To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?

[ethelred]

The difference is self evident - no PvP.

That might work for 20,000 players on PC - not so much for other PvE players.

Yes, that's what I am saying. Mobius is already a better solution for PvE in lieu of a very unlikely PvE Open. If PvE Open had the same population as regular open, then seeing "random" CMDRs would be low - as it is currently in Mobius.

So for a PvE player there's no difference, and crucially their desire for random PvE encounters is already catered for?

For part two, I'm afraid you have lost me - what "other PvE" players? Do you mean on console?

 

[deleteduser]

.

 

[Robert Maynard]

People have opinions... got it. :thumbs up:

Indeed - it's when they conflate opinion with fact that the problems usually arise.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes, that's what I am saying. Mobius is already a better solution for PvE in lieu of a very unlikely PvE Open. If PvE Open had the same population as regular open, then seeing "random" CMDRs would be low - as it is currently in Mobius.

So for a PvE player there's no difference, and crucially their desire for random PvE encounters is already catered for?

Taking PC as an example, there are probably somewhat in excess of 10M copies of the game in circulation, some fraction of those won't play at all any more, some will be altCMDRs that don't play concurrently with the player's main CMDR. Say, again for example, that 1M players play on a semi-regular basis, 50% of those in Open, 50% in the other two game modes. Players in Open have a chance of meeting any one of the 500k players that play in Open whereas players in a PG only have a chance of meeting those who are members and playing at the time. Using the same 10% still playing proportion and applying it to a PG, that's a limit of 2,000 possible players to meet.

For part two, I'm afraid you have lost me - what "other PvE" players? Do you mean on console?

Not all PvE players play in Mobius, i.e. other PvE PGs exist.

 

[deleteduser]

.

 

[KillaALF]

I'm not sure if you have the wrong impression of Open - you hardly see anyone most of the time.

Sure, I don't think much would change if you're just minding your own business, bumbling through the milky way as it were, but imagine all the usual hotspots where all the gankers congregate now, just without said gankers. Everyone driven off by their toxic behaviour, yet inherently socially inclined would not have to pick solo or PG. Pretty certain the picture would look a smidge different in that scenario.

That ship has long since sailed, I'm afraid. Frontier really should have taken steps when they had to increase the private group size because of Mobius. There was clearly a market there that they squandered with their hamfisted approach to MP (PVE / PVP don't mix, period!), which is especially infuriating considering the game's heritage. Hope they've learned their lesson.

Personally, if there was no open (PVE and/or PVP) at all, heck no MP at all, I would not mind one bit. I would have had just as much fun with the game.

 

[deleteduser]

.

 

[Robert Maynard]

All players who want to be part of the PG can be part of the PG. We've just seen the numbers. You posted the numbers.

Can they? Given that one of the PGs is very nearly full - and there's more than one Mobius PG.....

The existence of a membership limit means that not all players who may wish to join a particular PG can do so.

 

[Robert Maynard]

No, you've already posted numbers for average concurrent users... and its 4,000, not 500,000.

That includes PGs & Solo, so the average CMDR in Open has a chance to meet a fraction of that 4,000.

4,000 over the last three months on a platform that probably comprises less than 20% of the total number of game copies in circulation - and player numbers in the last three months have been very low.

.... and the players in a single PG have a chance to meet an even smaller fraction of the total number of players on their platform, given that there are three game modes and a number of Private Groups only limited by the number of players.

 

[ethelred]

Taking PC as an example, there are probably somewhat in excess of 10M copies of the game in circulation, some fraction of those won't play at all any more, some will be altCMDRs that don't play concurrently with the player's main CMDR. Say, again for example, that 1M players play on a semi-regular basis, 50% of those in Open, 50% in the other two game modes. Players in Open have a chance of meeting any one of the 500k players that play in Open whereas players in a PG only have a chance of meeting those who are members and playing at the time. Using the same 10% still playing proportion and applying it to a PG, that's a limit of 2,000 possible players to meet.

Not all PvE players play in Mobius, i.e. other PvE PGs exist.

Ok so I'm trying to frame your response to the objection or issue you have currently.

Your issue is that you have, say X percentage of a random encounter that may lead to emergent co-op gameplay, but you want it to by Y percent, where Y is higher than X?

Is that right?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Ok so I'm trying to frame your response to the objection or issue you have currently.

Your issue is that you have, say X percentage of a random encounter that may lead to emergent co-op gameplay, but you want it to by Y percent, where Y is higher than X?

Is that right?

With the caveat that the encounters don't contain PvP, that's it in a nutshell.

Essentially seeking parity with Open in terms of visibility and maximum population.

 

[Bigmaec]

Then the issue is with a lack of PG tools to remove inactive players?

Yes, I had their admin for Mobius PvE Eurasia on my friendlist and we talked some times at CGs.
It's a PITA you don't have admin tools, so for Eurasia he was solely responsible for aforementioned 12500 members.
Actively vetting is impossible in these circumstances, as are quick reaction times. Mobius took several days to be acknowledged,
and god forbid Saberius was on vacation. This is what PG people say when they want tools for administration (like squadrons).

On the other hand, it seems someone over at Team Mobius needs to step up and be a bit more pro-active as I think that's going to be the best solution, long term.

See above, it's just not possible. Word of mouth by the way is powerful, you don't find a ganker thread here or on reddit without mentioning Mobius.

There is SPEAR. A group that is dedicated to counter criminal behavior by players. For them pirates are also criminals that must be hunted down. So there more or less a RP Police Force, not limited to anti-gank.

And they sometimes gank themselves (as my squadron had first hand evidence). Still the best and only ganker deterence out there.
Except, well, most gankers love to fight, so they are actively helping the gankers by hunting them. A bit borked, but hey.
Aaaand the ones who don't want to be speared ( ) simply block them. Spear has an available public certified player ATR list, similar to the Distant Ganks list. No one hindering the gankers to block the hunters.

 

[Sylveria]

Not only the lack of advertising of large Private Groups on the launcher itself, it's the fact that there's a membership limit (and, of those members that still play, they don't all play at the same time).

Another issue is the availability of administrators who manage the group. If you run into a problem, you're not always guaranteed that someone will be online who has the privileges.

Yet another reason why private groups doesn't fit the bill.

 

[ethelred]

Sure, I don't think much would change if you're just minding your own business, bumbling through the milky way as it were, but imagine all the usual hotspots where all the gankers congregate now, just without said gankers. Everyone driven off by their toxic behaviour, yet inherently socially inclined would not have to pick solo or PG. Pretty certain the picture would look a smidge different in that scenario.

That ship has long since sailed, I'm afraid. Frontier really should have taken steps when they had to increase the private group size because of Mobius. There was clearly a market there that they squandered with their hamfisted approach to MP (PVE / PVP don't mix, period!), which is especially infuriating considering the game's heritage. Hope they've learned their lesson.

Personally, if there was no open (PVE and/or PVP) at all, heck no MP at all, I would not mind one bit. I would have had just as much fun with the game.

Yeah, I'm coming at it from a completely opposite direction tbh - in that I like the adversarial nature of being in an an inferior ship an the challenge of getting through.

However, I've not really considered things from a pure PvE POV so it's interesting to see what issues you guys face.

So, when there is either a CG or at say, Deciat, these aren't hotspots in PGs?

 

[TobiasFuzz]

With the caveat that the encounters don't contain PvP, that's it in a nutshell.

Essentially seeking parity with Open in terms of visibility and maximum population.

Robert, I admire how calm and settled you discuss with this players. I could not do that, so thanks that you bear the task.

 

[Rebel Yell]

I normally found very few pirates at the CG systems. I guess out of 10 Interdictions 1 is probably a pirate. And gankers not only ruin their victims time, they steal the pirating opportunities. The Pirates I know that still do RP pirating, have no good words for gankers.
But in general it is true, RP Pirates are a seldom player species and I fear they start to extinct.

The introduction of Fleet Carriers gave the final blow to piracy... speaking for the XB1 side, there are few PvP pirate groups (Dark Marauders, Chimera Crew) and us (KUMO) a bit of borderline because we add the pledge to the equation [and in some cases we played as "Delaine's law enforcers" if there was something of relevant interest for us].

 

[deleteduser]

.

 

[ethelred]

With the caveat that the encounters don't contain PvP, that's it in a nutshell.

Essentially seeking parity with Open in terms of visibility and maximum population.

Thanks for that, it's a lot clearer.

Whilst I don't necessarily agree that a completely new "damage off" mode is needed (if only because IMHO there are more important issues to be fixed) or that a limitless PvE mode would give a noticeable increase in random emergent gameplay the most important word in your reply is "parity", so yes:-

PG groups shouldn't have an arbitrary cap and PG admin tools need to be a lot, lot better.

Maybe it's time for an open letter!

 

[deleteduser]

.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Again, copies in circulation is meaningless. It is players online concurrently that matters. More specifically players online per platform.

There are not more than a single PGs worth of CMDRs online at anyone time.

We've seen the numbers, you posted them.

Which ignores the fact that PG membership is persistent and PGs are not advertised in the launcher.

Number of copies in circulation is entirely pertinent - as it is a measure of the potential number of players who may play at some point.

The number posted earlier only reflects Steam players and omits the population of PC players who don't use either Steam or Epic and also the 8M copies of the game given away in the Epic free week.