Make Elite an MMO again !!

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

Assigning the desire not to be interfered with or inconvenienced by PvPers and gankers/PKers the labels of fear or cowardice almost always comes off as a weak, or perhaps even desperate, attempt at shaming people into playing the part of victim for PvPers and gankers/PKers. It tends to put people off ones other arguments even when there may be some meat worth chewing on in them. Few people are scared of PvPers, we are annoyed by them and uninterested in their gameplay.

I am against any weighting at all at this point. I used be fine with considering a certain amount of weighting for PP, but that quickly went away when many of the people arguing for that, kept going with "recommending" open only, neutering block, and other measures designed to force other people to play with them the way they want to play. Never even understanding that most of those players would just leave the game in short order, or outright avoid places like CG, Deciat, or ShinDez and the like, and they would be there alone in open with fewer and fewer victims anyway.

Block is the bane of the PvP player, the fact that it exists at all in it's current form should indicate just how optional Fdev considers it.

So you make a supposition about people's motivations for not being in open (as well as the motivations of people presenting another plausible possibility).

Block, if it interferes with free instancing, is the bane of people wanting free instancing in open. This is the sort of myth I'd like to see vanish from the forums.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Block, if it interferes with free instancing, is the bane of people wanting free instancing in open. This is the sort of myth I'd like to see vanish from the forums.

The friends list and being winged also affect instancing.

Open is already a compromise mode - I don't expect that many players get exactly what they want from it.

 

[Vedmo]

Plus phantoms of open as a griefer paradise being dispelled.

I do agree with that, by the way. I have a few k hours into this game, I'm guessing half or more in open, and I've been attacked/interdicted by other players at most 10 times. To be fair, that number would probably be a lot higher if I didn't preemptively avoid some situations with solo mode.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

Indeed - players who prefer to engage in PvP in features that don't require players to engage in PvP are quite interested in what players in Solo and Private Groups are doing to "their" features (forgetting that the features are pan-modal by design).

Open facilitates griefers - and griefers can't get to players who choose not to play with them. Each player's perception of Open is their own, based on their experiences.

Okay, maybe you don't then after all. Those opponents in PG/solo are, well, opposing you, and could even be botting/AFKing (and coincidentally, you can impact that opposition via PvP, particularly in powerplay). Hence the interest, simple as that. If one had no interest in one's opponents' activities, it wouldn't speak of an exciting meta-game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Those opponents in PG/solo are, well, opposing you, and could even be botting/AFKing (and coincidentally, you can impact that opposition via PvP, particularly in powerplay).

They could indeed be opposing the players in Open - the features in question are designed to be affected by all players, they belong to those in Open no more or less than those who choose not to play in Open.

That some players want to engage other participants in PvP as part of feature engagement is obvious - however both sides need to want to engage in it as PvP remains optional in this game.

Accusations of botting are quite often made - and any confirmed cases should be reported. Botting is a plague on the game.

Hence the interest, simple as that. If one had no interest in one's opponents' activities, it wouldn't speak of an exciting meta-game.

Indeed.

 

[Rat Catcher]

It's not just rebuy or inconvenience, it's something more emotional.

Is boredom emotional?
This horse has been flogged so many times...

I understand this may damage you emotionally, but am sure you are mature enough to cope with the stress... There are people who do not wish to play with you, or any others, regardless of how you might feel that they should...

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

They could indeed be opposing the players in Open - the features in question are designed to be affected by all players, they belong to those in Open no more or less than those who choose not to play in Open.

That some players want to engage other participants in PvP as part of feature engagement is obvious - however both sides need to want to engage in it as PvP remains optional in this game.

Accusations of botting are quite often made - and any confirmed cases should be reported. Botting is a plague on the game.

Indeed.

All true but I've seen more complaints about powerplay being boring because everyone is in solo/PG than those complaining about being attacked while doing powerplay, FWIW. Anyway, it's all up to FDev.

I have no expectation of ever finding anyone botting as things stand - they are all likely in PG. Again, it's in FDev's court.

 

[Chrystoph]

Nor to complain about a buff for people who like PvP and playing in open

This, at least, is honest, "I want Frontier to discriminate in my favor."

The problem with your... position is that you want preferential treatment. Since your argument is founded in unequal circumstance across the whole of the player base, it won't happen.

(note that both inequity and discrimination are listed as synonyms)

 

[khalismur]

This, at least, is honest, "I want Frontier to discriminate in my favor."

The problem with your... position is that you want preferential treatment. Since your argument is founded in unequal circumstance across the whole of the player base, it won't happen.

(note that both inequity and discrimination are listed as synonyms)

Well done quoting a random statement and isolating it from the lengthy "discussion" that took place over the previous 10 pages that gave it context! Well played

 

[Chrystoph]

Well done quoting a random statement and isolating it from the lengthy "discussion" that took place over the previous 10 pages that gave it context! Well played

Except that I didn't isolate your Position from the previous 10 pages, only that specific post. I merely used a very succinct summary provided by you.

What you want is to have Frontier give you an advantage over your fellow players. You specifically said so in the quote. "... a buff for people who like PvP and playing in open." Since I am neither of those, you are explicitly asking for Frontier to grant you something I won't get.

Do you need a definition of the word discriminate?

 

[khalismur]

What you want is to have Frontier give you an advantage over your fellow players.

It's not as much as an advantage, but rather fixing a bug that players who enter a game mode with zero risk can have a much influence into BGS as players who venture into wild territory.

If you actually read this thread you'll see me and others advocate for a revamp of bounty system, as to somehow better deal with random gankers, but also to increase INF gain to players who are actually in Open. In my opinion, specially Conflict Zones and "war" state should be highly influenced by players in Open vs players in Solo/PG. High risk, high rewards. The game has "Dangerous" in its name, FYI.

But please, by all means, define me the word "discriminate".

 

[TiberiusDuval]

It's not as much as an advantage, but rather fixing a bug that players who enter a game mode with zero risk can have a much influence into BGS as players who venture into wild territory.

If you actually read this thread you'll see me and others advocate for a revamp of bounty system, as to somehow better deal with random gankers, but also to increase INF gain to players who are actually in Open. In my opinion, specially Conflict Zones and "war" state should be highly influenced by players in Open vs players in Solo/PG. High risk, high rewards. The game has "Dangerous" in it's name, FYI.

But please, by all means, define me the word "discriminate".

Zero risk, for example for newbie NPC's offer quite much else than zero risk.

 

[Rat Catcher]

It's not as much as an advantage, but rather fixing a bug that players who enter a game mode with zero risk can have a much influence into BGS as players who venture into wild territory.

The 'bug'?

My oh my, that's terrible that a part of the game that was designed in from the very beginning could possibly be a bug...

Methinks a nerve was touched when 'Preferential Treatment' was mentioned...

 

[Zieman]

Damn, this troll thread is still going?

Here's something to check out before posting stupid ideas like OP's again:

Modes - The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread [See new thread]

There have been several threads on the topic of switching between solo/private groups/open. This thread is going to be the merge target for all other threads on the topic, no matter how 'unique' the thread creator may think their thread is. Creating a poll is not unique. Posting in here has...

forums.frontier.co.uk

Modes - The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].

Elite Dangerous is an online game that allows players to play in three potential 'modes': Online ALL group (called open play) where the player is in the same universe as all other players and can see and be seen by all others in open play Online PRIVATE GROUP play where the player is online in...

forums.frontier.co.uk

Modes - The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

Elite Dangerous is an online game that allows players to play in three potential 'modes': Online ALL group (called open play) where the player is in the same universe as all other players and can see and be seen by all others in open play Online PRIVATE GROUP play where the player is online in...

forums.frontier.co.uk

Modes - The Open v Solo v Groups thread IV - Hotel California

Elite Dangerous is an online game that allows players to play in three potential 'modes': Online ALL group (called open play) where the player is in the same universe as all other players and can see and be seen by all others in open play Online PRIVATE GROUP play where the player is online in...

forums.frontier.co.uk

 

[Achtung-Goomba]

I’ve had a couple of thoughts on this while I’ve been working and following this thread through the day, and one of which I feel hasn’t quite been addressed yet; I know ‘immersion’ can be a bit of a dirty word sometimes depending on how you see it, but what would your in-game, in-universe rationale be for giving out different rewards in either credits/influence/whatever for the exact same action performed at the exact same location assuming all other variables such as interdictions and the non-encounter of other players are exactly the same, except one time I do it in Solo and another I do it in Open?
“Welcome back CMDR, thanks for selling us the exact same tonnage of [insert commodity] for the same profit as last time. I see that you’ve disabled your Pilots’ Federation universal cloaking shield so this time we’ve been authorised to pay double the price for [commodity] because you’ve been such a big brave boy! What’s more, even though the actual profit on your transaction was equal (excepting your big brave boy bonus) our economic status has also increased more because... well, we don’t know why, it just did.”
I just can’t rationalise it without completely ignoring the in-game logic and basically hand-waving it aside, which is fine for some but a crippling reminder for me that I’m not really a space cowboy, and I’m just playing a silly game...

On a more positive note this time, proposals for Open-weighting/Open-only would attract more support from players like myself, typically vocally opposed to such moves, if they started not with a bribe, but by making positive interactions easier. How many people pay attention to the chat box? How many use it? Especially if you’re on console like me and the other peasants, it’s a bit of a nightmare and I can understand that it’s much quicker and easier to deploy hardpoints and blast away. Start from there, and I’d be much more receptive.

 

[Chrystoph]

It's not as much as an advantage, but rather fixing a bug that players who enter a game mode with zero risk can have a much influence into BGS as players who venture into wild territory.

If you actually read this thread you'll see me and others advocate for a revamp of bounty system, as to somehow better deal with random gankers, but also to increase INF gain to players who are actually in Open. In my opinion, specially Conflict Zones and "war" state should be highly influenced by players in Open vs players in Solo/PG. High risk, high rewards. The game has "Dangerous" in its name, FYI.

But please, by all means, define me the word "discriminate".

Ah, one of those players that think the BGS is its own game instead of something that everyone that is not just flying in circles influences, got it. Sorry, I missed that part.

Literally everything that happens in the game in the Bubble is part of the Background Simulation. It is the set of rules by which everything occurs, not the game of RISK you wish it were.

For what it is worth, I am glad that you have found something that interests you, but the drivel about "playing the BGS" is exactly that, drivel. Your reward for that is the enjoyment that comes from succeeding at your self assigned objective. Anything else you claim is facetious. You have only reinforced the position that you want preferential treatment with this piece of information.

 

[Starshot_Jigawatts]

Well done quoting a random statement and isolating it from the lengthy "discussion" that took place over the previous 10 pages that gave it context! Well played

13 pages of nobody liking this idea.

Learn to read the room.

 

[Rat Catcher]

13 pages of nobody liking this idea.

Learn to read the room.

What have I told you about sensible comments?
Back on the naughty step with you, pal!

 

[khalismur]

13 pages of nobody liking this idea.

Another one who didn't bother to read I see. The majority of people seem to prefer playing alone, who figures. But there were also some supporters of the suggestion to fix this issue.

Ah, one of those players that think the BGS is its own game instead of something that everyone that is not just flying in circles influences, got it. Sorry, I missed that part.

On the complete opposite. I think BGS is everyone's game and thus should be weighted more heavily by actions taken in Open.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Perhaps, instead of asking for every possible benefit the game might bestow up us being increased because of the 'risk' of flying in open, which everyone knows is zero in 99.99999999% of the galaxy (although I'd be quite happy to have that corrected if you can be bothered with dividing 400 billion by the number of 'risky' systems) might it not be better to suggest that said benefits be reduced by at least 50% because of 1 third of the modes are acting upon the hard-working players in the other 2 thirds?