Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Sylveria]

They say that it's "useless" because they can't counter it with direct pvp, no matter how many times it's explained that PowerPlay is a political aspect of the game and politics are not war. They can't be stupid; a 10-yr-old could understand PowerPlay's mechanics. It is a self-willed blind spot cobbled together with justifications for pushing the openpvp agenda.

Then when their argument gets debunked they resort to "tantrum" mentality.

- - - Updated - - -

My point was that PvE can be just as competitive too.

We're in agreement from different angles.

My point was that the competitive attitude is IMO the primary basis for the action. I do agree there's exceptions, especially in the case of structured member organizations... because they understand that amongst each other an agreement (following rules, etc.) only makes them stronger, whereas total chaos benefits no one.

 

[relayer]

Woah there!

Were you actually at Hutton?

They failed completely to make any serious impact on the CG as a whole.

Sure they got a few people but I did 14 or 15 trips and didn't see them or any other pirate at all.

There were about 20 of them according to them - do the numbers - there were many many more "truckers".

I finally saw them after I'd finished my last run and got instanced with them as I went to help someone on my friends list.

Screeching halt my backside!

Seconded; the 'Active Community Goals' thread was full of people having fun, even with pirates and code bunnys. People were coming to Hutton in Anacondas or T-9s and dumping cargo so that the "littler guys" could contribute to the goal. People were doing it just for the in-game cred of having done one of the craziest pilgrimmages in the game. People got loopy; people had fun.

There were also singles and wings of people who came just to fight opposing forces, bringing some combat ships in and staying for hours, re-instancing and etc. The forum thread was full of them.

Not once did I see a "tears" post, as code would like to claim; mostly on-thread or in-game comms warnings were "there's a wing of Pythons here; there's some psycho hose beast there" and etc. Hutton Orbital Radio was a blast and really entertaining (until jerks took him out because they realized the video evidence was showing their hand).


Now there's some 'emergent gameplay' for you!

- - - Updated - - -

Now...Code did something interesting...which might have had an effect. They angered a large proportion of the community...which meant that many more people wanted to get a bite at them.

They certainly did have one effect at least: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=182525&highlight=operation+enigma

 

[relayer]

Interestingly Code guys had to drop to solo too to repair and re-arm when one of their guys was pad blocking in their instance making the queue even worse.

Exactly this. This kind of hypocrisy turns up over and over. These are the same people who rail against solo & want open "moar monetized," yet they will utilize solo when they feel like it.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

They say that it's "useless" because they can't counter it with direct pvp, no matter how many times it's explained that PowerPlay is a political aspect of the game and politics are not war. They can't be stupid; a 10-yr-old could understand PowerPlay's mechanics. It is a self-willed blind spot cobbled together with justifications for pushing the openpvp agenda.

Or maybe because they don't like the idea of testing their ability to fight npcs/ trade cargo and ignore npcs vs your ability to do so. The pve in this game is so lacking, I'd rather rip my tongue out of my head with a pair of pliers than do it for any extended period of time to raise a factions influence.

 

[Sylveria]

Or maybe because they don't like the idea of testing their ability to fight npcs/ trade cargo and ignore npcs vs your ability to do so. The imo pve in this game is so lacking I'd rather rip my tongue out of my head with a pair of pliers than do it for any extended period of time.

And you have the full ability to ignore Solo mode and play in Open anytime you choose. Just like Solo players may choose to ignore Open as well.

The point is that the propaganda campaign has failed, despite many attempts to "prove" that Solo is somehow affecting Open mode.

 

[Mouse]

Or maybe because they don't like the idea of testing their ability to fight npcs/ trade cargo and ignore npcs vs your ability to do so. The pve in this game is so lacking, I'd rather rip my tongue out of my head with a pair of pliers than do it for any extended period of time to raise a factions influence.

Funny I have that same feeling about mindlessness of PVP, PVE is actually vibrant to me.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

And you have the full ability to ignore Solo mode and play in Open anytime you choose. Just like Solo players may choose to ignore Open as well.

The point is that the propaganda campaign has failed, despite many attempts to "prove" that Solo is somehow affecting Open mode.

And yet any ability to pvp in any meaningful way, is undermined when players can and do use solo to avoid said pvp. When the meta game is, switch to solo to avoid any pvp to have the most impact, all that's left is the few pvpers in open, spinning their wheels while the real game is decided in solo.

is it right to force players in open if they don't want to? No. but is it right pvp has less impact in deciding the fate of the galaxy? No as well.

 

[Mouse]

And yet any ability to pvp in any meaningful way, is undermined when players can and do use solo to avoid said pvp. When the meta game is, switch to solo to avoid any pvp to have the most impact, all that's left is the few pvpers in open, spinning their wheels while the real game is decided in solo.

There is no undermining PVP.. When PVP is FORCED On others just for your own jollies.. that would be META GAMING... Elite Dangerous is a PVE game with a PVP element it is NOT nor ever has been a PVP game that some can PVE in..


And if the game is being decided in solo than look to those in OPEN who drove people to solo...

 

[ianw]

And yet any ability to pvp in any meaningful way, is undermined when players can and do use solo to avoid said pvp. When the meta game is, switch to solo to avoid any pvp to have the most impact, all that's left is the few pvpers in open, spinning their wheels while the real game is decided in solo.

is it right to force players in open if they don't want to? No. but is it right pvp has less impact in deciding the fate of the galaxy? No as well.

It's right for people to play how they want, if that means there aren't enough PVPers then more need to be convinced to PVP.

Or are you asking for a handout to make up for lack of numbers?

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

It's right for people to play how they want, if that means there aren't enough PVPers then more need to be convinced to PVP.

Or are you asking for a handout to make up for lack of numbers?

Unless you see another way to shift the meta away from solo grinding for pp and cgs. I don't see any other way than a monetary or merit, open buff. Even if more players liked the idea of open and pvp, it'll still be the same as it is now, If the going gets tough switch out of Open.

 

[Mouse]

Unless you see another way to shift the meta away from solo grinding for pp and cgs. I don't see any other way than a monetary or merit, open buff. Even if more players like the idea of pvp, it'll still be the same as it is now, If the going gets tough switch out of Open.

Game mechanics working as intended is NOT META... now adding PVP to those mechanics could be..

 

[Jockey79]

...
is it right to force players in open if they don't want to? No. but is it right pvp has less impact in deciding the fate of the galaxy? No as well.

Actually, yes it is right PvP has "less impact".

This is not a PvP game, it does not have PvP at its core, it does not revolve around PvP, it does not do a thing to push PvP into peoples faces (quite the opposite).
This is a game that allows CONSENSUAL PvP in which both parties find "meaning".

The game works from a PvE standpoint, proven by the updates, blogs and everything else the Devs do (As Roybe keeps saying, pushing little beans about). They even made a PvP arena for PvPers to go and play in... that is away from the main stories and galaxy politics. I mean, come on - they pitch a tent in the garden and shoved you (PvPers, not you personally) out of the house - is that not a big enough hint?

Once PvE piracy is fixed there will be no need for any time of PvP at all. Might as well just stop all player to player damage and leave PvP in the arena.

Oh, wait... where have I heard that before ........

 

[ianw]

Unless you see another way to shift the meta away from solo grinding for pp and cgs. I don't see any other way than a monetary or merit, open buff. Even if more players like the idea of pvp, it'll still be the same as it is now, If the going gets tough switch out of Open.

Well that's a problem for those PVPers - they need to sort it out. Play their PVP game instead of doing something they don't like to do.

Why don't you start banging on the table for FD to make even numbers of people in CGs and PP on all sides in all modes - with ships of equal capacity - then modes don't matter.

Stop trying to inflict your problem on everyone else.

 

[Sylveria]

The game works from a PvE standpoint, proven by the updates, blogs and everything else the Devs do (As Roybe keeps saying, pushing little beans about). They even made a PvP arena for PvPers to go and play in... that is away from the main stories and galaxy politics. I mean, come on - they pitch a tent in the garden and shoved you (PvPers, not you personally) out of the house - is that not a big enough hint?

LOL best description I've seen yet. Thank you!

 

[Robert Maynard]

Unless you see another way to shift the meta away from solo grinding for pp and cgs. I don't see any other way than a monetary or merit, open buff. Even if more players liked the idea of open and pvp, it'll still be the same as it is now, If the going gets tough switch out of Open.

One way to encourage players to play in Open would be if they were to lose less on destruction by another player rather than gain more, in a totally scattergun, untargeted manner, by a blanket buff to Open. Call it a Pilots' Federation compensation scheme (whereby members are compensated when destroyed by other members) - funded by additional Pilots' Federation bounties imposed on players who destroy other players.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Actually, yes it is right PvP has "less impact".

This is not a PvP game, it does not have PvP at its core, it does not revolve around PvP, it does not do a thing to push PvP into peoples faces (quite the opposite).
This is a game that allows CONSENSUAL PvP in which both parties find "meaning".

The game works from a PvE standpoint, proven by the updates, blogs and everything else the Devs do (As Roybe keeps saying, pushing little beans about). They even made a PvP arena for PvPers to go and play in... that is away from the main stories and galaxy politics. I mean, come on - they pitch a tent in the garden and shoved you (PvPers, not you personally) out of the house - is that not a big enough hint?

Once PvE piracy is fixed there will be no need for any time of PvP at all. Might as well just stop all player to player damage and leave PvP in the arena.

Oh, wait... where have I heard that before ........

It's clearly not a pve game either or open would be as you want, completely free of pvp. So until the devs take you up on your idea to completely remove my style of play, I'm going to keep asking for pvp to get a fair shake. Disagree all you want, but, I and I'm guessing a few others are going to keep asking. Just as the pve mode keeps getting brought up despite it not being an intended part of the game.

- - - Updated - - -

One way to encourage players to play in Open would be if they were to lose less on destruction by another player rather than gain more, in a totally scattergun, untargeted manner, by a blanket buff to Open. Call it a Pilots' Federation compensation scheme (whereby members are compensated when destroyed by other members) - funded by additional Pilots' Federation bounties imposed on players who destroy other players.

I'm not opposed to that idea, I don't think it'll do much to help but I'm not against it either.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's clearly not a pve game either or open would be as you want, completely free of pvp. So until the devs take you up on your idea to completely remove my style of play, I'm going to keep asking for pvp to get a fair shake. Disagree all you want, but, I and I'm guessing a few others are going to keep asking. Just as the pve mode keeps getting brought up despite it not being an intended part of the game.

PvE is most certainly an intended part of the game. Players in Solo are, by definition, PvE. There is no requirement on players in Private Groups to engage in PvP (unless they want to, of course). Most of the galaxy is PvE - there are hundreds of billions of systems and less than 1,000,000 players - moving just a few hundred LY from inhabited space and it's unlikely that a player will encounter another.

 

[ianw]

It's clearly not a pve game either or open would be as you want, completely free of pvp. So until the devs take you up on your idea to completely remove my style of play, I'm going to keep asking for pvp to get a fair shake. Disagree all you want, but, I and I'm guessing a few others are going to keep asking. Just as the pve mode keeps getting brought up despite it not being an intended part of the game.

- - - Updated - - -

The player pirate aggressor v player trader role simply isn't sustainable without the goodwill of the trader victim. PVP in general isn't sustainable without willing participants on both sides.

It doesn't matter how many schemes you try and come up with if people aren't up for it you can't force them - well you might once or twice..

Have a PVE login and a PVP login - or a toggle - and let people decide for themselves.

If PVP dies out because not enough people are up for then that's pretty much it - no?

 

[Daffan]

I would have to pull up comms from the time but IIRC there were close to 10k in Lugh, inclusive of both sides.

IIRC the people in system counter is jumps, the same person jumping in 50 times or relogging 50 times counts as 50.

One way to encourage players to play in Open would be if they were to lose less on destruction by another player rather than gain more, in a totally scattergun, untargeted manner, by a blanket buff to Open. Call it a Pilots' Federation compensation scheme (whereby members are compensated when destroyed by other members) - funded by additional Pilots' Federation bounties imposed on players who destroy other players.

Removing penalties on death makes dying or killing people meaningless.

The best way to do it is, rebalance the crime system to make it so that murderers and pirates are COMMITTED to being just that.

Right now i can log on, go to Eravate and blast 50 people and then in 2 hours be doing whatever with no penalty. That's why there is so many murderers and pirates. You make commitment or some sort of annoyance - all the quick gankers will dissapear and only the RP and diehard pirates will remain.

Funny I have that same feeling about mindlessness of PVP, PVE is actually vibrant to me.

I'm sure you do, considering AI haven't become sentinent yet or unscripted. Unless i missed something about Elite's emergent AI.

Game mechanics working as intended is NOT META... now adding PVP to those mechanics could be..

I think the argument is that the game mechanics are bleh in that regard. it rewards scripted grinding and not emergent gameplay.

I really enjoy these forums - they are more meaningful than the actual game, pretty amazing. (SC has the same thing really)

 

[Sylveria]

The player pirate aggressor v player trader role simply isn't sustainable without the goodwill of the trader victim. PVP in general isn't sustainable without willing participants on both sides.

It doesn't matter how many schemes you try and come up with if people aren't up for it you can't force them - well you might once or twice..

Have a PVE login and a PVP login - or a toggle - and let people decide for themselves.

If PVP dies out because not enough people are up for then that's pretty much it - no?

Exactly this.

As I've said before- If there's a mass exodus of players from Open because there's not as much PvP then it's a pretty good sign that's not what players are interested in.

Forcing people into a certain playstyle isn't going to change their minds- if anything it's going to make them quit playing, and although Frontier may have gotten their initial investment in advance, it sure won't do much for their residual income, or marketing the game moving forward.

Either way, blaming Solo or PvE focused players for the problems in Open (or PvP) isn't going to resolve the issue- it's better to focus your energy where it *should* be directed- and that's toward who implemented the system in the first place.

For example, I'm not "blaming" Open players for the fact there's no "Open PvE" mode to choose from and asking everyone to be pooled into it from the current Open mode, I'm asking that it be added as a choice instead.