Why should they request for a pure PVE in Open, if they have Private Groups? And where should the PVP Players go, when Open would be pure PVE? I dont understand.
- Status
Why should they request for a pure PVE in Open, if they have Private Groups? And where should the PVP Players go, when Open would be pure PVE? I dont understand.
I think we are perfectly representing the two parties system in the United States, we are vivid image that reflects the Legislative branch of the government...
Sometimes things are just simple.
And yes, Mobius group is a self-imposed PvE only play group in a PvP mode. The difference is what the players do and what the game allows them to do.
By your argument, League of Legends, and the whole MOBA genre, would be as much PvE as they are PvP. Much of the game, after all, is killing NPC minions.
Using the term PvP to refer to a game mode, server, game, etc that allows both PvP and PvE is the common stance in the industry. Look, for example, at what are called PvP servers in most MMOs; they are normal servers as far as PvE availability is concerned, but atop that allow PvP to happen. Hence, by having both PvE and PvP, they are called PvP servers, in contrast with the PvE servers where all PvP is either removed or made optional.
Consent is the basic difference. You can PvP in Mobius, but only in a way where every player must actively choose to engage in PvP. The same way, in other MMOs, game servers that only allow PvP by mutual consent are called PvE servers.
Of course, Mobius isn't a true PvE group because the devs didn't provide us with the tools to completely prevent unwanted PvP. Which is a flaw we really want fixed, preferably by adding a true Open PvE mode, though merely providing the tools to disable PvP in a group would already be a great help.
This is the truth.
No, that way you only reduce the chance that you get into combat with an other player. The game mechanics doesn't change.
The request is not to remove PvP from Open (Although there was a movement a few months ago that explored this possibility, with a few converts that still frequent these environs), but to create a different mode, where all the PvE players can go, congregate, and not have to worry that someone will find their congregation an excuse to start firing upon them!
Private groups are not a 'public' PvE zone. They also do not prohibit PvP from occurring. To get into a Private group, you have to know someone in the group. The groups long term existence is also up to a player maintaining that group over the life of the game OR breaking the ToS by sharing their login information/account with others for the maintenance of the group.
I remember this, and I warned it of its potential to fragment the community even further. I made a proposal to push for a flag system.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Those seeking an Open-PvE mode are not seeking a separate galaxy state all to themselves. Open-PvE would simply be another machmaking setting with an autokick on attacking/destroying another player (who would presumably be fully reimbursed).
That's quite different from those who want to increase running costs with the implementation of a separate galaxy state to develop, host and curate.
Those who wish to remove the freedoms of other players for their own gratification would have probably not been with regard to their requests to force unwilling players to be their targets simply because Frontier seem to value all players' freedoms - not just the freedoms of those who wish to prey on other players.
Why should players move out of interesting areas of the game just because PvP players congregate there?
And I dont want that. I dont want the devs spending time figuring out how to tell the core mechanics of the game to disregard gunfire from another player, separate that damage from NPC's, allow that damage through, disregard ramming damage from other player ships, but allow that of NPC's, allow "clipping through" another player ship, but not NPC (because that WILL come up if open PVE is allowed), and many, many other factors that would have to be researched, changed, added or removed. It may not even be possible, as you so correctly pointed out when you said the player driven economy wouldnt work because the GAME WASNT DESIGNED THAT WAY. We dont even know if its POSSIBLE to turn off PVP! In MY viewpoint, I want the devs working on content for all players. Not just the PVE crowd. Give us bounty hunting tools. Give us better NPC cargo to pirate. Give me some REAL penalties for being a pirate. You know, stuff thats important to everyone... not just the PVE open mode crowd.
True, but with 400B stars you can reduce your chance to 1 out of 1B. So may be it's not about the PVP mode, but about OCD?
Wow, thats complicated for somone who is not native english: Do you mean something like this?
Nope (well that was your original diagram anyway!)! Not separated from the galaxy...everyone still affects the states of stations, systems, etc. just as it is now...just a new state, either within the current Open system that flags PvE only or a separate PvE only mode, similar to Open, where no PC can injure another.
I would also point out that currently, the top two PvE choices do not exist at all...so the game is designed as offering PvP to everyone except those in Solo mode.
Last edited:
They don't have to. If a player can't stand his ground in 32 instances of Open mode they still can enjoy the "interesting areas" in Solo PVE or Group modes.
What about accidental fire? What about ramming damage? What about kill stealing and mission blocking? What about jerks who sit in the docking zone so others cannot pass? You would need a reworking of game mechanics to prevent these. THAT is griefing. And you would see MUCH more of it as soon as that mode went live. How does the computer tell the difference between someone who doesnt really know how to fly and someone intentionally blocking a docking mailslot? It cant. It would have to be worked out, reprogrammed, tested, patched -- time and money, my friend.
YOU ARE REMOVING the freedoms of other players by advocating this. Its the same thing! Why do they get theirs, but I "have CQC" that has nothing to do with ED, and thats MY answer? No thanks, mate. How is it ok for a wing of T9's to alter trade route value for me, but NOT OK FOR ME TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT by stopping them? Because they are doing it through market PVP and not with guns? That makes it ok?
Your PP clearly shows the disadvantage for a PVP player.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not sure what you mean - a player can only exist in one instance at a time....
Or, more importantly, be forced out because the PvE players were congregating somewhere and PvP players decided to crash the party.
Encountering PVP is already significantly reduced by instancing in Open, so there is no true area control or chocking point in ED. Unfortunately...
- Status