Again, trying to dismiss me because you're acting like you're smarter - when you're not, quite the opposite.
The problem is, as Brrokk said, the game you bought is not the game you want.
You talk about it as if you're playing EVE Online, well I suggest if you want big faction fights people cannot avoid, then go play EVE Online.
No, this is how the PvE part of solo needs to behave (i.e. really hostile NPCs), or in Open with players because otherwise a great deal of Powerplay is hollow. Why do you think its seen as such a joke and abandoned by many?
Its not hard to grasp that hauling should be subject to attacks as to stop powers being able to support massive territories nearly automatically. I don't care who attacks, as long as someone does and to the point where people get destroyed. For a feature with eleven competing powers who hate each other and have explicit territories, its far to easy to traverse anywhere.
Again, you're making the assumption that YOU are the important factor here and you're not.
The whole game was designed so you are not important, at all (none of us as individuals are important). I can even put you on "block", using in-game tools and I can mode swap to avoid you.
Frontier built these options and even improved the block feature, so I can dismiss you at will from my game.
YOU ARE NOT IMPORTANT.
NPCs are the only thing that cannot be avoided, in any mode, regardless of "block" and regardless of uPnP or other network tricks - the NPCs are still there.
So there is your answer. Harder and increased number of PP NPCs that interdict more often. But you'll ignore this because it's not "pew pew", so you refuse to accept this is the answer.
And the block rules would need to be changed for an Open segment, simply because in an opt in feature in an opt in mode why should you opt out of danger when you are deliberately putting yourself in danger?
And I've explained in almost painful detail why 'simply' upping the numbers won't work. Feel free to ignore the many 'too many interdictions' threads about this, but the underlying issue still remains. Also, you seem a bit blind to the fact nearly all of my ideas are PvE based- only one has 'pew pew' in it, and that idea has stuff for solo and PG too, just not the same jobs...which leads me to conclude you have a general chip on your shoulder regards PvP players in general.
Nonsense round-up of the modes, but okay. Whatever. (hint: open can use heal beams as well, and has wing benefits)
Really? You are blind then.
Open indeed has wing benefits, and heal beams. But it also has other hostile groups with
all weapons wanting to destroy you....its the only mode where you will face an equal or greater threat at all times and have to be wary of it. And on top of that you also have to be careful of
any other player too.
How is a PG with all friendly players dangerous? Its Solo x 4 bonus payouts.
Because you have exactly the same access as everyone else.
Now if I had access to PGs and you didn't - then I'd agree, but guess what, everything I can do.....
So can you!!!!!
So your answer is......to go into an easier mode because other people are going into easier modes. Yes, that makes a very solid base for a competitive game. When I play a game, higher challenges provide a better reward. In this case I have to grind in silence because everyone is forced to play the most basic mode.
If the PvE was more stimulating and harder, this would be less of an issue.
Patronising much?
Right now, Solo players are just as important as everyone else. Regardless of their abilities (or disabilities), age, home situations etc...
Any change is a direct nerf to them
How is having something equally important 'patronizing'?
If you can't play in open because of whatever reason then you have an equally important task- its not hard to understand.
If fortification cargo is generated by solo and PG missions alone, then thats really
really important. The bonus is that missions scale to NPCs better, can have lore flavouring, add variety, and be properly mode agnostic without undercutting Open.