Page 5 of 378 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 5660

Thread: The Open v Solo v Groups thread IV - Hotel California

  1. #61
    Originally Posted by Toxic_Waster View Post (Source)
    True, but with 400B stars you can reduce your chance to 1 out of 1B. So may be it's not about the PVP mode, but about OCD?
    Nope. It's about Frontier keeping their earlier promises that I would be able to just keep out of my gameplay everyone that I deem detrimental to my experience, for any reason whatsoever, including the mere fact the other player wants to engage me in PvP. It's, after all, a game I only purchased after making completely sure I would have a (legitimate, non-exploitive) way to go everywhere, experiment every non-PvP piece of content, without having to ever worry about someone else attempting to pick a fight with me.

    Frontier advertised ED as a game where players would be able to completely avoid PvP without any downside. So, guess what, that attracted a lot of players that want to completely avoid PvP without any downsides.

  2. #62
    So, after four megathreads, some people just want a new mode with friendly fire turned off?
    (And no-clip turned on to stop ramming?)

    IMO the fairest thing to do would be to enable multiple commander profiles and lock each profile to a single game mode (I know it's in the OP as something they're not planning on doing, but still...)

  3. #63
    Originally Posted by Toxic_Waster View Post (Source)
    Encountering PVP is already significantly reduced by instancing in Open, so there is no true area control or chocking point in ED. Unfortunately...
    From my point of view, one of the best features of the game.

  4. #64
    Originally Posted by Toxic_Waster View Post (Source)
    ....so there is no true area control or chocking point in ED. Unfortunately...
    Unfortunate for who exactly? - it's okay, I know the answer, as do you.

  5. #65
    Originally Posted by Roybe View Post (Source)
    Nope (well that was your original diagram anyway!)! Not separated from the galaxy...everyone still affects the states of stations, systems, etc. just as it is now...just a new state, either within the current Open system that flags PvE only or a separate PvE only mode, similar to Open, where no PC can injure another.
    How is that fair to me? What if I dont want your PVE open mode to affect my OPEN mode? Why are you allowed to affect my experience, but I am not allowed to affect yours?

  6. #66
    Originally Posted by Roybe View Post (Source)
    Nope (well that was your original diagram anyway!)! Not separated from the galaxy...everyone still affects the states of stations, systems, etc. just as it is now...just a new state, either within the current Open system that flags PvE only or a separate PvE only mode, similar to Open, where no PC can injure another.
    Ah I understand, you mean something like this:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	PVEvPVP2.gif 
Views:	161 
Size:	21.3 KB 
ID:	89240

  7. #67
    Originally Posted by Leto Thule View Post (Source)
    What about accidental fire? What about ramming damage? What about kill stealing and mission blocking? What about jerks who sit in the docking zone so others cannot pass? You would need a reworking of game mechanics to prevent these. THAT is griefing. And you would see MUCH more of it as soon as that mode went live. How does the computer tell the difference between someone who doesnt really know how to fly and someone intentionally blocking a docking mailslot? It cant. It would have to be worked out, reprogrammed, tested, patched -- time and money, my friend.
    The elements that you characterise as "griefing" would presumably need to be fixed for all mode. We have a timer that deals with players who block the mailslot - followed by lethal force - maybe the timer needs to be shortened from 5 minutes to exit. Players blocked inside the station can already just log out then back in again to find themselves at a distance from the station.

    Originally Posted by Leto Thule View Post (Source)
    YOU ARE REMOVING the freedoms of other players by advocating this. Its the same thing! Why do they get theirs, but I "have CQC" that has nothing to do with ED, and thats MY answer? No thanks, mate. How is it ok for a wing of T9's to alter trade route value for me, but NOT OK FOR ME TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT by stopping them? Because they are doing it through market PVP and not with guns? That makes it ok?
    Which freedom specifically? If it is the freedom to attack other players then we enter an interesting discussion with respect to whose freedoms are more important - the player who wants to shoot at other players or the player who does not want to be shot at by other players. We have a shared galaxy state - players in Solo / Private Groups affect it just the same as those on Open. To require that players in other modes can't affect a trade route that a player is enjoying in Open would require a separate galaxy state - a change - a change that would reduce the richness of the evolving galaxy for all players to suit the "must be able to shoot at anything that affects me" crew.

  8. #68
    Originally Posted by Theodrid View Post (Source)
    Unfortunate for who exactly? - it's okay, I know the answer, as do you.
    unfortunate for the game, as we all know...

  9. #69
    Originally Posted by eza View Post (Source)
    unfortunate for the game, as we all know...
    No, just some of the players, simple as that, suggesting the whole game is 'unfortunate' suggests that all players feel that way, they do not.

  10. #70
    Originally Posted by GluttonyFang View Post (Source)
    But isn't that too easy of a criteria to fulfill?

    By your definition, Mobius is a PvP mode. (Yes I know about their CZ rules)

    By jove it looks like it is finally sinking in...YES! Can't count how many times it had to be said but I guess you can ram a point home long enough until someone finally gets it..


    That is why people have been asking for a PVE mode.. because Private groups are PVP modes same as Open. Even with an agreement of PVE only with PVP restricted to certain areas as Mobius has people like your little friend MV have proved that it is still a PVP mode.





    And everyone using the the fallacy argument that Open isn't a PVP mode because there is PVE in there.. please don't' make me laugh.. how about you go look at other actual MMO games such as SWTOR, WOW, EQ2, UO, and you will see PVE servers and PVP servers.. in PVP servers the PVE content of the game doesn't just magically disappear and it is all PVP... the only difference in the game is PVP servers is PVP is allowed from the getgo just like Open. In PVE servers PVP is only allowed if you are flagged or certain areas like... well no mode.

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

    Originally Posted by Toxic_Waster View Post (Source)
    To have the pure PVE multiplayer mode you just need to make 5 jumps in either directions. Apparently this is too hard for so many players.

    Fallacy.. PVP is still allowed if you run into someone.. And why should those who enjoy PVE and not PVP be forced from going to systems just because PVPers are in the area?

  11. #71
    OK, I've never contributed to this debate in the past as I've never had anything to say before. But seeing as this thread has started up fresh again, I do have an observation to contribute.

    When I trade, I trade safe. I trade in Mobius. I trade in a D rated Anaconda with no weapons and no shields, to maximize my profits.

    My trade route seemed safe as well, for a good couple of months I was getting a return of 3300Cr per ton per round trip, until recently these past weeks it has become apparent that others are now using the same route, trading the same commodities, Imperial slaves one way, and Marine Equipment the other. Problem is now that others are here, and they seem to be here in force, as is evidenced by the large number of Anacondas now present in the traffic report, the effect has been to reduce the supply of Marine Equipment at one end while reducing the demand at the other, to such an extent that the profits from each round trip has now been reduced by 250,000Cr.

    Why is this a problem? It's not really, it doesn't bother me that much, but say this were for real, and for roleplay reasons I was so upset with the reduction in my profits to such an extent that I decided to take direct action to protect my profits, the following quandary arises with the solo/group/open mode approach of this game:

    If I want to eliminate the competition I have only one option: Enter open mode and start attacking my opposition. This means I may hopefully drive off the competition, as they may then decide to look elsewhere for a safer trade route. I cannot enter solo and drive off the player in solo mode, and neither can I molest my competition if I were to find them in Mobius Group.

    If the open mode player is upset with ME ruining HIS profits, there is nothing he can do about it. Similarly if the open mode trader is upset with the solo mode player reducing his profits, he also can do nothing about it.

    There is nothing to stop me, after switching into open mode to attack my competition, from switching back to Mobius group to continue trading, thus giving the open mode trader no option to attack me back, to fight to preserve HIS trade route.

    Similarly the solo mode trader can switch to open mode and attack the open mode trader if he so desires, and then return back to solo, without any recompense.

    The game is stacked against the open mode player in nearly all respects, and because it is not an open mode only game, and the universe is the same across all modes us players are left with too much choice. If we had the choice to play in solo or group, it really should be a separate PvE universe to the open mode universe, not all connected.

    I choose to trade in Mobius group, simply because it is the easiest option. I don't have to fear reprisals from other players, I have no worries about being attacked, and I can get away with a minimum specced trade ship which has been maximized for cargo.

    If the game was an open only universe, like EVE for example, then I would be forced to adjust my ship specs and make changes to my trading habits, such as be more organized and trade in a wing for greater protection, and kit out my ship for combat as well as trade, reducing my trade profits, but because of the solo/group/open nature of the Elite universe, I, and I assume a large majority of the player base, are always going to choose the easier option, the path of least resistance.

    Open mode is only a place that we go, when we CHOOSE to. If we had no other choice, Elite would then truly be Dangerous. As it is, and as I imagine it will stay, the game is too easy, with too many easy options, and while there is much conflict in the human occupied space, it is predominantly PvE, with PvP just being something we can do only if we choose to, like some may dip into CQC from time to time, so therefore the game is not a truly PvP experience, with all the excitement and risk that goes with it, and probably never will be.

    My two cents.

  12. #72
    Originally Posted by GluttonyFang View Post (Source)
    I think we are perfectly representing the two parties system in the United States, we are vivid image that reflects the Legislative branch of the government...

    I disagree, the 2 party system is flawed and each party is out just for themselves and don't really care for the county or their constituents. Whereas in ED while you still have one group who cares just for their gameplay and could care less about the game and the way others play, you have the other group who actually care about the game as a whole and want to see things better for the game and all playing it including the group who keeps trying to have things passed just for them.

  13. #73
    Originally Posted by Theodrid View Post (Source)
    No, just some of the players, simple as that, suggesting the whole game is 'unfortunate' suggests that all players feel that way, they do not.
    some do, many don't
    or many do, some don't
    we'll never really know

    i think it's unfortunate for the game because it makes the whole galaxy the same.
    i feel that variety is better than homogeny.
    i'd like to have to engage my brain a little bit, rather than simply engaging my warpdrive without thinking because i don't have to.

  14. #74
    Originally Posted by Benedictus View Post (Source)
    Why should they request for a pure PVE in Open, if they have Private Groups? And where should the PVP Players go, when Open would be pure PVE? I dont understand.
    Private Groups are still PVP and for everyone not just PVER's . And PVErs are not asking for Open to be turned into a PVE mode.. they are asking for the addition of a Open PVE mode alongside the Open PVP mode. That way PVPers can play in their open and PVErs can play in theirs.


    Same pool for both but with a divider.

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

    Originally Posted by GluttonyFang View Post (Source)
    I remember this, and I warned it of its potential to fragment the community even further. I made a proposal to push for a flag system.

    It wouldn't' fragment the community any more than adding another private group would, it would just be openly available for people to choose from and the flag system has been received with hostility by some PVPers.

  15. #75
    Unfortunately, with the shared pool someone will still attempt a Caddyshack moment

Page 5 of 378 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast