Another Open Only Suggestion.

First off, I love Elite, it's the only Sci Fi game out there with a solid grounding in reality. I adore that and it helps me relate to and understand the game.

However, this realism puts folks off as they endlessly complain about the distances and the scale citing games with 120KM diameter worlds as better and those just plain mess with my obsessive scientific nature. I believe that they're complaining about distance and scale because the golden goose that this game has.. had to offer is the emergent gameplay facilitated by the BGS, Interstellar initiatives and powerplay.

These changes would be the deal maker that would have me back in Elite for the Longhaul as I simply love this game, it's aesthetic, design, grounded sense of reality and it's light application of handwavium. However, I find myself unable to invest in the game anymore as I got my ship, I got my engineering and I got good, my friends and I got so good that many of the pilots and groups we fought simply switched play modes.

However, Most any input you have can be mitigated by folks behind an invisible barrier, I've heard all the arguments and I won't be checking back to hear them all again about how wrong and stupid I am, I know you're going to say it.

My suggestion for the perfect Elite Dangerous as it is now:

Powerplay, straight up, Open Only. You can go PG and you can go SOLO to collect rewards but any cargo, any fighting, any hostile actions have to be done in Open Only. Killing enemy power NPC's in Solo or PG should net no merits and no influence, simply bounties or bonds.

Missions collected and conducted in Open should reward influence for that faction as well as cash and reputation. Missions conducted in wing should do so to a greater degree in open to reward playing with your friends, not punish it.
Missions conducted in Solo and PG should give cash rewards and rep but no faction influence.

Exploration should be entirely unaffected by play modes as it is perfect to do solo, with friends or just to relax.


I believe this arrangement with some fine tuning and finishing would accommodate all play styles and yes, some folks would have to compromise but really what's the point in having competitive elements when server limitations and game modes entirely remove the competition from them.

The only real changes to people's game play this would make is you couldn't be in Private or Solo installing a power, faction or superpower that you want, under the noses of everyone who doesn't want it without repercussion. You can still earn money, you can still grind rank, you can still explore, engineer, dogfight, all that and more in private and solo but you can't flag up for PvP and then go AWOL.
 
Personally I'm opposed to this idea regarding cargo. I mostly play in solo mode, and I mostly play as a trader, passenger carrier and sometimes explorer.

I used to play in open mode, until I got sick of being mugged by other players. If you want to restrict fighting and or hostile actions to open mode, I wouldn't oppose that, but would oppose it for trading, cargo hauling and passenger transport as well as exploration.

I think doing so wouldn't increase the number of players for you to interact with much, but would instead increase the number of players who would quit the game.
 
Last edited:
Personally I'm opposed to this idea regarding cargo. I mostly play in solo mode, and I mostly play as a trader, passenger carrier and sometimes explorer.

I used to play in open mode, until I got sick of being mugged by other players. If you want to restrict fighting and or hostile actions to open mode, I wouldn't oppose that, but would oppose it for trading, cargo hauling and passenger transport as well as exploration.

I think doing so wouldn't increase the number of players for you to interact with much, but would instead increase the number of players who would quit the game.
Just to Clarify on Cargo, I was referring to Power Play commodities exclusively. No restriction should be placed on Earning money, delivering cargo, earning superpower and system power rep or exploration in Solo and PG and they should all pay full amount, the only restriction should be on their ability to change powers in a system or elevate a faction.


Checked back once expecting to be called an open only moron or told that this idea is retarded, instead I see an actual constructive criticism. I'm pleasantly surprised!
 
I have no choice but to play in Solo mode right now due to bandwidth caps. You are basically asking Frontier to break the one thing I find interesting these days, the BGS.

And chew on this before you respond - if you insist I be in Open to play the BGS, then you better buy a PS4 if you're looking to use PvP combat to somehow thwart me. And let's face it, that's what this thread is really about, not the BGS, but rather forcing PvP on people not interested in it.
 
Last edited:

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Some players have been calling for players in Solo and Private Groups to have no effect on either the BGS or Powerplay for years.

Just last year, Frontier restated their position on the BGS, i.e. that it is for all players, regardless of platform or game mode - which is consistent with the design for the game that they published well over six years ago. This is a game where PvP is an optional extra - and Frontier are "well aware" that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP.

We're still waiting to see which subset of the proposals in Sandro's first Flash Topic on Powerplay may be implemented.
 
Perhaps SOLO should be geared towards the players who want the safer game, and OPEN made more dangerous for those who brave 'OPEN' - more difficult AI, Thargoids openly seeking combat (instead of the player choosing to participate), Anarchy systems a lot more dangerous, etc.
I think this is a seperate, though definitely related, issue.

I wouldn't have a problem with a more difficult AI, and everything you touched upon (Thargoids, hostile systems, etc.) as a predominatly solo player. Actually that sounds pretty cool to me.

I just dislike more experienced players, with top end, heavily engineered ships jumping other players who don't have the experience, skills or equipment to stand a chance against them.
 
So Janette Vasquez you want a pay to play mode. So if you are you going to pay all the xbox and PS4 players to play in the Open? If not then shut then the hell up. I play on Xbox and I can't afford to play in Open I know some PS4 users who are in the same boat. Yes they can play in solo mode.

I LOVE TO PLAY POWER PLAY and we have OP that want to take it away from me.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps SOLO should be geared towards the players who want the safer game, and OPEN made more dangerous for those who brave 'OPEN' - more difficult AI, Thargoids openly seeking combat (instead of the player choosing to participate), Anarchy systems a lot more dangerous, etc.
As I just said, I'm in Solo right now because of limited bandwidth. Considering that I often PvP in a Sidewinder, I don't consider myself as someone who wants a "safer" game.

Thankfully Frontier understands this, so I don't have anything to worry about.
 
For consoles you need the subscription to allow multiplayer in general, not just in Elite. Xbox live, for example. Then you can play in open as you like.
 
Oh? I didn't know that. Wikipedia says "Unlike PS3, a PlayStation Plus membership is required to access multiplayer in most games; this requirement does not apply to free-to-play or subscription-based games"; so you're saying that Elite falls under this exemption? Interesting.
 
Sadly, the game will continue as it is, and Frontier will still continue to play a balancing act with its player base - resulting in a less difficult game, with little to no risk (it's not just combat where the risks have been eliminated...) - all the systems feeling pretty much identical to fly through (systems at war, civil war, etc., require q player to drop into 'combat zones' - the war doesn't affect the day to day operations of the system - flying to the station, etc. - the stations all unaffected by the war (same is true for other 'states').
Unfortunately, as seen with titanic games like Warcraft, when you continue to fix the lowest common denominator (just flying around and being chill) and shave off your niche (competitive/pvp/something else dangerous), that constant skimming of the few things you can't balance takes more and more out of your total pool. I for one really have no interest in playing E: D anymore because of the total lack of challenge from the galaxy itself and the unwillingness of the counter operative superpower to engage me in any kind of canopy to canopy interaction.

The other sci fi games out there just don't cut it for me, they lack the grounding in reality, the scale, the grandeur, they're all way too.. Gamified for me to feel compelled and passionate like I did when watching The Expanse or playing Elite when there seemed to be more open players and danger.


I agree, separating out the play modes would be a benefit, so would dedicated servers funded by a small sub fee (4 or so dollars just guessing server hardware/cloud computing costs per connection per performance/load) or if not that, at least fixing the peer to peer flakiness.
 
Oh? I didn't know that. Wikipedia says "Unlike PS3, a PlayStation Plus membership is required to access multiplayer in most games; this requirement does not apply to free-to-play or subscription-based games"; so you're saying that Elite falls under this exemption? Interesting.
OMG! Just checked! I do need a subscription to play multiplayer games. Apologies.
 
Oh? I didn't know that. Wikipedia says "Unlike PS3, a PlayStation Plus membership is required to access multiplayer in most games; this requirement does not apply to free-to-play or subscription-based games"; so you're saying that Elite falls under this exemption? Interesting.
He doesn't know what he's talking about. He also doesn't have any bugs on PS4 either. He must have the magical unicorn edition.

You can play ED on PS4 in SOLO without PS+, but not PG and Open.

-- NINJA'D --
 
Top Bottom