How Open-only would balance ED

Just a minor nitpick to that, it is solved by a simple galmap filter, so I wouldn't expect a gameplay loop would be formed around that. It would simply make trucking longer, taking detours.
I guess it'd depend on the complexity of the mechanic.

I mean, a star system could be high-sec but it could also be subject to pirate attacks, civil unrest or war at the same time.
It'd be up to players to pay attention to this stuff and use their experience to decide how safe a system was likely to be before travelling there.
On the flip-side, lawless players could do stuff to destabilise a system, thus creating "booby traps" where a system might appear safe after a casual look at the galmap but might be in turmoil upon arrival.

Not really sure how the game might figure all this stuff out but, in practice, I'd like to see lawless players relentlessly hunted by suitably powerful ships in seaceful high-sec systems.
In systems where there was some kind of unrest, those ships would still be around but they'd be less likely to target a lawless player immediately.
At the other end of the scale there would be, obviously, no security ships in anarchies.
 
Meant to address this part too.

I've always said that FDev should create some kind of tool which looks at the make-up of the current player-base and use that as the basis for generating NPCs instead of the current system where NPCs are generating solely to match a CMDR's combat rank.

Yes, it would be tough for newbies when they routinely find themselves being attacked by Dangerous/Deadly NPCs but it'd also make the transition from Solo to Open much less jarring.
How often does that update?
Does an influx of new players lead to an open season for PvP?
 
In a game with optional PvP, why should players in Solo and Private Groups be forced to play at a difficulty level effectively set by other players?

.... not every player sees playing in Open as a necessity for their continued enjoyment of the game.
Fair comment.

I've also always said that FDev should have a permanent beta-server online to test out stuff like this before adopting it (or not) in the real server.

I'm sure it'd need some tweaking, and perhaps some kind of "damping" in the early game, so newbies aren't immediately faced with the full level of hostility they're likely to find in Open, but it'd ramp up to parity as a player reached, say, Dangerous.

Let's face it, by the time a player reaches Dangerous, NPCs are currently little more than a minor annoyance so a greater likelihood of meeting Dangerous/Deadly/Elite NPCs would probably be a welcome change.

Also, if the likelihood of a player being "ganked" by NPCs was based on player-stat's too, chances are it'd result in fewer random attacks from NPCs.
Basically, Solo (for a veteran player) would be place where there was a lot of tough ships but the majority of them would be cordial unless you decided to shoot at them.
 
Let's face it, by the time a player reaches Dangerous, NPCs are currently little more than a minor annoyance so a greater likelihood of meeting Dangerous/Deadly/Elite NPCs would probably be a welcome change.
Isn't this determined by mission level rather than player level ?

I get plenty of good NPC pilots in Condas after me when flying elite missions, especially if you stack a few of them.
 
Last edited:

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Fair comment.
:)
I'm sure it'd need some tweaking, and perhaps some kind of "damping" in the early game, so newbies aren't immediately faced with the full level of hostility they're likely to find in Open, but it'd ramp up to parity as a player reached, say, Dangerous.

Let's face it, by the time a player reaches Dangerous, NPCs are currently little more than a minor annoyance so a greater likelihood of meeting Dangerous/Deadly/Elite NPCs would probably be a welcome change.
That presumes that the player is interested in combat in the first place - in a game where two of the three Elite ranks can be achieved without firing a shot in combat.

I suppose a player would be able to guarantee not to meet them simply by keeping their combat rank low....
 
How often does that update?
Does an influx of new players lead to an open season for PvP?
An influx of new players would only ever serve to make the galaxy safer since it'd mean that the proportion of Dangerous/Deadly/Elite players reduced proportionally.
But, as I said, it'd probably be best if the system was "damped" so that newbies got an easier time until they reached a reasonable ranking.

As for how often such a system might update, I'd like to think it'd be possible to do it in real-time.
More realistically, an adjustment every week, at the server tick, would be fine.
 
An influx of new players would only ever serve to make the galaxy safer
That's kind of my point. An influx of new players and the old hands suddenly have an NPC gold rush on their hands.
I think the current "graded" system is a better way to go, but perhaps they could be made a bit more challenging.
 
Isn't this determined by mission level rather than player level ?
To a limited extent.

If, for example, you take on an Elite-ranked cargo mission when you're Competent you might get attacked by Dangerous Dropships.
Take on a similar mission when you're Elite and it'll be Elite Annie's that attack you.

Main thing, though, is that it'd be ALL ships in the galaxy reflecting the player stat's - and they'd reflect player stat's for hostility too.
Most of the traffic you see would probably be fairly high-ranking but it'd also be cordial.
It'd mostly be when YOU choose to pick a fight (at RESs, NavBuoys and CZs) that you'd face a tougher challenge.
 
Everywhere in ED is "the wild west" and that only works if everybody wants to be a cowboy - and ED claims to give players the opportunity to take on many other roles as well.
I would be very surprised if most of the real 'wild west' wasn't considerably safer than crowded urban centers of the same era, despite the greater presence of security forces in the latter.

ED's security levels always seemed to be referring to the security response, not the safety of an area. Anarchy systems with no one present are almost absolutely safe, as they should be. High-security tourist traps can be quite dangerous, as they should be.

In a game with optional PvP, why should players in Solo and Private Groups be forced to play at a difficulty level effectively set by other players?
Since only CMDRs can influence any of the persistent setting elements players in Solo and PG are still forced to play at a difficulty level set by others, if they have any interest in any of those mechanisms.

At the other end of the scale there would be, obviously, no security ships in anarchies.
I'd expect security pursuit to follow fugitives until they crossed into another jurisdiction they respected. Depending on the power of the entity represented by these security forces, this could be almost anywhere.
 
An influx of new players would only ever serve to make the galaxy safer since it'd mean that the proportion of Dangerous/Deadly/Elite players reduced proportionally.
But, as I said, it'd probably be best if the system was "damped" so that newbies got an easier time until they reached a reasonable ranking.
Seeing all these Harmless T9s and Cutters in Open lately "griefs" my immersion, but on the other hand, I've never felt safer in Open!

Once I get my carrier, I'm going to have to bring out my PvP pirate ship again. There's nothing more fun than pirating a harmless Cutter :D

(When I say pirating, I mean it - nobody dies when I pirate other players.)
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Since only CMDRs can influence any of the persistent setting elements players in Solo and PG are still forced to play at a difficulty level set by others, if they have any interest in any of those mechanisms.
Not in terms of the NPCs that they face though.
 
That's kind of my point. An influx of new players and the old hands suddenly have an NPC gold rush on their hands.
I think the current "graded" system is a better way to go, but perhaps they could be made a bit more challenging.
If veterans want to get their jollies exploding NPCs, it's already like shooting fish in a barrel.
The appearance of extra low-ranking NPCs would make little difference.

Also, let's face it, with an average active player-base of, say, 10,000 players, even if we assume that several thousand new people pick up the game at the same time (after an update, perhaps) that's only going to double the likelyhood of meeting a low-ranking NPC.
In reality, of course, anything that draws in new players is also likely to entice lapsed players back too, bringing their own stat's back into play.

Like I say, it'd certainly need tweaking but I think it could make things more interesting than the current system, which is so obviously artificially nerfed.
Long as it was implemented in a way that didn't result in newbies having the poop kicked out of them in their first couple of months.
 
Not in terms of the NPCs that they face though.
This is broken IMO. NPC difficulty should be based on mission difficulty or cargo value just as much as it is player combat rating. If I'm carrying a billion credits worth of LTDs, any pirate worth his salt should take note. The idea that a Deadly pirate would look at my "Harmless" rating and say, "He's not worth my time" despite my carrying all those LTDs is just silly.

Of course, the fact these pirates KNOW I'm carrying LTDs ("Rumors were right! Look at that juicy cargo.") is broken in the other direction. As said in another thread, NPC piracy is nonsensical compared to proper PvP piracy.
 
This is broken IMO. NPC difficulty should be based on mission difficulty or cargo value just as much as it is player combat rating. If I'm carrying a billion credits worth of LTDs, any pirate worth his salt should take note. The idea that a Deadly pirate would look at my "Harmless" rating and say, "He's not worth my time" despite my carrying all those LTDs is just silly.

Of course, the fact these pirates KNOW I'm carrying LTDs ("Rumors were right! Look at that juicy cargo.") is broken in the other direction. As said in another thread, NPC piracy is nonsensical compared to proper PvP piracy.
See, I'm conflicted here although I agree it's currently a bit broken.

The way I see it, if I'm flying though a high-sec system I shouldn't meet criminal warlords cos, y'know, the local sys-sec should have already exploded them for all the other (notional) criminal stuff they've done and the same local sys-sec should be on hand to explode them if/when they attack you.
I'd say it'd be more plausible if it was tough ships flown by inexperienced outlaws, reflecting the idea that they were previously lawful ships who just couldn't pass up a lucrative opportunity.

Course, it's also plausible that a criminal warlord might track you and then attack you in a suitably remote system.
Which is why I'd like to see some kind of "Stealth" factor adopted.
If you're mining in a ring and you don't see any outlaws (or you explode the ones you do see) how is anybody going to know you're carrying a heap of LTDs at all?
Set it up so you initially have a "detection factor" of, say, 5% and that increases if you fly through busy systems, stop at navbuoys to scan them or dock at stations to refuel.

The idea of mining in a remote, empty, system and then immediately getting an "I've been tracking you..." message is pretty darned unimmersive.
And then you make a 40Ly jump in your Annie and the same bloody FdL or FGS miraculously arrives in the same system just after you do..... 😒
 
Disclaimer - I am NOT advocating for Open-Only, I'm just making an observation.
I'm sorry, but if there wasn't an private or solo mode, people would just quit. They wouldn't even try to 'Git Gud', they'd just leave and complain about the game being full of seal clubbers. Even the threat of being ganked (even though statistically it is quite rare), is enough to put people off.

I agree that the game would benefit from open only in certain circumstances (i.e. Certain parts of power-play or CGs) but if it's all open only, we'd see player numbers drop substantially.

This is another of the never-ending arguments!
 
Don't tell me how to play!

So we definitely appear to agree on the most fundamental point in this entire discussion?

I wasn't telling anyone how to play, anyway. I was "inviting" other players to. There's a significant difference.

Anyway, here's progress for ya. We have an accord in something.

Which essentially leaves a big question mark over this entire discussion, does it not?...
 
As a PvP pirate I’d love open only. However, on the other hand, I don’t wish to tell others how to play the game so I couldn’t really support doing away with solo/pg. BUT, one thing that is ridiculous is being able to attack the bgs in solo. I think if players in open are in a bgs fight with solo/pg players, the open players should have an influence boost for equal effort.
 
Top Bottom