.
Last edited:
To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?
- Thread starter AMX-008 GaZowmn
- Start date
Because it's ruining muh immurshon that it's always the same people "roleplaying opposition to the CG".
It was especially annyoing in that onionhead strain / anarchy hosted CG some time ago, where the same gankers ganked. How refreshing it would've been if they would've escorted the participants for a change. Just to show how they agree with the CG. But no, of course not, instead haha ship go boom.
The PvP side could use some honesty here, they are there to blow others up.
And they oppose open PvE or modes because it will deprieve them of targets.
Nothing more, nothing less. Not all of course, but many.
Nope.
- I cannot meet someone that is not in that PG
- I cannot meet someone that does not make the deliberate effort to search the internet for a PVE oriented PG and goes through the steps of joining. Assuming they find Mobius, there is no guarantee they will end up in the same Mobius PG as i am, which leads to the next bullet...
- And not at last i cannot meet another fellow pve-er that is member of a different PG, be it Fleetcom or Mobius or anything else.
To put it bluntly, playing in a PG is like playing in a Galaxy with maximum 20k players, instead of playing a galaxy with 200k players.
As i said, a PG is no substitute for a mode with doesn't restrict the membership in any way.
.
Last edited:
Can't say I've ever encountered a pirate in game, despite kitting my Python and trade Krait with such in mind. I presume they're all in rings after miners.
Having said that the gankers I encountered are the CG campers who are rather obviously there for 'ha ha ship go boom GG' and I have no qualms blocking them.
They weren't the guys doing the Ram Tah CG or the mass buy and dump thing during Cornsar.
The same individuals have been ganking at every CG for the last 18 MTHS or so.
They have no interest in the CGs themselves and actually stated they have no idea what the CGs are for. They're just there for 'ship go boom'. Although when one did get blown up themselves a while ago we were treated to a 2 day rant including the line
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
How else does one play multi-player without playing in Open? Joining one (or more) Private Groups is a requirement, not an option, if one wants to play in multi-player without playing in Open.
It seems that retaining impediments to co-operative play outwith Open is a "nice to have" for players who don't like the fact that it's possible in the first place.
People read, and believe, system chat?
I dont chose
I'm forced to, since there is no alternative for a PVE experience (unless i employ a very big block list)
This is all about, getting a PVE experience alongside likeminded Commanders.
Which is not possible in the same way a PVP commander can get from the current Open Mode.
.
Last edited:
Yes, in reality, that is almost certainly true.
To be honest though, so what?
Its a game, and the only method of interacting with other commanders (that cant be replaced with discord / other chat program) is to shoot at them. The penalty for dying is practically non-existent, and its really easy to not die if you put a tiny bit of effort in - eg for the salvation CG i had to build a new ship. I didnt have a ship capable of being gank proof while being able to carry 80 tons of cargo and land on medium pads, so i built one (Krait Phantom, well shielded, max speed, Reverb torps and packhounds - boost away, FA off face enemy, fire full spread of missiles. Enemy can now chase you into the torps, lose their shield generator and get ... manhandled by packhounds, or they can let you go, assuming they had something that could keep up in the first place)
Last edited:
.
Last edited:
None of these are an equivalent to an Open-Pve mode nor to a Open mode that is employing a pvp-flag
Indeed, but the session type is missing Open-PVE mode (or a pvp-flag)
Which is the point of the entire discussion
But you know very well all of these and it's obvious you're being purposefully obtuse
.
Last edited:
It would have the advantage that you could then assign, say, CG systems as 'flag on, no choice' systems, and prevent people bypassing other players when doing multiplayer activities.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Which would not be an OpenPvE mode - and players would still play in Solo and Private Groups.
Proposals for exceptions to the No-PvP nature of an OpenPvE mode and / or PvP-flag are common - from those who don't really accept that players don't need to play among those who want to shoot at them to affect mode shared features.
What you are saying is:
"us PvPers can have this unlimited size group and a single click access to it, but you who want the same feature, just PvE, cannot, YOU have to jump through hoops to get to a limited size groups or play solo"
My opinion, which i know is different to yours, is that you should not be able to affect multiplayer features without being exposed to other players trying to stop you. I think it partly ruins (bit of a strong word.. but still) what could have been an amazing game.
Personally, i think Solo/PG should be 100% separate from Open, and switching from open to solo/PG should not be possible, and only decided at account creation. Either play with the open players or dont, no swapping.
I wont argue with you further, ive seen your posts and understand your attitude. Ill never agree with it.
I personally dont mind it but it gets dull after a few dozen hours and I just start offering to pay them to wing up with me. Instead because getting shaken down every time I enter the system is a bit tedious and I can streamline that process.
.
Last edited:
I take it you've never heard of wing missions.
When every single PvE threat in the game can be defeated solo, easily until you get to the harder thargoids, where is the need to group up? So its twice as easy?
If there were enemies that could not be beaten by single players, id agree.