Should there be an 'Open' Player Vs Environment Option on the Login Screen

[Mr_Blastman]

Whether Frontier stop after implementing improved group management tools (and, hopefully, Private Group in-game rules) or go the whole hog and implement an Open-PvE mode - either would be an improvement over the status quo - where a single player could (without direct help from Frontier in the latest "episode") spend quite some considerable time scrolling through a list of c.20,000 unsorted players trying to find the one that is needing kicked from the group.

Private Group in-game rules should mean an immediate expulsion from the global universe. All account data is non-transferrable to other modes. If you are subject to special rules, you should not be able to participate in other modes where players are not subject to those parameters.

Thus... if someone plays in a private group with special rules, they are shelled to that private group and if they want to play in Open or Solo they must start over with a new pilot. That's the only way it is fair and just.

 

[Siobhan]

Private Group in-game rules should mean an immediate expulsion from the global universe. All account data is non-transferrable to other modes. If you are subject to special rules, you should not be able to participate in other modes where players are not subject to those parameters.

Thus... if someone plays in a private group with special rules, they are shelled to that private group and if they want to play in Open or Solo they must start over with a new pilot. That's the only way it is fair and just.

Nonsense! That's the sodium deficiency talking.

 

[Bomba Luigi]

Private Group in-game rules should mean an immediate expulsion from the global universe. All account data is non-transferrable to other modes. If you are subject to special rules, you should not be able to participate in other modes where players are not subject to those parameters.

Thus... if someone plays in a private group with special rules, they are shelled to that private group and if they want to play in Open or Solo they must start over with a new pilot. That's the only way it is fair and just.

But if a private group has a non-PvP rule then why exclude from Solo? That too has a non PvP rule

 

[Robert Maynard]

Private Group in-game rules should mean an immediate expulsion from the global universe. All account data is non-transferrable to other modes. If you are subject to special rules, you should not be able to participate in other modes where players are not subject to those parameters.

Thus... if someone plays in a private group with special rules, they are shelled to that private group and if they want to play in Open or Solo they must start over with a new pilot. That's the only way it is fair and just.

Why?

Solo players (PvE by definition) are not expelled from the single shared galaxy state, neither are Private Groups (who may be playing as PvE). No change there at all - all players in all game modes and on all game platforms experience and affect the same single shared galaxy state after all....

 

[Faded Glory]

Whether Frontier stop after implementing improved group management tools (and, hopefully, Private Group in-game rules) or go the whole hog and implement an Open-PvE mode - either would be an improvement over the status quo - where a single player could (without direct help from Frontier in the latest "episode") spend quite some considerable time scrolling through a list of c.20,000 unsorted players trying to find the one that is needing kicked from the group.

I assume they will try to address the group management tools. I'm not sure what you mean regarding (implementing?) PG in-game rules, but I cannot see them taking on micro-management of rulesets for the hundreds of different groups that exist. If you are referring to a PvP On/Off flag/toggle, then I'd have thought that implementing an Open PvE mode would be easier, and would encourage more random players to interact, which does seem to be at least a part of their goal.

 

[KaizoMK]

Private Group in-game rules should mean an immediate expulsion from the global universe. All account data is non-transferrable to other modes. If you are subject to special rules, you should not be able to participate in other modes where players are not subject to those parameters.

Thus... if someone plays in a private group with special rules, they are shelled to that private group and if they want to play in Open or Solo they must start over with a new pilot. That's the only way it is fair and just.

FD won't allow special rules that give that private group an advantage in the bgs or in other modes.

 

[excalibus]

Private Group in-game rules should mean an immediate expulsion from the global universe. All account data is non-transferrable to other modes. If you are subject to special rules, you should not be able to participate in other modes where players are not subject to those parameters.

Thus... if someone plays in a private group with special rules, they are shelled to that private group and if they want to play in Open or Solo they must start over with a new pilot. That's the only way it is fair and just.

We are not asking for 'locked' modes of play, people play in different modes and even switch modes at will for different reasons, videographers like darkenspace, create their videos in private groups, but might actually play the game in other modes when not doing video work. Explorer groups exist for multiplaying exploration teams, so should they suddenly not be allowed to join the rest of the community?

Community in this game is an important and fundamental part, at the current moment the people who want a multiplayer PVE only mode are spread across multiple Private Groups and solo mode and some may reside in OPEN as well, we are not trying to 'lock' the community in segregated areas, we are trying to bring the community together where both the PVP players and the PVE players can finally each play the game the way they want to...

The game has never been about forcing people to play a particular way, and that has been backed up by DB himself in saying their is no right way to play and that you can choose to play with friends, by yourself, with other commanders at any time...

 

[Mr_Blastman]

Why?

Solo players (PvE by definition) are not expelled from the single shared galaxy state, neither are Private Groups (who may be playing as PvE). No change there at all - all players in all game modes and on all game platforms experience and affect the same single shared galaxy state after all....

Because everything in life has tradeoffs. You can be rich and powerful but to do so, often you must sacrifice family and loved ones for that greed. You can be spiritually rich with twenty children and a beautiful wife but likewise, you might have to sacrifice those dreams of wealth to be a good father.

If private group gets a magic invincibility button that makes them immune to other player fire, then the tradeoff should equally be open and solo modes are immune to those who use the magic button. It is only fair.

 

[Lianachan]

Looks like some folks are starting to wake up to why we've always needed an offline single player game. I doubt FD are though, unfortunately.

 

[excalibus]

Because everything in life has tradeoffs. You can be rich and powerful but to do so, often you must sacrifice family and loved ones for that greed. You can be spiritually rich with twenty children and a beautiful wife but likewise, you might have to sacrifice those dreams of wealth to be a good father.

If private group gets a magic invincibility button that makes them immune to other player fire, then the tradeoff should equally be open and solo modes are immune to those who use the magic button. It is only fair.

it is not a magic 'invulnerbility' button, it would be up to FDev how they handle implementation of the mode, and if done properly, there could well be ways its handled that do not 'stop' you firing on another player but instead respond with force that destroys the firing player...

weather its implemented through no damage from player fire, or if its implemented through super extreme (instantaneous) security response that sees the agressor killed swiftly or forced to flee before they can kill the other pilor or if it is handled through an autokick or 'pilots licence' method, or yet still it could be handled through a 'user agreement' aspect when you enter that mode that could be enforced similar to the TOS and EULA...

So no there is no magic button involved...

and it would not give any 'advatage' over the BGS as current groups give no 'advantage' over the BGS

 

[Space Dandy]

Because everything in life has tradeoffs. You can be rich and powerful but to do so, often you must sacrifice family and loved ones for that greed. You can be spiritually rich with twenty children and a beautiful wife but likewise, you might have to sacrifice those dreams of wealth to be a good father.

If private group gets a magic invincibility button that makes them immune to other player fire, then the tradeoff should equally be open and solo modes are immune to those who use the magic button. It is only fair.

FD do not want to have separate BGS servers and have made that clear which is why solo which is the ultimate magic button yet uses the same BGS as the other modes.

This is something that wont change anymore than FD will change their minds about giving us offline mode. This also makes your point little more than some feeble attempt to try and block what there is clearly a need for with a very weak argument.

 

[Siobhan]

it is not a magic 'invulnerbility' button, it would be up to FDev how they handle implementation of the mode, and if done properly, there could well be ways its handled that do not 'stop' you firing on another player but instead respond with force that destroys the firing player...

weather its implemented through no damage from player fire, or if its implemented through super extreme (instantaneous) security response that sees the agressor killed swiftly or forced to flee before they can kill the other pilor or if it is handled through an autokick or 'pilots licence' method, or yet still it could be handled through a 'user agreement' aspect when you enter that mode that could be enforced similar to the TOS and EULA...

So no there is no magic button involved...

and it would not give any 'advatage' over the BGS as current groups give no 'advantage' over the BGS

They're just worried that their salt mine will dry up. Don't you feel sorry for them?

 

[Mr_Blastman]

FD do not want to have separate BGS servers and have made that clear which is why solo which is the ultimate magic button yet uses the same BGS as the other modes.

This is something that wont change anymore than FD will change their minds about giving us offline mode. This also makes your point little more than some feeble attempt to try and block what there is clearly a need for with a very weak argument.

It isn't weak at all.

Solo mode = You against the world by yourself

Open mode = You against the world by yourself, perhaps with other players helping -or- other players trying to rob/kill/extort you

Group mode with invulnerability to player button = You against the world with other players holding your hand


As you can see, Group mode with the button makes the game far easier than Solo mode and lacks the risks Open players put up with to have the option to wing with other players to help against AI. Thus... it has no tradeoffs. Tradeoffs are needed.

 

[excalibus]

They're just worried that their salt mine will dry up. Don't you feel sorry for them?

I actually understand the 'fear' that a few PVP players have told me they have due to the unknown answer of how many people will leave the current open mode for a PVE multiplayer mode...

But it's not something that any of us (except maybe FDev) can accurately guage.

All I can say is I am an Open player and will probably remain an Open player even if a multiplayer PVE only mode was implemented because I like the 'risk' most of the time, but there are times that I would love to meet another commander and just shoot the breeze and not have to 'watch my six'

 

[Siobhan]

It isn't weak at all.

Solo mode = You against the world by yourself

Open mode = You against the world by yourself, perhaps with other players helping -or- other players trying to rob/kill/extort you

Group mode with invulnerability to player button = You against the world with other players holding your hand


As you can see, Group mode with the button makes the game far easier than Solo mode and lacks the risks Open players put up with to have the option to wing with other players to help against AI. Thus... it has no tradeoffs. Tradeoffs are needed.

So what you're saying is that we need an OpenPVE mode with no "mode switch magic button"? Or are you advocating that everyone is forced into Open? Speak up man! If you have a point to make, then make it, and stop all this hovering round the edges like a Libral Democrat.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Twice the back end systems implies (to some degree) double the running costs which affects the bottom line / share holders.

Not going to happen.

Mode locking is more likely - pick a mode & stick with it (solo/group or open) but this feels like the Solo/Group/Open thread in a new form ;-)



(Finally, hating myself right now .. been lurking for months, but now starting to feel overcome by the forums and my headache returning ... *sigh*)

 

[Siobhan]

I actually understand the 'fear' that a few PVP players have told me they have due to the unknown answer of how many people will leave the current open mode for a PVE multiplayer mode...

But it's not something that any of us (except maybe FDev) can accurately guage.

All I can say is I am an Open player and will probably remain an Open player even if a multiplayer PVE only mode was implemented because I like the 'risk' most of the time, but there are times that I would love to meet another commander and just shoot the breeze and not have to 'watch my six'

Point taken, but if nothing is done and the current situation is left to continue, then PVE people are going to slowly migrate out, and even to solo or more tightly run private, as well as E's reputation being tarnished. It's a logical development. You don't make PVE players into PVP players by harassing them, you just drive people away.

 

[Space Dandy]

It isn't weak at all.

Solo mode = You against the world by yourself

Open mode = You against the world by yourself, perhaps with other players helping -or- other players trying to rob/kill/extort you

Group mode with invulnerability to player button = You against the world with other players holding your hand


As you can see, Group mode with the button makes the game far easier than Solo mode and lacks the risks Open players put up with to have the option to wing with other players to help against AI. Thus... it has no tradeoffs. Tradeoffs are needed.

Wrong.

Solo mode ~ you and the rest of the people affecting the BGS against the verse

Open mode ~ you and the rest of the people affecting the BGS against the verse, perhaps with other players helping -or- other players trying to rob/kill/extort you

Group mode ~ you and the rest of the people affecting the BGS against the verse, coop or not depending on group rules

There's no magical "invulnerability" in group that can't be had far more effectively than in solo.

The only tradeoff each mode have from the other is gameplay style..... saying groups makes AI easier in such a discussion is silly as its about unwanted pvp.

 

[excalibus]

It isn't weak at all.

Solo mode = You against the world by yourself

Open mode = You against the world by yourself, perhaps with other players helping -or- other players trying to rob/kill/extort you

Group mode with invulnerability to player button = You against the world with other players holding your hand


As you can see, Group mode with the button makes the game far easier than Solo mode and lacks the risks Open players put up with to have the option to wing with other players to help against AI. Thus... it has no tradeoffs. Tradeoffs are needed.

oh it has a tradeoff... no PVP experiences...

Also just to note, we are not really asking for changes to the group mode either, apart from better administration tools for it... we are asking for FDev to implement a Multiplayer PVE Only mode that is available from the login screen...

One of the things mentioned in the kickstarter was that there would be private groups, solo group and public groups, with the possibility of all having different rule sets so players can play the way they want to play... so far we have been given solo, private groups and one public group (current open) but none of the groups have the possibility of different rule sets except for solo - no other players present ruleset.

What is being asked for is the addition of another public group with a different rule set that promotes a multiplayer PVE only playstyle for players that want to engage in that style of play, because right now that is NOT a choice available from the main login screen is it...

 

[Mr_Blastman]

So what you're saying is that we need an OpenPVE mode with no "mode switch magic button"? Or are you advocating that everyone is forced into Open? Speak up man! If you have a point to make, then make it, and stop all this hovering round the edges like a Libral Democrat.

Ideally I want Open or Solo. Open is anything goes. Solo is... solo. And preferrably an offline Solo, too, for those who want to play on a submarine in the middle of the pacific ocean.

OpenPvE would be magic switch. Magic switch is bad. Tradeoffs are required.