Modes Elite Dangerous PvE vs PvP and who needs a Solo play if you had PvE server

CMDR EDGEL0RD

CMDR EDGEL0RD
Robert Maynard said:
I'm denying nothing - merely pointing out the shortcomings of data derived from a completely optional game launching system - that totally ignores two of the three platforms completely and the last at least partially.

When did Frontier ever share player count data?

Sales of franchise units - certainly - they quote the latest numbers in their financial reports.
Click to expand...

https://realmpop.com/eu.html

PvE/PvP players. Oh, but it is not wow... This is an Elite: Safety and should stay the same.
 

CMDR EDGEL0RD

CMDR EDGEL0RD
Robert Maynard said:
Indeed - that's data for another game.

The true explanation for "Dangerous" in the game's name is well known.
Click to expand...

I didnt buy it for that. And I wont be exploring again anytime soon knowing that there is nothing to be found.

PvP and PvE view counts on Youtube are PvP favored.
But yes. Streamers/youtubers are not an advertising mediums. Despite EVERY videogame company using it as such.

Lets deny more obvious stuff, shall we?
 
Last edited:

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Egy Ace Fyke said:
PvP and PvE view counts on Youtube are PvP favored.
But yes. Streamers/youtubers are not an advertising mediums. Despite EVERY videogame company using it as such.

Lets deny more obvious stuff, shall we?
Click to expand...

Streamers stream what they want to stream - and PvP presumably makes for more of a spectacle - to gain subscribers to increase chances of making money from views. It says nothing regarding how common PvP is in the game itself - nor what the predominant play-style is in this game.
 

CMDR EDGEL0RD

CMDR EDGEL0RD
Statistics are fine stuff, and GJ derailing with them.

Imagine that we went to the casino together. I had played roulette there and you just drank.
And even if we spend the same amount of drinks, 100% of the time I will have the same or less money than you.

What does that mean? That this casino is rigged, and should be fixed.

The fact that not everyone play casino doesn't mean that it is not a scam and should not be fixed.
And we can add to that that I have to spend more money on drinks (better modules).
Statement that ED is not a casino is just invalid.
The fact that roulette is optional is invalid as well.
And while you can play casino knowing that it is rigged, it kills most of the fun about it.

And exactly that makes open a place which is full of people who either do not know about that it is rigged or people which have nothing to lose. Exact situation we are having now.

And winrates shoud be added, and balanced in a way which will not bring people who hate gambling to it, but will satisfy people which do like gambling.

I can add that maternal instincts some people apply on players are misguided as well. PvP games/servers were always more popular.


I can add that maternal instincts some people apply on players are midguided as well. PvP games/servers were always more popular.
Click to expand...

Can you describe what is wrong with that reasoning?

Oh. And had Sandro talked about losses?
 
Last edited:

Yaffle

Volunteer Moderator
Yaffle
Well here's a surprise.

A thread about the modes that has turned into sniping, trolling, personal insults and not much else.

Cut it out. Stick to the topic, and if you have nothing to say on the topic then don't bother typing that nothing.

Thank you.
 

CMDR EDGEL0RD

CMDR EDGEL0RD
Ok.
Lets try it another way.

Here is what I think must be done. This is my opinion only, and I repeat, this only would concern monetary gains.

Firstly, income should be increased across the board, by some small figure around 1% to 5%.

This figure must not be too high, as it might skew balance other way around.

Secondly, Community goals need to get an increase of effort efficiency in Open as well.

Some figure, calculated by related to CG cargo losses in Open, cargo delivered in Open, and the number of PvP destructions in the CG system.
Dealing with pirate blockades is a very entertaining experience, in case of success, of course.



This should be enough. Yet, I want to present some additional possible Open-related features as well, which would add a lot of valuable gameplay.


Arbitrary levels of PvP criminal activity on the GalMap. Is systems where such activity is present, additional income can be added, with variable levels.

In order to not add too much monetary increase here, cooldown might be made rather long. Or, with no income increase at all, this would only serve as a warning on which systems to avoid.
Exploits such system might spawn would only reflect exploits of IRL criminal elements.

Increased profit of rare goods trade.

Pirates know trade routes as well as players, so this activity bears a distinct increased risk in the Open mode.
Can be multiplicative or additive with previous one.




I belive all of this should be implemented as an optional flag in ship's computer to avoid changes in EULA, with parental control if needed. OR it could be enabled from every station, costing (progressive, and with moderately large fee to opt in even at first time) fee to opt in and out, along with cooldowns.
When enabled:

Block functionality should be reduced to chat only.
Menu-log timeout increased.
Loss of P2P connections, as well as severely decreased number of connection between one and other players, should become punishable by loss of any bonuses for current transactions.
Sudden loss of connection will result in the same penalty as above, as well as an additional bounty worth of rebuy of the current ship.
And, essentially, logging to any other game mode while transactions made in Open are in effect will result in the loss of any bonuses as well.
Click to expand...

Can some one tell me what would be wrong with it? Lane by lane, if possible.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Egy Ace Fyke said:
Can some one tell me what would be wrong with it? Lane by lane, if possible.
Click to expand...

Simply that a blanket reward is ill targeted - as it is paid to anyone in the game mode (most of which is devoid of other players) just for playing in it - and disregards any hazardous encounters that may (or may not) happen.

Plus - as the game can crash all by itself (I've had two recently) - lost connections cannot reasonably be punished.
 
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: EUS

CMDR EDGEL0RD

CMDR EDGEL0RD
Robert Maynard said:
Simply that a blanket reward is ill targeted - as it is paid to anyone in the game mode (most of which is devoid of other players) just for playing in it - and disregards any hazardous encounters that may (or may not) happen.
Click to expand...

Even 0.5% would be fine. As I said, there is always some risk. And what about the rest?
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Egy Ace Fyke said:
Even 0.5% would be fine. As I said, there is always some risk. And what about the rest?
Click to expand...

The block functionality is unlikely to be removed - as it is there purposely to block other players.

Sandro has previously mentioned the possibility of increasing the menu-logout timer (when in danger).

Already mentioned loss of connection. Plus the fact that P2P connections can be broken at either end.

Not in favour of breaking the equality of effect actions in each mode - and neither, it would seem, is Sandro (except, maybe, for Powerplay - but then only briefly, over two years ago).
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
Egy Ace Fyke said:
http://steamspy.com/app/359320

In the left column. Oh, that makes it 0.8...0.4. My bad.
Click to expand...

Not all PC players use Steam.

I'm not counted if I load through Oculus VR as they have their own version.
The game also sold with it's independent launcher before Steam - so all those people may not use Steam and are not counted.

XBox 1, not counted.
PS4, not counted.

Using just Steam stats is dishonest and not a true reflection of what is going on.

Frontier have never told us how many people play, only how many copies have sold.
So your Stats information is pure fabrication you made up.
 

Tuub t Tute

T
You could also argue (without any data to back it up) that the majority of people who bought on Steam did so when it was cheap in a sale and thought it would be a fun throwaway gank account. Now they are bored and don't play, so the pv-seal player count is dropping to an all time low.

Just an opinion of course, no factual evidence available apart from a number!
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
Tuub t Tute said:
You could also argue (without any data to back it up) that the majority of people who bought on Steam did so when it was cheap in a sale and thought it would be a fun throwaway gank account. Now they are bored and don't play, so the pv-seal player count is dropping to an all time low.

Just an opinion of course, no factual evidence available apart from a number!
Click to expand...

That is an interesting thought. I bet in part you're right.

Also, both my daughters have accounts I bought through Steam in a sale and they are not currently playing - they love the game, but they are busy at the moment.
So real life and social commitments has kept them away from the game.
 

Ziggy Stardust

Ziggy Stardust
Robert,

I appreciate your posts a lot. You remain calm, cool and collected despite whatever people are throwing your way. I often find myself not needing to post because you already responded.

Cheers!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom