Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Robert Maynard]

Because the pvp as it is is awful. If it was better, you'd get even less ganking than there actually is.

That depends on the gankers - and many of them don't seem to want any challenge in their "PvP".

And, as I've said before, the fractured nature of the game modes has diluted player pressure on Fdev already meaning we get new updates while there are still major bugs in old updates (and core game).

The game was funded based on the design that has contained all three game modes from the outset - we'll never know if it would have been funded if it had been Open only.

More modes will either ensure that dilution or make it worse; It would definitely not make the situation better.

That depends on one's perspective, of course - from the PvE players' perspective, offering a game mode that would permit many players currently playing in PvE Private Groups or Solo to play in an official game mode with an unlimited population (and no PvP) would permit the fragmented PvE player-base to coalesce into Open-PvE, if they wanted to, of course.

Furthermore, if you actually spend the time learning how the simulation works, you can avoid 99% of all Pvp and evade 99% of the pvp you do encounter, especially if you give yourself a fighting chance by presuming hostility and by giving your ship some defences, even a shield if nothing else.

All of my ships have shields - if only for avoiding damage in "hard" landings....

That's not telling you how to play the game except when pvp is likely.

But I guess it's easier to get Fdev to make a new mode so then you can start to campaign for less skilled npc's and nerfing star damage and complete the mission to make E D little more than a shiny mobile game.

It was all going so well - until this. Typical casting of aspersion....

Not wanting PvP does not mean that players want less of a challenge from the game - just that they want to avoid PvP (which can be entirely lacking in "fun") so that their game-time is more "fun".

 

[BigBANGtheory [VR]]

Posts like these are indeed splendid advertising for Mobius.

Take your protein pills and put your helmet on.... you mean

 

[Geirdriful]

So you don't understand that people who are not you like different things than you do. Not only that, but you equate those things with a flash game your 6 yo plays. It's always so constructive to ridicule things you don't understand. Perhaps instead of ridiculing you could look to gain understanding?

Then you counter with your wish that all players should be in the mode where your preferred playing style is possible. "And PvP players would dominate the fringes", "Control areas of space". Is that a motivator I read? Is it your wish to be dominant and dictate other people's behaviour? And of course having the things in the game you like would make for a happier player base. Sure, because we already established you're unable to grasp other people like different things than you do.


Posts like these are indeed splendid advertising for Mobius.

But I'd like to address the aspiring PvPer, this sentiment is not common amongst PvPers. Just a couple of recurring posters in this forum. Most PvPers I met in game are much more open minded than that

This seems to have upset you, at least that's what I gather by your attempt to criticize me by accusations of "lack of understanding".

I had an expectation that others would understand my point, it seems you need some clarification.

I do understand that other people do not enjoy the same things that I do, I have never said that we all should enjoy the same things. I implied that I don't understand why some people enjoy things that present little or no challenge. I then demonstrated that with an outrageous example of a very simple game that my child plays.

I do not understand the joy derived from watching numbers grow in an imaginary bank account. I am of the opinion that any pve content is simply a means to earn credits. Surely you don't believe that if your t6 is blown up that little invisible space men will die because your medical supplies did not arrive? Do you believe that the Thargoids will take over the bubble, one system at a time until all of humanity is destroyed? Then FD turns off the servers?

But people get trapped in feedback loops, haul crap, get credits, buy bigger ship that can haul even more crap, haul crap, get credits, etc. They also have a tendancy to gravitate to the simplest methods to reinforce this feedback. This can be applied to any of the "professions" in the game.

I am against further segregation in game, I am for an active ecosystem of players. Another mode would exacerbate this segregation. See, in my dream world there is a place for you. You could mine rocks, haul crap, shoot harmless AI ships, all in the comfort of high security space. There seems to be call for on these forums for more punishment of killers and I support that. Give us CONCORD, the threat of their wrath would protect you from people like me.

It seems though, that in the dream world of the OP, there is no place for me, I can only assume, in your attack of my position, that you agree. Hence the reason for my post. I know I am not introducing any new ideas, I just want to be heard as an opponent of further separation of the playerbase.

 

[Littlerift]

Furthermore, if you actually spend the time learning how the simulation works, you can avoid 99% of all Pvp and evade 99% of the pvp you do encounter, especially if you give yourself a fighting chance by presuming hostility and by giving your ship some defences, even a shield if nothing else.

Unless you're going for the best shields, boosters, and SCBs, there's no point having shields at all if you end up in a fight with a PvP build.

 

[House0fDerp]

I am against further segregation in game, I am for an active ecosystem of players. Another mode would exacerbate this segregation. See, in my dream world there is a place for you. You could mine rocks, haul crap, shoot harmless AI ships, all in the comfort of high security space. There seems to be call for on these forums for more punishment of killers and I support that. Give us CONCORD, the threat of their wrath would protect you from people like me.

The issue with the place you're trying to create is that it's not a good place to dwell. In a game that gives a wide range of exploration you're confining players based upon their PvP preference rather than allowing them to proceed where their activities and curiosity lead them. If you're going to make corners that everyone needs to stick to for their playstyle you're still incentivizing solo/private group play.

It seems though, that in the dream world of the OP, there is no place for me, I can only assume, in your attack of my position, that you agree. Hence the reason for my post. I know I am not introducing any new ideas, I just want to be heard as an opponent of further separation of the playerbase.

Your place would obviously be in regular open, where it has been and will continue to be. Ideas about crime and punishment on the other hand make parts of the galaxy unusable for you and other parts unusable for others. No one really wins as the result is more confinement even on their would be game mode of choice.

 

[Anopheles]

That depends on the gankers - and many of them don't seem to want any challenge in their Pvp.

On the subject of casting aspertions...

Actually, most of the older pvp players want a return to organised group vs group pvp before the SCB revolution and heat meta.

When people so inclined banged heads against each other with less difference between ships (meaning skill/organization was the defining factor of victory) then there was less (not no) seal clubbing. Some groups even went after gankers in a kind of rp keeping the skies clean kind of thing.

There wasn't even that much piracy as self appointed police forces meant you were swapping out of pirate ships into Combat ships just to survive.


This is why think pvpers think pvp changes benefit everyone not just pewpew people.

- - - Updated - - -

Unless you're going for the best shields, boosters, and SCBs, there's no point having shields at all if you end up in a fight with a PvP build.

So learn to avoid the pvp in the first place. Circular routes, watching who is behind you on the scanner, dropping into space if you are not sure. Watching for weapon deployment on the scanner, etc.

 

[jacozilla]

I am against further segregation in game, I am for an active ecosystem of players. Another mode would exacerbate this segregation.

It's pretty hard for open minded, nice people to defend things like apartheid and segregation. Which I assume is why you choose that word. Unfortunately you completely misapply it here.

The word you're actually substituting is migration. You are against players freely choosing to migrate somewhere else so they can live in peace among other like minded people.

Segregation is when that condition is imposed upon you - by the state, by force, by laws or regulations, etc. You don't want your Open mode to be depopulated further, fine - that's a valid opinion and desire. I don't agree with it since keeping it populated means acknowledging people who don't like it are merely there to be game content for those that want to deny their migration. But expressing a want is simply an opinion. No right or wrong. So no problem.

But players leaving open, or asking for an open-pve mode is not segregation, it's migration. If FD or somebody who had the power to pick people up and drop them into a particular mode and say 'that's your mode, now stay there', that would be segregation.

What you are either clearly missing, or being disingenuous about is the critical components of free will and consent. You are stating that you're against further segregation of the player base; great so am I. Players are currently forced to flee to möbius or other private groups if they want social interaction. Solo gives them protection from open, but not the interaction. Hence private groups like möbius are the only game in town for them.

Bottom line is you are portraying the free choice of wanting to migrate to a mode with like minded people as somehow segregation being imposed. Depopulating Open does reduce the viability of that mode. Entirely concede that, and no getting around it as fact.

But also bottom line is so what? If the viability of that mode can only be sustained by keeping unhappy players in it or bringing in enough new chum until they hear about möbius or other options, then it deserves the lower population status. The sole reason this topic isn't even more of contention is the existence of two, filled to capacity möbius groups.

If and when that single post of failure ever bursts, FD will have no choice but to act in some way. Maybe good, bad, or the very typical nobody is happy with the change they make. But it's as incorrect as calling free will migration as segregation to pretend the balloon isn't ripe to burst the moment Möbius goes under.

 

[Geirdriful]

The issue with the place you're trying to create is that it's not a good place to dwell. In a game that gives a wide range of exploration you're confining players based upon their PvP preference rather than allowing them to proceed where their activities and curiosity lead them. If you're going to make corners that everyone needs to stick to for their playstyle you're still incentivizing solo/private group play.



Your place would obviously be in regular open, where it has been and will continue to be. Ideas about crime and punishment on the other hand make parts of the galaxy unusable for you and other parts unusable for others. No one really wins as the result is more confinement even on their would be game mode of choice.

I counter that it would make it a better place to dwell. I could visit Ziggy in his part of the galaxy when I am on my best behavior and he can bring his FDL to my side of town when he wants to go on a murder spree. We could be best of friends. But with separate modes we will never meet. And that is where the problem lies.

These areas could clearly defined on the galaxy map and there would be no suprised CMDRs wondering why they just got killed. No one would be restricted in their ability to travel anywhere, you would just need to make sure you could defend yourself when in certain systems. It's almost like another game already got this right...

 

[Robert Maynard]

On the subject of casting aspertions...

Are you trying to suggest that gankers are seeking challenge when attacking weak ships in their Engineered meta builds?

Actually, most of the older pvp players want a return to organised group vs group pvp before the SCB revolution and heat meta.

There's nothing stopping PvP players organising group vs group PvP - with agreed loadouts.

When people so inclined banged heads against each other with less difference between ships (meaning skill/organization was the defining factor of victory) then there was less (not no) seal clubbing. Some groups even went after gankers in a kind of rp keeping the skies clean kind of thing.

I doubt the difference in ships will reduce to that level again - even pre-Engineers the disparity between a pure combat ship and a trader was pretty huge.

There wasn't even that much piracy as self appointed police forces meant you were swapping out of pirate ships into Combat ships just to survive.

Nostalgia or rose tinted spectacles?

This is why think pvpers think pvp changes benefit everyone not just pewpew people.

.... and PvEers are probably concerned that changes that benefit PvP may involve them as unwilling targets - unless the game clearly differentiates between valid PvP targets and "others".

 

[Geirdriful]

It's pretty hard for open minded, nice people to defend things like apartheid and segregation. Which I assume is why you choose that word. Unfortunately you completely misapply it here.

The word you're actually substituting is migration. You are against players freely choosing to migrate somewhere else so they can live in peace among other like minded people.

Segregation is when that condition is imposed upon you - by the state, by force, by laws or regulations, etc. You don't want your Open mode to be depopulated further, fine - that's a valid opinion and desire. I don't agree with it since keeping it populated means acknowledging people who don't like it are merely there to be game content for those that want to deny their migration. But expressing a want is simply an opinion. No right or wrong. So no problem.

But players leaving open, or asking for an open-pve mode is not segregation, it's migration. If FD or somebody who had the power to pick people up and drop them into a particular mode and say 'that's your mode, now stay there', that would be segregation.

What you are either clearly missing, or being disingenuous about is the critical components of free will and consent. You are stating that you're against further segregation of the player base; great so am I. Players are currently forced to flee to möbius or other private groups if they want social interaction. Solo gives them protection from open, but not the interaction. Hence private groups like möbius are the only game in town for them.

Bottom line is you are portraying the free choice of wanting to migrate to a mode with like minded people as somehow segregation being imposed. Depopulating Open does reduce the viability of that mode. Entirely concede that, and no getting around it as fact.

But also bottom line is so what? If the viability of that mode can only be sustained by keeping unhappy players in it or bringing in enough new chum until they hear about möbius or other options, then it deserves the lower population status. The sole reason this topic isn't even more of contention is the existence of two, filled to capacity möbius groups.

If and when that single post of failure ever bursts, FD will have no choice but to act in some way. Maybe good, bad, or the very typical nobody is happy with the change they make. But it's as incorrect as calling free will migration as segregation to pretend the balloon isn't ripe to burst the moment Möbius goes under.

It is segregation, voluntary, but segregation nonetheless. And that's why I chose the word, as it is hard to defend this call for more of it. FD has failed by allowing the lawlessness of Open play ruin people's gaming experiences, handing out tools to make your own little "safe space" in private groups and denying the fact that many of us, admittedly not the majority, wanna shoot internet spaceships, and not giving us any meaningful purpose to it.

Had the OP been in a different game with clearly designated hisec and CONCORD, he would have known where he could and couldn't safely go. There would be no cries of "change the game for me" as he would have been told "you knew it was dangerous out there, why did you go?"

I do want to steal your cargo with the threat of your destruction as a motivator. I do want to live in an area of space that many players fear to tread. I want to be able to take over and defend a little corner of space from others. I assure you that if it was done correctly it would could all play side by side in much more harmony.

 

[bootsam]

Oops. Sorry. I appear to have forgotten my spectacles.

 

[Anopheles]

Are you trying to suggest that gankers are seeking challenge when attacking weak ships in their Engineered meta builds?

You know I was commenting on the bit that suggested that pvpers only want to seal club.

Personally I was never very interested in pure pvp, I was only interested in piracy. There being almost as many ways to pvp as pve.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It is segregation, voluntary, but segregation nonetheless. And that's why I chose the word, as it is hard to defend this call for more of it. FD has failed by allowing the lawlessness of Open play ruin people's gaming experiences, handing out tools to make your own little "safe space" in private groups and denying the fact that many of us, admittedly not the majority, wanna shoot internet spaceships, and not giving us any meaningful purpose to it.

Had the OP been in a different game with clearly designated hisec and CONCORD, he would have known where he could and couldn't safely go. There would be no cries of "change the game for me" as he would have been told "you knew it was dangerous out there, why did you go?"

I do want to steal your cargo with the threat of your destruction as a motivator. I do want to live in an area of space that many players fear to tread. I want to be able to take over and defend a little corner of space from others. I assure you that if it was done correctly it would could all play side by side in much more harmony.

The three game modes have been part of the game design for over four years and in the released game for over two.

Every player who has bought the game did so with the possibility of determining this for themselves before purchase and, if they did not like it, consider their options regarding said purchase.

Those who "wanna shoot internet spaceships" have plenty of NPCs to shoot at - and doing so in CZs affects the influence of Factions - there's a reason. If, however, those players want to prey on players only - Frontier can provide the framework that we all play in - they cannot, however, provide unwilling targets for players that like to shoot at other players.

Frontier are not making that other game - that much was clear at the outset.

If a play-style depends on other players then the player had better hope that others share a desire to engage in play that suits it.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You know I was commenting on the bit that suggested that pvpers only want to seal club.

Personally I was never very interested in pure pvp, I was only interested in piracy. There being almost as many ways to pvp as pve.

Interested to know which part of my post gave you that impression - I know that not all PvPers want to seal club.

Piracy still exists - if you're referring to PvP piracy then you'd best hope that someone else wants to play "piracy target".

 

[House0fDerp]

I counter that it would make it a better place to dwell. I could visit Ziggy in his part of the galaxy when I am on my best behavior and he can bring his FDL to my side of town when he wants to go on a murder spree. We could be best of friends. But with separate modes we will never meet. And that is where the problem lies.

I would point out that your counter is invalid as neither of your scenarios is eliminated by the decision to have an open PvE mode since the option is open to you both to switch modes, only now Ziggy has the option of joining you in a low security system when he wants to get his PvE pew on but decidedly not PvP. If you're the best of friends you should be able to coordinate your mode decision to the activity you want to participate in.

These areas could clearly defined on the galaxy map and there would be no suprised CMDRs wondering why they just got killed. No one would be restricted in their ability to travel anywhere, you would just need to make sure you could defend yourself when in certain systems. It's almost like another game already got this right...

Clear visibility doesn't counter restraint. It only makes it, quite obviously, more visible. And mind you, your last sentence ignores the very reasoning for the idea of an open PvE mode, a lack of desire for PvP, which is in no way changed by the option to be prepared for it.

And fundamentally, if this game treated credit gathering and player economies the same way a certain game did, we could likely have our cake and eat it too, but at the cost of creating a more niche game like that one is.

- - - Updated - - -

It is segregation, voluntary, but segregation nonetheless.

In much the same way that liking a particular restaurant segregates someone from those who don't like it when he's in the mood for it. It's technically true, but both meaningless and harmful when used definition.

I do want to steal your cargo with the threat of your destruction as a motivator. I do want to live in an area of space that many players fear to tread. I want to be able to take over and defend a little corner of space from others. I assure you that if it was done correctly it would could all play side by side in much more harmony.

Except for the impossibility imposed by having opposite goals. You seem to think not wanting PvP is somehow a geographically limited phenomena.

 

[TargetLost]

Actually, most of the older pvp players want a return to organised group vs group pvp before the SCB revolution and heat meta.

This times are gone. FD intentional or unintentional moved farther and farther away from balanced PvP.
There is no realistic way back anymore IMO. The only way to still have this is through player agreement selfmade sportsmen (=balanced) PvP Events. But I haven't seen many calls for such on the forum.

So learn to avoid the pvp in the first place. Circular routes, watching who is behind you on the scanner, dropping into space if you are not sure. Watching for weapon deployment on the scanner, etc.

Great so you tell him to play hide in a sea of sharks. Yup that's what PvE 'er are forced to do in open PvP. But it is not the way PvE'er like to Play.
For some uneven danger is exicting. For some simple not.

For me open danger is exciting when I have the means to fight back. This is simple not possible anymore with all the changes done and playing hide is not my style. A fair battle great! Playing a victim for one or a swadron that maxed out his PvP ship? Why the heck should any sane Person do this? There is no benefit except for those with some sort of masochistic excitment. I didn't buy ED to Play hide but to enjoy the galaxy with like minded People the way I like to Play it.

Worst of all some PvP'er seem to confuse Equipment with beeing good (get gud). I bet that many of those false proud PvP'er would look real stupid if they faced some of them that they call care bear PvE'er in balanced Equipment.

Choosing to Play PvE is as Play style choose. It's not only those without combat skills that choose to play PvE.

 

[jacozilla]

It is segregation, voluntary, but segregation nonetheless. And that's why I chose the word, as it is hard to defend this call for more of it. FD has failed by allowing the lawlessness of Open play ruin people's gaming experiences, handing out tools to make your own little "safe space" in private groups and denying the fact that many of us, admittedly not the majority, wanna shoot internet spaceships, and not giving us any meaningful purpose to it.

Had the OP been in a different game with clearly designated hisec and CONCORD, he would have known where he could and couldn't safely go. There would be no cries of "change the game for me" as he would have been told "you knew it was dangerous out there, why did you go?"

I do want to steal your cargo with the threat of your destruction as a motivator. I do want to live in an area of space that many players fear to tread. I want to be able to take over and defend a little corner of space from others. I assure you that if it was done correctly it would could all play side by side in much more harmony.

Ok, I'll entirely concede if you apply the prefix word 'self', then it is self-segregation. Just as if we apply the prefix anti-, it converts the meaning to the opposite or to be opposition to the original meaning. Fine.

But how does that change anything I wrote?

Self-segregation by the very act of calling it that means literally -you- segregating -yourself-, correct? Are we agreed that self-segregation would be the individual deciding for himself and segregating himself? Just want to be sure we're calling a kitchen sink a kitchen sink.

And the opposite, when it is segregation? Is this not by coercion, force, mandate by someone else?

So we're agreed. I am definitely against someone else mandating where I need to play, what mode i can or can not have.

When I freely choose to migrate or as we've now agreed to call it, self-segregate to Möbius, that's fine with me and others who are like minded. None of us are thinking we're being deprived of equal rights. Key components again being free will and consent.

But when some, not all, not trying for controversy by even saying most, just -some- people are saying no, we don't want you to leave open, don't want you to have an open-pve mode, and whatever rationale trying to make us like open, is that not at very least the attempted blocking of the migration of players away from open?

Call it migration or self-segregation, but either way it is entirely different than the implied negative connotation that 'segregation' has. By using that word incorrectly, you in essence are trying to pick up the pity vote or nice manners vote, because like I said, it's hard to argue against 'segregation' (if you don't wear white sheets at least)

 

[Anopheles]

This times are gone. FD intentional or unintentional moved farther and farther away from balanced PvP.
There is no realistic way back anymore IMO. The only way to still have this is through player agreement selfmade sportsmen (=balanced) PvP Events. But I haven't seen many calls for such on the forum.



Great so you tell him to play hide in a sea of sharks. Yup that's what PvE 'er are forced to do in open PvP. But it is not the way PvE'er like to Play.
For some uneven danger is exicting. For some simple not.

For me open danger is exciting when I have the means to fight back. This is simple not possible anymore with all the changes done and playing hide is not my style. A fair battle great! Playing a victim for one or a swadron that maxed out his PvP ship? Why the heck should any sane Person do this? There is no benefit except for those with some sort of masochistic excitment. I didn't buy ED to Play hide but to enjoy the galaxy with like minded People the way I like to Play it.

Worst of all some PvP'er seem to confuse Equipment with beeing good (get gud). I bet that many of those false proud PvP'er would look real stupid if they faced some of them that they call care bear PvE'er in balanced Equipment.

Choosing to Play PvE is as Play style choose. It's not only those without combat skills that choose to play PvE.

Yes, play hide in the once in a blue moon you are actually in any type of Pvp danger. This is called 'play' and is will be an exciting variation on what rinse repeat pve busywork gameplay you enjoy.

 

[Geirdriful]

The three game modes have been part of the game design for over four years and in the released game for over two.

Every player who has bought the game did so with the possibility of determining this for themselves before purchase and, if they did not like it, consider their options regarding said purchase.

Those who "wanna shoot internet spaceships" have plenty of NPCs to shoot at - and doing so in CZs affects the influence of Factions - there's a reason. If, however, those players want to prey on players only - Frontier can provide the framework that we all play in - they cannot, however, provide unwilling targets for players that like to shoot at other players.

Frontier are not making that other game - that much was clear at the outset.

If a play-style depends on other players then the player had better hope that others share a desire to engage in play that suits it.

Although I would love to hear that FD has realized private group mode was a bad idea, I am not the one calling for the change. OP is. Although I know they didn't set out to make another version of that other game, crime/punishment, karma, security levels and such have all been handled over there and it works.

I am only posting here because I want to be another voice against this idea. The Mobius groups are an interesting situation. Can he just decide to disband them himself and off all those players? Or are they now sanctioned and membership overseen by FD? If for some reason they were no longer in existence would FD step in to help retain this part if the playerbase?

If this Pve open play idea comes to fruition it will be another nail in the coffin of the original Open play that they have allowed to bleed players due to their failure to handle the security situation.

Yes I could go into a CZ and shoot at fish in a barrel and that will make a little number tick up in the station. And if I do this enough maybe a different name will be first on the list of mission givers. For some reason though it doesn't scratch my itch.

And yes FD could easily create incentives for players to become piracy targets. They could give us mechanics to fight over space to encourage more PvP play. This might even cut down on the random killing if people can get their fix with in game mechanics.

 

[House0fDerp]

Yes, play hide in the once in a blue moon you are actually in any type of Pvp danger. This is called 'play' and is will be an exciting variation on what rinse repeat pve busywork gameplay you enjoy.

Or just a nuisance, but that's up to the individual to decide. Personally the tedium of hauling is bad enough as is. I'd rather there not be someone trying to realize the worst case of failing several missions across a few different systems on top of a rebuy. The "excitement" is never worth the cleanup.