Modes I know I'm beating a dead horse, but we need official PvE servers

[Siobhan]

Consider them NPCs that actually pose a threat. If you stress out by playing a game that has very limited threat in open... Why play a game at all?

Btw you can leave an attacker in 15 secs, you don't need superheavy build. Unless your FSD is taken out, that is when you lose.

You play your way and leave me to play mine my way without telling me what I can and cannot do

And of course there aren't any weapons in ED that can force your FSD to reboot, or any kind of railguns or PAs that can take out your FSD or PP in about 5-8 seconds. And there wasn't a thread complaining even about some NPCs being able to do that recently.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Im not opposed to the game having PG but I do wish there was some way the game could be open only. I understand that in the games current state, open only isn't feasible but do wish there was a way for us all to get along in the same game mode.

So for me, I would prefer for Fdev to figure out a way for us all to play together instead of spending time separating us.

Game developers have been trying for nearly 40 years to figure out a way of doing this. The problem is a certain type of player who demands others be their content, but is unwilling to be the content of others in return. This type of player is hugely disruptive, and has a long history driving away most of a game’s player base, leaving game developers looking for a solution.

The traditional solution, a PvP switch, forces players to be either completely PvPers, or completely PvEers. This is easier than trying to control in-game behavior via in-game “consequences”, but carries its own problems. One game I played that added a PvP switch after the fact took four tries to get the duel dialog working correctly. Previous attempts either made it easy for players to accidentally accept an unwanted duel, or left them vulnerable to mobs until it was closed. The final version meant that you might not see a duel request at all, unless you were expecting one.

Frontiers solution is much more elegant IMO, it allows players to choose who they want to play with, starting with modes, and ending with friends and block lists. This ensures that the target “audience” of the most disruptive players isn’t available, creating an environment ill suited for the type of intereactions they prefer.

 

[[VR] optimal_909]

You play your way and leave me to play mine my way without telling me what I can and cannot do

And of course there aren't any weapons in ED that can force your FSD to reboot, or any kind of railguns or PAs that can take out your FSD or PP in about 5-8 seconds. And there wasn't a thread complaining even about some NPCs being able to do that recently.

All I suggested to those fearing open to open their mind and consider it as an added layer of gameplay.

I've lost about five ships in more than three years, out of which two times my FSD was taken out. I don't think this is excessive risk, especially as all of them were lost in CG systems. The risk is minuscule and changes very little on what is a very-very forgiving game.
I survived winged ganks in a Cobra MkIV, I can even get away in a T9. Yes, I sacrificed few dozen of tons of cargo capacity to fit an A7 shield. But hey, once I played with and foregone 30 tons of cargo out of the 600+ tons I hauled, and the CMDR pirate stood by his word and let me go.

As for any NPC being a threat, nothing is easier than escape their interdiction. If you chose not to engage NPCs, I don't know how you can lose a ship unless you are a newbie.

 

[Darkfyre99]

That's exactly what I'm saying. Why would anyone risk a rebuy while running missions in open when they could just run their missions, risk free, in a pve server with no repercussions? I've said in other posts that if they did make a pve open server they would have to make some kind of incentive for the normal open mode, like double rewards for missions or something.

For the same reason why a significant majority of players are currently running missions, hauling cargo, or even exploring in Open, with no additional compensation: we consider it more fun that way.

Speaking for myself, players represent a different challenge than a NPCs do. Not necessarily a more difficult challenge, but definitely a different one. Many of the strategies I use on players won’t work on NPCs, and vice versa. Plus, evading a hostile player by getting them to lithobrake into a planet or moon, before they get a chance to interdict you, is far more satisfying than winning the interdiction game against an NPC.

Also, I sometimes like to play the wounded bird by letting a hostile player interdict me, low waking away, and then rinse and repeat, to see how long it takes them to get bored or figure out that I don’t consider them a real threat. The record remains seven, because that’s where my limit is. After the seventh, I felt the need to send, “You are aware I’m willing to do this all the way to the station, right?” There wasn’t an eighth.

 

[Chaparral]

Given that my post addresses the modes, including the freedom to choose who you want to play with, and is in the modes section of Elite Dangerous forums, I think you might have missed something.



"In the absence of..."



I've been playing this game since the Alpha, mostly in Open, and it's hardly a "full time PvP experience." At worst it's a blue-moon PvP experience, and at best it's a once or twice a year unless you go deliberately seek it out experience.

There's major three reasons why I think Elite: Dangerous doesn't have the player base other MMOs do:

1) It wasn't primarily designed as an MMO, and it shows. Between the peer-to-peer networking solution, the rather odd placement of the chat, window, "guild" support only now getting added to the game, and a host of other issues, it's not surprising that its player base is smaller than traditional MMOs.

2) It has a steep learning curve. In nearly all MMOs, the controls are the same as a bog standard FPS. Elite: Dangerous is different. It doesn't play like a FPS or a traditional MMO. It plays like a flight simulator, which is a rather niche game genre. As one famous wit put it:



3) It's a space game. Space games have always been kind of niche.

While invoking steam charts hardly proves anything, it's the only information we have about concurrent players of most games. When you compare Elite: Dangerous to the other space MMOs on Steam, Eve Online and Star Trek Online, its player base is generally more than the other two games combined, and frequently by a large margin at that. Keep in mind that the former is genuinely a "full time PvP experience," while the latter is a more traditional MMO, requiring explicit consent to engage in PvP.

I'm personally of the opinion that Frontier went the route it did to minimize operating costs. This game has no on-call game-master support in the game itself, which is needed for the type of shenanigans that can happen in pure PvE environments. Add in the programming chores that a PvE mode would require, I simply don't see that happening. If Frontier had wanted a PvE mode, they would've done the work when the mode system was being created, not years after the fact.

Solid points.

 

[Chaparral]

Yes it does, as the game is heavily instanced reducing the odds of seeing others outside of hubs and you can still block anyone you don't want to play with anyway, meaning you can severely limit the chance of PvP in Open.

I have used the block function successfully, but you often don't know who to block until after the interaction. Since this is the "dead horse" forum, I can say from my own game experience that I have had pvp encounters many, many times at engineers, CGs, newly discovered easter egg sites (barnacles, downed thargoid ships, guardian sites, thargoid interacting with barnacle sites, etc. ). If I was just flying from place to place, absolutely minimal interaction.

It is unfortunate that the game is set up so that when these unique assets appear, and a player wanting a positive social experience where discussion, collaboration and appreciation can be expressed - that these locations become the most intense sites of pvp/ganking. I know of very few people that go to the movies alone (it's a rare person that would prefer to sit in a theater completely alone), it's usually done with others so that the shared experience can be appreciated.

As a result of the instancing restrictions, especially on PGs, in my opinion - a great deal of FDEVs efforts go underappreciated. If an improvement of PG instancing mechanics or an Open PVE were available, I think there would be a greater respect for the game.

 

[AP Birdman]

Game developers have been trying for nearly 40 years to figure out a way of doing this. The problem is a certain type of player who demands others be their content, but is unwilling to be the content of others in return. This type of player is hugely disruptive, and has a long history driving away most of a game’s player base, leaving game developers looking for a solution.

The traditional solution, a PvP switch, forces players to be either completely PvPers, or completely PvEers. This is easier than trying to control in-game behavior via in-game “consequences”, but carries its own problems. One game I played that added a PvP switch after the fact took four tries to get the duel dialog working correctly. Previous attempts either made it easy for players to accidentally accept an unwanted duel, or left them vulnerable to mobs until it was closed. The final version meant that you might not see a duel request at all, unless you were expecting one.

Frontiers solution is much more elegant IMO, it allows players to choose who they want to play with, starting with modes, and ending with friends and block lists. This ensures that the target “audience” of the most disruptive players isn’t available, creating an environment ill suited for the type of intereactions they prefer.

Other games have figured it out though. Elder Scrolls Online doesn't have any kind of a griefer problem as well as many other MMO's.
I have no clue what the solution could be or what it would look like but I still believe we all should be pressuring Fdev to figure out a way to bring us together instead of separating us.

 

[Sylveria]

Other games have figured it out though. Elder Scrolls Online doesn't have any kind of a griefer problem as well as many other MMO's.
I have no clue what the solution could be or what it would look like but I still believe we all should be pressuring Fdev to figure out a way to bring us together instead of separating us.

You're right- they have figured it out... it's called separating the game styles.

Elder Scrolls Online has a designated area for PvP- Cyrodil.
WoW has PvP flagging. And designated PvP areas.
Etc.

They've given up on the Holy Grail of Gaming because they know it's never going to be found.

 

[Jockey79]

Other games have figured it out though. Elder Scrolls Online doesn't have any kind of a griefer problem as well as many other MMO's.
I have no clue what the solution could be or what it would look like but I still believe we all should be pressuring Fdev to figure out a way to bring us together instead of separating us.

While the sentiment of "bringing us together" is a noble one and I applaud you for wanting it, no game has ever brought PvE and PvP together.

Star Trek Online has a PvPvE map, which I loved playing - nothing but complaints from some players that they couldn't complete the PvE missions there due to pesky Klingon's blowing them up in PvP.
/whistles and shuffles feet while polishing his Torpedo boat B'rel Bird of Prey.

EVE Online is another game that has tried, some would say it did it, but it really hasn't. Hardcore PvE'ers won't put up with unsolicited PvP for long (AKA people going into "safe space" to kill PvE'ers)
And CCP have constantly had to tweak their rules and CONCORD to limit and punish PvP'ers for going into "safe space" to try and stop them.
I myself loved 0.0 space, but when I was trying to help new players in 0.8+ and we were getting harassed by folks who were bored in 0.0, I and may others have quit over it.
(In case you're not familiar with the game, 0.0 - 0.4 was the "lawless" area, 0.5 - 0.7 was the mixed area and 0.8 - 1.0 was supposed to be the "safe space" starting areas)

WoW has PvP areas and War Mode for PvP - segregating PvP from PvE'ers, despite they used to have PvP servers (which they've shut down or converted to PvE servers - I'm on Vashj, a former PvP server)

You cannot bring together 2 fundamentally different play styles and expect everything to just work out.
That isn't just naive, the history of MMOs shows it's darn right stupid.

The smartest thing they've done is use a selective mode system, alas they've missed out on tools for groups and made is so PvE players are screwed if the group leader leaves.
Hence the need for an Open PvE mode, at least that way the whole mode and a chunk of players are not reliant one 1 person.

Should anything ever happen to Mobius, Frontier will have to take over his account / PG - or risk losing a block of players.
(Not me, I have my own PG and play in several others plus I use Open anyway)

 

[Darkfyre99]

Other games have figured it out though. Elder Scrolls Online doesn't have any kind of a griefer problem as well as many other MMO's.

And PvP in ESO requires explicit consent, like almost every other MMO out there: Duels, arena combat, or an opt in "alliance war."

I have no clue what the solution could be or what it would look like but I still believe we all should be pressuring Fdev to figure out a way to bring us together instead of separating us.

No thank you.

I've played enough online games over the last three decades to see that forcing pure PvE players into a mixed environment is a recipe for a horrid game experience. Not only for the PvE players themselves, but the player base in general. The only kind of player that thrives in an environment where PvE players are forced into a mixed environment is the type of player who simply isn't fun to play with, because they will do everything in their power, including the use of exploits, 3rd party cheating programs, and outside the game tactics, to ensure that they don't become the content of others.

I would much rather play in a mixed environment with players who want to be there, than a similar environment where players are forced to be there to access the content they're interested in. Been there, done that, and seen the inevitable results.

 

[Mouse]

All I suggested to those fearing open to open their mind and consider it as an added layer of gameplay.

I've lost about five ships in more than three years, out of which two times my FSD was taken out. I don't think this is excessive risk, especially as all of them were lost in CG systems. The risk is minuscule and changes very little on what is a very-very forgiving game.
I survived winged ganks in a Cobra MkIV, I can even get away in a T9. Yes, I sacrificed few dozen of tons of cargo capacity to fit an A7 shield. But hey, once I played with and foregone 30 tons of cargo out of the 600+ tons I hauled, and the CMDR pirate stood by his word and let me go.

As for any NPC being a threat, nothing is easier than escape their interdiction. If you chose not to engage NPCs, I don't know how you can lose a ship unless you are a newbie.

This right here explains why you don't understand...

First of all no one "Fears" Open, to suggest so is stupid. You say open minds and consider it an "added" layer of gameplay... you may want to try and sell that to the Open only proponents and explain to them that PG and Solo are layers of gameplay as well.

Secondly to suggest that just because YOU have no issues with NPCs at all and can escape their interdictions easily and don't get blown up means everyone else should and if you can't you are a "newbie" is horse crap and plainly blatantly offensive. I'm sick and tired of jerkwads like you who come in make statements about how you are gods in space and expect everyone else to be.... just.... like... you.... news flash... we ain't. Sell yourself and crow over your achievements all you want, I am glad they impress you.. they mean squat to me beyond you had fun.

 

[Goose4291]

 

[Deleted member 115407]

It's what I'll be doing

I mean, why waste the time off?

Oh, and uh, Goose? You're needed in the PvP sub...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...or-no-reason?p=7305629&viewfull=1#post7305629

That's pretty much the definition of a psychopath. These guys probably don't act on their lack of empathy in real life because society has long since created quite a few counter-measures that ensure any public psychopathic behavior is punished socially (even for small things, if you're consistently a negative person towards others, society will shun you).

Since they can't publicly let out their natural behavior due to the social consequences, they do it in video games and justify it by saying "it's just pixels" - when they very well know it's sadistic psychopathic behavior nonetheless.

This goes hand-to-hand with the animosity towards menu-logging - for most non-sadistic people engaging in a PvP battle, if your opponent menu-logs / taps out, you get a sense of victory. But for this subset of players, their sense of accomplishment and victory only comes from "forcing people to eat a rebuy" (aka inflicting real pain on the player victim).

At the end of the day, it is indeed a game, but when you destroy a ship flown by a human CMDR (as opposed to NPCs), there are very much real consequences to the psyche of the person affected, do it on a new player often enough and they will just quit the game out of frustration - making ED PvP not at all comparable to other video games where dying / losing has no consequence in terms of time lost (losing progress = effectively losing time), ie: people shooting in each in an online FPS tends to be much more akin to any regular sport, since the only downside to losing a fight is that you usually wait a few seconds / minutes to respawn (depending on the type of FPS).

And this is why I play mostly in Mobius / Solo, and keep a healthy blocklist for when I join Open. Life's too short to deal with sadistic psychopaths in a video game you're supposed to derive pleasure from. I am not someone else's "content".

 

[Havvk]

My point still stands though

That it does

 

[Goose4291]

It's what I'll be doing

I mean, why waste the time off?

Oh, and uh, Goose? You're needed in the PvP sub...

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...or-no-reason?p=7305629&viewfull=1#post7305629

Im not playing.tonight Vin, I'm home on leave with my 'fictious' wife as per Ziggys descriptives this time last.year,.and toasting a good hockey victory.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Im not playing.tonight Vin, I'm home on leave with my 'fictious' wife as per Ziggys descriptives this time last.year,.and toasting a good hockey victory.

Cheers to you, mate. And Happy New Year!

 

[Jockey79]

Whether you are in game blowing up NPCs or CMDRs, or stuck at work / on duty.

Happy New Year folks.


I've enjoyed your company all year, and I hope to continue to enjoy it for many more.
I'm off to watch the BBC New Year countdown, because one year their drone is so going to crash into the London Eye and I don't want to miss it lol.

Hope to catch you all January 1st or soon after.

 

[Mouse]

To all a Safe and Happy New Years.

 

[AP Birdman]

And PvP in ESO requires explicit consent, like almost every other MMO out there: Duels, arena combat, or an opt in "alliance war."

No thank you.

I've played enough online games over the last three decades to see that forcing pure PvE players into a mixed environment is a recipe for a horrid game experience. Not only for the PvE players themselves, but the player base in general. The only kind of player that thrives in an environment where PvE players are forced into a mixed environment is the type of player who simply isn't fun to play with, because they will do everything in their power, including the use of exploits, 3rd party cheating programs, and outside the game tactics, to ensure that they don't become the content of others.

I would much rather play in a mixed environment with players who want to be there, than a similar environment where players are forced to be there to access the content they're interested in. Been there, done that, and seen the inevitable results.

Well, what I would suggest is a way for us to all be able to play in the same mode but pve-ers would still be able to avoid pvp combat and pvpers could enjoy what they do.
I'm aware that such a system isn't really possible but I would much rather see something like that then players being separated.

 

[Jockey79]

Well, what I would suggest is a way for us to all be able to play in the same mode but pve-ers would still be able to avoid pvp combat and pvpers could enjoy what they do.
I'm aware that such a system isn't really possible but I would much rather see something like that then players being separated.

Well it is possible to have PvE and PvP in the same mode, but if you dig through the forum archives for the DDA and through S.O.G 1 - quite a few PvP only types screamed blue murder that "unkillable" targets in their mode would wreak their "immersion" , so they didn't want PvE people in their instances.

So that idea was well and truly killed off 4 years ago.