All modes may have PvE - but only two permit direct PvP.
Indeed. I have repeatedly mentioned this in previous posts on this thread.
All modes may have PvE - but only two permit direct PvP.
I wouldn't say that the community is fractured solely because of griefers and gankers. Although many people have moved to Solo or Mobius because of such people, I think it's safe to say that the majority or people in Solo and Mobius are there because those options provide an experience more amenable to their desires in terms of gameplay than Open does. Hence why, while a C&P update is imperative and long overdue, I don't think it really increase the size of Open's player base or bring about more community cohesion. Open PvE though may well improve the cohesion of the player base because it it's likely to appeal to many players in both Open, Mobius, and Solo. Hence why I think that the notion that it will fracture the community is erroneous. It may well reduce the population of Open PvP, but ultimately if it leads to more players playing in one mode the the community becomes less fractured, not more.
Presumably it would also be my interpretation that led me to think that the last paragraph in the same post was an attempt to discredit the opinions / feedback of some players.
No doubt that would be your reading again, with no responsibility on the bearer to deliver a coherant and clear message.
Made me think of:
https://s24.postimg.org/g1nqbod51/74560390.jpg
![]()
Can you explain that to me, because I was not aware of that actually being part of either the EULA or the TOS... What a user runs on their own PC, as long as it does in no way manipulate the game client or its data (read that memory hacking and file hacking cheat systems) is completely legal - providing it is legal to use the software in your country - no matter the software... 3rd party tools that inspect network packets could conceivably be run from a lap top hooked up to your local network router and inspecting the incoming / outgoing connections etc... without A) any way for a 3rd party to know it was happening and B) without breaching any sort of EULA or TOS if indeed such a clause was part of either as it would not be running on the 'client' computer...
What miffs me most is when people do spread misinformation so if you can back up such a claim do so and show us all where it states in either the EULA or the TOS that we cannot use network monitoring software on our own private networks...
Cheers
Yes of course, it would fracture the game, lets forget about all those people who WOULD actually use such a mode, let's forget about all those future players who would use such a mode... yes indeed... Sorry, if you cannot tell I am being a bit sarcastic... This argument has been put forward a few times in this thread and as has been explained (ad nauseam) that yes it does add an 'extra' mode, which in reality will see a number (no one knows how many, but it would be a safe assumption, that as the majority of the player base never engage in PVP, that the numbers using such a mode would not be insignificant.
Interesting POLL, 81 of those would only play in the current open mode if there was some tangible 'bonus' to them beyond the C&P system, along with 178 players who would not play in open even with a C&P system in place, to 228 players who would play in open if a C&P system was in place and >70 with 'other' listed... not really that clear as to the total swing is it GF?
I mean if there is no tangible personal 'bonus' for commanders playing in open with an implemented C&P system then the numbers would not back up your argument that the C&P system would fix it all, would they...
I am in no way suggesting a real, dynamic and fully fleshed out C&P system should not be implemented, indeed it has to happen, it should have happened in 2015 iMHO...
Using it in the way the person I was relying to, in the example given, would be game tampering, and thus a violation.
What miffs me is when people either don't read or have no comprehension.
Ciao
It's to place value judgment on them, for a person to contribute positively to a subject there needs a baseline of appreciation and dedication for said subject. I don't think the people I described have those things to any extent based on their description.
.
Do you learn english by reading books in the 1800s or perhaps just watch ripper street. Sometimes i think i am stepping back in time trying to fathom your posts
(Maybe its the pirate in you)
Dipping into forums again after some time away and finding new threads on the same topic, it always makes me wonder: while we debate over and over the merits or not of a PVE Open mode, or of a revamped crime and punishment system, and these become the repeated focus of forum discussion...
I wonder whether, had FDev simply built ED as a single-player game like all its predecessors, whether the greater focus on the forums would have been actual gameplay, player stories, suggestions and tips, and so on. Or would it, perhaps, have just been an endless cycle of thread after thread complaining about how the game would've been so much better with a three-mode system that no-one seems 100% happy with?
In short: still not convinced that the single-player mode they dropped, having of course never promised it in the first place, wasn't the mode that would've represented most players' ideal.
I'm 100% happy with the current three-mode system.![]()
Do you learn english by reading books in the 1800s or perhaps just watch ripper street. Sometimes i think i am stepping back in time trying to fathom your posts
(Maybe its the pirate in you)
I'd be 100% happy with the current three-mode system if the population of Private Groups was unlimited (like Open's) and if the administrative burden of large Private Group management could be shared.![]()
Or it could be he is educated to a better standard of english than you
Do you learn english by reading books in the 1800s or perhaps just watch ripper street. Sometimes i think i am stepping back in time trying to fathom your posts
(Maybe its the pirate in you)
Well even a fix would be a consideration, if the negatives outweighed the positives. If the wing situation was really that bothersome then you could simply apply friendly fire to wing-mates, the assumption being you would only wing with people you trust anyway. But I doubt the 'advantage to PvE mode' would be so great as to upset anyone. Everything has a downside, even the current situation. Holding out for perfection won't be possible in a game where players have opposing preferences.I wonder how many people actually play in wings, because the argument that a PvE mode would not change how the game functions is being thrown around so effortlessly.
Let's assume you are using rail guns and your wingmate passes by and you hit him/her instead. Or a wingmate or you yourself by mistake boosts into someone else's torpedo or mines.
Or if you want a much more common scenario, the wingmate is really close to the target when your Plasma Accelerator connects.
What happens then? They take no damage?
That would mean an inherent advantage over the other modes, where there is no friendly fire. Thus, fighting in wars and bounty hunting has even less risks, yet once again all of the rewards? Not only do you remove the risk of a hostile player, but also the risk of accidental friendly fire, a feature inherent to the core gameplay regardless of game mode. Yes, even solo, you can damage yourself with collateral damage.
Whatever alternative (aka band aid fix) you can find to counter this example will be available to the griefers to use against you. So that's not even a consideration.
This is why I claim that such a request is so egocentric that it shows from which subsets of players it stems from.
Well even a fix would be a consideration, if the negatives outweighed the positives. If the wing situation was really that bothersome then you could simply apply friendly fire to wing-mates, the assumption being you would only wing with people you trust anyway. Everything has a downside, even the current situation. Holding out for perfection won't be possible in a game where players have opposing preferences.
And see, like I said, your idea can be used against you. You get winged from someone, he annihilates your ship much faster than what you can leave the wing. There, griefed. So the mode is now pointless because it's main reason of existence is nullified and has a turnaround.
It's always an option not to actually throw the baby out with the bathwater, but don't let me stop you from being overly dramatic.