New game improvement suggestions

[znôrt]

But people being people, everyone is looking to gain an edge, and that results in players arguing to have more! Gimme! Mine! All under the pretense of balance. But that's such a transparent excuse I am sure Frontier doesn't fall for it.

this is the part where (imo) you loose your argument, by assuming this (imaginary) intent as universal and representative, and closing your mode, sorry, your mind to other perspectives.

does it happen? probably. is it the issue for all? not at all for me at least. i have zero desire to 'possess' anything in a game, but it indeed it is a heck of fun to 'fight' for something in a game, win or loose. often that's exactly the point. now, this game clearly isn't such a game, as it isn't many other things. and that's fine. but with these premises (i.e., everything will be achieved by massive parallel grind and grind only) there is very little incentive to actually participate in the virtual world, as little as there is to make it even believable even for a short while. i'm pretty sure many opinions against modes stem from this basic concept. i mean, the modes are here to stay (frontier doesn't know better), you can have your pie and eat it (in solo), so you have already won, man! show a little understanding, you do your sect a disfavor by being so narrowminded amen!

 

[-VR- Max Factor]

I am suggesting a new system for ED, I am pretty sure many (if not all ) would agree.


1. No more modes: 1 mode - Open Only, console plebs and poor internet connection folks will move to CQC.

2. Docking computer and turret weapons are removed form the game. If you cant dock you dont deserve a PF licence. If you cant aim at least with gimbals, you dont deserve to be a fighting pilot.

3. No more NPCs, the role of NPCs will be fulfilled by the PVE players. They like to go from A - B - A repetitively, high wake/explore, circle the station for no reason, having trouble docking while getting stuck in the mail slot, their skills match the NPCs.

4. Bounty hunting res sites and conflict zones will be full of PVE players and they will be farmed by the PVPiers like we do today.

5. Assassination missions will randomly choose one PVE player and put their name as a mission target, if they get killed you complete the mission and receive all their assets, they will be back in a sidewinder.

6. Combat logging will automatically result in you going back to sidewinder, even if you get disconnected by poor ISP, take it up with them.

7. Block functionality is removed from the game.

8. PVE players heatmap will be added to the game.

I think we can all see how this suggestion will balance the game and everyone can fulfill their role in the ED universe.

o7 commanders!

It will probably the worst game ever made. Just imagine flying around for hours looking for one of those PvE noobs to kill when you realise there are no PvE noobs actually playing the game is it is so bad. Or they have gone off exploring into the galaxy and left you all on your own in the 20,000 system bubble.

 

[znôrt]

This is exactly my position recently, too. Remove Open, perhaps make it PG's only even removing Solo, because Solo players can create their own "Private" session, and voila! No more messes.

Then perhaps FD can work on the number restriction for PG's, strict controls (PvP flag for the group) and all problems are solved.

that would actually be a good idea. if you can't get it right, then just don't do it. i approve.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

this is the part where (imo) you loose your argument by assuming this (imaginary) intent as universal and representative, and closing your mode, sorry, your mind to other perspectives.

You're absolutely right. I adopted the tactic, since it's been used by others, so I figured why do I have to be holier than thou/thee/them? Lets join in the festivities.

Note the similarity between this and: you greedy solo carebears, route of least resistance, and all that jive.

When you can't talk sense into them, join them

does it happen? probably. is it the issue for all? not at all for me at least. i have zero desire to 'possess' anything in a game, but it indeed it is a heck of fun to 'fight' for something in a game, win or loose. often that's exactly the point. now, this game clearly isn't such a game, as it isn't many other things. and that's fine. but with these premises (i.e., everything will be achieved by massive parallel grind and grind only) there is very little incentive to actually participate in the virtual world, as little as there is to make it even believable even for a short while. i'm pretty sure many opinions against modes stem from this basic concept. i mean, the modes are here to stay (frontier doesn't know better), you can have your pie and eat it (in solo), so you have already won, man! show a little understanding, you do your sect a disfavor by being so narrowminded amen!

Ah, but I'm arguing against the solution people are proposing to make things more interesting in Open. Which is either: make x Open only, or give x more bonus. I feel both are self defeating solutions to the aim that is trying to be achieved, a more vibrant open mode.

To have this, you need CMDRs coming to Open out of their own volition, not because of a bonus carrot, or a stick. The most effective way to achieve this would in my view be promotion and organised events. Promote Open. Make CMDRs curious about Open. Find out what their restrictions are. Help to overcome those restrictions. Organize events to draw in players. Once they've tasted the sweet taste of Open interaction some might not want to go back. And this has worked before. Distant Worlds saw people flying to Beagle Point who otherwise would not even think of going there. A large part of that group kept exploring. The Hutton Truckers promoted trucking, while on first glance that's a very monotone activity. They showed it can be fun and drew players into their activity. Videos like the one Rinzler made on how to trade in Open, removed restrictions for a lot of players who posted on these forums they got a lot of advantage out of that. They are now in Open trading.

I feel that this would be more effective than telling your target audience: you're a bunch of greedy cowards, now come play with us. Oh you're not eh? Well, then playing with us should be incentivized by Frontier.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

Anyone is free to log into whatever mode they want. Perfect balance.

Plus you get to wave your weenie around in the forum and draw your self worth from a mode in a game you're playing. That's a reward innit?

Thats your interpretation, I need a game reward not a forum one.

And because anyone is free to affect the common elements from any mode, the hardest mode is avoidable and becomes obsolete. Thats an unbalance, stop pretending like you dont understand.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Thats your interpretation, I need a game reward not a forum one.

Indeed. I want, want, want. Nag, nag, nag. Gimme, gimme, gimme.

And because anyone is free to affect the common elements from any mode, the hardest mode is avoidable and becomes obsolete. Thats an unbalance, stop pretending like you dont understand.

And after all this time with this situation, the Open mode still isn't obsolete and Open players are telling me it's going strong. Which torpedoes your assessment.

 

[znôrt]

When you can't talk sense into them, join them

yeah. pesky humans, but we need their heat after all!

Ah, but I'm arguing against the solution people are proposing to make things more interesting in Open. Which is either: make x Open only, or give x more bonus. I feel both are self defeating solutions to the aim that is trying to be achieved, a more vibrant open mode.

agree completely. if anything because the game lacks the networking environment for anything of that sort to work. there have been lots of suggestion, some good, but my answer always has been: fix instancing, network quality and persistence first or that's all pointless.

The most effective way to achieve this would in my view be promotion and organised events. (...) Distant Worlds saw people flying to Beagle Point who otherwise would not even think of going there. (...) Well, then playing with us should be incentivized by Frontier.

very true but ... distant world was a player initiative. frontier could at least do something! ok, no bashing. that's definitely the way but keep in mind the tools and infrastructure for interaction are actually quite limited. they are actually disfunctional for anything involving competition or conflict. salomé was a frontier sponsored event, and some people liked it a lot, but i wouldn't say it was a success. but, yes, there must be a bunch of reasons to just gather together in space and i completely agree that player initiative could go a long way in breathing some life into open.

actually, the suggestion of getting rid of open has a very good point. the mere existence of open gives many players expectations about the game that are in reality unfounded. so it would indeed be a way to end the discussion once and for all. unless that's not what we want!

 

[ALGOMATIC]

Indeed. I want, want, want. Nag, nag, nag. Gimme, gimme, gimme.


And after all this time with this situation, the Open mode still isn't obsolete and Open players are telling me it's going strong. Which torpedoes your assessment.

Going strong with flying around without any content, while the brave grind in solo.

 

[[Diplomacy] Carnegie]

Thats your interpretation, I need a game reward not a forum one.

And because anyone is free to affect the common elements from any mode, the hardest mode is avoidable and becomes obsolete. Thats an unbalance, stop pretending like you dont understand.

I'd be very happy a game reward for flying around in Solo mode then switching to Open once I dock, in order to cash in my mission/bounties/commodities/combat bonds/exploration data.

+1 for this suggestion.

 

[Phosphora]

Balance is the last thing this game has.

Anyway, lets get back to my proposal, as you see there are no issues of balance there, everyone fulfill their roles in the universe under one mode.

Balance is the last thing this game needs. People can find their own level of interaction with others - your mood affects your mode. Everything else is equal as you can change modes at will. Risk may be enjoyable to one person but irritating to another so trying to code in a hard link between risk and reward isn't possible - you need to consider the human.

Solo is a more efficient way of grinding rep or money or influencing the BGS, but you miss out on PvP. Open is better for PvP, but you miss out on affecting the BGS efficiently. There's no need to balance, people find their own way of playing.

Cheers, Phos.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

This is exactly my position recently, too. Remove Open, perhaps make it PG's only even removing Solo, because Solo players can create their own "Private" session, and voila! No more messes.

Then perhaps FD can work on the number restriction for PG's, strict controls (PvP flag for the group) and all problems are solved.

It also gets rid of the the superiority complex some people feel by playing in open. All modes will be truly equal, not just in terms of functionality, but in terms of status!!!!

Its a win-win!

 

[Sylveria]

It also gets rid of the the superiority complex some people feel by playing in open. All modes will be truly equal, not just in terms of functionality, but in terms of status!!!!

Its a win-win!

Completely agreed. Such an easy solution, too. Everyone has the same exact "ability" and "potential".

No more whining about "bonuses" and all that excrement.

Certainly a good way to determine demographics as well, withstanding actual numbers from FD... We'd finally be able to determine who many PvP vs PvE, for example

 

[JosiahD]

Open has extra risk without extra rewards. Thats not balance.

Not so much heightened risk as some would have us believe though, if looking at the mode as a whole. Sure, localised where players congregate, such as CGs, it could be argued the overall risk is elevated because of the increased presence of players in a small area. But with the size of the modelled galaxy, instancing mechanics in play, that 99.99% (estimate only, might be more than that) of the play area remains essentially PvE, and so on, the overall risk is not at all much different to the other modes. But then, some people do tend to overlook that the presence of other players is merely an additional hazard, not risk, and given all other hazards are present equally across all modes, that additional hazard in a rather limited space in open doesn't actually impact significantly on the risk score, if one were to calculate it for whole modes and compare them. You would only see an appreciable impact on risk on a local scale, say across a few systems, but not across the whole mode, certainly not enough to warrant treating open as a whole as anything special in terms of incentives or balance.

 

[Sylveria]

Not so much heightened risk as some would have us believe though, if looking at the mode as a whole. Sure, localised where players congregate, such as CGs, it could be argued the overall risk is elevated because of the increased presence of players in a small area. But with the size of the modelled galaxy, instancing mechanics in play, that 99.99% (estimate only, might be more than that) of the play area remains principally PvE, and so on, the overall risk is not at all much different to the other modes. But then, some people do tend to overlook that the presence of other players is merely an additional hazard, not risk, and given all other hazards are present equally across all modes, that additional hazard in a rather limited space in open doesn't actually impact significantly on the risk score, if one were to calculate it for whole modes and compare them. You would only see an appreciable impact on risk on a local scale, say across a few systems, but not across the whole mode, certainly not enough to warrant treating open as a whole as anything special in terms of incentives or balance.

^ The point is yet again made that the sheer chance of an "encounter" by another player =/= "meaningful PvP" or even "Combat".

I've yet to see a *compelling* argument made as to why Open deserves bonuses over any other mode...

...other than... "I deserve it".

 

[Non Grata]

Not sure if the OP is serious or not, but figured he's worth a rep either way.

 

[JosiahD]

Thats your interpretation, I need a game reward not a forum one.

And because anyone is free to affect the common elements from any mode, the hardest mode is avoidable and becomes obsolete. Thats an unbalance, stop pretending like you dont understand.

Except open is not necessarily the hardest mode, depending on one's point of view. It could be argued that the hardest content in game would be engaging the Thargoids in solo mode, without even the option of player wingmen or multicrew - both of which are only available in private group or open (until we can get NPC wingmen and available NPC crew provide the same benefits as player crew...if ever). While such solo activity can of course be attempted in all modes, only solo mode actually DENIES players access to those wingmen (in total) and multicrew (in the form of player crew) in the alternative.

 

[Shinji Ikari]

Thats your interpretation, I need a game reward not a forum one.

And because anyone is free to affect the common elements from any mode, the hardest mode is avoidable and becomes obsolete. Thats an unbalance, stop pretending like you dont understand.

ED is part of the elite saga which has always been a single player game. When ED was proposed, people asked for an offline mode but that sadly didn't make it to the game, instead we have solo which is offline mode but with internet. You cannot pennalize the use of solo mode since it is a recurrent feature and then open came afterwards to make it a pseudo MMO.

You also should be joking, open isn't really risky, especially when exploring. The difference is just minute, if a reward is made, it probably would become useless even for noobs.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

Except open is not necessarily the hardest mode, depending on one's point of view. It could be argued that the hardest content in game would be engaging the Thargoids in solo mode, without even the option of player wingmen or multicrew - both of which are only available in private group or open (until we can get NPC wingmen and available NPC crew provide the same benefits as player crew...if ever). While such solo activity can of course be attempted in all modes, only solo mode actually DENIES players access to those wingmen (in total) and multicrew (in the form of player crew) in the alternative.

Yeah, except solo thargoid kills dont affect any multiplayer content.
However, you should get more rewards for a solo kill, I agree with you there.

 

[DARGAN]

translator

more Open game.. by step..

start by allowing those who play on the solo server to play Multicrew.. allow to search for a part of CQC while being at a station (in Open as in Solo).. only a suggestion.

opportunities to interact with other players .. to attract people to the open game.

for fixed weapons and turret weapons. I do not care about your pride in using fixed weapons .. I use turrets just because I want to play this game as a tourist and not as a competition.

--
I write this but I have nothing against those who love the competition.

I wonder, though, whether fixed weapons are really better for a competition.

ok they do more damage .. but there is no angle to aim, it must be in the face.. more turret weapons are sensitive to flakes and heat sinks.

the difference ultimately should not be so great in terms of damage, with turrets it is possible to be much more mobile, and look for the dead angle against the opponent with a fixed weapon..

is it really more difficult with a fixed weapon? face a mobile opponent yes, otherwise certainly not.