Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Robert Maynard]

First we divide up the players between Open, Solo and Private. Then we divide them again with Horizons. Next expansion? Cut another chunk off of the pie and put them in another corner where no one else can interact with them.

It's bad game design, and that can't be argued.

From the perspective of the player who wants to interact with players that may not want to be interacted with, it's very poor design indeed, I would agree.

However, Frontier consciously designed their game to accommodate both types of players, not just those who want interactions with others regardless of whether the others want them.

Arguably the chunk of the pie that would migrate into an Open-PvE mode was given the opportunity to separate from the rest of the pie at the outset - by design - by Frontier - as they do not force any player to play in a game mode that they choose not to play in.

Permits, but does not require. There is no difference between permitting Players or NPC's to attack players, it's simply a petty, childish stigma some people develop towards the act of players doing it. If you've got a problem being attacked by other players when you prefer a PvE experience then you are just irrationally separating two identical occurrences for the sake of self-inflicted disgruntlement.

The only way that an Open PvE would make any sense is if it also didn't have a single aggressive NPC, which is completely contradicting everything the game is built around.

Thus, the proposal that Open PvE is a requirement for these players to play the game as they wish is a fallacy. The only requirement is that they either A: get over their silly self-induced aversion to one type of aggression over another identical type of aggression or B: Embrace the full nature of their request and also demand that all hostile NPC's be removed from Open PvE.

Stop being selfish. Stop saying "I don't want you playing in my sandbox because you have a CMDR in front of your name, but it's alright for everyone else to attack me."

Frankly, the reasons why each player may eschew PvP are irrelevant - as each player has the option choose for themselves and does not require to justify that decision to anyone.

.... and the expected conflation between seeking to play without directly opposing players and seeking to avoid any opposition is made. PvE != removal of all risk.

NPCs form part of the environment in this game - and behave as Frontier designed them to - so playing the game in a PvE play-style is playing the game that Frontier control. Frontier do not control other players, of course.

However the desire to play PvE is perceived by others and whatever conflations are made, the simple fact remains that players have been able to play this way from the very beginning if they wish to play in Solo.

Is it any less selfish to expect to be able to interact with players who don't want to engage in non-consensual interactions?

 

[Vorxian]

Everyone has the right to play how they like.

I have been drawing up a proposal to somehow promote Mobius into a MOBIUS OPEN mode. Mobius as it is will be exactly the same, for the advantages of being open, can accommodate the full playerbase subscribing to Mobius, not having timezone division etc, plus having a tool to disable friendly fire.

This will allow Mobius to realise the full dream of a true open PvE environment for whoever subscribes to that style of game play. The beauty is, since it would be a community run open server, FDEV can rinse their hands of any involvement / politics etc. Mobius administrators will have all their players in one place, and have the tools to make it as nuisance free as possible.

Best of both worlds.

 

[frostypaw]

This is purely an assumption ... in fact the majority of players who are now in solo will continue to stay in solo because they have no desire to interact with other people to beging with

You're correct - the part in bold and italics IS an assumption. You should be careful of making those.

Demanding Open PvE is just a selfish demand that other people be bullied into playing it your way.

Is playing in OpenPVE compulsory?

No. Don't talk utter rubbish.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Have you read the whole thread? There have been numerous suggestions as to how to deal with 'griefers' in an Open-PvE mode.

I've read so many of these threads over the years that I can just about recite every single suggestion in my sleep. They're all trash.

Conjecture. It hasn't been tried yet, so neither you nor I know if this is true.

It has been tried in other games. Countless times. It fails every time without a mandatory migration.

How do you know? It hasn't been tried yet. Also, you're stretching your argument a bit when you say 'mandatory migration of Mobius to Open-PvE' - why would it be mandatory? Why do you think hardly anyone who is a member of a PvE private group (Mobius) wouldn't want to move to an Open-PvE client mode? Are you trying to convince us they wouldn't accept the chance to meet up with even more like-minded players in an equally PvE but more open connectivity mode!?

Read: Every prior attempt has failed, and there is nothing special about ED that is going to make it magically succeed where others, who were doing a much better job at communicating with, providing for and facilitating their communities, crashed and burned in a glorious, bright blaze of failure.

In truth, ED has more obstacles to overcome than anyone who has attempted it before them, and they have less experience and resources to do it with. It is a guaranteed flop.

What difference would it make to Open if - as you say - currently Solo and Group modes already have the PvE players in them currently? Why would that affect Open in any meaningful way?

Divide and Conquer. This strategy has worked brilliantly for Military Generals for Millennia and will continue to do so.

The ultimate enemy of ED is Boredom. Continue to Divide ED and Boredom will Conquer.

I get tired of trying to explain this stuff in any other way than euphemisms because when you present basic facts and logic to a discussion on the internet that is inconvenient for the responding party the response is always "Ah Hah! I see you have a well rationalized theorem on the topic, but I'm going to raise you by one Baseless Opinion! Counter that, scum who should be agreeing with everything I say!"

I get so tired of this crap.

Which MMO's? Please provide examples otherwise I and I'm sure others may not take you seriously.

Everquest, EQ2, WoW only pulls it off because they're WoW, LOTRO has always been held back because their PvP mode is basically an entirely different game mode. Most famously? Ultima Online was completely destroyed by the decision to divide it's world and create an area with no PvP. It tore that game apart at the seams. Etc...

If you need examples closer to home? What's happened to CQC? Why is that community dead? If putting a divide between the CQC and ED player base didn't cause CQC any problems, why isn't it maintaining popularity like ED?

Theoretically, by your opinion, CQC should have only benefitted from being separated from the main game, because it was giving people more choices in how to experience the game. So why won't the majority of people in ED even touch CQC despite having qualms or stipulations with the game itself, the content, how it is played, etc?....

'random, spontaneous encounters' - I've stated it before and I'll state it again - go to any CG or player choke point and the 'encounters' are not random, because usually the 'encounters' amount to one or more Yahoos trying to blow ships up. It's spontaneous all right - spontaneous combustion.

What's the surprise? It's a choke point as you say. You should expect danger whenever you approach these areas. The only difference is that FDev are getting a bit lazy and haven't emulated this behavior in Solo, which in my opinion would be a nice touch and a nod of accuracy to human behavior.

Not completely. A lot of people would like to play the game by meeting up with anyone else without the boring stupidity of being blown up for no good reason other than to mine salt/lulz. Currently in Open, getting blown up by other players for the lulz is what keeps most of the player base from Open.

No, the irrational fear that this is going to happen constantly is what keeps them out of open. The same irrational fear that comes from being stung by a bee as a child. You spend years thinking that any and all bees exist only to sting you and only when you're in your mid-20's does it finally start to occur to you that the vast majority of bees don't give a damn that you even exist and just wish you would get out of the way so that they could go check out that bush behind you.

People need to stop being irrational. I go to CG's, play around in Open all day, etc.... Participate in PvP too.

How many times have I been attacked without provocation after several hundred player encounters? Half a dozen at most.

I don't live my life in fear of being struck by lightning. I sure as hell am not going to play a video game that way and expecting a developer to change the core design of their game around your irrational fear is not what I would describe as reasonable or practical.

This is laughable. Who'd be bullied into playing an Open-PvE mode? This is the most ridiculous thing I've read in this thread by far.

Oh, I'm just aping the common consensus that the push-back against an Open PvE is an attempt to bully people into playing Open or quitting. The logic goes in either direction.

 

[frostypaw]

Oh, I'm just aping the common consensus that the push-back against an Open PvE is an attempt to bully people into playing Open or quitting. The logic goes in either direction.

That's more total nonsense - that's nothing like the "common consensus" it's just something you've made up to be sneery about. Common consensus if there is any mostly seems to be to leave things as they are.

Divide and Conquer. This strategy has worked brilliantly for Military Generals for Millennia and will continue to do so.

The ultimate enemy of ED is Boredom. Continue to Divide ED and Boredom will Conquer.

And currently those who wish to avoid PvP entirely are divided amongst a thousand PG's and countless solo instances. You've pretty much ruined your own point and made ours more valid with this example.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

You're correct - the part in bold and italics IS an assumption. You should be careful of making those.

It's not an assumption, it's demonstrated fact. A couple opinionated people on a forum does not contradict decades of demonstrable practice by the industry in which this happens every time.

Take for instance a classic server based MMO. A server split is proposed. On the new server players are going to have faster connections, More farm because the spawns aren't over-camped, more GM interaction, less down-time, etc....

Based upon all of these great benefits players should be willing to jump to the new server right? As long as their friends migrate, they have no reason not to.

At best you'll get 15% instead of the hoped for 50%. People won't leave what they're familiar with, even if they're promised a reward.

- - - Updated - - -

That's more total nonsense - that's nothing like the "common consensus" it's just something you've made up to be sneery about. Common consensus if there is any mostly seems to be to leave things as they are.



And currently those who wish to avoid PvP entirely are divided amongst a thousand PG's and countless solo instances. You've pretty much ruined your own point and made ours more valid with this example.

And they will remain divided, adding Open PvE is not going to draw them out of Private or Solo.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

I've read so many of these threads over the years that I can just about recite every single suggestion in my sleep. They're all trash.


It has been tried in other games. Countless times. It fails every time without a mandatory migration.






Read: Every prior attempt has failed, and there is nothing special about ED that is going to make it magically succeed where others, who were doing a much better job at communicating with, providing for and facilitating their communities, crashed and burned in a glorious, bright blaze of failure.

In truth, ED has more obstacles to overcome than anyone who has attempted it before them, and they have less experience and resources to do it with. It is a guaranteed flop.




Divide and Conquer. This strategy has worked brilliantly for Military Generals for Millennia and will continue to do so.

The ultimate enemy of ED is Boredom. Continue to Divide ED and Boredom will Conquer.

I get tired of trying to explain this stuff in any other way than euphemisms because when you present basic facts and logic to a discussion on the internet that is inconvenient for the responding party the response is always "Ah Hah! I see you have a well rationalized theorem on the topic, but I'm going to raise you by one Baseless Opinion! Counter that, scum who should be agreeing with everything I say!"

I get so tired of this crap.





Everquest, EQ2, WoW only pulls it off because they're WoW, LOTRO has always been held back because their PvP mode is basically an entirely different game mode. Most famously? Ultima Online was completely destroyed by the decision to divide it's world and create an area with no PvP. It tore that game apart at the seams. Etc...

If you need examples closer to home? What's happened to CQC? Why is that community dead? If putting a divide between the CQC and ED player base didn't cause CQC any problems, why isn't it maintaining popularity like ED?

Theoretically, by your opinion, CQC should have only benefitted from being separated from the main game, because it was giving people more choices in how to experience the game. So why won't the majority of people in ED even touch CQC despite having qualms or stipulations with the game itself, the content, how it is played, etc?....






What's the surprise? It's a choke point as you say. You should expect danger whenever you approach these areas. The only difference is that FDev are getting a bit lazy and haven't emulated this behavior in Solo, which in my opinion would be a nice touch and a nod of accuracy to human behavior.


No, the irrational fear that this is going to happen constantly is what keeps them out of open. The same irrational fear that comes from being stung by a bee as a child. You spend years thinking that any and all bees exist only to sting you and only when you're in your mid-20's does it finally start to occur to you that the vast majority of bees don't give a damn that you even exist and just wish you would get out of the way so that they could go check out that bush behind you.

People need to stop being irrational. I go to CG's, play around in Open all day, etc.... Participate in PvP too.

How many times have I been attacked without provocation after several hundred player encounters? Half a dozen at most.

I don't live my life in fear of being struck by lightning. I sure as hell am not going to play a video game that way and expecting a developer to change the core design of their game around your irrational fear is not what I would describe as reasonable or practical.


Oh, I'm just aping the common consensus that the push-back against an Open PvE is an attempt to bully people into playing Open or quitting. The logic goes in either direction.

So you haven't read the thread - I really should stop replying to you at this point.

I'll just take up your CQC strawman - the reason CQC is a wasteland is because it's NOT in any way part of the main game, plus if you've actually read the forums for any length of time, you'll know that the more rabid griefers don't like CQC because it's 'fair PvP' and there's basically nothing to lose. In no way is CQC another way of dividing the player base, exactly because it's nothing more than an Elite-themed shoot-em-up arena game.

Notwithstanding that you contradict yourself with your CQC point in that how can CQC be both 'dead' and simultaneously dividing the Elite gaming community? 0.o

 

[frostypaw]

It's not an assumption, it's demonstrated fact. A couple opinionated people on a forum does not contradict decades of demonstrable practice by the industry in which this happens every time.

Take for instance a classic server based MMO. A server split is proposed. On the new server players are going to have faster connections, More farm because the spawns aren't over-camped, more GM interaction, less down-time, etc....

Based upon all of these great benefits players should be willing to jump to the new server right? As long as their friends migrate, they have no reason not to.

At best you'll get 15% instead of the hoped for 50%. People won't leave what they're familiar with, even if they're promised a reward.

That's not the point or argument you were making there. You claimed "in fact the majority of players who are now in solo will continue to stay in solo because they have no desire to interact with other people to beging with" - that's very different to "people are lazy and don't like change"

Did you lose this?

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's not an assumption, it's demonstrated fact. A couple opinionated people on a forum does not contradict decades of demonstrable practice by the industry in which this happens every time.

Take for instance a classic server based MMO. A server split is proposed. On the new server players are going to have faster connections, More farm because the spawns aren't over-camped, more GM interaction, less down-time, etc....

Based upon all of these great benefits players should be willing to jump to the new server right? As long as their friends migrate, they have no reason not to.

At best you'll get 15% instead of the hoped for 50%. People won't leave what they're familiar with, even if they're promised a reward.

Which of those games permit players to move freely between "servers"?

What of games that offer PvP and PvE servers from the outset?

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

That's not the point or argument you were making there. You claimed "in fact the majority of players who are now in solo will continue to stay in solo because they have no desire to interact with other people to beging with" - that's very different to "people are lazy and don't like change"

Did you lose this?
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-WKy1bn9KpAw/UtyxU9E5sEI/AAAAAAAADos/fmDDCmQbxsI/s1600/goalposts.jpg

Nope. Because I didn't need to reply to your (or Rob's) assumption that the only reason people play solo is to dodge gankers, which the absence of in Open PvE is going to be the sole driving force in pulling every single one of those players out of Solo.

Your non-argument wasn't worth including in my statement of what is observable fact, sorry. Instead I chose to gloss over it and pretend that you had made a reasonable statement so that I didn't get dragged down into the crap with you from which nothing I stated would have smelled any better.

 

[frostypaw]

Nope. Because I didn't need to reply to your (or Rob's) assumption that the only reason people play solo is to dodge gankers, which the absence of in Open PvE is going to be the sole driving force in pulling every single one of those players out of Solo.

Your non-argument wasn't worth including in my statement of what is observable fact, sorry. Instead I chose to gloss over it and pretend that you had made a reasonable statement so that I didn't get dragged down into the crap with you from which nothing I stated would have smelled any better.

Lol sure I've specifically stated several times that's not people's only reason to play solo.

Are you just having a laugh after a bad day or something?!? If you like I can find the links to the posts but I don't want to make you feel any worse.

 

[PeLucheuh]

This is purely an assumption based upon nothing but blind hope, when in fact the majority of players who are now in solo will continue to stay in solo because they have no desire to interact with other people to beging with and/or Open PvE will just be a guaranteed place to find griefers, because they know they'll get the most targets there.

You're not going to bring everyone back to Open with a PvE mode. It's a nonsensical pipe dream.




And it will stay that way even after an Open PvE is introduced. There is not going to be a mandatory migration of Mobius to Open PvE. There will be no mass exodus from Solo. People are comfortable where they're at or they wouldn't be there, they'd be playing something else. You may get a good portion, but you won't get everyone, and that results in smaller populations all around.

Basic knowledge gathered from watching 2 decades worth of MMO's fail at this.

Everyone who enjoys random, spontaneous interactions with other players. Why? Because it isn't happening anymore. The people who don't like playing with others will leave because development on the game slows to a crawl when the money stops coming in.



No. Because you already have the option to play the game how you want to. Demanding Open PvE is just a selfish demand that other people be bullied into playing it your way.

Rep you as much as i can!

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Which of those games permit players to move freely between "servers"?

What of games that offer PvP and PvE servers from the outset?

All of the above?

A server split is a free migration. Players are given free choice. You're only charged to move your character under circumstances that are not server splits.

EQ offered PvP servers from the beginning, and kept adding more due to demand. Along with different varieties such as faction PvP. Every additional server was less popular than the first one and the first one remained overcrowded. Instead of people migrating from the first server to get away from the crowds, people eventually began to request to migrate to the overcrowded server because their servers were "dead".

EQ2 same problem. I can't be bothered to follow WoW but I believe there are at least 3 documentaries and a novel written on server migration drama in that game, feel free to google it. LOTRO had PvP from the beginning but because it was a different game mode all people did was beg for PvP servers they never got, which hurt it's popularity, etc...

It's just a fact. Just like the people on the forums crying that the game needs huge, foundational changes to make it viable are a minority. The majority of people are playing the game and couldn't care less. It'll just be another option on the login menu much the same as when a new server is added to an MMO's list it's just another line of spam that doesn't get noticed because your preferred option is already highlighted.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

All of the above?

A server split is a free migration. Players are given free choice. You're only charged to move your character under circumstances that are not server splits.

EQ offered PvP servers from the beginning, and kept adding more due to demand. Along with different varieties such as faction PvP. Every additional server was less popular than the first one and the first one remained overcrowded. Instead of people migrating from the first server to get away from the crowds, people eventually began to request to migrate to the overcrowded server because their servers were "dead".

EQ2 same problem. I can't be bothered to follow WoW but I believe there are at least 3 documentaries and a novel written on server migration drama in that game, feel free to google it. LOTRO had PvP from the beginning but because it was a different game mode all people did was beg for PvP servers they never got, which hurt it's popularity, etc...

It's just a fact. Just like the people on the forums crying that the game needs huge, foundational changes to make it viable are a minority. The majority of people are playing the game and couldn't care less. It'll just be another option on the login menu much the same as when a new server is added to an MMO's list it's just another line of spam that doesn't get noticed because your preferred option is already highlighted.

*sigh* except in THIS game, it doesn't matter which client connectivity mode you set the game client to - Open, Group, Solo - it's the same client playing on the same game data using the same groups of back-end game servers. Those modes are nothing more than varying degrees of client-client connectivity, ranging from none (Solo), some (group), or 'anyone also in the mode known as Open'.

So your comparisons with other games in this respect are incorrect.

Adding an Open-PvE mode would basically be like adding a 'Mobius PvE' connectivity mode, and it would be playing the exact same game with the exact same data in the exact same universe.

And your entire argument rests on 'division of the playerbase' - which is blown apart as soon as someone mentions the fact that we have an Xbox playerbase and soon to have a PS4 playerbase - each having the existing modes, and each not being able to see players in the other platforms - yet whichever platform in whatever connectivity mode of Open, Group and Solo, every single player is playing and sharing the one galaxy, BGS, and data.

BOOM!

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Lol sure I've specifically stated several times that's not people's only reason to play solo.

Are you just having a laugh after a bad day or something?!? If you like I can find the links to the posts but I don't want to make you feel any worse.

I wasn't replying to a post, I'm pointing out that this blind faith that Open PvE will somehow cure all of ED's problems instead of just causing more is born of just what I stated, even if you're wisely not typing it out because you know that it is an irrational argument. It's everything between what you write that speaks what you're pinning your hopes on. Or rather, what you're allowing people who support your opinion to pin their hopes on while you go to bat for them in a cage where they'd strike out every swing.

It's the same blind faith you've been using to drum up various non-arguments for years. Stick with a low-key proposal as a base, and then spin it up into a diatribe of unreasonable accusations to draw in equally unreasonable demands while referring back to the basics if one of the radical assumptions gets shot down.

The basic argument of "Hey guys, wouldn't Open PvE be nice if it existed" is a long, far cry from "Open PvE is an essential and undeniable part of ED's future and anything that gets in it's way is anathema to God, Physics and Existence as a whole" which is the weight with which you're swinging your current baseless arguments.

- - - Updated - - -

*sigh* except in THIS game, it doesn't matter which client connectivity mode you set the game client to - Open, Group, Solo - it's the same client playing on the same game data using the same groups of back-end game servers. Those modes are nothing more than varying degrees of client-client connectivity, ranging from none (Solo), some (group), or 'anyone also in the mode known as Open'.

So your comparisons with other games in this respect are incorrect.

Adding an Open-PvE mode would basically be like adding a 'Mobius PvE' connectivity mode, and it would be playing the exact same game with the exact same data in the exact same universe.

And your entire argument rests on 'division of the playerbase' - which is blown apart as soon as someone mentions the fact that we have an Xbox playerbase and soon to have a PS4 playerbase - each having the existing modes, and each not being able to see players in the other platforms - yet whichever platform in whatever connectivity mode of Open, Group and Solo, every single player is playing and sharing the one galaxy, BGS, and data.

BOOM!

None of that is relevant.

Sorry, it just isn't.

People who play in Open will continue for the most part to play in Open.

People who play in Solo will by and large play in solo.

Open PvE will only see small fractions trickle in from various directions and the amount of player interactivity will be reduced for everyone.

It's just a simple fact. You divide the player base, the players feel less of a connection with the community, they leave.

 

[PeLucheuh]

*sigh* except in THIS game, it doesn't matter which client connectivity mode you set the game client to - Open, Group, Solo - it's the same client playing on the same game data using the same groups of back-end game servers. Those modes are nothing more than varying degrees of client-client connectivity, ranging from none (Solo), some (group), or 'anyone also in the mode known as Open'.

So your comparisons with other games in this respect are incorrect.

Adding an Open-PvE mode would basically be like adding a 'Mobius PvE' connectivity mode, and it would be playing the exact same game with the exact same data in the exact same universe.

And your entire argument rests on 'division of the playerbase' - which is blown apart as soon as someone mentions the fact that we have an Xbox playerbase and soon to have a PS4 playerbase - each having the existing modes, and each not being able to see players in the other platforms - yet whichever platform in whatever connectivity mode of Open, Group and Solo, every single player is playing and sharing the one galaxy, BGS, and data.

BOOM!

So PvP available in Open-PvE like it is in Noobius ? If not then it can t exist on the same universe because it would avoid an entire part of the game mechanic.

 

[frostypaw]

I wasn't replying to a post.....

I quote you "Nope. Because I didn't need to reply to your (or Rob's) assumption that the only reason people play solo is to dodge gankers, which the absence of in Open PvE is going to be the sole driving force in pulling every single one of those players out of Solo." - which wasn't what any of us claimed to start with.

Why do you expect us to reply to you and engage in proper conversation when you're pretty much just messing around and talking nonsense? If you're just going to make up stuff other people didn't say then try and squiggle out of it when you're called on it and head off on some new unrelated pile of nonsense why should we bother with considering any of the points you make? Or indeed engaging with you at all....

I am not under the impression you have known me for years to make such judgements about me, let alone to start reaching such far flung conclusions of extended meta-gameplay and manipulation. This is approaching the point of genuinely concerning behaviour and thinking. Your final paragraph is just unfettered paranoid fantasy and nothing like what people have said at all - it is if anything a mirror image of the nonsensical position you are taking that such a mode would kill the game.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

So PvP available in Open-PvE like it is in Noobius ? If not then it can t exist on the same universe because it would avoid an entire part of the game mechanic.

You just don't get it. Everyone is already playing in the same universe. Just in different client connectivity modes.

OMG why am I even posting here any more when it's quite clear that more than a few posters here don't even know HOW the game is constructed at the back-end!?

- - - Updated - - -

None of that is relevant.

Sorry, it just isn't.

People who play in Open will continue for the most part to play in Open.

People who play in Solo will by and large play in solo.

Open PvE will only see small fractions trickle in from various directions and the amount of player interactivity will be reduced for everyone.

It's just a simple fact. You divide the player base, the players feel less of a connection with the community, they leave.

I repeat - your entire argument collapses because its foundation lies on the part I highlighted - players on PC, Xbox, and soon PS4 are already separated. Understand!

The modes aren't on different servers. Understand!

The modes are just client connectivity modes. Understand!

And yet - each individual player, no matter what mode they're in, affects the same galaxy. There is no separate server for 'open' , 'group' , or 'solo'. There is no separate server for PC and Xbox players. And there will be no separate server for PS4 players. Understand?

So your argument about dividing players is null and void.

 

[Apos]

You just don't get it. Everyone is already playing in the same universe. Just in different client connectivity modes.

OMG why am I even posting here any more when it's quite clear that more than a few posters here don't even know HOW the game is constructed at the back-end!?

Yes, that includes that damage is handled the same way in all 3 modes.

How will Open PvE be different than Open if not in damage dealing? And if it's not different in that regard, then what actually stops griefers from griefing instead of wishful thinking?

And if it is, then just "no", you won't get to have advantages like using your wingmates for forced break stops by ramming, avoiding accidental friendly fire, etc.

The problem is that everyone argues as if the only damage that is involved between players is exclusively from PvP, whereas such a change affects much more than that.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

I quote you "Nope. Because I didn't need to reply to your (or Rob's) assumption that the only reason people play solo is to dodge gankers, which the absence of in Open PvE is going to be the sole driving force in pulling every single one of those players out of Solo." - which wasn't what any of us claimed to start with.

Why do you expect us to reply to you and engage in proper conversation when you're pretty much just messing around and talking nonsense? If you're just going to make up stuff other people didn't say then try and squiggle out of it when you're called on it and head off on some new unrelated pile of nonsense why should we bother with considering any of the points you make? Or indeed engaging with you at all....

I am not under the impression you have known me for years to make such judgements about me, let alone to start reaching such far flung conclusions of extended meta-gameplay and manipulation. This is approaching the point of genuinely concerning behaviour and thinking. Your final paragraph is just unfettered paranoid fantasy and nothing like what people have said at all - it is if anything a mirror image of the nonsensical position you are taking that such a mode would kill the game.

Sorry, but it's another PvP vs. PvE thread.

Nonsense is par for the course. If you didn't come into this thread to jack your jaw and accomplish nothing, you're in the wrong place. [hehe]

Whatever impression you're under, these threads always follow the same structure.

OP says: "I want a thing, and I think it'd be nice because I really want it!"

Horde says: "Yeah, we want nice things too! We haven't really thought about how it's going to work but... YEAH! WE WANT IT!"

Handful of agenda pushers: "We can spin this, push that, turn this into that and color it all purple then keep hammering on it like a drum and it'll get everyone to listen because the horde will keep making noise as long as we keep beating the drum."

It's not paranoia, it's human nature. Don't get defensive because you got called out for pushing an agenda that ultimately is more destructive than productive simply because it's closely tied with your personal opinion and you refused to distinguish opinion from fact. It's a cornerstone of society. Everyone does it.