Can't be done. On consoles it's at platform level.
META DISCUSSION half contributions from solo players
- Thread starter David Findley
- Start date
- Status
ok, maybe halving solo contribution is not right.
how about doubling it when accomplished in open.
and encouraging ganking.
to create a tense and dramatic atmosphere.
if you can't or won't play with other people (even if they want to kill you) then don't participate in community goals...
how about doubling it when accomplished in open.
and encouraging ganking.
to create a tense and dramatic atmosphere.
if you can't or won't play with other people (even if they want to kill you) then don't participate in community goals...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It amounts to the same thing - a bonus for one mode is a penalty for the others.
It doesn't seem that they need to be encouraged.
Not all players want to play the ganker mini-game though - so the game modes and block feature come in to play at that point, because each player's choice of who to play among precedes and may over-ride the desire of other players to play with them.
.... or a sense of ennui and predictability as to the outcome of an encounter where the attacker is optimised for combat and faces little to no risk in an encounter with a ship optimised for a different role.
Frontier were very clear, way back in 2015, regarding who can participate in community goals:
From the elitedangerous.com website:Its always good to hear of future developments and so thanks for the update etc but I'm wondering if this might be a first step in allowing player groups to do this sort of thing alone? Whilst I'm happy to play co-op I'm not sure what I think about having the entire playerbase rally behind one particular goal on an on going basis.
I need to think about this some more. Have I missed something? Sorry to be a stick in the mud.
Player in single, groups and open play can contribute to community goals.
Michael
All players make up the community, not just those who prefer PvP and play in Open.https://elitedangerous.com/seasons/elite-dangerous/ said:
Last edited:
Or you could accept that the game provides the ganky fun that you like and a quieter game for those who prefer it. We could all enjoy the gameplay we like and work on the goal together. Like in a community.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That seems to be the crux of the issue - some players revel in the fact that they can "play their own way", when it comes to attacking other players as and when they feel like it but don't accept that those other players get to "play their own way" too, without the players who want to shoot at them.
So I read thru this thread... Nothing new... I vote lock em all and link all previously locked threads like these. May require a spread sheet, and copy, paste.
Yeah it's pretty odd that people assume there's only one way to play a game and everyone should conform to how they play it.
And this particular game has so many different ways to play it, FDev expect people to play it how they want and created those options to cater to everyone.
It's also funny how people assume that others have or even want to bother with the same skill level as combat as them, when combat is something that you're freely allowed to avoid in this game.
I'm sure there are people that have infact avoided combat entirely, and I'm definitely sure there are plenty of people that get torn up by NPCs and NPCs are indeed a threat to them.
Some people are good at certain things, some people aren't.
The most important thing is that some people want to be good at certain things and some people don't, and there are many people that for whatever reason, be it role play or their own personal view on the game, that they simply don't want to be a 'combat pro' and don't need to get that justification from this particular game to feel good.
Because everyone can play this game how they desire and that's why they play it.
And this particular game has so many different ways to play it, FDev expect people to play it how they want and created those options to cater to everyone.
It's also funny how people assume that others have or even want to bother with the same skill level as combat as them, when combat is something that you're freely allowed to avoid in this game.
I'm sure there are people that have infact avoided combat entirely, and I'm definitely sure there are plenty of people that get torn up by NPCs and NPCs are indeed a threat to them.
Some people are good at certain things, some people aren't.
The most important thing is that some people want to be good at certain things and some people don't, and there are many people that for whatever reason, be it role play or their own personal view on the game, that they simply don't want to be a 'combat pro' and don't need to get that justification from this particular game to feel good.
Because everyone can play this game how they desire and that's why they play it.
Their right.
It is clearly unfair, but their right, if they want they even can add multiplier for contributions in solo "beacuse npc can kill us".
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
"Unfair" in what way, in a game where affecting the galaxy is something that every player does and where itsi-PvP is an optional extra that is not required for any game feature (except CQC)?
Idea, where we can contribute in CG's (all, but ESPECIALLY in competitve, like war between 2 powers), PP and BGS from safe haven, when nobody can stop us, and other side can only overgrind us is just stupid and unfair. Frontier's statement change...welp, nothing.
Just stop threat it as "I wanna blast unarmed vessels cause I'm ganker"- no, I'm not. 100% of my pvp experience is from CQC and few war CGs. Why we, as community can be only knights on white horses and contribute materials for galactic mafia to construct new starports? Why can't we interefere with it? Why people from safe solo, when they can use 800t tradecutter should have equally contribution, like people in open, where they must waste part of cargo for shields, maybe reinforcement, part of their jump for armour? It is weird in assumptions.
I said it few times, repeating it, as I see is pointless
Enjoy your "community" goals. I will see great, flourishing system with dozens of real people and 0 gankers. Yes, since start of this CG I saw 0 gankers in Harma.
It will be fair. When, and only if frontier will improve npc, and change it in REAL threat, no "I must use minimal shields, and they still can kill me, if I will afk for few minutes". This isn't space truck simulator.
PS: This is still fascinating- why in trade CG systems, where we have traffic like 10-20k ships daily noone criminal organisation make real attack. Such opportunity for pirates!
Just stop threat it as "I wanna blast unarmed vessels cause I'm ganker"- no, I'm not. 100% of my pvp experience is from CQC and few war CGs. Why we, as community can be only knights on white horses and contribute materials for galactic mafia to construct new starports? Why can't we interefere with it? Why people from safe solo, when they can use 800t tradecutter should have equally contribution, like people in open, where they must waste part of cargo for shields, maybe reinforcement, part of their jump for armour? It is weird in assumptions.
I said it few times, repeating it, as I see is pointless
Enjoy your "community" goals. I will see great, flourishing system with dozens of real people and 0 gankers. Yes, since start of this CG I saw 0 gankers in Harma.
It will be fair. When, and only if frontier will improve npc, and change it in REAL threat, no "I must use minimal shields, and they still can kill me, if I will afk for few minutes". This isn't space truck simulator.
PS: This is still fascinating- why in trade CG systems, where we have traffic like 10-20k ships daily noone criminal organisation make real attack. Such opportunity for pirates!
Last edited:
Oh it's an open only thread. Haven't seen one of these in a while. Anything new? 
<sigh>
Mods, please lock this troll thead.
@OP:
forums.frontier.co.uk
forums.frontier.co.uk
forums.frontier.co.uk
forums.frontier.co.uk
Mods, please lock this troll thead.
@OP:
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...
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...
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...
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...
How dare you bring common sense into this dumpster fire.
stormyuk
Volunteer Moderator
That's exactly how it works on PlayStation.
On PS it just blocks chat, you will still instance with them, you can even multicrew with blocked players.
If true this is a major revelation. Is there any source? (I'm pretty sure it contradicts the recent patch notes referring to "fixing an edge case"). Can anyone on those platforms confirm?
stormyuk
Volunteer Moderator
We tested it extensively at launch. Blocked players will still instance.
Recently I tried to block a player from joining my multicrew as his connection was terrible. Despite being blocked on PSN he could still join my multicrew.
So I am guessing instancing will be the same in open.
I've not seen the edge case thing. Can you show me? Was it PlayStation or PC related?
Edit: I think all the block does in ED PS is just set the PSN block which is just blocking chat, and invites via PSN. It probably has and never will affect instancing.
Last edited:
It's here: see under "Network". This is for "all platforms". It clearly states that being placed in the same instance as a player you have blocked is an "edge case" which has been fixed.
Patch Notes - September Update - Downtime and Patch Notes
Greetings Commanders, The Elite Dangerous servers will be offline for all platforms on 18 September at 8:00 AM (UTC) for approximately 9 hours as we apply the September Update. There is a chance that this could run over, so we really appreciate your patience. Update: Due to our internal...
Last edited:
Fly in solo to dock.
Switch to open. Turn in good.
Switch to Solo. Get more goods.
Repeat.
Better?
I think we have enough log fest material without the need for more reasons to menu log. Engineering mats grind and guardian sites being the worst offenders.
- Status