Modes The modes are brilliant!

[Stigbob]

In this enlightened age of participation awards all modes should be awarded the same bonus.

 

[the100thmonkey]

#Scottish

FREEEEEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

all modes are great.

Testify brother!

like all missions are great.

Alright, that's quite enough testifying.

And I don't think its "filth" - its reasoned and cogent m8.

It's filth because it's blasphemy. All modes were created equal.

Can a brother get a hallelujah?

This thread is one of the only ones still open on this subject, a true testament to it's fundamental brilliance.

Praise the modes!

With that said, I think bonuses for all activities in

Kumbaya my lord ... Kumbaya!

Everyone, sing along!

 

[the100thmonkey]

I think bonuses for all activities in Open seems emminentally appropriate. And why should non Open players care?

Because the platform isn't relevant. Look at the Patreus group's current conflict with an Xbox group for illustration.

It really is that simple.

Don't like it? Tough.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Long live the Holy Trinity!
Amen.

This man is blessed! The power of the modes compels thee!

 

[jasonbarron]

Because the platform isn't relevant. Look at the Patreus group's current conflict with an Xbox group for illustration.

It really is that simple.

Don't like it? Tough.

Wow, and I was just about to acknowledge you for your Braveheart reference, too. I guess I'll just have to spread my creamy rep butter somewhere else then.

 

[daman]

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.

I don't think you are correct in the context I am talking about.

Consider PP.

Undermining - many players will do it out of open to avoid the other faction preventing them from undermining.

Whatever you mean by more risk in your PG - it is not controversial to say that undermining a PP expansion in open is a lot more risky than doing it in solo.
CGs are also very similar. It is not controversial at all to say they are riskier in open.

If there was a greater reward for undermining in open - some may decide to do it in open - balancing risk vs. reward. Same for CGs.

And if people still wanted to do it solo etc. they could. But the reward would not come with the bonus, or the risk.

Just like they may not want to take certain missions for the risk they carry, and instead choose to take less well paying missions but which are less risky.

Because the platform isn't relevant. Look at the Patreus group's current conflict with an Xbox group for illustration.

It really is that simple.

Don't like it? Tough.

Groups can have players across platforms. You can't have players in other peoples' private groups or solo sessions by definition

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And then the fourth seal was broken.
And the lord spoketh, "This thread has becometh the carbon copy of threads of few colours and is an abomination".
The people were worried and they asked the lord, "what can we do Lord, give us guidance!".
There was a great rumbling as the lord did sigh.
"If this thread becometh another thread about bonuses in modes, thy shall ask thy priests to close the thread so it will be purged from the first page"
Now the people became enraged.
"Again lord? Why is it always the good who must give in to the wicked?"
And the lord replied: "Blame them not, for they know not what their indiscretions are"
And the people nodded, "Great use of the word 'indiscretions' Father"
"Thanks", said the lord, "I just googled it"
Amen.

 

[Sylveria]

The point of contention of giving "extra" bonuses to Open always swings upon the same word... "risk".

Some say there is more, others say there is not. Who is right?

It's really impossible to define this- but even this aside, there's also the problem of the 3 modes supposedly being equal in all aspects, as defined by FD.

Then on top of this.. throw in consoles, and having to pay for Premium access in order to fully utilize Open...

This is, of course completely off topic to the modes discussion at hand (should probably be it's own, since it really could go on forever, like Hotel California) but there are indeed many challenges to giving Open exclusive bonuses based on a non-tangible term such as "risk".

 

[the100thmonkey]

Wow, and I was just about to acknowledge you for your Braveheart reference, too. I guess I'll just have to spread my creamy rep butter somewhere else then.

I'm sure I'll live without.

I shall survive, hoping that you take the time to consider the full implications of an uncaring universe the BGS.

 

[znôrt]

The point of contention of giving "extra" bonuses to Open always swings upon the same word... "risk".

Some say there is more, others say there is not. Who is right?

open is the same as solo/pg plus other players. other players constitute an added risk. no matter what nonsense you have read in this thread, that much should be very clear.

It's really impossible to define this-

no, it isn't. see above.

but even this aside, there's also the problem of the 3 modes supposedly being equal in all aspects, as defined by FD.

Then on top of this.. throw in consoles, and having to pay for Premium access in order to fully utilize Open...

This is, of course completely off topic to the modes discussion at hand (should probably be it's own, since it really could go on forever, like Hotel California) but there are indeed many challenges to giving Open exclusive bonuses based on a non-tangible term such as "risk".

ironically this thread was born as a homage to frontier's brilliance in multiplayer design (see post #1). which is also utter nonsense given what you just described: rubbish improvisations blended together with total lack of vision and forethought.

but well, can't argue with zealots!

modes as-is are here to stay anyway, frontier doesn't know better. amen!

 

[the100thmonkey]

Groups can have players across platforms. You can't have players in other peoples' private groups or solo sessions by definition

really? I totally didn't know that.

 

[daman]

The point of contention of giving "extra" bonuses to Open always swings upon the same word... "risk".

Some say there is more, others say there is not. Who is right?

It's really impossible to define this- but even this aside, there's also the problem of the 3 modes supposedly being equal in all aspects, as defined by FD.

Not really.

1. Open - includes NPCs, and commanders with regular and engineered ships
2. Solo - includes NPCs

Quite clear which one involves more risk around hotspots such as CGs and PP areas - especially when there is a competitive element such as there is in PP. How much more may be a discussion point.

 

[Robert Maynard]

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.

.... but for the fact that Frontier have not considered personal reward increases at all.

 

[daman]

.... but for the fact that Frontier have not considered personal reward increases at all.

Personally they should -

Instead of for example PP being "open only" and therefore denying it to a large player base, this solution would reward risk-takers/ incentivise playing certain competitive elements in open while allowing all to participate in any mode they choose.

Anyway - am done. Thanks for listening

 

[Robert Maynard]

How much more may be a discussion point.

That it certainly is - there's no argument that encountering a player may pose more of a risk than not doing so - however, given the vast possible disparity between ship builds, weaponry, modifications, etc. (and player skill, of course, remembering that fully half of all players are at or below median skill), there's no guarantee that the player encountered actually poses a credible threat nor that the player encountered is even hostile.

Then there are matchmaking manipulation features to consider, i.e. friends lists, Wings and block lists - each of these will have an effect on who is encountered, to an extent.

 

[Sylveria]

That it certainly is - there's no argument that encountering a player may pose more of a risk than not doing so - however, given the vast possible disparity between ship builds, weaponry, modifications, etc. (and player skill, of course, remembering that fully half of all players are at or below median skill), there's no guarantee that the player encountered actually poses a credible threat nor that the player encountered is even hostile.

Then there are matchmaking manipulation features to consider, i.e. friends lists, Wings and block lists - each of these will have an effect on who is encountered, to an extent.

Exactly my point regarding "risk". CREDIBLE THREAT.

Just because you encounter another player in Open doesn't guarantee imminent threat.

But of course, I'm a "zealot" and all that... some people's kids, I swear.

(WE NEEDZ SPESHUL BONUS!!!!)

 

[seanguzzi]

And then the fourth seal was broken.
And the lord spoketh, "This thread has becometh the carbon copy of threads of few colours and is an abomination".
The people were worried and they asked the lord, "what can we do Lord, give us guidance!".
There was a great rumbling as the lord did sigh.
"If this thread becometh another thread about bonuses in modes, thy shall ask thy priests to close the thread so it will be purged from the first page"
Now the people became enraged.
"Again lord? Why is it always the good who must give in to the wicked?"
And the lord replied: "Blame them not, for they know not what their indiscretions are"
And the people nodded, "Great use of the word 'indiscretions' Father"
"Thanks", said the lord, "I just googled it"
Amen.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

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

Except this is not a real world, its a game which is extremely unbalanced.
PP and BGS can very much be stopped by PVP, otherwise why do you think people purposely go to SOLO and avoid conflict.

You just proved my point about open mode, you are saying "well I am in solo, why dont you also go to solo and have the same advantage"... Well yeah, thats the issue to begin with, you have an easy path and hard one, why should anyone bother?

The modes are unbalanced, PVP makes a huge difference because the threat from a player surpasses anything else you might encounter, and lets be honest you pretty much cannot die in this game except by another player.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

That it certainly is - there's no argument that encountering a player may pose more of a risk than not doing so - however, given the vast possible disparity between ship builds, weaponry, modifications, etc. (and player skill, of course, remembering that fully half of all players are at or below median skill), there's no guarantee that the player encountered actually poses a credible threat nor that the player encountered is even hostile.

Then there are matchmaking manipulation features to consider, i.e. friends lists, Wings and block lists - each of these will have an effect on who is encountered, to an extent.

Blocking has no place in a competitive multiplayer game, it should be removed. Its the same as with solo, you actively try to avoid conflict with stronger opposition, what stops you from blocking an entire wing of defending players, this is ridiculous. Harassment - sure, but where is the line between proper game play and harassment, its prone to abuse.