Tired of the Open vs. Private Debacle

[Mohrgan]

That's a big reason power play is dead

Power Play is dead because everyone interested has the modules already. Filling buckets doesn't have to be done in open. Failing in PP is the exact same thing as failing at the BGS. Playing it the way you want it to be, rather than how it is. PvP murder-boats won't win at PP either.

Use your bountiful imagination to offer suggestions that don't involve open only. Suggest a way to make open more appealing without bribery. The fact remains; you can only expect to play alongside those that want to play like/with you.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Maybe so, but I think we can all agree that if problems are solved via the sandbox, gameplay loops, and then the players own decisions within those, that the game would be massively better. And if the best result is that solo and pg just become superfluous, then so be it.

You think...
Actually, I disagree fundamentally with your propositions simply because of the generalities, rather than specifics, exactly what are these "Gameplay loops" to which you refer, ad nauseum? Of course, even with your inspiring ideas, the other modes wouldn't become superfluous at all as the option to remove the entire player base by any player would be removed... As the game stands, despite being 'part' of the same dynamic galaxy, any player can opt to never see another in-game... If your wonderful improvements permit any player to be anywhere without instancing with any other player, well, then we'd be getting somewhere. All you seem to be doing is bewailing the fact that other players are currently able to play how they wish - why should you care, you just play along as you wish, like the rest of us, you are a nobody in the game.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Fundamentally disagree. Would security functioning more appropriately not be a universal improvement? How about states providing dynamic affects to the sandbox, such as thargoid incursions? Or just from an immersion standpoint seeing high pop hustle and bustle vs low pop trickle?

The problem isn't lack of middle ground, it's lack of imagination and willingnes to not take the minimum viable product solutions

You seem to have misquote. I did not write that.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Now then there are some issues behind these ad nauseum threads: First some people seem to have kind of pipe brains, only solution for them seems to be "blockade tactics" aka shoot everything that moves. Somebody on opposing side of PP move pp stuff to your system -> shoot it. Somebody affects BGS by moving cargo to some faction -> shoot it. Due to many reasons such tactics is NOT effective, one those is modes and other are timezones, network related stuff, other playing systems, size of solar systems and so on and on. Solution really would be to abandon ineffective tactics, not to change the game.
On PvP itself, well there are players who have "git gud" and enjoy challenge of meeting equally skillfull player in match. Thats fine. But well there are other types too, some of who find out combat kitted engineered ships piloted by expert skipper little too much challenge for them. And well as Open currently is mode of choice for combat oriented types, they are out luck. Quite big part of population there knows about how to fight and what to carry. It is not fun to attack ships that will punch back, hard. Those people really would like galaxy full of easy prey, but are frustrated because most easy prey is inaccessible in solo&pg. Well I don't particularly care about that groups wants and needs.

 

[Stelar 7]

It makes perfect sense based on the arguments presented over the years, and over two decades of online gaming in general. I am not arguing for anything, I am conceding a position presented by others makes sense. That doesn't mean that it is what I want. Something can make sense even though it may contrast with what I personally would prefer. The complete and utter inability of you and others on both 'sides' of this discussions to consider other perspectives is what makes discussions like this so tiresome. And for a community that likes to congratulate itself on being so mature that is a bit disappointing.

So based on content not here and your measly two decades of online experience. I'm at three decades so I win.

Your decision to hand waive my points and assume I'm close minded puts you on the people not worth talking to list. Have a nice day with your presuppositions.

Yeah I have but I can restate it. So the premise of the suggestion is that because PvP can only exist within the greater context of the game, which is pve, the enhancement to that greater context would be beneficial to both groups.

That all sounds awesome, but as an addition to all game modes with the system police responding to Player and NPC agression alike.

Not invisible walls or flags.

Invisible walls is terminology for incompatible game states. That's cross platform, cross latency and also cross interaction desire.

All the cool stuff you want can be added. You still haven't made a case for why someone's desire to never see another human player should be denied when we have the tool to enable it.

I'm describing the current layout of our game. Security levels, economies, allegiances etc. Make them actually count for something. If it's similar to Eve so be it. One mechanism similarity is not the same as the entire game being the same. That's disingenuous at best.

They do count for something, just not for player interactions. I'm in favor of your expansions to NPC capabilities and more weight in the BGS and Powerplay.

Safety shouldn't be based on player threat, but currently player threat is the greatest threat. I don't think it should be that way. Case and point, jumping into a thargoids incursion system should be completely butt puckering if you do so unprepared. It isn't.

I can support this too, but it's got nothing to do with removing solo and group game modes.

The rest of your post doesn't address what I've said at all, which is modes and flags are lazy game design, whose issues they are meant to address should be addressed in the context of the actual game.

I've made no moral stance on the matter, reading ain't just for rich people Jethro.

This is where you seem to be misunderstanding me. You claim that those are lazy design. I see them as an efficient way to solve the problem of allowing players to control their online experience while opening the games content equally to everyone.

You are making a value judgement. One I suspect you feel so deeply that you haven't asked why you feel that way, it appears to strike you as axiomatically true.

I disagree with you about that and I'm trying to get you to support your position.

The things you want to add to the game all sound awesome to me. However none of them need us to remove solo mode.

The fact is some people don't want to play with other people and if you want to force them to you need to justify that.

So far, I see no justification. I do hope we get the powerplay and Thargoid enhancements.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

You think...
Actually, I disagree fundamentally with your propositions simply because of the generalities, rather than specifics, exactly what are these "Gameplay loops" to which you refer, ad nauseum? Of course, even with your inspiring ideas, the other modes wouldn't become superfluous at all as the option to remove the entire player base by any player would be removed... As the game stands, despite being 'part' of the same dynamic galaxy, any player can opt to never see another in-game... If your wonderful improvements permit any player to be anywhere without instancing with any other player, well, then we'd be getting somewhere. All you seem to be doing is bewailing the fact that other players are currently able to play how they wish - why should you care, you just play along as you wish, like the rest of us, you are a nobody in the game.

I agree we are nobodies in the game, and that's why the premise that it's some personal tragedy if you're inconvenienced by another player able to shoot you should be totally and wholly irrelevant to the games design.

I elaborated on what the gameplay loops id like to see are. Scroll back and you can see it. Choice and risk assessment in the sandbox, not ignorance of it.

Plus I'm at least suggesting improvements to the actual game, rather than the best I've seen from those who oppose is either no changes or more hamfisted invisible walls and magic bullets.

 

[Mohrgan]

I agree we are nobodies in the game, and that's why the premise that it's some personal tragedy if you're inconvenienced by another player able to shoot you should be totally and wholly irrelevant to the games design.

I elaborated on what the gameplay loops id like to see are. Scroll back and you can see it. Choice and risk assessment in the sandbox, not ignorance of it.

Plus I'm at least suggesting improvements to the actual game, rather than the best I've seen from those who oppose is either no changes or more hamfisted invisible walls and magic bullets.

You're just spewing PvP-centric talking points and buzzwords. You offer no substance besides "At least I'm trying". Take my suggestion offer ways to make open more appealing without bribery, and ask for changes that don;t include open only. That way you can have a conversation, instead of a debate.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I agree we are nobodies in the game, and that's why the premise that it's some personal tragedy if you're inconvenienced by another player able to shoot you should be totally and wholly irrelevant to the games design.

I elaborated on what the gameplay loops id like to see are. Scroll back and you can see it. Choice and risk assessment in the sandbox, not ignorance of it.

Plus I'm at least suggesting improvements to the actual game, rather than the best I've seen from those who oppose is either no changes or more hamfisted invisible walls and magic bullets.

Of course you are suggesting improvements...

I had no idea that your losing your ship was a personal tragedy, my condolences, of course.

I fail to appreciate how your proposals to modify "Choice and risk assessment in the sandbox" benefits the whole of the playerbase, rather than just a small subset

Never mind, it is hilarious to exchange this bovine excrement with you, but, as in the other thread, it is once more going around in a circle, I'll excuse myself and chuckle rather than type further. Have hope, lockdown will be over soon and boredom won't be such an issue for many. (I'm ok, I gave up work as soon as I could afford not to )

 

[leeG]

Again, the three modes of play operate on the same game server and each player influences the game equally. The only difference is instancing, whether you are alone (solo) or can encounter other players (PG and open). Any improvements in game play features thus automatically apply to all players. Nothing suggested so far changes that or requires altering or elimination of any of the game modes. All modes are equal by design.

 

[Ganogati]

In which case I doubt it would be implemented - as Frontier have stated that the only feature that they would consider applying a mode related bonus to is Powerplay.

That's unfortunate. In that case, I suspect we won't ever really see a difference in the current status quo of Open vs Solo/PG when it comes to player distribution. I suppose if FDev is happy with how things currently are then who are we to argue, but it's definitely a bit surprising and, moreso, disappointing.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

So based on content not here and your measly two decades of online experience. I'm at three decades so I win.

Your decision to hand waive my points and assume I'm close minded puts you on the people not worth talking to list. Have a nice day with your presuppositions.



That all sounds awesome, but as an addition to all game modes with the system police responding to Player and NPC agression alike.




Invisible walls is terminology for incompatible game states. That's cross platform, cross latency and also cross interaction desire.

All the cool stuff you want can be added. You still haven't made a case for why someone's desire to never see another human player should be denied when we have the tool to enable it.



They do count for something, just not for player interactions. I'm in favor of your expansions to NPC capabilities and more weight in the BGS and Powerplay.



I can support this too, but it's got nothing to do with removing solo and group game modes.



This is where you seem to be misunderstanding me. You claim that those are lazy design. I see them as an efficient way to solve the problem of allowing players to control their online experience while opening the games content equally to everyone.

You are making a value judgement. One I suspect you feel so deeply that you haven't asked why you feel that way, it appears to strike you as axiomatically true.

I disagree with you about that and I'm trying to get you to support your position.

The things you want to add to the game all sound awesome to me. However none of them need us to remove solo mode.

The fact is some people don't want to play with other people and if you want to force them to you need to justify that.

So far, I see no justification. I do hope we get the powerplay and Thargoid enhancements.

Ideally, if the game is designed well enough, solo/pg won't necessarily need removed but just become superfluous because the game addresses the issues sufficiently, with things like I've suggested and/or more.

And yeah there's more invisible walls besides just the modes. Id love to see the ones that aren't reality based removed. Like crossplatform enabled and dedicated servers introduced to resolve instancing. Can't help timezones or schedules. But the less walls the better imo.

I don't want to force anyone to play with others. I want the game to provide that experience in the context of the elite dangerous galaxy, rather than mode switches. Make your gameplay styles come with pros and cons. Pirates should have to weigh the cost/benefits of where they do business just as much as traders for example, like how someone who wants to be space hermit should have pros and cons to the person who wants buddies around all the time.

The game shouldnt simultaneously tell you that you aren't special and not the hero etc then also contradictively make it so you can control your own level of opposition or what inconveniences you face.

If we're not special then the game needs to be unapologetic about that design choice.

The primary value judgement I'm passing is consistency. We either are special or we aren't. The game either has an imminent alien threat or it doesnt. Bgs states affect gameplay or they don't. Curently everything is kinda sorta, a blend of halfism and in betweens. I mean shoot, if they fdev said, "screw it were making this a also single player experience" then fine. Let's bust the boot off the tires and make it an awesome version of that, open her up and let ride. Or the opposite. Elite needs to pick something and be that, unapologetically. Because all it does now is be half baked.

 

[Stelar 7]

I agree we are nobodies in the game, and that's why the premise that it's some personal tragedy if you're inconvenienced by another player able to shoot you should be totally and wholly irrelevant to the games design.....

Wow!

Right there, you just advocated for two levels of value for players, actual humans. Those like you whose desires should be addressed, and people not like you whose values should be ignored.

That is some next level entitlement. It's very bad.

This kind of blatant disregard for other people's identity and values is what leads to most of our real world conflict. It literally kills people.

 

[Leper Messiah]

Well my suggestion on consequences regard go well beyound simple monetary points. They would of course involve hefty financial losses, restricted docking rights, having NPC actively hunt you, put also some incentives for player bounty hunters, possible loss of engineered modules and so on. You would need to be very gud and lucky to do certain acts in policed systems. Especially high sec.

I've been suggestion this sort of thing for years, I find it ludicrous that a PvP seal clubber/ganker can waltz into high sec areas.... Imagine if one day Black Beard tried to sail up the Thames to buy some supplies?!!! That's what Elite allows.

 

[Stelar 7]

@Cheesehelmet

"The game shouldnt simultaneously tell you that you aren't special and not the hero etc then also contradictively make it so you can control your own level of opposition or what inconveniences you face."

Why? Why should the ingame decision that we are average people in space affect the out of game decision that players are allowed to select their experience and that the game should cater to players broadly?

 

[Ganogati]

I agree we are nobodies in the game, and that's why the premise that it's some personal tragedy if you're inconvenienced by another player able to shoot you should be totally and wholly irrelevant to the games design.

On an individual scale this may be true, but on a larger scale it would make enough people feel the exact same way that it becomes statistically relevant. If it wasn't, there wouldn't be posts or concerns about a handful of people playing in Solo. But obviously enough people are playing in solo that them being inconvenienced by others able to shoot them is starting to affect many people, not just them.

A single person being inconvenienced isn't worth changing game designs for. A large number of people being inconvenienced, and thus reacting in a way that further inconveniences more people, is worth it.

The alternative is to take away their hiding place to hope they go into Open, but then they'd probably just quit and folks would be no better off than they are now. In fact, from a cash shop and paid expansion standpoint, FDev would be objectively worse off.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

All wonderful proposals, though none if which seems actually a novelty. But no word about Open Only anymore, how comes? Did you never asked for - or where is the missing link that could explain why all this would require Open only?

The point of the proposals is that they aren't really novel, just expansion of what we have.

Id obviously prefer open only, but I think the best way to get to that desired end state should be to improve the game so that it address all player needs in the context of the elite galaxy, adequately enough that solo/pg are just superfluous.
So that's the point of my suggestion.

 

[Mohrgan]

I think the solution here is to simply let people play as they like. Just as FD invite us to. Fussing over who is filling PvE buckets in which ever mode is plain old silly.

I also think FD should introduce PvP vouchers. Everytime you enter a PvP fight, and complete it, the winner gets 3 vouchers and the loser gets 1. You get to turn these in for BGS and/or PP influence, on top of filling buckets. PvP becomes integrated and no one is forced to engage. Win - Win.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

@Cheesehelmet

"The game shouldnt simultaneously tell you that you aren't special and not the hero etc then also contradictively make it so you can control your own level of opposition or what inconveniences you face."

Why? Why should the ingame decision that we are average people in space affect the out of game decision that players are allowed to select their experience and that the game should cater to players broadly?

Maybe I worded it badly. It's a have your cake and eat it too concept I have the issue with. So yeah select your own experience, but through the lense of the game as it's presented. So places woukd present different experiences and you choose your own experience through that method. Want safety then high sec should be designed to offer that, and med and low sec at appropriately lower degrees. But it's up to you to provide yourself that experience through decisions. So if you don't want to be attacked by goids you avoid those places because they're hostile by default and will actively go for you, even if it's just a hyperdiction on your initial arrival. In other words the game functions regardless of you, and you must navigate through that. Rather than currently where you are just to the side of everything and must divert into it.

 

[Tar-Palantir]

Thanks for reading my rant, don’t slap the good side of my face with replies

It's not where I thought you were going with this, based on the title. I agree with your title.

Discussion of the game modes has never changed since launch. It is always the same viewpoints. Nothing has materially changed in game. Nothing will. The modes are what they are, and IMO everyone might as well play whatever mode they prefer and get over it. If FDev were going to make any real changes regarding this topic, they would have done so years ago.

That is not to say you don't have a right to discuss it. You do! The above is just my opinion in response.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Ideally, if the game is designed well enough, solo/pg won't necessarily need removed but just become superfluous because the game addresses the issues sufficiently, with things like I've suggested and/or more.

What is sufficiently? Lets think PvP content for some PvE player as kind of spam from that famous Monty Python show. Say our player does not want spam at all in his meal. Is little bit spam in ice cream just sufficiently spamless?