Time will tell, the subject is still on their radar.
Player affecting factions even in Pvt and Solo
- Thread starter 3Times4
- Start date
Time will tell, the subject is still on their radar.
It really isn't.
They mooted the idea and it caused arguments like this.
That's enough to tell Frontier that it's a bad idea.
I'd guess that there is some of that in there, but I also tend to think that there are some other players who really do want to have a "better" embodiment of PP without wishing it to be a gankfest. I'm generous like that.
Your source?
LOL.. it sounds like a miserable ending. To be honest I play in Open since day 1 and I've never been ganked (and I only had 1 pvp encounter in a CZ by a guy mistaking me for a NPC
). I guess gankers are a very minority.Just thinking it through. What will be the consequences of making PP or BGS open only?
A lot of anger from the large number of PvE players who have lost something they paid for.
What will be the consequence of not making it open only.?
A lot of complaining from the minority of hardcore PvP players.
The bottom line is that doing this will anger more players than not doing it. Therefore it will not be done.
LOL.. it sounds like a miserable ending. To be honest I play in Open since day 1 and I've never been ganked (and I only had 1 pvp encounter in a CZ by a guy mistaking me for a NPC
And all the time affecting the BGS.
Almost looks as if PvP has a very minor influence, doesn't it?
They have the data and feedback results from the flashtopic, you do not. We will wait and see what they decide. Leaving it how it is is unlikely though, because it sucks.
yea i know i'm jaded but thats what happens when you play to many online games. that or it was playing eve nulsec
Last edited:
It sucks for the minority. It's fine for the majority. That is what counts.
Oh really, you're saying Powerplay has been a success? lol, alright then.
No. Where did I say that?
I'm saying that requiring people to play in open to do PP would be a disaster for the game.
'Fine' implies it has been successful, which it hasn't.. it's has been roundly critisised since launch. It would not be a disaster for the game, it would breath life into a dead feature. It would only upset a few die-hard, anti-open sh*t-posters. boo-hoo.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Arguably that was each player's choice to buy the game with the ability to inform themselves that there was no PvP-unique feature (apart from CQC/Arena, of course).
The Developers don't seem to be inclined to develop a game that requires PvP - no matter how many complaints there are from players who expect it.
Demands for PvP-gated content smack of "I bought your game and want something that your game does not offer."
CQC is not part of the main game, hence the fact that it is a PvP-only feature is moot.
That CQC seems to be dead may be down to design flaws - or may be down to the fact that some players don't seek "balanced" PvP.
Indeed - as it relates to existing content that every player has bought. It'd be a significant step, in my opinion, if Frontier chose to gate existing content to Open.
.... future optional DLC need not be available in all modes, as not all players need to purchase an optional DLC. However, as Frontier are "well aware" that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP, it seems rather unlikely that there'd be a DLC dedicated to PvP (as it would appeal to less than half of players).
No, I'm saying that having every feature in the game available to all players is "fine". It would be a disaster to make non PvP players second class citizens by denying them access to certain features.
Also note that I am being entirely polite. I ask you to return the compliment.
Like many I bought the game before CQC, Powerplay or even solo/PG existed, so am disappointed to see the anti-pvp direction the game has moved in since those early days of open-only in alpha/early beta. Also saying saying PvP would be 'required' is a misrepresentation, that's the whole point in Powerplay being optional, you don't have to take part. Like CQC, it is optional to get involved in.
As do any complaints from anybody about features they perceive to be missing, space-legs, atmospheric landings etc. I don't see how that invalidates the argument for OOPP.
We all know there are players who just like to shoot down easy targets, but that is not why CQC is dead. CQC is dead because it does not reflect PvP in the main game.. continually respawning arena fighters with locked loadouts are not as fun as tense 1v1/wing v wing battles in the main game for most pvpers.
CQC is also not a level playing field due to leveled unlocks, so the argument about it being even is not accurate.
There is a strong argument for PvP features though. It would appeal to both new players (as in new audience) and players who have left the game already because of it's ring-fenced pvp design. Pretending PvP doesn't exist to satisfy those who hate it seems like a bad philosophy to me.
Last edited:
Please enlighten us what you mean by "before solo/PG existed"?
This should be quite interesting
Please enlighten us what you mean by "before solo/PG existed"?
This should be quite interesting
Those modes weren't available right from the beginning, they were added in one of the beta releases.
Edit: Standard beta 1.0 by the looks of it : https://lavewiki.com/releases
Last edited:
So what you are saying is that despite the game being developed - from the ground up - with solo and PG modes included, that just because the test release which was launched after the development of Solo and PG modes had begun, and that the test alpha launch didn't provide access to these modes (that were always incorporated in development, prior to alpha release), that somehow they were a later "add on"?
Interesting viewpoint, but not one that bears up to any scrutiny.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Solo and Private Groups have existed in the published design information since the start of the Kickstarter. With their inclusion in the released game, no-one has bought the released game without them (Alpha / Beta access notwithstanding).
It can be argued that the game direction has not been "anti-pvp" but more that it does not force anyone to engage in PvP - that choice is up to each player to make.
PvP would be "required" if Powerplay were gated to Open - unless there would also be a PvP-toggle? No such requirement exists at this time as players are free to engage in Powerplay in their mode of choice, not just in Open.
Not really - those complaints relate to adding content for all players, not arbitrarily removing existing content that forms part of the base game from players in Solo and Private Groups to satisfy a subset of the player-base.
The disparity between ships in CQC is, I strongly suspect, dwarfed by the disparity of ships in the main game.
Whether PvP features would appeal to an unknowable number of potential new players, or not, is an unknown.
Frontier do know, however, that they've sold a game that does not require PvP to every single player....