Where do I have to sign for that? 
Of course the answer is YES please! More booty to rob and more enemies to kill!
Of course the answer is YES please! More booty to rob and more enemies to kill!
General Remove private Lobby and single Player
- Thread starter Black White
- Start date
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
We all signed up to a tri-modal game with a shared galaxy when we bought it - even though it is obvious that some can't accept that others don't need to play with them to affect the galaxy that we all share.Where do I have to sign for that?
And unfortunately, unless the human predilection to seek and exploit advantages and to hunt the weak stops, this will likely stay this way. In PvP-focused environments, you don't seek fair fights. You seek fights you can guarantee to win. It's part of our survival instincts. And that is why CQC is a failure.
This predilection is why open worlds with a PvP focus and absolutely no safe areas (in essence, that is true for ED in open) are bound to fail because it culls those that cannot keep up with the relative power of the mainstream. And as more and more players leave, the bar is raised until there's no one to hunt anymore.
Congrats, gankers and griefers, this is on you and you alone.
Last edited:
Basically these "open only" discussion happen due to frustration. It is not that one does not have PvP in this game...but it distills to few basic scenarios. 1. Against other PVP'ers. Certain subgroup does not like that, because it does take skill and luck, and targets actually fight back, and may even trash opponent. 2. Experienced PVE'rs choosing to play in open. That gets frustrating too, as many ships can take some punishment and still high wake away. 3. Noobs who didn't understand mode selection and what open means. Nice juicy targets, but they eventually a. Leave the game. b. Realise what mode selection means, and leave open. c. Git Gud, sending them to category 1 or 2.
Now certain subgroup of PVP'ers do get frustrated, where are those nice targets one can troll all the day? They must lurk in solo or PG, solution remove those (and remove block feature...). Well very nice, they seem to forget that doing would lead more people leaving the game for good.
Now certain subgroup of PVP'ers do get frustrated, where are those nice targets one can troll all the day? They must lurk in solo or PG, solution remove those (and remove block feature...). Well very nice, they seem to forget that doing would lead more people leaving the game for good.
It's really a no-brainer to put CZs on top of Installations or on the surface of planets. Strange they've never done it before.
But where are easy targets then? Like explorer, badly shielded trader, some noob trying to visit first engineer? Other people in Arena are mean types with nasty looking guns on their killer ships, thats not proper ga...ah PVP.
Honestly, I don't think anyone on the dev team actually plays the game...there are a lot of no-brainer things they just don't do. Makes zero sense.
The only PvP I care to watch is RM and RN duking it out in these threads, I could follow along quite comfortably until those two got a bee in their respective bonnets
To be honest, I’d probably be supremely happy if ED was entirely Solo with shared BGS, but I’m often an antisocial type. The modes let me be social and cooperative with fellow squadron members, or a sheep amongst the wolves in Open when I choose to. And all in all I’m pretty happy with that.
Unfortunately if no one defends the design decisions FDev made in consultation with the community that backed them. FDev could very well think that some of the short sighted ideas presented here, are what is needed to progress the development of their game.
And before you know it, we could end up with the instantaneous transfer of a players stored ship, without any consideration for its impact upon base game mechanics. And I'm not sure that particular example was even asked for... well, at least not until after it was announced.
I for one appreciate Mr M's calm and respectful reiteration of verifiable facts. Even if they are repeatedly ignored.
Few people in here lobbing for removing Solo and PG won't achieve nothing. I'm not even worrying about Fdev removing Solo or PG mode because they can't and it is not their liking or disliking this idea why they can't. This decision would have to be made by Frontier managers and owners. Removing Solo and PG from ED would follow by large amount of players and supporters leaving this game, frankly there are people who play and buy this game just because of Solo and PG mode. I can't imagine Frontier making a decision that would create the biggest drop in all sorts of numbers in Frontiers history just to satisfy few players.
As much as I would love to see ED be a single, multiplayer game mode, this is the truth of it.
Saw it happen in Naval Action. Most folks trolled around the noob areas looking for baby seals to club, and then ran like cockroaches when an actual battle group sailed out to meet them.
Basically devolved from an open-world MMO to a gankfest among a handful of large, hardcore pvp groups. Seal clubbing and retribution ganks were the order of the day, and the devs only listened to the overly vocal minority and it killed a beautiful game.
Unfortunately, without significant consequences for PvP ship destruction and security forces that have actual teeth, open-only is just a pipe dream.
Many, many times in many different ways......there really hasn't been anything new said in most of these threads for a long time!
I dunno, they've helped me evolve my standpoint on pvp leagues. Rubber and my discussion a few pages back was pretty constructive.
Only slightly tongue in cheek.
No one who suggests the removal of solo or PG can be taken seriously - it's absolutely core design.
The frustration comes from the apparent resistance to any sort of PP overhaul. If we take the PvP arguement away and concentrate on gameplay irrespective of mode I can't see how anyone can argue it's working as intended - especially if you look at the launch material and it's planned implementation.
At it's most meta level, the most sensible suggestions are for some sort of PvP framework for some part of PP.
I don't see how that is so bad, except if you're against change for any reason.
No one who suggests the removal of solo or PG can be taken seriously - it's absolutely core design.
The frustration comes from the apparent resistance to any sort of PP overhaul. If we take the PvP arguement away and concentrate on gameplay irrespective of mode I can't see how anyone can argue it's working as intended - especially if you look at the launch material and it's planned implementation.
At it's most meta level, the most sensible suggestions are for some sort of PvP framework for some part of PP.
I don't see how that is so bad, except if you're against change for any reason.
![[VR] Bulbulunufus](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/261/261245.jpg?1671230473){kind=avatar}
This really. It doesn't take 23 pages to chuckle and move on. But it's a great opportunity to dogpile someone who must surely be a dirty griefer, air your prejudices and pay forward your bad experiences fittingly to them. Not to mention revive the ever-missed discussion of OOPP
.
I agree with this.
My only concern with an Open-only PP component is the "slippery slope" thing, and the fact that some support on the OOPP side is from people who really want that. Your right though, FD aren't going to roll back a core game design, and I agree they should seriously consider RN's PP ideas.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If the demands for PvP-gating are to be ignored, there's little resistance to improving Powerplay.
What is sensible, or not, remains a matter of opinion - and many of the proposals seeking to inject PvP into Powerplay seem to want it to dominate the feature to the detriment of those who don't enjoy PvP in a game where PvP is an optional extra in all but one (out-of-game) feature.