But that requires a new, additional, mode. I thought it was about making Open pve-only? If its just another matchmaking toggle you want added I dont see an issue.
Last edited:
Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.
- Thread starter CMDR Generic EventHandler
- Start date
But that requires a new, additional, mode. I thought it was about making Open pve-only? If its just another matchmaking toggle you want added I dont see an issue.
Since each of the modes is 'just a toggle'...or series of toggles...Open or Open PVE are not that different. Something to do about collisions (or tracking down traffic cops and removing their PVE only flag?) and no friendly fire between real players.
I'm not a proponent of making current Open PVE....but adding a new toggle for the matchmaker...I see no issues.
It has been pretty clear what a big portion of people want, an open pve mode to replace the limited mobuis grouping since there's a cap on how many can join groups, alternately they could just make grouping size unlimited but that again puts an onus on an individual instead of on Fdev like it should be.
It's difficult to keep on track or even answer questions of people that are REALLY here to debate or talk about an open pve when the same few pro open pvp only keep up with baseless accusation or feel the need to over use the same terms they have just learned in school.
Open pve would simply be one large unlimited private group with it's place in the front along with the open (pvp) we have now. No more need for splintered pve groups in small groups of 20k max, we could all go into open pve together.
Sadly some few here have an agenda and are not past posting rubbish and disinformation as they try and peddle their particular "vision", and I use that term lightly.
It's not about pvers vs pvpers or any one trying to ostracize one group or the other BUT some few here have made it amply clear how afraid they are of an open pve and how it would impact their minority group.
I would go more into detail about these few people but there's no point. They will just keep spamming the thread until we stop posting.
If we were as childish we would go do the same in their threads.
Last edited:
What difference does it make whether PvEers use Mobius or an official PvE mode to avoid Open? Or does the PvP crowd really believe there are a lot of PvEers reluctantly playing in open solely because they are unaware there are alternatives and do you really think denying them the opportunity to play the game their way will benefit anyone in the long run?
Both sides of this "argument" are guilty of the negative behaviors that you listed. I find it amusing that neither side can see that.
Because Mobius is a band-aid. It has no guarantee of PvE only. There was the SDC invasion not too long ago. I personally dealt with several of the SDC guys...and won. I don't build for PvE and I still came out on top. Private groups have member limits, so the PvE community is split there. Not every ED player makes it to the forums, which are the only way to learn about Mobius. So that is another split. Also, the multiple Mobius groups are managed by one guy. That isn't fair to him.
You both are saying same thing essentially. Think you misread murgle (although I admit maybe it's me who misread his post). The way i read his post, he wasn't saying let's not have an open pve mode because moebius = same thing as open pve.
Think what he was saying is that since from an impact point of view, moebius gives same public group with pve focus, it is essentially mot changing anything by FD offering an open pve mode other than exactly what you just said - e.g. The good improvements in that FD is the admin, not burdening a private player, no infiltration because pve is enforced by game mode mechanic not just player pledge, etc
You're saying open pve would be a better version of what already exists with private groups like moebius. That's how I read what murgle is saying --> there's no point or basis to protest the creation by FD of an open pve mode because that already exists today - but is burdensome due to the limits of private groups.
Basically, what players who oppose open pve mode request are saying is they are against private groups, because that is all an open pve mode would be - a private group like Moebius auto combined with all other pve focused private groups, with the admin being FD, and joining automated instead of cumbersome manual request and approval.
Not all, but some of these opposed are pvp focused players, and of this group, many are apparently the type that just can't stand that some players just don't want to be their game content. They realize that an openly offered open pve mode would essentially be moebius on steroids - easy to know about, join, and therefore opt out of being their pvp game content. (As apparently fighting other pvp opt in players doesn't seem to count as pvp or carry the same lulz satisfaction)
Last edited:
My main concern is that should "Open PvE" appear on the same list as the other primary modes, many people would flock to it without even giving "Open" a chance. This would fragment the player base further, and probably not in Open's favor. Many people here won't care about that, but I certainly would, and the FDev has made it clear that their vision involves potentially hostile, organic, and spontaneous, interactions between CMDRs.
A secondary worry about such a mode is that it would make it easier to organize manipulation of the background sim in a largely risk free environment. All the reasons given about why private groups are less than ideal solutions to the PvE problem are the same reasons they are less ideal for playing the BGS.
A secondary worry about such a mode is that it would make it easier to organize manipulation of the background sim in a largely risk free environment. All the reasons given about why private groups are less than ideal solutions to the PvE problem are the same reasons they are less ideal for playing the BGS.
Last edited:
To your three essential sub-points in reply -->
1- many people would flock to open pve mode if appears on main game mode start list
Seems you're admitting the self justification of why open pve should be on list then. If there is enough who prefer that to cause a flock to it, then as surmised by many who advocate for it, pve is indeed the substantial majority.
I do agree with you though that this would cause fragmentation of current open. But if you can admit that people would flock to open pve, then it would be more correct to say regular open is fragmenting the majority open pve mode, not the open pve mode fragmenting the regular open mode.
2- FD vision re potential hostile interaction between players
I agree, but the operative word to stress is potential, as in not mandatory. The only 'will happen' hostile interaction is npc / pve, although I suppose it is remotely possible if you explore long enough you could mostly avoid that.
Potential pvp only happens if you join open, which by definition means FD clearly provided solo and private groups as means to completely and 100% avoid hostile player interaction.
*before someone says moebius can be infiltrated and pvp attacked, that's why I said private, not moebius. When I play in my private family group of brother, cousins, and nephews, there is zero chance of hostile pvp. Same for solo. Bottom line is FD provides for potential hostile player interaction but also designed guaranteed methods to avoid it as well.
The sole difference in above and what people are asking for in open pve is the admin would be FD, not a private player (who pays multiple accounts, admin time, etc), and joining would be automatic rather than manual per today's private group.
3- risk free BGS Impact via open pve mode
I presume you mean risk free from pvp interaction, because the same pve risks would exist. This isn't a BGS pros/cons thread so I won't go into what should be the BGS mechanics and just go with what we have today.
Which means, so what if people affect the BGS in open pve? It would be the same as ability to impact BGS playing solo, completely risk free from pvp interaction as well. And moebius, and any private group of friends, family, coworkers, etc. They all allow BGS impact without pvp. So an open pvp would be no different.
There a lots of valid points people have made in other threads why BGS impacts should be different in open vs solo modes, but I'll leave that to those threads as off topic here. Point is that based on what we have today, your concern here re open pve impact on BGS is a non issue.
Last edited:
The issue, though, is that the 'potentially' hostile part of FD's dream of 'potentially hostile interactions' doesn't really exist. When was the last time you were properly pirated? Or attacked because of your political allegiance? I can tell you that the last time I was properly pirated was about two years ago, and that since then the only PvP content I've experienced outside of a single combat zone battle has consisted solely of being ganked.
I would rather see the crime and punishment system start hammering people for unwarranted murder, but in lieu of that happening it would be nice to have an Open PvE server. I mostly play in open anyway, but it would be nice to not have to start plotting a high wake route whenever another player is in the system just to try to prevent the loss of hours of work to somebody whose only goal is to harm other people's experience of the game. Which is, btw, all that such players care about, because if what they actually desired was the thrill of a good fight they wouldn't gank goddamn Diamondback Explorers in their fully engineered Corvettes...
An uninformed preference, if they have not given Open a chance.
I disagree. Open is the default because it has the most possibilities and potential, all other modes and potential modes are Open, but with the imposition of further limitations.
And the one that allows for hostile player interaction is obviously presented as the default choice for anyone who wants player interaction and doesn't have a private group specifically in mind.
I disagree. The very limits of Private Group you mention in your own post above and that thirstyfish mentions are similarly limiting to recruiting and organizing people for BGS manipulation.
On the first point, I used to have similar concerns. But I think I'm past caring about that nowadays. Neither side of the argument seems able to agree on a compromise so I'm not sure it's worth trying anymore. In any event, my main reason for siding with an open PvE mode nowadays is that it is clear Mobius is untenable as an enduring solution and not a fair imposition on him moving forward (however much he may be prepared to continue 'serving' the community doing something Frontier should be doing).
On your second point, why would it be any different to what can already be done via private or solo, in particular Mobius? I don't think it would make much difference really.
I think the easiest compromise would be to tweak how Groups work. Increased population limits, lieutenants/officers (or simply multiple owners), and maybe changes to the search function to allow browsing/descriptions of groups.
Last edited:
I agree, it seems like a much more likely and workable solution than adding another mode filter and a whole new ruleset.
So basically this will introduce tools to manage a group
for the whole community.
Not a bad addition.
How would a PvE mode make it easier to organize BGS manipulation? It would still have the same limited communication as Open, you'd still only be able to talk to the people in your instance or did someone suggest a PvE mode should have a global chat? (Not a bad idea mind though there might be some problems due to the whole P2P )
Perhaps so...but it still doesn't address the root cause here - the fact that expectations of PvEers and PvPers when thrown together in the same mode mix about as well as oil and water. Improved group management tools won't change that.
Last edited:
Yessirree
Getting rid of Open PvP wholesale would be bananapeanutbuttersandwich loony toons, so I can see why you'd be all torches and pitchforks.