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

[DaggerSnake]

Any solution that relies on players choosing to be become your victims won't work and any solution that forces players to play in Open isn't fair and goes against the core design of the game. They both also ignore Solo pirates.

I think a global agreement is to never force anyone. But creating interesting choices is what is missing. Will a player choose the risk of becoming a victim in Open for a huge payout? Or will they choose a standard payout with risk minimized by filtering out any adversarial player interaction (solo). Open vs solo are not equal and the recent Titan black contest showed that goals, risks, and rewards can be seperated. The precedence was set there.

I look at those modes as just risk filters, but with no reward change.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think a global agreement is to never force anyone. But creating interesting choices is what is missing. Will a player choose the risk of becoming a victim in Open for a huge payout? Or will they choose a standard payout with risk minimized by filtering out any adversarial player interaction (solo).

It will be their choice, of course - no-one can foretell the results.

Open vs solo are not equal and the recent Titan black contest showed that goals, risks, and rewards can be seperated. The precedence was set there.

I look at those modes as just risk filters, but with no reward change.

The "Race to Elite" and Titan Black contests were presumably run exclusively in open so that no-one would be able to complain that the winners had in some way "cheated" in "easy mode". The fact that CGs and Power Play are open to all modes would imply that these features are not considered the same way as the open-only contests.

 

[SteveLaw]

I think a global agreement is to never force anyone. But creating interesting choices is what is missing. Will a player choose the risk of becoming a victim in Open for a huge payout? Or will they choose a standard payout with risk minimized by filtering out any adversarial player interaction (solo). Open vs solo are not equal and the recent Titan black contest showed that goals, risks, and rewards can be seperated. The precedence was set there.

I look at those modes as just risk filters, but with no reward change.

That's what they are designed as.

How do you reward a trader for becoming a victim without rewarding them just for trading in systems away from other players or from tweaking their router to block other players? Open play is too diverse to give broad rewards to incentivise specific behaviours.

All official competitions (triple Elite, Titan Black) have been restricted to Open only yes, that's a very good point. They were designed as a competition and were therefore made fair by making it Open only. No other aspect of the game is Open only so it can be deduced that no other aspect of the game is designed as a competition and should not be tret like one or balanced like one.

 

[Joe Spivey]

That's what they are designed as.

How do you reward a trader for becoming a victim without rewarding them just for trading in systems away from other players or from tweaking their router to block other players? Open play is too diverse to give broad rewards to incentivise specific behaviours.

All official competitions (triple Elite, Titan Black) have been restricted to Open only yes, that's a very good point. They were designed as a competition and were therefore made fair by making it Open only. No other aspect of the game is Open only so it can be deduced that no other aspect of the game is designed as a competition and should not be tret like one or balanced like one.

Damn, I want to rep again... have some virtual rep and a round of applause as I sit here at my desk attracting the attention of my colleagues.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Any solution that relies on players choosing to become pirate victims won't work and any solution that forces players to play in Open isn't fair and goes against the core design of the game. They both also ignore Solo pirates.

Players choosing to allow player interaction, negative or otherwise, isn't that a core design of the game, as well?

I also made no mention of forcing players into open, so Idk why you mentioned that in your post. There's dozens of idea that don't ban mode switching and yet you jump to defend that one.

As for the solo pirates, I didn't say that it had to be one or the other. I said buffing npcs was needed, I didn't say other ideas would be better and we shouldn't buff npcs. I support a combination of ideas, and I think that's what's needed for piracy.

 

[SteveLaw]

Players choosing to allow player interaction, negative or otherwise, isn't that a core design of the game, as well?

Of course it is and those that choose it will choose it or not now. That doesn't seem to be working out for pirates though, hence why change is being called for.

I didn't say that you did mention forcing players. My original post was just a post, you replied to me. I was listing other possible "solutions" and describing why they weren't viable. I've only seen those as being relevant to drawing in piracy victims.

Which solutions do you think are viable? What are these "dozens of solutions"?

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Which solutions do you think are viable? What are these "dozens of solutions"?

Giving a boost to trading in open, harsher punishment for murder, increase to the survivability of trade ships, cargo insurance (but as I said, it has to be done well), lower rebuy when killed by a player, an overhaul of the mass lock mechanics, open only commodities that disappear if you change to solo, npc/player wings(maybe one could be free if you are in open), better system security response in high security systems, cracking down on griefing (not player killing but griefing) ramming and such, better non lethal piracy options, more escape options for traders.

There you go, a dozen ideas to increase the amount of players in open. Those are just the ones on the top of my head. I'd support all, or none depending on how well they were done. I also think a combination of them would work well together.

 

[SteveLaw]

Giving a boost to trading in open, harsher punishment for murder, increase to the survivability of trade ships, cargo insurance (but as I said, it has to be done well), lower rebuy when killed by a player, an overhaul of the mass lock mechanics, open only commodities that disappear if you change to solo, npc/player wings(maybe one could be free if you are in open), better system security response in high security systems, cracking down on griefing (not player killing but griefing) ramming and such, better non lethal piracy options, more escape options for traders.

There you go, a dozen ideas to increase the amount of players in open. Those are just the ones on the top of my head. I'd support all, or none depending on how well they were done. I also think a combination of them would work well together.

None of those address pirates specifically except potentially cargo insurance but that alone won't encourage players to Open, or would just remove some of the bad feelings of being a victim. In fact several of them probably help to reduce pirates' effectiveness (so pirates would immediately be calling nerf).

The ones that might actually encourage more traders into Open (but honestly, not as many as you think because Solo players are being generalised and many of their motives still misundertood) have nothing to prevent players utilising them in player-free systems. That doesn't help pirates.

 

[Ian Phillips]

Keep things civil.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

None of those address pirates specifically except potentially cargo insurance but that alone won't encourage players to Open, or would just remove some of the bad feelings of being a victim. In fact several of them probably help to reduce pirates' effectiveness (so pirates would immediately be calling nerf).

The ones that might actually encourage more traders into Open (but honestly, not as many as you think because Solo players are being generalised and many of their motives still misundertood) have nothing to prevent players utilising them in player-free systems. That doesn't help pirates.

Wait you asked for ideas to fix piracy? I thought the idea was to encourage more people to play in open?

I know a few of these are buffs to traders, but they're needed buffs imo. That's why I said some udeas will work well together. Piracy needs buffs, as well as open trading needs buffs. The non lethal one effects both pirates and traders, as well.

Also I know nothing FD does will draw everyone into open, short of banning solo, of course(which won't happen). The goal isn't to draw everyone into open, it's to drawn in the people who are hesitant, and would play if a few things were changed.

 

[SteveLaw]

Wait you asked for ideas to fix piracy?

Look back to my post which you replied to in the first place.

 

[Angorak]

From these it would seem that unless PKing for the sake of it is in some way disincentivised then it may be that Open remains relatively player-trader free.... Hopefully the changes to the bounty system in 1.3 will introduce more meaningful consequences that may go some way to reducing this behaviour.

I don't think it goes far enough in 1.3. The penalties come nowhere close to the losses potentially incurred by the victim. They should, at the very least, equal the cargo loss. These guys are spewing "the risk is not equal" bilge....their risk is NOT equal to that taken by a trader in open...they don't want the risk of doing the time from doing the crime.

 

[Fyrd Judge]

I would like to see those that play in Open being rewarded with far more in credit, than those who risk nothing by playing in Solo.

 

[SteveLaw]

I would like to see those that play in open being rewarded far more in credit, than those who risk nothing by playing in Solo.

I'm sure you would but the question is why should they? Why should Frontier make those changes? When was the game ever advertised as offered more rewards for more risk? Risk isn't even equal for everyone in Open mode anyway.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Look back to my post which you replied to in the first place.

Ok I see it now, stuff that helps pirates but, isn't about drawing players in. Let's see:

Better limpets, interactive npcs (ones you can demand cargo from), more non lethal piracy options(weapons that do less dmg against hull but more against subsystems, dead drives stop the ship, etc), better prices if you have a high rep in an anarchy system, open only commodities if they are more expensive than normal ones (they'd also have a higher profit for traders), A pirate reputation system (it'll keep track of your kills against traders, and bounty hunters and show it to everyone), better pirate bounty board missions (no more damned toxic waste ones), letters of marque to allow "legit" piracy, drones which will be here later today.

That's 8, not including drones.

 

[Jockey79]

I would like to see those that play in Open being rewarded with far more in credit, than those who risk nothing by playing in Solo.

Please go and read the opening post of this thread and post 3.

Also, people in this thread have played in open and see nothing wrong with it.
Remember, Open is its own reward

 

[Fyrd Judge]

Please go and read the opening post of this thread and post 3.

Also, people in this thread have played in open and see nothing wrong with it.
Remember, Open is its own reward

Post 3:
"Online SOLO play where the player is in the same universe as all other players, but will see no humans (essentially a private group of one)." essentially a private group of one

Exactly my point. Solo is like swimming in the sea with out sharks, Open is swimming with the sharks. As i said, i would like to see more credit for those prepared to take risks

 

[Robert Maynard]

Post 3:
"Online SOLO play where the player is in the same universe as all other players, but will see no humans (essentially a private group of one)." essentially a private group of one

Exactly my point. Solo is like swimming in the sea with out sharks, Open is swimming with the sharks. As i said, i would like to see more credit for those prepared to take risks

.... surely the attraction (for some) of Open is other players and the unpredictable nature of humans? That is the difference between Solo and Open (with Private Groups being somewhere in between, depending on the agreed ruleset of the Private Group) - why should Open players be rewarded for selecting a game mode?

 

[Mr_Blastman]

Any solution that relies on players choosing to become pirate victims won't work and any solution that forces players to play in Open isn't fair and goes against the core design of the game. They both also ignore Solo pirates.

I guess I come from a different generation or something. I was taught when growing up to face danger and challenges by coming up for a solution to fight it. That means if I were a trader...

1. Take a trade ship that can fight back. (Python, Anaconda)

-or-

2. Hire bodyguards and give them a cut of my run.

To me, this is more fun. We can do this now. Traders have had this solution since the Wings update. Why do traders still insist trading in solo instead of taking this option? Is it the challenge? The hassle? The reduction of profits?

I don't understand it as it isn't talked about. However, as ya'll have illustrated here, traders trade in solo because it is less risk. Which is exactly my main point for separating the modes. Less risky modes stay in less risky modes.

- - - Updated - - -

How do you reward a trader for becoming a victim without rewarding them just for trading in systems away from other players or from tweaking their router to block other players? Open play is too diverse to give broad rewards to incentivise specific behaviours.

Think of it in reverse. By encouraging traders to trade in solo with easy profits, pirates and bounty hunters are the victims because they have nothing to do. They have nobody to hunt thus their careers become irrelevant and all that is left is playing in solo mode.

I have heard from plenty of traders in open how rewarding it is to trade in open. They love the thrill, excitement and challenge that it adds. They certainly didn't seem like they were being victimized in the least.

 

[Fyrd Judge]

.... surely the attraction (for some) of Open is other players and the unpredictable nature of humans? That is the difference between Solo and Open (with Private Groups being somewhere in between, depending on the agreed ruleset of the Private Group) - why should Open players be rewarded for selecting a game mode?

It isn't the game mode that i make a point of, it is the different type of game play where one is with risk, the other is without.

For example a commander with 6 weeks worth of data is killed near the centre of the galaxy by a player. Another player decides i will avoid all that and keep avoiding it by going Solo and hence has no chance of ever losing any data. Why should those in open not be rewarded extra for their risks and huge losses?