Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Littlerift]

And a news flash for all of you Open PvE proponents (not aimed at the two of you I quoted): Fdev aren't going to waste a bunch of time creating a new safe space for you guys when there's an easier, more effective option on the table already that would benefit the community in a broader, fairer manner.

I don't want a safes-space, I'll be staying in Open PvP regardless. What I want, however, is for the game to become more accessible and open to community play both in a PvP and PvE environment. Currently there's no way to have a multiplayer experience without risking that experience being a hugely negative one (if one interprets being killed for little reason to be hugely negative, I'm aware that opinions vary), which seems unduly unfair on those who do just want to experience PvE content.

We very rarely have people argue that FD shouldn't invest any time into upgrading the mining or exploration systems because those careers are less common, why is it a valid argument when it comes to pure PvE?

 

[Ian Skippy]

I have repeatedly said that how other people want to play their game is fine by me except for ramming their view of the game down anyone else's throats, be that PvE or PvP. As for the rest of your first paragraph, good for you. Play the game the way you wish.

Mobuis +-2%? Where does that come from? The statistics are not incredibly clear otherwise I would not be questioning them. Where do you get the value of 2%? I will continue to challenge on this and any other unsupported use of statistics until you either state where you are getting the value from or admit that you're guessing.

So far you have just avoided answering the question, the implication being that you do not have the values and are guessing. Otherwise you'd reveal your sources if for no other reason than to rub my nose in it.

Thats the thing. If you undermine someone's BGS in Solo/PG, you force them to start spacetrucking themselves. Its inevitable. There is no combat-counter, pve or pvp, to UA bombing for example. When I fly in Open I am never forced into PvP combat: if I am not interested in just dont fight them. And FWIW: I am currently flying my Sidey, with an Eagle and Viper transferred to my new temporary home, so I am not relying on uber-ships. So my point is this: play how you like, but if you want to remove options from others (combat counters for example) you should be willing to give something up instead.

As for stats: Sorry, I am really not following you. ED has over 1.6 million players (see trade reports). Mobius had 30k with room in one them left (see Mobius' posts). Thats about 2%. These are the only stats we have. Based on this, there is no reason to claim its anything but a tiny majority. There are many variables we dont know. For example, we know people in Mobius also play Open as some report that. We dont know how many of them do that. We dont know how many accounts in total are active, and how many in Mobius are active. Etc etc. But to go from 2% to >50% requires some pretty solid stuff beyond "we dont know all, so 2% may really be 70!%". If I write a paper claiming my method detects Y in 2% of the cases, but I feel it works really well anyway, no journal will ever take me serious ever again. Its just silly.

 

[GluttonyFang]

I totally agree. I think that's the really sad thing about this - the PvP crowd (of which there definitely is a "there's nothing else worth doing in this game" vocal crowd) spend so much time insulting everyone else and lumping them together it's just gotten ridiculous.

Almost all the players I've spoken to are quite happy to have PvP encounters and fight - they just hate being treated like filth and insulted and ridiculed and randomly ganked. As often pointed out there used to be some balance but it's become more and more polarised as those dedicated to being the 'hardest' keep grinding ahead be it on engineers or sheer fighting and practise such that there's a gulf in skill and preparedness. This and the relatively slim vocal/unpleasant crowd that the PvPers tolerate within their ranks (much as I imagine certain political movements tolerate their extremists on the basis of roughly agreeing with them if not exactly) results in a more and more polarised and unpleasant tone to any discussion with the carebears/griefers nonsense.



No I'm listening - I'm just not in a fantasy land where applying a load of unwanted pressure to people is going to make them enjoy the game. People don't want to be coerced, they want to have fun and play a game. While pressure and coercion might result in a player-activity landscape that some find appealing it's relatively few or you'd see very different results on combat-logging and C&P polls - the majority of people don't want that sort of game. Nothing much you or I can do about it, just got to adapt

The question is what is FD vision for the game. If they want Open fixed, they should at least give a proper C&P.

 

[jasonbarron]

I don't want a safes-space, I'll be staying in Open PvP regardless. What I want, however, is for the game to become more accessible and open to community play both in a PvP and PvE environment. Currently there's no way to have a multiplayer experience without risking that experience being a hugely negative one (if one interprets being killed for little reason to be hugely negative, I'm aware that opinions vary), which seems unduly unfair on those who do just want to experience PvE content.

One solid reason to shift your expectations: it's not going to happen. The C&P thing maybe. The Open PvE thing never going to see the light of day.

 

[MarkAusten]

I expected that reply, I will just say one last thing before I let the digression die since I know I am walking on thin ice.

Moderators are humans too, they don't want extra work. When there is a large amount of reports toward a specific post, it gets a lot of attention from the team, I know that much from my time in here. But when you already have a large PVP user base, it's obvious what will get reported most, regardless of who triggered who. And often one party doesn't get punished due to lack of report. The victim couldn't report after getting banned, and most just give up on the forum seeing the other offender running free.

Like I said, I don't blame the moderator team, it's human, it's inevitable

You are indeed walking on thin ice. I suggest that since what you are talking about is way off topic and a somewhat sensitive, that you talk this up privately with the moderators and FDev.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I'm a PvE player. I play mostly in open. I use the other modes from time to time.

I do not want FD to spend half a year of dev. resources to make an Open-PvE mode.

I'm completly content with the modes we have and feel that this is a forum issue.

I of course think I represent the majority of ED players.

Thats basically it. Most people here arguing against the PvE mode actually are not the PvP players we are taken for. The idea that Open is for pvp-players is absurd. Open is for people who want the full experience, including everything. Anyway, almost got all the CSD for Ram Tah, so hopefully I can deliver them soon at his base. In Open. In my Sidey. Good golly, I hope noone will grief me.

 

[Littlerift]

One solid reason to shift your expectations: it's not going to happen. The C&P thing maybe. The Open PvE thing never going to see the light of day.

I very much doubt a worthwhile C&P system will ever see the light of day either; FD's incompetence and unwillingness to communicate with the community has been truly staggering in the past.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It is ridiculously easy to escape from unwanted encounters in open play. Trust me, I am on a lot of KoS lists and haven't died to a gank wing yet (even in my taxi DBS).

If people did not want to be "bothered" with unwanted encounters, then they should feel free to play one of the PvE game modes that comprise of literally 66% of the current game modes. It's not that hard, really.

That is often offered as a reason why PvE players should not be overly concerned with attempted attacks - and if escape was able to be simply effected with a high probability of success then I'd expect that there'd be fewer complaints.

Indeed, two out of three game modes do offer the option to play PvE (although the largest PvE Private Group has been the subject of intentional breaking of the rules of said Private Group on a number of occasions now) - however there is only one game mode with an unlimited population - and the desire to play among the largest number of potential players seems to overcome the desire to play in a mode where PvP is less likely for some players.

 

[Ian Skippy]

The question is what is FD vision for the game.

Personal opinion: read Legacy. Its quite clear how MB sees the game from there (hurrah for asteroid bases, magboots and blowing up defenseless traders and their escape pods!). Its incredibly common in Elite books: rampant murder versus passenger ships, cargo ships, escape pods, blowing up slaves for no real reason etc. There's loads of insane killer AI suffering from psychpathy, the lore clearly describes most of space is pure anarchy because police cannot intervene in time (this has been mentioned so often: even in high-sec it will take many minutes to reach a place, so traders need to defend themselves). Everything clearly points to a game where you are never really safe and where you yourself are primarily responsible for your safety. Not FD, not other players, you yourself.

- - - Updated - - -

We very rarely have people argue that FD shouldn't invest any time into upgrading the mining or exploration systems because those careers are less common, why is it a valid argument when it comes to pure PvE?

Because that is gameplay that improves all modes.

 

[jasonbarron]

You are indeed walking on thin ice. I suggest that since what you are talking about is way off topic and a somewhat sensitive, that you talk this up privately with the moderators and FDev.

Yep. Thin ice indeed. He's 100% correct, though.

 

[frostypaw]

The question is what is FD vision for the game. If they want Open fixed, they should at least give a proper C&P.

Thing is I think they've been clear on this. People have posted DB and others talking about how PvP action was intended lots, but I don't think those engaging in 'offensive' PvP care.

Hopefully the Karma style system will make this more abundantly clear and result in fewer people wanting to leave Open, and more trust that the encounters in it will be fun

 

[GluttonyFang]

You are indeed walking on thin ice. I suggest that since what you are talking about is way off topic and a somewhat sensitive, that you talk this up privately with the moderators and FDev.

Agreed

 

[jasonbarron]

I very much doubt a worthwhile C&P system will ever see the light of day either; FD's incompetence and unwillingness to communicate with the community has been truly staggering in the past.

I honestly don't think we haven't seen C&P because fdev is deaf to our comments, I actually think it has to do far more with the inherent difficulty of the task. If they implement a plan that doesn't involve an outright ban for Rinzler for daring to kill an unshielded trader at a CG, 99% of the contributors to this thread are going to flip out and scream that it doesn't go far enough, and conversely, if they implement a plan that DOES have draconian measures for anyone living the criminal lifestyle, that whole segment of the gaming population is going to walk away. You guys would desperately love to see that I'm sure, but Fdev is wise enough to know they have to find a better solution, even if it takes some time to do so.

@Rinzler o7o7o7, I'm sure you wouldn't do that, would you? Rinzler?

 

[SnowyNI]

And the broader, fairer manner of ED will be like it always is... half baked! *murders 30 players* "Now, now! Don't do it again, you can't enter a station now for 3 minutes, that'll teach you, you.. you.. minx!".

 

[MarkAusten]

Thats the thing. If you undermine someone's BGS in Solo/PG, you force them to start spacetrucking themselves. Its inevitable. There is no combat-counter, pve or pvp, to UA bombing for example. When I fly in Open I am never forced into PvP combat: if I am not interested in just dont fight them. And FWIW: I am currently flying my Sidey, with an Eagle and Viper transferred to my new temporary home, so I am not relying on uber-ships. So my point is this: play how you like, but if you want to remove options from others (combat counters for example) you should be willing to give something up instead.

As for stats: Sorry, I am really not following you. ED has over 1.6 million players (see trade reports). Mobius had 30k with room in one them left (see Mobius' posts). Thats about 2%. These are the only stats we have. Based on this, there is no reason to claim its anything but a tiny majority. There are many variables we dont know. For example, we know people in Mobius also play Open as some report that. We dont know how many of them do that. We dont know how many accounts in total are active, and how many in Mobius are active. Etc etc. But to go from 2% to >50% requires some pretty solid stuff beyond "we dont know all, so 2% may really be 70!%". If I write a paper claiming my method detects Y in 2% of the cases, but I feel it works really well anyway, no journal will ever take me serious ever again. Its just silly.

Okay, I see where the problem is. The trade report did not differentiate between sales of the Elite game and the Elite merchandise and no breakdown was given. It said, as I recall , I don't have the document to hand, something along the lines that sales in the Elite area of FDev were 1.6 million units. Then again, sales of the Elite Game do not correlate to the same number of players. Many players it seems have more than one account, some even many more than one. Again we do not know the figures here either.

Agreed with what you say about other variable like active and inactive accounts and so on.

So that 2% figure you are talking about represent the absolute minimum assuming that no-one has bought and merchandise and each player only has one account and all are active players. But, since we don't know any of the rest of that it is certainly higher than 2% but we don't know by how much.

Then there's the issue that I think you are assuming that it is only Mobius players that want the Open PvE and I have to disagree with that. But again, we cannot put numbers on that either.

Does that make more sense?

- - - Updated - - -

Yep. Thin ice indeed. He's 100% correct, though.

In your opinion. I won't comment unless I see the reasons for each supposed infraction and the reason why the decision was made on way or the other.

 

[jasonbarron]

In your opinion. I won't comment unless I see the reasons for each supposed infraction and the reason why the decision was made on way or the other.

Of course in my opinion; it's all I have I have to offer this community, after all

 

[Littlerift]

I honestly don't think we haven't seen C&P because fdev is deaf to our comments, I actually think it has to do far more with the inherent difficulty of the task. If they implement a plan that doesn't involve an outright ban for Rinzler for daring to kill an unshielded trader at a CG, 99% of the contributors to this thread are going to flip out and scream that it doesn't go far enough, and conversely, if they implement a plan that DOES have draconian measures for anyone living the criminal lifestyle, that whole segment of the gaming population is going to walk away. You guys would desperately love to see that I'm sure, but Fdev is wise enough to know they have to find a better solution, even if it takes some time to do so.

@Rinzler o7o7o7, I'm sure you wouldn't do that, would you? Rinzler?

I can't speak for anybody else, but what I expect from a C&P system is a system that makes unwarranted player killing (and potentially NPC killing) incredibly punitive, and other criminal activity rather punitive too. I want that to happen mainly because my true favourite playstyle is privateering and smuggling, but the actual risk involved in such illegal actions is almost 0.

Criminal actions should face fairly draconian consequences, that's the point of a legal system. It seems to me a fairly care-beary attitude for player killers and pirates do adopt to assume that they shouldn't suffer serious consequences if caught.

 

[jasonbarron]

I can't speak for anybody else, but what I expect from a C&P system is a system that makes unwarranted player killing (and potentially NPC killing) incredibly punitive, and other criminal activity rather punitive too. I want that to happen mainly because my true favourite playstyle is privateering and smuggling, but the actual risk involved in such illegal actions is almost 0.

Criminal actions should face fairly draconian consequences, that's the point of a legal system. It seems to me a fairly care-beary attitude for player killers and pirates do adopt to assume that they shouldn't suffer serious consequences if caught.

Perhaps we should start working on the specifics

 

[Ian Skippy]

Okay, I see where the problem is. The trade report did not differentiate between sales of the Elite game and the Elite merchandise and no breakdown was given. It said, as I recall , I don't have the document to hand, something along the lines that sales in the Elite area of FDev were 1.6 million units. Then again, sales of the Elite Game do not correlate to the same number of players. Many players it seems have more than one account, some even many more than one. Again we do not know the figures here either.

Agreed with what you say about other variable like active and inactive accounts and so on.

So that 2% figure you are talking about represent the absolute minimum assuming that no-one has bought and merchandise and each player only has one account and all are active players. But, since we don't know any of the rest of that it is certainly higher than 2% but we don't know by how much.

Then there's the issue that I think you are assuming that it is only Mobius players that want the Open PvE and I have to disagree with that. But again, we cannot put numbers on that either.

Does that make more sense?

- - - Updated - - -

Ah, so its ED socks that will make Mobius the majority. Fair enough, we dont know the exact number. We do know that 30k is in Mobius. To make that a majority Ed cannot have sold more than 60k copies. We know Steam alone has 900k or so. Even if every single purchase in the Frontier store are socks and such, that still leaves Mobius at 3-4% or so. I am sure we can work on some of the other variables to maybe get it to 6%. But you really cannot seriously admit that this clearly points to a minority.

 

[MarkAusten]

Of course in my opinion; it's all I have I have to offer this community, after all

Agreed along with everyone else.