Switching modes. I still don't get it.

I think it's excellent. The eat it's implemented doesn't break immersion as it's seamless and only affects who you see in game, not the game itself.

It really helped me last night. For some reason I couldn't hyper jump into a system, no matter how many times I tried, it kept saying I couldn't connect. So I switched to solo on a hunch and, voila! I could jump. I then switched back shortly after.
 
That entire premise is based around the opinion that Solo is risk-free, which has yet to be proven in any way, shape or form. Over a year later from when people made the same argument on a weekly basis, it still has yet to be proven, least of all in a Release version of the game. Best to also ignore the fact that All has the potential to be far safer than Solo. Also best not to mention Private Groups at all, either.

been trading in group mode(not much different to solo) and never lost a ship to an NPC, rarely get interdicted, and made a few million in credits. Solo and Group mode have no risk(currently)
 
This is where the point I am trying to make comes in, if you do not allow the transfer of the solo save game to then be used in the open play environment, it means the player is forced (if they want to play with friends) to play from the beginning, in open play. They cannot use solo mode to level up to a large ship with multiple gun solutions, then bring it over to the open world mode.

Space is huge.

Even if I select "all" I can head off in a random direction to a remote part of the galaxy and never meet another player. There, using your logic, I can "level up" in peace to return in a death ship : There is no difference.

If FD had built the game around a small number of systems then I would agree with you, however it isn't the case in ED.
 
Space is huge.

Even if I select "all" I can head off in a random direction to a remote part of the galaxy and never meet another player. There, using your logic, I can "level up" in peace to return in a death ship : There is no difference.

If FD had built the game around a small number of systems then I would agree with you, however it isn't the case in ED.
Yep. Ive done exactly that. Started exploring a bit. Found a nice place to haul/kill wanteds/bring info and went around there for a day and gathered whole bunch of cash and bought the Viper for the first time. I didnt see any players at all. So if i go back now to places that have people they wouldnt know if i came from solo or from far far away.
 
My post above is based only on my own findings between the solo and open modes.

In the current Beta 2 version of the game, yes? Not the Release version?
I've been in roughly the same spot for weeks now, total number of Commanders seen (in both Open and a large Private Group)? Still one. How would that single Commander know what game modes I played?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Starjammer:
Nothing wrong with Xenith's comment. Technically the local defense system is suppose to waste anyone who attacks in a station. So there is nothing incorrect with the statement. Now there might be attempts and that tends to be fatal, but now and then some wild pilot might get away now and then... but no one SHOULD is still a valid sentence.

Did you ever get a answer to your OP that you could understand (with 46 pages I REALLY hope so)?
 
Wow are you serious?

Check out what happens at the beginning of this video from Frontier (a beta trailer).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mx9io7bFR64&list=UUd1Xmm1TFBD-lfZUWaWf7EA

Maybe you should make sure Frontier knows nobody should be blowing people up in the stations?

Xenith - in my opinion, many of your posts make little sense to me. <snip>

That video seems like a bit of a mistake from Frontier. Showing the ship exploding on the pad in the station may be a bit dramatic but I don't think they want players to be able to actually do this.
 
That video seems like a bit of a mistake from Frontier. Showing the ship exploding on the pad in the station may be a bit dramatic but I don't think they want players to be able to actually do this.

Don't see why not :D

Notice the station fires on the ship as it's leaving .. that part is missing (or was from Beta 1) when opening fire inside a station.
 
Don't see why not :D

Notice the station fires on the ship as it's leaving .. that part is missing (or was from Beta 1) when opening fire inside a station.

I think it was a mistake because it encourages behavior that would be described by most players as griefing.

Stations seem to be set up as safe zones, especially with the new SC jump in range putting you inside or very close to the no fire zone as well.
 
Don't see why not :D.

Neither do I now that we've seen, at least in some early form, how most of the defence systems are supposed to work and what equipment is available to determined aggressors.

Bear in mind that if a player wants to take someone out during the docking phase they will have to:

  • Take down their target very quickly before it can evade or enter the bay.
  • Survive an initial barrage of return fire from the station's internal weapons.
  • Make it through the docking port before the port weaponry takes them out (or the blast doors close, if they get implemented properly).
  • Minimise hits from the station's external weaponry, system defence craft and any opportunistic commanders who just saw a massive bounty get posted.
  • Make it into hyperspace.
  • Deal with the consequences of a huge bounty and a wanted status in every system aligned with the station.

I think it was a mistake because it encourages behavior that would be described by most players as griefing.

It might look that way in the video but it shouldn't be a problem if it's controlled correctly.

Let's be honest, anyone who tries what's described above isn't going to be your average opportunistic jack-of-all-trades or even occasional bounty hunter in a 40t cargo-racked Cobra. It's going to be someone in an Asp or Anaconda sized ship, packed to the brim with high power weapons, shield generators and shield boosters specifically configured for assassination missions that are only viable because they carry a huge payoff in credits or reputation or both.

Such missions are most likely to be against NPCs, not players. If you can pull something like that off you're going to be wanted across half of civilised space for an awfully long time whether you succeed or not. You're not going to attempt it against a random noob in a free Sidewinder for poos and sniggers unless you enjoy repeatedly seeing the effect of your ship exploding around you and every bounty hunter in the area coming after you every time you jump somewhere.

Before the defence systems were implemented certain aspects of the early builds were something of a griefer's paradise. Now that some defences are starting to appear and a barrage of station fire can take down a fully shielded Asp in a few seconds it's much less of an issue.

Groups of players randomly attacking noobs may still be a worry, because they might be able to overwhelm the defences long enough to cause some carnage. But they'd still need heavily armed and armoured ships, and would still incur the fines and reputational damage even if they managed to gank a few players. Either way it would be an expensive hobby, and without the ability to easily pool resources not a very easy hobby to fund.

Players also need to be cautious, of course. I'm playing in Open at the moment but rarely seeing any other players. But if I saw a group of three or four, all flying what are nominally long range explorer or trade ships but which are packed with nothing but heavy guns and shield generators, I might choose to go elsewhere.

Stations aren't going to be the griefer's playgrounds, but player-instigated interdictions in supercruise might be. Unless they're balanced very carefully they're going to become a huge problem, especially for long trade runs that require an intermediate jump through a non-aligned and unpopulated system. They could become virtual camp points. It's going to be interesting to see what happens when they're introduced.
 
I am an alpha member of the game, and it has been a while since I have posted here, but I have been reading forums every now and then. Sadly, busy life has kept me away from Elite Dangerous more than I would like, but I am looking forward to seeing the final release (gamma?). I posted concerns months ago about modes of play. I would like to revisit this.

I heard people will be able to switch from online to not online. Is this really true? Will people be able to jump back and forth between modes? Can anyone please help me understand the concept of having people able to jump from online to not online modes of play? Seriously, what is the point of it? I have the upmost respect for Frontier, and the crew behind the game, but I just cannot grasp why this is. I was actually starting to think, OK great idea, have two modes of play, but being able to jump back and forth is a total immersion killer in my opinion. Does anyone else think this is not right? I think two modes is good, but not being able to switch back and forth.

I look at the board polls also, and noticed how many people are wanting to start in Ironman(open), which appear to have some good numbers. Does Frontier actually see the polls? Do they care about them? I think this shows strong desire from the gamer base to be in total immersion, despite the risks involved.

Am I wrong? Am I missing something? How can there be two modes coexisting? Any constructive comments appreciated. :S

I am completely with you.

I think this is one of the worst decisions in the history of gaming.
 
I am completely with you.

I think this is one of the worst decisions in the history of gaming.

You probably want to check out GTAV online then, one of the most successful and highest grossing games 'in the history of gaming'. Guess what, SOLO and OPEN coexist perfectly.. Dead horse is well and truly dead...
 
Last edited:
Quoting the factually incorrect OP without reading any of the other posts will do that.

fyi: I've read all the posts, mate! And I still don't see why OP is factually incorrect - There is just no reason to combine open and solo in the way FD decided to do. Strongest argument (which actually is a real argument unlike yours): Players can level up in solo and just go to open when they want to PvP. That way there is just no point in playing in open-play.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

You probably want to check out GTAV online then, one of the most successful and highest grossing games 'in the history of gaming'. Guess what, SOLO and OPEN coexist perfectly.. Dead horse is well and truly dead...

Lol, comparing GTAV with ED and therefor totally denying the points the OP made? Really? That's your argument? *rolleyes*
 
Last edited:
Strongest argument (which actually is a real argument unlike yours): Players can level up in solo and just go to open when they want to PvP.

So your "strongest" argument is entirely based on the premise that Solo is "exploit/cheat/easy mode" and the problem is, that has not yet been proved in any way shape or form and All has the potential to be far "easier" than Solo could ever be.
You also completely exclude Private Groups for some reason. I'm looking forward to your concrete and definitive proof that Solo is "easy mode" since you require a real argument.
I have no idea what this "levelling" up thing is either, I can't seem to find an XP bar on my ship.
 
fyi: I've read all the posts, mate! And I still don't see why OP is factually incorrect - There is just no reason to combine open and solo in the way FD decided to do. Strongest argument (which actually is a real argument unlike yours): Players can level up in solo and just go to open when they want to PvP. That way there is just no point in playing in open-play.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -



Lol, comparing GTAV with ED and therefor totally denying the points the OP made? Really? That's your argument? *rolleyes*

Not denying anything, the OP state the 'HE' does not like the ability to switch,fair enough, but the game was not designed for 'him alone'. And yes, I can compare an open world multiplayer game like GTA with ED, in fact the creators of GTA even praise Elite as the inspiration for the series.

Bottom line is you can have a successful game that combines SOLO and OPEN... Don't understand what all the whining is about, not that I really care or it affects me. It's happening whether you like it or not.. Get used to it.
 
Last edited:
So your "strongest" argument is entirely based on the premise that Solo is "exploit/cheat/easy mode" and the problem is, that has not yet been proved in any way shape or form and All has the potential to be far "easier" than Solo could ever be.
You also completely exclude Private Groups for some reason. I'm looking forward to your concrete and definitive proof that Solo is "easy mode" since you require a real argument.
I have no idea what this "levelling" up thing is either, I can't seem to find an XP bar on my ship.

I see there is no point in discussing the matter with someone who just doesn't WANT to get the point people like me or OP are trying to make. And yes, if you don't have to meet me in solo-play I really consider solo as 'easy mode'
 
I see there is no point in discussing the matter with someone who just doesn't WANT to get the point people like me or OP are trying to make. And yes, if you don't have to meet me in solo-play I really consider solo as 'easy mode'

Okay, I'll bite,

Scenario One - Player in SOLO ONLINE, flying a Cobra, taking on 3 Elite Ranked Eagles.
Scenario Two - OPEN ALL, 3 pirate players in a 'wing' attacking a player controlled Hauler.

Which one is easy mode again?

My point is that it is nowhere near as 'black and white' as the quoted text implies.
 
Back
Top Bottom