Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Sylveria]

Also, to answer what FD should learn from the statistics regarding solo, it should indicate that the majority of players do not want to interact with other players, and prefer to play alone. To infer something more from this would be unscientific at best.

I would prefer option one, just increase the consequences for murder of other players..

I actually agree with this. I think it all comes down to three things that are "missing" from Open in its current state-

1) a true system of consequence for those who engage in murder (not necessarily "piracy") and
2) a true system for Bounty Hunting which would help to address this, but properly designed would provide those who choose to murder a worthy set of adversaries to counter their existence.
3) a proper "grouping" tool for those who choose such roles in Open


The important caveat being "If properly designed"- because systems which introduced such (like in EVE for example) in the past were simply a joke which serve as exploits (and had to be revised later). If the roles had a proper grouping tool (wings) that would make it easier for those who choose to band together to engage together, etc.

A nice little "bounty board" that you could lookup in Station Services would serve this well- listing hunters and murderers both with the locations of their "hunting grounds" (not current location, but rather give you a general area to hunt).

Just a thought.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Official vs. private.
No PvP possible vs. PvP possible but not done because every member agrees not to do PvP
Open for everybody vs. invite only

That are for me huge differences.



It's not so much about what is implemented as it is about how it is. In my opinion it's about the chance of evading an interdiction. It's about the shield, armor and speed values of ships. It's about how chaff or ECMs work. There are a lot of variables that can be changed and adjusted. The result can be a gameplay that is fun/interesting/entertaining for a lot of players or that only is fun for a few. In my opinion the game should be fun/interesting/entertaining for the majority of the players, if that's the case I consider it good gameplay.

And if those things others mentioned sound fun to you, you might want to try it someday

I get that you have to be invited, but how hard is it to get in anyways? So we remove the invite, it is basically the same thing. Either way, no point in arguing over the same old ground. That other poster gave you some valid examples of how to avoid combat, claiming they had not tried it is not really fair. Oh and I have tried all of the tricks of the trade, did you know the Cobra is the fastest ship in the game, and can evade almost anything? When I upgraded to ASP, I had little problem dealing with vultures. I fan Anaconda gets me, well the last resort is to hail them and beg for mercy. It works , sometimes I agree that the game needs more balance, but I think it is a cop out to just throw in a game mode and segregate the players. There are more intelligent and inclusive ways to deal with this. Powerplay allegiances turned out to help in some cases. Players looking for PvP who would have, in the past, interdicted and attacked me, have not done so down to the faction allegiance in the info display. They feel some sense of alliance. This means I feel safer in home areas of space, and can rely on more help form other players based on this. It is changes like this which will help to create safe spaces for people who want to avoid combat, without destroying the online galaxy and making it "Elite:NotDangerousAtAll"

 

[Marra Morgan]

Just ROFLMAO. Seriously- it's apparent you've never actually done this.

I've played both hunter and hunted - it's the best way to understand how stuff works.

Admittedly my advice hasn't always saved me, as I've found out the hard way! But for the best part it sees me and my cargo through safely.

Out of curiosity, how have your own experiences with pirating / evasion worked out?

 

[DarkWalker]

Also, most players in Open are really just friendly, and there is a giant misconception about the actual hostility of these players.

One bad apple spoils the bushel.

Or, in a longer answer: the tolerance players have for "hostile play" varies from player to player. Some don't mind it, but for others a single case of griefing can ruin a day's or a week's worth of playing the game. Many will even have the their enjoyment ruined merely from the chance of meeting such a "hostile" player.

I take it that you enjoy this kind of hostile play, or at least it doesn't negatively impact your game. Good for you, but be aware that not everyone is like that.

And, what's more, the game as been explicitly marketed as one where players would always be able to choose who they meet, where they would be able to avoid PvP without downsides; thus, there are many players in the game that won't accept being permanently open for PvP, that will keep demanding for all the content to be available for those that opt to not engage in PvP, because we have been promised that from the very start of the game's Kickstart.

 

[bootsam]

Ive done as you state Marra numerous times quite successfully. Only once did it fail. I was mass locked by a conda and I had cheap D Class shields. The Conda kicked my teeth in before I could even utter 'you rotter...'. Even though I managed to escape to SC, my ships components had taken such a hammering and I exploded on exit overheating.

I run A Class shields now.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

One bad apple spoils the bushel.

Or, in a longer answer: the tolerance players have for "hostile play" varies from player to player. Some don't mind it, but for others a single case of griefing can ruin a day's or a week's worth of playing the game. Many will even have the their enjoyment ruined merely from the chance of meeting such a "hostile" player.

I take it that you enjoy this kind of hostile play, or at least it doesn't negatively impact your game. Good for you, but be aware that not everyone is like that.

And, what's more, the game as been explicitly marketed as one where players would always be able to choose who they meet, where they would be able to avoid PvP without downsides; thus, there are many players in the game that won't accept being permanently open for PvP, that will keep demanding for all the content to be available for those that opt to not engage in PvP, because we have been promised that from the very start of the game's Kickstart.

I was not aware that "avoid PvP without downsides" was part of the games marketing, along with those other specific claims. I remember it was all "blaze your own trail", and "be a miner, be a trader, be a pirate etc..". Either way, players can avoid PvP without consequences by dropping out of the game and going into solo/private group mode, then going to the station, and popping back up. As you just stated, no consequence. So an extra game-mode seems unneeded.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

I've played both hunter and hunted - it's the best way to understand how stuff works.

Admittedly my advice hasn't always saved me, as I've found out the hard way! But for the best part it sees me and my cargo through safely.
…

In a T-6 against a CMDR in an Anaconda? Just curious, never tried it in a T-6. Somehow I suspect this would always end bad if the attacking CMDR knows what to do - fixed rails and target un-lock if chaff…

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

In a T-6 against a CMDR in an Anaconda? Just curious, never tried it in a T-6. Somehow I suspect this would always end bad if the attacking CMDR knows what to do - fixed rails and target un-lock if chaff…

Sometimes, you don;t win fights and you die. There is no 100 percent guaranteed way to escape unharmed. If a good pilot interdicts you, and wants to do you harm, and can avoid all your countermeasures, then you will die. It is part of the game. Also, you will not be trading in a T6 forever, I guarantee it. One day you will be able to do it in an A rated python, and just watch what happens when the Vulture comes in looking for a kill..

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Or, in a longer answer: the tolerance players have for "hostile play" varies from player to player.

Not just player to player, but situation to situation.

For example, after an exploration mission i will always return to dock in solo, because the loss of weeks worth of data to a PvP fanatic who doesn't want a fair fight, just an easy kill, would really ruin my day. In a situation where i'm combat ready, ill accept the risk and fight or run as i think is best for my commander (I usually try and treat my commader like its real, so will run if i'm obviously outclassed). The final situation is like when I was out in a sidewinder interdicting people for interviews. One guy in a Clipper just blew me up without comms (as i recall, he interdicted me the first time). I laughed, so went and interdicted him back. And he blew me up again, and i laughed again. So respawned and interdicted him again, all the time asking for him to talk with me, but this time he was obviouslly annoyed and avoided the interdiction. I kept trying to get a lock on him but he kept avoiding it, the guy obviously was bored of blowing up sidewinders. I had lots of fun thanks to that random "griefer" (in some peoples terms he would be called that).

I actually can highly recommend that if you can spare the time. If someone randomly kills you in a weak ship without comms and without a reason, grab yourself a sidewinder and go keep interdicting them. Let them blow you up until they get bored, but keep at it. Keep interdicting them over and over. You can afford the loss, but they can't afford the time, they are losing valuable griefing time, and its only fun for a griefer if your target has tears, its not fun when they laugh about it

 

[Roybe]

When CQC releases, do away with friendly fire in Open and make the game the PvE game it is designed to be then.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

When CQC releases, do away with friendly fire in Open and make the game the PvE game it is designed to be then.

The PvE game it was designed to be? Any sources for this? You surely are joking?

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…So we remove the invite, it is basically the same thing. …

OK, as you try to ignore the differences: The difference between a private group and Open mode is the that the private group is invite only and it is moderated by the player that made that group. The game rules are the same as in Open Mode: PvP is possible.
The only thing that turns a private group like Mobius into a PvE group is that all members agree on not doing PvP. It is NOT a PvE environment. PvP can still always happen.

In an Open PvE group PvP would not be possible.

That other poster gave you some valid examples of how to avoid combat, claiming they had not tried it is not really fair.

I never claimed they didn't try it and Marra didn't give me some examples, she replied to an other posting.

…, but I think it is a cop out to just throw in a game mode and segregate the players. There are more intelligent and inclusive ways to deal with this.…

So in your opinion an Open PvE mode would segregate the player base. Since you think that Mobius group is basically the same thing as an Open PvE mode (it's not) - what would exactly change? Why does offering a PvE option for those players who don't want to play PvP in any way would affects you? Those players don't play Open mode because they don't like PvP. It would simply something to make the game more fun for them.

At the same time making Open Mode (incl. PvP) more attractive to more players would (hopefully) increase the amount of CMDRs willing to play Open Mode (incl. PvP). You probably missed the context I made my comments about combat balance and evasion/defence/fleeing - no problem, this can happen in such a large thread. They where part of a sub-discussion how to make Open Mode (incl. PvP) more attractive to more players.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

OK, as you try to ignore the differences: The difference between a private group and Open mode is the that the private group is invite only and it is moderated by the player that made that group. The game rules are the same as in Open Mode: PvP is possible.
The only thing that turns a private group like Mobius into a PvE group is that all members agree on not doing PvP. It is NOT a PvE environment. PvP can still always happen.

In an Open PvE group PvP would not be possible.



I never claimed they didn't try it and Marra didn't give me some examples, she replied to an other posting.



So in your opinion an Open PvE mode would segregate the player base. Since you think that Mobius group is basically the same thing as an Open PvE mode (it's not) - what would exactly change? Why does offering a PvE option for those players who don't want to play PvP in any way would affects you? Those players don't play Open mode because they don't like PvP. It would simply something to make the game more fun for them.

At the same time making Open Mode (incl. PvP) more attractive to more players would (hopefully) increase the amount of CMDRs willing to play Open Mode (incl. PvP). You probably missed the context I made my comments about combat balance and evasion/defence/fleeing - no problem, this can happen in such a large thread. They where part of a sub-discussion how to make Open Mode (incl. PvP) more attractive to more players.

Indeed I had confused with another poster regarding the suggestions made. As for the definition of a PvE group, I am not that invested in the outcome of this debate, Moebius is for all intense and purposes a PvE group set up by the community. I actually don;t have a problem with this being recognised and supported in game as such, as I feel large player groups DO deserve recognition for their in-game achievements. I also pointed out that there ws a possibility the traders now flying in open would not use open PvE anyway, as they are in Open and not solo for a reason, because they enjoy the risk. I am doing it right now in Empire Space, in an A rated Python. Solo offers NO challenge for me. I do not see the need to add an extra game mode to balance combat avoidance, as players already have a 100 percent effective way of avoiding combat through the existing features. This could be dealt within a more advanced way by balancing the existing open universe to punish murderers more. I think the best way to solve this would be to have separate commanders, so your solo/open career cannot crossover. Obviously this is never going to happen, but then I ma a hardcore gamer in this respect. I would have been happy knowing the ship stayed in space after you logged off . I don;t use the solo myself, I don;t think it is in the spirit of Open Play and is not fair on other Cmdrs who are hunting me. I always thought FD agreed with me, given they shadow-ban people who combat log to avoid conflict after the agreed to be part of the open mode. Either way, I would rather see the main online galaxy become far richer and diverse, and more of a challenge than it already is. EDIt: To add, I get that this would not actually affect my playstyle if it were introduced, so I feel bad for campaigning against something that may have little impact on my gameplay. I am an advocate of player factions and guilds, and often have t defend my position by saying "It wont affect your game, but it will improve mine". I would just feel the universe in PvP would lose something valuable if it was only combat ships roaming about, instead of a diverse mix of players (groups/guilds/lone wolves/pirates/powerplayers/explorers/traders etc..)

 

[DarkWalker]

I was not aware that "avoid PvP without downsides" was part of the games marketing, along with those other specific claims. I remember it was all "blaze your own trail", and "be a miner, be a trader, be a pirate etc..".

"""Multiplayer: you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends as you choose. This technology is already working, using a combination of peer-to-peer (to reduce lag) and server connections."""

Control who you might encounter. Rendezvous with friends as you choose. Which basically means, you don't want to play with someone, you don't need to, and there's nothing that player can do to force it.

And this was just the start. I've been following interviews, posts, and other sources of information there last years. Apart from contests with real world prizes, like the Race to Elite, there has been no content restricted to a given mode, and every time the devs speak about it they reinforce that all modes are equal.

If you want more examples, you can try Jockey79's Wall of Info.

Either way, players can avoid PvP without consequences by dropping out of the game and going into solo/private group mode, then going to the station, and popping back up. As you just stated, no consequence. So an extra game-mode seems unneeded.

Not exactly without consequences right now, because doing so means giving up on the chance to meet random players. Less so when playing in Mobius, but still it only provides a fraction of the players that an official PvE mode could provide, and thus is subjecting PvE-seeking players to a more watered down experience than the game could provide. An official PvE mode would solve this issue.

 

[Roybe]

The PvE game it was designed to be? Any sources for this? You surely are joking?

Nope. This game is designed completely around PvE. That is all that we are rewarded for doing. PvP costs attacker and attacked money, time, and goods lost that should be better spent working on the PvE goals. I will repeat this again....the PVP in this game is between large groups collecting PVE trophies. Anything else done in this game is not rewarded through the systems of credits, goal attainment, or any other measure of in game reward system. PvP is deterred at every turn....this HAS to be by design at this point in the games development. And should be accepted as such.

Look at the last 3 pages....people in this thread feel that the PvP around Hutton orbital is useless and a gankfest. <shrug> Setting aside the hypocrisy, (shouldn't everyone be allowed to play the way they want, where they want, within the rules of the game?). the introduction of CQC will increase the likelihood of PvP in Open.

I'm betting that the 'good' players will be going where the PvP is actually competitive, can occur without inordinate amounts of time waiting to fight someone. That will mean that you will have a decreasing chance overall for competitive PvP in Open...but that the 'quality' of those meetings will be worse...

FDev needs to get ahead of these problems and just set the whole of Open to 'no friendly fire' and do away with the illusion that PvP has a place in the game in this mode.

It will, finally, close this thread...and almost all the arguments that are bandied back and forth, the PvP people have a place to go and fight that is truly a great PvP experience...and the griefers will be left out in the cold.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

"""Multiplayer: you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends as you choose. This technology is already working, using a combination of peer-to-peer (to reduce lag) and server connections."""

Control who you might encounter. Rendezvous with friends as you choose. Which basically means, you don't want to play with someone, you don't need to, and there's nothing that player can do to force it.

And this was just the start. I've been following interviews, posts, and other sources of information there last years. Apart from contests with real world prizes, like the Race to Elite, there has been no content restricted to a given mode, and every time the devs speak about it they reinforce that all modes are equal.

If you want more examples, you can try Jockey79's Wall of Info.



Not exactly without consequences right now, because doing so means giving up on the chance to meet random players. Less so when playing in Mobius, but still it only provides a fraction of the players that an official PvE mode could provide, and thus is subjecting PvE-seeking players to a more watered down experience than the game could provide. An official PvE mode would solve this issue.

"Control who you might encounter. Rendezvous with friends as you choose. Which basically means, you don't want to play with someone, you don't need to, and there's nothing that player can do to force it." - They already have those features though, as I pointed out in my post

"because doing so means giving up on the chance to meet random players" - Well if you are hiding, then you should expect not to see anyone. I can think of nothing more "watered down" than the PvE mode people are proposing here. As an advocate of guilds and Player Factions, I am constantly told that the external tools for player interaction and communication are just fine. Is this not also the case for people interested in making friends in the ED universe?

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Nope. This game is designed completely around PvE. That is all that we are rewarded for doing. PvP costs attacker and attacked money, time, and goods lost that should be better spent working on the PvE goals. I will repeat this again....the PVP in this game is between large groups collecting PVE trophies. Anything else done in this game is not rewarded through the systems of credits, goal attainment, or any other measure of in game reward system. PvP is deterred at every turn....this HAS to be by design at this point in the games development. And should be accepted as such.

Look at the last 3 pages....people in this thread feel that the PvP around Hutton orbital is useless and a gankfest. <shrug> Setting aside the hypocrisy, (shouldn't everyone be allowed to play the way they want, where they want, within the rules of the game?). the introduction of CQC will increase the likelihood of PvP in Open.

I'm betting that the 'good' players will be going where the PvP is actually competitive, can occur without inordinate amounts of time waiting to fight someone. That will mean that you will have a decreasing chance overall for competitive PvP in Open...but that the 'quality' of those meetings will be worse...

FDev needs to get ahead of these problems and just set the whole of Open to 'no friendly fire' and do away with the illusion that PvP has a place in the game in this mode.

It will, finally, close this thread...and almost all the arguments that are bandied back and forth, the PvP people have a place to go and fight that is truly a great PvP experience...and the griefers will be left out in the cold.

So you are actually suggesting we do away with any combat at all in the open galaxy, and restrict it all to CQC? So no more PvP Anaconda/Vulture fights between players? Seems like a suggestion that will never get off the ground, but I admire your creativity. As well, the fact you go around complaining calling people "ats" for playing the game as intended is not welcome in a mature discussion. It is a valid way to play the game and this kind of pejorative talk is not helpful.

"FDev needs to get ahead of these problems and just set the whole of Open to 'no friendly fire' and do away with the illusion that PvP has a place in the game in this mode." - PvP does have a place, it is fully supported, and it is its own reward. Thankfully ED accommodated people who want no part of it, by providing them with alternative gamemodes. There is no need to be so offended by other peoples play-styles.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

… I would just feel the universe in PvP would lose something valuable if it was only combat ships roaming about, instead of a diverse mix of players (groups/guilds/lone wolves/pirates/powerplayers/explorers/traders etc..)

Just adding an Open PvE mode wouldn't be helpful. Adding an Open PvE mode and making balancing adjustments to the game to make Open PvP mode more attractive would have a positive effect on the game - in my opinion.
If Open PvP mode is more attractive to more players because of better balance it won't become a combat ship only mode. To be honest in my opinion Open Mode right now has a very heavy bias towards combat only ships. Balancing Open Mode would result in my opinion in a more diverse open mode.
As a bonus an Open PvE mode could be added to make everybody who doesn't want PvP happy.

I hope that this would result in less complains about Open Mode (PvP) being empty and at the same time reduce the complains about "undesired player behavior" by pure PvE players.

I know, sometimes I dream of Utopia*


*) Not the PP Utopia

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Just adding an Open PvE mode wouldn't be helpful. Adding an Open PvE mode and making balancing adjustments to the game to make Open PvP mode more attractive would have a positive effect on the game - in my opinion.
If Open PvP mode is more attractive to more players because of better balance it won't become a combat ship only mode. To be honest in my opinion Open Mode right now has a very heavy bias towards combat only ships. Balancing Open Mode would result in my opinion in a more diverse open mode.
As a bonus an Open PvE mode could be added to make everybody who doesn't want PvP happy.

I hope that this would result in less complains about Open Mode (PvP) being empty and at the same time reduce the complains about "undesired player behavior" by pure PvE players.

I know, sometimes I dream of Utopia*


*) Not the PP Utopia

Even the term PvP mode is misleading, it is called "Open" Mode. Not all players are pitted against each other. My own personal experience is one of very limited aggression on the part of other commanders. To me it is a dynamic place that can evolve under real selective pressures, and the fear and danger is an important part of the environment that shapes the way players adapt and survive. My admiration for the Open World comes not from a place of hate or aggression, but from curiosity and wonderment at what is happening in the game. I just feel there is a lot of misrepresentation going on, probably on both sides of the debate.

 

[DarkWalker]

Not just player to player, but situation to situation.

Which is why keeping intact not only the modes, but also mode changing, is important

And it's not only based on situation either. Mood plays a large part for many people, and so do how much time they have available to play — people with more time available are more open to unpredictable things happening in game, things that might need more time to properly tackle. Even connection quality plays a part, as many people are only able to play Solo when traveling.

I actually can highly recommend that if you can spare the time. If someone randomly kills you in a weak ship without comms and without a reason, grab yourself a sidewinder and go keep interdicting them. Let them blow you up until they get bored, but keep at it. Keep interdicting them over and over. You can afford the loss, but they can't afford the time, they are losing valuable griefing time, and its only fun for a griefer if your target has tears, its not fun when they laugh about it

I used to do something similar in WoW; when I was particularly annoyed by a PvP attack, I would lead my opponent in a merry-go-round across the whole map without fighting back. After all, not only I preferred playing with a hybrid Tank/Healer spec often nicknamed Cockroach at the time, I was fairly proficient in PvP and knew how to avoid being killed
(And I would finish by either leading the attacker to neutral NPCs that would attack him — which, for the attacker, meant either allowing the NPCs to kill him or fighting back and losing reputation with that neutral faction — or by doing some kind of suicide run — I got some would-be gankers to kill themselves that way.)

---

"because doing so means giving up on the chance to meet random players" - Well if you are hiding, then you should expect not to see anyone. I can think of nothing more "watered down" than the PvE mode people are proposing here. As an advocate of guilds and Player Factions, I am constantly told that the external tools for player interaction and communication are just fine. Is this not also the case for people interested in making friends in the ED universe?

I would say a 11K+ player group focused on PvE tells otherwise.

---

Just adding an Open PvE mode wouldn't be helpful. Adding an Open PvE mode and making balancing adjustments to the game to make Open PvP mode more attractive would have a positive effect on the game - in my opinion.

Not sure how well it would work. It's easy to tweak one's networking settings to never see anyone else despite choosing Open, and I believe the kind of people that would do this is exactly the same as the kind of people that would subject themselves to gameplay they don't perceive as fun for the sake of extra rewards (AKA the players that would move from Solo/Group to Open because of incentives to play in Open).

- - - Updated - - -

Even the term PvP mode is misleading, it is called "Open" Mode.

From my point of view, if PvP is possible without all involved parties explicitly agreeing to it, it's a PvP mode and should be treated as such.