PvP/Open-Only CGs?

[Phoenix13]

Can we get CGs that are more player- interactive based and must be done in Open-Only? Obviously these would be in ADDITION to other weekly CGs and NOT replacing them.

Currently yes, we have the option to do then in Open, but since there is the option, it is much more efficient to do them in Solo so most people just do it in there, and many players that look for pvp (without being a seal-clubbing jerk) just avoid cg's due to most people doing them in Solo or PG.

An Open Only CG would give meaningful player interaction and combat, something ED has always desperately missed, and should be easy to implement.

 

[GraphiteGB]

It would have to be non-exclusive CG event..

Due to their net code and server lag screw ups, they need Solo and private group events to equal the same p2p hosted events...

Also due to the P2P based system fdev force on users those who get selected as host in low player activity time zones would have a default lack of players to interact with any way. This is why CGs are allready aimed at Private groups and solo runs As they don't require fix play in active high player time zones...

The host that gets selected for an instance with only 3 players is smegged....
This smegs over players who get this low activity instance it happens in FPS were you wait for ages for players to join the last P2P hosted lobby...

The games not good enough To run stable instances... thats the reason many move to PG and solo as they can controll the user base and numbers of players in the instances...

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Frontier did try running open-only story events many years ago. As GraphiteGB says, the networking issues meant that they just didn't work on that scale ... a few people had fun, the rest were just desperately trying to find the right instance.

That said, you'd probably have more fun organising your own anyway:
- you only need 50 or so people online at once to make a system get pretty busy
- you can just outright ban cheap tactics like entire wings fitted with healing beams, parking carriers right next to the station so you've got about a second to try to interdict, etc.
- you can also introduce further restrictions - e.g. T-9s and Vipers only - to make the event more interesting and keep it fresh week-to-week
- you can set up far more interesting scenarios than "deliver cargo to this station"

 

[Rubbernuke]

It would have to be non-exclusive CG event..

Due to their net code and server lag screw ups, they need Solo and private group events to equal the same p2p hosted events...

Also due to the P2P based system fdev force on users those who get selected as host in low player activity time zones would have a default lack of players to interact with any way. This is why CGs are allready aimed at Private groups and solo runs As they don't require fix play in active high player time zones...

The host that gets selected for an instance with only 3 players is smegged....
This smegs over players who get this low activity instance it happens in FPS were you wait for ages for players to join the last P2P hosted lobby...

The games not good enough To run stable instances... thats the reason many move to PG and solo as they can controll the user base and numbers of players in the instances...

In reality Powerplay in Open is what you want OP, all it lacks is the rewards.

 

[ethelred]

Paging @Robert Maynard

Srsly though as others have said the coding doesn't really support it.

And - why not just do the CG in open anyway?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Paging @Robert Maynard

Srsly though as others have said the coding doesn't really support it.

And - why not just do the CG in open anyway?

It depends on what that CG is for too. The only Open Only CG I know of was the Titian card one, and that was a treasure hunt which had you hunting about following clues and if you came across someone you could nick the cargo.

The other unofficial one was Drew Wagars Salome event which was a 'run the gauntlet' of DMed player NPCs and the galaxy either helping or killing them.

P2P will always be the weak link, but at the same time unless you take risks and experiment you'll always have the same pattern of CGs and never see anything new.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Paging @Robert Maynard

You rang?

Srsly though as others have said the coding doesn't really support it.

The coding was designed to make player interaction an option while engaging in any game feature (except CQC, of course).

And - why not just do the CG in open anyway?

That is the option that every player (who can play in the multi-player game modes that is) has - they can't force others to make the same choice though.

 

[Rubbernuke]

You rang?

The coding was designed to make player interaction an option while engaging in any game feature (except CQC, of course).

That is the option that every player (who can play in the multi-player game modes that is) has - they can't force others to make the same choice though.

Choice is fine, however it also limits what you can do.

I mean, why not have two parallel CGs, one in Open and one for Solo PG but with different scenarios? I can think of several situations that you could set up that would be far more exciting and focused.

 

[Phoenix13]

Choice is fine, however it also limits what you can do.

I mean, why not have two parallel CGs, one in Open and one for Solo PG but with different scenarios? I can think of several situations that you could set up that would be far more exciting and focused.

Or something like that.

Yes p2p sucks donkey balls, but you will still run into players, potentially working against you.

A CZ one where you have to pick sides would be great for open-only.
It's simple and would go a long way, and probably draw players in. Obviously open-only powerplay would be ideal, but that clearly isn't going to happen for some hogwash reason... the devs need to give this community something.

 

[GroG79]

Open only? Been a while since I have seen that

 

[Ettanin]

Insert obligatory console tax explanation

 

[Bigmaec]

Open only? Been a while since I have seen that

Doom threads were so hot for the last 4 weeks, open only threads tend to get forgotten by people not encountering anyone in open due to how Odyssey fractured the playerbase even more.

 

[Northpin]

Choice is fine, however it also limits what you can do.

Choice is fine.
And we should leave it like that. There is no need to add anything else since Choice has no limit. The limit would be to force things up.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Choice is fine.
And we should leave it like that. There is no need to add anything else since Choice has no limit. The limit would be to force things up.

Well, no. One size in ED does not fit all, especially for things like CGs. Anyway, if there are CGs for each mode whats the problem? Everyone gets a better experience rather than being lumped in the same one.

Take for example the latest CG- imagine that is Open Only, and each side can either deliver or claim bounties on the other side- how more interesting is that, with all the possibilities of teaming up then it is to simply have yet another deliver-em-up? So rather than mindless PacMan you get an actual struggle?

Solo and PG can also have a unique CG too, so if you want to play alone you can, just not limiting the open side. Thats true choice that actually benefits the game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Choice is fine.
And we should leave it like that. There is no need to add anything else since Choice has no limit. The limit would be to force things up.

Some want their choice of gameplay style to be made dominant in some way by removing the ability for those who make different choices to affect aspects of the game or for their choice of how to play the game to be removed if they want to engage in particular content....

 

[Rubbernuke]

Some want their choice of gameplay style to be made dominant in some way by removing the ability for those who make different choices to affect aspects of the game or for their choice of how to play the game to be removed if they want to engage in particular content....

But its not 'taking anything away' if you give each mode a CG. I can argue lumping everything together is removing choice because it makes Open level play pointless.

 

[Northpin]

Well, no. One size in ED does not fit all, especially for things like CGs. Anyway, if there are CGs for each mode whats the problem? Everyone gets a better experience rather than being lumped in the same one.

The problem is Open-Only-Anything does not offer any Choice. There is no Choice in Open-Only. The hint is Only if you really need me to point it out.


People that want to play in Open have this choice available to them at any moment.
I dont want to be forced in a single mode since i never purchased an Open-Only Elite Dangerous. Pretty much like i never purchased a Solo-Only Elite Dangerous.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But its not 'taking anything away' if you give each mode a CG. I can argue lumping everything together is removing choice because it makes Open level play pointless.

.... depends on what the CG affects.

If a hypothetical Open only CG had a permanent effect on the galaxy then it would have actively excluded a significant number fo players from participating in it, i.e. those who don't want to engage in PvP (for whatever reason) and bought a game where it's not a requirement of any game feature (except CQC).

"Lumping everything together" is how the game was designed - PvP is not a requirement of affecting the galaxy.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The problem is Open-Only-Anything does not offer any Choice. There is no Choice in Open-Only. The hint is Only if you really need me to point it out.


People that want to play in Open have this choice available to them at any moment.
I dont want to be forced in a single mode since i never purchased an Open-Only Elite Dangerous. Pretty much like i never purchased a Solo-Only Elite Dangerous.

Open is pointless because by design it has no consequences, thus its not a choice.

If you make both modes meaningful thats an actual choice worth making.

 

[Rubbernuke]

.... depends on what the CG affects.

If a hypothetical Open only CG had a permanent effect on the galaxy then it would have actively excluded a significant number fo players from participating in it, i.e. those who don't want to engage in PvP (for whatever reason) and bought a game where it's not a requirement of any game feature (except CQC).

True, but again it can be for something self contained, its just a matter of design.