True but yeah, that´s the 'Problem' or that what affords the thought in that kind of Gameplay. Some hired NPC Escort Ships would do the Job or evtly the upcoming from your Cargohold launchable Fighters.
How FD could make a lot more people play in open play
- Thread starter valbarr
- Start date
Replying to the topic, not any one person. 
I play in a private group with my small group. We don't want to play with anyone else.
Not interested in open. Not interested in being someone's content. Likewise, I don't want to force anyone else to be my content.
I don't want to play with you.
I play in a private group with my small group. We don't want to play with anyone else.
Not interested in open. Not interested in being someone's content. Likewise, I don't want to force anyone else to be my content.
I don't want to play with you.
Free lollipops would do it for me.
I've had some quite emergent PvP with SWtOR on a PVE server. You could toggle it on and off as you went along. That allowed for watching the fray without hindering them or being in danger or team up for some interesting fights.
Total PvP? I get that people like it - I guess there are still people playing DayZ and the like. I don't see other than a pointless waste of time in it, but that's probably just me. Imo, a game needs rules or else it becomes a pile of dog poo - ever watched a team sport match where rules weren't enforced? Those aren't exactly matches that are remembered as "good" - then again it could be just me.
The only reason ED isn't one big heap of toxic waste is the size of the playing ground which allows to avoid hotspots and you still can have conflict when you e.g. join a group and maybe come to a disagreement with another group.
In any case, a design that is prohibitive to ship loss - do people really wonder why random PvP is not really loved here? OP solution is at least reasonable in my eyes. The call for consequences and punishments for PKing - you guys realize it's still a game, right? I doubt penalty on penalty on disincentive make for funny times - but maybe it's just me.
Total PvP? I get that people like it - I guess there are still people playing DayZ and the like. I don't see other than a pointless waste of time in it, but that's probably just me. Imo, a game needs rules or else it becomes a pile of dog poo - ever watched a team sport match where rules weren't enforced? Those aren't exactly matches that are remembered as "good" - then again it could be just me.
The only reason ED isn't one big heap of toxic waste is the size of the playing ground which allows to avoid hotspots and you still can have conflict when you e.g. join a group and maybe come to a disagreement with another group.
In any case, a design that is prohibitive to ship loss - do people really wonder why random PvP is not really loved here? OP solution is at least reasonable in my eyes. The call for consequences and punishments for PKing - you guys realize it's still a game, right? I doubt penalty on penalty on disincentive make for funny times - but maybe it's just me.
You might persuade some with this, but not all. People have all kinds of reasons for playing solo. Losing a ship might be the least of their worries.
I have not really thought abut this, but perhaps something like this is worth a try, although I think that 10% of insurance is very low..
This is only about getting killed and losing a ship.
How do you propose to handle cargo?
If traders would stand to lose their entire cargo then they would not fall for it I am afraid.
Last edited:
people don't disappear into group or solo because they are afraid of pvp, myself for example play in private simply because I have no interest in the pvp element of this game. as I have a choice of how I can play this game I choose to play it without the pvp. you can change loads of stuff to entice players into open but if they have no interest then they are not going to change their minds.
Actually - speaking only for myself - I would *prefer* to play in Open. Alas, there are far too many jerks in Open to make that mode of Play appealing or enjoyable. I've written it a few times already, but worth re-iterating that it is the PvP Combat Brigade that have basically nerfed the Galaxy - perverted the Galaxy - subverted the Open play-space. What *should be* the "Wild West" - Anarchy systems, etc,,, - is pretty safe at the moment, while the front doorstep of what is *supposed to be* "secure and governed" space is exactly where all the jerks lurk taking out easy prey with impunity - and costing their chosen targets (almost exclusively players with weaker and non-PvP combat optimised equipment) a lot of the progress that they have invested their game time towards. While this persists, many otherwise willing Open PvE players, including myself, will "hide" (their word, not mine) from the jerks in Groups and Solo. Such is the way that E: D Galaxy has been perverted.
Cheerz
Mark H
This is the point that's almost always missed in discussions like this. I have a friend that only plays in a private group with his young son as he doesn't want him exposed to the player groups that pride themselves on trash talking, another friend only plays in solo because he has no interest in interacting with anyone at all when playing, he specifically plays it to be alone. I choose to play in open as I like the unknown of that hollow icon. These are all valid choices that have nothing to do with PvP. These are all valid game modes. These will not change.
I think it would make a lot more sense to make in-game changes to promote open play. For example, create policed trade corridors. You can use them, but if you have illegal goods you run the risk of being scanned and fined (or worse, depending on the laws vs what's in your hold). This would have the effect of evening out the odds. You could still technically be interdicted in these areas, but a quick distress call and a minute or so of surviving might be enough to get help from the authorities. (presumably you'd know how far away the nearest assist would be once the distress call was made.) Pirates could still potentially get you, but they risk a wanted status, and might not have enough time to collect cargo even if they do manage to blow up a ship in the corridor.
This would also have the effect of making illegal trade much more interesting. If you want to avoid scans, you stay off of the trade corridors. But doing that you greatly increase the risk of piracy.
And hey, since I'm thinking of this as I type, make an ongoing Community Goal of assisting in the policing of the corridors. Every week get a small bonus if you assisted law enforcement, and a somewhat bigger one if you did a lot of it.
This would also have the effect of making illegal trade much more interesting. If you want to avoid scans, you stay off of the trade corridors. But doing that you greatly increase the risk of piracy.
And hey, since I'm thinking of this as I type, make an ongoing Community Goal of assisting in the policing of the corridors. Every week get a small bonus if you assisted law enforcement, and a somewhat bigger one if you did a lot of it.
I'm pretty sure you don't want to play in open because there is no self-determination on when combat can occur (because that extends to everything from location, time, which ship you are in, etc). It isn't really all of the commanders' who play in open fault. Actually.
The developer decided to provide an open experience, where combat can occur at any time, with trivial crime costs. It's not that Open has been "perverted", it's that frontier are in no apparent rush to give people control over when they can be shot at, in open. So it doesn't really matter what the crime and punishment model looks like; because that was never the problem. It's that Commander Y doesn't ever want to be shot at by Commander X.
When you distill the arguments down to their core, some people elect to not be shot at, by a commander. That's fine. But one does not need to brand or blame commanders for what is, ostensibly, a lack of self-determination; that is all on the developer.
Note, I have no problem with Frontier adding better PVE options. More people playing Elite is always a good thing. And there can be any number of reasons why a PVE setting may be preferred. But I think we can all prefer the mode we prefer, without branding entire portions of the community as "the bad people".
Last edited:
Because yea, the guys camping noob start points simply can't help themselves.
Ask frontier why this continues? Sure. I don't think it's particularly sporting. But the developer has allowed this to continue. In fact, they encourage it by handing starting systems over to PVP groups and don't bother to even move the starting points or randomise.
Frontier could easily increase the starter system count, and semi-randomise where people spawn in. They don't. Frontier could address the crime and punishment model to some degree. They haven't.
And again, you've illustrated my point; self-determining when combat occurs is the core issue. The only way to solve that is for frontier to address PVE as a fully support game mode.
Last edited:
The sooner you realize that the majority of the forum are not into MMO in a contemporary sense, the less harm you'll probably suffer. Also FD won't like distinguishing player caused death and NPC caused death due to immersion.
Shameless self-advertisement:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=235327
Shameless self-advertisement:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=235327
I would only allow changes in modes to occur whilst docked and empty of cargo
.
I have no problem with people playing open private solo or what ever - I do think that its a problem that on the first sign of a problem the first thing some people do is swap to private or solo as a "get around"
.
I would have community goals only available in open as the clue is in the name they are for the community not for a small subset of the community nor for someone on their own.
A community goal should have a group within the community who want a task to succeed and a group who don't - the two groups are the same community and shouldn't avoid each other
.
Having things only available in open has a precedence - The elite challenge was definitely only available to open players - think the video card hunt may have been as well
.
I have no problem with people playing open private solo or what ever - I do think that its a problem that on the first sign of a problem the first thing some people do is swap to private or solo as a "get around"
.
I would have community goals only available in open as the clue is in the name they are for the community not for a small subset of the community nor for someone on their own.
A community goal should have a group within the community who want a task to succeed and a group who don't - the two groups are the same community and shouldn't avoid each other
.
Having things only available in open has a precedence - The elite challenge was definitely only available to open players - think the video card hunt may have been as well
Last edited:
I don't agree with your definition of community, but it's a valid opinion.
I somehow don't get the point of this (repeating?) discussion.
Didn't FD give us all the tools to play as we like?
We have:
solo - pretty much self explanatory. And a lot of people really like to play this way. It is nice to now that you fly through a universe that is influenced by all other playes, but you get your own private playing experience. I like this mode and I play it for what it is sometimes, so I know that I only get bothered by the game mechanics and my own errors - and nothing else.
open - Also rather self explanatory: (almost) anything goes. You see all the players that are also in open and you know they can use you for target practice. Either get better at (not) being a target or don't play this mode. There are some rules regarding haressment and as far as I have noticed in the forums, when filed through the proper channels will be acted upon by FD (maybe not completely to your satisfaction, but - as with all support - that is very hard to achief for a support organization; and you mostly only hear the complainers, those who are satisfied mostly do not state themselves loudly. They continue playing the game).
And then there is the third option that allows us to orchestrate everything in the middle: private groups. I for one joined Möbius just for the PvE aspect. No need for FD to put it in there: a group of likeminded people found each other and decided to make it big (thanks by the way for this great group!). When in the bubble I mostly play in this group and I enjoy it! Okay, the group has been compromized. I also think that the offenders have been removed again from the group. But any kind of group is possible! Big, small, in-between. The freedom!
I don't see what has to change in this set-up, as with the tools available we can create all the game experience we want! Lovely game, great game play modes.
Fly safe,
CMDR Jermus
(Who wonders when we are going back to playing the game, instead of arguing about it...)
Didn't FD give us all the tools to play as we like?
We have:
solo - pretty much self explanatory. And a lot of people really like to play this way. It is nice to now that you fly through a universe that is influenced by all other playes, but you get your own private playing experience. I like this mode and I play it for what it is sometimes, so I know that I only get bothered by the game mechanics and my own errors - and nothing else.
open - Also rather self explanatory: (almost) anything goes. You see all the players that are also in open and you know they can use you for target practice. Either get better at (not) being a target or don't play this mode. There are some rules regarding haressment and as far as I have noticed in the forums, when filed through the proper channels will be acted upon by FD (maybe not completely to your satisfaction, but - as with all support - that is very hard to achief for a support organization; and you mostly only hear the complainers, those who are satisfied mostly do not state themselves loudly. They continue playing the game).
And then there is the third option that allows us to orchestrate everything in the middle: private groups. I for one joined Möbius just for the PvE aspect. No need for FD to put it in there: a group of likeminded people found each other and decided to make it big (thanks by the way for this great group!). When in the bubble I mostly play in this group and I enjoy it! Okay, the group has been compromized. I also think that the offenders have been removed again from the group. But any kind of group is possible! Big, small, in-between. The freedom!
I don't see what has to change in this set-up, as with the tools available we can create all the game experience we want! Lovely game, great game play modes.
Fly safe,
CMDR Jermus
(Who wonders when we are going back to playing the game, instead of arguing about it...
)Didn't FD give us all the tools to play as we like?
...
Fly safe,
CMDR Jermus
(Who wonders when we are going back to playing the game, instead of arguing about it...
Glad to see other people getting on board with this mindset given the prevalence of "open online" only games these days. Can't fathom for a moment why people complain about the generous setup here.
Also, we'll get to playing it instead of arguing when we get home from work?
...*chuckles quietly in the corner*
Last edited: