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

[Robert Maynard]

Well the "arena" design is going against the open world idea of the game.
What about open pvp AND dedicated combat zones where killing a commander is actually "worth it", worth the risk that you take compared to the NPC flying the same ship?
Believe me, a game with huge battles in space, a true MASSIVE multiplayer space sim would work and the core audience, the young one, would love it. Movies are pretty popular and just think about all the film fans enjoying huge battles in space.
Elite can be all that with some minor changed (minor but expensive and hard to implement!).

I expected the p2p solution and the 32 player limit to be the first step on the way to a full server=client connection with regional servers, supporting the open play where we can meet ANYONE in the system, interact with them without "loading screens" (the transition between supercruise and normal space is just that!) and allow more ways to interact with more people at the same time.

I miss the MASSIVE feeling in the multiplayer part here. And its not possible with the current system...

While an arena may be inconsistent with the open world nature of the game, it may actually be necessary - the galaxy is just too big to guarantee the sort of player density in any location to satisfy PvP players.

The networking system that the game employs will probably never allow huge battles in space - the 32 player limit is a hard one and it requires 528 concurrent connections to make it work for those 32 players. Increase the 32 to 128 and there would need to be 8,256 concurrent connections.

I do not expect the networking model to be changed at this stage, especially as we will have XBox One and PS4 players joining us in due course. The transitions / loading screens are necessary to allow the game to reframe its reference for the player and probably won't be going away either.

I would expect that many who have been here for a while are quite familiar with the limitations of the P2P/server-lite networking model - which is probably a necessity to avoid having to pay a subscription for the game.

 

[WlLL0W]

i used to play a game. i wont mention the name of it.

there was 1v1 dogfighting
4v4 dogfighting

but my favourite mode was 2v2v2v2 arena

four teams of two.

each team had a base and a fleet, and the idea was to destroy the opposition.

it made for some excellent battles!.

even if you knew who you were fighting against, you didnt know what part of the map they spawned in

would they attack the enemy to their left, or their right,
or would they go the long way across the map to take out the enemy in the opposite corner.

would they be paired up attacking or did they load up a slower base killer for a solo attack run.

it was so simple but it made for some epic battles.

even if Elite was four teams of four, in a randomly generated game area
which could be up or down voted at the end of the match
there could be hundreds of battlegrounds to play in
and it wouldnt stress connections that much.

nor would it be that difficult to set it all up.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Arena fighting has been suggested before, but along with the suggested Open-with-Guilds idea, it was not very warmly received by certain segments of the Pro-PvP faction. Guaranteed fighting, or guaranteed guild clashes is not what these people seem to be interested in. It all really does seem to boil down to wanting to smack indiscriminately in Open

Arena play would be very good fun I think. Conda vs 5 sideys, some pro-bro Vulture jockey vs 10 combat haulers with railguns - you get the idea

 

[cryon1cang3l]

Well open has already all what we need for pvp. Community goals scream for pvp action, but with the solo & private mode anyone can avoid it. Powerplay has introduced even more things worth fighting for, but again the same.

The 32 player limit and the awful p2p (sorry but i have to say it - anyone knows that this is bad compared to a good local server cluster for your region!) kills anything massive. Its an MMO with enough people to actually BE massive in populated systems, but the system behind it doesnt support it.

Arena would be nice, but just as a small part of competetive pvp. Dont confuse open pvp, massive fights and hard limited arena with small teams and the 1v1 situation aka duels. All of this is pvp, but only part of it can be balanced enough for competetive gameplay. Open pvp (something like 4v1) will always be unbalanced and massive battles too.

With the current system (p2p, solo&private VS open mode and other limits like combat logging etc) we cant have the full pvp expirience. If it doesnt change, most people who actually want pvp here, will leave.

 

[fademist]

Well open has already all what we need for pvp. Community goals scream for pvp action, but with the solo & private mode anyone can avoid it.

Dont go again there ....solo/groups is here to stay us long devs say so...

 

[Don Alvarez]

With the current system (p2p, solo&private VS open mode and other limits like combat logging etc) we cant have the full pvp expirience. If it doesnt change, most people who actually want pvp here, will leave.

Those people who want pvp here, should form their own Mobius-like group and have at each other. I mean, there's no rule in group play that says you have to be friendly with each other, right?
-
But seriously, demeaning other modes of play, just because you don't enjoy them, has never earned open-only types any consderation. Beleive it or not, there are A LOT of people who enjoy playing space trucker and scanning multi-colored balls in space.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Those people who want pvp here, should form their own Mobius-like group and have at each other. I mean, there's no rule in group play that says you have to be friendly with each other, right?

It has been suggested several times but never seems to gain traction - presumably because all players are not locked in to the group and also the fact that they are playing in a PvP group means that all PvP is consensual.

 

[Don Alvarez]

It has been suggested several times but never seems to gain traction - presumably because all players are not locked in to the group and also the fact that they are playing in a PvP group means that all PvP is consensual.

Let me get this straight - you're saying PvPers, many of whom weep to the moon that the game cannot succeed if it fails to cater to hardcore PvP play and yearn for more action packed PvP space pew-pew, don't want to form their own dedicated PvP group with like minded players because participation in it assumes they'd all be consenting to PvP by default even if they don't really wish to - and at the same time want to funnel all Solo and Group players into open so they'd be forced into PvP against their will.... Do I have it right?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Let me get this straight - you're saying PvPers, many of whom weep to the moon that the game will fail if if fails to cater to hardcore PvP play and yearn for more action packed PvP space pew-pew, don't want to form their own dedicated PvP group with like minded players because participation in it its assumes they'd all be consenting to PvP by default even if they don't really wish to - and at the same time want to funnel all Solo and Group players into open so they'd be forced into PvP against their will.... Do I have it right?

If a PvP Private Group would work, it would have happened by now....

It would seem that a proportion of PvP players play as pirates - pirates need prey, PvP pirates need live prey - I doubt that many players in a PvP private group would opt for the role of prey. The desire of some PvP proponents to force players out of Solo / Private Groups into open would seem to be aimed at dealing with any lack of live prey for PvP pirates.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Let me get this straight - you're saying PvPers, many of whom weep to the moon that the game cannot succeed if it fails to cater to hardcore PvP play and yearn for more action packed PvP space pew-pew, don't want to form their own dedicated PvP group with like minded players because participation in it assumes they'd all be consenting to PvP by default even if they don't really wish to - and at the same time want to funnel all Solo and Group players into open so they'd be forced into PvP against their will.... Do I have it right?

Yup, that is exactly right. Everyone wants to be the seal-clubber, but nobody wants to be the seal.

 

[ianw]

Yup, that is exactly right. Everyone wants to be the seal-clubber, but nobody wants to be the seal.

Funny that!

And therein lies the fundamental flaw in the concept of pirate v trader pvp...

 

[Asp Explorer]

Funny that!

And therein lies the fundamental flaw in the concept of pirate v trader pvp...

I think it's a little more complex than that. What I thought Elite would be like, and the reality of it, are almost diametrically opposed. I honestly thought that Open would be chock full of ships in the original Elite style, traders running routes with armed escorts, police patrolling controlled sectors, anarchy rife with piracy but immense profits to be made, bounty hunters searching for those pirates, explorers heading out to discover the unknown - but needing traders for resupply etc. It would be ideal for all these roles to have been filled by both PC and NPC ships - and definite reasons required for those behaviours to occur. Not rules, but reasons. Everyone would be free to do as they will at any time of course, but there would be swift and permanent repercussions.

Instead, what we currently have is a curious mix of psycho-pew-pews, min/max traders who scoff at anything other than perfect profit runs, anarchy systems safer than corporate states, explorers hopping all over the galaxy like locusts, players all migrating to perfect ship builds because everything else is sub-par, and a game of Risk someone left running as a background task.

I find it all quite strange, but it's clear to me that the need to be able to enjoy your gametime in Elite very much depends on how much you want to interact with other players - and the Modes we currently have are the best way of controlling that. I don't think it's the game itself that needs to change much, but it can certainly evolve - I very much hope for the better. What I do think is the problem though, is that so many players are looking at Elite as a game to be won in some way, rather than a game to be played.

 

[fademist]

I think it's a little more complex than that. What I thought Elite would be like, and the reality of it, are almost diametrically opposed. I honestly thought that Open would be chock full of ships in the original Elite style, traders running routes with armed escorts, police patrolling controlled sectors, anarchy rife with piracy but immense profits to be made, bounty hunters searching for those pirates, explorers heading out to discover the unknown - but needing traders for resupply etc. It would be ideal for all these roles to have been filled by both PC and NPC ships - and definite reasons required for those behaviours to occur. Not rules, but reasons. Everyone would be free to do as they will at any time of course, but there would be swift and permanent repercussions.

Instead, what we currently have is a curious mix of psycho-pew-pews, min/max traders who scoff at anything other than perfect profit runs, anarchy systems safer than corporate states, explorers hopping all over the galaxy like locusts, players all migrating to perfect ship builds because everything else is sub-par, and a game of Risk someone left running as a background task.

I find it all quite strange, but it's clear to me that the need to be able to enjoy your gametime in Elite very much depends on how much you want to interact with other players - and the Modes we currently have are the best way of controlling that. I don't think it's the game itself that needs to change much, but it can certainly evolve - I very much hope for the better. What I do think is the problem though, is that so many players are looking at Elite as a game to be won in some way, rather than a game to be played.

nice post us always...
and we must prepare for the repair cost panic yelling;p

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Yup, that is exactly right. Everyone wants to be the seal-clubber, but nobody wants to be the seal.

So traders are baby seals, incapable of taking any action to defend themselves. That's more insulting to the traders than the pirates imo.

 

[Asp Explorer]

So traders are baby seals, incapable of taking any action to defend themselves. That's more insulting to the traders than the pirates imo.

How many Haulers have beaten you 1v1?

 

[Don Alvarez]

If a PvP Private Group would work, it would have happened by now....

It would seem that a proportion of PvP players play as pirates - pirates need prey, PvP pirates need live prey - I doubt that many players in a PvP private group would opt for the role of prey. The desire of some PvP proponents to force players out of Solo / Private Groups into open would seem to be aimed at dealing with any lack of live prey for PvP pirates.

I see this as one strand of many in the rope that makes the open-only arguement. I've identified them, in no particular order as:
-
1)That open pirates need human traders because the NPC ones are just no fun. This to me is the only compelling argument so far, but difficult to acheive because players have to volunteer to be the sheep. This can be helped somewhat by sponsoring more trading CG's and focusing tradeships in a narrower area where they can be found, and for the prey any losses are somewhat offset by CG rewards. Downside is this also draws the lunatics like flies.
2)That open-only players can't compete as efficiently in community goals, which argument I've said repeatedly doesn't hold water. Its eternally debunked by the associated argument that "there aren't enough players in open" and "even in open I barely see anybody"
3)That Open-Only players should received special awards and bonuses for playing the "real" game in open. The "Elitest" argument. The elite few inhabit every MMO I've ever played, you know the lot. The ones that love to brag about their epic acheivements on the forums and whine when super hard content is dumbed down that allows more people to complete and have access to what they have. Gaming's bluebloods, they just need to feel special. . The "you got what I got but not how I got it so you shouldn't be allowed to have it" crew. Needless to say, I despise this lot. They poison everything they touch and are just generally bad for a gaming community, especially when they are catered to
4)The "I need epic pew-pew just like they have in NewbSlaughter Tournament, fast and furious!" I don't mind this bunch. I am one from time to time, but frankly they've come to the wrong game.
5) The "I just like to test my skills in a fair fight against another human being". The rarest of the rare, most noblest creature, but not to be confused with:
6)I just enjoy the human interaction for what it is, be it chat, pew-pew'ing teaming in a CZ or RES, or rescuing overmatched Type 6's from pirate Pythons. And finally:
7)DIE SIDEWINDER DIE!!!! EAT SEVEN RAIL SLUGS!!! KABOOM!!!! HAW HAW HAW!!!Mouth me all you want in chat I WON!! And now I'm going to report you for foul language!!!!!!! Don't like it, GO PLAY SOLO!!!! HA HA HA HA HA YOU"RE SO COOL, BREWSTER!!!!!!! yeah mom? I don't CARE which one of your boyfriends is coming over! Where's my sandwich? What do you mean get up and get it myself!?!?!

What I do think is the problem though, is that so many players are looking at Elite as a game to be won in some way, rather than a game to be played.

I see this reflected in every "Elite: Boring" post I read. Elite, or honestly sandbox games of any kind, require a certain mentality and freedom of thought to enjoy. For the classic "Well, i quested out Elwyn forest, time to move to the next zone" They are going to find things difficult to enjoy if they need to feel closure about an area of a game before moving on, or needing neon question marks to indicate what you should be doing next. Sandbox games are a tool of the imagination, to have fun with the former, you must first possess the latter. Elite is but a framework, within which you need to envision your own path. I'm pretty well steeped in sandbox play. Some of my most enjoyable titles sice I started gaming have been sandbox, notably Mount and Blade, CK2, and I've been playing Sid Meier's Pirates! since 1987. So this game really appealed to me, and I read about every review and article first to find out if it was what I wanted to be playing. I get the impression that alot people who bought this game just didn't do their due diligence before they did, and were expecting something completely different.

 

[Mercy Killing]

It has been suggested several times but never seems to gain traction - presumably because all players are not locked in to the group and also the fact that they are playing in a PvP group means that all PvP is consensual.

I think it would be closer to the truth to say:

If they did that, nobody would be the helpless victim they could just shoot up all the time. Someone would always be shooting back....and THAT is what they don't want. They just want someone to be the victim....but solo/group play prevents that from happening more than once.

 

[Don Alvarez]

HA HA HA HA HA YOU"RE SO COOL, BREWSTER!!

Off topic, but +rep if you can name the movie.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

How many Haulers have beaten you 1v1?

I haven't interdicted a hauler since my cobra days. I did crash into one and die in an eagle before.

Sure in some situations traders can have no chance to defend themselves but far from most, or all of them. It's still insulting and wrong to say traders, are weak little "baby seals" waiting for a big old meanie to club them.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I haven't interdicted a hauler since my cobra days. I did crash into one and die in an eagle before.

Sure in some situations traders can have no chance to defend themselves but far from most, or all of them. It's still insulting to assume traders have no say in their own defensive capabilities.

I meant no insult to traders, but when you have PvP people openly boasting about popping ships in one salvo, and then saying "it's not quick enough"* I do wonder how your average trader is supposed to protect himself from combat-oriented ships with massive firepower.

Of course, the trader can learn to chaff/heatsink spam - go silent, dump some junk and hyperspace out - but how many fat traders who do nothing but use external trading tools are actually going to know basic game mechanics? Those tactics also annoy real pirates - as they don't want junk. It's annoys the pew-pew-crew as they want kills. That leaves traders with either combat logging (despised by everyone) or playing in Solo or Group. Those traders who DO play in Open, and are completely at your mercy - have you ever considered winging up with them instead? You get the bounty from attacking pirates, and a small chunk of their trading profit, and a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside that comes from knowing you are not a mindless pew-pew, but a real player.