Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Anopheles]

So if you don't want pvp and instead of the meaningful choices of playing in Solo or Private group... Open has to be PVE too?

Everytime I hear that PVPers, when they suggest some small change that increases their enjoyment, get shouted down for 'forcing their playstyle on others', I think of threads like this where the entire game is changed for everyone, to the benefit of those who cannot be bothered to learn to fly defensively or find out where it is safe to fly (or how to avoid unwanted interaction), or want to max out cargo slots and fly safe through Open with no defenses, no shields and no danger. I laugh.

I laugh hard.

 

[Eidolon]

I too would love a PvE Open mode. The game would be better for it methinks.

+rep OP

 

[Herbrand]

So if you don't want pvp and instead of the meaningful choices of pl;aying in Solo or Private group... Open has to be PVE too?

Everytime I hear that PVPers, when they suggest some small change that increases their enjoyment, get shouted down for 'forcing their playstyle on others', I think of threads like this where the entire game is changed for everyone, to the benefit of those who cannot be bothered to learn to fly defensively or find out where it is safe to fly (or how to avoid unwanted interaction), I laugh.

I laugh hard.

What part of "add a new open mode" you did not understand?

 

[Robert Maynard]

there are two arguments being made here. One CG specific, one not.

The PVE people are crying because they want to do CG's and such without risk. NPC's are easy to either avoid or kill and CG's offer lots of reward for essentially much less effort than you would need under non-CG circumstances most of the time. So they're attractive in that way.

The PVP people are crying about allowing the above situation to exist outside of how the game currently works because CG's by their nature tend to effect the game in significant ways and there is no way to oppose them unless a second CG is specifically created to do just that. Their only option is to dissuade players from participating in the only way the game allows.


That's the CG debate.

.... and Frontier chose to implement CGs, like Powerplay, so as to be accessible from all three game modes, in keeping with their approach to player freedom and the single shared galaxy state.

The other debate is that PVE'rs are complaining that anywhere in the galaxy, they want to be not at risk of being attacked by a ship that is too hard for them to beat. They want to do that and be in "open".

The PVP'ers are worried that allowing that will essentially fragment the playerbase that exists in open now, making chance encounters of any kind even less likely than it already is.. And it's very unlikely outside of CG's or starting systems. Powerplay is just about the only thing that allows players to cross other human players in Open outside of CG's. Ironically, this player - player interaction is almost never hostile and when it is hostile, it's because of the powerplay roles. So not pointless murder.

It's less about wanting more players who can't fight to be in Open and more about not wanting the existing players to choose an easier mode to play in to accomplish everything you can in the mode that has the additional risk of pvp. Most players are lazy and will opt to the easiest mode of play that is still fun for them vs choosing one with more risk. The PvP'ers aren't upset about that possibility simply because it means their targets either go away or get much harder to find and difficult to kill. It's the risk of being attacked that is what makes the current Open mode more fun to those players. You can go years in Open and never be attacked or attack another player but it would still be more fun than playing in a mode where that's not even a possibility. And it can't work in a huge galaxy without numbers.

It's not surprising that some of the PvPers are worried - as they've probably been telling players, who have complained on the forums about being attacked by other players, to "git gud or go Solo" - so they did....

There are complaints (many complaints) about Powerplay being accessible from all three modes, just as CGs are - usually from players who want to directly oppose other players. Frontier didn't choose to implement Powerplay that way though - if players *want* to engage in Powerplay related PvP then they can choose to - by participating in Open - otherwise they can choose to participate in another game mode.

Not every player enjoys being attacked by other players - that much is evident.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So if you don't want pvp and instead of the meaningful choices of playing in Solo or Private group... Open has to be PVE too?

Everytime I hear that PVPers, when they suggest some small change that increases their enjoyment, get shouted down for 'forcing their playstyle on others', I think of threads like this where the entire game is changed for everyone, to the benefit of those who cannot be bothered to learn to fly defensively or find out where it is safe to fly (or how to avoid unwanted interaction), or want to max out cargo slots and fly safe through Open with no defenses, no shields and no danger. I laugh.

I laugh hard.

That's not what is being asked for....

 

[Darth Ender]

I just log on those people. They are not worthy of my time, and honestly everyone else should just ignore them at the best of their abilities.

Or the game shouldn't place newbies in a situation that directly pits them against more experienced players.

Rather than use modes to try and force safety, it should be part of the game in general.

I always push for a geographically situated risk system. I think core systems of the 3 major powers should be super safe. Military presence, near instant reaction to any kind of crime, especially human player instigated. This is where newbies would be spawned and they could choose to stay in these areas forever if they want. Income however would be adjusted to reflect risk.

The further away from the core you get, the more risky and less responsive the authorities are. Local systems here and there would differ a bit but in general, that's how it would be graded.

So players know exactly where they should feel "safe" and where thy shouldn't based on very well known zones in the galaxy map. Local disputes and wars aside.

In this way, I can see ending the pvp vs pve Open mode debate. But i suspect that's not easy enough for the most vocal pve players.

 

[Anopheles]

What part of "add a new open mode" you did not understand?

Since it would have the effect of leaving an Empty Open PVP mode because, despite the claims that Open is full of griefers, it really isn't. So because the game is changed because a lot of people invest too much of themselves in pixels and or insufficiently research the game they purchase, it would be pretty much the same as killing Open.

 

[RhymeRhyme]

History:

Splitting the player group even more. Muahahaha... You got private groups. Buy you daughter her own game and the problem is solved.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Since it would have the effect of leaving an Empty Open PVP mode because, despite the claims that Open is full of griefers, it really isn't. So because the game is changed because a lot of people invest too much of themselves in pixels and or insufficiently research the game they purchase, it would be pretty much the same as killing Open.

If Open is not that bad then perhaps only those currently in Solo / Private Groups would use an Open-PvE mode.

The thing is, perception of Open is a highly subjective thing - and only each player themself can decide whether their experiences there warrant continuing to play there (or not).

 

[Anopheles]

If Open is not that bad then perhaps only those currently in Solo / Private Groups would use an Open-PvE mode.

The thing is, perception of Open is a highly subjective thing - and only each player themself can decide whether their experiences there warrant continuing to play there (or not).

Except that those who lose the most, shout the loudest and make a false picture of Open which, you among others, do nothing to counteract for reasons of your own.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Except that those who lose the most, shout the loudest and make a false picture of Open which, you among others, do nothing to counteract for reasons of your own.

It is not up to the Moderation team to attempt to silence players who wish to express their opinions (unless same break forum rules).

Whether the picture is false (or not) depends on the perception of the individuals involved and is not subject to third party verification....

 

[Anopheles]

It is not up to the Moderation team to attempt to silence players who wish to express their opinions (unless same break forum rules).

Whether the picture is false (or not) depends on the perception of the individuals involved and is not subject to third party verification....

No, but it's not for the moderation team to pick a side and bang the drum loudest for that side either, too. Perhaps.

 

[Robert Maynard]

No, but it's not for the moderation team to pick a side and bang the drum loudest for that side either, too. Perhaps.

In Moderation terms, certainly.

However, Moderators (who are players too) do not Moderate threads that they participate in - and are, like other players, permitted to express their opinions on the forums....

 

[Anopheles]

In Moderation terms, certainly.

However, Moderators (who are players too) do not Moderate threads that they participate in - and are, like other players, permitted to express their opinions on the forums....

True, but the fact that the moderators take a strong stance on this matter is why only a few PVPer's bother with this forum (mostly to talk on reddit) and why there is a false ratio of PVE to PVP player opinions on these forums and make it something of an Echo Chamber (as Reddit is an Echo Chamber for PVP views).

 

[Darth Ender]

.... and Frontier chose to implement CGs, like Powerplay, so as to be accessible from all three game modes, in keeping with their approach to player freedom and the single shared galaxy state.

And if that was working great, there wouldn't be an issue with CG's essentially being all but guaranteed to be successful unless they specifically create an opposing CG. A community goal without a way of opposing it is not a community goal. It's just FD throwing crumbs out to keep players busy between releases or looking to progress some plot along their own pre-defined story. Make every CG have an opposing CG and you can end that argument.

It's not surprising that some of the PvPers are worried - as they've probably been telling players, who have complained on the forums about being attacked by other players, to "git gud or go Solo" - so they did....

There are complaints (many complaints) about Powerplay being accessible from all three modes, just as CGs are - usually from players who want to directly oppose other players. Frontier didn't choose to implement Powerplay that way though - if players *want* to engage in Powerplay related PvP then they can choose to - by participating in Open - otherwise they can choose to participate in another game mode.

Not every player enjoys being attacked by other players - that much is evident.

You're assuming the way FD implemented these things is at all a good implementation. Powerplay puts players against other players but in an indirect way with a minor almost non-existent amount of optional direct opposition. Powerplay, even when in Open is 99.9999% PVE. The different things you do in powerplay do not benefit player vs player interaction at all. In fact, you're wasting your time attacking another powerplay player. You dont get more points for killing a player. You take longer doing it and you end up risking your own merits if you lose. Powerplay pvp is simply an opportunity-based interaction that is essentially all role-play.

That's how it currently is. The complaints on the PVP-side have been to make it more direct player vs player action rather than all PVE as it currently is.

If we're going to paint Open as PVP'ers playground and solo and private as the PVE'ers playgrounds, then I dont see anything wrong with PVP'ers asking for Open to incentivize PvP interaction.

I think that's what most PVE'ers are missing from the PVP'ers posts. PVP'ers want incentives associated with player vs player combat because it's harder. That doesn't involve removing anything from PVE'ers.

Either way, the stalemate in what the multiple incompatible gamer-types want with this game is the evidence to why there are universal laws like "jack of all trades but master of none". I wish FD would stop being scared to commit to something and just go all in one way or the other and build the game the best that it can be. It's nobody's perfect if it's everybody's average.

 

[Robert Maynard]

True, but the fact that the moderators take a strong stance on this matter is why only a few PVPer's bother with this forum (mostly to talk on reddit) and why there is a false ratio of PVE to PVP player opinions on these forums and make it something of an Echo Chamber.

Mark Allen has already confirmed the oft speculated: Frontier are well aware that the majority of players do not get involved in PvP....

.... so the forums might be more representative than reddit in that regard.

 

[Globusdiablo]

Oh I am aware of it, but the way you used the category is completely incompatible with how I treat non-PvP players in my proposal. Since you claim to have read my proposal, I'm confused as to why you believe I'm " [insisting] on non PvP players to be [my] content"?

I don't understand how can I insist on any player to become my content when said "content" is universal and bidirectional? My proposal doesn't force actual solo players into Open, either. So I am very confused as to what you mean despite having a rough idea of what you mean by "content."

Settle down Commander. My initial querry was based on your recent comments in this thread. I really can't remember your entire (lengthy) proposal. But flagging as you mention suggests a tick box option for non PvP players to move freely in the same instances as PvP players in one coherent game world, does it not?

Depending on how up front you are about this particular point more or less decides the nature of your debates. But you enjoy a good roast as much as the next man, yes?

I'm not going back to reading your entire proposal again, so I'll rely on you for the short and sweet of it regarding accommodating the two major player groups.

 

[Anopheles]

Mark Allen has already confirmed the oft speculated: Frontier are well aware that the majority of players do not get involved in PvP....

.... so the forums might be more representative than reddit in that regard.

Circular Argument and only relevant to modern times. Back in the day, there was a lot more PVP (Code vs Traders, lots and lots of Bounty hunters vs The Code. Group vis group.). PVP died because it got dull. If PVP was as good as it was before the black ships invisible meta, then those numbers would be different.

 

[Julio Montega]

And if that was working great, there wouldn't be an issue with CG's essentially being all but guaranteed to be successful unless they specifically create an opposing CG. A community goal without a way of opposing it is not a community goal. It's just FD throwing crumbs out to keep players busy between releases or looking to progress some plot along their own pre-defined story. Make every CG have an opposing CG and you can end that argument.



You're assuming the way FD implemented these things is at all a good implementation. Powerplay puts players against other players but in an indirect way with a minor almost non-existent amount of optional direct opposition. Powerplay, even when in Open is 99.9999% PVE. The different things you do in powerplay do not benefit player vs player interaction at all. In fact, you're wasting your time attacking another powerplay player. You dont get more points for killing a player. You take longer doing it and you end up risking your own merits if you lose. Powerplay pvp is simply an opportunity-based interaction that is essentially all role-play.

That's how it currently is. The complaints on the PVP-side have been to make it more direct player vs player action rather than all PVE as it currently is.

If we're going to paint Open as PVP'ers playground and solo and private as the PVE'ers playgrounds, then I dont see anything wrong with PVP'ers asking for Open to incentivize PvP interaction.

I think that's what most PVE'ers are missing from the PVP'ers posts. PVP'ers want incentives associated with player vs player combat because it's harder. That doesn't involve removing anything from PVE'ers.

Either way, the stalemate in what the multiple incompatible gamer-types want with this game is the evidence to why there are universal laws like "jack of all trades but master of none". I wish FD would stop being scared to commit to something and just go all in one way or the other and build the game the best that it can be. It's nobody's perfect if it's everybody's average.

That is well put. +1

Outside from player hubs, which are CGs or more lore based systems,
or even stuff like Merope and Maia where new "content" is found Open very much is PvE.
The scale of the 'verse creates that perspective.

If a CMDR frequents hotspots however, as described above,
the perception of open might change.

In this very case i very much agree with what FD stated some time ago:
It is opnions and personal perspectives represented, rather than hard facts.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Circular Argument and only relevant to modern times. Back in the day, there was a lot more PVP (Code vs Traders, lots and lots of Bounty hunters vs The Code. Group vis group.). PVP died because it got dull. If PVP was as good as it was before the black ships invisible meta, then those numbers would be different.

Maybe yes - maybe no. We'll never know what might have been. We do know, however, what Frontier have told us....