Thats exactly why everyone goes to Solo. FD just keep ignoring this. They never made the two sides equal. Why would average Joe fight for Alliance when empire offers a shiny exclusive ship. Makes no sense to have wars if one side offers less that the other.
Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
- Status
Thats exactly why everyone goes to Solo. FD just keep ignoring this. They never made the two sides equal. Why would average Joe fight for Alliance when empire offers a shiny exclusive ship. Makes no sense to have wars if one side offers less that the other.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The Kickstarter's been and gone - I doubt very much that Frontier would go there again as it would be very unlikely to be well received by the community at large. The fact that the game is buy-to-play also rules out subscriptions. Therefore server costs need to remain at a level whereby the game remains profitable to FD - no profit, no continued game.
Well, we don't have those disclosed numbers, so this bit of discussion is kinda redundant. But think of those possibilities, how better it would make the game.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It's (almost certainly) never going to be a mass fleet twitch battle game - the public broadband infrastructure probably won't support that for a long time to come.
Also, "better" is subjective - it is likely that not everyone's personal definition(s) of the term with respect to E: D are going to be the same.
So you're saying the 32 player bubble is fine right now?
Last edited:
Petition to ED to separate Solo/Group from Open
Dear Frontier Developments,
I humbly beseech you to consider separating Solo/Group play from Open. Right now it is drastically damaging the open experience. There are no repercussions for traders to trade in solo mode, risk free so they earn up huge amounts of money to buy big and expensive ships. This goes against the spirit of play. By allowing this, the trading population in open has dwindled substantially. However, this is to a degree. I am finding with ever increasing frequency players showing up in open mode who are novices, harmless or mostly harmless in ships like Pythons, Anacondas etc. Now, certainly they could have traded their way to these ships in open but I'm finding a lot of the time they have come from Solo having made giant profits there.
For those of us who only play in open, we've embraced risk from day one. We accept all the good (open is mostly good) and the sometimes bad (I can't really think of anything bad about open, actually). We should be rewarded for our persistence with it. In no way should a player be able to play risk free and then, ultimately enter open mode with lots of money and toys. It isn't right.
So I'm asking you to consider putting up a brick wall between the modes. Money earned in open stays in open (though if the servers ever shut down I would expect there to be a small patch to allow us to transfer). Likewise, all money, profits and ships earned in solo, stay in solo/group.
This would equalize things. We would no longer have people thinking of solo as the risk free easy road to riches. If players want to make it in open, they must stay in open.
Please consider this. I know the community is divided and viciously adamant about their position but please, it is simply something to look at from a gameplay perspective. Low risk stays in low risk. High risk stays in high risk. This in no way would detract from the overall game. People would still be able to play the mode of their choice. It would simply keep them divided like they should have been from the start.
Thank you.
Dear Frontier Developments,
I humbly beseech you to consider separating Solo/Group play from Open. Right now it is drastically damaging the open experience. There are no repercussions for traders to trade in solo mode, risk free so they earn up huge amounts of money to buy big and expensive ships. This goes against the spirit of play. By allowing this, the trading population in open has dwindled substantially. However, this is to a degree. I am finding with ever increasing frequency players showing up in open mode who are novices, harmless or mostly harmless in ships like Pythons, Anacondas etc. Now, certainly they could have traded their way to these ships in open but I'm finding a lot of the time they have come from Solo having made giant profits there.
For those of us who only play in open, we've embraced risk from day one. We accept all the good (open is mostly good) and the sometimes bad (I can't really think of anything bad about open, actually). We should be rewarded for our persistence with it. In no way should a player be able to play risk free and then, ultimately enter open mode with lots of money and toys. It isn't right.
So I'm asking you to consider putting up a brick wall between the modes. Money earned in open stays in open (though if the servers ever shut down I would expect there to be a small patch to allow us to transfer). Likewise, all money, profits and ships earned in solo, stay in solo/group.
This would equalize things. We would no longer have people thinking of solo as the risk free easy road to riches. If players want to make it in open, they must stay in open.
Please consider this. I know the community is divided and viciously adamant about their position but please, it is simply something to look at from a gameplay perspective. Low risk stays in low risk. High risk stays in high risk. This in no way would detract from the overall game. People would still be able to play the mode of their choice. It would simply keep them divided like they should have been from the start.
Thank you.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The 32 player instance limit has been known about for a very long time now - it is what it is - a limitation of the game. Personally, I'm not expecting massive numbers of players engaging in battles - simply because it has been clear from the outset that it's not going to happen.
So very inb4 merge :3
Thanks for the amazing lulz. I nearly spilled my beer laughing.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Just....
Ew. I'm Lost for words. Anywhoo, Robert, that is a big disappointing and surely their netcode and servers would be in the future able to better handle them. They're going to have to especially if they want it to work with the Mac and Xbox version after all!
Last edited:
It's always confusing to me how some people are so invested in a special way of playing (Solo, Open, Groups), they start arguing the "others" should suffer because they aren't playing the only right way.
Human nature at work, I guess. Luckily Frontier has proven so far to be smart enough to stay above those little fights. You just have to think about what would happen if Frontier took the side of group-players and started adjusting the game to be worse for both Solo and Open players. That would be absurd, wouldn't it?
Newsflash: It's absurd regardless of which group gets screwed over. Just be happy Frontier isn't mad like some players seem to be.
Human nature at work, I guess. Luckily Frontier has proven so far to be smart enough to stay above those little fights. You just have to think about what would happen if Frontier took the side of group-players and started adjusting the game to be worse for both Solo and Open players. That would be absurd, wouldn't it?
Newsflash: It's absurd regardless of which group gets screwed over. Just be happy Frontier isn't mad like some players seem to be.
With all respect Texan, how many connections do you think a 5Mbps can handle? How many on a 33Mbps line? How many on a gigabit linerate?
Open should be separate from everything else. A brick wall should be made. Anything else is nonsense.
Well, I did everything I do in other modes - I've not been near a CG at all (I've only done 3 CZ before, and to be honest - they bore me, so I tend to ignore them now), but I will try to do a CG next weekend.
If I can get the wife and children to leave me alone for some time, I'll split a gaming session into Solo part and Open part - will have to dust off my Twitch account
Just understand the parameters...it's not just a CZ. It's a pair of them, in direct competition with each other, where the sides are racing one another to completion. Almost all the CG's, only provide one side fighting. Keep your eyes out though! And thanks for the willingness to try!
That is incredibly easy. IF IP=Nonserver THEN GOTO Lulzban
Well Texan, yeah. Even SC will only have instances holding roughly 32 players. What is supposed to be different is that you can look into other instances and see the action, and be able to shoot across instances. But, yeah, because of the distances and speeds involved with this type of game...hundreds in a single instance will never occur.
- Status