How FD could make a lot more people play in open play

[Crimson Kaim]

What change please? You are asking for yet another reduction of insurance. At the moment, one only pays 5% of the total value of the ship. I believe the insurance company is in a serious depth. And reducing it to 10% of the current cost would be just 0.5% insurance. This is simply not Elite: Dangerous, this would be an arcade game for 12 year olds who start crying and pointing with a finger at the bully "He was so mean, Mommy!".

Grow up and either learn to defend yourself or just accept that you already have a blessing with just having to pay 5% of the value of your ship. But either way, start doing something else than posting on forums and/or reddit that Elite: Dangerous is too harsh. This is not only directed at the OP but everyone claiming that this game is unfair, too difficult or harsh or whatnot. The danger makes it exciting, without any loss, nothing would be dangerous or exciting. It's a simulation and not some shooter like battlefield or RPG like WoW where you just hit the respawn button and don't care about anything.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

I played a lot of WoW many years ago, and one of the reasons it was so successful imo, was that you could tag/untag yourself for PvP. If you wanted to go about your business in an unmolested way you could do so. Within the same server, those wishing to PvP could flag themselves (by the push of a button) and notify everyone that he/she was available for PvP (and so be killable). Anyone unflagged (or green) was simply untargettable. Made life very straight forward for everyone. Something like this would render private groups & solo obsolete imo.

yes, PVE server rules they were, while ELite is form this point of fiew an open PVP server.

 

[Iori]

how about a commitment system?

If you switch to solo, you stay in solo for a week before being able to switch back to open, and vice versa.

That way people who are only interested in one mode will be able to stick to it without a problem, but at the same time it will prevent people from abusing switching back and forth all the time.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

how about a commitment system?

If you switch to solo, you stay in solo for a week before being able to switch back to open, and vice versa.

That way people who are only interested in one mode will be able to stick to it without a problem, but at the same time it will prevent people from switching back and forth.

that won't motivate the solo and grp player to EVER even giving open a slight try.

 

[tagos]

how about a commitment system?

If you switch to solo, you stay in solo for a week before being able to switch back to open, and vice versa.

That way people who are only interested in one mode will be able to stick to it without a problem, but at the same time it will prevent people from abusing switching back and forth all the time.

It is not 'abusing the system' to play in whatever mode happens to take your fancy.

 

[Jypson]

how about a commitment system?

If you switch to solo, you stay in solo for a week before being able to switch back to open, and vice versa.

That way people who are only interested in one mode will be able to stick to it without a problem, but at the same time it will prevent people from abusing switching back and forth all the time.

How is changing modes abusive?

 

[Kenneth McGrew]

Its a sand box so you can do what you like, if you don't want to get interdicted all the time then you have an option of solo, personally I like the risk of open it makes ed exciting

And escaping pvp when I know I cant win is all the more fun.

For those who camp and greif there will always be a wing of CMDRs seeking them out to show them the rebuy screen too so no harm done. Although I don't condone it your not going to stop it just except it and move on in solo if you cba with the hassle or open for the thrill and excitement

 

[Iori]

that won't motivate the solo and grp player to EVER even giving open a slight try.

It is not like giving it a try is gonna make them fall in love with it anyway, if they are not the type to play open they will not do it anyway.

If they are the type to play in open most of the time, but just switch to solo for that one risky trade, they may think twice before abusing the solo feature.

 

[Seonid]

That way people who are only interested in one mode will be able to stick to it without a problem, but at the same time it will prevent people from abusing switching back and forth all the time.

And those that don't have a choice? I'm always in Open unless I'm working away on rubbish hotel wifi and Solo is the only option that is possible. What then?

 

[Iori]

How is changing modes abusive?

Because a lot of people uses open when they have nothing to lose or are not in risk or simply want to kill others, and then go solo when they are vulnerable themselves.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

It is not like giving it a try is gonna make them fall in love with it anyway, if they are not the type to play open they will not do it anyway.

If they are the type to play in open most of the time, but just switch to solo for that one risky trade, they may think twice before abusing the solo feature.

No they won't think twice, they will just not consider playing in open anymore, and open would lose even more players.

 

[sewerratuk]

But either way, start doing something else than posting on forums and/or reddit that Elite: Dangerous is too harsh. This is not only directed at the OP but everyone claiming that this game is unfair, too difficult or harsh or whatnot.

I guess the same can be said for pirates and PKers that come on the forums complaining about the lack of victims

 

[dayrth]

..hence people dont play in open play.

But they do. I do as do most of my group and everyday I play I meet many (and new), commanders in open with me. You may be working from a false premise.

 

[Banana's_Are_Good_For_You]

If there's no risk to the game in by way of what you can lose, the game will becoming very boring to very many players very quickly and that's not good.
A lot of players who've played this game have had to deal with Insurance at some point or another and it's very much part of the game.

Having no downside to losing your ship will just turn this game into a pew pew fest. Something that it's not too far from currently regarding Open as credits are far too easy to come by.
One of the many nails in it's coffin.

 

[Iori]

No they won't think twice, they will just not consider playing in open anymore, and open would lose even more players.

Not if they want to kill people no.

 

[bamber]

How is changing modes abusive?

I wouldn't call it abusive but you do see a number of posts such as

A CMDR is blocking an outpost landing pad - what do I do?
I'm back from 3 weeks of exploring and need to get to a system what do I do?
I'm in a community goal but CMDRS keep shooting me what do I do?
I'm doing Robigo but keep getting shot at coming back what do I do?
Im collecting UAs but commanders shoot me what do I do?
I'm going to do a barnacle hunt what should I do first?
.

In every case above the answer given by many is "swap to solo - job done" - That shouldn't be the answer to any of the above questions but it is the answer you will be given if you post the question and it will be within the first 5 posts of each thread and make up the majority of the answers

 

[kofeyh]

how about a commitment system?

If you switch to solo, you stay in solo for a week before being able to switch back to open, and vice versa.

That way people who are only interested in one mode will be able to stick to it without a problem, but at the same time it will prevent people from abusing switching back and forth all the time.

I'd rather frontier address it as increasing the numbers of people playing Elite, than fixate on which mode people are in. More choice is always good. Always. Less choice is bad. This is why there are eleventy posts on PVE vs PVP.

Open will not ever attract people who do not wish to play in open; there is no carrot, no change that can be made, for a portion of the community that does not wish to be there. So frontier can either continue to try and ignore it (and/ or hope people will stop asking) or decide that that portion of the community is worth the effort to make a multi-player PVE mode.

It's really about as simple as that.

 

[Glock_N_Load]

Players will play in whatever game mode they want, for whatever reasons they want. This notion that you can persuade or incentivise players to do otherwise is doomed to failure.

I agree with this for the most part buuuuut if there were just one or two things you could change to up the population in open then why not. I have played mostly solo because I'm not interested in anything open (pvp, wings...etc). A funny thing, I played in open a couple of hours last night and didn't even know it. I had been switching modes to refresh missions and you know the rest. Open really depends on players and I'm for anything that would help this out as long as those changes don't effect, in a great way, solo. Give them more of everything if that's what it takes. I want to keep as many people playing Elite as possible.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I agree with this for the most part buuuuut if there were just one or two things you could change to up the population in open then why not. I have played mostly solo because I'm not interested in anything open (pvp, wings...etc). A funny thing, I played in open a couple of hours last night and didn't even know it. I had been switching modes to refresh missions and you know the rest. Open really depends on players and I'm for anything that would help this out as long as those changes don't effect, in a great way, solo. Give them more of everything if that's what it takes. I want to keep as many people playing Elite as possible.

Ask not what Elite can do for you but what you can do for Elite.

 

[Tanith Low]

I love these threads, this idea that people don't play in open because they're scared of getting blown up, as though that never happens in solo.

Some people just don't want to meet others when they play. Eliminating the insurance won't change that.

 

[tagos]

Because a lot of people uses open when they have nothing to lose or are not in risk or simply want to kill others, and then go solo when they are vulnerable themselves.

Again. How is that 'abusing the system' as opposed to 'doing something I don't like'?