Why must it be viewed that Open is getting something extra? It's actual balancing and bringing about of equality as I've already explained why the competitive scope give Solo/Private incentive over Open.
Powerplay Collusion Piracy and More
- Thread starter Sandro Sammarco
- Start date
Why must it be viewed that Open is getting something extra? It's actual balancing and bringing about of equality as I've already explained why the competitive scope give Solo/Private incentive over Open.
As an FYI the instances in this game are around you, not a region of space. (About 15KM in normal space IIRC)
If you jump to a star system and you're the only one there then you will slowly (not quick enough IMO) spawn NPCs. If someone else comes to the system and move close enough to you then your instances merge (they have one too) and NPC information from you flows to them. Likewise if you jump to a system and there's another player there already you receive data about the NPCs already there (spawned from the other player)
Exactly. I'm not saying there is significant more risk from NPCs in Open, but the fact that there are other players doesn't negate the risk form NPCs: if anything, it exacerbates it.
Open is disadvantaged. In a competitive PvP situation like Powerplay, it needs bonuses to be balanced
YES! That's why the sidewinder costs 150 million credits less, is significantly smaller and more agile than an Anaconda.
You're arguing against balance as a concept here, which is preposterous
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Similar mechanisms to the Triple Elite and Nvidia competition one would assume
Perhaps because it is about getting something extra
The "equality" you speak of is subjective - not everyone is as good a pilot as you so irrespective as to the mode the game is hard all the same. The only difference is that NPCs don't show mercy, nor can I have wingmen to assist
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
We're going round in circles here ... Open isn't disadvantaged as you also have the option to group up with others. In solo you can't. Ergo solo is arguably the most difficult mode of them all
I will bow out this for now - suffice to say we don't agree, which is fine, as ultimately FD call the shots
Perhaps because it is about getting something extra
The "equality" you speak of is subjective - not everyone is as good a pilot as you so irrespective as to the mode the game is hard all the same. The only difference is that NPCs don't show mercy, nor can I have wingmen to assist
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
We're going round in circles here ... Open isn't disadvantaged as you also have the option to group up with others. In solo you can't. Ergo solo is arguably the most difficult mode of them all
I will bow out this for now - suffice to say we don't agree, which is fine, as ultimately FD call the shots
Circular arguments indeed, this happens every time (ignoring of private group)
Off the top of my head, I'd suggest something like giving the mats a bonus variable that is reduced (or eliminated) whenever the player logs into anything but Open. The mats would remain, but their "bonus points" are negated upon mode switch. A bit like losing bounties or exploration data upon death, without losing the actual materials.
Of course - as has previously been discussed - FD would need to find a way to prevent anyone "sidestepping" Open.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Simply because it would be - more contribution to Powerplay for the same unit effort - the fact that choosing to play among other players (presumably because one wants to play among other players) impedes some players and reduces the number of units of effort that they can contribute is caused by the interaction with other players.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The Sidewinder cost a tiny fraction of the price of an Anaconda and is less effective than an Anaconda.
I'm putting forward the possibility that balance may be subjective and also that it may not be achievable.
Perhaps because it is about getting something extra
The "equality" you speak of is subjective - not everyone is as good a pilot as you so irrespective as to the mode the game is hard all the same. The only difference is that NPCs don't show mercy, nor can I have wingmen to assist
The problem is that solo/private mode has that "something extra" as it is currently in PP precisely due to the rationality of competition that I explained. NPC wing is easy to escape compared to a player wing.
I already addressed the subjectivity issue, everything is subjective, using it as an argument has little to no leg to stand on until we have a sovereign to put a stop to the zero-sum game.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
But it isn't, and I explained why.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
But it is done to counteract the rational competitive choice of using solo/private to gain and advantage in the competition.
Like for example, powers failing.... almost 1 year later, and no power has failed. Its a large strategy game where nothing much ever happens. Borders change a bit, those at the top get more of a bonus, but no power ever loses. No large scale changes happen.
Its not just the fortification that is boring, the large scale game is boring (disclaimer: just my opinion of course - accept some people find interest in this).
If they make this change, they will then spend development effort analyzing and trying to balance the changes, depending on how many people continue to play in other modes, when they could actually be spending more effort on making the game itself more interesting, thereby getting more people taking part in all modes.
Exactly! Balance!
Just because perfect balance is impossible doesn't mean we should not change our current, obviously imbalanced system
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Again, balance may be subjective and opinions may differ somewhat as to the degree of any perceived imbalance.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
A choice that is available to all players equally.
What is being proposed is to make one mode more equal than the others by increasing the weighting of merits gained in Open - presumably as an attempt to increase the population of Open (an assumption on my part, however this latest proposal taken alongside Sandro's outline proposal for increased consequences for illegal PKing in the "Yes PVP is unfair" thread doe tend to suggest that Open may have a population issue).
The notion that any player has any real lasting impact on PP or the BGS for that matter is sweet, like the notions of a child...
But when it rationally drive players into a certain mode under a competitive examination, it isn't "equal choice," there is inclination, and clear inclination.
I find the crime and punishment system revamp a perfect opportunity to implement this attempt to achieve equality. Also, this is done to compensate the clear inclination in the past for certain modes.
So if you managed all your PP "tasks" for the week in Open without being interdicted or seeing another player, would your contribution still have that little extra?
Is this about the difference between measurable and potential risk?
Would it be that "in Open you can't fly a shield-less T9, so you are automatically less efficient", even if your week runs without a CMDR-led intervention?
Is this about the difference between measurable and potential risk?
Would it be that "in Open you can't fly a shield-less T9, so you are automatically less efficient", even if your week runs without a CMDR-led intervention?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If players choose to eschew player interaction to min/max their effects they are hardly likely to stop doing so - unless the multiplier is at the high end of "significant".
Anything that reduced the massive inequality in financial outcome between the "murderer" and the destroyed will be welcome. Whether that encourages many players to move into Open remains to be observed.