Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Daffan]

Open Play just got another nail in the coffin with CQC. First Solo takes all the PVE players, CQC takes a lot of the pvp players. The worst crime system with murder sprees galore made both parties never come back.

And open has soo much potential, escorts,/power play wings/fleets, CG fights, RES fights, CZ fights..... now just solo grinding or CQC.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Everyone battling against each other to make their chosen faction the strongest. The whole thing seems rather bizarre if everyone is playing it... on their own...

Frontier designed and implemented Powerplay (and Community Goals before it) to be played by all players, in all modes. With the introduction of the Xbox One version, we will have more players from a different platform participating in Powerplay - players that we will not directly encounter in-game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

When there is no reward for the risk, why expose yourself in open undermining a system?
It needs to be fixed but only by offering an incentive to play open.

A bonus for one mode / penalty for the other modes is very unlikely to be implemented given Frontier's stated (and repeated) opinion that all game modes are equal and valid.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Solo play was a compromise to those who didn't want an online game, especially those who gave a lot of money for the kick starter and then saw offline pulled late in development.
It was promised solo mode would be available instead and to start limiting PP, even if it's pants, to open would be completely against what they promised.

Just because you play in open doesn't mean everybody has to.

Solo online play has been part of the stated game design from the outset (along with Private Groups and Open). Offline mode was introduced after the initial pitch and was, unfortunately, cancelled prior to launch.

Simply put, the Solo mode that we have is not "instead" of anything - it predates (in design terms) the cancelled Offline mode.

 

[panz3r]

What you are talking about is called, by Frontier, "Combat Logging" - it is nothing to do with the three game modes, single shared galaxy state or the ability to change game mode on a session-by-session basis.

You should be aware that combat logging in this manner is considered by Frontier to be an exploit and you can be reported to Frontier by other players for doing so.

Frontier took some decisions to maximize the player-base and that's fine. But Elite is not the only game in town.
Solomode and "seamless" transition solo-multiplayer : more attraction to "risk adverse players"
Castrated yaw although in space there is no reason for it - so they can make consoles with controllers competitive
"Combat logging" possible because they chose p2p networking model to save server money.
No offline mode to be able to enforce the DRM.

 

[hoppingdeth]

When there is no reward for the risk, why expose yourself in open undermining a system?
It needs to be fixed but only by offering an incentive to play open.

?

The 'incentive' for Open play is you are playing against other players. It's the same incentive for playing any multiplayer game. Why do you need any other incentive to play a multi-player game?

I think I'm missing something here.

 

[Muetdhiver]

Not sure if this is been discussed before, but I'm not sure why PP is available in Solo play as I though the purpose of PP was to get people playing together, but after finding out that lots of people hide in Solo when doing expansion fighting (amongst other things), kinda took some of the excitement away for me.

So there I was are, battling it out in Open, undermining systems to expand, and your enemy can simply undermine you in Solo without you being able to do anything about it. All seems very odd. :S

I understand Solo for the single player game but I dont understand it for PP.

Any thoughts? And do we think this will be changed?

1) Yes it is frustrating to discover that there is not a thing you can do to directly counter player undermining, because 95% of them are doing it in solo. Think of playing CTF in a game where you cannot interact with the oposing team : welcome to elite PP XD
2) Nothing will get done about it, because the only way to make PP meaningfull is to have it open only.
3) And so, PP is reduced to ALD merit farmers for credits (PP salary) and more credits (bounty hunting bonus).

 

[Robert Maynard]

Frontier took some decisions to maximize the player-base and that's fine. But Elite is not the only game in town.
Solomode and "seamless" transition solo-multiplayer : more attraction to "risk adverse players"
Castrated yaw although in space there is no reason for it - so they can make consoles with controllers competitive

Of course E: D is not the only game in town.

To call all players who choose not to play in Open "risk adverse" is a bit insulting don't you think? Some players choose not to play with others simply because they don't want to play with others - it's not necessarily anything to do with perceived risk.

The flight model is consistent with the original game, albeit with improved yaw - Elite had no yaw whatsoever.

 

[Ian Phillips]

This thread is meant to be for discussions about the three game modes.

Please keep your posts to that topic, not general complaints about how you view the game.

Thank you.

 

[LeetNoob]

Solo online play has been part of the stated game design from the outset (along with Private Groups and Open). Offline mode was introduced after the initial pitch and was, unfortunately, cancelled prior to launch.

Simply put, the Solo mode that we have is not "instead" of anything - it predates (in design terms) the cancelled Offline mode.

Ok so. It doesn't really change anything. From what I remember during the uproar after offline was cancelled, solo was pitched by FD as all that was needed for those who wanted a single player. Which was by the way.
Either way some people play the game but don't want to deal with other players, and so limiting power play to open only is against the idea of the design of the game.

- - - Updated - - -

1) Yes it is frustrating to discover that there is not a thing you can do to directly counter player undermining, because 95% of them are doing it in solo. Think of playing CTF in a game where you cannot interact with the oposing team : welcome to elite PP XD
2) Nothing will get done about it, because the only way to make PP meaningfull is to have it open only.
3) And so, PP is reduced to ALD merit farmers for credits (PP salary) and more credits (bounty hunting bonus).

This. This does indeed negatively affect power play and I agree it's silly. But solo mode was here long before power play, and therefore the issue is with the design if power play, and not solo mode.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Ok so. It doesn't really change anything. From what I remember during the uproar after offline was cancelled, solo was pitched by FD as all that was needed for those who wanted a single player. Which was by the way.
Either way some people play the game but don't want to deal with other players, and so limiting power play to open only is against the idea of the design of the game.

It doesn't change anything - except maybe the perceptions of those who think that Solo online was an afterthought. You are correct in that Solo was pitched by Frontier as an alternative to Offline mode in the immediate aftermath of the Offline cancellation.

Regarding "limiting power play to open only is against the idea of the design of the game" - that certainly seems to be the case given Frontier's statements on the topic.

 

[panz3r]

?

The 'incentive' for Open play is you are playing against other players. It's the same incentive for playing any multiplayer game. Why do you need any other incentive to play a multi-player game?

I think I'm missing something here.

The problem is that in a massively multi-player game you have the option to continue in single-player when you feel like, which is kind of lame if you are not hypocrite.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Not sure if this is been discussed before, but I'm not sure why PP is available in Solo play as I though the purpose of PP was to get people playing together, but after finding out that lots of people hide in Solo when doing expansion fighting (amongst other things), kinda took some of the excitement away for me.

So there I was are, battling it out in Open, undermining systems to expand, and your enemy can simply undermine you in Solo without you being able to do anything about it. All seems very odd. :S

I understand Solo for the single player game but I dont understand it for PP.

Any thoughts? And do we think this will be changed?

There's plenty of opportunity to play directly against other players in PowerPlay - fighting in the expansion zones, or intercepting enemy fortifiers, underminers and prep'ers. There will usually be a cadre of players on the opposing side spoiling for a good ruck.

And your enemy may be able to undermine you in Solo, but you can bet with certainty that there'll be a lot of players on your side doing exactly the same to them!

Ultimately, the bulk of PP points come from collective PvE efforts - rather than direct pilot-versus-pilot, it comes down to one group's collective effort versus the other's.

I think this is good as it gives the most flexibility to all players and they way they like to play. I use all three play-modes, depending on my mood, who I'm playing with, what I plan to do, etc.

Given FD's stance that all modes are equal, I doubt there will be any change to this.

 

[panz3r]

Of course E: D is not the only game in town.

To call all players who choose not to play in Open "risk adverse" is a bit insulting don't you think? Some players choose not to play with others simply because they don't want to play with others - it's not necessarily anything to do with perceived risk.

The flight model is consistent with the original game, albeit with improved yaw - Elite had no yaw whatsoever.

I am curious why do you think that risk adverse term is insulting.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I am curious why do you think that risk adverse term is insulting.

Players who choose not to play in Open are often variously referred to as "hiding" and/or "cowards" - "risk averse" is in the same vein (albeit a milder form).

 

[Roland2]

I should add that the time earned is a consumable. So 1 hour of trading earns you the right to fly a combat ship for 1 hour (this can be adjusted if needed). After that hour is spend the pirate would have to go back to a trading ship to earn more time in a combat ship.
That way a good supply for "sheep" is available.
It helps the "sheep" as they can jump into combat ships and then be the wolfs and take revenge on those who pirated or killed them as those would sooner or later have to refill their "combat ship time account".

And even if everybody who is currently a trader doesn't play open mode my system would ensure that there are always "sheep" for the "wolfs" in Open mode as all "wolfs" would have to spend some time as "sheep" in Open mode. Everybody happy

No need to start from scratch for everybody. As you already mentioned nobody would complain, but it's not needed and everybody would be even more happy

Sorry, this makes even less sense to me. I buy a "combat ship" whichever ones they are meant to be, I get it set up the way I want, go for a test flight, then magically appear in a trader ship because my hour ran out. Talk about immersion breaker. Or, I have to dock to change ships. So, now I have a ship I payed millions of credits for, but can't fly because of a stupid timer.

And again, what would prevent the sheep from flying in group or solo, thereby not being available for the wolves?

Your solution still hasn't solved anything. At best, it just gives a different set of problems.

 

[panz3r]

Players who choose not to play in Open are often variously referred to as "hiding" and/or "cowards" - "risk averse" is in the same vein (albeit a milder form).

So what else is doing the solo play other than removing the risk of meeting other players ?

 

[Imperial Guard]

This will sound like a broken record but that is the fundamental problem.

I have no problem with people that want a solo PVE game (like the original Elite in 1985)
or play in a private group co-op role.

But the SOLO / GROUP PVE game should be totally INDEPENDENT from the online OPEN game. (separate saves)

There should be and initial choice between a starting a SOLO career path or an OPEN career path.
Then everybody can make that conscious decision from day 1.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The problem is that in a massively multi-player game you have the option to continue in single-player when you feel like, which is kind of lame if you are not hypocrite.

Why is it hypocritical to opt for solo play in a game where all 3 modes are advertised?

So what else is doing the solo play other than removing the risk of meeting other players ?

To dock in outposts when you get the docking denied. To make high res screenshots. To avoid annoying players who call other players hypocrites for no reason.

That kind of thing.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This will sound like a broken record but that is the fundamental problem.

I have no problem with people that want a solo PVE game (like the original Elite in 1985)
or play in a private group co-op role.

But the SOLO / GROUP PVE game should be totally INDEPENDENT from the online OPEN game. (separate saves)

There should be and initial choice between a starting a SOLO career path or an OPEN career path.
Then everybody can make that conscious decision from day 1.

It does indeed sound familiar.

Frontier have stated from the outset that all players in all modes will both experience and affect the same shared galaxy state. This has now expanded to cover all platforms with the upcoming release on Xbox One.

Given that this core feature has been in place from the outset, it is rather surprising that people who are opposed to it bought the game - buying the game was a conscious decision after all....