So what's the point of Open PVE? Since you only play solo/group?
After all PVE players won't miss open right?
Yes PVP is unfair.
- Thread starter _Dastardly_
- Start date
So what's the point of Open PVE? Since you only play solo/group?
After all PVE players won't miss open right?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It would allow like minded players to form a more tight-knit community to coalesce if Solo / Private Group players seeking a PvE experience were able to play in an Open-PvE mode.
rootsrat
Volunteer Moderator
Quite often it's enough to ask for help in Local if you're in a system with other Commanders. I realise that a lot of time this won't be the case. But cases like CG's, core systems, more popular ones etc. - there's always at least a few players. Why not just ask for escort in the local chat?
Won't that just broadcast your presence and vulnerability to good and BAD ?
The suggestion for a PvE mode was to avoid the PvP/PvE argument of griefing/combat logging complaints that spring up on the forum almost daily. Either FD fix it (in some way) or people accept it is what it is. Personally I don't care where people play. I'm happy enough doing my own thing.
I think you are of the same opinion that players should just get on with it and enjoy the game.
For many, because they don't want to. As I said, I would rather uninstall the game than ever ask for help. I already find asking for help beyond frustrating in the real world, no way I will ever accept that in an activity that is supposed to be done for fun, like a game.
And ED was, and is still, sold as a single-player game. Which makes it dead certain that it will continue attracting other players that want the same degree of self-sufficiency I want.
Upset? Think lawsuits over false advertisement and demands for refunds. Removing the offline mode already got them those*, and they did it before the game even launched; the fallout right now, should they remove either Solo or Group modes, would be worse.
(*Or, in the case of the lawsuits, nearly got those. Frontier folded before any case could get to the courts, though they were served a few letters before action.)
Edit: We could think this a bit further too, how about different types of insurances? A basic one wouldn't cover if you die in anarchy, one that covers would cost more? Etc etc
The issue with this is that it is only fun for part of the player base, those that see dealing with money flow, calculating risks, etc, as part of the game.
For those that are in the game for different reasons, those things just add extra hassle with little to no upside.
I believe this is part of why virtual worlds didn't truly work out in the MMO space. What one player sees as the game can be merely a source of inconvenience and frustration to another. Add enough of those mechanics and a virtual world becomes just as bothersome and boring as the real world.
In the current Open? Yeah, I completely agree PvE players don't belong there. Frontier seems to not be aware that part of ED's player base would like social interaction, but only as long as it doesn't include PvP, so they didn't make a mode for those people. And that despite having advertisement tailored to attract those players.
Or Mobius, which is the best answer players can do with the limited tools at our disposition. Can you even imagine how much trouble it is to create a private group that is approaching 20K players, when a single person has to approve every single one of them (and kick those that break the rules)?Only if you can accept player interaction that could go south at anytime do you belong in Open. Otherwise, may I put it bluntly... go play with yourself.
Which is why many of us are asking for an official PvE Open mode. A mode made for us, where PvPers would be prevented from disrupting our fun in the first place, and one whose ongoing support wasn't dependent on the goodwill of a single player.
The discussion about an Open PvE mode or PvP flags, appears to fall on deaf ears...just as the Open vs. issue.
I think the reason for this is that the devs have set the game up in such a way as to try to coerce PvE people into putting themselves at risk. For those that desire a feeling of belonging to a larger community, it is self punishing to be in Solo or Private group...and the pressure to interact SHOULD bring many of these people back into Open...
This is why Mobius has flourished...to what I feel is a detriment to the devs design. By allowing an unlimited group size...FDev has broken the carrot and stick portion of the interactivity part of the game. They are also putting a player in charge of their defacto PvE mode...rather than providing this type of game play in the game itself...they are going to let a player handle it for them...until the player leaves. Then what? The group is nearing 20k players in the next few days or week...and will continue to grow as more and more folks find out about it. (I can't wait to see the release of the XBone Private group mode! That will definitely point to the devs intentions.)
All players should be demanding a fix to this situation. Doing any combination of ideas, but not limited to, including limiting Private group sizes, changing the amount of loss people are assessed when killed by a PC, opening a new mode, or putting PvP flags that can be changed when in a station.
I think the reason for this is that the devs have set the game up in such a way as to try to coerce PvE people into putting themselves at risk. For those that desire a feeling of belonging to a larger community, it is self punishing to be in Solo or Private group...and the pressure to interact SHOULD bring many of these people back into Open...
This is why Mobius has flourished...to what I feel is a detriment to the devs design. By allowing an unlimited group size...FDev has broken the carrot and stick portion of the interactivity part of the game. They are also putting a player in charge of their defacto PvE mode...rather than providing this type of game play in the game itself...they are going to let a player handle it for them...until the player leaves. Then what? The group is nearing 20k players in the next few days or week...and will continue to grow as more and more folks find out about it. (I can't wait to see the release of the XBone Private group mode! That will definitely point to the devs intentions.)
All players should be demanding a fix to this situation. Doing any combination of ideas, but not limited to, including limiting Private group sizes, changing the amount of loss people are assessed when killed by a PC, opening a new mode, or putting PvP flags that can be changed when in a station.
I normally play in Open when I'm in a smaller ship. However the risk of playing in Open just isn't worth the rewards when the rebuy cost exceeds about 5 million, so Mobius is a good compromise.
I don't see why there should be any kind of "stick" to encourage us into Open; if it wasn't for the mindless gankers, the rewards of player interaction would be enough.
I totally disagree with the limiting of Private Group sizes, it would most likely push people to play in Solo or away from the game completely than play in Open.
---
If people do not want to interact with others or only wish to interact with likeminded people then they should permitted to do as they wish.
---
Address the crime and punishment concerns and some players may be more willing to play in Open but there are at least some that will never play in Open regardless.
Last edited:
I'd like to take a moment with this statement, it is true that PVE only people may have some issues competitively with a person who prefers a pvp environment. Now on to the real statement: Unlike other MMO or MMO types, or games with MMO properties...ED does not hand out or allow you to buy pve and pvp equipment...its all just equipment, no advantage there....the advantage comes from fitting the proper fit for the job. An example, some folks in the pvp environment make their ships tougher, more survivable with addition of HRP's in mutiples, maybe SRB's but these have been hampered so maybe less , shield boosters,...etc, their build will be centric around stripping the person down fast, ie high dps output, likely gimbaled weapons possibly turrented, (this could actually be something to take advantage of if you are a good shot with fixed weapons)(ps get good with fixed weapons), they will have armor...ie makes em more survivable.
next ...a pve fit tends to be more about getting rid of npc's...ship can do that with just about anything in the right order...npc are not creative...they fly the way they are programmed to...great for learning by the way...target practice is target practice....pvp types unless they are new will more than likely have a ship capable of doing what it should...they have the money...otherwise well its even...its about the skill at this point and ship...an example, a python is not as nimble as a vulture, but it has more fire power and it is tougher, vulture is more nimble but its slower....it has its sweet spot for sure, and depending on its fit can actually give a python a bad day...head to head it wont last, but its cheaper to replace A graded. Python v python...better fit wins, lighter fit might get a bit of edge for mobility, but the one fit for fighting will likely be more survivable.
all preaching to the choir right? not really...point is...pve/pvp no advantages...difference is one is a person not program....take 2 equally fit ships...its going to be skill...if there was different sets...pvp or pve then there would be a valid argument there...but its all the same stuff.
Better definition is that some maybe not all pve types, don't feel they can compete or they don't want to. they just want to do their thing. that's cool and should be respected...if they aren't pushing their style on any one then the pvp crowd, shouldn't feel the need to drag them into their shenanigans.
I play in either arena....it really depends on mood or need. TBH I would get bored with just pvp content ie why I stopped playing MWO...there just isn't enough diversity in one play style that is centric around PVP...I like stories, like missions, trading not as much but fast way to money, bounty hunting (I dove tail my PVP into this area), even mining for quiet I don't want ppl to bug me days.
Last thing, because of the huge deal it has become. A lot of people are just leary of playing in open and getting ganked multiple times. Lots of horror stories on this and well it makes headlines; people will shy away from it, others well no so much. Gotta understand, someone been working the hard way to an anaconda for trade and the money to fill the cargo hull, get pulled over and shot at by not a pirate just some joker wanting to kill the guy for giggles, well I can see a problem. Pirates are about the greed and its cool; viable job, but the other guy nope just killin to kill, no bounty, cargo blown up, no purpose. Those fellas make it hard on the pvp community period. Its not the ppl screaming pve. Its not the pvp crowd. Its a third group of whatever you want to call em, this one makes it no fun for the pve guy, and the pvp guy who wants to bring in the pve dude ; well hes been shut down because of party 3 leaving a terrible taste in ones mouth.
Im done with my wall...fly well all!!
Last edited:
I'd say option 1 is viable. Your actions still matter in the greater universe of PVE and Solo players and PVE/Solo players should be happy with it. Open remains Open.
Of course, FDev would have to maintain two universes, one for Open and one for PVE/Solo and each player needs two characters to give them the same choice they have now. They lose the option to apply advantages gained in PVE/Solo to Open, and that's a good thing.
The second universe requires more curated content (CGs etc.) and additional cloud server resources; the cost for FDev would increase. Over time though, with some management tools in place and expecting that cloud computing becomes cheaper, this may not add too much overhead. FDev already maintains a beta testing universe from time to time, so technically there shouldn't be a barrier.
Of course, there is a big Open vs Solo thread elsewhere so I better stop now.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
What about the XBox One players in their Open - would they not get a separate galaxy state?
.... and new platforms (looking at PS4 at some point)....
Well, as the BGS or PowerPlay respond to PvE input, and PvP does little to nothing without the PvE mission to support it (killing someone for the sake of killing them does nothing for the BGS or PP, where there are missions to kill target types which can be humans or AI and will impact the BGS) - you might as well move PvP of to its own static server and leave the living breathing galaxy for the PvE'ers - who are already fully part of it.
So that sounds great, PvP'ers get the static, ignored universe - as their actions don't contribute to it anyway and the PvE'ers get the BGS and PP they have worked on since the game came out.
Tbh, I wasn't thinking about "other" platforms and don't know much about them. If I'm not mistaken then Xbone uses the same universe as the PC but players from either platform can't see each other? It's like an Xbone private group?
My suggestion would be to have the same PVE/Solo across all platforms but separate the Open universes if - and only if - players from the different platforms are not allowed to see each other. There may be contractual reasons for this separation; I don't know. If the only reason is the assumption that PC players may have an advantage over Xbone players because of their more cutomisable setup: I'd say don't worry about it, just let players see each other and group all platforms together into the same Open universe as well.
With new platforms FDev has the choice what to sell of course. In the end FDev has to make money and I'd like to see them around for a long time. I just hope FDev finds balance that acknowledges PVP as one of the defining parts of ED.
That's the beauty of it: In Open mode you can do exactly the same PVE interactions that you can do in Solo or PVE mode and you can have the same impact on the BGS; it would just progress independently if we were to have separate universes for Open and PVE/Solo.
The only difference in Open is that you can see the other commanders doing it and engage in combat with them. There is instancing but you have good chance to, for example, counter-act a player initiative in power play because you can actually see the opposing party.
PVP is NOT about killing someone for the sake of killing someone although some people do. PVPers include traders evading pirates, escort wings, protection squads for new players, bounty hunters and, yes, murderers. It just appears that the balance is a bit out currently making murder inconsequential and counter-acting difficult.
Frontier made it quite clear, they will only have 1 living universe they will run.
So any 2nd one (should one turn up) will be fully static and just there for decoration and for people to look at not interact with.
Hence, if PvP'ers want to exclude PvE'ers from "their" universe - then they should get the static one, as they don't contribute in open now.
(and yes, the balance for crime/punishment is way off)
I'd be interested in reading about FDev's stance; do you have a source?
A while back FDev also said there would be an offline mode, so things can change if it makes sense financially, i.e. if revenue from players gained or retained outweigh the additional cost for maintaining a second universe. I don't know if it does, of course.
Is unofficial, only know to those that come to the forums, and will be in great trouble if Mobius ever tire of accepting thousands of requests per month or otherwise vanishes from the game.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Plenty of interviews point to this. Having a single galaxy developed both by player actions and their own editing and vetting was the intent from the beginning, and the reason Offline wasn't offered at first (they wanted even solo players to contribute to the galaxy) and was removed (as from Frontier's own explanations whenever faced with a choice to either support offline or improve the single online galaxy simulation in any way, they went with the online).
And yep, the intent to include the influence of solo players was explicitly told in a few dev videos and interviews.