Game loses something by not forcing Open play

[Tettric]

I disagree.

Having the same commander in both solo and open means that people are free to play their character if their internet get's throttled for some reason. It also allows people to avoid griefers.

At the end of the day people who choose to play open don't do it so they can switch to solo to avoid combat. They do it because they want the multiplayer environment. Having solo available just means they can avoid people who are just their to spoil the fun of others.

 

[Joe Spivey]

Oh I fully admit I have zero proof that this is going on here on ED, but I'm basing my expectations from many many, many years of online play since it first became online, like when hotplayer or whatever was around to connect peoples games. Dial up, null modems.

Even in Eve there were players who would hide in NPC corporations, so if you attack them, concord kills you, and you cannot declare a sanctioned war against the npc corp. They would find you mining in an expensive ship, and come in, suicide gank you with much cheaper ships.

These players are out there, they play many games, and I'm confident these people will find their way into ED as well.

I'd like to mention on that note however that attacking players that are not wanted needs a much stiffer penalty and response. Like if it's in a medium to high security system, the federal ships appear quickly and engage that target, and that bounties cannot simply be paid off. I think destruction of another player that is not wanted should add a bounty that is stiff and stays until you die. Or something like the bounty is at whatever you cost that player. So if you killed a clean hauler worth 100k, you get a 100k bounty.

And bang, there's your mistake right there. ED is not like those games we've all played. It was deliberately designed to be the antithesis to those games because DB and the devs were fed up of the way those games are played. You have to try and put all that 'other mmos do this' stuff behind you. Let it go, it doesn't play like that here. Aaaaand now i have to go and make a brew and actually do some work. later guys.

 

[Kramster]

This came to mind...



http://vimeo.com/89858791

 

[Jockey79]

Well, personally I wouldn't mind if traders could have a pvp flag. But what I would ask, would be that some sort of abuse control. Such as, when you create your commander, you flag PVP on or off then, and you cannot change it to kill someone, then turn it off to go back to trading.

Some sort of delay, like a month or something. Just some way to prevent people from attacking players and using the flag to hide from retribution. Or building up in the safety of pvp off until they have crazy gear and credits to fund their war machine, then turning into pvp mode.

The whole concept of "abuse control" is specious at best. Anything brought in to either prevent forced PvP or prevent people switching at will only plays in to the hands of the opposing group.

Example (assuming open only play);

Trader A gets bored with trading and mining, swaps to a combat ship and goes to LTT 15449 (randomly picked for example), docks, does a final check before looking to engage.
PvPer B mulling around LTT 15449 sees a new ship undock at the local station with a PvP flag on, thinks Bingo! - Trader A sucks at PvP, couldn't hit the side of the station let alone PvPer B.

Trader A gets annoyed with how bad they suck, thinks that's enough, half a dozen deaths, cash running low - back to trading to get the reserves back up. PvPer B had a great time showing Trader A who is boss.
So Trader treis to leave the area and go back to traiding, but PvPer B is not finished and wants more kills..... oh dear, PvPer B has a wake scanner, Trader A cannot get away and keeps spawning at LTT 15449
Even when asked PvP B won't let Trader A leave, so trader goes to turn the PvP flag off... opps, cannot change flag status for 6 hours.... Trader A has no choice to but to log out and not play any more and due to the actions will never again turn the PvP flag back on.

1 less target for PvPer B from now on and all other PvP players lost out as well.

 

[TheEponymousBob]

As it stands, Open play is likely to turn into a PvP mode, even though few really want that, and it's the kind of thing that could have me consider playing solo, despite championing open play.

And the likelihood of that happening is far greater if players can't switch between solo and open.

But still, I can certainly realize that there aren't enough players in open play.

Then let's not discourage normally solo players from trying open play.

You're right tho, I haven't seen someone say "I am angry at the thought of not being able to build up in solo then play on open" however it can be derived over their protest over the idea of solo mode and open mode having separate progression.

No. It. Can. Not.

 

[Tyr07]

And bang, there's your mistake right there. ED is not like those games we've all played. It was deliberately designed to be the antithesis to those games because DB and the devs were fed up of the way those games are played. You have to try and put all that 'other mmos do this' stuff behind you. Let it go, it doesn't play like that here. Aaaaand now i have to go and make a brew and actually do some work. later guys.

It's not a 'other mmos do this stuff'

It's a "Other players are <insert insult here> and will exploit what you have here." Great that it's different, but it will become a different exploit is all. I think it will, anyway, I might be wrong.

Oh, and if I'm wrong, and that totally doesn't happen, I'll be excited and pleasently surprised. In fact, if I'm hopefully still playing this 6 months to a year down the road, and someone messages me to remind me, if this isn't happening at that time, I will go through each one of my posts and edit it, and mark in ** I was wrong, I'm grateful for the discussion but my fears were just that and it never happened**

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

No. It. Can. Not.

I guess we will have to wait and see. I hope you're right, I honestly do.

 

[JamieM]

This came to mind...



http://vimeo.com/89858791

I've now for to watch this again , Thanks I was planning on doing some work.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So in other words, a player might enjoy it, and that makes you angry, so it shouldn't happen.

The players who enjoy adversely affecting other players' gameplay are the players that I would quite happily give a wide berth.

Yup.

Getting together in a trade convoy should be encouraged and rewarded. it also lends to larger battles/ wolf pack tactics and pirate gangs working togeather

So, the advantage of being in a group and mitigating risk through numbers is insufficient and some form of group reward is required in your view? Then the game emphasis shifts from the "one pilot, one ship" philosophy to "if you don't group up it'll end badly", effectively mandating group play. Thankfully there are no player guilds or player corporations or even player run factions - they would only make it worse....

 

[FoxTwo]

The thing I find funny about these kinda threads is this:

1. Common theme - "Solo should not be allowed" or "Solo profile should not be interchangeable with Open Play" (which I happen to agree with, by the way)
2. The people making the above points are ALWAYS those that play in Open mode

You never see solo players coming in to say the same exact thing, such as:

a. "Open Play players should never affect MY gameplay! I found this nice track of pristine asteroids! I am going to mine them dry! Now I can't because all you open play people also found this and are also mining it, and I can't go away on vacation for a month to come back to a pristine belt!"

b. "I have a nice trade route that earns me 500,000 credits per run. All you Open Play people have spoilt the market by saturating it. I am now forced to find another route. This sucks!"

See, solo players have these peeves too, but they don't go to forums to yell that Open Play should not affect Solo profiles. Yet, the reverse is not true.

Makes one wonder what the TRUE motivations are

 

[Finwolven]

Personally, I'd like 'open' to be actual MMO-side, with 'solo' play mode being just that, solo play, your own universe where you can single-player to your hearts content.

But then again, I'd like 'open' to have actual player-driven economy, persistent player-driven things happening, groups and alliances claiming territory and resources...

These may not be goals of the Dev Team, which is okay by me, just a bit disappointing from the perspective of what this game could be.

Perhaps eventually they'll introduce a Persistent World Server or something, a place for more complex play and player-to-player interaction. Or maybe some day they'll abandon the product and release the server code, and we'll be able to mod it into that.

However, I'm willing to wait and see, things like that take time and effort, and Frontier is working hard on just getting the Core game launched.

EDIT: As for why I'd like to have a world with PVP and other sort of player-to-player interaction:

I love emergent systems. I love emergent gameplay. And I dearly, dearly love playing with, and against, other players.

When those players also voluntarily want to play with or against me.

I do not want Solo-Play to be an unviable playmode. I want it to be an option. I don't think I want to play it for long. I certainly don't want Solo-play to impact online 'open' player economy because then it's simply PVP with another name, from players who can't be challenged directly. Personally, I think a valid way would be to create a working player economy, then 'shadow' it to Solo, so that transactions in Solo Play mirror 'Open' only one way.

I also like building things. Building grand things with other people, and building small things with just my own effort in-game. Once they are built, I want others to come and see them, use them, try to break them or take them. It keeps the game interesting.

I love the idea of taking a group of players 70 000 ly from starting area, setting up a refinery and factory, mining and slowly creating a place for our colonists to grow into inhabited worlds, building our own ships and guns and missiles, our own stations and outposts, eventually perhaps to find the 'empire' or 'federation' expanding to our doorstep... And beyond.

In short: I want online 'Open' play to be a viable long-term play mode, with a magnitude more goals than there are available right now. Not in the way of 'content', that simply spoon-feeds you 'do this and you'll have shiniest trinket', but in the way of 'these things are possible for you, if you can manage it'.

 

[{SAS}Stalker]

Cmdr Y
Cr Balance 4353764323423423652352343242323534657345423423234254235342243
Ship Type : Asp
Armed to the teeth : Oh yes!
Wants to kill you : Indeed he does

Cmdr X
Cr Balance 4353764323423423652352343242323534657345423423234254235342243
Ship Type : Asp
Armed to the teeth : Oh yes!
Wants to kill you : Indeed he does

Scenario
One of these commanders, (neither of which have any human murders and you have never met before) traded fully in open, he hates solo play and he would rather die than go group, he hates groups! The other has made his way through solo play and has only just recently come to open play. They are both about to attack you depending on the destination of your next jump.

Question
1. Which is which
2. Show your working out as to how you have worked this out.


go!

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Scenario
One of these commanders, (neither of which have any human murders and you have never met before) traded fully in open, he hates solo play and he would rather die than go group, he hates groups! The other has made his way through solo play and has only just recently come to open play. They are both about to attack you depending on the destination of your next jump.

Question
1. Which is which
2. Show your working out as to how you have worked this out.


go!

Er... Can I have a clue please?

 

[{SAS}Stalker]

Er... Can I have a clue please?

You have all the info you would have in game (actually more), so no!

 

[Tyr07]

The thing I find funny about these kinda threads is this:

1. Common theme - "Solo should not be allowed" or "Solo profile should not be interchangeable with Open Play" (which I happen to agree with, by the way)
2. The people making the above points are ALWAYS those that play in Open mode

You never see solo players coming in to say the same exact thing, such as:

a. "Open Play players should never affect MY gameplay! I found this nice track of pristine asteroids! I am going to mine them dry! Now I can't because all you open play people also found this and are also mining it, and I can't go away on vacation for a month to come back to a pristine belt!"

b. "I have a nice trade route that earns me 500,000 credits per run. All you Open Play people have spoilt the market by saturating it. I am now forced to find another route. This sucks!"

See, solo players have these peeves too, but they don't go to forums to yell that Open Play should not affect Solo profiles. Yet, the reverse is not true.

Makes one wonder what the TRUE motivations are

Actually it's instanced...you can quit and come back, mine the same astroid -_-

 

[McWafflez]

Solo and multiplayer should not have a shared account. Solo shouldn't have any effect on the multiplayer economy.

 

[Stormprooter]

Scenario
One of these commanders, (neither of which have any human murders and you have never met before) traded fully in open, he hates solo play and he would rather die than go group, he hates groups! The other has made his way through solo play and has only just recently come to open play. They are both about to attack you depending on the destination of your next jump.

Question
1. Which is which
2. Show your working out as to how you have worked this out.


go!

CMDR X has come from Solo, and CMDR Y has always been in open.
Reasoning:
X is often a symbol used for 'Closed' - solo is a more closed environment than open

Did I get it right?

 

[{SAS}Stalker]

and Y looks like open legs?

unfortunately no

 

[murraypaul]

Solo and multiplayer should not have a shared account. Solo shouldn't have any effect on the multiplayer economy.

Then multiplayer shouldn't have any affects on the solo economy.
The solo is a completely separate galaxy from multiplayer.
Then... Frontier have said they can't do this, so conversation stops.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Scenario
One of these commanders, (neither of which have any human murders and you have never met before) traded fully in open, he hates solo play and he would rather die than go group, he hates groups! The other has made his way through solo play and has only just recently come to open play. They are both about to attack you depending on the destination of your next jump.

Question
1. Which is which
2. Show your working out as to how you have worked this out.


go!

If I'm stepping over the broken body of CMDR X 30 seconds later, and am reading CMDR X's forum thread, "Hax! How can a Type-6 out-turn my Asp, make my 6 gimbals miss him, then lose my target lock? Hax!"... it was CMDR X from 100% Solo Mode.

 

[FX2K]

No, it just becomes difficult if someone players solo mode to trade in a risk free envrionment, then after equipping themselves, they go open mode to...what?
Based on what is currently available in the game. I have acknowledged other people pointed out that later in the game there will be co-op missions and other reasons to be in open play, but look at it for what we can confirm we have right now.

I traded up to an Asp in open mode, I never saw a single player whilst transferring 100t of gold etc between two stations in the same system.
Your point is invalid. Where I am now, not a single player has passed through the station except me, not one..

Spoiler

Pointless thread is pointless, but I am bored so pointless it will have to be