Why don't the PvPers buy EVE Valkyrie instead? Elite Dangerous should not be reduced to an arcade shoot'em up. ED has so much more to it.
Frontier. Please make a PVE mode to this game.
- Thread starter CMDR Generic EventHandler
- Start date
Why don't the PvPers buy EVE Valkyrie instead? Elite Dangerous should not be reduced to an arcade shoot'em up. ED has so much more to it.
You are aware people aren't forced to accept wing requests right?
If not then I understand how you could think your point was rock solid, but really you can say no. The rest of your points have been dealt with extensively in the rest of the thread.
So you want to interact with people, but you will never be fooled to wing up with someone you don't know and get griefed. And somehow still manage to meet people.
Well, ok. Now that's a realistic expectation if I've ever seen one.
You still didn't reply to me about ramming damage as well. Will Open PvE players have bumper car maneuvers available to them?
Last edited:
It's worked fine so far, and if it does happen it's a one off then they're blocked. What is so very hard for you to comprehend about that? It doesn't need to be air-tight and infallible, it just has to work. Obviously!!
As you'll see if you check my reply I said those points are extensively covered already in this thread. You being growly at me doesn't mean I have to repeat it all - just read the thread.
This post is all kinds of ironic and hypocritical.
If it's not air tight, then it's a waste of time as a request, since you will still end up getting griefed and complain about it, thus going back to step one.
If you only need a system that works at least to some degree, then the current system already works good enough if you just put those people in your ignore list and the people you want to play with in your friends list, since the instansing will prioritize them less for you and your friends more. Easy as that and it doesn't involve giving you damage immunities "just cause".
As for the people who rush to their teeth by running towards credit exploit hotspots, I'm sure they can handle a buyback inbetween the billions they making for nothing, so I have no sympathy for them.
Last edited:
That's patently nonsense Apos. How often and how much/easily a thing (griefing) happens is obviously a factor too.
You're just being silly now.
I'm not sure you know how the 'instantics' or instancing works, but yes at the moment we can use private groups like that and people do just fine. If you take a moment to read this thread you'll see everyone's aware of that
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I don't think the block system works like that - even if it did then it would only work in instances that were nearly full and there were more players waiting to join it than spaces available in it.
I'm not being silly, I'm being direct. You want to have special benefits compared to other players and use a moral highground standpoint as an argument and I'm saying that I don't agree with it and that it provides imbalances that even the current modes do not.
And you still have not replied about ramming damage. So I assume you also want to play bumper cars. If not, then people will still be able to ram you instead of shoot you, so you will be griefed just as much and the sum benefit is still zero.
And that's why I don't care about people's wishful thinking of what such a mode should be, but what about the actions of the same people that currently exist would do within it. And if the griefers want to do it and have ways to do it, the name of the mode won't deter them.
Last edited:
Yeah, I'm pretty sure blocking someone has no affect on how likely they are to be instanced with you.
It is, however, handy as a list of names for people to explode on sight...or just to avoid.
Last edited:
No I don't. You're talking nonsense. Show me anywhere on this entire forum in my entire posting history where I request special benefits.
Yes I have. You're clearly just on the wind up - go play elsewhere buddy.
Been just letting this thread burn hoping that the silly garbage would've been consumed and blown away in ashes by now. How has it gotten this long?
Open PvE wouldn't do anything but rush ED to the point of the servers being closed. You're dividing the player base so there is less interactivity, restricting the types of interactions players will have on one side making the game less interesting and restricting the number of interactions on the other side even among those who aren't on the PvP servers solely for PvP.
You goobers keep begging for FDev to divide up the player base into smaller chunks so that everyone can feel special and loved, and all it's going to do is drive everyone away from the game and make it unprofitable for FDev to continue development.
These suggestions are born purely of short-sighted selfishness and ignorance.
If you think your answer of making compromises to the main request which would nullify its goal is adequate, sure.
I don't.
I'm playing just fine where I am. It's you people who need to go play elsewhere. Namely jump a few systems away from griefers and tada, problem solved.
And I assume that asking for a mode where it is an inherent feature that other people can't hurt you is not a special benefit nowadays. I assume that it's not relevant that not even private offers such an ability, but only the equivalent of a guardsman on who gets in.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The introduction of an Open-PvE mode might result in less interactivity (in remaining Open, presumably) while at the same time increase it (by allowing PvE players, who eschew even the possibility of PvP, to play among others rather than be fragmented between Solo and an unknown number of Private Groups). If players don't want to partake in some forms of interaction then they are already free to choose one of the two game modes that allows that - an Open-PvE mode would not suddenly introduce this opportunity as it already exists.
The PvE player-base is arguably already divided into small chunks - as Private Groups have limited membership and Solo has a population (from the perspective of the player) of one.
Who do you suggest that such a change would drive away from the game - and, perhaps more importantly, why?
.... or maybe just a desire to "play the game how you want to" in an Open game mode that forms part of the game and has rules that suit the play-style of players playing in it (as suggested would be the case in the KS FAQ).
Last edited:
It hasn't. It only blocks direct communication. It would be nice if it worked, but the algorithm for instancing would be almost infinitely complex.
Player A has blocked payer B. Player C is friends with Player A and B. Player D is also friends with A and B, but has blocked C. It quickly ends up with everyone alone. At least you end up alone if you jump into a system where a player on your list all ready is or a player that has you on his list all ready is.
Messy and open to abuse.
This is purely an assumption based upon nothing but blind hope, when in fact the majority of players who are now in solo will continue to stay in solo because they have no desire to interact with other people to beging with and/or Open PvE will just be a guaranteed place to find griefers, because they know they'll get the most targets there.
You're not going to bring everyone back to Open with a PvE mode. It's a nonsensical pipe dream.
And it will stay that way even after an Open PvE is introduced. There is not going to be a mandatory migration of Mobius to Open PvE. There will be no mass exodus from Solo. People are comfortable where they're at or they wouldn't be there, they'd be playing something else. You may get a good portion, but you won't get everyone, and that results in smaller populations all around.
Basic knowledge gathered from watching 2 decades worth of MMO's fail at this.
Everyone who enjoys random, spontaneous interactions with other players. Why? Because it isn't happening anymore. The people who don't like playing with others will leave because development on the game slows to a crawl when the money stops coming in.
No. Because you already have the option to play the game how you want to. Demanding Open PvE is just a selfish demand that other people be bullied into playing it your way.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The aim is not to drag players against their will into a new mode - it is to offer players who eschew PvP the opportunity to play with other players who share their play-style choice.
Of course it would remain up to the player to choose whichever game mode they would want to select each session. Reading the complaints on the forums regarding occurrences in Open, I would suggest that some players who currently play in Open do so as a compromise between a desire to play with as many players as possible and a desire for not being a target for PvP.
The possibility for such encounters would presumably remain in Open. Why would the money stop coming in? Frontier seem to be well aware that the majority of players do not get involved in PvP, after all.
Until there is another mode with an unlimited population then I would disagree that PvE players, who eschew PvP, have that option - as the only game mode with an unlimited population permits direct PvP.
117 pages, and looking at the comments, looks like we have the new open vs group vs solo debate thread! Can we close the old one now?
Have you read the whole thread? There have been numerous suggestions as to how to deal with 'griefers' in an Open-PvE mode.
Conjecture. It hasn't been tried yet, so neither you nor I know if this is true.
How do you know? It hasn't been tried yet. Also, you're stretching your argument a bit when you say 'mandatory migration of Mobius to Open-PvE' - why would it be mandatory? Why do you think hardly anyone who is a member of a PvE private group (Mobius) wouldn't want to move to an Open-PvE client mode? Are you trying to convince us they wouldn't accept the chance to meet up with even more like-minded players in an equally PvE but more open connectivity mode!?
What difference would it make to Open if - as you say - currently Solo and Group modes already have the PvE players in them currently? Why would that affect Open in any meaningful way?
Which MMO's? Please provide examples otherwise I and I'm sure others may not take you seriously.
'random, spontaneous encounters' - I've stated it before and I'll state it again - go to any CG or player choke point and the 'encounters' are not random, because usually the 'encounters' amount to one or more Yahoos trying to blow ships up. It's spontaneous all right - spontaneous combustion.
Not completely. A lot of people would like to play the game by meeting up with anyone else without the boring stupidity of being blown up for no good reason other than to mine salt/lulz. Currently in Open, getting blown up by other players for the lulz is what keeps most of the player base from Open.
This is laughable. Who'd be bullied into playing an Open-PvE mode? This is the most ridiculous thing I've read in this thread by far.
And that offer is going to be rejected more often than it is accepted, because you're just creating yet another smaller population within an already divided population.
Every choice in life is a compromise. Playing ED in general is a compromise. We're compromising between spending our time playing this game, or playing another game, or washing the dishes, or whatever. Expecting players to be able to play the game without compromising is just a jar of fairy farts.
What's next, segregating mouse and keyboard users so that players aren't forced to "compromise" their experience with the game based upon their input devices?
Pipe dream. Possibility becomes an Impossibility as player populations drop, and the only thing splitting the player base does is cause it to drop relatively for every player. Thus damaging every players' experience.
Every game in the history of the industry has only suffered as a result of dividing it's player base, whether it's through map packs, server variations, or region locking. It is a kick in the balls every single time that is detrimental to the player experience as a whole, and ED has it coming from every angle.
First we divide up the players between Open, Solo and Private. Then we divide them again with Horizons. Next expansion? Cut another chunk off of the pie and put them in another corner where no one else can interact with them.
It's bad game design, and that can't be argued.
Permits, but does not require. There is no difference between permitting Players or NPC's to attack players, it's simply a petty, childish stigma some people develop towards the act of players doing it. If you've got a problem being attacked by other players when you prefer a PvE experience then you are just irrationally separating two identical occurrences for the sake of self-inflicted disgruntlement.
The only way that an Open PvE would make any sense is if it also didn't have a single aggressive NPC, which is completely contradicting everything the game is built around.
Thus, the proposal that Open PvE is a requirement for these players to play the game as they wish is a fallacy. The only requirement is that they either A: get over their silly self-induced aversion to one type of aggression over another identical type of aggression or B: Embrace the full nature of their request and also demand that all hostile NPC's be removed from Open PvE.
Stop being selfish. Stop saying "I don't want you playing in my sandbox because you have a CMDR in front of your name, but it's alright for everyone else to attack me."