Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread [See new thread]

[Jockey79]

Yes - that could!

However, all kills made in the PvP arena can't transfer to Solo or Open or affect your Elite rating. After all, a gated arena is safe mode as you can't be disturbed or interdicted by NPC's or other players. You can't even scoop cargo, earn credits, be in a group, or do anything at all apart from mindlessly pew-pew in a 64k radius of a station.

Oh that could be so much fun - but the pew-pew-crew would hate it

too funny !! I'd rep but it wont let me

speaking of which, this thread is going too swimmingly, where are they all?

You know, I thought I was enjoying myself - I hadn't even noticed they'd gone :S

 

[Beetlebum]

Its one big server set.

I know and I don't demand that to change.

Now maybe there could be some sort of flag that allowed people to join an Open+ mode only if they'd never been in Solo mode, that would probably be possible, but you'd be next to all alone in there. Almost nobody would play in that, you might as well play Solo.

I don't think so. There are a lot of people who dislike the fact, that people switch between open and solo as they like. I read it too many times on the forums.

 

[Jockey79]

No disrespect, but these mods need to really lighten up and back off. The "thread merge" fetish and "thought policing" has got to stop. And why the rules? Is it so important to control what we think and how we express it? Who cares if multiple threads are spawned, that's simply an indication of how pervasive/important an issue is to the community.

We paid for the game and participate in the community. Let us have discussions we want and how we want. If no one is disrespecting the community or individuals, I don't see the benefit of the draconian moderation practices.

Other threads for this topic just fall in to a basic insulting spree after about 5 pages and last for around 50 - 60 pages before getting locked for breach of forum rules and infractions given out.
This is not "thought" policing, it is keeping the forums tidy and not full of locked threads.
And, while I would like to label people who are (in my opinion) clear griefers asking for new ways to be mean to others, that is an insulting term and not helpful.
So they are right in banning the insulting terms used by both sides - in real life (in the UK) we have laws on Breach of the Peace and Public order, to help maintain an environment for everyone, no reason the forums of any game be any different,
they are for everyone - not just those with foul mouths and fast fingers (oh er!)

 

[maxcorwyn]

If the devs don't want to change the game modes, and I fear they won't, they should at least tweak the mechanic to switch between them.

For starters: switching between solo, group and open play should only be allowed while being docked at the station. With a cooldown of lets say 5-10 minutes?

 

[snotface]

After 18 pages of the same complaining about Solo mode being easire than open mode I still find myself a little confused as to why it Clearly Upsets so many people who believe wrongly that being in solo is a beniefit.

Open mode players get, More credits for pirate kills, More pirates to kill and a lot more things to shoot at.

Where as

Solo players have to suffer with less money from pirates and have to haul all of the time just to make some money.


I have spent all day in open mode and tested out the theory that Solo players benefit for not playing Open play.

I have managed to make well over 3.5 million on pirate kills including missions to kill Anacondas, Best kill price 110k. had a nice 79k python and about 7-8 30k-45k Asps. I have upgraded my ship and it costs a boomb if it goes to the space ship heaven in the sky.

I build up this ship mostly in solo just hauling because anything else is worthless until you can kill 100k bounties in Solo, which are much harder than on Open play. Best ever pay out on Solo is 29K from an Anaconda and about 50k for a real nasty python.

I can PVP in open or just solo. I have seen more people today, about 20 max, then I have since the start of the game. Open may as well be Solo because there isn't anybody around.

I do not understand why after 18 pages of the same complaints we are always at the same answer, exclude solo players from playing on Open server. This clearly is not the answer and making a different server for it is not cost effective.

I have to ask myself why all of these nice people are so jealous of other people who are enjoying the game the way they want to play it. It makes no sense at all.

If you believe somebody is cheating because they play in solo, or believe they are taking away your fun as you cannot kill them, you are clearly mislead by the things people tell each other. If I said that I had a 300 k bounty kill in Solo will everybody instantly believe it without hard evidence, I think not, but that is what has happened so far in this game.

I have not met an aggressive play in game yet, and have really enjoyed my day in open, but I have a right to play this game however I wish to play it, just like everybody else. You cannot remove my right to play on either game modes just because I take away the opportunity for you to attack me
I have posted this in red because people tend to not read what people say or just argue about things which do not matter, for example the open & solo debate. Lets just stop the arguing about which way people want to play because its only a bit of code after all.

 

[Jockey79]

If the devs don't want to change the game modes, and I fear they won't, they should at least tweak the mechanic to switch between them.

For starters: switching between solo, group and open play should only be allowed while being docked at the station. With a cooldown of lets say 5-10 minutes?

As has been shown, the word "freely" was used to describe mode switching. Plus people cannot always get to a station to do it, one guy posted a screen shot yesterday of him being 17,000+Ly from Sol.. no stations out there.

 

[eeps]

one guy posted a screen shot yesterday of him being 17,000+Ly from Sol.. no stations out there.

wth was he doin out there? .. he needs his own mode .. 'lost'

 

[maxcorwyn]

As has been shown, the word "freely" was used to describe mode switching. Plus people cannot always get to a station to do it, one guy posted a screen shot yesterday of him being 17,000+Ly from Sol.. no stations out there.

No need to switch modes either.

 

[chagnampra]

Erm, to quote myself (sorry) from another thread ... (I just thought it was relevant to the discussion):

I started off playing in Beta in solo mode, while I got to grips with the game, but then quickly reverted to open play. Most of that time, I'm happy to say, has been more enjoyable.

I decided to only trade in a defensible ship (in my case, a Cobra initially, and now an Asp) due to the constant threat of being pirated on my rare trade route (especially around Lave, Leesti, Orrere, etc - surprise, surprise). I wanted to be able to defend myself, should the worst happen. Occasionally, NPC pirates would interdict me, but escaping them wasn't especially hard. However, my encounters with other CMDRs have been mostly thrilling.

The first pirate player to interdict me asked me to help him provide for his 6 kids! Hmm, I was not feeling overly sympathetic or generous, so quickly boosted away. Due to being mass locked, that wasn't so easy... So, several laser blasts and shield cells later, I was unfortunately only left with 53% of my hull; but I escaped and was also left with the feeling of a moral victory ("What's mine is mine, pirate!"), the sound of my heart pumping in my ears and the feeling that I had experienced something truly different and special.

I do understand the argument that trading in open play is a risk and, quite possibly, an unnecessary one, since everyone has the choice to play open or solo. However, I would suggest that playing in open play is potentially the most rewarding way to do it (and I'm not talking credits). Sure, it could depend partly on what ship a player is flying, how defensible it is and how much he stands to lose, should the worst happen. If he is flying a fairly weedy hauler or poorly defended transport ship with an expensive cargo, that risk would seem to be too much. It would certainly shred my nerves if I had sunk a lot of time, effort and in-game credits into a trading run that was in danger of being wasted by a random act of violence, or even an accident. Yet, this is still part of the experience.

Trading under these circumstances gains something in open play - that feeling of uncertainty while travelling, of adrenalin while barely escaping a would-be pirate and the relief of reaching your destination and the safety of a station. Of course, there may be frustration too, but such is life - we can't have it all our own way, I guess.

Plus, if a particular location seems to be a haven for players trying to spoil the fun, it could be advisable to move to a different part of the Galaxy. After all, it's a big playing field.

TL : DR - don't give up on open play. Solo play has its merits and I am glad it exists, but open play (and, indeed, private groups) adds something to the experience of Elite Dangerous that can be truly memorable.

(Edited slightly for clarification)

Fly safely,
CMDR Ed Geiger

 

[ReaperAlex]

once i got to the point where i understood the ship i undocked in might never redock i found pvp a lot less stressful and a lot more fun. i learnt that in eve after being burnt as a newbie and hiding in safe space for 2 years. now i've got over that fear games like this feel a lot more alive. ship destruction in eve is far more damaging on your assets, so while elite is more dangerous it's also far more casual with it's approach to loss.

so i've been playing open since day 1 knowing the excitement it can bring. i know one day a commander will take me out, but so far they have tried and failed.

 

[Zenicetus]

No disrespect, but these mods need to really lighten up and back off. The "thread merge" fetish and "thought policing" has got to stop. And why the rules? Is it so important to control what we think and how we express it? Who cares if multiple threads are spawned, that's simply an indication of how pervasive/important an issue is to the community.

If it were a new topic, I might agree. I don't know how new you are to the game, but when I came in on Beta 1 somewhere last July, these same topics asking for fundamental changes in the game were popping up on the forums. That happened all the way through the Beta period, and it's still happening post-release.

I think it's reasonable to cut the mods some slack at this point, for merging threads that have been discussed to death since last Summer with no impact on the actual game that we're all playing.

The censorship is over the top and needs to stop. Not sure if this is a UK culture thing, but in America, we generally frown upon people trying to control our right to express ourselves respectfully.

I'm an American too (technically a USA citizen, so as not to upset our neighbors), and I understand the right to free speech under our Constitution. I also understand how that doesn't apply to private company forums. You and I are free to stand on a soabox in the town square in public and rant all we want (under certain definite limitations, like not shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater), but that has nothing to do with the right of private companies to control speech on their public forums.

Even ignoring the fact that Frontier is a UK company, if they were based in Silicon Valley they'd have the same legal right to merge threads and control speech here. As these things go, it's one of the most well-run game forums I've seen.

 

[scoda]

Erm, to quote myself (sorry) from another thread ... (I just thought it was relevant to the discussion):

(Edited slightly for clarification)

Fly safely,
CMDR Ed Geiger

My thoughts exactly when I experienced trading in Open Play also.. So much more enjoyable in my case..

 

[eeps]

freedom of speech shouldnt be mis-interpreted as 'freedom to inspire hate' or 'hate speech' or 'abusing others' .. which was what was happening in other solo/group/open threads.

bravo to the mods for creating a vortex for this discussion, and moderating it effectively. so many times similar threads have been closed due to personal attacks (some even called me a 'nerd' , oooh cutting), and thus the topic never got a full airing.

by creating this thread (possible threadnaught) all the discussion can be in one place and can be free from blatant negativity. nothing to do with free speech and all that malarkey, just a way of keeping the peace so the topic can be addressed in full.

there is a similar thread with a poll attached to it, which was not merged into here .. go have a brief look .. pick any page .. see if you can find a page where someone isnt flaming/abusing/belittling/insulting another member. I'd happily quote an example or two, but things are still so clean and shiny in here, and real discussion is taking place, and there's no internet tough guy looming with his flamethrower .. (although its almost knock-off time in Australia, so the flaming will being again shortly)

 

[Chioxin]

I saw this thread while at work and wanted to post! that was when it was on page 5! Now it's on page 20 =( I hope the devs see this.

The horn that's often tooted, that phrase that a lot of people love to sling around here... is that "Players should be allowed to play the way they want to." I totally agree with this, people definitely should be able to play the way they want to. Have any of you who demand the ability to play between Solo, Group, and Open with the same character and with the same galaxy changing based on their actions ever consider that the "Open Player" isn't getting what they want? An honest, open world, where a player has a real effect on what's going on in a Universe they can actively manipulate? One that is based on Player to Player conflicts?

I'm not saying get rid of Solo or Private Group play, but I seriously think that ANY universe or character changing effects done in Solo or Private Group play, should stay in those modes on their own computer ... or something, and here's why.

This link is important https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=71327

A player, or better a group of players has decided to actively change a system from one faction to another. They have actively decided to oust the Federation, because they can, and that's awesome! To effectively do so, this requires them to do missions for the faction that they want to take control of the system. There's more however. They probably need to effectively blockade other players from performing missions that would turn the tide against their cause. They've probably done this. But... they can be, and might have been cheated of their desired out come in ways they can't actively do anything about. What's to stop 100 players going there Solo Mode and performing missions that effect the Open Play systems and reversing their desired outcome? How is it fair that they can't defend this desired outcome and goal?

Let's take Trading as another example.

Last weekend I was happily doing it around Amarak, found an amazing route, was netting a ton of money on Friday night. I came back on Saturday to find that pirates were, though I honestly think they were Traders trying to preserve their now "profitable" trade route, were now teaming up in 3's to prevent me from trading. I turned them down, and mechanics aside I escaped them with 17% of my hull left. Then later that evening I returned after changing over to bounty hunting a bit, to be interdicted yet again with the same story. I escaped unscathed this time, but I was done bounty hunting and wanted to make some cash. So, I switched to Solo mode to remove the hassle of being interdicted by players. This isn't cool for several reasons. These guys were putting up a good fight for their trade route for one, but two, I was now doing the trade route in Solo mode making the same cash, but at the same time actively depleting the resources between the stations they were ACTIVELY defending! I completely negated that with Solo Mode! How is that fair to them? I'm reducing their profits and there is NOTHING they can do about it.

No one is saying people shouldn't be able to play the way they want to play, but "Open Player's" are saying .... "Hey, if you can play this game the way you want to play it, why can't I play it my way?" I think people are missing what the desires of "Open Player's" actually are. And that sucks for them, and people who want to play solo and unhindered just plain old don't get it because they don't understand that these Open Players don't care about their own personal stuff, it's the community itself they crave and care about. Players swapping from Open to Solo destroys that community development.

If it were me?

Solo Play - Universe is yours man. Make a character, play in it, do stuff, change it.
Private Group - Same as Solo, the "GROUP" owner decides if players can switch between open and solo play.
Open Play - Universe is completely seperate and owned by FD. Players on "OPEN" can not hop between Solo and Open modes.

Now the sad thing is? I don't think Frontier really understood what they were doing here in regards to multiplayer and single player being combined in this way, and I imagine that it is impossible to have "Solo" or "Group" mode existing on any one computer client, as I imagine every solarsystem, and state is stored on their personal servers [because even in Solo mode you need an internet connection] .... So sadly this can't be a thing =( It means we'll have to deal with it... It means those of us in Open who /really/ want to do something, and if the opposing players really want to do the "other" thing... it's going to come down to who has more people doing the thing to make it happen rather than true and meaningful conflicts breaking out to prevent the other sides from wining.

To me, that's a sad missed opportunity.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I smell sockpuppet.

Ok - my apologies - that is a little too harsh. What I mean is - phrases such as "How is it fair that they can't defend this desired outcome and goal?", "They probably need to effectively blockade other players from performing missions that would turn the tide against their cause.", " I completely negated that with Solo Mode! How is that fair to them? I'm reducing their profits and there is NOTHING they can do about it.", "And that sucks for them, and people who want to play solo and unhindered just plain old don't get it because they don't understand that these Open Players don't care about their own personal stuff, it's the community itself they crave and care about. Players swapping from Open to Solo destroys that community development." and most of all "true and meaningful conflicts" just reek of ulterior motive.

Sorry - but that is how I honestly see it - especially when it has already been determined that precisely none of what is being mentioned here has any bearing on the game at all.

 

[anikaiful]

<snip>

You can't do anything in open either if other players don't end up in the same instance. With that in mind, it's irrelevant whether someone plays in open or solo.

 

[Zenicetus]

A player, or better a group of players has decided to actively change a system from one faction to another. They have actively decided to oust the Federation, because they can, and that's awesome! To effectively do so, this requires them to do missions for the faction that they want to take control of the system. There's more however. They probably need to effectively blockade other players from performing missions that would turn the tide against their cause. They've probably done this. But... they can be, and might have been cheated of their desired out come in ways they can't actively do anything about. What's to stop 100 players going there Solo Mode and performing missions that effect the Open Play systems and reversing their desired outcome? How is it fair that they can't defend this desired outcome and goal?

Blockades and choke points have been designed out of this game, and I think that was probably intentional.

It just doesn't matter that you can't see those 100 invisible players. Numbers don't matter, except in the collective impact all players -- in all modes -- are having on that system. You can only have 32 players in a P2P instance, and if you fill that instance with your own blockading force, you'll never see any other players. That's just how this network model works.

Even if you limit the numbers in your own shared instance with friends, there is no guarantee that the P2P matchmaking servers will show a proportional representation of all the players in that system! You might see fewer on your side, just due to matchmaker P2P quality gating. Or you might see more on your side. It's never a reflection of the actual number of players moving through that system.

It's how the network works, and you need to understand how it works to suggest improvements or changes. Suggesting changes that won't make a bit of difference, due to the network design, are a waste of time (IMO).

 

[CATPAIN KIRK]

Mostly traded in solo myself, because similar to the OP, I didn't see the point. When I was trading, I mostly did it in unarmed, unshielded ships, so why bother?

If someone interdicts me, I'm going to run, because I don't really have another option, given the fact that I don't have shields or guns and I myself don't have the desire to interdict or shoot anyone myself.

Having a chat may be nice, but I talk to people all day long at work, so not having to talk in my spare time isn't exactly an unwelcome side effect either. The only exception were conflict zones, because the AI is mind-numbingly terrible.

Recently, I've played in open more and more even when I just traded. When I don't do rare trades, I stick around in 3-4 hubs and all are quiet - rarely see a CMDR and interaction is limited - got rammed by a few (or the same - didn't read the name) Type VIIs, but I'm not even sure if it was intentional and if it was - so what?

I know that sooner or later, this will cost me a ship (or ten - I'm bad at piloting spaceships), but having at least a grain of unpredictability makes up for it.

 

[eeps]

and people who want to play solo and unhindered just plain old don't get it because they don't understand that these Open Players don't care about their own personal stuff, it's the community itself they crave and care about. Players swapping from Open to Solo destroys that community development." and most of all "true and meaningful conflicts" just reek of ulterior motive.

Im not entirely sure I see your point clearly.

I will agree that more people in 'open' will make the community 'better', but only if the interactions themselves are 'good'.

I've asked in another thread and got no decent reply, so I will ask you ..

"How or why is it a bad thing to allow players to play in solo/group mode?"

 

[SE-Apocalypse]

Welcome to the crowd. Watch your six and enjoy the ride.