Modes How to incentivise Open without buffing its rewards

[Jockey79]

I also would like to know a statistic that shows how PvPers are much more commmon.

According to one forum user (who shall remain nameless), then this picture (they provided, I added the red ring and arrow) "proves" that PvP'ers are the "majority" of Elite players;

Apparently 273 comments (not even people, just comments in a singe thread) is proof of PvP being more popular than PvE.

 

[Sylveria]

According to one forum user (who shall remain nameless), then this picture (they provided, I added the red ring and arrow) "proves" that PvP'ers are the "majority" of Elite players;

Apparently 273 comments (not even people, just comments in a singe thread) is proof of PvP being more popular than PvE.

And on a forum site that doesn't require verification of game purchase, to boot.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

According to one forum user (who shall remain nameless), then this picture (they provided, I added the red ring and arrow) "proves" that PvP'ers are the "majority" of Elite players;


https://i.imgur.com/EC231yf.jpg

Apparently 273 comments (not even people, just comments in a singe thread) is proof of PvP being more popular than PvE.

There are more than 273 thats for sure. The thing is you didnt define what pvp is. Killing noobs in Eravate is PvP? Sort of since its player vs player although unbalanced.

There are enough complaints about gankers here, reddit and fb so it wouldnt make sence that 273 people are able to "grief" the entire player base in open.

There are those who belong in the pvp circle and those who dont while still considered pvpiers becsuse they fire at other players.

 

[UmbraRex]

There are more than 273 thats for sure. The thing is you didnt define what pvp is. Killing noobs in Eravate is PvP? Sort of since its player vs player although unbalanced.

There are enough complaints about gankers here, reddit and fb so it wouldnt make sence that 273 people are able to "grief" the entire player base in open.

There are those who belong in the pvp circle and those who dont while still considered pvpiers becsuse they fire at other players.

I see ED (and most other games to be fair) as a playground. there are kids on the swings, on the monkey bars and a dodgeball field.

I see PvPers as the kids over on the dodgeball field doing their thing while other kids play on the swings or the monkey bars.

I see GSPs as kids from the dodgeball field coming over with their balls and telling the other kids 'yer playing wrong' and hitting them with dodgeballs.

There is a name for people like that.

There are games that are all dodgeball field, nothing more. Go there.

 

[Kimosabe_X]

*bla

Sorry, but... ( No, I'm not writing what I wanted to spit out first... It's Christmas and it's not worth taking that trouble for such a ridiculous attempt ! )

Uc

 

[ALGOMATIC]

I see ED (and most other games to be fair) as a playground. there are kids on the swings, on the monkey bars and a dodgeball field.

I see PvPers as the kids over on the dodgeball field doing their thing while other kids play on the swings or the monkey bars.

I see GSPs as kids from the dodgeball field coming over with their balls and telling the other kids 'yer playing wrong' and hitting them with dodgeballs.

There is a name for people like that.

There are games that are all dodgeball field, nothing more. Go there.

ED is one hell of a dodgeball game, there are dodgeball mechanics and the game advertised as a dodgeball game, some special flakes are offended by a dodgeball, keep being offended, many people are offended by many things, tough life, git gud.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

ED is one hell of a dodgeball game, there are dodgeball mechanics and the game advertised as a dodgeball game, some special flakes are offended by a dodgeball, keep being offended, many people are offended by many things, tough life, git gud.

Well it's not really. There's a dodgeball field for sure. A pretty big one that's pretty darn fun too.

But there's also a pretty darn big set of swings and monkey bars. However, unlike many playgrounds, the dodgeball field and the swings are separated by a giant wall. There is a small door in the middle that allows kids to change activity should they wish.

Now, if kids choose the wrong playground, that's their problem. But the playground owners certainly provide activities for both kinds of kid.

 

[Sylveria]

and the game advertised as a dodgeball game

No, it's advertised as a playground that includes dodgeball, amongst many other things.

 

[jasonbarron]

I have seen a lot of posts about adding increased rewards to counter the increased risk of playing in Open.

These are usually shouted down by people who feel that this shouldn't be the case or by others who come up with elaborate reasons why it would be exploited. Some even claim they would modify the settings in their router to achieve this.

So giving that it is a given that the general populous feel that an increase in rewards for Open play is a no go, there is a simple answer that so far appears over looked.

Nerf rewards in the other modes!


This way, there would be no exploitable credit mechanics for those playing in open!

Basically you have fixed the game.

Plays who play with a lower risk, get a lower reward.

People who play in the main mode get the standard rewards.

Its a simple solution to an on going problem.

I've always felt that the most practical and interesting way to not only incentivize but also reward players for playing in Open would be to have player controlled ships yield rare data packages and various g5 materials upon destruction.

 

[Sylveria]

I've always felt that the most practical and interesting way to not only incentivize but also reward players for playing in Open would be to have player controlled ships yield rare data packages and various g5 materials upon destruction.

That's actually a pretty good idea. It's not "game breaking" yet it still offers incentive.

(Of course, it doesn't really offer incentive beyond destroying player ships)

 

[Eidolon]

That's actually a pretty good idea. It's not "game breaking" yet it still offers incentive.

(Of course, it doesn't really offer incentive beyond destroying player ships)

So all I have to do is get my router white listed wingmates together and farm each other's sidewinders?
I suppose it would save time searching for high grade emissions etc. That would incentivise us to open briefly, then back to PG for more proper ED.

 

[Sylveria]

So all I have to do is get my router white listed wingmates together and farm each other's sidewinders?
I suppose it would save time searching for high grade emissions etc. That would incentivise us to open briefly, then back to PG for more proper ED.

I'm sure there's some sort of mechanic that could be introduced to prevent "spam killing". It's not "the" solution to Open, but definitely would add incentive for people pew-pewing ships.

As I also said, it doesn't do much for incentives outside of the pew-pew, either.

 

[jasonbarron]

That's actually a pretty good idea. It's not "game breaking" yet it still offers incentive.

(Of course, it doesn't really offer incentive beyond destroying player ships)

Baby steps

 

[Sylveria]

Baby steps

Oh, I agree. I honestly do believe that defining professions would REALLY help this, too. I know people want to "keep the options open", but providing some sort of defined framework (and still keeping it "optional") might help guide people to where they eventually might want to be in the game. Give people some options, and a few passive bonuses for their chosen profession- else if people want to remain "undefined" they may do so but don't gain the bonuses.

(My thread is here if you haven't seen it yet)

Outside of "combat" it's pretty loosely defined in game, which ultimately just leads to the consensus belief that "Open is all about FFA Pew-Pew", instead of people trying to be creative with interaction and "providing content".

Reminds me of Daman's(sp?) "Slave Liberation" cause in Open, which is a good example of someone doing their best to get creative in an environment where professions aren't really very clear.

 

[Jockey79]

And on a forum site that doesn't require verification of game purchase, to boot.

Well, to be fair, neither does this one.

The thing is you didnt define what pvp is.

Oh, now that is quite the debate.

Me trading in my PG Vs Someone trading in Solo - is "player versus player".
So by that broad thinking, the whole game is PvP, just a mix of direct and indirect PvP.

Though someone in Solo may think they are off doing PvE things, when actually they could be tipping the balance in a war with 2 sides in Open - so accidental indirect PvP.

That means I'm a PvP'er - w00t

 

[deathmagnet]

LOL.

3 years. Same arguments.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I've always felt that the most practical and interesting way to not only incentivize but also reward players for playing in Open would be to have player controlled ships yield rare data packages and various g5 materials upon destruction.

Incentivizing ganking. Brilliant.

Explain how PvE players who are the target demographic will be incentivized by this. Traders aren't the one destroying ships, but they're the ones being destroyed.

 

[EvE4evah]

Incentivizing ganking. Brilliant.

Explain how PvE players who are the target demographic will be incentivized by this. Traders aren't the one destroying ships, but they're the ones being destroyed.

I'd further expand Jason's idea and include rare commodities in the mix…
Since looting player ship wrecks is going to be seen as a natural way of farming mats, rares and data; since new Engineers will have a mat broker; and (optimistically supposing) further developing of economy and making mats essential for the game, plus allowing CMDRs to actually supply the mat broker:

1. People will see Open aggression as natural (not 'Griefing'), which will benefit their enjoyment of the game

2. Traders will see looting wrecks as an integral part of the economy.

FD won't ever go there, because their current playerbase majority is against it…

 

[jasonbarron]

Incentivizing ganking. Brilliant.

Explain how PvE players who are the target demographic will be incentivized by this. Traders aren't the one destroying ships, but they're the ones being destroyed.

You're not taking this very seriously, so the answer is no.

I'd further expand Jason's idea and include rare commodities in the mix…
Since looting player ship wrecks is going to be seen as a natural way of farming mats, rares and data; since new Engineers will have a mat broker; and (optimistically supposing) further developing of economy and making mats essential for the game, plus allowing CMDRs to actually supply the mat broker:

1. People will see Open aggression as natural (not 'Griefing'), which will benefit their enjoyment of the game

2. Traders will see looting wrecks as an integral part of the economy.

FD won't ever go there, because their current playerbase majority is against it…

Exactly right on points 1&2, and you're right on the money concerning FD.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

I'd further expand Jason's idea and include rare commodities in the mix…
Since looting player ship wrecks is going to be seen as a natural way of farming mats, rares and data; since new Engineers will have a mat broker; and (optimistically supposing) further developing of economy and making mats essential for the game, plus allowing CMDRs to actually supply the mat broker:

1. People will see Open aggression as natural (not 'Griefing'), which will benefit their enjoyment of the game

2. Traders will see looting wrecks as an integral part of the economy.

FD won't ever go there, because their current playerbase majority is against it…

That is because ED is a space truck simulator and killing players is literaly being Eugene amirite?