Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Asp Explorer]

Did I not mention CQC was not what we were after. It was a move to appeal to "Battle royale/Survival of the Fittest" players which will definitely appeal to a demographic but not those who enjoy PvP in a persistent world environment which I believe needs attention.

Atak my friend, you have given me more than enough laughs tonight - I am truly thankful. If you don't want PvP in a pure PvP focused arena (which is what CQC is), then what would you like to see? PvP in an environment where some players who don't want PvP will just play in Solo, or if they find PvP to not be tasteful to them will simply quit the game or (unfortunately) lulzbann pew-pews?

Enjoy the pew-pew avenue you have!

 

[Mouse]

Did I not mention CQC was not what we were after. It was a move to appeal to "Battle royale/Survival of the Fittest" players which will definitely appeal to a demographic but not those who enjoy PvP in a persistent world environment which I believe needs attention.

- - - Updated - - -



Better adversaries

You already have PVP in a persistent world environment though.. Open

- - - Updated - - -

^ Truth.

The reality is they will never be satisfied unless this entire game is turned into a no-holds barred free-for-all PvP-fest.

I will fight tooth and nail against those who want to turn ED into EVE in space.

 

[Asp Explorer]

There is a large market like me ready for a directly competitive space game.

Then write one!

Start here.

https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/introduction-to-x64-assembly/

If you are a complete beginner though - this may be a better place to start, and better understand Elite.

http://worldofspectrum.org/Z80.html

 

[Mouse]

I have no one idea what your vision of PvP is about. Despite playing many different games including the dreaded Eve recently PvP has been the best part of the game.

Elite could enjoy the same benefits - competitive and PvP players cooperating or opposing each other directly for goals.

There is a large market like me ready for a directly competitive space game.

ED would do well to accommodate us.

They already do though... Open, CQC, CZ's they accommodate you well. You can even co-op or oppose each other for goals.. not all of them PVP but still

 

[Mouse]

ATAK2 I'm not trying to be hard-headed, but I think it is extremely funny that we have PVP advocates up in arms over the request to make a PVE mode (which would be simple thing to do and not cost much resources) but they are all for completely altering the game to give them a "PVP'ers " only galaxy..

 

[Mouse]

Would I be posting in this thread if I thought the above mechanics were satisfactory? That was rhetorical if you missed it.

I'm off to bed. Carry on the pat on the backs now.

That is a funny word to use.. Satisfactory.. harkens back to the "give and inch they will demand a mile" comment. PVPers request.. the request was heard and graciously answered... but it's not enough. Before you have told me that I need to work with you here.. well it seems you need to work with FDev here .


And the "pat on the back" comment was incendiary and uncalled for. We are being civil, and not busting your chops like the time you flew in here all hostile and determined to take us down. Yet you still seem unable to pass up any opportunity to throw barbs so to speak .

- - - Updated - - -

I have said many times I'm in favour of a PvE mode too. Your argument is not with me. I Sleep now - bye.

since you want to drastically alter the game to suit the mode of play for a few.. it is with you.

 

[Asp Explorer]

<Hugs for everyone!>

Drunks of Sol approve!

 

[Mouse]

I have already said I am not gifted in programming.

If you are are as intelligent as your preening posts propose; you write one!

Asp isn't' the one wanting to drastically alter a game for personal preference

 

[Asp Explorer]

I have already said I am not gifted in programming.

If you are are as intelligent as your preening posts propose; you write one!

I don't have to - FD have done an excellent job as it is!

Even if I did write an Elite game - you'd need to TSO into it - and well, the graphics would be a little bit underwhelming. Have you ever used a terminal?

 

[Mohrgan]

Don't get caught up in a antagonists trap. Unless there is a valid point to discuss, let it pass.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Belittle me how you wish - I will be back.

I never belittle you at all Atak - I value our discussions. Get some sleep and we can all discuss it more later

 

[Asp Explorer]

So someone well versed in programming cannot make a version of Elite Dangerous on their own without years and years of dedication. Shocker!

I use a terminal daily. My Pi maintains my home backup server.

A Pi is not Z/OS

Until you've dealt with big iron, you have no idea about big iron.

 

[Mouse]

Lol, PvP is already a feature in the game. I suggest enhancements for the large PvP demographic just like the small demographic of miners want improvements.

I really need sleep now. Belittle me how you wish - I will be back.

At no point did anyone belittle you, though you tried to, to others. And I'm sorry but you are not suggesting any "enhancements", you are suggesting major fundamental changes of some of the core parts of the game as advertised. An enhancement is adding a spoiler to the car or tuning the engine, not chopping the top of and turning it into a convertable

 

[relayer]

Elite could enjoy the same benefits - competitive and PvP players cooperating or opposing each other directly for goals

Atak, I asked you a simple question several 10s of posts back and never received an answer. It was regarding a CG, open and various sides either protecting or hindering each other in open.

Now there is another - the CG in Apalar. There is a whole thread, the Community Goals thread, which details the actions of the haulers, the PVPers, the pirates, the traders, the bounty hunters... all sides. In open.

It seems to me that this would be exactly what you state you are looking for - a chance to oppose real players on a concrete goal. I'm asking you again - isn't this just what you've said you wanted? Are you participating? If not, why not?

 

[GG7]

My view on this topic is simple.... To Each His/Her Own!

Personally, I more than likely would have passed on this game for the XB1 had there not been a SOLO mode available. After more than 12 years on the Xbox Live system, I have reached the point where I am no longer interested in playing ANY video game with members of the general public. Solo and Private modes are all I am interested in at this point in my video game experience, and I am VERY glad that FD provided me the SOLO option, and I hope that at some future point, the XB1 version will also "finally" get a functional "PRIVATE" mode as well, so that I can also play with people on my friends list.

How my activities effect those in open play is really not my concern. I would have actually preferred a true OFFLINE mode, so that I would not have to rely on servers and my internet connection to play this game, but I know that whole story from back in the early days of this game's development, so I can live with Online Only Solo mode.

 

[Asp Explorer]

I appreciate that you have a level of intelligence in computing I haven't yet reached.

I haven't reached it either I'm a hardware guy, and some things these software code-code-pukes want to do make me want to cry. I've seen pages and pages of code set to return a certain value to zero. These noobs have no understanding that there is a set register FOR zero. It cannot be anything else, but yet they still code around it. Still, it's a giggle to watch.

 

[Kyo]

My view on the subject is this...

If I am in open carrying something valuable or have a bounty and another player kills me I am fine with that. He was doing IMO what he should do. Whether it be pirating my ship or collecting my bounty. A tiger does not ask its prey if it is ok to be eaten after all. This goes for opposing factions as well.

If I am in open and a player kills me for no discerable rhyme or reason, now I have an issue with that. What would be the point in killing me if it did nothing but make your
E-peen feel bigger. That's something that I do not like, and is something that I think we should all agree that really serves no purpose.

If there is a logical reason that you just blew my ships into a quadrillion nanobits of space dust, I would be so angry...but I couldnt truly fault you for it as you were just properly doing your role, and I was either outside my zone of protection, not quite stealthy enough or in general not smart.

There needs to be some actual RoE that make sense though to me..

To each his own though...

 

[Hempstead]

Don't get caught up in a antagonists trap. Unless there is a valid point to discuss, let it pass.

Guys/gals, Mohrgan is right. He who shall not be named is simply messing with you. He is clearly not interested in discussion. Every few days he comes in and drops the same copy and paste royal decree without any reasoning. Don't you see the pattern?

The best option is the silent treatment.

 

[Jockey79]

.....

If I am in open and a player kills me for no discerable rhyme or reason, now I have an issue with that. What would be the point in killing me if it did nothing but make your
E-peen feel bigger. That's something that I do not like, and is something that I think we should all agree that really serves no purpose.

.....

The thing is, that is a valid role within the game - that was confirmed by DBOBE a while back.
What FD didn't count on, is how many people would flock to that role within game. Which has left it unbalanced.

Out of all the PvP focused players, it would seem (judging by these forums) that a larger portion of them went this route and now have few targets left to shoot at.
Hence the whole desire for forced PvP, like atak2 keeps requesting - despite FD saying they will not do that (last link in my sig (yellow) has the quotes to prove that).

Things that are staying - 1 BGS, Mode Switching, Player freedom of movement.
Things on the "No" list - Locked Modes, 2 or more BGS, Removing player choice who to play with.

They have been given CQC for their "pew pew" needs, though atak2 has shown that "consenting" battle is not what he and his ilk want.
They want to roam space like schoolyard bullies picking on lesser targets en masse and will not settle for anything less.
And of course they are not going to get that, because we have the choice not to play in their game, which by the insulting posts they keep putting up, drives them crazy we can do that.

 

[ianw]

Putting aside for a moment the fact that it has been repeatedly stated mode switching is staying - you only have to think about it a bit to see why it would be impractical to make drastic changes.

If for a moment you thinking about adding modes you could add (leaving all the current modes and switching exactly as they are);

PVE with optional switching to all the others as normal.

And a PVP mode where your character is locked to that mode.

But that still wouldn't satisfy the PVP campaigners because - background SIM.

They've made it clear they want something separate but it's equally clear that FD are having enough trouble as it is with one background SIM - 2 or more would be unworkable.

You'd end up with branching story lines which would require different newsletters, additions, background tweaking etc. etc.

When you look at it from that pov it's obvious why FD have said nothing is changing..