I'd be more worried about the "if done right" -part, so I concur.Sneaky player piracy would be PvP - and the target would be penalised if they retaliated - so, for me, 6) is required.
I'd be more worried about the "if done right" -part, so I concur.Sneaky player piracy would be PvP - and the target would be penalised if they retaliated - so, for me, 6) is required.
That would be a sad thing to happen. Open Mode can be fun and interesting. It needs a lot of fixing and balancing (that would, in my opinion, be beneficial to all players not only those interested in PvP or Open Mode). FD certainly has a lot of work to do in the coming years.
I hope that if FD ever makes a PvE mode it would be an addition to Open Mode and not a substitute.
That would be a sad thing to happen. Open Mode can be fun and interesting. It needs a lot of fixing and balancing (that would, in my opinion, be beneficial to all players not only those interested in PvP or Open Mode). FD certainly has a lot of work to do in the coming years.
I hope that if FD ever makes a PvE mode it would be an addition to Open Mode and not a substitute.
They've decided on the open/private group/solo model and nothing else will be done as long as these modes exist. I really don't think they'll add a fourth mode. Personally, I would prefer to see a proper crime/punishment system and make everybody play in open. However, this has been discussed to death, and they seem determined not to do implement a revamped system.
... this say only that some players want it. Imo the last thing, what this game really needs, is adding another mode.Well, I made a poll a couple of weeks ago and it was pretty clear that OpenPVE is needed, I think it was around 70 %.
Be pedantic as you will, it won't change what you have when you play the game.
The intended scope is obvious from the implementation.
If you want a big PvE group, start one.
Better idea: Let's give PVP players something to actually do. We need a war where people can sign up for active military service and fight for control of objectives. If you're in active service you are free game for military personnel from opposing powers.
Having something to fight over / campains will cause PVP players to aggregate in the areas of contention and give them tooled up opponents to fight instead of 'seal clubbing'.
I really don't think a completely pure PvE mode is in the vision of the game, it breaks immersion in a way more than most things as old as the saying goes.
It's probably been said before (I haven't read all 138 posts). There already is a PvE mode at the main menu. It's called Solo. Why you want to add another one?
To have some meaningful interaction with other players, duh.It's probably been said before (I haven't read all 138 posts). There already is a PvE mode at the main menu. It's called Solo. Why you want to add another one?
It's probably been said before (I haven't read all 138 posts). There already is a PvE mode at the main menu. It's called Solo. Why you want to add another one?
It's probably been said before (I haven't read all 138 posts). There already is a PvE mode at the main menu. It's called Solo. Why you want to add another one?