Some will never get it.
Open has nothing to offer people in solo or pg.
Open has nothing to offer people in solo or pg.
Make the risk / reward of playing in "Open" sensible for newer players, our community is too small to be divided
- Thread starter commander_spanky
- Start date
There's a difference, though.If people could plot high security versus low security routes, and we have popular hubs in different security level systems, you get people who can choose their risk and not have to compromise on isolating folks from the community / galaxy of players. Your point above kind of eludes me... If they switch to solo whenever there's a bunch of commanders around, it's basically the same as always being in solo
Super-hot systems - Deciat, Shinrarta, the CG - are where the hostile PvPers hang out, so if you go there in Open there's a high chance of being shot at.
Merely busy systems - still with a few hundred traffic a day, still a good chance of meeting another player or two whenever you visit - aren't, so 99%+ of the people you meet won't shoot at you (and if they do, well, even if you can't flee you can just go PG for a couple of days until they move on)
For the people who currently never go in Open, there's nothing Frontier can do to get them there. For the people who currently sometimes go in Open, I don't think there's much Frontier could do to get them to go there more often.
(Plus if you want a high-res screenshot you can't do that in Open, of course)
Yes. Now define "illegally destroy" in a rigorous way so that the person who is doing the attacking by any reasonable human assessment of "what is an attack?" is always the one who ends up destroyed.
Near a space station, we already have the "unstoppable police force" in the form of the station's cascade lasers and class 6 weapons. If you commit a crime in reach of its guns, you're going to die very quickly.
When a Corvette moving at 102m/s rams an unshielded Sidewinder to death inside the docking bay, it's very clear to the game who the criminal is, and it reacts accordingly. No chance of escape for that Corvette! Unfortunately, the actual hostile PvPer is likely the person in the Sidewinder.
Sure, it's easy. Frontier implemented it already for attacks close to / inside stations. Do you think it's working? Perfectly enough to stop even the most risk-averse, conflict-averse, or can't-really-be-bothered-with-this-today commander to go in Open anyway?
There are at least three big problems with this bit
1) New players in Sidewinders have way cheaper rebuys than veterans in fully-equipped combat ships. Even within the same ship class, a T-9 with lightweight armour, no shields, and no HRPs is way cheaper to rebuy than one with full military armour, high-end prismatic shields, class A internals, and so on. This is basically encouraging the criminals to pick on the easiest targets as the payout is much cheaper for them.
2) For the player who is destroyed, the rebuy can easily be insignificant compared with other losses - lost exploration data, or a hold full of gems, can easily be worth more than their entire ship, never mind the 5% rebuy.
3) At notoriety 10 you already get bounties of this sort of size from PvP kills and it barely matters. The hostile PvPers are generally experienced enough to know how to make money fast - a medium-vs-medium kill you could recover both rebuys in a single five minute mission, or selling the Painite from a few minutes of mining.
Not at all. There are hugely popular PvE-only private groups - and if you want a "Frontier should do something" from me, Frontier should improve the management tools, backend and discoverability of Private Groups so that it's much easier for people to find them, join them without the 20,000 person cap, share the management workload between multiple players, and so on.
There are a lot of "the normal PvP community" who enjoy both fair fights with other PvP-fit ships and a bit of seal clubbing. Indeed, some of them seal-club with the partial intent of attracting "lawful" PvPers to their position for a more interesting fight. (I've been "the lawful PvPer" in that situation a few times, and I can assure you that they're perfectly capable of shooting back at fully engineered combat ships too)
If there were literally just a dozen or so seal clubbers entirely distinct from "the normal PvP community", then the normal PvP community would have shot the dozen back to Sidewinders years ago, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Elite's not really an MMO, even if it fits the literal descriptions of "massively", "multiplayer" and "online". Even if it did only have Open, the vast majority of the time outside a few popular hubs you wouldn't see anyone else, and almost all the game mechanics are designed to be doable Solo (with the very rare exceptions designed for a group no larger than a Wing)
And yet the game has been growing and thriving for some time with many huge PvP and PvE communities.
The majority of players already play in Open the majority of the time, so at best even a perfect plan to stop people being attacked by other players unless they wanted it would maybe increase player numbers in Open by ~50%. As I said, ~50% is the difference between "weekday" and "weekend", or the difference between "patch released recently" and "last patch was months ago".
My real "Frontier should do something" is "Frontier should improve, extend and add to all the game features so that it's a better and more popular game and ten times as many people want to play it". Odyssey - while not necessarily my sort of thing - sounds like it could attract a lot of extra players / encourage existing players to play more often - and I think at least in the first couple of months after release will give a >50% player number increase.
(As an aside, the "social hubs" in Odyssey's "on foot" zones do appear to be designed as PvP-free, so maybe Frontier are implementing a bit of what you suggest too - though I give it at most two hours of Beta before a creative PvPer figures out some way to at least successfully annoy other players in them, who then won't even be able to fire back...)
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... at which point the block feature comes in to play.
Playing with specific others is a privilege, not a right - and those other players can remove the right for specific players to play with them as they see fit.
The ideal solution would be to make a feature that is for PvP hunting / evasion and then this leaves the core game multi mode.
I have not yet come up with a name for it yet though...
Master Play....Power Chase.....I dunno.
I have not yet come up with a name for it yet though...
Master Play....Power Chase.....I dunno.
Last edited:
Then we get the run around on the forums complaining how the block feature should only block communication and not stop them interacting with other players, but we've got that already so not a big difference I guess.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Those who like to shoot at other players because they feel like it (and, of course, the game permits them to do it) don't seem so accepting of other things that the game permits those other players to do, if they feel like it.
Block feature as it currently is implemented is quite usefull and its up to players themselves how they use it. Some people block known gankers, especially ones that had ganked them. Other people limit it to block really annoying people, like those station rammers and so on.
It would make sense that in systems where you have built up allied stratus your allies jump in to protect you.
I'm pretty sure this already happens in game as whenever I get attacked in erevate space cops show up very quickly to deal with anyone that attacks me.
Perhaps it would be good if they came with a support ship too, that would hit you with sheild booster and repair limpet?
Enabling a player organised group to take on the gankers would be best
I'm pretty sure this already happens in game as whenever I get attacked in erevate space cops show up very quickly to deal with anyone that attacks me.
Perhaps it would be good if they came with a support ship too, that would hit you with sheild booster and repair limpet?
Enabling a player organised group to take on the gankers would be best
the solution for me would to just make pvp optional, but i can see how that can ruffle some feathers too. Really i think there's just no way to fix open without ""ruining"" the pvp.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
What useful purpose would that serve?
Hi. Many of us have played that game (since decades ago, for decades).
I've taken part of that 'risk vs reward' mantra over there for quite a while, it's an integral part of the experience.
As for THIS game though.
This is Elite Dangerous and I do not appreciate what you are saying that this game should turn into.
Let's have a look at the 'whys' of your post::
Let's not mistake (external) community for in game experience and activities nor people flying spaceships inside the game. These are separate entities.
I assume you mean 'the PvP Combat players and members' as of such.
Hence, when you say "adjust risk/reward of being in open" you mean for this group of members in particular.
The rest after this is just flavor to mask the rest of your intentions as "for the greater good".
No, the community isn't divided as discussed, however a group of members (same as above) feel unjust because 'not everybody plays the game in the same way we do'.
Instead, the way we play the game, how we experiences it is provided in three different flavors. These are called 'Options'. As in "Opt in".
This provides more people to chose why, how and when they play.
This is important as it brings other people to the community as you mistakenly confused as being "a problem needed to be addressed".
Having options and bringing more people to a community isn't the problem.
Rather it is a problem for you that "it isn't your idea of the kind of people you want to see" from what I read between the lines.
You're trying to minimize 'the others' as 'the random commander here and there who do solo'. You're forgetting (or omitting deliberately) all the others.
I think I recall some study FD did a couple of years ago. PG and Solo caters for most members. Or was it Non-combat?
I'm not sure, I need help to find those numbers again.
Finally the last argument: "for new players, in open"
They already have such a sector in game, where the 'new player experience safety' problem is addressed with lower risk and lower reward.
In conclusion
Adjusting the whole game model on what a narrow group of people want as an experience isn't a valid argument for the reasons stated and what we've discussed here.
Nope. Njet.
Nein. Nix. Nei. Nada.
Last edited:
There is no reason to prop open up as something more than it is. What it is a choice a player can make at any time they choose to play. What it isn't is the favored mode. Leave players to make the choices that best suit them, and they will do the same.
The Modes were a serious element in my choosing to get involved with E|D. Had I seen E|D with the intention to create another Eve Online, I would have walked away as quickly as I did with EO.
The Modes were a serious element in my choosing to get involved with E|D. Had I seen E|D with the intention to create another Eve Online, I would have walked away as quickly as I did with EO.
The meat from this old bone has been gnawed off years ago, and whatever scraps left sticking to it has long since rotted...
Some players do not 'need' the delighful company of other players, nor need 'guaranteed' safety provided they stick to a set path... The game is what it is, at any time I, as can any other player, can select the mode in which I wish to play, it may or may not involve other human players...
Thanks for opening the same old discussion, I for one have no desire to have my playing time dictated by other players ideas of what makes their game 'gud'... I'll play with whom I wish, whenever I wish.
Some players do not 'need' the delighful company of other players, nor need 'guaranteed' safety provided they stick to a set path... The game is what it is, at any time I, as can any other player, can select the mode in which I wish to play, it may or may not involve other human players...
Thanks for opening the same old discussion, I for one have no desire to have my playing time dictated by other players ideas of what makes their game 'gud'... I'll play with whom I wish, whenever I wish.
And we haven't yet seen a reasonable argument for forcing players of consoles to pay monthly fees to play the game in Open when they can already play it free in Solo, for them it not only removes a mode, it actually punishes them above and beyond PC players who are forced to play open only.
People who want to play a multiplayer game are likely already playing in open, as it is the the mode that lets them interact with random people online.
People who want to play a single player game are likely to play in solo, and removing risk from other players being goons will do little to alleviate that issue as it doesn't solve the real problem for a single player game - the fact that there are other players doing player things. The other players are the problem, not their in-game actions.
In my eyes, if they want to try to bridge the two communities, they should add in a full incognito mode for players that convincingly disguises them as normal NPCs to the point that other players treat them like NPCs.
People who want to play a single player game are likely to play in solo, and removing risk from other players being goons will do little to alleviate that issue as it doesn't solve the real problem for a single player game - the fact that there are other players doing player things. The other players are the problem, not their in-game actions.
In my eyes, if they want to try to bridge the two communities, they should add in a full incognito mode for players that convincingly disguises them as normal NPCs to the point that other players treat them like NPCs.
I play only Open mode for any activities and don't think there is something wrong with it. I really don't understand people who prefer to play pg/solo, but Indoubt it's because of some "risks".
Though I feel that in Open an encounters with other commanders are way to rare, unfortunately
That is the thing, as long as you avoid all the usual hotspots, community Goals, some very popular engineers, etc, the play area is so big that it is very unlikely that you will encounter other players.
I went years in Open and had only minor bad interactions, newbie me had fire deploys weapons and I accidently shot at a player, and of course player killed me for that. my mistake, I learned that leason and changed the setting, so no big deal. Next encounter was some random "invite" for PvP, I random encounter with another player who interdicted me, I did a flyby and blasted him with some lasers (to return the favour) and then high waked away and that was it... then we have the really stupid one, I fly new project, an Adder, that I needed to fix experimental effects etc, so I visit Felicity Farseer and got killed as I landed by another player, sniping me with railguns from 8km away! TWICE! this makes no sense... but I have been visiting engineers where there was a queue of ships waiting for a free landing pad. noone was shooting at each other etc. Got bored and switched to solo and I could land without waiting.
So it only takes one "bad" player to ruin your experience. I do not care about that player, he just wasted my time twice for what exactly? glory? courage? lols?
Then we have the what is the real downside of being a wanted player in a system? First of all the game does differentiate if you kills clean players, clean NPCs (including Authority ships), but one thing the game do care about, is if you keep killing the authority ship reinforcements, because that will sooner or later lead to ATR arriving, and these are much tougher opposition to deal with, so I call ATR mythical because of this strange behaviour, as most players are never going to encounter ATR, because there is very little reason to keep killing authority ships reinforcements... and you can easily get rid of the ATR, by simply entering super cruise, interdict the next clean ship/authority ship and now just the regular stupid authority ships will be sent after you... it has totally forgotten about your previous encounter less than 5 minutes ago where you "ran" from the ATR's...so playing as an outlaw is for the most part without any real downsides. So any player camp a popular engineer, and kill targets from far away without any real danger. which is stupid.
This has nothing todo with sense of danger or whatnot, it is about your actions should have consequences, and at the moment, playing as an outlaw has very few downsides, regardless if you kill clean NPCs or clean players.
Consider this, do a log of a standard gaming session and the check the times for where you are most likely to encounter another player. how much time of your regular session exposes you to a random encounter? if we remove stations and planetary bases, it will mostly boil down your time spent in super cruise, and as soon as you leave for mining hotspot, conflict zone etc, you are more likley to spent alot more time doing this activity than what you spent in super cruise. so we could be in the same system, and due to most time being spent outside super cruise we could go days without encountering each other, expecially if we are doing different things, for example mining in hotspots vs combat in conflict zones.