A possible way to inspire people to play in Open

[Han Zulu]

Odyssey has inspired me to play in Open. Ever since it was released, I have logged into the Open world. So far, I've seen 3 other players in total. Never talked to them or interacted with them, only saw it in the contact history panel after the fact.

I just make sure I have enough to rebuy. And there's no cost to "dying" on-foot anyway either.

 

[Han Zulu]

I like dogs.
Huah, well... why don't you like cats?
I never said I don't like cats. I just said I like dogs.
Well, you should be more clear next time!

Whatawhat!!!??? You don't like goldfish!!! Shame on you! You're a bad bad person...

(Oh, I don't like goldfish either. Too small for a sandwich...)

 

[Deleted member 115407]

Whatawhat!!!??? You don't like goldfish!!! Shame on you! You're a bad bad person...

(Oh, I don't like goldfish either. Too small for a sandwich...)

On a side note, I took one of my girls in yesterday to get her nails trimmed. I live in the middle of the city, so the place I took her too was all... well, you know how city people are.

Anyways, I bought the girls some dog treats that are little dried Baltic Sprat. They love them, man. Best dog treats ever.

 

[Han Zulu]

On a side note, I took one of my girls in yesterday to get her nails trimmed. I live in the middle of the city, so the place I took her too was all... well, you know how city people are.

Anyways, I bought the girls some dog treats that are little dried Baltic Sprat. They love them, man. Best dog treats ever.

I have three, two boys and one girl. One of the boys is my daughter's, but she lives at home so the puppy basically is mine. They're the best (except when they bark like crazy, pee or poop in the wrong places, but other than that, they're good.)

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I have three, two boys and one girl. One of the boys is my daughter's, but she lives at home so the puppy basically is mine. They're the best (except when they bark like crazy, pee or poop in the wrong places, but other than that, they're good.)

Nice man. Had four until earlier this year. Lost one in January and one on the first of March.

I miss them

 

[Han Zulu]

Nice man. Had four until earlier this year. Lost one in January and one on the first of March.

I miss them

I'm so, so sorry. I know how it feels.

Yesterday, Facebook showed me a historical picture for me. It was a quick charcoal drawing I did on one my previous dogs, and it was years ago she left us, but it still hurts. I miss her so much.

 

[Comtedeloach]

It's a simple idea that could easily be implemented with the existing mechanics, as they appear to work. Since most of the people who play in solo do so to avoid pirates and gankers, the only way to lure people out of solo is to drastically reduce the risk of encountering those types. And I think you could do that by instituting a "death penalty" for anyone who attacks an unarmed ship. Basically, attack an unarmed ship and your commander is erased as if you had hit the menu option yourself. All your ships, all your money, all your ranks-- gone. Enjoy your new Sidewinder!

Here is the problem with games like this. People don't act the way they would in real life because there is no real consequences if they did. Player X will kill new players because he can, whether there is profit in it for him or not. That's not the way it happens in real life. Excepting the case of serial killers, people generally don't just go around killing others and blowing up just because they can. But ED is a game, there are no consequences, so people act differently. There are things people will say to others in chat in game they know they wouldn't say to their faces. I played a**holes ONLINE (EvE) for about 6 months, some players would go kill new players in protected zones knowing the security patrols would kill them just because they could. it didn't matter to them, there were no consequences.

I like this idea, but it would never work.

 

[Erei]

Not going to lie, the dogs discussion was a lot better than the rest of the thread if you ask me. Very wholesome and stuff.
John Wick approves.

 

[MCCART]

Not going to lie, the dogs discussion was a lot better than the rest of the thread if you ask me. Very wholesome and stuff.
John Wick approves.

I'm still not entirely sure about Vin's stance on cats though.

 

[Han Zulu]

I'm still not entirely sure about Vin's stance on cats though.

Can't speak for Vin, but for me, personally, I've experience with cats and dogs, and I love dogs more.

Grew up with cats, and we've had a few now and then over the years, but I didn't grow up with dogs. Didn't get one until much later in life, and I can say I'm 100 times more a dog lover than cat lover. Cats are okay. Cute. Soft. Independent. Don't make loud noises. Easy to care for, except when they run away and disappear (probably eaten by a coyote), but still... dogs connect with me soul-to-soul.

 

[Tividar]

It's a simple idea that could easily be implemented with the existing mechanics, as they appear to work. Since most of the people who play in solo do so to avoid pirates and gankers, the only way to lure people out of solo is to drastically reduce the risk of encountering those types. And I think you could do that by instituting a "death penalty" for anyone who attacks an unarmed ship. Basically, attack an unarmed ship and your commander is erased as if you had hit the menu option yourself. All your ships, all your money, all your ranks-- gone. Enjoy your new Sidewinder!

Problem #1
The game is rather draconian in how it applies penalties for Friendly Fire. Its ridiculous that a parking violation is a capital offence. I don't think expanding that logic to cover unintentional "Friendly Fire" incidents is likely to improve the "Open" experience for anyone involved.

Problem #2
This solution targets the behavior of people already in open to entice people who do not play in open. The problem isn't -chapeau'd griefers in open, its the lack of incentive to deal with them combined with the lack of available tools to respond.

Currently the game is balanced so that a ship's effectiveness at one career path comes at the expense of viability in another. Pilots being equal, a ship optimized for combat is going to eat miners and freighters for lunch. That leaves running away as the non-combatant's only viable response against a dedicated hostile. Its a two year old thread, but still just a true: How to avoid and escape interdictions in Open Play, a comprehensive guide

If you want to get the merchant classes into open, you've got to give them a reason to do it and tools to be effective.

• Hazzard pay could be one incentive: a stacking multiple on non-combat mission rewards and Commodity buy prices based on the number of incidents of interdictions followed by hull damage or loss of cargo via hatch breakers you've survived since you picked up the cargo/mission. Certainly this could be abused, but I don't think its abuse would be any worse than existing problems with the games economic model.
• Rationalize Mining equipment so that its useful against combatants or doesn't monopolize all your hardpoints. Subsurface Missiles and Seismic Charges should do ugly things to un-shielded ships. Mining Lasers should be an "experimental" modification on existing lasers, and asteroids should be targetable so that Turreted "mining" lasers have a viable purpose in the game (no, multicrew doesn't count). Landing a prospecting limpet on a target ship could improve the effectiveness of mining lasers vs. the target.
• Add an engineering option for non-combat modules like limpet controllers and cargo modules to increase hull resistances and shield generator integrity.

As it stands, there's very little incentive to play in open as a non-combatant, and lots of opportunity to have your desired game-loop get interrupted. No reward, lots of risk.

 

[MCCART]

Can't speak for Vin, but for me, personally, I've experience with cats and dogs, and I love dogs more.

Grew up with cats, and we've had a few now and then over the years, but I didn't grow up with dogs. Didn't get one until much later in life, and I can say I'm 100 times more a dog lover than cat lover. Cats are okay. Cute. Soft. Independent. Don't make loud noises. Easy to care for, except when they run away and disappear (probably eaten by a coyote), but still... dogs connect with me soul-to-soul.

T'was but a joke CMDR. For the record though, I like dogs and cats. At this point in my life? ...cats a little more.

 

[Han Zulu]

T'was but a joke CMDR. For the record though, I like dogs and cats. At this point in my life? ...cats a little more.

They're definitely less maintenance. Unfortunately, we have people in family with allergies. For some reason, the dogs seems to work fine, while the cats causes more allergy reactions in them.

 

[Red Rocket]

It's a simple idea that could easily be implemented with the existing mechanics, as they appear to work. Since most of the people who play in solo do so to avoid pirates and gankers, the only way to lure people out of solo is to drastically reduce the risk of encountering those types. And I think you could do that by instituting a "death penalty" for anyone who attacks an unarmed ship. Basically, attack an unarmed ship and your commander is erased as if you had hit the menu option yourself. All your ships, all your money, all your ranks-- gone. Enjoy your new Sidewinder!

That would work for me, BY BY Greifer

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I'm so, so sorry. I know how it feels.

Yesterday, Facebook showed me a historical picture for me. It was a quick charcoal drawing I did on one my previous dogs, and it was years ago she left us, but it still hurts. I miss her so much.

Thanks man. I appreciate it.

 

[Deleted member 115407]

I'm still not entirely sure about Vin's stance on cats though.

I like 'em. Had two cats growing up.
Unfortunately I'm alergic to them though, but not dogs.

 

[Morgan James]

I played a**holes ONLINE (EvE) for about 6 months, some players would go kill new players in protected zones knowing the security patrols would kill them just because they could. it didn't matter to them, there were no consequences.

Insulting the players of an alternative spaceship based video-game is obviously not a good starter.
Still, I'll clear up an evident falsehood from what you've tried to establish:

Killing newbies in starter systems in EVE Online is a big no-no.
There are consequences, in that GM's will give offenders a warning, followed up by a ban.

 

[Comtedeloach]

Insulting the players of an alternative spaceship based video-game is obviously not a good starter.
Still, I'll clear up an evident falsehood from what you've tried to establish:

Killing newbies in starter systems in EVE Online is a big no-no.
There are consequences, in that GM's will give offenders a warning, followed up by a ban.

Accurately describing their behavior is not insulting them. And no, there are no real consequences for established players killing new players in protected system. It’s possible they changed that, but I doubt it.

 

[Stanford]

If Open actually worked more people would use it.

 

[Feanor the Tall]

I think a big problem is new players come to the forums, see everyone going on about how open is a nonstop murderfest and decide to go into solo. It's mostly hyperbole. Yes if you go to see Farseer during peak hours you will likely see someone who wants to collect your scalp. But Ive been playing for years in quite active areas of the bubble with active squadrons exclusively in open and I can count on one hand the number of times I've been ganked. It's not as scary as it seems, people. Punishing people for killing other players is much more likely to drive people away from the game than being killed by another player in a game where it's expected that it might get "dangerous" ever will.