Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].

[Robert Maynard]

I'm sure this has been brough up before... But I'll raise it again, as I see it as a fundamental issue with the soon to be released Power Play...

You know, I do believe it has....

Surely the biggest problem is simply the fact PowerPlay is creating more "community goals" but huge swaths of CMDRs are "untouchable" in Solo. So not only are they are they "untouchable", but worse still because the game will actively reward them for being so.

Given that Xbox and (eventually, presumably) PS4 players will also share the same BGS and influence the same CGs and Power Play, why single out Solo / Private Group players on one platform? If it is a problem, it is a problem of Frontier's making when they successfully pitched a game with three game modes (effectively three different settings of the same matchmaking algorithm) that influence the same BGS, coupled with the ability to switch between the modes on a session-by-session basis. As the debate over the merits (or not, as the case may be) of the three modes, shared BGS and mode switching has been going on for over two and a half years now and also that we are now 6 months post launch and these game features are still in place, I would expect that they are here to stay.

CMDRs can spend the effort trading, bounty hunting or what ever now to improve the (communal) outcome for a specific Power/Faction. Why be less effective in Online mode risking real CMDRs reducing your "input" when in Solo mode you only have to face less challenging AIs?

If the NPCs are less challenging that's for SJA to fix, firmly bearing in mind that half of all players are of average combat skill or below. Where a player chooses to contribute is up to that individual player. The fact that some players choose to play in and contribute to CGs from Open is up to them.

ie: If you are Trading to help your Power, why not do it in the safety of Solo? If you are killing opponents in a Combat Zone, why risk facing CMDRs rather than inferior NPCs? Do it in Solo!

As above.

So not only might Powerplay risk rewarding players for going into Solo play, but worse still this will yet magnify the ever more obvious issue of communal goals then being affected by huge swaths of players actively not wishing to play within the communal environment (because the game rewards them!)? Your Power/Faction wants you to prevent traders from getting to a particular station? Fine... Buy good luck interdicting/attacking all the CMDRs simply carrying good there "under the radar" in Solo.

If Frontier decide that not enough CG contributions or Power Play interactions are taking place in Open then they will probably do something - what "something" is is a matter of conjecture at this point. Frontier hold all the statistics regarding who players in which mode and earns / contributes how much - and they're not sharing that information.

There seems to be a fundamental issue with Solo and Online at almost complete loggerheads on this sort of game mechanic(s)!

It's not just CGs and Power Play - they are simply two new debating points in the long running discussions around the three modes, shared BGS and mode switching.

 

[SteveLaw]

So not only might Powerplay risk rewarding players for going into Solo play

Unlike community goals, Powerplay is a swinging balance - ie solo players are also balancing solo players.

There are Solo players on both sides of a Power. Some are working against you but some are working FOR you. While you cannot effect enemy Solo players, enemy Open players cannot effect YOUR Solo players. They will balance each other out so that the effective result will be which Power has the most followers.

 

[W0OCQCK]

Isn't that precisely what Private Groups are for?

Exactly what I was thinking.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

There are Solo players on both sides of a Power. Some are working against you but some are working FOR you. While you cannot effect enemy Solo players, enemy Open players cannot effect YOUR Solo players. They will balance each other out so that the effective result will be which Power has the most followers.

And what if they don't balance each other out? What if one side has more solo than the other? They have the better chance still no?

With open you can use proper offense and defense to counter it.

 

[SteveLaw]

And what if they don't balance each other out? What if one side has more solo than the other? They have the better chance still no?

Yes they do. That's kind of how politics works.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That's a non argument. Since the same can be said for Open and Group.

.... especially with players inhabiting different instances in Open and the contributions of players from different time-zones - we all need to sleep sometime....

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Ok so solo will balance solo, maybe. If they can be bothered.

 

[Aimeryan]

The issue as I see it is that if you are being effective in Open (say you are successfully blockading traders from boosting the rival power) what do you think is going to happen? They are just going to go Solo and you might as well sit around twiddling your thumbs in Open. Basically, the losing side will always end up going Solo, then the winning side will effectively be playing solo as well. There is not going to be Open Powerplay, not after a while.

Maybe a few strong willed players will stick around in Open for Powerplay, but the rest are going to see the cake being offered in Solo and leap to it.

 

[SteveLaw]

They are just going to go Solo and you might as well sit around twiddling your thumbs in Open.

What do you think Solo players will be doing with no other players in Solo?

 

[Aimeryan]

What do you think Solo players will be doing with no other players in Solo?

Losing out on fun interaction.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Losing out on fun interaction.

That very much depends on what each players' personal interpretation of "fun" is, doesn't it?

 

[NeilF]

Given that Xbox and (eventually, presumably) PS4 players will also share the same BGS and influence the same CGs and Power Play, why single out Solo / Private Group players on one platform? If it is a problem, it is a problem of Frontier's making when they successfully pitched a game with three game modes (effectively three different settings of the same matchmaking algorithm) that influence the same BGS, coupled with the ability to switch between the modes on a session-by-session basis. As the debate over the merits (or not, as the case may be) of the three modes, shared BGS and mode switching has been going on for over two and a half years now and also that we are now 6 months post launch and these game features are still in place, I would expect that they are here to stay.

Different issue IMHO. If I'm trading to station X and another Power's CMDRs have a goal of interdicting/destroying traders going to X, in Open during my travels I stand a chance of being seen/attacked by other CMDRs in my instance.

This should really be no different to CMDRs on different platforms such as XBox/PS4; There still all face the risk of encountering real CMDRs.

And the significant issue (being discussed) is common across all of them... The (trading) CMDRs just go into Solo and become immune/invisible, or at the very least safer most likely.

If the NPCs are less challenging that's for SJA to fix, firmly bearing in mind that half of all players are of average combat skill or below. Where a player chooses to contribute is up to that individual player. The fact that some players choose to play in and contribute to CGs from Open is up to them.

True, but after a year or so of this being addressed how would you say it's going so far?

In short, if "results" were you prime objective, would you rather go into a combat zone to destroy enemy vessels against just AIs, or enemy AIs and a couple of enemy CMDRs? As it stands at the moment, almost certainly go into Solo, and make your Powerplay "input" more significant.

At the moment I'd suggest as such, the game will actively reward (promote) people choosing solo.

It's not just CGs and Power Play - they are simply two new debating points in the long running discussions around the three modes, shared BGS and mode switching.

Indeed... and I'm slowly coming to the conclusion given Frontier are seemingly adding more community goal type core mechanics (Power Play), the two (Online & Solo) are not happy bed fellows.

Where the premise is you can hopefully make a difference in the Universe, how frustrating is it, the effort you put in is undone by groups of people who simpy take an option to be complete invisible to you. And this choice is not primarily down to a subtle gameplay preference, but possibly down to the game strongly rewarding one.

That very much depends on what each players' personal interpretation of "fun" is, doesn't it?

It does, but the game as it stands at the moment I'd argue will make it almost a no brainer to duck into Solo if you are actively trying to work for your Power/Faction.

 

[Aimeryan]

That very much depends on what each players' personal interpretation of "fun" is, doesn't it?

No, and that is the problem. Take a look at the obesity issues in first-world countries and you'll understand that people often take the easiest choice and the one that offers immediate satisfaction over a harder option that will lead to longer-term satisfaction.

Solo is the easy choice here - you have no resistance. Overall though, those people might find they would enjoy Open more if they couldn't just jump into Solo the moment someone scratched their ship. I am not saying that there aren't people who genuinely prefer Solo in all ways, but I am saying there will be a lot who can't resist what is basically a cheat when compared to the difficulty of Open. As we know, cheating just wrecks it for yourself in the end, however much fun it immediately seems. Worse though, those that are not doing this basically are penalised.

 

[SteveLaw]

Losing out on fun interaction.

If that's the case then they'll soon come back to Open. Problem solved.

 

[W0OCQCK]

The issue as I see it is that if you are being effective in Open (say you are successfully blockading traders from boosting the rival power) what do you think is going to happen? They are just going to go Solo and you might as well sit around twiddling your thumbs in Open. Basically, the losing side will always end up going Solo, then the winning side will effectively be playing solo as well. There is not going to be Open Powerplay, not after a while.

Maybe a few strong willed players will stick around in Open for Powerplay, but the rest are going to see the cake being offered in Solo and leap to it.

Ya know a lot of the open players simply will not accept any accountability here. If you want more players in open, ya got to play open like you want more players there! This includes things like pirates actually playing like pirates & Thieves, and not just being a block headed Player Killers. Increased dialog and role play, not just "Kaboom" every single time a defenseless ship appears.

Stop doing silly on these forums to put people off from it. Just play and do things to encourage it!

Yes if you ruin a players enjoyment of the game, why would they want to stay? There's a fair amount of that going on in that mode.

FD needs to be a little accountable here to, like any intentional ramming inside a no fire zone is a mandatory 30 day ban. Do it again ya get 6 months, one more time, gone. Things like this would stop this almost instantly.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Different issue IMHO. If I'm trading to station X and another Power's CMDRs have a goal of interdicting/destroying traders going to X, in Open during my travels I stand a chance of being seen/attacked by other CMDRs in my instance.

Is it really different? Your group of players are unlikely ever to meet the Xbox or PS4 players (as crossplay is uncommon between PC and consoles) but the same BGS, CGs and Power Plays are being affected by all players in whatever mode on whichever platform.

This should really be no different to CMDRs on different platforms such as XBox/PS4; There still all face the risk of encountering real CMDRs.

I would expect that, as a PEGI7 game, E: D will have Solo mode on Xbox and PS4 - therefore there is no reason not to include Private Groups on those platforms.

And the significant issue (being discussed) is common across all of them... The (trading) CMDRs just go into Solo and become immune/invisible, or at the very least safer most likely.

That's their choice, just as it is the choice of each combative player to play / contribute in open. We play the game for fun - not necessarily to be another player's content.

True, but after a year or so of this being addressed how would you say it's going so far?

Probably that it's getting better with each new point release - I'm looking forward to 1.3 in that regard.

In short, if "results" were you prime objective, would you rather go into a combat zone to destroy enemy vessels against just AIs, or enemy AIs and a couple of enemy CMDRs? As it stands at the moment, almost certainly go into Solo, and make your Powerplay "input" more significant.

If results are all that matter (rather than fun) that would suggest that it has become less of a game to some and more of a "task".

Indeed... and I'm slowly coming to the conclusion given Frontier and seemingly adding more community goal type core mechanics (Power Play) the two (Online & Solo) are not happy bed fellows.

For some players the existence of the three online modes has never been an acceptable situation.

Where the premise is you can hopefully make a difference in the Universe, how frustrating is it, the effort you put in is undone by groups of people who simpy take an option to be complete invisible to you.

As a single pilot in a massive game world, I would not expect that any difference I may make would be that great (on a galactic scale).

 

[Aimeryan]

If that's the case then they'll soon come back to Open. Problem solved.

Or, they get bored with Solo and leave the game. People aren't always logical.

Ya know a lot of the open players simply will not accept any accountability here. If you want more players in open, ya got to play open like you want more players there! This includes things like pirates actually playing like pirates & Thieves, and not just being a block headed Player Killers. Increased dialog and role play, not just "Kaboom" every single time a defenseless ship appears.

Stop doing silly on these forums to put people off from it. Just play and do things to encourage it!

Yes if you ruin a players enjoyment of the game, why would they want to stay? There's a fair amount of that going on in that mode.

I've already mentioned the griefing that goes on in Open. Hopefully the 1.3 will solve a lot of that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

No, and that is the problem. Take a look at the obesity issues in first-world countries and you'll understand that people often take the easiest choice and the one that offers immediate satisfaction over a harder option that will lead to longer-term satisfaction.

Solo is the easy choice here - you have no resistance. Overall though, those people might find they would enjoy Open more if they couldn't just jump into Solo the moment someone scratched their ship. I am not saying that there aren't people who genuinely prefer Solo in all ways, but I am saying there will be a lot who can't resist what is basically a cheat when compared to the difficulty of Open. As we know, cheating just wrecks it for yourself in the end, however much fun it immediately seems. Worse though, those that are not doing this basically are penalised.

Are you trying to infer that those playing Solo / Private groups should not be allowed to because other players "know what's good for them"? We have all been told to "play the game how you want to" - that does not mean "play the game how other players want you to".

It's a game - people play games to have fun (i.e. their kind of fun). If it stops being fun they will probably stop playing.

Using options available from the launcher menu cannot reasonably be described as cheating....

 

[Jockey79]

Losing out on fun interaction.

That very much depends on what each players' personal interpretation of "fun" is, doesn't it?

This ^^
And it gets brought up every week. Open players either cannot or will not understand that some of us, can have fun without them.

As for the whole Real Life Vs A Game - Jordan, you're the one stressing out over a game, why don't you just go play it and leave others to play their game then. If it's just a game, it's not important enough to keep arguing about is it.

 

[FuzzySpider]

No, and that is the problem. Take a look at the obesity issues in first-world countries and you'll understand that people often take the easiest choice and the one that offers immediate satisfaction over a harder option that will lead to longer-term satisfaction.

Solo is the easy choice here - you have no resistance. Overall though, those people might find they would enjoy Open more if they couldn't just jump into Solo the moment someone scratched their ship. I am not saying that there aren't people who genuinely prefer Solo in all ways, but I am saying there will be a lot who can't resist what is basically a cheat when compared to the difficulty of Open. As we know, cheating just wrecks it for yourself in the end, however much fun it immediately seems. Worse though, those that are not doing this basically are penalised.

You're underestimating the demand for solo player experiences in not just this game but all games. Go and read this. Seriously. Go and read it.

Secondly, you're wrong in your assessment of those who will play Open but transfer to Solo "the moment someone scratched their ship". I am that exact demographic - normally an Open player who now Solos a lot. Now go and read my first post here. Seriously. Go read it. I play this game to be a space captain in an imaginary universe. I don't play this game for Unreal Tournament style player battles. That isn't what this game is or ever was, but there is far too much of that in Open.