Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.

[Robert Maynard]

And there would be no reason not to implement other stuff in open as there is no need to play in it

All* permanent content has been implemented in all game three modes - and there's no indication that Frontier are going to change that approach.

*: except Wings - as only one player in Solo cannot form a Wing, at least until NPC Wingmen are implemented (as they were discussed in the DDF).

 

[MarkAusten]

Original design had multiple modes, still waiting for 'Iron man mode' which defiantly was in the design plans...

I forgot that. Man, that would please some commanders.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Exactly. Where is my immershun if I can't shoot a ship in front of me?
If it's implemented I want instant ship transfers, faster SC, micro FSD jumps, FSD jumps direct to stations. All the things people calling for this fought against

i am all for immersion, and for me there is nothing more immersion breaking than ships ganking multimillion credit ships in high sec space for no "in game lore reason" with no consequences, along with 1% health ship suicide for lolz on other ships.... Genor (SP - sorry for butchering name but cant find post by him) posted the perfect video of this yesterday with his cutter being blown up before barely getting out of the station, which got complaints so i wont link again.

And that for me is the rub, i actually think what i have seen myself with my own 2 eyes in mobius is more plausible and realistic than what i have seen occurring in Open.

i do agree that ghost ships is a horrble idea, and i do not like magic bullets which do no damage either. in an ideal world players who just play "sensibly with common sense" (quotes because i realise that they are a subjective view) within the spirit of the universe but generally this does not happen.

as long as the interesting places are magnets to player groups like the SDC, then a PvE mode will be more realistic imo.....

you are free to disagree, and that is fine, and presumably you would never log into such a mode.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Then there is no point to investing time to the equivalent of joining Mobius.

"You are free to harm everyone's goals as long as you don't harm their ship."

I'll agree to disagree at this point.

.... and everyone is given methods to counter other player actions against the BGS - by influencing the BGS itself themselves, regardless of game mode.

 

[sewerratuk]

Prey tell what is the difference between the above and someone playing in a PG or SOLO? You won't stop that player if they don't want to be stopped, period. The only difference is, in an Open PvE mode you'd get to see them. I still fail to see the issue, unless that player was bragging about what they were doing in LOCAL (otherwise do you go scanning the cargo of every ship you pass by?). And if they WERE bragging - well, there's the block feature at the ready.

Well anyone coming into our systems get hailed and asked what they are doing. Zero or unsatisfactory response results in a shoot to kill policy.

Guess that makes me a griefer in the eyes of many and a reason why this thread is still going on but I call it gameplay

 

[Apos]

Prey tell what is the difference between the above and someone playing in a PG or SOLO? You won't stop that player if they don't want to be stopped, period. The only difference is, in an Open PvE mode you'd get to see them. I still fail to see the issue, unless that player was bragging about what they were doing in LOCAL (otherwise do you go scanning the cargo of every ship you pass by?). And if they WERE bragging - well, there's the block feature at the ready.

The difference is that it would drain resources from actual development of something more meaningful, just so people can say "oh yes, I play in open all the time".

If people feel so guilty about playing in Mobius, then they should play in Open. Otherwise, they already have what they want. It's not like everyone plays Open and such a mode would place them with more people anyway.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well anyone coming into our systems get hailed and asked what they are doing. Zero or unsatisfactory response results in a shoot to kill policy.

.... only in Open though.

How do you deal with players who do not read English?

 

[Navigare Necesse Est]

Then there is no point to investing time to the equivalent of joining Mobius.

"You are free to harm everyone's goals as long as you don't harm their ship."

Is that why people get butthurt over solo players? Just play the BGS yourself, deliver them alloys or whatever it is they load into stations or do something else than trying to defend "your castle". You won't catch a perpetrator in open 100% anyway. That's just some convenient tale people tell all the time - while they complain about instancing in another thread.

 

[sewerratuk]

.... only in Open though.

How do you deal with players who do not read English?

Yep, broken game

As said, unsatisfactory or no response results in shoot to kill vOv

 

[Apos]

I'll agree to disagree at this point.

.... and everyone is given methods to counter other player actions against the BGS - by influencing the BGS itself themselves, regardless of game mode.

UA bombing is not a BGS procedure. It's a manual event triggered by FD by noticing the sale rates of UAs on a system. And you can't counter it until things have already shut down, at which point you can start bringing alloys and hope FD notices the intake of alloys fast enough, otherwise you are stuck.

In terms of what is actually in the BGS, no, you can't counter everything in the BGS directly. Such an example being skimmer missions or any other mission that has been broken in the past. Additionally, preventing a person from handing in stacked war massacre missions is much more effective than trying to stack 50 yourself, because not all factions give them out at the same rate.

Just a few examples.

 

[JosiahD]

Prey tell what is the difference between the above and someone playing in a PG or SOLO? You won't stop that player if they don't want to be stopped, period. The only difference is, in an Open PvE mode you'd get to see them. I still fail to see the issue, unless that player was bragging about what they were doing in LOCAL (otherwise do you go scanning the cargo of every ship you pass by?). And if they WERE bragging - well, there's the block feature at the ready.

And let's not forget that even were they in the same mode as someone they wanted to stop, there's no guarantee the instancing mechanics will matchmake them anyway. And there's Xbox and soon PS4 players also playing in the SAME BGS - how do they expect to stop them doing the same? Some people need to take some time to really understand how the game works hey.

 

[sewerratuk]

That's just some convenient tale people tell all the time - while they complain about instancing in another thread.

Same as the convenient tale solo players tell about griefing I guess
- while complaining about someone making too much money on another thread

 

[JosiahD]

Well anyone coming into our systems get hailed and asked what they are doing. Zero or unsatisfactory response results in a shoot to kill policy.

Guess that makes me a griefer in the eyes of many and a reason why this thread is still going on but I call it gameplay

Well, given those systems are not actually 'yours'......

You can try to defend them as best you can, but the game's design prevents you from blocking access to 'your' systems - whether that be via solo or private, or as simple as the instancing mechanic not matchmaking you with someone entering such systems even if in the same mode as yourself. You don't 'own' any systems though, so.....

 

[Apos]

Is that why people get butthurt over solo players? Just play the BGS yourself, deliver them alloys or whatever it is they load into stations or do something else than trying to defend "your castle". You won't catch a perpetrator in open 100% anyway. That's just some convenient tale people tell all the time - while they complain about instancing in another thread.

I'm aware of instancing and solo. Thing is people are asking to enforce that even further instead of providing a proper Open experience, which yes, it would include that you are in threat by someone who has different interests than you, just like you threaten them.

If people want Utopias so much, then by all means gather together and enforce one in a system(s) through their own volision. But by the looks of it, people instead want FD to enforce that Utopia everywhere by default.

 

[MarkAusten]

The difference is that it would drain resources from actual development of something more meaningful, just so people can say "oh yes, I play in open all the time".

If people feel so guilty about playing in Mobius, then they should play in Open. Otherwise, they already have what they want. It's not like everyone plays Open and such a mode would place them with more people anyway.

beg your pardon, but where did the 'feel guilty' part come in? I didn't read that in any of the prior posts (or missed it). I suspect that most players in Mobius feel many things but not guilty.

 

[JosiahD]

I'm aware of instancing and solo. Thing is people are asking to enforce that even further instead of providing a proper Open experience, which yes, it would include that you are in threat by someone who has different interests than you, just like you threaten them.

If people want Utopias so much, then by all means gather together and enforce one in a system(s) through their own volision. But by the looks of it, people instead want FD to enforce that Utopia everywhere by default.

So PvPers could go create their own utopic private group then, in the same way that open PvEers have resorted to using Mobius?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yep, broken game

Working as intended, according to the published design information that the game was pitched and successfully funded on.

 

[MarkAusten]

So PvPers could go create their own utopic private group then, in the same way that open PvEers have resorted to using Mobius?

Of course they can, but for some reason they don't want to. There again, no-one is forcing them to either.

 

[Apos]

So PvPers could go create their own utopic private group then, in the same way that open PvEers have resorted to using Mobius?

Ah yes, the boogeyman "PvPers" that magically know where you always are out of the 17000 systems of the inhabited bubble. And they are so many that they make the population of He Bo seem like Liechtenstein compared to China.

 

[Robert Maynard]

UA bombing is not a BGS procedure. It's a manual event triggered by FD by noticing the sale rates of UAs on a system. And you can't counter it until things have already shut down, at which point you can start bringing alloys and hope FD notices the intake of alloys fast enough, otherwise you are stuck.

In terms of what is actually in the BGS, no, you can't counter everything in the BGS directly. Such an example being skimmer missions or any other mission that has been broken in the past. Additionally, preventing a person from handing in stacked war massacre missions is much more effective than trying to stack 50 yourself, because not all factions give them out at the same rate.

Just a few examples.

How is UA bombing not a BGS procedure? Players affect the BGS, the BGS shuts down elements of the station - players do not directly shut them directly but as a result of selling particular items to the Black Market in the targeted station.

I didn't say that using the BGS is more effective than directly opposing players or would prevent player actions - just that those actions could be countered.