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

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
I totally get that. But why does it say : "Help stop traders from trading there !" When all I can see are NPC's. Every trader will be in Solo because losing your ship is one thing, losing your ship and another 10 mil worth of cargo... So just remove those damn things and make this Witcher 3. It's almost singleplayer anyway...

Did it say help stop other CMDRS or traders?, if it said "traders" it would include AI. As there are more AI than players it might even be directed at AI rather than CMDRs.

ETA if that was a general quote involving solo & groups too they must be talking about AI, I never met another CMDR in solo yet.
 
Last edited:
That's a pretty poor argument. Try harder.

Maybe you're seeing this over and over because it might be true. No, wait, just answer a question...

What scares you more?

1. An AI opponent.
2. A human you have never met before in a ship full of nasty weapons who just interdicted you.

Is there anything to even be scared about in the game? It's all make pretend. The only thing that matters is how enjoyable the experience is, as it makes no sense to ever play a game if the experience isn't enjoyable.

Which is why I flat out refuse to open myself to non-consensual PvP. It sounds about as fun as cleaning a murky public toilet.
 
Last edited:
So tired of seeing all this "risk" crap. Like a broken record. Maybe solo/group players should start railing that open players are affecting their(persistent universe) gameplay. They don't perhaps because they are more mature.

I too find it pretty obnoxious. I've been gaming all my life. Me personally, my life is full of risk, every single day. Between being in business for myself, my employees, my clients, it's chalked full of risk, & conflict. To say any game is risky is pretty much utter nonsensical, but I guess some feel like there being risky. I play to relax, I know it's hard for some to take, but I bet a lot of folks play to relax here too.

Many have been brain washed from other gaming companies that, "Risk vs Reward" is a must have, it's not true, but many whole heatedly believe it. I'm not of a mind set of this. I believe the most important part of any game is the participants need to have fun, and enjoy playing it. All else is secondary.

The other catch word is, "it has to be balanced". Let me tell you from experience a little imbalance can make games much much more interesting, and way funner to play.
 
Last edited:
Oh yeah maybe i jumped to conclusions. Let's analyse the trailers shall we. Wings trailer...PvP all you can see it's about players smacking the hell out of eachother. Ok maybe the launch one is fine, oh noes, it's actually full of PvP isn't it? Oh didn't it actually have a massive war at the end of it with bullets and ships everywhere? Nah im just stupid. Ok last trailer. Capital ships trailer....is there even a doubt that that trailer spells: come we have big ships and pvp? Maybe im just hella stupid sorry for coming in and actually bringing facts i should be just kissing hands left and right

Did you ever go to the cinema and realise the whole film was not as action packed as the 2 minute trailer you saw? I have, I never spent 6 months moaning about it on their forum though YMMV

PS please point out which ships in the trailer are players and which are AI, I missed that bit, maybe I am stupid and missed it, tyvm.
 
Last edited:
Is there anything to even be scared about in the game? It's all make pretend. The only thing that matters is how enjoyable the experience is, as it makes no sense to ever play a game if the experience isn't enjoyable.

Which is why I flat out refuse to open myself to non-consensual PvP. It sounds about as fun as cleaning a murky public toilet.

Nicely put. I tried to Rep you, but the button is being uncooperative.

It's interesting how many of the pro Open brigade resort to snide insults about how people who can't handle Open must be cowards, scared of the pixels on their screens. I think it speaks volumes more about them than it does about people who play the game the way they want to. :)
 
Perhaps we should start a thread... :D

Fair point but the solo bonus needs to be bigger than groups to compensate for the lack of support, I would leave open out of and start a solo vs groups thread but it would get merged lol., bloody Mobius with their wings and no PVP outside CZ, solo needs a buff to fix this to balance my solo time too.
 
I hear you can eventually recruit NPCs for your cause eventually.

Its planned for a future update, until it happens Solo needs to be compensated as its "the real hard mode". Wings in open & groups give the potential to earn 5% for every trader you escort, I would suggest a 15% buff to solo until FD make solo earnings equal to groups and open if we want the "modes" to be balanced.
 
I too find it pretty obnoxious. I've been gaming all my life. Me personally, my life is full of risk, every single day. Between being in business for myself, my employees, my clients, it's chalked full of risk, & conflict. To say any game is risky is pretty much utter nonsensical, but I guess some feel like there being risky. I play to relax, I know it's hard for some to take, but I bet a lot of folks play to relax here too.

Many have been brain washed from other gaming companies that, "Risk vs Reward" is a must have, it's not true, but many whole heatedly believe it. I'm not of a mind set of this. I believe the most important part of any game is the participants need to have fun, and enjoy playing it. All else is secondary.

The other catch word is, "it has to be balanced". Let me tell you from experience a little imbalance can make games much much more interesting, and way funner to play.

Risk versus reward is cobblers. Smart devs don't reward players for simply taking risks, they reward players for doing the content the devs already think will be the most enjoyable to the player.

The opposite, risk not being rewarded, is often true; ever wondered why many games will give, at most, an achievement for beating challenges above what the player was expected to tackle? Devs don't want to push common players into doing the most challenging content, otherwise they might fail too often and become discouraged. And the players that challenging content, with its harder challenges, is aimed at will typically do it even without rewards.

Risk versus reward also isn't true in the real world. It can sometimes look like that simply because people won't pursue activities whose perceived risk is too great for the rewards, but what is being rewarded isn't the risk itself. In fact, a common pursuit in about every human endeavor is to find ways to reduce risk.

And, BTW, offering rewards that increase performance for beating the hardest challenges is, sincerely, dumb. It means you are rewarding the players that actually seek the harder content by making the game easier, which is one heck of a headscratcher. Kinda remind me of the plethora games that have a broken difficulty choice exactly because the dev fell into that trap, showering the player that chooses the higher difficulty with rewards and unwittingly making their hard difficulty actually the game's easy mode.
 
Kinda remind me of the plethora games that have a broken difficulty choice exactly because the dev fell into that trap, showering the player that chooses the higher difficulty with rewards and unwittingly making their hard difficulty actually the game's easy mode.

This, exactly this.
 
It is never fair for one party or the other. But since Solo guys want Solo play. Why do they care about Community Goals. They are for the Community. I mean real people here. They cant see them anyway so why do they really care about those...

Maybe we can get a comment from FD on this, possibly Edward the "community manager" can explain to me why I am not one of the "real people here" because I haven't played in open for a while after so long since PB in open, best I not buy a copy of ED for my best mate who has crap broadband, I have known him 25 years but I doubt I could explain why he should play the game but be not a "real" person here. But I wouldn't dump him for a few extra CR either, guess I am a crap friend.
 
I decree that the maximum capacity of stations and 'island' instances be improved and doubled/tripled. More players, more NPCs, THE WORKS.Also more diversity and cool stuff in the Community Goals and more Events overall.

I agree 100%, all you need to do is optimize the whole internet by 200/300 % and buy everyone a new PC that will keep up, can I be first mine is a little slow plus you got a free video card, its got to be my turn next in the interests of balance & fairness.

I wish FD had thought of this, geez did FD never make a game before, so obvious, I am kicking myself I missed it, I feel so stupid now I realise how simple it really is.

Maybe one of the router guys can do some costing for FD to see how much it would cost to resolve this silly little oversight.
 
The game seems to be having quite a bit of an identity crisis right now.

It's been pretty plainly stated by dev team that they want equal opportunity to open, closed and solo options. So it's probably best we all operate under that assumption.

I've also seen a lot of risk/reward discussion in this thread and in others, and have in fact relied on that analysis myself in discussion of changes that might be considered in the game. However let's step back a moment and remember why many of us play games, in general, and elite, in particular.

Personally, and I feel like I might speak for a lot of those here or others who might consider playing the game who are fans of open-world games -- I play for the experience. I don't play to accrue the most money (I'm sure some do but I feel as though they are in the minority and may be better served applying such skills to the stock market), or get the biggest ship, or whatever other single pieces of content there might be. I play for the moments where I can go "whoa, that was so cool"...it doesn't really matter if it's in solo, group, or open play. I had equal enjoyability and fun playing the Mass Effect series (which for those not aware was single-player for the most part...the story at least) as I did playing Dayz online in servers of 50+ players, at least half of which were trying to kill me and zero my progress (which may be minutes, hours, days or weeks in the making).

I think right now the debate is focused on rewards and how to balance these in solo or group or open play, and I think it's the wrong focus. Instead, I think the question should be "How can we make more 'that was so cool' moments?"

People are willing to risk what they've worked for if they feel like they've gotten something out of it in the end, and that experience can be part (or whole) of the reward in and of itself. I think it's easy in general to get bogged down in the details of "how do we balance x with y and z when there are 100,000 different players" but if you look at the most popular games, and thus infer from those that people must be having fun because they're popular for a reason...it's that they allow the user to feel like he's made some impact in the game on some level.

Imagine this: A community event where players had to get some unique research items from a remote sector far from what is currently colonized space to a research hub at System X (insert relevant system here). However, a pirate cartel is currently in possession of one of the products of the assimilation of this research data, something that they want to prevent others from obtaining so they can maintain their astronomical bidding prices for governments interested in unlocking its secrets.

There would be three steps to the operation. The first would be to scan asteroid belts in a certain remote region of space to detect fragments of the scientific artifacts that were once on a planet that long ago was destroyed by a force of unimaginable magnitude. Then miners would need to mine for the rare fragment. Haulers would then need to move these fragments to a high-security system bordering System X (Call it system Y) and sell it at a specific station, creating a global "dump" that would track the number of fragments and adjust their price according to availability. All of the above elements could be done in open, solo or closed group play.

The last leg, however, would only be available in open play. Smugglers would need to move the stockpile from System X to System Y station, currently in anarchy due to the enormous pirate influx attempting to exert dominance in this market. If the smugglers/miners/haulers could do all of this in a certain period of time, they would be rewarded with a large credit compensation and a special logo for their ships that would be unique to the event. If the pirates win, then they get a similar prize. Furthermore, with PP, you could possibly reward various factions for certain achievements (i.e. most relics discovered, most total relics hauled, most relics smuggled, most smugglers killed, etc).

This would allow for everyone, no matter where they prefer to play, to contribute in a meaningful way to the event, and actually see their impact matter. If there weren't enough miners or haulers, people could swap to discovery, mining or hauling in whatever format they preferred to help boost the effort as a whole and ensure they got their unique, one time reward. Heck, maybe even PVE only players if they saw the relics they spent hours searching and mining and hauling were getting cut off by pirates and not making it to the station, maybe they'd volunteer their own ships to help run escort wings to ensure the Type 9s trying to smuggle at least had some sort of protection. If the relic supply ran dry, maybe smugglers and escorts would hop into an asp to help push the discovery and long-range hauling effort.

I think these are the types of creative solutions that can be implemented to make so many more "cool" moments. Give both PVE and PVP players very cool, unique objectives to do and watch what creativity and unique solutions offer humanity in return.
 
That's a pretty poor argument. Try harder.

Maybe you're seeing this over and over because it might be true. No, wait, just answer a question...

What scares you more?

1. An AI opponent.
2. A human you have never met before in a ship full of nasty weapons who just interdicted you.

Neither. Played in a pvp space sim that makes the combat in this one child's play. With full Newtonian physics that required skill not just point and squeeze.
My STATEMENT was not an argument but an opinion. Sorry you couldn't see the difference.
 
Last edited:
Neither. Played in a pvp space sim that makes the combat in this one child's play. With full Newtonian physics that required skill not just point and squeeze.
My STATEMENT was not an argument but an opinion. Sorry you couldn't see the difference.

Oh give me a break. You're dodging the question. That answer is a cop-out. Pony up and put your cards on the table. Do you have chips in this game or not?

The question stands. Answer it.
 
Oh give me a break. You're dodging the question. That answer is a cop-out. Pony up and put your cards on the table. Do you have chips in this game or not?

The question stands. Answer it.

I have 2 cards in my hand and there is 2 Clubs, Q Clubs, and Q Spades in the hole. The question is, do you feel lucky punk? Well, do you? :D
 
Oh give me a break. You're dodging the question. That answer is a cop-out. Pony up and put your cards on the table. Do you have chips in this game or not?

The question stands. Answer it.

I could say the same to you... I asked you a question, but you chose not to answer it. (Post 1523 to save you having to search for it.)

And I also don't get scared playing computer games.
 
Last edited:
I too find it pretty obnoxious. I've been gaming all my life. Me personally, my life is full of risk, every single day. Between being in business for myself, my employees, my clients, it's chalked full of risk, & conflict. To say any game is risky is pretty much utter nonsensical, but I guess some feel like there being risky. I play to relax, I know it's hard for some to take, but I bet a lot of folks play to relax here too.

Many have been brain washed from other gaming companies that, "Risk vs Reward" is a must have, it's not true, but many whole heatedly believe it. I'm not of a mind set of this. I believe the most important part of any game is the participants need to have fun, and enjoy playing it. All else is secondary.

The other catch word is, "it has to be balanced". Let me tell you from experience a little imbalance can make games much much more interesting, and way funner to play.
Im not brainwashed by anything that risk vs rewards is a thing
I know it's a thing. In CSGO, when you are 1v2 and you have a weapon. You have choice, take the risk and win the round(this is a competitive esports game) or just run and hide somewhere so you keep the weapon next round. Risk vs REward. Simple stuff FD seem to be blind too. That round you amy have won could be definitive for the entire game. But here in ED? Do we even have risk ? I don't think so, cuz there is no one to aply that risk on you since everyone is in Solo. FD should actually state somewhere that maybe half if not more of the players are in Solo and you will never see them. Maybe some people won't bvuy into the game then. Yeah i play to interract with others and that's what many think they are offered. Then they come here and realise there is absolutely nobody, even at CG's. It's a community goal for gods sake and giving that 500000 people bought the game you would think at least 10k would be there right ? Nope you would be utterly wrong cuz every instance is just 30 NPC's and 2 players, maybe 3 or 4 players. And thta's in CG's, the rest is not even worth mentioning.
 
Last edited:
Oh give me a break. You're dodging the question. That answer is a cop-out. Pony up and put your cards on the table. Do you have chips in this game or not?

The question stands. Answer it.

He did answer it: "Neither." I would answer the same thing because neither of those options scare me. If you aren't satisfied with that answer, I would suggest the fault lies in the question.

You might perhaps ask with offers the greater challenge but even that is dependent on several variables. An Elite Ananconda NPC might well offer more of challenge than, for example, me.
 
Last edited:
He did answer it: "Netiher." I would answer the same thing because neither of those options scare me. If you aren't satisfied with that answer, I would suggest the fault lies in the question.

You might perhaps ask with offers the greater challenge but even that is dependent on several variables. An Elite Ananconda NPC might well offer more of challenge than, for example, me.
There is no way an NPC can ever kill you. It can maybe more of a challenge, but all you have to do is point your ship away and press J. Magic will happen while the NPC tries to take out your hull, cuz you know, god forbid we eve shoot those thrusters or the powerplant....
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom