Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Deadspin]

Finally, when it comes to the BGS - the BGS doesn't really belong to anyone. No minor faction can really be claimed by any one person or group. You can pretend it's yours, but it really isn't. So the question becomes a bit non-sensical once you realize this.

The BGS wasn't made to be "gamed". It was made to provide a simulation of a real world happening in the background. That's why its so often wrapped in mystery (no one bar FD really knows how the BGS works), and also why the game doesn't permit any larger groups / guilds / coprorations (maximum limit is the number of pilots in a single wing).

So player groups that had factions named and placed on their behalf cannot claim to run/support said faction?

Given that player groups can indeed steer expansion, know how to counter every "state" a faction can find itself in, how to get to those states and how to avoid them, I'd say that player groups very much can claim a faction (Many have already done so) and that the BGS being gamed is exactly how about 70% of the PvP goes down in this game to begin with.

- - - Updated - - -

Not... really. We ALREADY have the solo mode, so by that argument SOLO should be the death of open.

Were people clamoring to play by themselves, alone in this vast universe, I would agree with you. That, however, is not the case.

 

[Shaamaan]

Again (will probably be ignored because sloganeering is so much easier and fun): Open is not PvP mode.

I think the argument is that there are fewer people interested in PvP, not that there are fewer PvP activities... than again, I'll admit I'm just guessing what the meaning behind the quote might be.

 

[Deadspin]

I think the argument is that there are fewer people interested in PvP, not that there are fewer PvP activities... than again, I'll admit I'm just guessing what the meaning behind the quote might be.

You seem to have a hard time with context. Try checking the source for what he quoted in that reply before you yourself reply.

 

[Monk]

It seems what people are wanting are random encounters with players but for those encounters to be predictable and safe.

I understand the desire but I'm concerned it won't be of appreciated value. Random encounters in an Open PvE will just be like random encounters in Mobius...wave really fast while passing at super-luminal speeds. At least, in my experience, folks in Mobius aren't all that interested in player interaction much more than a "hello" and "safe flying". A couple of y'all are really into queuing, so there is that. In Open, when I'm docked at a station we talk about what is going on around the system, where the pirates are and a few CMDRs in Vultures/FDLs offering protection. It is much more engaging and leads to fun, even if short-lived, wings.

I fail to see the value added by Open PvE over what is already available through PGs. Sure, PGs need some love, I get that, but I don't know how that ends up into needing Open PvE. I could be convinced but I have't seen a solid case for it...even more difficult now with C&P potentially dissuading ganking.

 

[Shaamaan]

So player groups that had factions named and placed on their behalf cannot claim to run/support said faction?

Given that player groups can indeed steer expansion, know how to counter every "state" a faction can find itself in, how to get to those states and how to avoid them, I'd say that player groups very much can claim a faction (Many have already done so) and that the BGS being gamed is exactly how about 70% of the PvP goes down in this game to begin with.

The naming thing seems to me to be more of a "have a bone, you did good, your name will be memorialised". The reason you can't really claim these factions is that if enough people decided to prevent them from expanding, then there would be NOTHING you could do about it. It's not a race you can control like in a strategy game. It's something that happens as a result of your actions. You can support your chosen faction if you will, but you are really just playing pretend.

There's nothing wrong with that - playing pretend, I mean. But every once in a while you have people forgetting a faction isn't really theirs and causing an uproar about it, which I find a bit silly.

Were people clamoring to play by themselves, alone in this vast universe, I would agree with you. That, however, is not the case.

Sorry, what? I'm not sure I follow the argument. No one's proposing that the Open PvE is devoid of any and all dangers. NPCs would exist just as they do in solo. Since solo exists, is the difficulty "baseline" defined by FD, and open sill exists and people still play there, I can't see how a PvE mode would suddenly cause regular open to be obsolete due to its difficulty.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I think the argument is that there are fewer people interested in PvP, not that there are fewer PvP activities... than again, I'll admit I'm just guessing what the meaning behind the quote might be.

Yes, but what I mean (sorry for the confusion) is that Open as we have it is also aimed at non PvP-players. So yes, more people are into PvE than PvP, but that is not an argument against Open as we have it. The difference is that there are two types of PvE players: those who wish to be mixed with PvP players, and those who dont. FD never gave stats on those, because short of a poll there is no way of knowing. So the quote has nothing to do with this discussion. If you want an actual quote about PvE Mode from FD, you have one from David Braben himself, who clearly says he understands the appeal to some but gives a clear "no", and explains why. You dont see many repeating that quote here, because those lobbying for Open PvE arent interested in what FD actually has a stance on this, they are just mining for fake support.

 

[Shaamaan]

You seem to have a hard time with context. Try checking the source for what he quoted in that reply before you yourself reply.

I seem to recall someone at Fdev stating here on the forums that the majority of ED players count as PvE.

This was the thing I was referring to, to which the reply was

Again (will probably be ignored because sloganeering is so much easier and fun): Open is not PvP mode.

I.e. the counts isn't about how many hours one has (can have) in Open doing no PvP at all, it's about how many people are interested in PvP vs how many aren't. Again, that's my interpretation. If I'm missing the context, feel free to correct me.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Sorry, what? I'm not sure I follow the argument. No one's proposing that the Open PvE is devoid of any and all dangers. NPCs would exist just as they do in solo. Since solo exists, is the difficulty "baseline" defined by FD, and open sill exists and people still play there, I can't see how a PvE mode would suddenly cause regular open to be obsolete due to its diffiulty.

Its calmed down a bit, for quite some time a bunch of diehard Mobius players went around the general and newcomers forums telling everyone to never try Open because its full of evil gankers and you'll always die every minute if you have no super-cutter, VR set and four joysticks. Its not that Open is objectively incredibly much harder, but some do seem intent on spreading that rumor.

 

[Shaamaan]

Yes, but what I mean (sorry for the confusion) is that Open as we have it is also aimed at non PvP-players.

You're right!

BUT, that doesn't really matter in the context of this conversation. The fact is that open supports PvP, and a certain subset of people do not like PvP in the slightest (in fact, that group will actively avoid PvP). Thus, a PvE group was created, which is now too large to hold everyone interested. I think it helps going from this premise onward.

 

[Ian Skippy]

I.e. the counts isn't about how many hours one has (can have) in Open doing no PvP at all, it's about how many people are interested in PvP vs how many aren't. Again, that's my interpretation. If I'm missing the context, feel free to correct me.

Thats impossible to have stats on. The only stats they can have is how many people actually engage with other cmdrs. They can a threshold (x/1000 fights should be with cmdrs at least) and thats the percentage of PvP players. How many have an interest in PvP, either directly or enjoying it existing in the same mode, is impossible to know without a poll.

 

[Shaamaan]

Its calmed down a bit, for quite some time a bunch of diehard Mobius players went around the general and newcomers forums telling everyone to never try Open because its full of evil gankers and you'll always die every minute if you have no super-cutter, VR set and four joysticks. Its not that Open is objectively incredibly much harder, but some do seem intent on spreading that rumor.

I see, thanks for clearing that up. Hmm, I remember those Mobius posts usually popped up whenever someone complained about getting killed in Open tho. I don't recall threads being created crying "join Mobius or you'll die!".

- - - Updated - - -

Thats impossible to have stats on. The only stats they can have is how many people actually engage with other cmdrs. They can a threshold (x/1000 fights should be with cmdrs at least) and thats the percentage of PvP players. How many have an interest in PvP, either directly or enjoying it existing in the same mode, is impossible to know without a poll.

That's very true, I'll give you that. I sort of assumed that's the case - because only in this context does "there's more PvE that PvP" bring anything tangible. Saying there's more "PvE activities than PvP activities" is a bit obvious, and really doesn't bring much to the discussion.

That said, could someone relink that original quote from FD for context, please?

 

[Deadspin]

The naming thing seems to me to be more of a "have a bone, you did good, your name will be memorialized". The reason you can't really claim these factions is that if enough people decided to prevent them from expanding, then there would be NOTHING you could do about it. It's not a race you can control like in a strategy game. It's something that happens as a result of your actions. You can support your chosen faction if you will, but you are really just playing pretend.

Have a bone, you did good? Do you even know how factions make it into the game? There's nothing involved but an email and a waiting list.

Given that the larger, more proliferate player factions and alliances now actually have established lore to support them, I'm of the opinion that you are wrong. When hundreds of players from a single group devote their in-game time to the support and furthering of a faction they had placed in the game, I'd say they own the faction as there isn't anybody else to lay claim to them and it's through BGS manipulation (Or gaming, as you put it) that factions can be erased from the game entirely. It's already happened once.

Sorry, what? I'm not sure I follow the argument. No one's proposing that the Open PvE is devoid of any and all dangers. NPCs would exist just as they do in solo. Since solo exists, is the difficulty "baseline" defined by FD, and open sill exists and people still play there, I can't see how a PvE mode would suddenly cause regular open to be obsolete due to its diffiulty.

Did you get your posts confused?

The "difficulty" in question is the "unwarranted" PvP of Open. Not the difficulty of NPCs. I'd imagine we're all well versed at avoiding NPCs and that doing so is probably the easiest activity in the game.

The whole point behind asking for an Open PvE mode is to be able to avoid unwanted player interaction, IE: Ganking / CG Slot camping, etc. The "easy route" attribute is also just a theory on why or how an Open PvE could kill regular open. Not my definitive statement about how it will kill anything.

 

[Monk]

The "difficulty" in question is the "unwarranted" PvP of Open. Not the difficulty of NPCs. I'd imagine we're all well versed at avoiding NPCs and that doing so is probably the easiest activity in the game.

The whole point behind asking for an Open PvE mode is to be able to avoid unwanted player interaction, IE: Ganking / CG Slot camping, etc. The "easy route" attribute is also just a theory on why or how an Open PvE could kill regular open. Not my definitive statement about how it will kill anything.

I believe it is important that we focus on the merits of adding an Open PvE. When I really think about what Open PvE adds to the game, I'm left feeling short. I'm left asking for things that already exist or can be more easily achieved in other ways. Improving PGs seems like the obvious answer to me, though I'll admit, I'm not an expert in how all of that works and if it is reasonably feasible.

What I'm tired of seeing are Open complaints..."well, these people, they are there and they don't play nice" is the gist of the argument. I need more than that, I need to see good reasons for adding another mode of play over improving the existing ones. (C&P for open and better support for PG)

 

[Ian Skippy]

Given that the larger, more proliferate player factions and alliances now actually have established lore to support them, I'm of the opinion that you are wrong. When hundreds of players from a single group devote their in-game time to the support and furthering of a faction they had placed in the game, I'd say they own the faction as there isn't anybody else to lay claim to them and it's through BGS manipulation (Or gaming, as you put it) that factions can be erased from the game entirely. It's already happened once.

Everyone has an equal claim on any faction in-game, regardless of belonging to some player group. There is nothing to 'own', anything the 'owners' of a faction can do can equally be done by any other person.

 

[Shaamaan]

Have a bone, you did good? Do you even know how factions make it into the game? There's nothing involved but an email and a waiting list.

Given that the larger, more proliferate player factions and alliances now actually have established lore to support them, I'm of the opinion that you are wrong. When hundreds of players from a single group devote their in-game time to the support and furthering of a faction they had placed in the game, I'd say they own the faction as there isn't anybody else to lay claim to them and it's through BGS manipulation (Or gaming, as you put it) that factions can be erased from the game entirely. It's already happened once.

Then perhaps the lore is the bone, and the creation is just because it's so simple on FDevs part? I mean, if it makes players happy, why WOULDN'T they do it? In any case, the BGS was always, as the name implies, a "background" thing for me.

I guess some argument could be made not for the singular factions of the BGS, but for the powers in Power Play, since the game actively promotes subscribing to one power over the others. And, yeah, in a way I can see how it might suck when you can't do anything about another player working against your chosen power. BUT in a PvE mode this becomes more of a race then a direct competition - i.e. who can do their part faster, rather who can beat the other player into submission.

Did you get your posts confused?

The "difficulty" in question is the "unwarranted" PvP of Open. Not the difficulty of NPCs. I'd imagine we're all well versed at avoiding NPCs and that doing so is probably the easiest activity in the game.

The whole point behind asking for an Open PvE mode is to be able to avoid unwanted player interaction, IE: Ganking / CG Slot camping, etc. The "easy route" attribute is also just a theory on why or how an Open PvE could kill regular open. Not my definitive statement about how it will kill anything.

The reason an Open PvE would kill regular Open has it's roots inside of the fact that people will always take the easiest route.

That's the start of your argument. I say this is wrong purely because solo exists, which is also devoid of "all those pesky PvPers making things difficult". And to that you replied something I still don't get, so, yeah, please explain:

Were people clamoring to play by themselves, alone in this vast universe, I would agree with you. That, however, is not the case.

I really don't understand the above as any reply to the argument regarding difficulty... What?

 

[Apos]

Everyone has an equal claim on any faction in-game, regardless of belonging to some player group. There is nothing to 'own', anything the 'owners' of a faction can do can equally be done by any other person.

Well, despite a couple mistakes along the road, most groups do have a form of ownership of the characters they have created and usually you don't get to create galnet articles on their behalf.

Of course, most groups are also courteous enough to not try it.

 

[Deadspin]

I believe it is important that we focus on the merits of adding an Open PvE. When I really think about what Open PvE adds to the game, I'm left feeling short. I'm left asking for things that already exist or can be more easily achieved in other ways. Improving PGs seems like the obvious answer to me, though I'll admit, I'm not an expert in how all of that works and if it is reasonably feasible.

What I'm tired of seeing are Open complaints..."well, these people, they are there and they don't play nice" is the gist of the argument. I need more than that, I need to see good reasons for adding another mode of play over improving the existing ones. (C&P for open and better support for PG)

Oh, I'm not an Open PvE advocate.

The only benefit I see from it is the ease of mind gained from not having to worry about being randomly ganked. At the same time, I'm not like a lot of other people, trust nobody, am prepared to kill (or attempt to kill) every commander I come across and generally try my best not to let people get the drop on me. So ganks have been.. well.. I've never really been ganked but I've lost a few fights.

- - - Updated - - -

Then perhaps the lore is the bone, and the creation is just because it's so simple on FDevs part? I mean, if it makes players happy, why WOULDN'T they do it? In any case, the BGS was always, as the name implies, a "background" thing for me.

Timeline wise, the "bone" doesn't fit. There was never a "bone" outside of having something you created in the game, inserted into a place of your choosing (Though Frontier did pull back on the locations a bit when some poor choices were pointed out).

I really don't understand the above as any reply to the argument regarding difficulty... What?

Players will take the path of least resistance. The easiest route.
I pointed this out.
The conversation of Open PvE -v- Regular Open is, at heart, a multiplayer conversation/argument. People want multiplayer, though some want it as it currently is, some want it changed to suit their play style and state of mind.

You commented that solo would be the true path of least resistance.

Nobody here is talking about solo as a viable option because it's not the multiplayer option, otherwise I would agree with you that solo is the path of least resistance and thus the more appealing option.

Did I get it right that time? I don't know how else to explain it to you.

 

[sewerratuk]

You can support your chosen faction if you will, but you are really just playing pretend.

There's nothing wrong with that - playing pretend, I mean. But every once in a while you have people forgetting a faction isn't really theirs and causing an uproar about it, which I find a bit silly.

I hate to be the one to break it too you but it's all pretend.
It's a pretend ship your flying, earning pretend credits or exploring pretend planets or fighting other pretend ships.

In other breaking news, if another player blows up your pretend ship it's only a pretend pilot that gets ejected into space and only pretend credits you lose, so to cause an uproar about, I find a bit silly

 

[Monk]

Oh, I'm not an Open PvE advocate.

The only benefit I see from it is the ease of mind gained from not having to worry about being randomly ganked. At the same time, I'm not like a lot of other people, trust nobody, am prepared to kill (or attempt to kill) every commander I come across and generally try my best not to let people get the drop on me. So ganks have been.. well.. I've never really been ganked but I've lost a few fights.

Oh, don't let the quote reply confuse things, I know where you stand

I'm just seeing a lot of defense of the current state of game modes and for the same reasons, repeatedly. What I don't see are how Open PvE improves the game in a worthwhile way without being completely unnecessary in the face of simpler solutions.

 

[Shaamaan]

Players will take the path of least resistance. The easiest route.
I pointed this out.
The conversation of Open PvE -v- Regular Open is, at heart, a multiplayer conversation/argument. People want multiplayer, though some want it as it currently is, some want it changed to suit their play style and state of mind.

You commented that solo would be the true path of least resistance.

Nobody here is talking about solo as a viable option because it's not the multiplayer option, otherwise I would agree with you that solo is the path of least resistance and thus the more appealing option.

Did I get it right that time? I don't know how else to explain it to you.

Yeah, I get your argument now. Thanks for clearing it up.

I do, however, feel it's a nonsensical argument. I mean, choosing between "I want multiplayer" and "I want no difficulty" in a game not aimed at PvP makes no sense. If this were a game like Quake / Doom (or any other PvP-focused game with a single-player) I'd be on board with the argument. But in an MMO-like game this it is a bit silly.

- - - Updated - - -

I hate to be the one to break it too you but it's all pretend.
It's a pretend ship your flying, earning pretend credits or exploring pretend planets or fighting other pretend ships.

In other breaking news, if another player blows up your pretend ship it's only a pretend pilot that gets ejected into space and only pretend credits you lose, so to cause an uproar about, I find a bit silly

That's not the kind of pretend I had in mind, and you know it. The difference is in the amount of direct involvement. Any player has a LOT of input when it comes to their pilot / ship. There's miniscule direct involvement when it comes to minor factions.

Seriously - if you really want to use the BGS as an argument then use Power Play as an example or those CGs which are directly opposing each other (ex. a conflict between Empire and Federation or something). That at least makes some sense, because the game expects players get active towards those goals.

It's still a moot point, because
a) solo and PGs exist, so the game, from the design, doesn't permit anyone from opposing everyone else at their leisure
b) in a PvE mode those scenarios become races rather than direct oppositions... and anyone playing in that mode KNOWS about it...

So if someone wants to do anything related to the BGS and wants to be able to actively stop opposing players, why would that person choose the PvE open to begin with? They wouldn't. That still no reason why a PvE couldn't exist - those who would be playing in the PvE mode would just do the BGS actions and not seek the direct opposition.