Let's get one thing straight.

[askavir]

Askavir you won't see people moaning about open effecting their solo because its not a two-way system. Open want to have players, solo by its very definition doesn't, having no players only effects one of these so its really obvious why you only get people in open complaining about the population in open.

I also wouldn't make comparisons to religious zealots primarily because both groups are just as bad. You say they want to impose their ways onto others because they believe their way is the true way, but your doing exactly the same thing, unless they are going all the way to removing solo mode which really is imposing their way.

Of course open wants players. But some players do not want to be there, and its their absolute right. Their freedom to play the game in a manner they enjoy highly outweights the wish of open players to see more players around.

I am an open player myself, and I've stated many times on this forum how much I would like to have a more populated environment. The difference between me and the open zealots, is that I would never want it to happen at the expense of other people's wishes and enjoyment.

I do not have the delusion of grandeur or the narcisism to make myself believe that other people should change the way they play just to provide me with a better experience. For me, people enjoying the game in peace how they want trumps people trying to impose their ways on other people every single time. It's about freedom of choice vs some people's need to dictate how others should play the game and incapability to mind their own business.

People minding their own business in peace gather far more simpathy than people constantly nagging about other people's business, especially when imaginary problems are used as reasons for nagging.

Sorry to disagree, butboth groups aren't just as bad like you stated. People in groups/solo keep mostly to themselves, enjoying the game in peace. The endless altercations regarding modes are always started by some open players. "Those guys in solo / mobius this / that", "buff open", "nerf solo", "remove solo", "those cowards/crybabies/carebears", "force everyone into open", I could go on forever, there are hundreds of such threads. Some open players are just plainly butthurt by the fact that some people don't want to play with them. Solo and group players on the other hand simply don't give a fart what people are doing in open. They enjoy the game in peace and don't feel this demented, endless need to harass or disrupt whatever other players are doing in other modes.

The OP in this thread tried to put this in simple terms, but as expected the thread quickly mutated to yet another iteration of the endless "open is the one true way, all heretics must pay" crusade.

The way for a more populated open is not by "fixing other modes". It's by fixing itself to become more appealing to everyone. If people think there is a need to either bribe players by adding rewards to open, or punish other players by removing functionality from other modes, its a clear sign that the disease lies within open itself, not in the other modes.

 

[4Corvus]

Solo and group players on the other hand simply don't give a fart what people are doing in open. They enjoy the game in peace and don't feel this demented, endless need to harass or disrupt whatever other players are doing in other modes.

http://i.imgur.com/2659WLf.gifv

 

[tagos]

The way for a more populated open is not by "fixing other modes". It's by fixing itself to become more appealing to everyone. If people think there is a need to either bribe players by adding rewards to open, or punish other players by removing functionality from other modes, its a clear sign that the disease lies within open itself, not in the other modes.

Have much +Rep.

And regarding the erroneous belief that playing PP in Solo is an exploit.

The biggest exploit undermining PP is the so called Fifth Column exploit which is not possible in Solo and cannot be detected or opposed by other players in Open or any other mode. And of course the proposal to magnify the effect of player actions in Open will give even more reason to do it.

But no - it's people choosing to play a part of the game they've paid for in Solo who are the problem.

Open will become more popular when it becomes a quality experience. Even then others plain don't want the aggro. My opinion is there's just too much work needed to address the massive imbalances in Open. Once they chose to make Open a PvP environment with no consequences then they chose everything that followed.

Short of introducing a PvP flag, which would just be exploited, there's not much they can do that wouldn't demand massive work.

So you can't shoot people who are in another mode even if they are doing something you want to stop?

Too bad. They aren't there to provide you gameplay.

 

[Craith]

... lots of good stuff ...

Repped, people like you give me hope about the future of open. The problem is that just a few spoiled eggs ruin a cake ... *returns to sitting on the fence whether playing more open our not*

 

[Siobhan]

Twas a joke? Who would seriously rate someone as combat logger for playing in solo?

Some would try

 

[smiths121]

My opinion:

People should play in whatever mode they want to. Life's too short. People playing in solo or private groups do so for a number of reasons as discussed in this thread so far. People who play in open out of a choice (rather than being new and it is the default start) are choosing interactions good or bad as their play style.

The question comes should individual interaction with a particular play style be rewarded differently? The obvious answer is no, personal achievements and progress needs to stay the same across all modes - its just a style of play choice.

However, with the question "Should the affects of group based activities be calculated differently in open to solo or private group?" - this is where I tend to lean towards yes. Group based activities such as Powerplay and BGS can be opposed (by that I mean directi opposition, rather than PP opposition mechanic) in open but not so in private groups or solo. The opposition is the part that makes the action in open less effective than the action in a private group or solo. The problem with a simple approach of say 1.2% multiplier is the vast majority of actions in open go unopposed, so the problem of PP/BGS being harder or riskier in open just gets replaced with players in solo and private groups feeling they are being persecuted as their efforts do not count as much as those in open.

Its a tricky area to get right, whilst I think the risk in open for group activities is higher and this needs to e addressed, the solution to this imbalance is not simple, and does not involve changing the rate of progress or personal rewards in open.

Glad I am not a game designer.


Simon

 

[kofeyh]

It's exploit in a similar manner to mode switching.

Players doing Powerplay (or opposition BGS) switch to solo/PG since they can then affect the game without any risk of being opposed.

Sandro suggests a *significant* number of players do this.

That is because the single most efficient way to support a power is solo. It virtually all takes place in solo. Because it can. And it's unstoppable. Even the much lamented fifth-column (has anyone wonder why this happens? Guess. Word starts with S and ends with o) can't prevent it.

So people can absolutely and should absolutely do all powerplay in solo. Because a) cannot be stopped and b) zero risk.

Sandro is considering whether the balance between impact in solo and in open should be equivalent. Right now, it isn't. It literally is not equivalent. The suggestion has been to improve the effects for the power so that the additional risk in open, is reflected in mechanics between both modes.

As for which modes people play - use whatever works. I don't care.

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

I think the primary issue with the different modes is little more than, people just want to play with other people (the MMO experience) without risking what they're playing for, without "being forced" into the "unfairness" of PvP, without the worry of PvP interaction, without having your cargo stolen by players who are simply too lazy to do their own trading, without the griefing... well the list can go on, I think you get the point. I play in solo to avoid PvP, I'm not playing this game for PvP, I'm not interested in PvP, and the PvP is unbalanced, I played open once for 3 hours a little after the game first came out. I was harassed by 7 different players, blown up by 5, pirated by 4, helped by 1, and interdicted 22 times in 1 system by 1 player. Since this experience, I haven't even thought about open, in fact I fight against open purely due to PvP. Granted things have changed since then, but not really, there are just far far far far fewer players in open now than there was then, the overall mechanics and attitude hasn't changed, those players still exist, this is why I play solo and fight against open. I want open, just without the ish behavior of PEOPLE, after all, people are by far the worst aspect of humanity... ironic huh?

So the idea is to rip open apart, to make it less open and more PVE. Great. That's not the game I bought. That's not what was sold. That's also really really upending the entire apple-cart.

How about having a mode where people can just shoot at AI, and leave open as is? That doesn't mean upending anything for a net improvement. Two options, rather than one. Isn't that better?

Also open isn't all instant death. Hasn't been like that for a while. Really. Even CG are fairly tame now compared to the early days. Judging something on old data isn't really helping your argument, no offence.

It does need a heap of work within crime/ punishment and I believe Frontier are working on that, at least to some degree.

 

[Siobhan]

So people can absolutely and should absolutely do all powerplay in solo. Because a) cannot be stopped and b) zero risk.

So, let me get this right... Everything is better and more efficient in Solo, and the main reason for Groups is to hang out with friends... OK, cool. It also seems that you're saying the only reason to ever play in Open is to Pew Pew people who'd rather not be Pew Pewed? TBH that seems to me that Open needs serious work. It's already responsible for driving people away from Elite, and yet more to Solo... Well as far as I am concerned, Open is good, since while it exists, we at least have a good idea where the undesirables will hang out and can therefore be avoided.

 

[kofeyh]

So, let me get this right... Everything is better and more efficient in Solo, and the main reason for Groups is to hang out with friends... OK, cool. It also seems that you're saying the only reason to ever play in Open is to Pew Pew people who'd rather not be Pew Pewed? TBH that seems to me that Open needs serious work. It's already responsible for driving people away from Elite, and yet more to Solo... Well as far as I am concerned, Open is good, since while it exists, we at least have a good idea where the undesirables will hang out and can therefore be avoided.

No, I am saying what I said, that there is less risk in solo for powerplay.

How you read that as anything other than I said, I do not know. I thought I was being quite clear. You appear to be a reasonably intelligent person; misquoting me or manufacturing a statement on my behalf, seems a really odd thing to do.

So no, you don't have that "right" with respect to what I said. I don't care what modes people play. I am simply stating, again, in case there is any kind of confusion, that solo is the optimal location for powerplay as such actions are not reversible or preventable.

They are, however, in open.

That is automatically a massive imbalance.

 

[Derath]

Solo and group players on the other hand simply don't give a fart what people are doing in open.

Then they spend an awful lot of time complaining about it, like just as much as the openers complain about wanting more reason to play open.

They are just as bad, the worst offender in this thread is a solo for example, constantly arguing with points nobody is talking about and acting like they are removing solo tommorow which is ludicrous, if you have to put words in someones mouth to make an argument it really isn't much of a discussion -_-. They aren't going to force anybody to play in Open, solo isn't going anywhere.

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

Have much +Rep.

And regarding the erroneous belief that playing PP in Solo is an exploit.

The biggest exploit undermining PP is the so called Fifth Column exploit which is not possible in Solo and cannot be detected or opposed by other players in Open or any other mode. And of course the proposal to magnify the effect of player actions in Open will give even more reason to do it.

I've literally never heard of PP solo being an exploit and i've read alot of these, it sometimes gets flagged as a cheesy mechanic for a system that sets players against players to have a mode which avoids players but considering they set it up as a tug of war It makes sense anyway.

5th columning is possible in solo and will happen mostly in solo (because solo is the consistent way to PP hence why they are considering a bonus) but isn't actually a problem with solo, its a huge gaping hole in the way the powerplay mechanics are setup that means the most effective method to beat a faction is to join it and expand to completely worthless systems so it collapses.

That problem isn't mode related at all, its just a giant piece of bad design that needs fixing.

 

[kofeyh]

People in groups/solo keep mostly to themselves, enjoying the game in peace.

This is at odds with the dozens of threads opened, that are either manufacturing ways to "fix" open, or to explain why they aren't in open. Or why open is bad. Or why crime is bad in open. Or various hot takes on all of the above.

Really, for people who spend all their time in Solo/ PG, they have an awful lot of time to talk about open.

I do hope Frontier will do something towards a more official PVE option; but the really huge number of threads where people are just having a go, regarding all of the above, is that going to encourage the developer at all? Again, I personally don't really put much thought into which modes people play; everyone has their reasons, and I respect that. Having concepts pushed at me, as though it's some sort of religion I have to believe in?

Not so much. It's pretty clear to me a number of vocal people want Open to be PVE only. That's the only conclusion I can draw at this point.

 

[Scoopy Doopy]

This is at odds with the dozens of threads opened, that are either manufacturing ways to "fix" open, or to explain why they aren't in open. Or why open is bad. Or why crime is bad in open. Or various hot takes on all of the above.

Really, for people who spend all their time in Solo/ PG, they have an awful lot of time to talk about open.

I do hope Frontier will do something towards a more official PVE option; but the really huge number of threads where people are just having a go, regarding all of the above, is that going to encourage the developer at all? Again, I personally don't really put much thought into which modes people play; everyone has their reasons, and I respect that. Having concepts pushed at me, as though it's some sort of religion I have to believe in?

Not so much. It's pretty clear to me a number of vocal people want Open to be PVE only. That's the only conclusion I can draw at this point.

I think the reason solo/group players are getting quite vocal is because there seems to be a perception that open is getting all the attention and development effort. Powerplay ,wings, multi-crew and probably shipboard fighters can be seen as basically of use to open players and not much use to anybody else. It's a perception regardless of wether it is true or not.

For me, solo is where I spend most of my time and I'll keep buying the seasons even if most of the content is of no use to me because I love what we have now and the little enhancements e.g. bookmarks are worth it.

The only thing that annoys me, as a solo player, is that open affects my BGS.

 

[Derath]

I think the reason solo/group players are getting quite vocal is because there seems to be a perception that open is getting all the attention and development effort. Powerplay ,wings, multi-crew and probably shipboard fighters can be seen as basically of use to open players and not much use to anybody else. It's a perception regardless of wether it is true or not.

I really don't think they are any more or less vocal than they used to be and as I mentioned earlier this argument about the fact they spend too much of their dev time on open stuff seems relatively new (probably just to me), if it isn't new it certainly doesn't get raised as the counter argument enough because its by far and away the best one.

I think its right anyway but then I am biased lol, despite that a vast majority of my playtime is open I don't like wings I think they've had a genuinely bad effect on the game in open, PP wasn't thought through well enough and has all these gaping holes (but does have advanced accelerators) and i literally cannot think of an implementation for multi-crew that isn't either overpowered or completely pointless.

If you tally those together would I have been happy if they'd spent the time developing other things that benefited all 3 modes? Yes, not least of all because I think the general game background needs building up but they keep adding more thin framework above it.

Edit: Though a good counter argument would actually be that the game was released unfinished and was missing the components for open and as a result they were developing the missing bits. When I think about it you couldn't even chat to people out of system in vanilla it was literally the worst multi-player framework i've ever encountered I couldn't believe it was multi-player at all.

 

[bitstorm]

I am an open player myself, and I've stated many times on this forum how much I would like to have a more populated environment. The difference between me and the open zealots, is that I would never want it to happen at the expense of other people's wishes and enjoyment.

I do not have the delusion of grandeur or the narcisism to make myself believe that other people should change the way they play just to provide me with a better experience. For me, people enjoying the game in peace how they want trumps people trying to impose their ways on other people every single time. It's about freedom of choice vs some people's need to dictate how others should play the game and incapability to mind their own business.

Now that's an interesting point, because currently people don't have a choice (Hobson's choice is not a choice). The idea of providing a bonus for a specific Powerplay activity is intended to make open valid for such activity the result of that being that players have a choice where before they had none.

If the added risk of PPing in open is offset by a balancing bonus then suddenly there's reason to go open and people then have a choice, do it in solo where it's safer, or do it in open where there's more risk but higher reward. This choice is open to everyone.

If folk really don't want to play in open this is absolutely fine, but by doing so they're choosing a less risky environment. Again totally fine, but risk should = reward.

Risk without reward means people inevitably migrate to where it's safest.

Irony of course being that more risk makes for a more exciting game (assuming you get away with it), you could take the view that adding incentives for folk to walk a riskier path could bring the overall standard of the game up a notch or two.

 

[CMDR Dreamstate]

What makes me laugh are the players who want to play this game without any risk...

Sort of takes the whole "Dangerous" word out of Elite, doesn't it?

"I love Elite because it is Dangerous... What? Lose my ship to other humans? No way, that's too dangerous for me!"

When I bought this game, my friends told me that it was a difficult and deadly game - many risks, and I'm not just talking about versus other players in open. I have lost my ships many times to various different accidents - probably more ships from my own faults than against other players, yet there seems to be a biased, almost certainly negative point of view regarding PvP in Open when there are plenty of ways to avoid fighting other players to begin with (speed boosting to jump, running silent to remain off the radar, avoid interdiction, etc.) - yet there seems to be an anti-player biast in one particular game mode, and everything about it screams anti-social... Or, at least, that is how it seems to me.

There are some big changes that Frontier need to make if they will want to keep up with other games in the future - Engineers 2.1 being delayed shows that presence-of-mind. Solo will not last in functionality forever - if Elite wants to be a game that pushes the boat out and wants to create a massive community, Solo will be gradually phased out of importance.

Frontier are a publicly traded company, after all - and that means share-holders. Share-holders love money - it makes them smile when they get up in the morning, and these people will grin over the thought of an economic crash in which to buy vast products of cheap shares and goods...

And you all think other players are the enemy...

 

[kofeyh]

I think the reason solo/group players are getting quite vocal is because there seems to be a perception that open is getting all the attention and development effort. Powerplay ,wings, multi-crew and probably shipboard fighters can be seen as basically of use to open players and not much use to anybody else. It's a perception regardless of wether it is true or not.

For me, solo is where I spend most of my time and I'll keep buying the seasons even if most of the content is of no use to me because I love what we have now and the little enhancements e.g. bookmarks are worth it.

The only thing that annoys me, as a solo player, is that open affects my BGS.

Which is ironic, because solo affects the open BGS; that being because the BGS runs on the universe servers and doesn't care what modes people play. Right now, there is no open-only activity that is unavailable in solo, apart from multiplayer (wings in particular).

This game is designed to be multiplayer. It was always designed to be multiplayer. The developer has provided a solo mode for those who prefer a pure PVE environment. No other commanders means no commander based features such as co-op (effectively what wings provides) or multiplayer.

I'm glad they did add a pure PVE mode, however in doing so, mechanics such as powerplay don't really take into consideration relative risk. It probably should. Because as I have noted, powerplay is optimal in solo. I don't believe that was Frontier's intention. But like a lot of their game mechanics introductions, what they intended and what happens, is often not in sync.

One can't expect multiplayer features to exist in a pure PVE setting. They can in a multi-player PVE setting but that requires that a) frontier make changes needed to matchmaking to disable player ship hitboxes and damage and b) a willingness to entertain the idea at all and then do so.

 

[the100thmonkey]

Which parts of powerplay, specifically, are more effective in solo?

It's a genuine question - I'm something of a neophyte in Powerplay - I only do it when I absolutely have to (it's grindy and, frankly, boring). However, it seems to me that for resisting the combat-focused powers, private group or open is more effective - wings mean that anyone who touches an enemy ship in a security sweep or resistance pocket, or indeed interdicting ships, gets the full merits, thus multiplying the effectiveness by four for a full wing.

Is this solo advantage a feature of preparation and nomination?

 

[xaisis]

If FD would just split the background sim between the modes. And add a true offline mode for those that don care, and just want something moddeble.

oh and lock me out of open as well, just so no one can complain.

i do not want my gaming experience nerfed just to make some1 else happy.

 

[Derath]

Which parts of powerplay, specifically, are more effective in solo?

It's a genuine question - I'm something of a neophyte in Powerplay - I only do it when I absolutely have to (it's grindy and, frankly, boring). However, it seems to me that for resisting the combat-focused powers, private group or open is more effective - wings mean that anyone who touches an enemy ship in a security sweep or resistance pocket, or indeed interdicting ships, gets the full merits, thus multiplying the effectiveness by four for a full wing.

Is this solo advantage a feature of preparation and nomination?

All of them, its pretty simple to explain really

your chances of destruction at the hands of a NPC is ~0%

you chance of destruction at the hands of a player is greater than 0 trending all the way to 100 depending on the player and circumstances

solo and open are identical except one has players, as players cannot increase the speed at which you contribute to powerplay but can slow it down (depending on how you play/skill level/location choice etc). The only real question is, how much do they slow you down?

The easiest way to think of it is reduced effect of what you get at community goals, if you have lets say a military strike CG and you have to get vouchers from combat zones, players in open cannot come close to the tokens generated by players in solo, because the resources are shared. This is a large problem with the Barnacle CG atm as well for example because people are already finding that the numbers are vastly too high to suggest finding them in open as viable, numbers are based off solo / mode switching to refresh. In ED players working together are not more efficient than the same number of players working solo, with the possible exception of mining.

 

[Siobhan]

Is this solo advantage a feature of preparation and nomination?

It's just the Pew-Pew types boosting their fragile egos by shouting that solo players are afraid of them... As if they present more of a challenge to a prepared commander than the NPCs do. They do the same in every game, and frankly, it all gets a bit tedious.
Thing is, as it stands, you need different load outs for PvE vs PvP, so a solo or group commander is unlikely to have a prepared ship (especially when said Pew-Pews invade groups). When those same PvE types (or to use the Pew-Pew word, "carebears") meet them in PvP equipped ships, most of them do a runner to their own private groups to hide.