That is not my definition of multi role ship. That is your definition of PVP defensive ship with cargo racks that a PVP offensive ship can still destroy. But there is no need for defensive shield tank and banks, because there is no need for open.
Modes Mega ships open only content?
- Thread starter Wyldwiisel
- Start date
That is not my definition of multi role ship. That is your definition of PVP defensive ship with cargo racks that a PVP offensive ship can still destroy. But there is no need for defensive shield tank and banks, because there is no need for open.
To a degree you are correct - it is to satisfy one subset of the community. But it is not all the PvPers. It is instead to satisfy a subset of that community - those who preferentially attack PvE players, a.k.a. player-killers. Thanks to the modes system, most of that subset of the community (PvEers) are playing in Solo and Private Groups.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
At least they're still able to play the game - while avoiding the unwanted attentions of those seeking no-contest combat to destruction (of the target, of course).
Servus rlsg,
Solo will separate itself over time inevitably, .....Frontier adding new advanced MP content into its relevant modes, creating features not existing in Solo.
Or will it be fun, destroying a Squadron base fleet carrier in Solo?
If you like that sort of "competition", will this not contradict multiplayer? Frontier can't be interested in developing an aardvark synergy between modes, self contradicting its very own purpose.
While such a carrier could be attacked in all modes, presumed they shortsightedly keep "equality of modes", it could not be defended at all in MP modes.
To keep any sense and coherence of gameplay, such vessels will be exclusive multiplayer. Solo interference in advanced MP features contradicts and inevitably denies any social (MP) advancement.
No surprise, they abandoned it for now.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Yet Frontier have just restated what the BGS is - designed to be affected by players in all game modes.
I fixed that.
"To keep any sense and coherence of gameplay, such vessels will be exclusive multiplayer. Solo interference in advanced MP features contradicts and inevitably denies any social (MP) advancement."
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Private Groups are multi-player. The only thing they lack is the unlimited population of Open however they do have the advantage of being able to control membership.
Therefore, restricting such vessels to multi-player will not stop single players accessing them - as a Private Group with only one member, the PG creator, is functionally identical to Solo.
As well as that, restricting such vessels to multi-player would mean that console players without premium platform access would not be able to interact with them.
I see. No wonder they are not coming any time soon.
Their purpose is strictly social, BGS doesen't need them nor a sole player ....
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Private Groups are social too.
.... and Frontier's continued stance on the BGS suggests that it is for all players, not just those who prefer the entirely optional play-style that is PvP.
I understand that Robert.
All MP modes are relevant. In my musings above you do not find a single "PvP" only "multiplayer" deliberately. Joggling three modes over oh so long a time, advancing the game, will have its technical impossibilities and shows sooner or later where modes contradict themselves.
edit
of course where there is multiplayer there is PvP not far behind...
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Whether "technical impossibilities" are encountered, or not, remains to be seen - however, Frontier's adherence to the three mode / single shared galaxy state design (fast approaching six years now) suggests that they're here to stay - and that new game features will be designed taking them into account rather than ignoring them.
Plus the fact that, as mentioned earlier, the only thing that blocking content from Solo really does is to block some console players from accessing it - as any player (who has access to multi-player) can create a Private Group with only themself as a member.
Good morning
True.
I am very excited to see with what they come up, by now I don't expect a change to the mode system perse, but deliberately developing and advancing multiplayer features and content further will, either remain very basic and simplistic like the "explorer mode" we have now, or getting more complex. Chapter four seem to suggest a more complex advancement. Multiplayer features will not lag behind, they can't since a large part of Elite is strictly social.
I accept, complexity will increase the challenges. Some of the game features contradict each other, obviously!
So simply kill Squadron base flee carriers in Solo mode, as an example? Makes no sense to me. Equality of modes at risk. Either way.
Dilemma!
No wonder they are not coming any time soon. I hear Sandro's brimming head hum [up]
The issue is we cannot force players into Open Mode. I was there, been in every CG since December last year, made a lot of attempts to do them in Open. As Xbox One player I pretty much have experience how abusive players on that platform are, not even interested into roleplaying piracy, just to ruin others' day.
This said, we cannot really punish people for being in Private Group or Solo, whatever their reason is. Because this is what you want to do - to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
To put stuff into perspective, I had seen (and even experienced) how C&P can be used to troll other people, to get rid of them +200 ly away from CG. Should we remove it? No, cause it's not fault of the mechanic. It's fault of the people who abuse such a mechanic.
Last edited:
Actually I read that the Fuel Rats just beat off the the attack, I guess with a lot of support. It's nonsense to say they could do nothing.
Yes, they are looking good ATM.
What some folk appear to miss in the argument is that support can be given to assist in many ways, not solely going pew-pew... I was running missions in solo transporting passengers / goods for TFRM (I really am dreadful in combat!) and each completed mission gave them a tiny bit more influence, not as much as the folk in the CZ's (who I think did a brilliant job!) but still a contribution. Maybe those loud voices would prefer that I played in open and didn't make it out past the toast rack before being blown up by the gankers, but that really isn't any kind of fun IMHO
ETA: I'm still in Fuelum, running missions/passengers - still in solo...
I presume OP is actually talking about fleet carriers and not megaships.
My feelings on this is they will not be destroyable, so modes don't matter. No group, no matter how big, could really provide 24x7 protection of their carrier across all platforms and instances, even if it was open only.
The only option would be to provide them with significant NPC defenses so they can protect themselves.
They may be like megaships where you can harvest them for stuff, but then, that might be a tad exploitable, so again, would need NPC defenses.
I'm going to guess that they will be like movable stations, where only squadron members can dock and use the services.
If they could be attacked, then you can guarantee there would be certain player groups going around destroying other group's carriers with pretty much impunity, even it was Open only.
Do people really want to have to sit babysitting a carrier all the time on the chance of an attack? An attack which when it comes would probably involve overwhelming force as they attackers would be able to choose the time and gather all their members, while the defenders might not even have any players online at the time of attack.... and who wants to sit waiting for one anyway?
My feelings on this is they will not be destroyable, so modes don't matter. No group, no matter how big, could really provide 24x7 protection of their carrier across all platforms and instances, even if it was open only.
The only option would be to provide them with significant NPC defenses so they can protect themselves.
They may be like megaships where you can harvest them for stuff, but then, that might be a tad exploitable, so again, would need NPC defenses.
I'm going to guess that they will be like movable stations, where only squadron members can dock and use the services.
If they could be attacked, then you can guarantee there would be certain player groups going around destroying other group's carriers with pretty much impunity, even it was Open only.
Do people really want to have to sit babysitting a carrier all the time on the chance of an attack? An attack which when it comes would probably involve overwhelming force as they attackers would be able to choose the time and gather all their members, while the defenders might not even have any players online at the time of attack.... and who wants to sit waiting for one anyway?
A likely scenario.
My hope is, Frontier does take the opportunity to add some PvP related game aspects. Perhaps both sides PvE multiplayer and PvP multiplayer can benefit.
Flag your fleet carrier as PvP available or not... if so, it only appears in Open.
Of course, assuming even the open only crowd want to babysit 24x7. I can't imagine that. They would be missing out on all the hot PvP action.