Modes Bonus for doing CGs in Open

[kofeyh]

Or maybe the devs could just make CG worth doing in the first place.

There is exhaustion because Frontier just roll these things from one week to the next, fiddle with what the commodities are and then away we go again; even they aren't asking why are they doing this anymore, it's just automatic. The truely hilarious thing, is people lose their minds, if there isn't one.

And yes, a bonus for open doesn't change that the underlying reason for CGs has long since run it's course, and the entire thing is just endless repeat. That's okay, really, people just need to accept it and move on. The degree of obsession over this game can be genuinely frightening; and that's illustrated here far more often than anyone probably cares to admit.

Variety is the spice of life, as they say; Frontier could stand to add some variety? But it doesn't change that a tired old mechanic is a tired old mechanic. Proving that resisting change is never a good thing, even when people endlessly protest that it is.

Frontier's exampled, actually, what happens when they add some variety and spice; this current bonus week. That's new, amusing, actually fun for the most part and has actually resonated really well outside of the forums. I hope they do it again. And find the value of maybe throwing some curveballs like this in future, across a few facets.

That? Would be amazing.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Re-read the topic, which uses such words as 'bonus' and 'benefit'. Note the words 'open only' appear in the op's post exactly zero times. But, it's okay, you do you.

Wouldn't a bonus or benefit be a feature and if that bonus or benefit is only available in open, wouldn't that result in an open-only feature

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

No bonus for open, I'd rather they were just locked to open like PP; they are competitive after all and much easier in pg/solo.

 

[korombei]

I would like to see more benefits to playing in Open, perhaps a “bonus” for certain interactions like CGs and trading.

Not sure how you could implement that in a way that can’t be exploited by mode switching.

It shouldn’t have a negative effect on Solo, only encourage and reward Open play.

I disagree. Changing powerplay for open makes complete sense given the aim of powerplay itself and the fact that people in solo can influence it without being able to be countered, but there's no need for anything else to change to favour open. If that's where FD wanted the game to go, there would be no different modes.

Not only that, I'm pretty sure these forums would implode if that happened.. the melodrama over the proposed PP changes is bad enough.

 

[kofeyh]

Wouldn't a bonus or benefit be a feature and if that bonus or benefit is only available in open, wouldn't that result in an open-only feature

No? Removing CG from solo, and PG, makes it an open only feature. Having the same feature, with different outcomes? Does not make it 'open-only'. It makes it "different". One of the best things that could happen is solo/pg and open becoming different, so they both provide improved features and more engaging outcomes. The mantra of "must be the same" has done untold damage at this point. It's the gift that's kept on giving.

Regardless, the issues with CGs having nothing to do with whichever mode, in this case, it's that they are remarkably unchanged from what they were 5 years ago. Weirdly, if you reject change, mechanics become stale. Who knew?

And that's the fundamental issue. Everyone has their tolerance. Frontier introducing some variety? Like we've had this week? Probably the best thing they could possibly do for energising commanders and the game itself. Imagine if they did the same thing, for CGs. The possibilities are endless, if you ignore the forums bleating for "the same", and instead make some stuff different. Fresh. New. Engaging. Exciting. Approachable.

Just a thought.

[The forums have become fixated and obsessive to the point of becoming disconnected, not only from reality, but the rest of the player base. This is seldom understood. That Frontier seem to now be listening to the broader player base, and doing some of what they want? Massive improvement. I hope they keep doing that.]

 

[VR Murgle]

Re-read the topic, which uses such words as 'bonus' and 'benefit'. Note the words 'open only' appear in the op's post exactly zero times. But, it's okay, you do you.

Wouldn't the bonuses apply only to Open?

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

No bonus for open, I'd rather they were just locked to open like PP; they are competitive after all and much easier in pg/solo.

CGs are community goals, goals that the entire community tries to achieve.
CGs aren't competitive.
On an individual basis those who contribute more get a better reward, but primary goal is something that a single player can never achieve (in most cases). Every participant of a CG contribute to the reward every other participant gets.

Even CGs with opposing goals aren't competitive. In that case it's simply a matter of what side has the most support.

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

CGs are community goals, goals that the entire community tries to achieve.
CGs aren't competitive.
On an individual basis those who contribute more get a better reward, but primary goal is something that a single player can never achieve (in most cases). Every participant of a CG contribute to the reward every other participant gets.

Even CGs with opposing goals aren't competitive. In that case it's simply a matter of what side has the most support.

But they appear to be competitive to me, you said yourself players compete for payout.It is absolutley legitimate to try and oppose a CG, it's a choice to compete at a cg no-body is forced.

 

[gooddoc]

Can't see what difference that would make to FD.

All Frontier want are players logging in & playing their games, in whatever mode that player wants to choose.

I can't see that changing anything from how FD have set it up from the start, is gonna suddenly have a massive impact on the numbers playing ED.

What's needed is content & depth in the game, limiting it to certain modes will only limit the catchment of new or inactive players, back to the game. I don't think that's what FD want to do.

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

Can't see what difference that would make to FD.

All Frontier want are players logging in & playing their games, in whatever mode that player wants to choose.

I can't see that changing anything from how FD have set it up from the start, is gonna suddenly have a massive impact on the numbers playing ED.

What's needed is content & depth in the game, limiting it to certain modes will only limit the catchment of new or inactive players, back to the game. I don't think that's what FD want to do.

I think attracting new players is exactly what they are after, they have our money already. This is why they are moving to traditional MMO structures, to attract those put off by the lack. It is also why they are moving towards open-only functionality for competitive stuff to attract the competitive terratory/war players from Eve.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

But they appear to be competitive to me, you said yourself players compete for payout.It is absolutley legitimate to try and oppose a CG, it's a choice to compete at a cg no-body is forced.

No, players don't compete for payouts. The individual reward is not based on the contribution of the player alone.

A player who contribute will get a reward based on the individual contribution (top X% contribution) and the contribution of all other players (tier of the CG).

 

[kofeyh]

Wouldn't the bonuses apply only to Open?

No? They would have to strip payout from anyone picking up cargo in open, re-logging to solo, flying to destination, re-logging to open and handing in cargo. They would also actually have to think about people doing that. Just to get a bonus. They'd also have to strip those profits from people just doing the CG by collecting in open then returning to solo to fly to destination and deliver. And just about every other combination of mixed-mode movement.

Let me count the ways people arguing this point, are missing it entirely. Shall I begin? There are many, though, so how much time do you have?

I mean, everyone is welcome to keep arguing pedantic "it must be the same like literally identical; stay on target!" as much as liked. Doesn't actually make it a relevant observation. Or even recognise why CGs have become stale. The op assumes Open and a bonus, solves CG exhaustion. When in fact, it's simply the lack of change. At all.

Which, weirdly, seems to be a fixation on the forums. Resist change. Resist it all. And then complain about stale outcomes and inch-deep mechanics and maybe bonus for open? lol. no kidding.

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

No, players don't compete for payouts. The individual reward is not based on the contribution of the player alone.

A player who contribute will get a reward based on the individual contribution (top X% contribution) and the contribution of all other players (tier of the CG).

Will have to respectfully disagree here, if it has competitive elements then it should be open-locked, anything in which cmdr's gain gain advantage from the mode system should also follow suit. This would appear to be the direction of travel anyway, but we shall have to wait and see.

 

[gooddoc]

I think attracting new players is exactly what they are after, they have our money already. This is why they are moving to traditional MMO structures, to attract those put off by the lack. It is also why they are moving towards open-only functionality for competitive stuff to attract the competitive terratory/war players from Eve.

But that is only of a limited short term fix. When the next game comes along in a few weeks/months time those players are most likely to disappear from ED.
Leaving Frontier then trying to win back those 'loyal' fans, who were with them from the start but were disappointed by such decisions - good luck with that!

 

[sollisb]

I wouldn't see it as a 'benefit'..

Rather, I'd see is a gradual spiral of Elite Dangerous into obscurity. Ruined by the 'want more' pvp crowd.

But that's my opinion.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Will have to respectfully disagree here, if it has competitive elements then it should be open-locked, anything in which cmdr's gain gain advantage from the mode system should also follow suit. …

Then the wing bonus for bounty hunting has to be removed, the ability to transfer rare goods would have to be removed. A bonus would have to be introduced for players not in a wing, because of the higher risk of flying alone.

Rewards would have to be limited to the contribution of the participant alone and not affected by the contribution of all other players…

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

Then the wing bonus for bounty hunting has to be removed, the ability to transfer rare goods would have to be removed. A bonus would have to be introduced for players not in a wing, because of the higher risk of flying alone.

Rewards would have to be limited to the contribution of the participant alone and not affected by the contribution of all other players…

Nah, be simpler to make it open only .

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Nah, be simpler to make it open only .

It just wouldn't have the effect you mentioned as a reason for making it open only

 

[VR Murgle]

No? They would have to strip payout from anyone picking up cargo in open, re-logging to solo, flying to destination, re-logging to open and handing in cargo. They would also actually have to think about people doing that. Just to get a bonus. They'd also have to strip those profits from people just doing the CG by collecting in open then returning to solo to fly to destination and deliver. And just about every other combination of mixed-mode movement.

Let me count the ways people arguing this point, are missing it entirely. Shall I begin? There are many, though, so how much time do you have?

I mean, everyone is welcome to keep arguing pedantic "it must be the same like literally identical; stay on target!" as much as liked. Doesn't actually make it a relevant observation. Or even recognise why CGs have become stale. The op assumes Open and a bonus, solves CG exhaustion. When in fact, it's simply the lack of change. At all.

Which, weirdly, seems to be a fixation on the forums. Resist change. Resist it all. And then complain about stale outcomes and inch-deep mechanics and maybe bonus for open? lol. no kidding.

Lets start by saying I'm all for change; the complete removal of PvP is a change I'd welcome, failing that a PvE mode is something I could get behind. The addition of handcrafted missions, a proper narrative. There are lots of changes I'd like to see, changes you might not like but you can't please everyone.

Now if I understand you correctly you're saying that the bonuses would not apply to Open only because people would cheat, unless of course FD would take measures to prevent that in which case they would apply to Open only.

Oh and better rewards are going to make CG's less stale and more interesting? Who Knew.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

Keep in mind some CG types are better suited for Open (pure execution/mechanical limitations) than others.

Trade, Exploration, Micromaterials etc. work fine, since there's no reliance on a very few isolated spots.

But if i.e. a Bounty Hunting CG takes place in a System with only very limited Bounty Hunting Grounds? That'll be 10-15 Players racing towards a single Wanted Eagle NPC that was unlucky enough to spawn and not even any way to "share" it amongst all.
Or if a CG sends Players to a single or very limited set of Guardian Ruins etc. - what will Players #3 through 15# still find to scoop when they arrive? Probably next to nothing.
Under these circumstances Open Play simply can become a huge disadvantage or make participation next to impossible, simply due to technical limitations. Open Play then just becomes terribly inefficient at getting anything done.

IMHO no "Open benefit" could make up for that until the technical/mechanical limitations are solved.
Restricted event locations for Task execution just often happen to be overwhelmed with CG traffic. God-forbid one would take place at an Outpost or a small Planetary Outpost with its limited Pads, that alone could be a self-explanatory showstopper.

PS.
IMHO we'd need extended Instancing and location Scripts that support the temporarily increased requirements for such places where Players are heavily channeled to get their Task done.
i.e. instead of using our common "P2P augmented by Servers" those isolated locations would benefit massively from "Client/Server augmented by P2P" netcode.
Then, amend the spawn Scripts to properly handle multiple Wings worth of Players operating in the same Instance.

The highly localized Client/Server network support strictly reserved for these event locations/hotspots wouldn't cost FDev much and most of the current restrictions for many Players hitting the same spot would vanish.
On top, having those reliable, low-latency "XL Instances" sure would give Open Play in these places the unique qualities and experiences that might make it worthwhile to visit all by itself - no special rewards needed.