Correct, the easy modes availble to everyone making OPEN useless for those activities making them another PVE grind (like we dont have enough already).
Modes Will 3.0 Increase, decrease or have no effect on Open population?
- Thread starter Chaparral
- Start date
Correct, the easy modes availble to everyone making OPEN useless for those activities making them another PVE grind (like we dont have enough already).
In over a year of harvesting salt there was not a single day that there was noone to harvest it from.
I always think it is so funny that you call the other modes the "easy" ones. This from someone who mines salt going for soft targets that are not a threat to your ship and claiming that it is "PVP". Now you want to talk about an "easy mode". That is it right there.
I've got nearly 2000.....and I was down to less than a rebuy for my Cobra. Without some of these high credit opportunities I was shut out of the game in the ships I wanted to fly...looking at huge amounts of grind to get back to actually playing. I hadn't needed to continuously relaunch the game...but there were other ways to make money.
Goose4291
Banned
What I've been trying to do is using it as a parallel with the other types of cheating, to try to show why I think the calls for 'perma-bans' with the 5/1 situation were uncalled for, because they are exactly the same, but at different points along the path of being plugged.
5/1
1. Exploit discovered
2. Exploit reported
3. No response from FDev
4. People ask for clarification
5. Still no response from FDev
6. People assume it's okay to do.
7. Months pass, in which period many people do it.
8. Frontier announces it as cheating.
9. Hole plugged. All 5/1 assets revoked.
Instance Switching
1. Exploit discovered
2. Exploit reported
3. No response from FDev
4. People ask for clarification
5. Still no response from FDev
6. People assume it's okay to do.
7. Months pass, in which period many people do it.
Yet for some reason, because it's a perceived as a PvP exploit (which it really, really isn't, because you can use said engineering on PvE assets to impact PP/BGS/CGs/the precious cr/hr) the forum moral police were crusading for perma-bans for anyone who'd used the 5/1, but instance switching was regarded as an okay normal status quo.[/quote]
Nah I get that. I suspect were on a similar page when it comes to cheating/exploiting, its just the level of punishment being issued that we're quibbling over. On that note, I'll just reitterate that now it has been declared as such, If it were possible to 5/1 in the future and people cracked ahead with it, I'd be comfortable with seeing bans/account suspensions, as the precedent was set (however not enforced) with combat logging.
Goose4291
Banned
Which is all well and good, until people with lots of time use it to maximise the return or impact of their gameplay because in the case of BGS nonsense for example, it forces an opponent to adopt the exact same exploit tactics if they don't want to lose.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Alternatively, the modes available to everyone that doesn't enjoy direct PvP (i.e. the apparent majority of players) so that they don't have to subject themselves to an optional play-style that they don't find to be "fun".
was playing in open last night, there were lots more commanders than i normally see. went to founders world quite a few times to and didnt get interdicted once, which is something of a rarity.
The funny thing is, I’ve used that argument about grinding, mode switching, and all the other unpleasantness people do rather than simply enjoying this game, other MMOs, or any form of entertainment, really. Some people, in return, consider my refusal to use trade route calculators, using the ejection rules, and wishing Frontier had retained the original version of Supercruise and the Economic Sim to be gaming masochism.
The fact of the matter is that there are some players that are genuinely unpleasant to play with. How unpleasant they are to play with varies from person to person, and that can change depending upon the situation as well. For example, if I had to choose between a PvP or PvE server, with no moving back and forth between them, whether or not I choose the PvP server or not depends upon easy it is to evade them.
I happen to feel that PvP can enhance my experience as a role player, so I’m willing to put up with the occasional jerk that likes to pretend they’re an 1337 PvPer by attacking newbies, non-combat players, or use exploits and cheats to gain an advantage, because genuine PvPers tend to be fun to play with. But if the ratio of jerks to fun encounters are too high, or if an encounter with a jerk is “you’re dead” with no option to flee or evade*, then I’m going to choose the PvE server sooner or later. Or quit the game entirely, if IMO the PvE side of things is too easy.
Bottom line is that I can easily see players who like Powerplay or the BGS, but have zero desire to be forced to play with jerks to do so, using every tool Frontier gives them to have fun in this game. If they those tools are taken away, they’ll quit playing those parts of the game, or quit playing this game entirely. Such a move IMO would gut the already small Powerplay playerbase, and reduce BGS manipulation entirely into a game of who can grind PvE the most.
Both of those effects is why I consider this concern for PP or the BGS to be a smoke screen for people who want easy kills in Open, as opposed to a genuine interest in improving PvP in Open. I’ve seen some great opt-inideas for adding PvP influence to both systems that don’t involve forcing people who have zero interest in being the content for jerks into Open. The main problem is that it involves adding PvPcontent to the game in such a way that colluding players can’t manipulate the system to their own advantage.
Well, that and players who opt-in to PvP tend to know how to protect themselves, so they require some skill to kill, making hard for certain players to pretend they are 1337 PvPers. Probably why they keep on harping about “Open Only” instead.
________________
* Main reason why PvPers tend to be fun to play with is that those that do seek out encounters with non-PvPers intentionally self nerf, give a player ample opportunity to escape, are genuinely gracious in victory or defeat, and sometimes even give advice on how to improve in the middle of combat!
Its worse than that. You’ll also never see players who play at different times than you do, play on different continents than you do, or play on different platforms than you do.
Furthermore, if you go with the assumption that anyone in “your” system is an enemy out to hurt your faction, you’ll be destroying incoming influence from nearby systems and driving away many uninvolved players who would naturally be helping your faction... assuming you’re actually manipulating the BGS to your own advantage, and not blindly grinding influence.
Finally, your assuming that all BGS groups and players have a “home” to counter attack. There are numerous BGS groups out there whose purpose is promoting ideologies, Superpowers, shaping the Powerplay landscape, or any number of other reasons besides promoting one minor faction.
No. 5/1 exploit is cheating. It breaks a rule. Instance switching is not cheating. It breaks no rules. They are far from the same.
No one in their right mind would think 5/1 is ok to do. That's ludicrous. It is clearly cheating.
Although I agree neither deserves a perma ban.
Last edited:
How about a local SysNet that reports influence changes and who is responsible for it? It would need players to officially pledge to their faction.
I guess I have a different definition of “benefit.”
I see no benefits in new players skipping over the smaller ships, learning the skills they need to thrive in the game while rebuys are small. I cringe whenever I hear about an Anaconda or Corvette being lost due to not having a rebuy, because you have to know they used the “get rich quick” flavor of the month to get those ships, complete with doing the Mode town dance.
As a short time player, I see no benefit to wasting half my time precious game session switching modes and rereading the mission screens over and over again, when I can take whatever decent missions are available, and simply fly my space ship.
And personally, I’m not much of a PvPer, but those few times I’ve gone out there with PvP on my mind, I’ve had far more fun taking a cheap ship and relying on skill, prepared to die in a glorious but fun battle, than I would’ve if I spent most of my time grinding through the game’s menus and mission boards, to keep a ship I can’t fly well.
But that’s just me.
It was the same when the exploit became public, attempts to downplay it.
"It's not an exploit", "anyone can get these mods legitimately", "no different to instance switching".
Also Goose's attempts to pretend it wasn't secret are really a bit off.
It had become so bad that finding exploits, keeping them to yourself (and your group) and abusing them against others had become a legit part of the PvP meta. Premium ammo exploits for +30% against others, unobtainable exploited G5 god mods used against others.
Literally the ONLY reason the exploit become public on the forums is because one group had leveraged this particular exploit for all its worth and wanted it closing so other groups could not use it.
"What secrecy?" says Goose now.
Not sure about perma but I think bans were definitely in order, bugs will happen, Frontier have to send the right signals.
Last edited:
So Open isn't easy mode as well? Admittedly I only have a bit over 20 weeks in Open, when does it get more difficult than the other modes?
No difference.
I play open sometimes for rez farming. It's a bit quicker in a wing and so there's an incentive. For almost everything else, encountering PvP meta-builds in a non-combat ship or a PvE build has zero appeal regardless of c&p improvements/changes.
I play open sometimes for rez farming. It's a bit quicker in a wing and so there's an incentive. For almost everything else, encountering PvP meta-builds in a non-combat ship or a PvE build has zero appeal regardless of c&p improvements/changes.
Goose4291
Banned
See to me, they're both cheating, just in different manners that yield different outcomes by using broken mechanics to play against the spirit of what the devs intended. I'm fairly sure there was a post by a Dev a short while back stating that while Instance switching is a broken exploit and not the way they intended for us to play, it's not something they can address at this stage. My point is, with Instance Switching, we're not at the stage where like 5/1 they could plug the hole and potentially start issuing punishments. All my posts are doing is highlighting the reason why its not a good idea to throw stones at someone from within a glasshouse, because it's likely to turn round and smack you in the teeth one day.
My problem with the idea of throwing those levels of punishments at people for unplugged exploits/broken mechanics is (i) that by accident (I had a G3 lightweight missile launcher on my Adder that I accidentally got through burning out my G1 materials for rep with the Engineer) they could fall foul of it, and (ii) if you leave something unchecked in a competitive game for that length of time, as I mentioned earlier, it becomes the status quo because if you don't use it, you're going to lose.
I dont find it fun to move pve tokens around in SOLO...