Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Benedictus]

Your basic assumption is flawed. You are assuming that the choice of game mode is related to what you personally class as "risk", that is false and as a result, everything you derive from that assumption will also be false. Easy example: a friend of mine plays in a Private Group with his 8 year old son, why do you think they do that? Hint: it's nothing to do with PvP...

If I play with a beginner, I would go with him to a private group (PVE)
If I want to go with my clan I go to Open 1 or 2 (PVE / PVP)
If I want the full dangerous galaxy, the galaxy without the invisible influence on my powerplay oder cg, I would go to Open 2 (no switching MODE + no influence from other modes = PVP)

 

[Benedictus]

"The enemy" implies that everyone in Solo is working against you. This paranoia is the root of all the delusions about Solo.

In Powerplay? Yes! If he is not in my, but in another Power!
In Community Goal? Yes! if he has the opposite goal

 

[Seonid]

If I want the full dangerous galaxy, the galaxy without the invisible influence on my powerplay oder cg, I would go to Open 2 (no switching MODE + no influence from other modes = PVP)

So in your Open 2 mode, how do you fight against enemies of your chosen faction when you are sleeping or at work? Or when you don't get matched with your enemies as the internet connections are not good enough? Assuming you play on the PC, how about all the XBOX1 enemies you will never see, ever?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

In Powerplay? Yes! If he is not in my, but in another Power!
In Community Goal? Yes! if he has the opposite goal

And No! If he's in your power, and No! if he has the same goal. So it all equals out.

By the way, I fully support your BGS2, if you pay for it, and none of my money I spent on Elite goes into it. I did my work before I bought it you see, and I liked what I was buying and I don't need some self-aggrandizing players who couldn't be bothered to check trying to take that away from me. Thank you very much

It can be the BGS for people who think they're so special playing in Open. When character creation comes around they can have extra big heads. Lets call it the Really Dangerous BGS for Really Brave CMDRs. Yes you are a brave CMDR, yes you are.

edit: By the way, you do realize even less players will be in your added BGS2 don't you? Such a shame. All those Die Hard PvPers all dressed up and no one to fight.

 

[Benedictus]

So in your Open 2 mode, how do you fight against enemies of your chosen faction when you are sleeping or at work? Or when you don't get matched with your enemies as the internet connections are not good enough? Assuming you play on the PC, how about all the XBOX1 enemies you will never see, ever?

This graphic is not limited to PC gamers.
I'm not sleeping at work
This is a problem that I had in the original state as well. The advantage for the Open-only player and PVP players predominates. The rest is no different than before.

 

[Jockey79]

Based on the open play and the reasons that I have already mentioned.

The game is not "based" on Open Mode.
It is based on player choice.

if I want to play with AI only, I can.
If I want to play with just friends, I can.
If I want to play with strangers, I can.

This is what the game is based on - so I ask you again, why should anyone "overcome the player, and not only the enemy AI."?
That is how YOU want to play in YOUR game. That is not how I want to play in MY game.

So why should YOUR game be more important than MINE ?

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Oooh. Zaphod Beeblebrox want's his own universe. Will he be willing to pay extra for it? And our survey says: Uh-uh. That's a big no. Two more and your out.

 

[Benedictus]

The game is no "based" on Open Mode.
It is based on player choice.

if I want to play with AI only, I can.
If I want to play with just friends, I can.
If I want to play with strangers, I can.

This is what the game is based on - so I ask you again, why should anyone "overcome the player, and not only the enemy AI."?
That is how YOU want to play in YOUR game. That is not how I want to play in MY game.

So why should YOUR game be more important than MINE ?

I do not want to take away your choice.
I want to add an additional choice option.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

I do not want to take away your choice.
I want to add an additional choice option.

You want an option that includes only you. It will be a very small universe. Probably boring too.

 

[Seonid]

This graphic is not limited to PC gamers.

But the game is. I also said "sleeping or at work". However, your suggestion requires a second and separate BGS and since we know what it takes to run one of them, do you really think they are going to run more than one for the sake of a small group of players?

 

[Jockey79]

I do not want to take away your choice.
I want to add an additional choice option.

So you do not see enough people now and you want more modes to dilute the player base even more ????

 

[Benedictus]

You want an option that includes only you. It will be a very small universe. Probably boring too.

You can not know that. What I know is that this mode infrastructure is already a long controversy. Probably there is a need.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

You can not know that. What I know is that this mode infrastructure is already a long controversy. Probably there is a need.

Perhaps the controversy should be resolved by removing Open. It will be much cheaper (no alternative universe, no additional work for FDev maintaining two story lines) and it will be more inclusive. You can then choose a group to play in with like minded players and everyone will be happy.

It would also mean that there are no players taunting others for not playing in Open. The community will feel much better about itself.

 

[Jockey79]

What I know is that this mode infrastructure is already a long controversy.

Because some PvPers (and that is an insult to real PvPers) only want easy targets to shoot - and the mode system lets us all play without the people we do not want to play with.

Those "PvPers" hate that and have complained about it for 3 years - they have been ignored by FD for 3 years.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

You can not know that. What I know is that this mode infrastructure is already a long controversy. Probably there is a need.

It's not the length of the controversy, but the validity of arguments that count.

I'm glad you spotted the strength of those who argue against it lies in their persistence, while they're lacking in their reasoning.

 

[Benedictus]

Perhaps the controversy should be resolved by removing Open.

Yes you are right,





It would be honest. The players would know where they stand. The players would have to make no more hopes. The players would also not discuss this issue here in the forum. Already in the third solo vs. Open vs Group Thread. MAybe they would leave the Game, if they are unsatisfied with the status quo.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

The argument against evolution also has been running for a while. That must mean there's a good case against evolution presented.

 

[Jockey79]

The players would know where they stand.

The players do know where they stand - you can see others, if they let you.

Elite: Dangerous is not the only game to have selective multiplayer modes or any sort of player controlled instancing.

Guild Wars, I only played with friends in my mission instances (PvP was optional).
Star Trek Online, only my friends could join my mission instances (PvP is optional).

Just to name 2 out of what I have played.

Also Shroud of the Avatar has the same selective multiplayer as Elite: Dangerous.
And Star Citizen has a PvE <-> PvP slider to increase or decrease how often you will see other players, plus it has private servers that will update from the PU.

 

[Garbarrage]

The game gives you the freedom to do what you like. Yes, absolutely. However, the only place the game rewards players is for PVE trophy movement...basically, if you do something that changes the BGS you get a reward.

You run a mission...you get a reward.

You play in a CG....you get a reward.

You bounty hunt...you get a reward.

Players are no more, nor less than an NPC in any of these calculations...the game even recognized players as NPC targets for mission completion....but that is the extent of any rewards for active PvP.

And that would be all that would be allowed in a game where the modes have to have equality. Any time you increase the rewards in favor of a play style between the modes...it brings more importance to the rewarded mode. Although this might or might not matter...the devs have clearly stated that modes are here to stay and that there will be no difference between them.

I think it's a given that players are much much harder to kill than NPCs. A bounty on a player should be a lot more than for an NPC. The risk is greater. So should be the reward.

I think that this would achieve several things. It would encourage PvP, reward it fairly, appease the Open only players, and have zero effect on the background simulation, so would not affect anyone else in any other mode, other than them knowing that someone else might be getting rewarded for doing something that they would prefer not to do themselves.

Allowing players to place bounties on each other, would help create emergent gameplay to some degree, and could also facilitate the suggestion in the ED blurb that each player that you meet could be your greatest ally, or your worst enemy...

Unless I'm missing something, and please tell me if I am, I'm not playing that long so it's entirely possible, but I can't se how such an inclusion would make any difference to players of the other modes. The mechanic would be there for them too, except they don't have the player tgts to complete the bounties.

I think it shouldn't be difficult for a system which recognised players and NPCs differently with regard to rewards.

 

[Benedictus]

Because some PvPers (and that is an insult to real PvPers) only want easy targets to shoot - and the mode system lets us all play without the people we do not want to play with.

Those "PvPers" hate that and have complained about it for 3 years - they have been ignored by FD for 3 years.

If they want easy targets, they can go to Solo, Private and Open 1, to shoot at NPC.
My suggestion with the additionally Open 2 lets you still play without the people you do not want to play with.
We PVPers hate invisible Enemies. If Solo and Private-players infuence Solo and Private Groups, and Open Players infuence Open only (in relation to Powerplay, Community Goal etc.). there is no problem. Everybody can stay in his own world and can influence his own BGS. Nobody is forced to be an easy target for PVPers. You have still the choice. PVP is optional.