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

[fademist]

According to this thread, there is what - 5 people left in Open now (and they spend more time in the thread than the game )?
And according to other threads, they are the "gankers", "griefers" and "exploiters" that everyone else wants to avoid.

Unless FD actually give us some numbers, no one will ever know how many people are where. The crime update may bring more people to Open, not sure why - but it may, for a week or two.

i didnt speak about numbers lol.....but from what i read on beta discussion have that feeling ....

 

[Mercy Killing]

i didnt speak about numbers lol.....but from what i read on beta discussion have that feeling ....

Well, from what -I've- read on the beta discussions....open, group or solo won't matter at all.

If Sarah Jane has cranked up the difficulty of the NPC's too high for the casual players.....this game is going to bleed population right quickly.

 

[KevinMillican]

Your actual solutions, while they look fine to me, really don't address any of the Open/Solo/Group "problems" (not necessarily your fault, your thread got dumped in here to die - welcome, pull up a chair, would you like a drink? ). They are just general ship balancing ideas, 6) in particular would benefit all modes and NPC AI is something that is constantly being improved anyway.

Thanks for your considered reply - and yes, having spent time writing my post, I didn't really want it dropped in this one !

The main point I was trying to make is that if you're not actively seeking PvP, you tend to equip your ship differently (not always, I admit). Reducing the possible variance between strength of ship defences and weapons (for the same ship model) might reduce the imbalance when a PvP player interdicts someone who is geared up to PvE.

I agree about improving AI - I have posted in other threads that I think Anarchy and Feudal systems should be much more dangerous but offer higher trading profits to make it worthwhile. Other systems would (and should) be safer if AI police ships did their job better and were more proactive. In corporate states, which were traditionally the safest, they should be patrolling SC and interdicting anyone with a bounty.

Pirates should feel as endangered in corporate states as traders do in anarchic systems.

 

[fademist]

Well, from what -I've- read on the beta discussions....open, group or solo won't matter at all.

If Sarah Jane View attachment 40168 has cranked up the difficulty of the NPC's too high for the casual players.....this game is going to bleed population right quickly.

i dont think will be npc problem ....but more of powergrind problem;p

 

[W0OCQCK]

Well, from what -I've- read on the beta discussions....open, group or solo won't matter at all.

If Sarah Jane View attachment 40168 has cranked up the difficulty of the NPC's too high for the casual players.....this game is going to bleed population right quickly.

Agreed.......

 

[W0OCQCK]

Agreed.......

Well if they make solo imposable to play that's one way to get everyone out of solo I guess. Probably out of the game too!! Just an unintended consequence I guess.

 

[DaveB]

...the Background Simulator also has a competitive aspect of it in its nature. The way the player interact with Minor and Major Factions is apparent as you help them (or harm them to prevent them from expanding) and they in turn, expand. By nature, this sort of game mechanic is competitive and conflicts it within the all three modes, in my personal opinion is The competitive bit should be in Open Play so they openly compete...

You're still competing with other players in terms of your effect on the background sim if you're playing solo - it's just less direct in that you will only ever encounter direct opposition from NPCs.

Suppose there are two groups of players. One wants to increase the influence of a local minor faction and take over system control for a different major faction. The other wants to maintain the status quo and keep the system aligned with its current major faction.

In the first group, Arthur and Brenda are playing in open, Charlie, Dianne, Eric and Fiona are playing in PvE groups and George, Heather, Ian and Janet are playing solo.
In the second group, Amanda, Bill, Catherine and David are playing in open, Elizabeth, Frank and Gabrielle are playing in PvE groups and Hector, Iris and John are playing solo.

Following what you propose the first group is outnumbered 2:1 but that's unfairly penalizing 8 players for the benefit of 6. With 10 players on each side it's still an even match. You are considering "competitive advantage" only from the standpoint of direct confrontation between players but that's not all there is to achieving ANY goal in ED, never has been.

If you and I were both traders working for opposing factions, if I'm a better trader than you are I'll gain my faction more influence by making it more profit - even without considering any trade missions at all. We're still in competition with each other whatever mode either of us plays in. Similarly if you and were more combat oriented and decided to support our chosen faction through piracy of the oppositions vessels we would have exactly the same opportunity to damage the opposing factions influence as each other - if I were not to be up for PvP action I could spend my time boiling the oppositions NPCs in a private group or solo, while if you were up for PvP action you could still do the same in open, you could boil as many NPCs there as I do in my PvE group PLUS you get the opportunity for PvP action as well. If you choose not to do that but only go looking for PvP action then it's your choice that limits the effect you have on faction influence compared to mine, not the game mechanics. That's fine, play it however you have the most fun, but if that is not the most optimal strategy for maximizing your effect on the background sim that's not the games fault.

 

[Roybe]

You're still competing with other players in terms of your effect on the background sim if you're playing solo - it's just less direct in that you will only ever encounter direct opposition from NPCs.

Suppose there are two groups of players. One wants to increase the influence of a local minor faction and take over system control for a different major faction. The other wants to maintain the status quo and keep the system aligned with its current major faction.

In the first group, Arthur and Brenda are playing in open, Charlie, Dianne, Eric and Fiona are playing in PvE groups and George, Heather, Ian and Janet are playing solo.
In the second group, Amanda, Bill, Catherine and David are playing in open, Elizabeth, Frank and Gabrielle are playing in PvE groups and Hector, Iris and John are playing solo.

Following what you propose the first group is outnumbered 2:1 but that's unfairly penalizing 8 players for the benefit of 6. With 10 players on each side it's still an even match. You are considering "competitive advantage" only from the standpoint of direct confrontation between players but that's not all there is to achieving ANY goal in ED, never has been.

If you and I were both traders working for opposing factions, if I'm a better trader than you are I'll gain my faction more influence by making it more profit - even without considering any trade missions at all. We're still in competition with each other whatever mode either of us plays in. Similarly if you and were more combat oriented and decided to support our chosen faction through piracy of the oppositions vessels we would have exactly the same opportunity to damage the opposing factions influence as each other - if I were not to be up for PvP action I could spend my time boiling the oppositions NPCs in a private group or solo, while if you were up for PvP action you could still do the same in open, you could boil as many NPCs there as I do in my PvE group PLUS you get the opportunity for PvP action as well. If you choose not to do that but only go looking for PvP action then it's your choice that limits the effect you have on faction influence compared to mine, not the game mechanics. That's fine, play it however you have the most fun, but if that is not the most optimal strategy for maximizing your effect on the background sim that's not the games fault.

So it good to compel Open players to Private? Which is the point of the discussion. You offer a Hobsons choice. Which really isn't a choice at all...if you are interested in the faction part of the game...or the outcome of a competitive CG. The choice is you can play as you like, but if you stay in Open your reward is to limited in an area of the game that is important. To say it differently, if you play against others you cannot expect to play the BGS or win competitive CG's.

 

[fademist]

So it good to compel Open players to Private? Which is the point of the discussion. You offer a Hobsons choice. Which really isn't a choice at all...if you are interested in the faction part of the game...or the outcome of a competitive CG. The choice is you can play as you like, but if you stay in Open your reward is to limited in an area of the game that is important. To say it differently, if you play against others you cannot expect to play the BGS or win competitive CG's.

what stop u to recruit for ur community ppl from solo/group and coordinate from forums ?

 

[Roland2]

Well, from what -I've- read on the beta discussions....open, group or solo won't matter at all.

If Sarah Jane... has cranked up the difficulty of the NPC's too high for the casual players.....this game is going to bleed population right quickly.

Agreed.......

Well if they make solo imposable to play that's one way to get everyone out of solo I guess. Probably out of the game too!! Just an unintended consequence I guess.

I played the beta in a RES with a ship identical to by current build (Viper, gimballed pulse lasers and gimballed multi-cannons). There were two kinds of RES, High RES had no police force, low RES had a lot of police force (Too many in my opinion). My first opponent was a diamondback, after that I continued to take out cobras and vipers and eagles. I didn't notice any real differences, which probably means I'm to inept to notice whatever the changes were.

Bottom line: I played in RESs in solo for over an hour and didn't get killed, therefor in my opinion playing in solo won't be an issue.

 

[DaveB]

So it good to compel Open players to Private? Which is the point of the discussion. You offer a Hobsons choice. Which really isn't a choice at all...if you are interested in the faction part of the game...or the outcome of a competitive CG. The choice is you can play as you like, but if you stay in Open your reward is to limited in an area of the game that is important. To say it differently, if you play against others you cannot expect to play the BGS or win competitive CG's.

I think you slightly misinterpret what I was saying. I wasn't saying anything about compelling folks to private as a strategy. If we're both in a combat-oriented goal and I'm in a PvE group and you're in open, we can each boil as many NPCs as the other. You get to add in the PvP action as well. The strategy choice I was referring to is a player in open ignoring the NPCs and going full-bore PvP only (as many folks that enjoy PvP seem to do). On the face of it it looks like you're being more effective because you're taking out opposition players but in fact you're not. You're still going to want to boil as many NPCs as you can, its just that in open mode taking on the opposing players directly is a bonus.

As for competitive CGs, as I mentioned in my previous post, a single CG that is oriented to anything but pure combat is almost always going to be unbalanced between modes. A balanced set of CGs considered as a whole, where each ingame role is equally represented on ALL sides involved is required for the existing mechanics not to create pressure towards one mode or another - a single CG in the set might be skewed towards encouraging a particular mode but so long as all the biases in the set add up to zero, the game mechanic works. If that's not the case it is the fault of the overall scenario design not the game mechanic.

 

[Roybe]

what stop u to recruit for ur community ppl from solo/group and coordinate from forums ?

Actually, we did that! Well, we couldn't figure out a way to try to bring on the solo players, we just had to hope they realized they were invited also! ;P But if you check the Forums for Mobius, you will see we reached out. Great fun was had by all. However, that still ignores the fact that our 'Open only' players were forced to choose between winning and playing in Open during these CG's.

 

[fademist]

Actually, we did that! Well, we couldn't figure out a way to try to bring on the solo players, we just had to hope they realized they were invited also! ;P But if you check the Forums for Mobius, you will see we reached out. Great fun was had by all. However, that still ignores the fact that our 'Open only' players were forced to choose between winning and playing in Open during these CG's.

if u have recruit many from solo/group ..open ppl do their thing at open at others at their mode

 

[Roybe]

I think you slightly misinterpret what I was saying. I wasn't saying anything about compelling folks to private as a strategy. If we're both in a combat-oriented goal and I'm in a PvE group and you're in open, we can each boil as many NPCs as the other. You get to add in the PvP action as well. The strategy choice I was referring to is a player in open ignoring the NPCs and going full-bore PvP only (as many folks that enjoy PvP seem to do). On the face of it it looks like you're being more effective because you're taking out opposition players but in fact you're not. You're still going to want to boil as many NPCs as you can, its just that in open mode taking on the opposing players directly is a bonus.

As for competitive CGs, as I mentioned in my previous post, a single CG that is oriented to anything but pure combat is almost always going to be unbalanced between modes. A balanced set of CGs considered as a whole, where each ingame role is equally represented on ALL sides involved is required for the existing mechanics not to create pressure towards one mode or another - a single CG in the set might be skewed towards encouraging a particular mode but so long as all the biases in the set add up to zero, the game mechanic works. If that's not the case it is the fault of the overall scenario design not the game mechanic.

Agreed. ;P That's why I've come to the conclusion that there should never be a competing set of goals like there were in the War of Lugh. If they go down that road again, without changes to the Open vs. issue, this will become a bigger issue than it already is. Or...Open players just have to suck it up, accept that they are going to have to grind in Private modes, to win. There is room for compromise on this issue, but those that are privileged, cannot see they are and think their rights are being tromped upon.

For those to understand my last statement:

http://www.boredpanda.com/lesson-about-privilege-awareness/

Truth.

 

[DaveB]

...we couldn't figure out a way to try to bring on the solo players, we just had to hope they realized they were invited also!...

I participated (on your side) in all 3 modes and had a blast I'm sure you did get at least some of the dedicated solo players too because some of them do actually read the forums and would also have seen the CGs for the later stages of the campaign in-game.

 

[fademist]

Agreed. ;P That's why I've come to the conclusion that there should never be a competing set of goals like there were in the War of Lugh. If they go down that road again, without changes to the Open vs. issue, this will become a bigger issue than it already is. Or...Open players just have to suck it up, accept that they are going to have to grind in Private modes, to win. There is room for compromise on this issue, but those that are privileged, cannot see they are and think their rights are being tromped upon.

For those to understand my last statement:

http://www.boredpanda.com/lesson-about-privilege-awareness/

Truth.

so its fair to scr solo/group for open hm ....

 

[DaveB]

so its fair to scr solo/group for open hm ....

Be fair to Roybe, he's not saying that at all - he's saying that the set of CGs as inserted into the game for the War of Lugh was inherently unbalanced in that playing open put one side at a disadvantage. A differently designed set of competing CGs could have been more balanced and would not have caused the pressure to play in one mode or another in order for your side to succeed.

 

[fademist]

Be fair to Roybe, he's not saying that at all - he's saying that the set of CGs as inserted into the game for the War of Lugh was inherently unbalanced in that playing open put one side at a disadvantage. A differently designed set of competing CGs could have been more balanced and would not have caused the pressure to play in one mode or another in order for your side to succeed.

that with cg's is just an excuse for that agenda

 

[Faded Glory]

Well if they make solo imposable to play that's one way to get everyone out of solo I guess. Probably out of the game too!! Just an unintended consequence I guess.

Well, the same NPC's are in Open too.

 

[Faded Glory]

I played the beta in a RES with a ship identical to by current build (Viper, gimballed pulse lasers and gimballed multi-cannons). There were two kinds of RES, High RES had no police force, low RES had a lot of police force (Too many in my opinion). My first opponent was a diamondback, after that I continued to take out cobras and vipers and eagles. I didn't notice any real differences, which probably means I'm to inept to notice whatever the changes were.

Bottom line: I played in RESs in solo for over an hour and didn't get killed, therefor in my opinion playing in solo won't be an issue.

While the NPC's can easily be programmed to be able to beat pretty much any player, that's not necessarily their purpose. A challenge doesn't have to end up as someone dead (and I've seen a few PvP fights on Youtube that didn't end up with a kill), what they are now is more difficult to destroy. They fly with much more agility, even the lower ranked ones, they seem to use shield cells, or maybe their load outs just mean their shields charge faster, and quite often, at least for me, they are in wings. The main change with them is that killing them takes a bit longer, and that's not necessarily a bad thing.