Modes Get off Solo/Private groups and onto Open play!

[Dietger]

Interaction between players? Even then it's in Private Groups too.

So nothing?

In principle you are right. Two modes out of three offer multiplayer. If desired, but only one provides an abysmal liberty.
My arguing, my premise if you which, however is, only one, only Open provides the unity, for us all.

Going after the Open play option in Elite dangerous, my arguing is, go where all are, all in one. You may not want to go there alone ....

Sorry Sylveria for being cryptic

 

[Sylveria]

In principle you are right. Two modes out of three offer multiplayer. If desired, but only one provides an abysmal liberty.
My arguing, my premise if you which, however is, only one, only Open provides the unity, for us all.

Going after the Open play option in Elite dangerous, my arguing is, go where all are, all in one. You may not want to go there alone ....

Sorry Sylveria for being cryptic

No apology needed- just trying to get to the root of your point.

I do, however, disagree with your assertion that Open was "designed for PvP" because it indeed wasn't. Just because the existing game mechanics allow for unrestricted PvP does not make it the "reason" Open was created.

Open was intended to be a multiplayer mode for all game play styles- however, the nature of "ganking" is to have a total advantage on another in that you initiate the engagement (mainly by surprise).

To say in this regard "Open was created for PvP" is like saying "People walking down the street are fair game because they make themselves available to get hit by a car". No, the environment may be dangerous- but that doesn't mean that's why it was created.

 

[Han Zulu]

Hell, all of that can be done in PG's too. Mobius invasions have proven that.

Sure. But very uncommon. And you get booted out if you do.

In principle you are right. Two modes out of three offer multiplayer. If desired, but only one provides an abysmal liberty.

Yeah. Open is basically the anarchy mode of multiplyaer. PG is the moderated/policed multiplayer.

 

[wrmiller]

In principle you are right. Two modes out of three offer multiplayer. If desired, but only one provides an abysmal liberty.
My arguing, my premise if you which, however is, only one, only Open provides the unity, for us all.

Going after the Open play option in Elite dangerous, my arguing is, go where all are, all in one. You may not want to go there alone ....

Sorry Sylveria for being cryptic

Apparently, the majority of players do not want the "unity" you describe. I certainly don't.

I (and others here apparently) am comfortable in my own skin and do not need the presence of strangers to feel good about myself. If you do, more power to you. Just don't try to tell me and other like-minded players that we need you, because it simply isn't true. You sound like you need us. Thanks but no thanks.

 

[Dietger]

Hell, all of that can be done in PG's too. Mobius invasions have proven that.

That's right.
But you are invited Sylveria. In Open you and everyone else is good to go. Do what you want to do.
You could possibly make up a free non consensual, private PvP group. Granted But what's the point? Go Open.

What's the difference between a DELIBERATELY mutual agreement to play and what is it to play Open?

Abuse as you described above ( in case of PG's) doesn't count, cos that wasn't Frontiers nor anyone's (beside the offender) agreement.

 

[Han Zulu]

To say in this regard "Open was created for PvP" is like saying "People walking down the street are fair game because they make themselves available to get hit by a car". No, the environment may be dangerous- but that doesn't mean that's why it was created.

What? I thought the road was made for the purpose of hitting other cars and running over people. Huh. Dang. I've been doing it all wrong all these years.

 

[Sylveria]

What? I thought the road was made for the purpose of hitting other cars and running over people. Huh. Dang. I've been doing it all wrong all these years.

I know, right? How DARE you go for a walk! Oh, you're unhappy because I hit you with my car??? Well, when you walked out there you consented to me being able to do so!

 

[Dietger]

Sure. But very uncommon. And you get booted out if you do.


Yeah. Open is basically the anarchy mode of multiplyaer. PG is the moderated/policed multiplayer.

Anarchy?

What about C&P? Its more Liberty. As I see it. Do what you want, but take the consequences - if there are any

 

[Sylveria]

Anarchy?

What about C&P? Its more Liberty. As I see it. Do what you want, but take the consequences - if there are any

Yep, you're right. And Open is currently facing the "consequences" for the actions of people hitting other people with their cars.

As a result, people go to Private Groups and Solo.

And now those in Open are begging for them to come back and take a stroll. Good luck with that.

 

[Han Zulu]

Anarchy?

What about C&P? Its more Liberty. As I see it. Do what you want, but take the consequences - if there are any

Until now there hasn't been much of C&P system in place. There's been a lot of Crime, but very little Punishment. We'll see how the new update will fare.

 

[Han Zulu]

I know, right? How DARE you go for a walk! Oh, you're unhappy because I hit you with my car??? Well, when you walked out there you consented to me being able to do so!

And it's called Open road as well, so it means it should be allowed, yeah? And they said it's "dangerous" on the road, which means that it should be made dangerous for everyone, because that's what it's called. "Dangerous open road." So I've just been fulfilling CalTrans intentions for the road all along. And we know that it's all about git gud on the road, add extra metal plates on the car, add some cannons, don't drive an expensive car unless you have the expertise of hitting other cars, and most of all, have a lot of money in your account to pay for new cars. Just expect to be rammed when you're taking your kids to school...

 

[Sylveria]

Until now there hasn't been much of C&P system in place. There's been a lot of Crime, but very little Punishment. We'll see how the new update will fare.

Indeed. IMO it's probably going to be "too little, too late" for all parties involved here.

I seriously doubt it's going to bring Open a mass exodus of players from Private Groups or Solo, because it doesn't address the core of the issue... which is the "liberties" seem to be one-sided.

 

[Dietger]

No apology needed- just trying to get to the root of your point.

I do, however, disagree with your assertion that Open was "designed for PvP" because it indeed wasn't. Just because the existing game mechanics allow for unrestricted PvP does not make it the "reason" Open was created.

Open was intended to be a multiplayer mode for all game play styles- however, the nature of "ganking" is to have a total advantage on another in that you initiate the engagement (mainly by surprise).

To say in this regard "Open was created for PvP" is like saying "People walking down the street are fair game because they make themselves available to get hit by a car". No, the environment may be dangerous- but that doesn't mean that's why it was created.

Well I think here we understand each other pretty well but disagree.

I do think Open, its sole purpose is to provide a platform for ALL no matter what. But until David or the Cowboy unveils (DDF? its been a long time) provides the details, I am far to lazy, to dig up the papers.

As for real life and innocence. Ask the insurance companies, there is none.

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

That's right.
But you are invited Sylveria. In Open you and everyone else is good to go. Do what you want to do.
You could possibly make up a free non consensual, private PvP group. Granted But what's the point? Go Open.

What's the difference between a DELIBERATELY mutual agreement to play and what is it to play Open?

Abuse as you described above dousen't count, cos that wasn't Frontiers nor anyone's (beside the offender) agreement.

Yeah, that almost makes sense...
don't you think that if you did that the people who joined would be consenting simply by joining?

The problem is that the small minded 'I just wanna kill' attitude has removed access to playing (voluntarily but under duress) in open for a great many people, yes, there are many people who do not use the open play mode because of the reputation of those that reside there, and the attack on Morbius by a trigger happy group is simply another reason to remain in solo or close nit 'trusted private group'
you are totally wasting your time trying to tell us it ain't so because we've in general made up our minds mainly by trying it and some just don't want entertain the thought.

In open those that want to shoot other players will, and so get their wishes, those that don't wish to be shot get shot so don't get their wishes... where is the justice in that?

 

[Roybe]

Indeed. IMO it's probably going to be "too little, too late" for all parties involved here.

I seriously doubt it's going to bring Open a mass exodus of players from Private Groups or Solo, because it doesn't address the core of the issue... which is the "liberties" seem to be one-sided.

C & P will be just as harsh on those in PG and Solo. I am looking forward to how this is all going to shake out...mainly because I do not believe it will work the way everyone thinks it will.

 

[Dietger]

Yeah, that almost makes sense...
don't you think that if you did that the people who joined would be consenting simply by joining?

The problem is that the small minded 'I just wanna kill' attitude has removed access to playing (voluntarily but under duress) in open for a great many people, yes, there are many people who do not use the open play mode because of the reputation of those that reside there, and the attack on Morbius by a trigger happy group is simply another reason to remain in solo or close nit 'trusted private group'
you are totally wasting your time trying to tell us it ain't so because we've in general made up our minds mainly by trying it and some just don't want entertain the thought.

In open those that want to shoot other players will, and so get their wishes, those that don't wish to be shot get shot so don't get their wishes... where is the justice in that?

Sir, how many hours did you logged in Open?

 

[Skip Rockbounder]

Sir, how many hours did you logged in Open?

sufficient to become an unarmed victim on more than one occasion... I'm still unarmed, but that's because the AI has no reason to deceive me and the 'TRUSTED' group does not deal in silliness.

 

[Dietger]

sufficient to become an unarmed victim on more than one occasion... I'm still unarmed, but that's because the AI has no reason to deceive me and the 'TRUSTED' group does not deal in silliness.

So you once ventured out there and faced the rebuy screen. Once is sufficient. For that. Threads come up to a dozen here, Captains claiming Open as insufferable.


I logged to this very day 2259 hours, minus 2 minutes. Since Alpha 4. And I tell you, Open is a friendly place.

 

[Sylveria]

And I tell you, Open is a friendly place.

 

[Roybe]

So you once ventured out there and faced the rebuy screen. Once is sufficient. For that. Threads come up to a dozen here, Captains claiming Open as insufferable.


I logged to this very day 2259 hours, minus 2 minutes. Since Alpha 4. And I tell you, Open is a friendly place.

...until it isn't! LOL!