Modes Statement that "all game modes are equal" is naive and completely false at the moment.

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

That is entirely subjective - especially when it comes to defining "fun"

It's fun for me to mimble about in a Hauler and mess about with random game mechanics in complete isolation without even the merest whiff of a PvP-Pro-Bro - unless they are physically present at my place, on a godrig, enjoying a lag-free, 4k or multiscreen or VR setup on a 10GbE LAN and we're drinking beer and blowing the snot out of each other

Lagfest pewpew with randoms is not fun for me - and it's got nothing with me being afraid of them or anti-pewpew - it's simply that if a game experience isn't as utterly smooth as it can possibly be on capable hardware, I'm not interested. I'm not going to compromise my gaming experience for the sake of some pew-pew with >1000ms ping and a potato that can barely handle the instance table.

The current state of things:
No risk = same reward.
Risk = same reward.
Skill (including pirating and evading pirates) = same reward


There is a lot of people who do not like the risk. But then, there is a lot of people who like risks.

And there is a lot of people who hate boredom and waging rebuy over nothing equally. Which are hurt the most here.

 

[Jockey79]

The current state of things:
No risk = same reward.
Risk = same reward.
Skill (including pirating and evading pirates) = same reward


There is a lot of people who do not like the risk. But then, there is a lot of people who like risks.

And there is a lot of people who hate boredom and waging rebuy over nothing equally. Which are hurt the most here.

"No Risk" is subjective - not everyone is an Elite Combat pilot and not everyone has the capability to do PvP combat (arthritis / disabilities etc..).
Also, the game is made for 7 years and up if you'd care to check. So the NPCs provide lots of risk for the younger players as well as those mentioned above.

 

[Jockey79]

Stay a while and you will have some dumbed down wall of crap pasted on half the page, and than you will be told to play CQC (not joking, they are actually serious).

No matter how "dumbed down" it is, some folks still struggle to understand Elite wasn't built as a COD in space simulator.
And yes, CQC was built with PvP in mind, in fact the sole purpose of CQC is for PvP fun.

 

[wrmiller]

There are no real risks in a computer game. It's all fake, and for entertainment purposes only.

As far as the modes go: Play them all, pick one you like, and play it. Period. You don't like a mode, don't play it. As for incentivizing open, that's just stupid. You play in open for the PvP. THAT'S your bonus for playing in open. If you don't like that, well, don't let the door hit you on the backside on the way out.

Oh, and Jockey wants your stuffs... LOL.

 

[GJ51]

At least we're not just re-hashing another well-worn beaten-to-death topic...

Again

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

"No Risk" is subjective - not everyone is an Elite Combat pilot and not everyone has the capability to do PvP combat (arthritis / disabilities etc..).
Also, the game is made for 7 years and up if you'd care to check. So the NPCs provide lots of risk for the younger players as well as those mentioned above.

....

As long as there would be a single "red triangle" in the Open, there would be increased risk for being there. Do not deny the obvious.

Plain multiplier across the board should be 1-5%. But it is not all to it.
Creating layers of PvP-crimes and player trade activity is not too hard.
And do not forget rare goods.

And existance of handicapped people should not morph this game into eldery house/baby care. They would be welcome to try and get those increased rewards, so there is nothing insulting.

There are no real risks in a computer game. It's all fake, and for entertainment purposes only.

No st Sherlock...

Yet there is a risk of additional rebuys. Exclusive to open and counterbalanced by nothing.

 

[Jockey79]

....

As long as there would be a single "red triangle" in the Open, there would be increased risk for being there. Do not deny the obvious.

I can hit block long before you get anywhere near me to pull me over - so no extra risk for me.

Any perceived risk in open from other players is completely optional and avoidable.
So it is isn't something to be given a bonus. not when people choose to encounter other players.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

I can hit block long before you get anywhere near me to pull me over - so no extra risk for me.

Any perceived risk in open from other players is completely optional and avoidable.
So it is isn't something to be given a bonus. not when people choose to encounter other players.

Well, block should not work for Open then. Naturaly.
And risks by themselves have entertaining value. Or no one would play poker.

And, in case if you are special, poker without wages have no risks.
Wages without potential gains are, in turn, simply stupid.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I had a habit of hauling CG biowaste strictly in Open. Getting out with 5% on hull was pure adrenaline rush.
But when I failed to got out while doing last haul to firmly get into 25%, I had stopped doing that.
Because I had realised that returns of risk was exactly zero.

So it is not about just pew-pew PvP.

It then seems to be about the added frisson that some players seek when playing in Open - the possibility of being attacked (however small the chance might be).

In which case, it's the player's choice.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

It then seems to be about the added frisson that some players seek when playing in Open - the possibility of being attacked (however small the chance might be).

In which case, it's the player's choice.

QUOTE=Egy Ace Fyke;6659866

Well, block should not work for Open then. Naturaly.
And risks by themselves have entertaining value. Or no one would play poker.

And, in case if you are special, poker without wages have no risks.
Wages without potential gains are, in turn, simply stupid.

/QUOTE

What is there so hard to understand?
That there is faster and safe and there is riskier and slower ways? Which yield exactly same reward?

 

[Robert Maynard]

QUOTE=Egy Ace Fyke;6659866

Well, block should not work for Open then. Naturaly.
And risks by themselves have entertaining value. Or no one would play poker.

And, in case if you are special, poker without wages have no risks.
Wages without potential gains are, in turn, simply stupid.

/QUOTE

What is there so hard to understand?
That there is faster and safe and there is riskier and slower ways? Which yield exactly same reward?

Why not?

PvP has always been an optional extra in this game.

 

[Havvk]

Is it just me, or are "those posts" becoming less coherent at a quite alarming rate?

This

 

[Jockey79]

Well, block should not work for Open then. Naturaly.

Well, Frontier would disagree. As they added that feature and improved on it after release.
It's a great way for each person to control who they interact with and a great way to deal with harassment / bullying.
Which is handy as the game is rated 7 Years and up in the UK. And I know there are some folks I don't want my children to interact with.

The whole game is based on each player having a personal choice over whom they play with.
This includes your would be targets, they can choose if they want to be your target or not.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Why not?

PvP has always been an optional extra in this game.

Cause the game becomes either boring or anything takes more time, at very least?

If you could not switch modes, that would not be the issue. With switch taking 5 seconds, it is.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Cause the game becomes either boring or anything takes more time, at very least?

If you could not switch modes, that would not be the issue. With switch taking 5 seconds, it is.

Mode switching, at will, has also always been part of the published game design....

.... and what is found to be "boring" is rather subjective, just like the definition of "fun".

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Well, Frontier would disagree. As they added that feature and improved on it after release.
It's a great way for each person to control who they interact with and a great way to deal with harassment / bullying.
Which is handy as the game is rated 7 Years and up in the UK. And I know there are some folks I don't want my children to interact with.

The whole game is based on each player having a personal choice over whom they play with.
This includes your would be targets, they can choose if they want to be your target or not.

If increased reward for open at expense of block function can be added as a switchable option with parental control, or Open itself becomes locked by parental control, this would not be an issue. So this argument is not valid.

Mode switching, at will, has also always been part of the published game design....

.... and what is found to be "boring" is rather subjective, just like the definition of "fun".

Of course it is. Not everyone likes poker.
But no one would wage over anything he can just take.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Of course it is. Not everyone likes poker.
But no one would wage over anything he can just take.

Yet the "problem" features that are the basis of this discussion topic have all been part of the game design from the outset - and every player that either backed or bought the game did so with the knowledge that they form part of the game (or the ability to find out about them).

 

[Stigbob]

Just curious: Would be interesting to check out if that actually works instantly (which I doubt), when you already see the hollow rectangle. Have you or someone else tested this? I always was under the impression that blocking only would come to effect afterwards, at the next possible matchmaking.

Block works by vastly lowering the chances of the blocker being instanced with the blockee, it doesn't effect the blockee at all. It does block all comms though.

Technical details and dev posts here :

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...ners-advice-on-dealing-with-griefing-(part-2)

 

[Jockey79]

If increased reward for open at expense of block function can be added as a switchable option with parental control, or Open itself becomes locked by parental control, this would not be an issue. So this argument is not valid.

It is an issue, because you cannot just lock out a section of players because you say so or because didn't understand the game you bought.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Yet the "problem" features that are the basis of this discussion topic have all been part of the game design from the outset - and every player that either backed or bought the game did so with the knowledge that they form part of the game (or the ability to find out about them).

So all I want is to add a choice to get additional reward for your additional risks.
I am ok even with victim loosing nothing in Open if destroyed by PvP causes as long as they have it disabled.