Read First Why I will play 'all' and why I think you should too

[Storagebod]

This time/effort will directly impact whether solo/private group players can get indirectly disruptive to the all group or not.

A group of players can almost certainly more directly impact the background simulation than a single player...the solo player is going to really struggle to massively impact trade prices etc.

Actually, potentially the most disruptive group is the private group but with the instancing system the way it is; the private group is absolutely crucial to enable groups of friends to play together in a deterministic manner. If I was worried about manipulation (which I'm not); it's a private group who decides to fly a whole convoy with a few fighter escorts to flood a market. But then again, any large group of players may be able to do this even in ALL with a bit of co-ordination.

So your independent trader in SOLO or ALL is probably at a massive disadvantage when we take group dynamics into account. But they have the advantage of flexibility and freedom...

The logical group for your min/maxers to play is PRIVATE but good luck with taking that out of the picture...

 

[Meritz]

Exactly, they play by the same rules. Players who jump in and out of the game also play by the same rules as everyone else.

No they don't, but if you can't see that after all the ways I tried to explain it, I can't help you.

 

[Meritz]

A group of players can almost certainly more directly impact the background simulation than a single player...the solo player is going to really struggle to massively impact trade prices etc.

Actually, potentially the most disruptive group is the private group but with the instancing system the way it is; the private group is absolutely crucial to enable groups of friends to play together in a deterministic manner. If I was worried about manipulation (which I'm not); it's a private group who decides to fly a whole convoy with a few fighter escorts to flood a market. But then again, any large group of players may be able to do this even in ALL with a bit of co-ordination.

So your independent trader in SOLO or ALL is probably at a massive disadvantage when we take group dynamics into account. But they have the advantage of flexibility and freedom...

The logical group for your min/maxers to play is PRIVATE but good luck with taking that out of the picture...

Agreed, private grouping is potentially most disruptive. However, I don't think it is essential to ensure friends can play together - it would be relatively easy to ensure the instancing procedure always groups them together. As it stands, private group only allows them to play together exclusively. Basically enables them to have a shared, exclusive ignore list.

The advantage of not having to deal with players while getting to influence the persistent universe remains.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Exactly, they play by the same rules. Players who jump in and out of the game also play by the same rules as everyone else. So why do you seem to have a problem with that? If you think they are gaining some kind of advantage then by the same rules you can do exactly the same.

I'm sorry. All you are doing is indulging in a logical fallacy called special pleading. You have provided that; by a player jumping from one online mode to another she gains an unfair advantage. However, when presented with another situation where I suggested that by player 'A' having more time to play than player 'B', player 'A' would also have an unfair advantage you dismissed this. In both situations all players are playing by the same rules therefore your logic is inconsistent. You have yet to adequately justify why YOUR case is special while mine is not. Until you can do this your argument is simply not valid.

No they don't, but if you can't see that after all the ways I tried to explain it, I can't help you.

Yes they do. You can do exactly the same as they can so you are playing by the same rules. Now, you say they don't but your rationale HAS to fit both the situation you describe AND the situation I describe. If it doesn't then you are engaged in special pleading and your whole case falls apart.

 

[Storagebod]

Agreed, private grouping is potentially most disruptive. However, I don't think it is essential to ensure friends can play together - it would be relatively easy to ensure the instancing procedure always groups them together. As it stands, private group only allows them to play together exclusively. Basically enables them to have a shared, exclusive ignore list.

The advantage of not having to deal with players while getting to influence the persistent universe remains.

Not really...you keep assuming that players will be harder to deal with.

I think there will be outliers where this is the case but in general, I'm not expecting there to be any real difference. And this is just in combat.

Blockades etc will be predominantly made up of NPCs. A great majority of your 'interactions' will be with NPCs in general.

And for many, if you can't guarantee to play with friends...it'll be a game breaker.

DB has made it perfectly clear mind you that the online universe is shared between all modes and has done consistently. Absolutely no bending on that....even if online modes were not moveable between...we'd still be playing in the same galaxy. The one true version of reality.

 

[Meritz]

Not really...you keep assuming that players will be harder to deal with.

That's not an assumption, that's a fact. Also, basic math - even if NPC AI is made to be exactly as hard to deal with as players, All group has to deal with the NPCs AND players while private group has just NPCs to deal with.

But rest assured FD have not made great strides in developing general artificial intelligence. NPCs are dumb and predictable as usual. Of course they are, it's a bunch of code with predetermined output. In combat, they have fixed flight patterns, with enough practice you will know exactly how they will react to a given situation.

Not to mention complete lack of creativity and adaptability to situations outside combat. Which is where the main difficulty with human players comes in - they can set up ambushes, talk to their buddies, anticipate your moves and generally behave in an intelligent manner. NPCs can't.

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

That's not an assumption, that's a fact. Also, basic math - even if NPC AI is made to be exactly as hard to deal with as players, All group has to deal with the NPCs AND players while private group has just NPCs to deal with.

Sorry Meritz, but it's not a fact in my world. Player skills vary a lot, and especially in such complex game as ED. Add game size, safe systems, etc. etc. and advantage is not just what do you think it is.

I think you are worried someone escaping in SP after attacked by PvPers. I won't say I feel sympathy for that

But rest assured FD have not made great strides in developing general artificial intelligence. NPCs are dumb and predictable as usual. Of course they are, it's a bunch of code with predetermined output. In combat, they have fixed flight patterns, with enough practice you will know exactly how they will react to a given situation.

Judging how many people struggle to get them, I will disagree. Also as far as I know, we just don't know true scale of NPC AI - for testing purposes we don't have Elite level NPC pilots in game yet.

Not to mention complete lack of creativity and adaptability to situations outside combat. Which is where the main difficulty with human players comes in - they can set up ambushes, talk to their buddies, anticipate your moves and generally behave in an intelligent manner. NPCs can't.

I will disagree - all what needs is having proper code for this. In general this is easier done than combat in fact. NPCs already creating wings sometimes to destroy players too hot on some poor NPC trail.

It seems you keep operating on lot of old assumptions. I think I have to close this thread, because it has turned into another platform of yours to push your message.

All I wanted to say with this thread that I will play 'all' and have fun. But I didn't say I want everyone to push into this group. I wanted everyone to feel welcome there. You seem to be little bit obsessed with getting everyone at any cost, thus pushing people away.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Yes they do. You can do exactly the same as they can so you are playing by the same rules. Now, you say they don't but your rationale HAS to fit both the situation you describe AND the situation I describe. If it doesn't then you are engaged in special pleading and your whole case falls apart.

Meritz, ignoring my post does not make it go away.

As for your reply to Storagebod

... That's not an assumption, that's a fact...

It isn't anywhere near a fact. You do not have enough evidence to claim it as fact. It is a weak hypothesis at best.

 

[Praevarus]

That's not an assumption, that's a fact.

It's not a fact. It's your opinion that it's a fact. Some players will be harder to deal with, not all of them. Not everyone will have the skill to defeat every single NPC.

NPCs are dumb and predictable as usual.

Multiple threads on this topic that all result in circular arguments are equally dumb and predictable. Not every pilot is going to be good, great or even average.

In combat, they have fixed flight patterns, with enough practice you will know exactly how they will react to a given situation.

Even if someone figures out what they need to do, it doesn't necessarily mean they'll be able to do it.

Not to mention complete lack of creativity and adaptability to situations outside combat.

Tons of gamers lack the same things. They're usually referred to as the lowest common denominator.

Which is where the main difficulty with human players comes in

They post over and over trying to get their way and fail to realize that it almost certainly will not happen?

 

[Barberetti]

Also, basic math - even if NPC AI is made to be exactly as hard to deal with as players, All group has to deal with the NPCs AND players while private group has just NPCs to deal with.

If the NPC AI is exactly as hard to deal with as players, then both groups would be equally as hard.

 

[Meritz]

I will disagree - all what needs is having proper code for this. In general this is easier done than combat in fact. NPCs already creating wings sometimes to destroy players too hot on some poor NPC trail.

Look, AI research is something I know a little about. No, it is not just having "proper code".

Game AI shouldn't even be called such. It's a set of limited algorithms. Even the most basic expert system is lightyears more advanced, and *that's* not general AI, not even close.

The most dumb, unimaginative human being is far more creative and adaptable than the most advanced AIs we have today. NPCs will absolutely not be able to match human players on the field outside of combat. Don't get your hopes up.

 

[Meritz]

Meritz, ignoring my post does not make it go away.

I'm not ignoring, but you seem to be intent on running in circles, and that's not very interesting. My answer to your post can be found in earlier posts.

 

[Tempered]

If I may barge in with a poorly constructed analogy, imagine we all got together for a game of soccer and you decided you're going to be playing by yourself, with your own ball, on the same field. You won't touch anyone and no one is allowed to interfere with you, except that you can score goals for whatever team you choose.

That's why.

But as I said, I might be wrong, maybe players will have such negligible impact on the overall simulation I'm fretting about nothing.

It's my ball and I'll do as I please with it, thank you very much Any goal I score obviously doesn't count in your game (to extend your bad analogy), and if it does, what about the goals you score in my game? What gives you the right to interfere in my game on my field? So you see, if my playing solo is affecting you, then your playing online is effecting me just as much. So why the hell do you care if I play online or not?
The only reason I can see is that it frustrates you that I would be beyond your annoyance.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The only reason I can see is that it frustrates you that I would be beyond your annoyance.

There does seem to be a group of players who use the "unfair" argument relating to solo-online / private group players affecting the online economy as an alternative to "I want all online players to *have* to play in the all group".

The effect of players outwith the All Group on the online economy will never be that great - players are not "special" and there will be far too few (in terms of 400,000,000,000 stars, with planets, populated by NPCs) to make any great difference.

 

[Meritz]

It's my ball and I'll do as I please with it, thank you very much Any goal I score obviously doesn't count in your game (to extend your bad analogy), and if it does, what about the goals you score in my game? What gives you the right to interfere in my game on my field? So you see, if my playing solo is affecting you, then your playing online is effecting me just as much. So why the hell do you care if I play online or not?

First, your score does count in my game, that's the whole point. If they gave solo/private group players their own separate version of the galaxy, I'd shut up in an instant.

Second, ask any soccer player that question, see what they tell you.

 

[Meritz]

The effect of players outwith the All Group on the online economy will never be that great - players are not "special" and there will be far too few (in terms of 400,000,000,000 stars, with planets, populated by NPCs) to make any great difference.

Well, as I said, that's a possibility, in which case I won't particularly mind. My speculations in this thread are based on the assumption that players will have sufficient impact on the simulation that even a single player with a large/powerful enough ship and/or enough time can see the difference he makes, so as not to have the simulation appear totally disconnected from player action.

 

[Storagebod]

Look, AI research is something I know a little about. No, it is not just having "proper code".

Game AI shouldn't even be called such. It's a set of limited algorithms. Even the most basic expert system is lightyears more advanced, and *that's* not general AI, not even close.

The most dumb, unimaginative human being is far more creative and adaptable than the most advanced AIs we have today. NPCs will absolutely not be able to match human players on the field outside of combat. Don't get your hopes up.

So what are you arguing....now you've moved the goalposts again; will NPCs be able to match human players on the field in combat? If so, you really have little to worry about...Outside of the field of combat it probably matters little whether we are all playing in our own little bubbles or in one mass bubble.

So is it the 'unfairness' of players being able to avoid other players on the field of combat that you are worried about or is it something else that is vexing you?

 

[Space_Killer69]

Kickstarter:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous

We have the concept of “groups”. They can be private groups just of your friends or open groups (that form part of the game) based on the play styles people prefer, and the rules in each can be different. Players will begin in the group “All” but can change groups at will, though it will be possible to be banned from groups due to antisocial behaviour, and you will only meet others in that group.

Caveat Emptor:

The ability to change groups has been a core game concept, and well publicised since day one.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Kickstarter:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous

Caveat Emptor:

The ability to change groups has been a core game concept, and well publicised since day one.

*We* know that - others may not have read the available literature sufficiently before buying in and now feel somewhat aggrieved that their preferred play-style can be easily subverted by players opting to move out to solo-online or private groups....

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Kickstarter:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1461411552/elite-dangerous



Caveat Emptor:

The ability to change groups has been a core game concept, and well publicised since day one.

Exactly this!. Take for example organised guilds.... I dislike them because I am predominantly a loaner and I feel it makes a game unfairly weighted against me. I see EDs structure as a huge plus for me personally and the Star Citizen on as a huge negative

BUT I would never go into then star citizen forums and demand that guilds should be borked because I don't think they are fair. I read the KS weighed up what I liked and what I didn't like, looked at Roberts past games and decided over all the game was worth my time.

It would be arrogant of me to go in to SC telling them they got it wrong and they must change for me, regardless of the backers who like the game exactly as it is.

I personally think you are mistaken about this huge advantage I may have changing modes, but even IF you are right, sorry but that is the game you bought into.