I dunno man the game is a tad complicated as it is.
To clarify this, as it does appear to confuse people, the proposal would really only introduce
one mode that can then also apply to Player Groups if players wanted to do so (the tools would then already be in place, so might as well add the option so to speak).
Looks like more server requirements, maintenance and costs, for very little in terms of real benefits.
I'd rather Frontier put their resources into improving core gameplay, as per their Beyond roadmap.
I would rather have more core gameplay than this feature too. Please keep in mind this is a discussion on whether you would use or have interest in such a feature in general, not a request for FD to drop everything they are doing right now (or in the near future). Your comment implies that you might see some use in it, if it were not for any technical issues and other important features did not suffer in development for it. Is that correct? Or is this a feature you have no interest in at all?
i think the community is split enough allready..
This.
We already have a player base fractured between open and various private groups. Breaking things up even further would not be a good idea, in my view, as it would further reduce the chance of actually encountering other players anywhere other than the very few busiest systems.
This is an interesting argument against such a feature, as
the current divide among the community is the core issue this proposal aims to address. Let me explain in more detail below.
The game caters to three categories of gameplay:
1) Competitive
2) Co-op
3) Solo
The first two focus on direct player interactivity, the last only allows for indirect interactivity through outcomes of the shared BGS/CGs/PP/First Discoveries, etc.
The focus of this discussion is largely on those first two categories, however keeping in mind they do not solely define the multi-player aspect of the game. What this boils down to is the following:
Competitive gameplay can be defined as anything involving two or more players working against each other (= Player vs Player). This includes player combat, manipulating the BGS/PP/CGs, as well as being the first to discover X stellar body or delivering cargo to a station (race against other traders and pirates).
Co-operative gameplay can be defined as anything involving two or more players working together. This equally includes player combat, manipulating the BGS/PP/CGs, as well as any social activities such as expeditions, wing missions, etc.
There appears to be a common misconception among players that competitive and cooperative gameplay does not mix well and players must be given the option to engage in one or the other at their leisure.
Of course every player has the right to play a game how they enjoy it. That is a golden rule.
The fact both of those playstyles are very often intertwined is not actually an issue when it comes to the fun-factor aspect of the game however. Why? Because the competition aspect already exists through the NPCs within the game in any mode, effectively by imitating other competitive players.
This is where the actual problem comes to light: Players aren’t NPCs. NPCs do not adapt at the same rate as players do while the game progresses. NPCs are unable to develop strategies.
Standard NPCs encountered in the game world do not use the engineering system. Encountering hostile NPCs can even be entirely avoided through careful gameplay decisions.
So hang on, what does this all have to do with a mode that eliminates engineering? How is this supposed to work against splitting the community?
To determine this, one must first take a look at what is actually splitting the community in the first place. Largely, this is down to three factors:
1) A player does not wish to interact with any players at all. Be it combat, or simply socialising.
2) A player wants to interact with other players only through cooperative gameplay or socialising.
3) A player wants to interact only with specific players of their choosing.
Again, every player has the right to play a game how they enjoy it. It is unfortunate however, when a player feels that they must avoid the wider community because they disagree with the player-driven competitive aspect of the game due to imbalance.
This is where the proposal comes in, raising the following question:
Would you play in an open mode (again), and engage with the wider community including the player-driven competition if there was a mode that eliminated the modifications induced through engineering for all players?
Why not just join Mobius... No PvP... so engineered or not... where is the competition?
In a non-PvP frame work... frank can jump 10ly more than Tom because he's engineered.......So what.
If that bothers you, then maybe the competition is in your head.
And given that different class ships all offer different results on different abilities, the disparity between what a player can do compared to those around them will always exist with or without engineering.
With the new engineering system, pretty much anyone can have the same results as the guy next to him if he invests the extra game play time.
I think maybe with the old engineer system which was an RNG fruit machine rewarding the invested and lucky, there was an advantage to some people who got rare and awesome results. But the new Engineer system almost guarantees uniform results to players at the cost of a little extra play time.
I agree with VS, the creation of 'legacy modes' is entirely redundant. If there were to be a demand for either of these, then the opportunity to create these already exists (well, at least one anyways). Go forth and create a PG, call it legacy and have people adhere to your legacy framework. As for 'legacy open'... why split this mode? Are you trying to troll out renewed threads about a new 'easy/hard mode', 'open is empty'...
This should be adequately answered in the above.
