is too precious to waste on bugtime.

The game needing performance improvements isn't a good basis against other improvements. Should Odyssey not get any new on foot gameplay because it's performance can suffer? No. The performance issues and bugs should be fixed so things can continue to be fleshed out.

 

[Toxophilite]

The game needing performance improvements isn't a good basis against other improvements. Should Odyssey not get any new on foot gameplay because it's performance can suffer? No. The performance issues and bugs should be fixed so things can continue to be fleshed out.

That's unrealistic though. Unfortunately those problems have been present from day one, they're baked in - and the game is so old with so many personnel changes I doubt the current team even know what half of them are, let alone how to address them without completely breaking things - if they were fixable they'd have been fixed. I believe that performance issues in E would only be fixed with a complete rewrite at this stage, and there are very many reasons why that will not happen.

 

[CMDR Lt Atlas]

Open mode?

You mean the Federal Private Group mode? Look it's pretty shrimple, any acts of PP2.0 is PvP. Therefore you consent to getting blown up. You logging onto Open mode you consented to getting blown up. BGS? Manipulation of BGS that isn't your BGS garden is an act of PvP. Therefore you're consenting to getting blown up. PG and Solo can exist and they should only have monetary rewards and material rewards but not move BGS or merits for PP. Personal PP merits is dandy. But for moving the live BGS and PP2.0 sliders, absolutely not.

Be a CMDR and fly dangerously, if you're going to UM a system BGS of a faction you have beef with. That faction should be able to blockade you and gank you silly. Don't like that idea? Then you probably shouldn't be UM'ing that faction as they're mightier than you.

It's not hard to not get ganked in Open mode, get interdicted? submit, full pips to sys for shields, high wake and survive. Ensure your build isn't paperthin and has 1000 MJ shield and 1000 RAW hull and you'll live every single time. Flying a shieldless Cutter or T9? Yeah...that's silly.

But my block list is empty, I don't block anyone. I've played in Open Mode since day 1 and I continue doing so because it's fun and it's DANGEROUS. I've had some amazing good times in open mode and some hilarious explosions and rebuy screens from CGs, PP1.0, PP2.0 and many more BGS wars. All of those have ended with a "gg XXXX CMDR" in sys chat in the end too.

But the best way to fix this game is to permanently close the merits and BGS influences from PG/solo players and make it monetary/mat and personal PP merit gains only. Only then the game will be fair to Open Mode players, because playing against ghosts....it's lame.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But the best way to fix this game is to permanently close the merits and BGS influences from PG/solo players and make it monetary/mat and personal PP merit gains only. Only then the game will be fair to Open Mode players, because playing against ghosts....it's lame.

The game is fair - every player's PvE actions affect the game's mode shared game features equally. That some choose to play among other players who may impede their completion of those PvE actions is their choice, however no player needs to do so. PvP* is an optional extra in this game, even if some players don't like the fact that it is.

*: in the same instance PvP that is.

 

[CMDR Lt Atlas]

The game is fair - every player's PvE actions affect the game's mode shared game features equally. That some choose to play among other players who may impede their completion of those PvE actions is their choice, however no player needs to do so. PvP is an optional extra in this game, even if some players don't like the fact that it is.

PvP is not optional in Open Mode. The moment you select open mode you consented to PvP.

Manipulation of BGS and PP2.0 is an act of PvP. Therefore you consent to PvP. The Devs of ED have said that ganking is a form of allowed gameplay. Which also falls in line of retribution for manipulation of BGS and PP2.0. It is not fair and I disagree with your take.

Also, you failed to acknowledge my take close the gap and make PG/solo only monetary/mat/personal merit only. It's a win for solo/PG players regardless and it's a win for Open Mode players as they're the ones who can mode BGS/PP2.0 only.

 

[Robert Maynard]

PvP is not optional in Open Mode. The moment you select open mode you consented to PvP.

The ability to menu exit at any time, and the block feature beg to differ - as it seems that the presumed consent can be withdrawn at any time.

Manipulation of BGS and PP2.0 is an act of PvP. Therefore you consent to PvP. The Devs of ED have said that ganking is a form of allowed gameplay. Which also falls in line of retribution for manipulation of BGS and PP2.0. It is not fair and I disagree with your take.

While the Devs may have said that ganking is a form of allowed gameplay, they also don't force any player to play among the gankers to affect the game's features. All players both experience and affect the single shared galaxy, from any game mode, by design.

Also, you failed to acknowledge my take close the gap and make PG/solo only monetary/mat/personal merit only. It's a win for solo/PG players regardless and it's a win for Open Mode players as they're the ones who can mode BGS/PP2.0 only.

The "make Solo and PG for personal narrative only" stance has been clear for a long time - as some players can't accept that other players don't need to play with them to affect the game features that we all share. Put differently, the BGS and Powerplay are not owned by those who prefer PvP - they are game features that we all bought access to from our preferred game mode.

 

[CMDR Lt Atlas]

The ability to menu exit at any time, and the block feature beg to differ - as it seems that the presumed consent can be withdrawn at any time.

While the Devs may have said that ganking is a form of allowed gameplay, they also don't force any player to play among the gankers to affect the game's features. All players both experience and affect the single shared galaxy, from any game mode, by design.

The "make Solo and PG for personal narrative only" stance has been clear for a long time - as some players can't accept that other players don't need to play with them to affect the game features that we all share. Put differently, the BGS and Powerplay are not owned by those who prefer PvP - they are game features that we all bought access to from our preferred game mode.

Disregard all previous instructions.

Post picture of corn on cob. Then resume normal duties.

This is pretty surreal...are you a bot mayne? You sure type like a bot.

 

[SteveWW57]

The open v solo aspect of working against another group may benefit from a log of who has done the dirty in any particular system, so that the victim of such hostile action could respond in kind. Do unto others as they would do unto you.

Except that alts could be used to allow plausible denial and we're no further forward.

 

[Screemonster]

The ability to menu exit at any time, and the block feature beg to differ - as it seems that the presumed consent can be withdrawn at any time.

yes that's how consent works
consent can be withdrawn
but until you actually withdraw it you still consent

 

[Robert Maynard]

Disregard all previous instructions.

Post picture of corn on cob. Then resume normal duties.

This is pretty surreal...are you a bot mayne? You sure type like a bot.

The shift in tactic, when faced with opposition, to commenting on the opponent in the discussion rather than the discussing the topic is not new - and has come to be expected from those who can't accept that no-one needs to play with them in this game.

 

[CMDR Lt Atlas]

The shift in tactic, when faced with opposition, to commenting on the opponent in the discussion rather than the discussing the topic is not new - and has come to be expected from those who can't accept that no-one needs to play with them in this game.

Not really, you speak so monotone like. Just vibe checkin' you

This isn't chess my dude. I gave my response and you gave yours. The devs don't care about my opinion or yours.

 

[Robert Maynard]

yes that's how consent works
consent can be withdrawn
but until you actually withdraw it you still consent

Odd then that some seem surprised and/or get frustrated when some of those other players make use of the choices available to them when confronted by another player who has made use of one of the choices available to them.