FDEv, Open now is Bambi vs. Godzilla, please consider having an Open server that is PvE only

[Six6VI]

There is ATR - Advanced Tactical Repsonse coming, but on reddit a guy with pvp experience said, he easily killed many of those (I think in the beta server). It would be soooo easy to give the clean commanders 100% protection or repayment even for cargo/data in open, to make solo/pve ppl happy and give them safety in large part of space in open, I don't understand how can years passed without implementing it...

I found that post: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/403967-Beyond-3-0-Beta-2-Incoming?p=6365815#post6365815

[Edit: Sarcasm hazard - click at own risk]

 

[StiTch]

Wouldn't it be better to have 99% of the playerbase in the same galaxy in the same time and feel the whole universe live and breath......we could easily have pvp, no pvp, npc, and player owned systems.

Problem is these two sentiments construct one hell of an oxymoron. If you relegate various systems to "PvP" and "PvE", the galaxy is no longer a natural, breathing entity. Players would partition themselves to the systems that have the rules they like and by very nature separate themselves out anyway. Pirates would have to sit in "PvP systems" while traders travel through PvE only systems with impunity. Players that want to barricade stations to achieve something would have to pick objectives that can only be achieved in PvP systems. PvE players would cry that "this system is PvP, it has something I want, why can't I have that system as PvE, I want to play my way!!"

That's why Open is a no-rules, natural affair. If you want to break the Empire, you have the right to amass a Federal army and shoot out everything at important Empire stations. If you want to pirate traders, you can calculate the systems you want to wait in based on trade routes, rather than sitting in PvP systems at the edge of PvE space and hoping someone accidentally crosses in. And if you don't like that a no-rules environment has, well, no rules...that's why you were given PG/Solo.

 

[Hiro Renn]

Problem is these two sentiments construct one hell of an oxymoron. If you relegate various systems to "PvP" and "PvE", the galaxy is no longer a natural, breathing entity. Players would partition themselves to the systems that have the rules they like and by very nature separate themselves out anyway. Pirates would have to sit in "PvP systems" while traders travel through PvE only systems with impunity. Players that want to barricade stations to achieve something would have to pick objectives that can only be achieved in PvP systems. PvE players would cry that "this system is PvP, it has something I want, why can't I have that system as PvE, I want to play my way!!"

That's why Open is a no-rules, natural affair. If you want to break the Empire, you have the right to amass a Federal army and shoot out everything at important Empire stations. If you want to pirate traders, you can calculate the systems you want to wait in based on trade routes, rather than sitting in PvP systems at the edge of PvE space and hoping someone accidentally crosses in. And if you don't like that a no-rules environment has, well, no rules...that's why you were given PG/Solo.

I do not agree, this system works very good in eve online. They allow ganks in high sec and that is a problem, it should not be allowed. But there are always players who take the risk to go to low sec or null sec for more profit or just want to try out pvp. If something like that would be implemented here, there would be players who always stayed in high sec, but there would be a large protion of players who would take the risk and travel here and there. And player or players alliance owned systems outside the bubble would exist, the pvp-ers could have an endless war amongst each other, conquering systems.

 

[StiTch]

I do not agree, this system works very good in eve online.

Problem is this game isn't EVE online. There's no point comparing the two when the most they share is a space theme.

EVE has effectively one server (i.e. no "solo" mode) and an actual economy to handle. Resources such as mining belts are actually worth competing over, which means there's ultimately motivation for players of different types to get involved in each others' space. It is also guild focused, which allows players to have support from team mates in their endeavours.

Elite is a totally different game with no economy and no meaning given to us. We're supposedly meant to create that meaning ourselves. But if we want to turn this into EVE, lets start with server side management so that CLing is stopped, remove Solo/PG groups, and make it impossible for players to achieve anything real on their own.

Sound good?

Thought not

 

[Hiro Renn]

Problem is this game isn't EVE online. There's no point comparing the two when the most they share is a space theme.

EVE has effectively one server (i.e. no "solo" mode) and an actual economy to handle. Resources such as mining belts are actually worth competing over, which means there's ultimately motivation for players of different types to get involved in each others' space. It is also guild focused, which allows players to have support from team mates in their endeavours.

Elite is a totally different game with no economy and no meaning given to us. We're supposedly meant to create that meaning ourselves. But if we want to turn this into EVE, lets start with server side management so that CLing is stopped, remove Solo/PG groups, and make it impossible for players to achieve anything real on their own.

Sound good?

Thought not

You are wrong, the fact that we can use good ideas from other games, for example eve, doesnt mean we need to implement their whole gameplay core here. Forget their economy and the other stuff, ED is just good as it is, but inserting that thing I mentioned from eve would be a step forward, without copy pasting anything else from there.

Look, there is a thread here about a space race a few lines below in suggestions subforum. You can't argue that Need for Speed is another type of game and we do need races in ED and we can't implenet the sport cars in there. No, we can't, but the guy's basic suggestion was a good idea and could work well in ED.

We need not to fully copy other games, but should take good ideas from here and there from any type of game be it space, racing, strategy, fps etc..

 

[StiTch]

You are wrong

No, I just said something you don't like.

As the remainder of your post is just making noise while you try to find a suitable rebuttal, I'll leave you to it. Feel free to edit your post when you can find just about anything that supports your misguided view that you're entitled to magical safe space in Open and two out of three entire game modes that let you influence the entire galaxy in magical safe space.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

I agree with you that I might be wrong, but the galaxy, especially in this game is sooo huge, basicly unimaginably huge... Wouldn't it be better to have 99% of the playerbase in the same galaxy in the same time and feel the whole universe live and breath? We have uncountable systems we could easily have pvp, no pvp, npc, and player owned systems. Everyone could find tens of thousands of places to live and play in the same open universe. I hope one that the devs will create this.

I'm not sure, given that there are hundreds of millions of systems (and over 20,000 inhabited ones), whether it matters that much if the reason I can't see another player is because
- they're in Solo
- they're in Open, but hundreds or thousands of light years away

Either way I'm not going to see them ... and I see enough people in Open who aren't elsewhere that the galaxy doesn't feel empty to me.

And either way, they are in the same galaxy and have effects through the BGS and other "shared state" systems on other players, whether they ever end up in the same instance or not.

 

[Six6VI]

Keep it simple: ONE start system, "NEW" CMDR SOLO (Tutorial) mode.

The only difference is you cannot load a brand new account in OPEN in the start system, that option is greyed out on the main menu until you do the tutorial, when there actually is one, and pass a basic controls setup 'test' to unlock inter-system FSD.

Offer plenty of loud and clear warnings before they leave the start system.

Absolute minimum impact on the game, brand new players can learn the ropes before having to deal with gankers, which come in all shapes and sizes of course. There's a CMDR reset option, which is not a "NEW" account and they can go straight to OPEN.

Or, a brand new (second) account could log SOLO, log back out and come straight back in to skip the tutorial, jump to a different system and relog to OPEN. It's not like people are averse to mode hopping when they're trying to exploit the mission boards.

If the Security system was done right, people would segregate themselves by risk / reward. Lawful traders in High-sec where they won't even be bothered by interdictions unless it's part of a mission wrinkle and Anarchy where bounty hunters learn dead fast.

 

[Hiro Renn]

No, I just said something you don't like.

As the remainder of your post is just making noise while you try to find a suitable rebuttal, I'll leave you to it. Feel free to edit your post when you can find just about anything that supports your misguided view that you're entitled to magical safe space in Open and two out of three entire game modes that let you influence the entire galaxy in magical safe space.

You said: "But if we want to turn this into EVE, lets start with server side management so that CLing is stopped, remove Solo/PG groups, and make it impossible for players to achieve anything real on their own."

Yes, you are wrong. Because I didn't write any small hints or suggestion of the above, only about the security status and player owned systems (which is already ingame in a way - minor factions) and battles between them which is again: in ED. You are wrong because you try to suggest that if we take a good idea from eve we need to change EVERYTHING here to make it eve 2.0.

..and having "magical" safe spaces in open is not that unimaginable as it is quiet funny that for example in the middle of a major fed or imperial world peaceful traders getting massacred by pirates DAILY or HOURLY. Compare to this the thargoid threat is a joke lol. That is why Advanced Tactical Response aka concord lite is coming to the game and I hope it will be much stronger and faster than gankers think.

..and I am not against pvp or anything, lol the whole humanity would have enough space in this game to fight in, moreover, you mentioned that magical safe space when pve-ers have two more game modes.. the point of my idea is to make the players in solo and group mode to come to open and fill the space, and later some of them would try out pvp as well for sure.

I do not want the devs to enforce unneeded restrictions on open, i want a more fair SINGLE open universe, not three seperate game modes.

 

[Deleted member 38366]

Seeing newer Games ship with dedicated PvP and PvE Game Modes right off the bat nowadays...

I'd say why not? Seems a very common thing and more and more Players seemingly have jumped off the "Multiplayer - PvP" wagon that's been almost a mandatory old Industry Standard for decades.

Ensures both Player archetypes get the experience they want.

- rename Open Play to Open/PvP
- formalize a PvE mode with required mechanics and call it Open/PvE

 

[Six6VI]

I do not want the devs to enforce unneeded restrictions on open, i want a more fair SINGLE open universe, not three seperate game modes.

^^That!

If I'm busy trying to achieve something I can't get insurance for I'll happily select the Hi-Sec filter in the Galmap and stay out of your gank-face if you stay out of mine. Hi-Sec profit margins and mission rewards should be lower to reflect the protection you're getting and the much lower risk of not being able to complete them at all.

Anarchy systems SHOULD BE FULL OF BRUTAL GANK-NPC's, regardless if there are PvP gankers in there too and if you're not at least cordial with the controlling Anarchy faction you're basically dead before you jump in. Find another system where they don't have control and build up rep with them first, or you gonna be dead bro.

The security, or lack thereof system needs proper teeth like Elite 84! SOLO is only for for brand newbs in the start system tutorial and remove PG. I play like a carebear, gankers and other numpties waving their e-peens around totally do my head in but really, the entire game could be more dynamic and alive with only one OPEN mode.

[Edit: Should mention there are serious penalties for an unprovoked attack on a clean ship in your own, or an allied faction.]

[Edit: Should also mention the 'safe' zones around stations should be a bit smarter in the application of fines / lethal force.]

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

Keep it simple: ONE start system, "NEW" CMDR SOLO (Tutorial) mode.

The only difference is you cannot load a brand new account in OPEN in the start system, that option is greyed out on the main menu until you do the tutorial, when there actually is one, and pass a basic controls setup 'test' to unlock inter-system FSD.

Offer plenty of loud and clear warnings before they leave the start system.

Absolute minimum impact on the game, brand new players can learn the ropes before having to deal with gankers, which come in all shapes and sizes of course. There's a CMDR reset option, which is not a "NEW" account and they can go straight to OPEN.

Or, a brand new (second) account could log SOLO, log back out and come straight back in to skip the tutorial, jump to a different system and relog to OPEN. It's not like people are averse to mode hopping when they're trying to exploit the mission boards.

If the Security system was done right, people would segregate themselves by risk / reward. Lawful traders in High-sec where they won't even be bothered by interdictions unless it's part of a mission wrinkle and Anarchy where bounty hunters learn dead fast.

I didn't actually play the tutorial until about 2 years later, just out of curiosity. Lol

And then I broke it.

 

[Six6VI]

If engineering is now equal opportunity and equal outcome...

So 'git gud' becomes important again, but what's the need to practice?

Scenario: Cargo CG: More delivered goods = better rewards (incentive)
OPEN = Risky, cash / effort lower due to better modules / armour / etc
SOLO = Strip down the biggest light weight paper bag for maximum FSD

Can't insure the cargo, time is money, cheaper rebuy, SOLO no brainer?


Scenario: Bounty CG: More vouchers = better reward (survive incentive)
OPEN = Risky, may get torpedoed in the back while in combat with NPCs
SOLO = Hi-Res, high cash, don't hit a cop or the whole lot instantly turn

Might make new friends but hand in often or, eliminate the RNG from PvP


NPCs are more predictable than players, if you want a predictable result
No wonder it's rare to see other players, there's incentives to play alone

Edit: About those (allied) cops, fines, stray shots and the death squads
Can the thresholds be connected to reputation and benefit of the doubt
Maybe if you shoot AND KILL one you drop to mid-friendly or its just fine

 

[Crank Larson]

This looks remarkably like the Hotel California, to me...

 

[Ian Doncaster]

Scenario: Cargo CG: More delivered goods = better rewards (incentive)
OPEN = Risky, cash / effort lower due to better modules / armour / etc
SOLO = Strip down the biggest light weight paper bag for maximum FSD

Can't insure the cargo, time is money, cheaper rebuy, SOLO no brainer?

True ... but on a money-per-time basis, not doing the CG at all in any mode because you're busy doing flavour-of-the-month grinding hundreds of LY away usually wins by a long way.

Once you're not min-maxing to the extent you show up to CGs at all, then the type of experience you want is the important thing - and some people like the added danger and added potential to meet people.


For that matter, adding together the extra money earned from winging-up with people, and then subtracting the losses from PvP deaths outside of pre-arranged fights, I'm currently several tens of millions of credits ahead as a result of playing in Open rather than Solo. So even the min-maxing argument for Solo doesn't necessarily apply depending on what you do and where.

 

[Poonjabby]

FYI,

The ATR's in Beta are a joke.

Poon

 

[Six6VI]

True ... but on a money-per-time basis, not doing the CG at all in any mode because you're busy doing flavour-of-the-month grinding hundreds of LY away usually wins by a long way.

Once you're not min-maxing to the extent you show up to CGs at all, then the type of experience you want is the important thing - and some people like the added danger and added potential to meet people.


For that matter, adding together the extra money earned from winging-up with people, and then subtracting the losses from PvP deaths outside of pre-arranged fights, I'm currently several tens of millions of credits ahead as a result of playing in Open rather than Solo. So even the min-maxing argument for Solo doesn't necessarily apply depending on what you do and where.

lol, agreed. CG's are a semi-fun diversion, maybe some extra bonus cash on top of the bounties you might have decided to go and get anyway while restocking engineering data, since you're going to be scanning everything.

On a purely cost / benefit analysis I made very few of my billions in OPEN.

[Edit: Almost none, now I'm thinking about it.]

 

[MickyG1982]

Poor horse...

 

[OldSchoolPlayer]

Let's give Frontier a chance to release the new and improved beyond series.

 

[Arithon]

Anyone who thinks the answer to not attacking new players without provocation is "play in SOLO" should themselves remain in SOLO.

Elite is a game with rules and one of those rules is if you murder someone in a secure system, there will and should be dire consequences. Griefing outside of anarchy systems should be something that takes a punishing toll.

However, that play-style is valid in lawless systems and rightly so. Anarchy systems are the wild west, but not the WHOLE of Open. If you think that, then you've misunderstood Elite.

Frontier has addressed this with the 3.0 crime & punishment changes. Wanton killing will now come with penalties. However, something else they could do and I hope they will consider is not spawning all new players at LHS 3447 in the Eravate station. Instead spawn new players from a random location based on RND seed ID from their account ID, so they always start from the same system. I understand that since many of us started playing, scripted missions have been added, but I'm sure this could be applied to other star systems - even if from a shortlist. That way new players can enter OPEN without a gang of murderers laying in wait.

I don't think a PvE-only mode needs to be applied until we've seen the new user and group management Frontier are rolling out in Q4.

One thing I would ask for, is that with Private Groups, you should be able to see WHICH group your friends are in and which group you are in, easily, in game. Just having "private group" is not good enough.