Modes Mega ships open only content?

Dietger

Dietger
Agony_Aunt said:
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.
Click to expand...


Well I reread what I have wrote above and indeed I was confusing MP and PvP into each other at times! LOL
Personally multiplayer automatically includes PvP for me, I know you guys beg to differ, however stepchild PvP needs more love. My argumentation and reasoning did indeed,
pictured SQDRN Carriers as a possible MP PvP. Sorry for the confusion. So in that light, most likely easiest way: "unsinkable", is what they will gone be.
"Simple" MP/PvE/SP vs advanced MP/PvP/PvE
Anyway, I guess we all agree? More objectives for PvP in Open would relax the situation quite a bit, hopefully diminishing hardcore PvP for you?




Well, I wouldn't miss Solo or PG[big grin]





edit
I am aware of the instancing and 24/7 global playing context
 
Last edited:

Saikun

S
To be honest, Xbox playbase consists of a rather huge group of trolls that makes CG in Open Mode not so enjoyable, if not outright unplayable. and I say that on basis of year with Elite Dangerous on Xbox. I wouldn't mind being pirated, but these guys just butcher other players without much care if they have a fat Type-9 with cargo that would make them rich - or poorer players in their Sidewinder or Eagles that barely can fight against NPCs. The A-module Cobra Mk III, the fastest unengineered ship, simply cannot outrun abusers like these.

Like in case of some people ranting about BGS - it's fault of people abusing mechanic, not mechanic itself. Forcing Xbox One players into Open would make a lot of people just leave the game and never return, due to amount of people eager to troll you in there. And I am not joking. I really wish that was a damn joke, because I enjoy interaction with players.

It's just almost impossible to enjoy that mode with so many trolls on Xbox.
 
Last edited:

Dietger

Dietger
Saikun said:
To be honest, Xbox playbase consists of a rather huge group of trolls that makes CG in Open Mode not so enjoyable, if not outright unplayable. and I say that on basis of year with Elite Dangerous on Xbox. I wouldn't mind being pirated, but these guys just butcher other players without much care if they have a fat Type-9 with cargo that would make them rich - or poorer players in their Sidewinder or Eagles that barely can fight against NPCs. The A-module Cobra Mk III, the fastest unengineered ship, simply cannot outrun abusers like these.

Like in case of some people ranting about BGS - it's fault of people abusing mechanic, not mechanic itself. Forcing Xbox One players into Open would make a lot of people just leave the game and never return, due to amount of people eager to troll you in there. And I am not joking. I really wish that was a damn joke, because I enjoy interaction with players.

It's just almost impossible to enjoy that mode with so many trolls on Xbox.
Click to expand...

Well thats sad to hear. How about an account on PC? Folks in Open are pretty helpful in most cases here.
 

lenna

lenna
Dietger said:
Or will it be fun, destroying a Squadron base fleet carrier in Solo?
Click to expand...
You are assuming that another Squadron's carrier (should FD ever introduce such a thing) would be present in an instance without any members of their squadron present - I do not either endorse nor propose that in any shape or form.

As for the mega-ships FD are referring to, they are not actually owned by a given faction - they may temporarily be under a given faction's custody but that is the general nature of the BGS.
 

Brrokk

Brrokk
rlsg said:
You are assuming that another Squadron's carrier (should FD ever introduce such a thing) would be present in an instance without any members of their squadron present - I do not either endorse nor propose that in any shape or form.

As for the mega-ships FD are referring to, they are not actually owned by a given faction - they may temporarily be under a given faction's custody but that is the general nature of the BGS.
Click to expand...

That seems likely to me. I guess that only members of a squadron will be able to instance with their carrier. I haven't seen any suggestions that carriers are intended to take part in combat.
 

Saikun

S
I think that Squadron Carriers may be two things:
- Megaship variant with squadron-restricted docking clearance mechanic (think restricted planetside bases).
- Player-owned Capital Class ships present in Conflict Zones.

The former pretty much would be something like Zachary Hudron's FNS Starship One, although landable for Squadron/Faction members.
 

bookmite

bookmite
Old Duck said:
Let's make a deal - you can have Open-only content as long as we also get Solo-only content. Things like narrative-driven missions, removal of all instance-related restrictions (like limited SLF and SRV range), NPC crew and NPC wings, persistence, etc. Make Solo Great Again!
Click to expand...

I also thought we were over tosh like this. All the screaming and ing by player groups , soloists, PG's and last but not least pvp'rs isn't winning any credibility anywhere. Playing in open does not make you a pvp'r just as much as playing in solo doesnt mean youre anti social or not capable of pvp.


cmdrs complaining that their bases would be hit by solo or pg players, doesn't cut as its unlikely the attackers would defend it in open, so there's always ways to defend or at least level the playing field. The system has worked across modes for years, why change something just to appease ANY monority. That would drive players away from BGS
 

Agony_Aunt

Agony_Aunt
bookmite said:
I also thought we were over tosh like this. All the screaming and ing by player groups , soloists, PG's and last but not least pvp'rs isn't winning any credibility anywhere. Playing in open does not make you a pvp'r just as much as playing in solo doesnt mean youre anti social or not capable of pvp.


cmdrs complaining that their bases would be hit by solo or pg players, doesn't cut as its unlikely the attackers would defend it in open, so there's always ways to defend or at least level the playing field. The system has worked across modes for years, why change something just to appease ANY monority. That would drive players away from BGS
Click to expand...

I find it a good way to highlight the problem with the open only position. Its basically saying "Give us something that's just for us and forget about those who play in other modes, they are inferior anyway". This is unfortunately the position they take, so by demanding solo only content in return it highlights it. I think most PG/solo players don't really entertain the idea of PG/solo only content as long as there is no open only content.
 

Sylveria

Sylveria
Agony_Aunt said:
I find it a good way to highlight the problem with the open only position. Its basically saying "Give us something that's just for us and forget about those who play in other modes, they are inferior anyway". This is unfortunately the position they take, so by demanding solo only content in return it highlights it. I think most PG/solo players don't really entertain the idea of PG/solo only content as long as there is no open only content.
Click to expand...

Indeed. The issue of "exclusive" options is usually associated with "open only" because those players seem somehow "disadvantaged" because others have options instead of none.

I'm all for "open only" exclusives as long as "PG's/Solo" gets "exclusive" options, too- to balance it out.

If people who feel they're "disadvantaged" in Open choose to self-nerf, that's on them- not the rest of the playerbase.
 

wrmiller

W
Sylveria said:
Indeed. The issue of "exclusive" options is usually associated with "open only" because those players seem somehow "disadvantaged" because others have options instead of none.

I'm all for "open only" exclusives as long as "PG's/Solo" gets "exclusive" options, too- to balance it out.

If people who feel they're "disadvantaged" in Open choose to self-nerf, that's on them- not the rest of the playerbase.
Click to expand...

I'll second the unique content solution. Can we start with NPC crew and NPC wings for solo? :)

And open can have it's own exclusive options as well. Like PP, squadrons, wings, and whatever else they can come up with.

I would make the split between solo and mmo (pg/open) though, as I think that might be easier. Just a thought.
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
JetsonRING said:
Just make the entire game "SOLO Only" so we can stop having to listen to whiners complain there aren't enough easy-to-kill noobs in OPEN for them to slaughter.
Click to expand...

I've suggested removing Open, that alone fixes all the problems some people keep whining about.
 

avow555

avow555
I have played online games across time zones and many many times your base would be attacked whilst you were sleeping.
Forcing this aspect into open in no ways resolves the issue you outline.
 

lenna

lenna
avow555 said:
I have played online games across time zones and many many times your base would be attacked whilst you were sleeping.
Forcing this aspect into open in no ways resolves the issue you outline.
Click to expand...
This is a key point that has been raised several times - further more, there is additional segregation by platform too (XB1, PS4, PC/Mac).

Essentially, the open only argument for ANY of the mechanics is fundamentally flawed.
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
avow555 said:
I have played online games across time zones and many many times your base would be attacked whilst you were sleeping.
Forcing this aspect into open in no ways resolves the issue you outline.
Click to expand...

rlsg said:
This is a key point that has been raised several times - further more, there is additional segregation by platform too (XB1, PS4, PC/Mac).

Essentially, the open only argument for ANY of the mechanics is fundamentally flawed.
Click to expand...

You forget, our resident PvP'ers are omnipresent.
They play 24/7/365 on PC, XB1 and PS4 at the same time without food, sleep or bathroom breaks.
So the game has to be open only, otherwise they have nothing else to do.

It's not like there is a whole industry churning out games they could try, find something more to their tastes.

:D ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom