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

[TruffleSnout]

I already believe that solo is encouraged over open

Most of the stuff I read here (outside of this thread) seems to attach a stigma to playing in solo. Like you're somehow a "lesser" player if you stick to solo. Not sure that qualifies as encouragement.

- - - Updated - - -

And not even a good beer, like a flat one with a cigarette butt in it.

That made me lol.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Most of the stuff I read here (outside of this thread) seems to attach a stigma to playing in solo. Like you're somehow a "lesser" player if you stick to solo. Not sure that qualifies as encouragement.

I meant through the game mechanics not people.

The game mechanics make solo more desirable by letting you earn more credits by facing easier enemies.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I meant through the game mechanics not people.

The game mechanics make solo more desirable by letting you earn more credits by facing easier enemies.

If Solo is indeed less risky than Open then all players can choose to play in it if they wish, or not, as the case may be.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

We don't need to measure it. Every player decides for him or herself.

If fighting another player as you say is less fun for someone, why try to pursuade someone into having less fun for the sake of credits?

I'm not trying to persuade people to come play something they don't enjoy. People who don't enjoy it, won't even come into open if I increase the income 1000x.

I'm trying to get people who would otherwise play in open, but won't for fear of not making as much/enough money.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

FD will never make this what I want and what many of you posting here want. They like their backers and those are mainly over 25 requesting for you to stop asking for Open only content.

What is the deal with this age thing that rears its ugly head from time to time. The whole don't trust anyone over 30 is so 1969. Let it die already. Elite is the only game I know of where a portion of the population seems appalled that they might be playing with someone who has children as opposed to being a child. Makes zero sense.

 

[FuzzySpider]

I meant through the game mechanics not people.

The game mechanics make solo more desirable by letting you earn more credits by facing easier enemies.

I've not made that much through "facing enemies", I've always preferred trade to combat to make money. I've traded mainly around the core Empire worlds, which are mostly designed to be safe. The entire point of sticking to those worlds is to minimise danger.

I don't actually care too much if they do buff credit earning in Open by 20% though. It'll lead to Open players getting massively overpowered ships vs Solo players, and in no time at all unbalancing both groups to a degree that nobody who wasn't already in an established combat ship with top specced modules would dare touch Open.

 

[fademist]

I'm not trying to persuade people to come play something they don't enjoy. People who don't enjoy it, won't even come into open if I increase the income 1000x.

I'm trying to get people who would otherwise play in open, but won't for fear of not making as much/enough money.

and for many of them the reason to be on other modes is mainly cause the few bad apple(GRIEFFERS) open have and u continue to not understand it

 

[CMDR Beltane]

A better "tax" would be to drop the player to the base model of current ship and 10% of accumulated wealth removed.

Hehe, that only sounds good at first glance. True, with a low amount of money right at hand (like after you have bought a ship). But with the bigger stuff - i guess a Conda pilot is more willing to pay 30 - 40 millions for a nicely stuffed Conda than loosing hundreds of millions worth of upgrades plus an additional 10% of his current budget. Also, it would be exploitable - people would avoid that with buying ships they don't intend to fly, just to keep the budget low. And third, it would totally eliminate the risk of loosing it all when you don't calculate properly. Anyways, sorry for OT - just catched my eyes.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm not trying to persuade people to come play something they don't enjoy. People who don't enjoy it, won't even come into open if I increase the income 1000x.

I'm trying to get people who would otherwise play in open, but won't for fear of not making as much/enough money.

Rather than boost earnings, another approach may be to reduce losses - i.e. if you are trying to attract traders then requesting that Frontier activate the obviously implemented cargo insurance would go some way to mitigating what can potentially be the biggest loss for a trader, their cargo. Losing a ship is bad enough - losing the cargo compounds the loss and increases the setback.

 

[Roland2]

I'm not trying to persuade people to come play something they don't enjoy. People who don't enjoy it, won't even come into open if I increase the income 1000x.

I'm trying to get people who would otherwise play in open, but won't for fear of not making as much/enough money.

Why don't you make recommendations that address the issue, instead of blanket "open players should get more money". It's been stated several times that open has more risk potential due to human players. So make the human interaction the deciding factor. Something like: Merchants who get killed by a human player should get have a smaller insurance payment, or merchants who get killed by a player should get half there cargo back. Note that these would work in groups as well as open, just like wing bonuses do now. Changes like that would address the risk vs reward, without making any one mode seam "better"

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

I've not made that much through "facing enemies", I've always preferred trade to combat to make money. I've traded mainly around the core Empire worlds, which are mostly designed to be safe. The entire point of sticking to those worlds is to minimise danger.

Easier enemies means, less hassle while trading. Less hassle means more profits.

I don't actually care too much if they do buff credit earning in Open by 20% though. It'll lead to Open players getting massively overpowered ships vs Solo players, and in no time at all unbalancing both groups to a degree that nobody who wasn't already in an established combat ship with top specced modules would dare touch Open.

I said 20% did seem a little too high, i suggested 10-15% as a better balanced number. Right now I'd say it's the opposite, solo players coming into open to cause trouble in their Top specced ship.

 

[Mercy Killing]

Except I don't view it that way, I already believe that solo is encouraged over open, im merely trying to tip the balance back to what I think is normal.

Fixed that to more accurately represent the truth. Totally free, I might add.

 

[Jockey79]

No the justification is to encourage more players into the realm of open.

I'm not trying to persuade people to come play something they don't enjoy.

I cannot put my finger on something.......

 

[CMDR Beltane]

Rather than boost earnings, another approach may be to reduce losses - i.e. if you are trying to attract traders then requesting that Frontier activate the obviously implemented cargo insurance would go some way to mitigating what can potentially be the biggest loss for a trader, their cargo. Losing a ship is bad enough - losing the cargo compounds the loss and increases the setback.

Couldn't agree more. Thats the the right angle to view at it if you want to "solve" this, not some boosts just cause. At least its the right direction. That and a working crime system that "encourages" true piracy and not pointless murder. Would at least bring some more people to open, at least the ones that that don't stick to a particular mode for a reason.

 

[Killakiwi]

Hehe, that only sounds good at first glance. True, with a low amount of money right at hand (like after you have bought a ship). But with the bigger stuff - i guess a Conda pilot is more willing to pay 30 - 40 millions for a nicely stuffed Conda than loosing hundreds of millions worth of upgrades plus an additional 10% of his current budget. Also, it would be exploitable - people would avoid that with buying ships they don't intend to fly, just to keep the budget low. And third, it would totally eliminate the risk of loosing it all when you don't calculate properly. Anyways, sorry for OT - just catched my eyes.

Yes but the player would never lose it all, Perhaps a "buy up" insurance scheme then.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Rather than boost earnings, another approach may be to reduce losses - i.e. if you are trying to attract traders then requesting that Frontier activate the obviously implemented cargo insurance would go some way to mitigating what can potentially be the biggest loss for a trader, their cargo. Losing a ship is bad enough - losing the cargo compounds the loss and increases the setback.

Earnings are universal, cargo insurance only helps one profession. All roles face tougher enemy players in open, not just traders. A blanket increase seems easier than doing something for every profession.

 

[fademist]

Earnings are universal, cargo insurance only helps one profession. All roles face tougher enemy players in open, not just traders. A blanket increase seems easier than doing something for every profession.

And the best solution is not change anything ...

 

[CMDR Beltane]

Yes but the player would never lose it all, Perhaps a "buy up" insurance scheme then.

While i respect your opinion, would be a no go for me. There should always be the risk of loosing it all if you do it wrong. Options to be able to recover better, like the cargo insurance Richard mentioned - okay. But beeing totally safe? Nope - not for me, even in case the AI will get as good as a battle hardened player.

Earnings are universal, cargo insurance only helps one profession. All roles face tougher enemy players in open, not just traders. A blanket increase seems easier than doing something for every profession.

Urm.. and how many of those other professions have cargo thats easily worth another 75% of the ships insurance? Right, none. Unless you want to expand that statement really towards bounty vouchers and such... which is by far not the same. And no, explorers only count half at best, as for them it makes no difference if they are alone in open or alone in solo.

 

[Distance]

I now refuse to play in open, Pirating will kill the open version of Elite if the "death tax is not changed" It is far to steep for the casual player right now and believe it or not the casual player is whom will keep this game alive for many years.

A better "tax" would be to drop the player to the base model of current ship and 10% of accumulated wealth removed.

What this would encourage is more people to venture into the open world and try out the PvP system.

I recognize you from my pirating videos, I shot your python up the other day as you thought dropping 20t of cargo was less than your repair costs. I also remember you only dropped 10-15t instead of the requested 20t so if you're ever back in open I'll be coming back for the other 10

I think you'll find that most of the people asking for higher bounties, better high/low security space and harsher consequences for piracy/murder are actually the open play pirates.

The new changes in 1.3 will only really affect credit farmers and not do enough to stop random pking in open (which is just as bad for pirates as we get a bad name).

If you notice there's no incentive to keep a bounty but a lot of us legitimate pirates do.

We want the crime and punishment system fixed as much you do and I'm sorry to see you go to solo because of a few bad experiences.

 

[fademist]

I recognize you from my pirating videos, I shot your python up the other day as you thought dropping 20t of cargo was less than your repair costs. I also remember you only dropped 10-15t instead of the requested 20t so if you're ever back in open I'll be coming back for the other 10

I think you'll find that most of the people asking for higher bounties, better high/low security space and harsher consequences for piracy/murder are actually the open play pirates.

The new changes in 1.3 will only really affect credit farmers and not do enough to stop random pking in open (which is just as bad for pirates as we get a bad name).

If you notice there's no incentive to keep a bounty but a lot of us legitimate pirates do.

We want the crime and punishment system fixed as much you do and I'm sorry to see you go to solo because of a few bad experiences.

how so? :S:S