Incentive(s) for playing in Open..

Riverside

Riverside
Open is not the thing to incentivise, it's interacting with other players that's the risky bit ;)

I have played in Open for years, I explore in Open, I trade in Open, I rarely meet experienced players & even then it's generally benign.

I appreciate where the OP is coming from but the risk is grossly overstated & perpetuated by trolls that want people to think they are being brave and people who have little to no direct experience.

I also don't really see any problem with players continuing in groups or solo if that's what they want.


That said, I'd have no objection to a monetary reward (ie in-game credits) since they are essentially meaningless now anyway.
 
Last edited:

sewerratuk

sewerratuk
Sylow said:
But time IS the difference. Loosing bounty vouchers after 45 minutes in a RES means i lost the work of 45 minutes. In the unlikely case that a ganker can destroy my RES-fitted ship. Loosing a trade ship costs me like the last 10 minutes since i launched and a bit of cargo. Which comes cheaply enough. But an exlorer, coming back from the void after spending several weeks RL (and dozens of hour of gameplay time) there really looses a lot.

As long as "ship lost, all lost" is how things are implemented, that won't change. So it's extremely reasonable for an explorer to do that in solo. Why let somebody take away many hours of your work, just so he can feel superior for a few seconds, basking in the "skill" of being in a combat fitted ship instead of an exploration ship?
Click to expand...

Solo is a viable method, why wouldn’t you if you have concerns and likely to get upset about losing your progress?
It’s a PVP player approved method of engineering, cash grinding, taxi ship transferring, etc so don’t worry about it

My only issue with solo/ pg is when people are actively targeting my business in a 5C way but that’s for another thread
 

wetwire

wetwire
Sylow said:
But time IS the difference. Loosing bounty vouchers after 45 minutes in a RES means i lost the work of 45 minutes. In the unlikely case that a ganker can destroy my RES-fitted ship. Loosing a trade ship costs me like the last 10 minutes since i launched and a bit of cargo. Which comes cheaply enough. But an explorer, coming back from the void after spending several weeks RL (and dozens of hour of gameplay time) there really looses a lot.

As long as "ship lost, all lost" is how things are implemented, that won't change. So it's extremely reasonable for an explorer to do that in solo. Why let somebody take away many hours of your work, just so he can feel superior for a few seconds, basking in the "skill" of being in a combat fitted ship instead of an exploration ship?
Click to expand...
I completely agree, but ED does not balance time. This is noticable in how hard the player base has to fight to get small changes. Recall the grind for materials for the engineers then compare it to the "compromise" we got with mat traders and update to the USS. If we lose our cargo, or bounties our care is not for the material loss but how long it took us to obtain those. So yes in respect to time loss the explorer loses the most. But FD is not in the habit of refunding time. If a bug or other event happens that is the games fault FD will give you credits to compensate. That is all they can honestly do. Making adjustments to Exploration data loss will not solve the honest issue of lost time.

The best i believe we can hope for is a method of reducing the cause of time loss. As others have noted currently the best way is avoidance. My prior suggestion was features to increase the avoidance system by giving in game tools that alert players of hostile actions in nearby systems. To the extreme point of showing overtly hostile players on the galaxy map. This would let explorers actively avoid those areas.
 

Neutronium

Neutronium
wetwire said:
The best i believe we can hope for is a method of reducing the cause of time loss. As others have noted currently the best way is avoidance. My prior suggestion was features to increase the avoidance system by giving in game tools that alert players of hostile actions in nearby systems. To the extreme point of showing overtly hostile players on the galaxy map. This would let explorers actively avoid those areas.
Click to expand...

Well yes, that is a logical suggestion. Why not have a radar in the galaxy map showing all players in our instance that act aggressively? Good point!
However I think even with these measures there may be an instance where due to network issues or other causes an aggressive player may not be shown even on the radar (e.g. hiding in the gravity well of a star or planet). In that worst case scenario a returning explorer may find themselves in a very difficult situation.
 

lenna

lenna
neutronium said:
What I suggest is simple and straight-forward: Introduce insurance cost to the exploration data and the re-spawning at the point of destruction.
For example: Let the explorer retain the lost exploration data at the cost of their value (maximum penalty) or a fraction of that*( There could be a screen similar to rebuy screen where the cmdr simply chooses which data they want to keep (and consequently loose their value) and which to discard). Similarly, using the lore of galactic logistics, the cmdr's ship can respawn at the point of destruction by paying the proportional & appropriate fee for their ship to be transferred there taking into account the distance between the nearest station (or the station the player has their ships stored) and the point of destruction.

What I am essentially suggesting is a way to recover the huge amounts of time lost by trading the lost time for credits. I believe it is a fair trade. Because the game itself is a huge time sinker and exploration is a big part of that.

So what do you think? Is this a fair proposal? If yes do you think it will help drive more people in open if implemented by Frontier? Do you think the griefer/ganker should also pay a fee?
Click to expand...
Personally, I would just penalise the griefer/ganker - let them bear the brunt of the cost of killing targets that are not wanted in-game. However, that is a matter for another thread really.

As for the data insurance concept, not sure I agree with the principle. It could be exploited by explorers who may suicide to turn in their data quicker.

Overall, I see no good reason to incentivise Open mode at all - IMO the only thing that might address the matter would be to introduce sufficiently punitive measures to discourage certain types of PvP behaviour. The last round of major C&P changes seemingly attempted to do this but ultimately it seemingly failed and to be fair to FD I don't think they can do anything to stop the relevant behaviours without effectively disabling PvP all together.
 

wetwire

wetwire
rlsg said:
Personally, I would just penalise the griefer/ganker - let them bear the brunt of the cost of killing targets that are not wanted in-game. However, that is a matter for another thread really.

As for the data insurance concept, not sure I agree with the principle. It could be exploited by explorers who may suicide to turn in their data quicker.

Overall, I see no good reason to incentivise Open mode at all - IMO the only thing that might address the matter would be to introduce sufficiently punitive measures to discourage certain types of PvP behaviour. The last round of major C&P changes seemingly attempted to do this but ultimately it seemingly failed and to be fair to FD I don't think they can do anything to stop the relevant behaviours without effectively disabling PvP all together.
Click to expand...
Give CMDR @threeofnine a radar that will ping the location of reported griefer/gankers. Problem solved.
But i agree with @rlsg i doubt FD can do much regarding player behavior. So even though my suggestion to give threeofnine a special radar is a joke, it is not a completely unreasonable solution. As ED has players with the desire and capabilities to counter the griefer/ganker play style. Expand on the PVP system by giving players tools and abilities to "hunt" for player bounties.
 

Neutronium

Neutronium
rlsg said:
As for the data insurance concept, not sure I agree with the principle. It could be exploited by explorers who may suicide to turn in their data quicker.
Click to expand...

Nope. That is NOT how it should work. The insurance would ONLY kick in:
1. If you are destroyed by a human player AND
2. You don't have a bounty on your head AND
3. You have unhanded exploration data.
 
Last edited:

Lestat

Banned
Lestat
Do we really need another dumb topic about forcing people into the open and calling people carebear to boot? I am already seeing the reason why this topic been made. So lame PvP can get their jollies on killing players.
 

sewerratuk

sewerratuk
wetwire said:
Give CMDR @threeofnine a radar that will ping the location of reported griefer/gankers. Problem solved.
But i agree with @rlsg i doubt FD can do much regarding player behavior. So even though my suggestion to give threeofnine a special radar is a joke, it is not a completely unreasonable solution. As ED has players with the desire and capabilities to counter the griefer/ganker play style. Expand on the PVP system by giving players tools and abilities to "hunt" for player bounties.
Click to expand...

People gave up asking for proper bounty hunting tools a longggg time ago
 

Phisto Sobanii

Phisto Sobanii
Phisto Sobanii said:
Explorers could choose to be more crafty. For example: stash a "Bubble ready" ship in an out of the way place (perhaps obtain the permit to an out of the way permit locked system) and switch into that ship before going to turn in data somewhere risky.
Click to expand...

What about some feedback this idea here? I'd like to point out it can be accomplished in game right now and doesn't rely on FDEV at all.
 

Neutronium

Neutronium
Lestat said:
Do we really need another dumb topic about forcing people into the open and calling people carebear to boot? I am already seeing the reason why this topic been made. So lame PvP can get their jollies on killing players.
Click to expand...

No need for you to reply into "dumb topics" then :)
 

wetwire

wetwire
Phisto Sobanii said:
Those aren't proper bounty hunting tools. They are easy win buttons. Which, not incidentally, it seems what too many people in this game want.
Click to expand...
How is the addition of proper bounty hunting tools a easy win button? given we currently have no tools in this regard. How do you hunt for player bounties that are worth the effort in the current game system?
 

RELSPI

RELSPI
Phisto Sobanii said:
What about some feedback this idea here? I'd like to point out it can be accomplished in game right now and doesn't rely on FDEV at all.
Click to expand...
It's a good idea which can just be ignored by hitting the 'lol solo' button. Totally unnecessary unless you're dedicated to open-only.
 

Para Handy

Para Handy
Lestat said:
Do we really need another dumb topic about forcing people into the open and calling people carebear to boot? I am already seeing the reason why this topic been made. So lame PvP can get their jollies on killing players.
Click to expand...

Is there some whatsapp group or similar where they decide who's turn it is to start another "get people into Open" thread? ;)
 

sewerratuk

sewerratuk
Phisto Sobanii said:
Those aren't proper bounty hunting tools. They are easy win buttons. Which, not incidentally, it seems what too many people in this game want.
Click to expand...

. The only way to track people effectively is through friends lists which is the I win button. Otherwise you just hang out in the popular areas or arrange a meet through discord or similar

Edit
FD why are the letters b and s censored. Jeez
 
Last edited:

Phisto Sobanii

Phisto Sobanii
wetwire said:
How is the addition of proper bounty hunting tools a easy win button? given we currently have no tools in this regard. How do you hunt for player bounties that are worth the effort in the current game system?
Click to expand...

When you're talking about radars that instantly reveal the location of a target you are asking for easy win buttons. Right now in the game you've got the Kill Warrant Scanner, the bounty boards, and out of game tools like Inara to track your targets. There's also experience and creative problem solving to help you.

Improving instancing, especially between Commanders in different parts of the world, would be a huge help as well.

But just off the top of my head I'd like to see in game platform specific bounty boards and a way to perhaps mark one target so you don't have to return to a bounty board to check their location again.

RELSPI said:
It's a good idea which can just be ignored by hitting the 'lol solo' button. Totally unnecessary unless you're dedicated to open-only.
Click to expand...

The OP is obviously interested in improving the Open experience for explorers. How did you miss that?
 

Bigmaec

Bigmaec
Lestat said:
Do we really need another dumb topic about forcing people into the open and calling people carebear to boot? I am already seeing the reason why this topic been made. So lame PvP can get their jollies on killing players.
Click to expand...
You're the first one to name-call in this thread.
Para Handy said:
Is there some whatsapp group or similar where they decide who's turn it is to start another "get people into Open" thread? ;)
Click to expand...
Nowadays it's discord.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom