AP Birdman
Banned
C'mon bro that's a super weak argument. Screw pirates, they can just pirate NPCs. That's laughable man. You're better than that Jockey.
Last edited:
Modes I know I'm beating a dead horse, but we need official PvE servers
- Thread starter Aardwolfz
- Start date
- Status
C'mon bro that's a super weak argument. Screw pirates, they can just pirate NPCs. That's laughable man. You're better than that Jockey.
What kind of irks me is that when someone makes the suggestion that PVP be put to a PG the answer is basically no because the people want social interaction. My thought on that is.. well so do PVErs yet they are denied it to the extent those who PVP enjoy it. The difference in PVE and PVP and the modes mainly seems to be people wanting no social interaction or... social interaction with or without hostile social interaction. This game should be able to handle all three with relative ease, yet it handles no social interaction with ease, with hostile social action with ease, and when without hostile social action proponents request the same ease they are met with ridicule and turned down and told the system in place is "good enough for them". Yet as we can see when someone suggests a reversal on who uses that system.... suddenly it isn't good enough anymore.
I do not think it's laziness at all. From what Braben said, I think it's very likely Frontier have run a cost/benefit analysis and figured that the costs outweigh the gains.
I don't know where you are getting "with ease" from. It would require significant effort to code in rules for a Non-PvP mode (going to stop calling it PvE Mode because you can PvE to your heart's content in Open, as I do), and as Jockey mentioned Braben didn't think it was feasible.
That is a sound strategy for flying in Open hot-spots. Looks like a winning formula to me [up]
AP Birdman
Banned
I'm sorry Mouse but most people don't have the same issues that you have and can pve in open just fine. I truly am sorry and I understand it's not fair but thats just the way it is. Honestly, you should be extremely grateful that you have things like pg and mobius which allows players with disabilities or lack confidence in their abilities to still be able to play in a somewhat social environment.
I keep hearing mobius brought up in these arguments but what I don't understand is why it isn't enough? Why do you need a pve server when you have mobius? I think the reason why is because mobius isn't very populated because most people have realized that open is pretty low risk despite what some might say.
Not for who... for what.
What being a nearly 40 year old conundrum: How do you maximize the player-base of an open world sandbox MMO that includes PvP, without relying on a PvP switch?
There's a certain type of player who is extremely GIFTed at driving away the player-base of a game like open-mode Elite: Dangerous, simply by indulging in GIFT-like behavior. In my experience, such games are extremely attractive to GIFTed players, because such an environment provides them both a huge stage play upon, and a captive audience. Games like open-ED I've played in the past have tried everything from super-powered NPCs that respond instantly in "safe" zones, to draconian criminal penalties, to massive incentives to "hunt" them down. The only thing that's worked in the past at reducing GIFT-like behavior is some form of PvP switch.
A (hopefully) growing trend in games similar to Elite: Dangerous is the realization that GIFT-like behavior requires three ingredients, just like combustion does: anonymity, audience, and opportunity. Anonymity is a given in an online game. That leaves opportunity and audience. In the past, game developers have concentrated on addressing opportunity, until they either have to shut down due to lack of paying customers, or they remove opportunity altogether via the PvP switch.
What Elite: Dangerous and other games have done is address the third leg of the triangle: the audience. The GIFTed aren't looking for any particular audience. They have a target audience in mind. PvPers, for example, don't get upset when they get attacked "for no reason." They simply kill their attacker instead. Players who fall in the middle of the PvP/PvE spectrum also tend to not get upset when attacked. They regard such an attack as an opportunity to test their combat skills at best, or have the skills and knowledge to escape at worst. The target audience of the GIFTed are those who fall on the PvE end of the spectrum, because they are the easiest to kill, and the most likely to get upset in the process.
When players are given the freedom to choose who they want to play with, without any form of coersion, the GIFTed suddenly find themselves faced by the wrong audience. An audience who regards their attacks as an easily endured hazard at best, or responds with deadly force at worst. An audience that could respond to non-PvP oriented GIFT-like behavior with PvP. This is not the kind of environment the GIFTed enjoy, so they inevitably move on to greener pastures.
Is it a perfect environment for everyone? Of course not, there is no such thing as an online game that is perfect for everyone. But it is the perfect environment for a significant majority of the Elite: Dangerous player base. This is the first online game I've played of this nature where this has been the case. And that, IMO, is what makes it a winning formula.
Because if Mobius is on holiday, sick or (God forbid) dies; no one can admin the group.
No new members, no kicking disruptive members etc.
Because account sharing is a bannable offence under the TOS, so he cannot share his login for these things to be done in his absence.
So without 1 person the group is done and gone.
A PG isn't a replacement for a Frontier run mode.
Also, Mobius has a quite stable population. not sure where you get "isn't very populated" but you should try playing in it and you'll see how wrong you are.
I stopped playing in it because where I was playing became too busy and getting a landing pad was a nightmare.
(someone updated the trade tools with my area and a fleet of traders turned up to cash in)
The area in Open was nowhere near as busy.
Sorry, didn't see this reply.
And again, it doesn't not "bin" piracy. As an Open PvE Mode would be optional.
Just as the current Open PvPP Mode is optional.
Seriously, what are you so afraid of?
The only people who'd use it are those who are not playing Open PvP currently.
You act as if an Open PvE Mode is going to take the entire game away from you.
Is that way you want the hurdle of joining Mobius to stay in place, to put people off from playing PvE and force them into Open PvP?
Admin tools for PG owners is something I've already advocated in this thread, and I think it would solve that problem. PG owners need to be able to delegate admin responsibilities, have access to last-logged-in times for their members and have an array of filters for easier sorting. These mechanics are already in place for Squadrons.
While admin tools would be welcome, it still does not solve some issues with CMDRs having to rely on a player run group.
At the end of the day, it still all falls down if Mobius ever hits "Disband Group" or just plain leaves/ dies so no one could make more admins or deal with problems.
Problems like a bad admin, or all the admins moving onto other things would still cause issues without the group owner there to sort it out.
The only sensible solution is Frontier to manage a PvE Mode.
And it's not going to be an issue for PvP'ers, because those who want PvP are in Open currently and those who don't are not.
So it's not even as if there will be a mass exodus should Frontier have an Open PvE Mode.
It's just giving some of the player base a bit more security and removing the chance of their style of play suddenly being removed.
It was and still is lazy for FDev to rely on players to do something they should have done from the start.
This is not a problem for Squadrons if the leader leaves, s/he appoints a successor. Frontier support can also help if the group owner goes AWOL.
There is already a PvE Open mode. We just call it "Open".
What you're advocating is "Non-PvP Mode".
Maybe, as I suggested earlier, Frontier simply don't see the gains in a non-PvP mode, or maybe it goes against the spirit or design of how they want the game to be. Either way, it doesn't look very likely that the modes as they stand will change. And that is fine with me.
I've said my bit in defence of the status quo, and as much as I enjoy a discussion this one isn't really going anywhere.
o7
Consensual pvp flag in open, simple.
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
I love this idea that people who prefer not to indulge the personal psychosis of players who seem to think everyone is a target even if not wanted in systems or carrying cargo is unable to cope with pvp. take a breath and consider that some would prefer to spend their game time doing what they want not wasting time fighting with some idiot who would be better suited to pulling the legs off flies for satisfaction.
As for a PvP flag in open this, contrary to above, is not such a bad idea, in fact games such as World of Warcraft which have been around a lot longer that Elite dangerous use just such a system to great success.
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
AP Birdman
Banned
What am I afraid of? Honestly it's shocking that you can't clearly see that a pve open server would divide and ruin the game for many players. Why would anyone bother running missions in the normal open server anymore? The open server would become a wasteland of just players looking to PvP and because there's no incentives for PvP the server would eventually die. Pirates would be completely screwed because they would no longer have players to prey on.
I'm shocked that you and others can't understand this. Fdev clearly understands this because they haven't included a pve open server in the game.
Of course I'm afraid of an open pve server being included in the game because it would ruin Elite Dangerous for me and many others.
And the dumbest part of the whole thing is that open isn't all that dangerous. All of these people are complaining about a problem that rarely happens.
I've been flying in open, every day for 6 months and I've NEVER been interdicted by a player outside of the CG.
These stories of players being attacked constantly by other players are either complete lies or there's something more to the story that they're not telling us.
The majority of the player base can survive just fine in open so why ruin the entire game for the few who can't figure it out?
So... You're saying that many people only play in open because they have (or know of) no alternative, and that the moment an alternative exists, open will empty as people flock to it? Hmm, seems it's not so much desired as needed if this is the case.
Just need clarification on this as that is what you appeared to be implying.
We only need more serververers.
They like Servers but no freezy.
PvE PvP all good - as long as there's the choice!
They like Servers but no freezy.
PvE PvP all good - as long as there's the choice!
You are omitting the huge pressure release valve in your argument - the modes. In the absence of solo and PGs this game does not serve the non-pvp pve community. Let's be real for a moment about the "winning formula". This game has less than 1/10th the active player base of AAA mmos. There is nothing winning about it other than it serves the small fraction of mmo players that have the tolerance for the full time pvp experience. Try to look outside of your own personal experience to the broader market of mmo participants.
Birdman, if you could keep your arguments about the game without insulting those that disagree with you, people might listen to what you have to say.
- Status