It would partly remove player choice from a feature that was added for free, after release. For console players without multiplayer access, nothing would change. Modifying their matchmaking filter has no effect. They would still be alone.
Modes Obligatory "Merge solo, open, private groups" thread
It would partly remove player choice from a feature that was added for free, after release. For console players without multiplayer access, nothing would change. Modifying their matchmaking filter has no effect. They would still be alone.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Added for free, as part of the base game - so every new player who buys the game does so with access to that feature regardless of game mode.
Still alone and participating in a mode locked feature? I don't see that being very popular among those who would prefer that particular aspects of the game were locked to a single game mode.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
The majority is not fighting against it. Remember there is a bingo card with all the names on it. Those are the people that have been fighting against it. And over time the people that have bandwagon-ed this whole damn thing. Arent even active, have no connection, or simply arent interested in that type of game play.
Almost every single one of you have admitted that.
And yet, you still think nothing should change. Everything is fine the way it is. Even though there has been not effort from the other end.
So no I dont think someone with No Experience holds equal or greater weight than the people that are active in it.
Ive tried every outlet in the book for Meaningful "organic" PVP. Couldnt find it. Ive been stream sniped! That was cool! Finally got something outside of CG's or fabricated player group fights.
BGS player factions and their actions, is way different than what the BGS was tailored for.
But BGS player Factions and Powerplay Factions are all driven by the multiplayer experience. Not NPC's.
Kind of like mobius players are, vs the group of MCRN. Active(some on break) and Inactive. Most of the people in mobius could give a crap about the BGS. They are just using it as a "public server" Away from PVP.
Ive done the same in WoW. But anytime I took action against the other faction in WoW. I was automatically flagged for PVP.
Any Player vs Player Activities should require direct PVP along with it.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Man this hand holding nonsense seriously needs to stop. This game is suffering because of it.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's WoW, not E: D.
Opinions vary.
As one of the Squadron tags mentioned in the recent stream was "PvP" that suggests that Squadrons do not require to engage in PvP.
Last edited:
In my opinion, all kinds of direct PvP should require indirect PvP to go along with it. It indicates having good reason to engage in PvP.
So before you can engage in direct PvP, you should have played the BGS or PP and created a certain amount of merits or influence. Only then are you free to engage with other players directly.
What's good for the goose, is good for the gander after all
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
WoW = Huge Success
Elite = Mile Wide Inch Deep meme that existed long before I got here. Content problem, a thread and video by none other than obsidian ant. There wouldnt be a content problem if people could interact with each other properly.
5 years of this conversation wouldnt exist.
Powerplay wouldn't have failed.
And we probably would have had a balanced BGS around player groups much quicker.
I like this game. And I feel it shouldnt be held back by a few solo and private groupers who dont experience those parts of the game.
Hell people are getting UA bombed, and one of our best BGSers in our group really gets tired of collecting META alloy. Because its forcing a play style. If they could say hey, blockade this system. Then we wouldnt have this issue. And yes we have people from all over the world. One of us can instance with the guy. Our group runs 24/7 and they are damn good too.
We have player group interaction all the time. I hate it because its imbalanced. Dont really like taking part in it much anymore. Now with the one click crap too.
Maybe we should do that, Ill get a group and you get a group. You continue to play as a group in Phekda. Turn in bulk stuff like people normally would. Then our group can use the one click. See how that goes for you.
Do you think thats proper balance for PVP activities?
NNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO I think not Maynard.
UA bombing should go. It makes no sense whatsoever.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Agreed.
Off Topic : I think UA bomb should still work, but once repaired via meta-alloys then become immune to further attempts.
On Topic : Boo 2 modal changes.
On Topic : Boo 2 modal changes.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
There might not have been a game to be debating features of if the design pitched during the Kickstarter was different - and we'll never know.
We can "what if" all day - it's unadulterated speculation.
I'd agree that UA bombing is an unnecessary bone of contention between players who prefer different game modes - actually a proposal, made in the preceding post, might go a long way to "solving" UA bombing.
It's not mode locked. It just makes PP systems ignore your mode choice and give you a custom matchmaking filter.
It's not important what those that want 'Open only' think. It's important what Sony and Microsoft think, and they would never allow removal of content from some of their customers.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
To be Fair UA bombing and Flipping someones system out from under them is really no different maynard. Especially when one uses the META's to their advantage.
What we are asking for Breaks every META that currently exists in the book. Every ship build would change. A whole new layer would be added to the game at the flick of a switch. You cant get away with a fully kitted killing machine, and you couldnt get away with a barbones FSD python.
Dunno what they are going to do with this one clicking business though. my hopes are they just rework the whole damn thing. Because its busted trying to apply it to two different elements of the game at once.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's the functional equivalent of mode locking.
Indeed.
Why should PC players be treated any differently?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
I could say the same for you when you say the majority of the players as well.
What you see here on these forums, and what you see elsewhere is completely different. As a matter of fact these forums come up elsewhere as very toxic.
Discords, Reddit, Twitch, Youtube, Other parts of reddit that talk about this game outside of the ED subreddit.
This stuff comes up every damn time.
Get outside these forums once in a while. Get involved with a lot of the community. And you'll see people talking about it.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Given that Frontier don't release player numbers, how is it determined whether any of these constitute a majority of players?
No content would be removed from PC players.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It would: from PC players who choose not to play among other players who currently engage in existing pan-modal features.
Remembering that there is no current requirement to play in a multi-player game mode to engage in these features.
Incorrect. Some people just want to play alone and not even see other players. They wanted a single player game to start with like the predecessors. Also being in instances with other players can negatively impact for those with potato internet providers, so those people probably appreciate solo mode as well.
In addition, PvP flagging is not a perfect cure anyway. In GTA you can kill people in passive mode by causing a car to explode near them, and there are probably other ways of doing things.
You're looking for a solution to a problem when the solution already exists. Modes are the solution, not the problem.