Dear FDev

Phrosperatus

P
I do not care what you think about my knowledge of EvE Online. The way you act towards me is an "immediately ignoring you in the future".
 
Last edited:

n13L5

n13L5
rdslw said:

Let me address shortly beginning of your response, which is simply false. Let me iterate it for you (I wrote it before your post, please read discussion before jumping in ;-) :
* my group of 30 members temporarily used SOLO to compete and harm other groups of OPEN players
* I did it
* our opponents do it, and confirm it
* people write to use SOLO for parttime of your powerplay as a suggestion to carry tasks against other powers (there is PLENTY of it)
* observing data in PP, while being in SC in a given system shows split of open/solo happens, WITH the very same people switch modes

So no, it's a fact, not a claim. Bear with me, I'm not writing that EVERYBODY is doing it.

And I agree with you, I would love to see time constraint on switching modes. That would be great. I'm not against removing SOLO, I do understand there are players who love to haul commodities/explore etc. alone.

I do however think (while here, not like above, this is my supposition and I may be wrong): OPEN would be much bigger than SOLO (if separated completely) in terms of players count. And people (switchers) know it. Hardcode (yet vocal) solo truckers will chose solo: good for them - but they're minority (which I think can be proven statistically from forums & reddit) . Of course I may be wrong here, but I see a lot of arguments for that, I even thought about starting such discussion, yet I do not accept to being moved into another 5000 pages one thread where you can not effectively communicate. <sarcasm> Of course it was done only for the good, and for newcomers have one convenient place with solo/open debate</sarcasm>. BTW my statistical analysis of people chosing solo/open mode based on ship they're flying was moved there.
Click to expand...

Ok, reasonable response and I'll consider your point under 1 proven.

This doesn't change the issue with players who get a total lockup over competition. But regardless, maybe we can make something half useful out of this, even if there's slim chance that it will ever get implemented:

I'm NOT a solo trucker. I just dislike PvP as I play for relaxation and not for an adrenaline rush. I still kill NPC's sometimes for diversion from other stuff, but I've never touched PP. If any developer as much as mentions "emergent game play", their game is off my list.

But... I'd drop SOLO the minute FD introduces a PvE open.

If FD did offer a PvP open with certain restrictions to switching to other modes (temporal or otherwise), to prevent the tricks you mention -
and adds a PvE open, I have this wild idea, that most people would drop solo, since you could now socialize in PvE open and cooperate against the environment, without the barrier of finding a suitable group first, for those who prefer that.

The background sim might still be impacted as previously by both modes, but at least you know one group of open PvP players aren't able to drop out to foil the efforts of your group where you can't touch them. People would need to purchase and grind up a secondary account to purposely skew things, which you wouldn't be able to prevent in any case, but it would be a lot higher barrier.


I realize no solution will ever be perfect for everyone, but this might give a lot of people *more* of what they want...?


For me personally, its like this:
- Online SOLO brings only disadvantages over offline SOLO. (no choice about installing patches, no control over my save games, need to be online etc)
- Online open PvP brings one massive additional disadvantage - hostile players interfering with the enjoyment of MY Sunday afternoon.
My Sunday afternoon is not open to anyone else to mess with, because I signed up for a game that promised that immunity.
So FD can never fundamentally change that, no matter what widely hated competitive issues arise...

- Online open PvE brings one fairly nice advantage over online solo: I can socialize like on a PvE server in WoW without being bothered by those with a need for PvP and I can treat CQC like a WoW battleground for the rare occasions when I actually do feel like PvP.

When you pay for a game, you want to be able to control your experience along the lines promised by the publisher.
 
Last edited:

Mosait

Mosait
An experiment I'd like to see is how PvP interactions would play out if there wasn't a clear indication that that cobra your trying to interdict was a player or npc. Would it make any difference to the game? Would griefing minimize? Would more ppl play open?
 
Last edited:

HectorW

H
rdslw said:

Nope.

Very often, while playing on TS, group of commanders put themselves on different instances on purpose to completely monitor given system. I personally did it few times while opposing Felicia Winters. Is it possible to break such blockade? It is, but much more difficult, as number of instances is much smaller than players. Also in SC this is reduced even more as instances are mostly used for slow flight. Not to mention that 'searching for empty instance' is easily solvable even within current P2P design.

In general, no solo will tenfold increase chances of blockade, so your argument is moot. It's like saying: vaccine helps only 50% of people against HIV. Its useless, don't use it, i want that 50% (to be possibly cured) be ill and die of HIV, because HIV is a god thing and we must be with it ;-)
Click to expand...

You have belifs, I can respect that. You are wrong but its another thing. Point is you cant blockade anything, instances are based on geography and quality of connection, you can block 5-10, I can still with few friends be in another one.

If you dont accept it there is another reason this discussion is moot - FD constantly is saying - there will be no discrimination agains solo players. Live with that. I can agree that CG and PP should be done in Open, but remember that in Open lonely player (core of ED) is in great disadvantage against wings of FDLs , Vultures etc. - this is not acceptable for FD afaik.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom