Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[JosiahD]

The only way this would ever come is if the modes are restricted to the ones who play it.

You want PvE? Fine, but you can't log in PvP with your PvE earned stuff.

Different servers would be needed, PvE people shouldn't influence the PvP server and vice-versa.

Different servers were a solution for other games aswell. Sure, this would mean a segregation for players and i'm not sure if Fdevs wants it.

Umm, don't PvPers in his game actually need to PvE in order to acquire the ships and equipment with which to PvP? Unless PvP were participated in with nothing but stock starting Sidewinders that is....which we knkw is not the case. You do realise that an open PvE mode would be identical to the existing open mode, complete with the same PvE content for both modes as well as private and solo (as we do now), sharing the same BGS, just with none of the PvP potential? So just as one can freely switch from, say, solo (ie entirely PvE) to open (ie principally PvE but with a chance of PvP), why wouldn't one be able to switch between open PvE and the current open mode again?

- - - Updated - - -

This topic has been ongoing throughout the development cycle of the game (at least since I joined back a couple of months prior to release) so noo I do not think the PVE players have shamed the PVP players away from the forums at all.. I am sure there are many from both play styles that have come and gone Heck I took about a 9 month break from the forums due to discontent with how the forums appeared to me to be going downhill from what they used to be when I first joined them, you can read that as I got sick and tired of the belittling and so forth that was occuring when trying to have a rational discussion...




That is a fair statement, it is also equally fair to take away from that statement, that the majority of players are PVE centric and may well appreciate the ability to play in a readily accessible multiplayer PVE mode with other PVE centric players...




Granted, but there have been many many polls on this particular subject and every time it has ended in indicating those who participated where favour of PVE MODE. I ran a poll that was open for a month, over 1100 respondants... and 55% in favour to 45% not in favour, that was over a year ago now... and that was simply a poll and thread to discuss the OPTION of an OPEN PVE mode on the desktop client.



And there is NO PVP without the PVP player engaging in PVE, this is one fact I know we can agree on/ So it stands to reason that in your example situation, the PVP player would do things in his mode to affect the BGS... Infliltrating the PVE players mode to exact PVP justice (such as happened in Mobius by SDC) is simply something that should not be able to happen... Due to the fact that for the PVP player to keep his system in the state he wants, he/she typically will need the play the BGS anyway even if there is no other players actively competing with him in another mode... There is no avoiding that and it is indeed intended gameplay...




Except that as part of the actual kickstarter, they stated that there would be different open modes of play with different rule sets being possible to cater for different play styles, as well as the ability to play solo or in small groups with your friends...

I think it is safe to state that Mobius is not a small group in so far as the original intent of group mode , and in fact has not been a small group for some time... Wouldn't you agree? I mean the US group (if I am not mistaken) is full to capacity for a second time, and the EU group is at 13.5K memebership, I am going to guess that new players who want to join Mobius will be simply added to the EU group until that reaches capacity and then the third group will get utilised...

Some minor issues with this (the reason the them creating 2 country based groups on the capacity first split) is that there will be issues with players from say the US not seeing many others in the EU group due to time zone differences... Further to that, the group as a whole can not play together, in the one 'group' due to the hard cap built into the group system.





Of course the reverse is never true is it... I mean no one ever insults a PVE player do they, PVE players don't get sick and tired of stupid names like rainbow mode, safe zone, etc etc, of course not... For some, the NPCS are dangerous enough to make their game a challenge whilst still being fun, and not without risks... But of course 'git gud' is never meant as a relative term is it, perhaps they did 'git gud' and do continue to 'git gud' against the NPC's whilst still not wanting to play against other players but DO want to play with other players...




And i think the whole we are PVP, we are uber, engineer up or die, sort of statements that some PVP players put forward as rationales are a total waste of time. We can both agree that the C&P system needs a total overhaul, there needs to be significant work done both to make it more dynamic and responsive as well as somewhat more realistic in the responses (within the lore of the game) and needs to actually be based on a commanders actions and a history of their actions taken into account...

So yes much discussion needs to be had on that for sure and I think all players will benefit from it, I do not believe however it will give those that want to play in a PVE only environment the incentive to come out of solo or the current private groups dedicated to PVE and back into the current mixed mode open...




Unless you live where I live, in which case, going for a swim means there is an exceedingly high risk of shark attack...

The Australian Shark Attack File (ASAF) investigated 33 reported incidents of shark-human interaction within Australian waters occurring between 1st Jan to 31st Dec 2015. Upon review, 22 of these incidents represent confirmed cases of unprovoked shark attacks. The number of unprovoked cases in 2015 is above the 11 unprovoked encounters recorded in 2014 and is above the decadal average of 13 unprovoked cases per year.

And when you consider our population size, and the fact there are no bears here (besides drop bears and koala bears) hiding in the sand, I think your analogy is quite flawed... The chances are definitley below 1 in a million, maybe 1 in 600,000 or so, and that is with active shark defenses, and patrol planes etc, this of course does not include the beach closures due to shark presence etc... here in the town I live, typically up to 1/8th of the public beaches get closed for a few days either side of shark sightings each year, let alone the other beaches around the country, we even have actively patrolled shark proof netted bays that sharks sometimes get through... usually they get shot by the patrols pretty quickly and so most people feel comfortable with going into the water with those nets in place... Kind of akin to an OPEN PVE OPEN mode where the game could kick PVP players out should they break the rules and eventually ban them from re-entering that mode if they continue to attempt to engage in PVP in a PVE mode

I have say I agree with your points.

 

[stooger]

Eh. If Frontier makes Elite less than dangerous I'll drop it faster than a hot plate. I don't even actively PVP (When the opportunity arises I'll go get my fill) and it honestly accounts for very little play time on my end.

But a few things I'll point out.

-I generally have to look for PVP and know what systems to avoid if I'm not feeling it.
-My trade and smuggling routes are mine. I don't run into players so I can min max without fear. I still make sure the ship can survive a bad attack though
-At CGs I build for worst case. You would be foolish to do otherwise and rightly deserve what you get.
-I signed up for a PP faction which means I'm going to get attacked. I'm aware of it and keep it in mind. AKA. No hauler taxis because stuff happens.

My point of this being you put yourself out there with a bit of due diligence you're gonna have a lot of fun. I got killed in a shieldless T6 once. Learned my lesson and had next to no problems after. Mil hull. A half decent shield with chaff. On my way to the CG station would always select a high wake system if I needed to run. Even now I'll run a Cobra for rare material CGs just for the fun of it.
Half the fun of open is the risk from other players.
*I do have a fully fitted Cutter but I'm also building a space cow miner and working on a Viper MK4 for day to day shenanigans. Why? Because it's fun. I can survive everything in the Cutter. The T9 provides some edge of the seat excitement!

I don't think we need a PVE mode.

People don't think realisticly IMO. When it's cold out do you wear a coat or try to make it work in a T shirt? Elite is no different and your experience depending on those decisions will be the difference between being comfortable or freezing and miserable.

Revamping crime and punishment might not be a horrible idea. Maybe after X amount of player murders your insurance/repair costs, rearm goes up a % in that particular area. (Say 50LY?) After so much maybe you go hostile to the high security systems and no docking privileges. Not sure if there's a way to make the NPC interdict more but in a fashion that makes it slightly more difficult to kill unpledged clean players.
Gankers in Vettes might think a second or two as 1% on a full A grade is something like 6 million. 14 days or something reasonable. Separate from the bounty. IE. No suici-sidies out of it.
Would think you could leave power play alone as you know what you're signing up for. Don't like PVP don't pledge.
So unpledged players would get a crime and punishment system and greifers would have motivation to leave them alone. Guessing it would drastically lower ganking. Pirates can still pirate of their careful. Plus a dead mark is worthless one.

Just my thoughts.
*mobile. Sorry. Auto correct butchered this

This. Everyone can fly and do any activity the game offer in peace if they want. Game is so big that there is a lot easier to fly all alone than meet other people. You can do missions, trade, mine, explore, fight npcs/wars/res/cz all alone in open. But there is always a minimal risk of meeting someone and even smaller risk of meeting someone PvP oriented... and even a smaller risk of meeting somone PvP oriented who want to destroy you on the first sight. But for some peope it's still too much. They have to go to CG systems unprepared and complain about being killed. I went to the las CG (in t9) and lost ~30mil in rebuys but I didn't complain, I took the risk and I lost and it's all my fault. But people want truck sim instead of elite "dangerous". That's the problem. No matter there is a way to fly almost completly safe in open, it still won't beat complete 100% safety of solo. Now people want PvE mode and it mekes me sick. People bought elite DANGEROUS and now want to change this game into truck sim. Like solo and groups aren't enough... If there was open only mode from the beginning there wouldn't be this topic right now. Poeple would fly safe and learn to adapt like in any ogher MP game. Some would quit the game but some other would play instead and what matters we would most certainly see many more commanders in game. Stop making elite a safe heaven and splitting player groups over different modes.

 

[excalibus]

This. Everyone can fly and do any activity the game offer in peace if they want. Game is so big that there is a lot easier to fly all alone than meet other people. You can do missions, trade, mine, explore, fight npcs/wars/res/cz all alone in open. But there is always a minimal risk of meeting someone and even smaller risk of meeting someone PvP oriented... and even a smaller risk of meeting somone PvP oriented who want to destroy you on the first sight. But for some peope it's still too much. They have to go to CG systems unprepared and complain about being killed. I went to the las CG (in t9) and lost ~30mil in rebuys but I didn't complain, I took the risk and I lost and it's all my fault. But people want truck sim instead of elite "dangerous". That's the problem. No matter there is a way to fly almost completly safe in open, it still won't beat complete 100% safety of solo. Now people want PvE mode and it mekes me sick. People bought elite DANGEROUS and now want to change this game into truck sim. Like solo and groups aren't enough... If there was open only mode from the beginning there wouldn't be this topic right now. Poeple would fly safe and learn to adapt like in any ogher MP game. Some would quit the game but some other would play instead and what matters we would most certainly see many more commanders in game. Stop making elite a safe heaven and splitting player groups over different modes.

the player base is split over different modes already, an open PVE mode would to a reasonable extent consolidate the various players from all the modes who only want to play in cooperative multiplayer PVE...

Elite Dangerous is DANGEROUS, it is not elite safe haven as you put it... or does your ego need to be fed and be told that it's the players that make it dangerous? I have lost more ships to NPC's than I have to players, and up until now I have only played in open, and have engaged in community goals, PVP stoushes - who remembers 'the crusade'? that was a lot of fun I can tell you now, yes players make it dangerous to some people, just as psychopathic NPC's make it dangerous to to other people...

I could not care about your 30 mill in rebuys honestly... that is, as you put it, your choice... an open PVE mode is not truck sim, or do you think all people will do in such a mode is trade goods to watch their credits rise? if you seriously think that, then I will disagree with you and tell you that you are definitely mistaken.... sure some might want to do that, others will want to persue other game elements that take their fancy...

 

[Shaamaan]

You wanted examples of where PvP was shamed for PvP, guess what happens in PvP? Sometimes ships get blown up... Oh wow .-.

And funnily enough piracy focuses on minimizing that, but nope, people are still hostile toward the concept of PvP and jam piracy into griefing.

Just as there are multiple types of PvPers, there are multiple types of PvE players. Some don't like to have ANY hostile interactions involving other players. This (obviously) does include piracy. Outside of Mobius (a player organized group bursting at the seams of technical support) these people are excluded. Again, there was no shaming of PvPers form the first post at all.

Guess what happens when you go around believing in rumors? And guess why I have to spend so much time on this forum just to keep an eye on rampant defamation of The Code's name? The only reason it died down is because of SDC, and SDC came into being because of parts of the Code got fed up with the bull on this forum.

You're not helping, by taking rumor for the truth.

Point taken, but you're not a good "ambassador" if I need to drag some decent answers out of you. Wouldn't the title imply you ought to be a bit more helpful and try and clear up things like that?

There's no air of superiority, there's frustration from being fed up with people throwing random accusations at The Code and others using them as basis to judge the organization.

Sorry, but that's your problem. Take a walk, count the stars, take up a calming hobby of some sort. I'd imagine that handling accusations (baseless and otherwise) comes with the ambassador title.

Hah... why can't people read the thread before jumping into a conversation...

Page 40-50, have fun.

Did I mention already you're not helpful? The above really isn't. I still don't understand why it is you think a PvE mode would be a problem for the kind of PvP folk who are looking for a PvP challenge. Let me quote my original question and your original response once more:

And finally, it's hard for me to see the PvP argument sometimes, other than a veiled cry of "we want more targets to shoot at". I'm sorry for saying so, but if PvPers are interested in PvP against each other (i.e. willing PvP-oriented folk), then what do they care so much if PvE-focused people are in solo, private or (in this case) some yet-to-be-seen PvE mode? No one's proposing to take away your toys. Heck, I'd ague that the ideas behind a C&P system might affect free-form PvP more than unwilling people leaving Open...

To that you replied:

It's the same reason people complain about how the recent beta is "only targeted for PvP (which isn't true, it's a combat update)." Development time should prioritize things that benefit both integral components of the game, not just one of them.

I emphasized what seems to be the most direct answer. Aside from the fact that the statement isn't really true (because not all things which are being developed affect all play-styles equally anyway) I say that if something takes little dev time, then it doesn't matter - improvements and fixes should be implemented whenever they can be squeezed in, and I believe implementing a bare-bones PvE mode is one such improvement. If you don't agree with this, elaborate why. I'm willing to debate this, really, but don't direct me to 10 pages of this thread, because it's a wild guess what exactly you're trying to say here.

 

[MarkAusten]

Of course, but it got ignored, as expected.

Could that possibly be because it doesn't infringe the rules? Is there any chance you could ask the moderators for justification? Not that I'm really bothered by getting justification but I am bothered by you and others constantly claiming moderator bias when your reports are denied. Could be that you are wrong and they are right?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

or do you think all people will do in such a mode is trade goods to watch their credits rise?

Yes he does. As do many. And it's no use trying to explain your motivators to them. It simply does not register.

It is very much about ego. They want a safe space, they want truck sim, they want this, they want that, unlike me, so I am right. I have lurked the last 20 pages, and I have noticed that no one quotes a post with that sentiment, it's all paraphrased into a nice comfortable strawman. There's no conversation or discussion going on in this thread. For that to happen, exchange of ideas need to happen. And that means people need to consider the motivators of those who would like to see a PvE mode.

Of course it's much easier hyperboling the hell out of the thread with conversation stopping arsegravy.

Screw 'em. Let them think it's all about safe mode. It's not as if anything anyone says can dissuade them from that comfortable strawman they've erected and are pointing and laughing at.

Plus, we don't get decide for ourselves what we think it's fun. We've got our resident Forum Arbiters of Fun explaining to us why we're wrong on that account.

Seriously, screw 'em. Let those little people live in their small world where ridicule is the medium and ego is king.

 

[MarkAusten]

Yes he does. As do many. And it's no use trying to explain your motivators to them. It simply does not register.

It is very much about ego. They want a safe space, they want truck sim, they want this, they want that, unlike me, so I am right. I have lurked the last 20 pages, and I have noticed that no one quotes a post with that sentiment, it's all paraphrased into a nice comfortable strawman. There's no conversation or discussion going on in this thread. For that to happen, exchange of ideas need to happen. And that means people need to consider the motivators of those who would like to see a PvE mode.

Of course it's much easier hyperboling the hell out of the thread with conversation stopping arsegravy.

Screw 'em. Let them think it's all about safe mode. It's not as if anything anyone says can dissuade them from that comfortable strawman they've erected and are pointing and laughing at.

Plus, we don't get decide for ourselves what we think it's fun. We've got our resident Forum Arbiters of Fun explaining to us why we're wrong on that account.

Seriously, screw 'em. Let those little people live in their small world where ridicule is the medium and ego is king.

Morning Ziggy, contributing to the straw man right from the start eh? Good to see you.

 

[excalibus]

Yes he does. As do many. And it's no use trying to explain your motivators to them. It simply does not register.

It is very much about ego. They want a safe space, they want truck sim, they want this, they want that, unlike me, so I am right. I have lurked the last 20 pages, and I have noticed that no one quotes a post with that sentiment, it's all paraphrased into a nice comfortable strawman. There's no conversation or discussion going on in this thread. For that to happen, exchange of ideas need to happen. And that means people need to consider the motivators of those who would like to see a PvE mode.

Of course it's much easier hyperboling the hell out of the thread with conversation stopping arsegravy.

Screw 'em. Let them think it's all about safe mode. It's not as if anything anyone says can dissuade them from that comfortable strawman they've erected and are pointing and laughing at.

Plus, we don't get decide for ourselves what we think it's fun. We've got our resident Forum Arbiters of Fun explaining to us why we're wrong on that account.

Seriously, screw 'em. Let those little people live in their small world where ridicule is the medium and ego is king.

Ziggy - Your last sentence, that was the reason I stopped coming to the forums months ago to be honest...

And GluttonyFang and I where actually starting to have a pretty decent conversation before all the hooplah pvp vs pve derailing began... Of course we all know that the derailing that occurs is just a mask for a lack of actual substance to arguements...

So then that makes me wonder more so, what would be the better of the 2 real choices as far as frontier face with regards to this issue - and no I do not mean the PVE vs PVP issue people, I mean the choice of implementing either an open PVE mode or implementing a complete and proper ruleset system for groups that allows the group admins to set what pvp / pve interactions can occur and where they can occor and haviing the game client to enfore said ruleset along with additional tools for admins for group membership manipulation and either expansion or merging etc...

Because if the current status quo of just the one open mode is FDev's true vision for the game, then a group tools and rules system would definitely need to be implemented... because at what point does it become embarrassing for them that only a handful of players are required to be responsible for the management of over 30K players (or 2% of the player base according to sluetelbos) does it become embarrassing when it is 5% or 10%? personally I would hope they feel embarrassed that it has come to where it is right now... Without the proper tools for managing it easily and effectively...

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

To be honest all this arguing for and against is kind of moot. There SHOULD be multiple "open" modes with different rules in each, because that was what was detailed in the kickstarter pledge. Any other reasons for it is just icing on the cake.

just like all the other things which were in the KSer, dev diaries and DDF, I accept that not all the stuff in there will make it BUT when FD decide they have come up with something "better" than in the KSer/DDF/Dev diaries, then they owe it to the backers to at least make a post detailing why "feature XYZ which was listed in the KSer is no longer deemed to be in the vision of the game and why "new" feature ABC is better!".

This is what they did when the offline mode was dropped, and, IF they have decided that there should only be one open mode, then they should do the same again, because as far as i am concerned until we hear it from the devs themselves, then i think it is reasonable to fall back to the KSer and other feature lists around that time as to what we should expect to be on the roadmap.

 

[Cosmos]

Thanks for your opinion.

Other opinions vary, naturally.

.... and some wonder why there is antipathy between PvP and PvE players.

I dunno if its because of the blue highlighted background but this thread appears to have become the world according to Robert Maynard; your soapbox.

Whats the usual nonesense you fall back on .. Oh yeah, somehow Open is for everyone.. The way you express this and your views in general over the game reminds me of a conversation I once had my my ex-wife:

Everything of hers was hers, everything of mine was hers too.

You have an uncompromising attitude towards everything and throughout this thread, and many before, are expert in your passive aggressiveness to the point where you are suggesting Frontier stiff anyone who PvPs..

All things considered, perhaps with such strong views you should consider your position as a moderator for this forum.

This really has reached a level which I find nauseating.

 

[excalibus]

I dunno if its because of the blue highlighted background but this thread appears to have become the world according to Robert Maynard; your soapbox.

Whats the usual nonesense you fall back on .. Oh yeah, somehow Open is for everyone.. The way you express this and your views in general over the game reminds me of a conversation I once had my my ex-wife:

Everything of hers was hers, everything of mine was hers too.

You have an uncompromising attitude towards everything and throughout this thread, and many before, are expert in your passive aggressiveness to the point where you are suggesting Frontier stiff anyone who PvPs..

All things considered, perhaps with such strong views you should consider your position as a moderator for this forum.

This really has reached a level which I find nauseating.

I don't see the discussion as Roberts soap box myself Cosmos... He is definitely active and passionate about this particular topic granted, just as I and others are, and just as much so can be said for those against the proposition for an Open PVE mode...

That has been the case for many a discussion on this (and other) topics no doubt...

What I personally find distasteful, is when discussions turn into the flinging of personal insults... Not that you are doing that of course that was not the implication...

I have actually not ever once seen robert suggest that PVP was not a valid play style nor have I seen where he has even come close to saying that PVP players should be 'stiffed' as you put it or said PVP players should be short changed or left to rot in a bowl of their own excrement? Could you please point to a post where he has said anything that would be clearly construed that way?

Cheers


*edit* clarification - I do not think PVP players should be short changed or left to rot in a bowl of their own excrement either. PVP is a valid and at times entertaining and exciting aspect of the game for me... It is not my main play style that much is certain, and chances are I probably suck the preverbial at PVP combat...

 

[SnowyNI]

Ziggy - Your last sentence, that was the reason I stopped coming to the forums months ago to be honest...

And GluttonyFang and I where actually starting to have a pretty decent conversation before all the hooplah pvp vs pve derailing began... Of course we all know that the derailing that occurs is just a mask for a lack of actual substance to arguements...

So then that makes me wonder more so, what would be the better of the 2 real choices as far as frontier face with regards to this issue - and no I do not mean the PVE vs PVP issue people, I mean the choice of implementing either an open PVE mode or implementing a complete and proper ruleset system for groups that allows the group admins to set what pvp / pve interactions can occur and where they can occor and haviing the game client to enfore said ruleset along with additional tools for admins for group membership manipulation and either expansion or merging etc...

Because if the current status quo of just the one open mode is FDev's true vision for the game, then a group tools and rules system would definitely need to be implemented... because at what point does it become embarrassing for them that only a handful of players are required to be responsible for the management of over 30K players (or 2% of the player base according to sluetelbos) does it become embarrassing when it is 5% or 10%? personally I would hope they feel embarrassed that it has come to where it is right now... Without the proper tools for managing it easily and effectively...

I still think they (FD) have a very hard choice to make, that being, "Do we (FD) add a C&P and hope (as per DB's dream) that players will flock to open as is". Personally, I think it will not do any of that because I believe they (the players) will not trust it or they (FD) will half bake it (in some eyes).
It's just a big merry-go-round of them vrs us vrs them, and no one is stepping off even though we're all dizzy.
Again, personally it has put me in ED grieving mode (pardon the pun), the anger has passed and now the "F' it all, it's not worth it" depression is setting in... Soon the "can't be playing" will follow. I love how FD make windows and we take turns at smashing the one's we don't like (be it that some of the said windows leak or have broken handles).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yub3-Ow7tBs

 

[Whitehair]

This really has reached a level which I find nauseating.

Edit - no thats mean.

 

[MarkAusten]

I dunno if its because of the blue highlighted background but this thread appears to have become the world according to Robert Maynard; your soapbox.

Whats the usual nonesense you fall back on .. Oh yeah, somehow Open is for everyone.. The way you express this and your views in general over the game reminds me of a conversation I once had my my ex-wife:

Everything of hers was hers, everything of mine was hers too.

You have an uncompromising attitude towards everything and throughout this thread, and many before, are expert in your passive aggressiveness to the point where you are suggesting Frontier stiff anyone who PvPs..

All things considered, perhaps with such strong views you should consider your position as a moderator for this forum.

This really has reached a level which I find nauseating.

Please, take the moderator bias question to its own thread. It's off topic and you going on about it is getting nauseating. If you have an axe to grind there is a properly place to deal with it which is not here. In the meantime, please can we get back to the topic?

Thanks.

 

[Sir.Tj]

Please, take the moderator bias question to its own thread. It's off topic and you going on about it is getting nauseating. If you have an axe to grind there is a properly place to deal with it which is not here. In the meantime, please can we get back to the topic?

Thanks.

As above with the exception of not creating a thread, if you have an issue with a moderator or their actions then the correct and only way to do so is via the following.

Moderator actions aren’t always correct; if you feel that a moderation action was performed against you incorrectly, please see the final post on how to appeal. Openly posting about a moderation action upon you or others on the forums will not be permitted.

To appeal a moderation action against you, please message Brett C by clicking here or email community@frontier.co.uk. Harassment and threat emails sent to us will be ignored.

Posting about it on the forums as a thread or reply to a thread is not a valid method to initiate an investigation on whether or not the moderation action performed was correct.

Moderators are allowed an opinion just as everyone else is.

Some moderators take part in discussions more than others and are exempt from moderating in a thread they are participating in.

Personally I've participated less and less over the years on subjects I'm passionate on because of this fact.

However, If there are any further public discussions on a moderators actions, don't be surprised if you get a PM from the Mod team.

 

[MarkAusten]

As above with the exception of not creating a thread, if you have an issue with a moderator or their actions then the correct and only way to do so is via the following.

Thanks, T.j, I was unaware of that.

 

[Cosmos]

I don't see the discussion as Roberts soap box myself Cosmos... He is definitely active and passionate about this particular topic granted, just as I and others are, and just as much so can be said for those against the proposition for an Open PVE mode...

That has been the case for many a discussion on this (and other) topics no doubt...

What I personally find distasteful, is when discussions turn into the flinging of personal insults... Not that you are doing that of course that was not the implication...

I have actually not ever once seen robert suggest that PVP was not a valid play style nor have I seen where he has even come close to saying that PVP players should be 'stiffed' as you put it or said PVP players should be short changed or left to rot in a bowl of their own excrement? Could you please point to a post where he has said anything that would be clearly construed that way?

Cheers


*edit* clarification - I do not think PVP players should be short changed or left to rot in a bowl of their own excrement either. PVP is a valid and at times entertaining and exciting aspect of the game for me... It is not my main play style that much is certain, and chances are I probably suck the preverbial at PVP combat...

Excrement? wow.. Thats pretty harsh language. Nevertheless you wont find me reporting (crying to mom and dad) about how you express your views. Fine by me. I do disagree mind you.

 

[excalibus]

I still think they (FD) have a very hard choice to make, that being, "Do we (FD) add a C&P and hope (as per DB's dream) that players will flock to open as is". Personally, I think it will not do any of that because I believe they (the players) will not trust it or they (FD) will half bake it (in some eyes).
It's just a big merry-go-round of them vrs us vrs them, and no one is stepping off even though we're all dizzy.
Again, personally it has put me in ED grieving mode (pardon the pun), the anger has passed and now the "F' it all, it's not worth it" depression is setting in... Soon the "can't be playing" will follow. I love how FD make windows and we take turns at smashing the one's we don't like (be it that some of the said windows leak or have broken handles).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yub3-Ow7tBs

cheers for the tune I understand your sentiment and I don't see it so much as a hard choice myself... they will have to end up implementing a much better crime and punishment system, because the one we currently have is seriously lacking, they can try things like karma (however it is implemented will be interesting to see)...

I think when said C&P system fails to entice people from PG and solo back to open, which is my firm feeling that it will not do so, unless it includes aspects that seriously allow a PVE only player to play with the PVP players without the risk of any serious PVP damage being done to them as a result. If such an inclusion then fails to grow open play, I think they will come to the realisation that they will need to either seriously look at the PG structure and try to fix the issues with it or implement more open modes

I have finished reading Gluttony Fangs proposal for a number of changes to open earlier tonight and the whole deal looks promising, it does need more discussion and definitely more work done as far as fleshing out some the finer details of how some of the mechanics would work but overall the base concepts seem fairly good to me...

 

[CMDR M Kozak]

However, If there are any further public discussions on a moderators actions, don't be surprised if you get a PM from the Mod team.

I hate to be that one guy, but... you are saying its OK for mods to have opinions and not ok for us mortals to talk about mods having opinions ... While you post as a mod.

I will let my self out, but please think about what you just said.

 

[Zieman]

You have an uncompromising attitude towards everything and throughout this thread, and many before, are expert in your passive aggressiveness

Friendly hint: read the quoted part of your post aloud while staring at your reflection in the mirror.
Although, your agressions are more of the active variety, everywhere (on these forums, that is).

What I'm trying to imply here, in a veery subtle manner, is: try to tone down the arrogant, condescending attitude towards anyone who doesn't share you view, and your view may get better reception.

And before you go swinging about in a red-misted nerd-rage: although I quoted you, the intent isn't to single you out or attack you, the tip is for everyone (alas, I'm afraid most of those who it's aimed at don't get the hint, or dont' even understand I mean them) who's belittling "the other side" in these debates.