How does that blow up ships, cause endless rebuys, and rob players of trade goods or exploration data?
Modes The modes are brilliant!
- Thread starter Ziggy Stardust
- Start date
- Status
How does that blow up ships, cause endless rebuys, and rob players of trade goods or exploration data?
Another nail in the coffin for Open, because I aint shavin nothin.
I'll drink to that.
Warning: explicit gfx of hairy drinker inside:Good, I could use less graphic examples, I don't need visual pictures...
I do think it makes sense for PP though - undermining and deliveries occur in limited areas of space so much greater chance of meeting in open.
CGs same thing.
BGS over competing areas the same.
Last edited:
Goose4291
Banned
Except I didn't say that, did I?
Powerplay or BGS Player Faction on Player Faction 'War'.
We've been over these two bones of contention so many times now. I don't think I need to outline my points again.
Affecting the BGS from Solo is fine. People affect the real world all the time without the threat of violence - I've done it myself by studying for job interviews. Similarly, not all in game modifications can be stopped with PvP. There's already balance - my actions can be counteracted from any mode.
You're welcome to come to Solo if you think it's more efficient than Open. I can't play PvP from Solo, but I don't mind losing this feature as I find PvP boring (not scary, boring).
Cheers, Phos
That isn't true.
The PvE community only *really* step in when someone suggests removing Modes or messing with Mode effects, for whatever reason.
The PvE community only really step in when someone suggests that the Modes are "not balanced".
The PvE community *would* step in to denounce anyone "exploiting" the Modes, however, the design of the system is as intended and therefore *cannot truly be labelled an exploit*. So the PvE community is not ignoring exploits, as you suggest, because there isn't an exploit here.
As an example, the Devs are aware that station ramming still occurs, they agree it is an exploit and it is something that they have tried to dissuade and yet have failed in doing so. (I know this to be true since I recently contacted support about it.) Yet the PvP community could not care less about station ramming as far as I can tell here, and mostly appear to see it as "valid" gameplay. Well, actually, it isn't valid. It is not intended. Fact. Yet it appears to be ignored and tacitly accepted by those not of a PvE persuasion. In BEYOND, station ramming is one of the areas at which they are closely considering changes to dissuade this exploit.
As an example going the other way, the Modes are explicitly designed to be balanced and are perfectly balanced in that no matter which Mode of play or platform is used to access the game, BGS effects are identical. By absolute design. FDev are standing behind this as an "intended" design, (as opposed to the station ramming which is unintended). Yet there are still calls for Modes to be messed with, or for content to be removed from Modes, etc, which is not a valid request, due to the explicit intent of the fundamental game design. Those of a PvE persuasion are shoulder-to-shoulder with FDev that it shouldn't be changed from their intent.
So to be clear about what you said, station ramming, etc, is an exploit. Mode switching is not an exploit, but rather a valid choice that every single player has equal access to.
It will be interesting to read your #reasons why you disagree. Your opinion on why you disagree will be accepted, of course, but it will just be that, an opinion.
Yours Aye
Mark H
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It seems that Frontier were considering it for PowerPlay only (and specifically not for the BGS, Factions, CGs, etc.) though.
Frontier designed the game around indirect PvP with optional direct PvP - and Frontier would seem to be well aware that the majority of players do not get involved in PvP - so I doubt that they would remove this type of gameplay from two of the three game modes to suit the play-style of a subset of players.
You know ... I really don't care about Powerplay, so as far as I'm concerned Open can have it. But that would be selfish. Other players who aren't me do like to play that. So I cooled down from that idea.
But ... having spent some thought on it, I feel making Powerplay Open only would be glorious. Because I severely doubt that people are arguing in good faith here. So let them have it. I predict they'll not flock to Powerplay, but rather be sorry they don't have a posterboy feature anymore. And they'll move on to BGS, and arguing Open needs bonuses and the like. And when they are reminded: "Fellers, you got what you wanted, you got an Open only Powerplay, have a ball", the response will be that Powerplay is crap and a waste of a feature.
Go on Frontier, make Powerplay Open only. I'll look forward to some true colours.
I don't suggest removing it.
Simply increasing the rewards/ impact of players who undertake related actions in open due to increased risk. For PP and CGs that would be easy to track. Maybe BGS its not really possible to distinguish between unintended traffic and targetted bgs actions.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
A blanket bonus would be ill targeted, in my opinion, as there's no guarantee that the player will actually be impeded by a player even if they do encounter one - plus the fact that the vast majority of Open is as devoid of players as either of the two other game modes - and especially as the players chose to play in Open in the first place - presumably for exactly that type of player interaction.
If we're to go down the risk based payment route then there are many more criteria that should be considered....
Last edited:
How would you stop people grabbing and cashing missions in open for the special space-game-menu-bravery bonus.
I don't agree -
a. they may not be impeded, but the risk is greater
b."vast majority of open" does not apply to CG or PP
If you go to any CG station where you need to drop off the cargo/ cash in on BH - there is always traffic in open.
And if you go to expansion systems, home systems etc. of the PP factions there is normally traffic as well.
And the increased rewards would increase participation in open.
They would have a flag set -either when they sign up for the CG, or collect the whatever they need to deliver for PP when in open
and that flag would remain set so long as they don't go into any mode other than open.
Once they switch to another mode - the flag is turned off/ reset.
So to collect the bonus, they would have had to have been in open the whole time from pick up to delivery as observed from their flag
Last edited:
That could work for PC, but x-box players have to pay a subscription for open (IIRC) and pay-2-win always goes down badly.
What is this talk of bonuses for Open? Please take that filth to the appropriate threads. There's plenty on this section of the forum. I created this thread to contrast those.
In this thread we celebrate the glory of the modes. All modes are equal in the eye of the creator.
In this thread we celebrate the glory of the modes. All modes are equal in the eye of the creator.
all modes are great. like all missions are great.
but just as risk for missions raises reward, so should risk in modes.
just my opinion.
And I don't think its "filth" - its reasoned and cogent m8.
This doesn't make one mode better than another - players may weigh up that solo would be better for them as they could get more done quicker, and therefore benefit more from the rewards in solo than in open. etc. etc.
Last edited:
And this was explained in another thread a few weeks back that with consoles own seperate modes, instancing, block function friends lists time zones you could still not see anyone and this was before people also mentioned changing router or firewall settings so they could be in thier own little solo in open so these so called exploiters in solo pg would still carry on regardless
This thread is one of the only ones still open on this subject, a true testament to it's fundamental brilliance.
With that said, I think bonuses for all activities in Open seems emminentally appropriate. And why should non Open players care?
Point a. you are wrong. The potential for risk is perhaps increased - but that depends entirely upon how you play. For me, I know for a fact that Open is less risky. I take less risk in Open. I take more risk in PG.
The bit in bold - I would tend to disagree. I absolutely believe that, for instance, most Mobius players would absolutely continue in Mobius. They're there for a specific reason. I absolutely believe that, for instance, the vast majority, if not all, Solo players are there for a specific reason and no amount of "bonus" will bring them away from Solo. Except perhaps to just leave the game entirely. I am convinced that players would actually leave the game. In what numbers remains to be seen, but if you demean the players by dis-incentivising their choice of mode, that is crystal clear going to happen.
And I can guarantee that any switch of players from these Modes is in the most likely scenario only going to be short-lived and they will return to the Mode that they went into for the same specific reason that they went into it in the first time around.
Careful what your wish for and for what reasons you wish it.
It may well be that you don't care about more players in Open and just want the bonus anyway? Difficult to tell.
Yours Aye
Mark H
- Status