Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Jockey79]

Maybe each new page of the thread should start with the Jockey FD patented wall of Text?

I suggested that once

Where would we be without the wall?

I wonder if anyone it's aimed at actually reads the whole thing? (I confess I haven't - but then I'm not arguing with it..)

You have not read it !!

Some good stuff in there, most of the quotes I've ever used, and a good chunk of Roberts are in there.
It's a collection of counters from various forum members as the topic has moved on and FD quotes as they come out.

I have tried just quoting the relevant quote when needed, but that has little impact - posting the entire wall seem to have a better effect.
Also, I use any excuse now from either side of the discussion to post it - as it's become a bit of a running gag

 

[Mouse]

I suggested that once



You have not read it !!

Some good stuff in there, most of the quotes I've ever used, and a good chunk of Roberts are in there.
It's a collection of counters from various forum members as the topic has moved on and FD quotes as they come out.

I have tried just quoting the relevant quote when needed, but that has little impact - posting the entire wall seem to have a better effect.
Also, I use any excuse now from either side of the discussion to post it - as it's become a bit of a running gag

That is part of the problem is those who need to read it, won't and just think it is a gag >.<

 

[Cody]

Too much grey text in the wall.

 

[Mouse]

Too much grey text in the wall.

shouldn't it be pink?

 

[willowfan]

Now a question for everyone: Why does a solo player wants to have influence on the background sim/other players if he/she is only playing alone?

Why not? They paid just as much for the game as you did.

 

[Himmel Tropf]

I am not playing PowerPlay, but I carefully read the PowerPlay Manual. English is not my native language too, but from the PP Manual, I clearly understood that the whole PP thing was carefully designed with Solo/Group/Open in mind. Maybe it is not written in big red letters on the page one of the manual, but "YOU ARE NOT NEITHER SUPPOSED TO, NOR REWARDED FOR DIRECT INTERACTION WITH PLAYERS FROM OPPOSING FACTIONS".

You are not the only PvPer, who either did not read the PP Manual or did not understand it. PP is from basic designed to be played INDIRECTLY via PvE missions. And it is by design, with common Galaxy shared across modes and platforms in mind.

So would you agree with or deny that, hypothetically, if a player were to harass enemy faction players, delaying or preventing them from completing community goals, that this would have a direct effect on the powerplay change for that player and faction as a whole?
I appreciate what he's saying tbh. Direct competition does appear to have been lost, as people can work in the background, and the only recourse or 'counterattack' be it violent or economic, is to try to outpace them or work against their efforts, be it carrying slaves to X or supplying meat to Y, something that you'd need to take a wild guess at, as opposed to following the player and interacting with them?

 

[Mouse]

So would you agree with or deny that, hypothetically, if a player were to harass enemy faction players, delaying or preventing them from completing community goals, that this would have a direct effect on the powerplay change for that player and faction as a whole?
I appreciate what he's saying tbh. Direct competition does appear to have been lost, as people can work in the background, and the only recourse or 'counterattack' be it violent or economic, is to try to outpace them or work against their efforts, be it carrying slaves to X or supplying meat to Y, something that you'd need to take a wild guess at, as opposed to following the player and interacting with them?

The problem is that Power play was never "Direct conflict" to begin with. It is shadow play, political maneuvering, election. .. it is politics.

 

[ianw]

But that is kind of the point - direct opposition is entirely optional - as is PVP.

I know many people don't like that but that's how it is - optional - not obligatory. FD see powerplay as a means for people to play the background sim - and they also play against each other through that.

If people prefer to play that way because they believe that is the best way to progress then presumably they prefer progress to the fun of direct opposition.

And let's be realistic direct opposition is severely hampered anyway by the design of the game and the bugs with wings and instancing etc. etc.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

I dont. But the variations caused by other players effects on the background sim adds another variable to the galaxy we exist within. Makes it less static and more dynamic. Now tell me this, why is the same effect we cause the background sim troubling you? Its just another random variable.

So would it be a problem if solo players do not influence the background sim BUT live in the same universe? Like, the background sim is only changed by players playing in open but every (solo) player for now will be in the same universe but not every player might be able to influence it. Individual progression throug hcommunity goals (credits) and powerplay (merits) will remain unchanged but for example the progression of the community goal can only be made in open, the same applies for udnermining progression or civil war influence on local factions and stuff like that.

I would expect that players in Solo want to experience and affect the evolving galaxy state, that is affected by every player, as Frontier stated at the outset. The more players affecting the galaxy state, the more it evolves. Don't forget, players on different platforms will also affect the same shared galaxy state.

But the exciting part of the universe is erased due to the fact that it is influenced by "ghost players", resulting in a completely random influenced background sim and having little to no differences to a randomly generated background sim.

This is the main reason why I am here and why I am not really into local factions and market things and stuff like that. The only reason I do powerplay is because of rolepaly and the 50 million credits reward per week. And this makes PowerPlay less exciting as well.
With a change this would make faction (not only powerplay factions) conflicts way more interesting since you would have the possibility to theoritcally win the war by yourself. But being denied to affect certain parts of the background sim (which is the source of other influences aka players) makes it uninteresting and blocks certain strategies and actions.

I hope that isn't too confusing (though it is confusing for me as I read this lol). But in general I am pointing out that players should be able to influence ALL parts of the background sim, inclduing the source of other influeces which are considered to be players but due to the fact that inaccessable "ghost players" have influence on the background sim, it results in a random feeling because you are wodnering for whic hreason your system is suddenly in a civil war if nothing happened in your instance. Same applies for undermining and fortify tasks.

It is quite simple really.. if the game was offline, there would have to be program written to randomize everything.. influences, trade, even if stars are explored.. everything that effects the universe and stations and all. By using a Background Sim where everyone effects everything.. WE are that randomizer..

Solo players effects what they do and everyone else either counters it or helps it. It is their universe as well as everyone else.. they have as MUCH a right to influence the universe as anyone else. Being in solo does not mean they should be subject to the whim of everyone else in trade, influence, etc.

And here my opinion differs. A SOLO player should only be able to influence him-/herself and a group of players (group mode) should only be able to influence themselves. While the open players should either only influence themselves as well or being the main influence factor of the background sim. Why? because ope nis mostly just once instance while other players sneak-peak through thousands of other instances away.

However, all palyers should get the benefits from the background sim. For example if a solo player decides to help in a community goal, he may not influence the actual progression but still get the credits and will be ranked in the, let's say top 40%. Meanwhile open players will help to get the community goal done and assuming it is successful, every player who participated will get the full reward regardless of which mode he or she was playing in. So the solo player gets the top 40% credit reward due to the open players getting the progression bar up.

Doesn't sound that good?

In addition to all this stuff and modes, I would also appreciate an offline solo mode. Basically a universe for myself. Same would be awesome for groups so I can build up our own galaxy with my friends.

What the player want on this subject doesn't really matter, FD themselves want everyone in the same galaxy.

And they can be in the same galaxy, benefiting from all its pros and cons but without having to ability to influence it in certain circumstances. As I have stated above, my suggestion includes that every player benefits from the background sim but has not always the ability to influence it depending in which mode he/she plays.



Conclusion: The aim is to provide players the ability of full control over any influencing source/factor regarding the background sim. Currently, due to modes, many parts of these factors are inaccessable which makes the modes unequal/unbalanced in my opinion. My suggestion would (hopefully) not neglect any player in any mode.


PS: sorry for all my typos

 

[ianw]

Why? because ope nis mostly just once instance while other players sneak-peak through thousands of other instances away.

I'm not sure how you arrive at this statement?

At busy times in a popular area such as one involved in PP there are likely to be lots of instances you just don't see in open. Remember players are matched not just on their location but the "health score" of their connections and other things such as friends lists, wings etc. - this keeps people with rubbish connections away from those with more stable connections - up to a point. They don't just dump everyone into the same open instance just because they're there.

And if everyone was forced into open you'd see proportionately even fewer of those players because the instance sizes remain the same but now there even more people at one location in open.

 

[willowfan]

My suggestion would (hopefully) not neglect any player in any mode.


PS: sorry for all my typos

Apart from making players in other modes second class citizens. Again, they paid just as much for the game as you, why should your preferred playstyle trump theirs?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

So would it be a problem if solo players do not influence the background sim BUT live in the same universe? Like, the background sim is only changed by players playing in open but every (solo) player for now will be in the same universe but not every player might be able to influence it.

Forgetting the fact that you are assuming that open is somehow better than all other modes and is therefore more deserving - A point which I no not agree with -

but even forgetting that your suggestion is hugely open to abuse and would get open players going mental.

I have a handful of profitable routes but they are all low population systems and supply and demand is quickly exhausted.

So what this means is I get 3 or 4 very good trades in a run, then I have to move on.... this is because I am affecting the BGS. Me dropping off 1000 tons of product and buying another 1000 tons all within a 1 hrs period pretty much floods the market for - well at least a little while.

IF FD did as you said, solo would become the defacto place to do all your trading. because it has no effect on the BGS, then those profitable but unstable trade runs would never ever dry up so long as no one in open came accross them.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

The idea that open is the only mode allowed to influence BGS is not driven by fairness. It is driven by ego: "I can force my will onto other players and they will have to do what I say or be negatively impacted."

Let us, for a moment hypothesise about PP in this new future. The "strong" would pledge to a specific PP allegiance, some other "strong" groups might choose to oppose them. The "weak" would be left with the choice of pledging to the same allegiance as the strong, or be negatively impacted... All well and good.
-
But this isn't good enough for the strong. They have harvested their PP reward from their allegiance and recouped their initial outlay to get to rank 5 with a few weeks of 50M reward moneys. They then move en masse to another allegiance to harvest the next weapon. They don't care about the factions, they care about the shinies. On top of this they then flood the forums with rants about PP weapon balance and how things need to be nerfed in a never ending cycle depending on which faction they are harvesting.
-
FDev are now in a tough situation. By locking the BGS to Open, they have given tacit acceptance to the fact that Open is a pvp mode, that PP is a pvp game, that CGs are pvp encounters and thus feel a responsibility to expend resources "balancing" combat against the endless demands for nerfs and balance passes.
-
Any future content is now contaminated by the thread of "If we introduce this, what will the Open crowd scream about until we change it to what they want?" And thus the game becomes horribly skewed towards a subset of the player base.
-
Fdev are standing firm against this small but vocal criticism of their egalitarian and inclusive game design and I thank them for that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But the exciting part of the universe is erased due to the fact that it is influenced by "ghost players", resulting in a completely random influenced background sim and having little to no differences to a randomly generated background sim.

This is the main reason why I am here and why I am not really into local factions and market things and stuff like that. The only reason I do powerplay is because of rolepaly and the 50 million credits reward per week. And this makes PowerPlay less exciting as well.
With a change this would make faction (not only powerplay factions) conflicts way more interesting since you would have the possibility to theoritcally win the war by yourself. But being denied to affect certain parts of the background sim (which is the source of other influences aka players) makes it uninteresting and blocks certain strategies and actions.

I hope that isn't too confusing (though it is confusing for me as I read this lol). But in general I am pointing out that players should be able to influence ALL parts of the background sim, inclduing the source of other influeces which are considered to be players but due to the fact that inaccessable "ghost players" have influence on the background sim, it results in a random feeling because you are wodnering for whic hreason your system is suddenly in a civil war if nothing happened in your instance. Same applies for undermining and fortify tasks.

There are no "ghost" players. There are players in all modes. There are also players in Open that you will almost certainly never meet - simply due to mutual ping-times or time of day that you and they play or even more fundamentally, which platform you play on - all platforms share the same galaxy state as well.

Frontier designed Powerplay to be played by all players in all modes. They are also on record as holding the opinion that all modes are equal and valid (and they know that some players disagree - but that's OK). DBOBE is also on record as holding the opinion that there is no "right" way to play the game - what you propose is that Frontier change their stance on that.

Affecting the single shared galaxy state is not the same as directly affecting all of the other players who affect the single shared galaxy state.

 

[Sylveria]

Elite already offers Open play. It's right there on the menu to choose. If you mean a PVP only environment, where Solo players cannot intrude to grief PVP'ers and the constant pew-pew - Elite offers another mode. It's called CQC. You might have to pick up an Xbox to play it right now, but they are dirt cheap and readily available.

I see what you did there... and I approve

Perspective is a wonderful thing.

 

[Sylveria]

The idea that open is the only mode allowed to influence BGS is not driven by fairness. It is driven by ego: "I can force my will onto other players and they will have to do what I say or be negatively impacted."

Let us, for a moment hypothesise about PP in this new future. The "strong" would pledge to a specific PP allegiance, some other "strong" groups might choose to oppose them. The "weak" would be left with the choice of pledging to the same allegiance as the strong, or be negatively impacted... All well and good.
-
But this isn't good enough for the strong. They have harvested their PP reward from their allegiance and recouped their initial outlay to get to rank 5 with a few weeks of 50M reward moneys. They then move en masse to another allegiance to harvest the next weapon. They don't care about the factions, they care about the shinies. On top of this they then flood the forums with rants about PP weapon balance and how things need to be nerfed in a never ending cycle depending on which faction they are harvesting.
-
FDev are now in a tough situation. By locking the BGS to Open, they have given tacit acceptance to the fact that Open is a pvp mode, that PP is a pvp game, that CGs are pvp encounters and thus feel a responsibility to expend resources "balancing" combat against the endless demands for nerfs and balance passes.
-
Any future content is now contaminated by the thread of "If we introduce this, what will the Open crowd scream about until we change it to what they want?" And thus the game becomes horribly skewed towards a subset of the player base.
-
Fdev are standing firm against this small but vocal criticism of their egalitarian and inclusive game design and I thank them for that.

The PvP crowd is always "high maintenance" in any game- at least with the PvE crowd most of the content they develop doesn't need constant balance passes within short time frames to sate the thirst of the ego-driven types, however, the PvP types think their voices carry more "weight" for some reason.

Simply put- if the developers focus on PvE content, they're giving something to everyone with a lot less maintenance- rather than catering to a select few who will want constant changes brought, which will dig into the profits.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

The PvP crowd is always "high maintenance" in any game- at least with the PvE crowd most of the content they develop doesn't need constant balance passes within short time frames to sate the thirst of the ego-driven types, however, the PvP types think their voices carry more "weight" for some reason.

Simply put- if the developers focus on PvE content, they're giving something to everyone with a lot less maintenance- rather than catering to a select few who will want constant changes brought, which will dig into the profits.

Um that's not really true. Sure pvp requires more Balance passes, but pve play requires more content. Player driven content doesn't cost anything to make and it makes up most of pvp games.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Player driven content doesn't cost anything to make

It does to implement though.

 

[DarkWalker]

Now a question for everyone: Why does a solo player wants to have influence on the background sim/other players if he/she is only playing alone?

I got this game for the offline mode, where I would have a galaxy that I, and I alone, could shape.

That not being available, with the game locking me into the same shared galaxy as everyone else, then I want to be able to play alone or in a group of my choosing and still influence the shared galaxy to the same extent that a player in any other mode, including Open, can. Parity and all that.

Conclusion: The aim is to provide players the ability of full control over any influencing source/factor regarding the background sim. Currently, due to modes, many parts of these factors are inaccessable which makes the modes unequal/unbalanced in my opinion. My suggestion would (hopefully) not neglect any player in any mode.

Sincerely, your suggestion is just a thinly veiled attempt to make Open the only "true" way to play the game and relegate other modes to a subservient role. And goes against what Frontier wanted from the start; they explicitly want Solo players also contributing to the Galaxy simulation in order to have as many players influencing the galaxy as possible, making for a livelier experience. I doubt they would throw out the influence of every player that doesn't like to play in Open just because a few people keep making conspiracy theories about invisible commanders coordinating themselves to undermine Open players.

You are looking at this game as if it intended to be a kind of EVE with joysticks. As if being able to take full control over limited resources was in the game's plans. That is not the case, allowing this kind of player exclusion was never part of the plan. Why do you think Power Play doesn't allow players to create their own factions, but only to support pre-existing NPC Powers (and, in the future, to help NPC minor factions ascend to powers, but without controlling them)? Powers that anyone can join, and the players currently supporting the Power can't do anything to prevent it? Unless Frontier completely changes their current design philosophy no group will ever be able to exclude other players from any piece of content or reward, and that is by design.

Besides, because of the networking model chosen from the start — a model that seems to be specifically chosen because Frontier didn't care about players being unable to control space — Frontier can't lock it down now even if they wanted to. It's possible to manipulate the matchmaking to be alone even when playing in Open; attempting to discriminate against Solo in any way will only serve to spread the knowledge of how to do so across the player base.

---

I appreciate what he's saying tbh. Direct competition does appear to have been lost, as people can work in the background, and the only recourse or 'counterattack' be it violent or economic, is to try to outpace them or work against their efforts, be it carrying slaves to X or supplying meat to Y, something that you'd need to take a wild guess at, as opposed to following the player and interacting with them?

Not lost. You can play in Open and face players in the opposite faction that are doing the same.

Rather, direct competition is not the only way, and was never intended to be. If you go back to the Kickstart page, and look at the developer diaries, you will see that allowing solo players to engage with and influence the events that will shape the galaxy was part of the larger plan from the start; that is even explicitly stated by DB himself in the second Dev Diary.

 

[Sylveria]

Um that's not really true. Sure pvp requires more Balance passes, but pve play requires more content. Player driven content doesn't cost anything to make and it makes up most of pvp games.

Given that same logic - "PvE-driven content" doesn't cost anything to make either. Here's the point, though- the "base" content that either would rely upon (of which neither would exist) still costs money to make, and once PvE content is implemented, it doesn't require as much to maintain. This is where the true "cost" comes into play.