Modes Obligatory "Merge solo, open, private groups" thread

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

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.

Everything you just said contradicts itself when that guy that wasnt to be in a single player game like its predecessors starts intentionally effecting a player faction. They are no longer playing for themselves now are they?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Everything you just said contradicts itself when that guy that wasnt to be in a single player game like its predecessors starts intentionally effecting a player faction. They are no longer playing for themselves now are they?

None of us have a choice - we all affect the single shared galaxy state - by design.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

None of us have a choice - we all affect the single shared galaxy state - by design.

And thats fine for the single player Co/Op the game started out to be.

Its not like that anymore. There is much more to it than that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And thats fine for the single player Co/Op the game started out to be.

Its not like that anymore. There is much more to it than that.

It's still a game based around optional direct PvP and non-optional indirect PvP though - nothing has yet changed in that regard. Whether it does, or not, remains to be seen. If it does, I don't expect that the changes will be as significant as some hope.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

It's still a game based around optional direct PvP and non-optional indirect PvP though - nothing has yet changed in that regard. Whether it does, or not, remains to be seen. If it does, I don't expect that the changes will be as significant as some hope.

No its not, well it kinda is. But only after they introduced player factions. And even then it was a little while before people started using it against each other.

It really picked up in colonia though. And lots of changes stemmed from some happenings in colonia.

But just like I explained earlier about the one click stuff. This games core mechanics was not designed for player group vs player group play. Even though we are technically using it. It was never balanced around it. Its been band-aided forever. Ask anyone thats been involved with the BGS they will probably tell you the same things. Bandaides everywhere lol.

It was made for single player co op. Thats why transactions were a thing. It was never meant to be adversarial on release. Powerplay was though, and they used to reward merits for PVP kills. They used to reward that gameplay. They could have done much better things like diminishing returns instead of completely turning off PVP rewards.

At any rate. People are now using the BGS against each other. Everyone knows this. And people are using a bandaided version of the BGS that somewhat was balancing player group vs player group stuff.

So honestly I see them reworking the whole damn thing like they did engineers and crime and punishment. Around the players. And not the NPC's like the game started out as. NPC's mattered when it was a single player Co -op game. Now the game is geared towards player actions. ALL OF THEM.

The BGS has fallen behind. And im sure they will catch it up and tie it in to todays existing and upcoming features. Just like every other game in history has done before this one. I said it once, Ill say it a million times. Dont think Elite is special where there will never be any change for this stuff.

 

[Han_Zen]

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.

There is no requirement now. That does not mean that content is removed if it's added.

It's like the AFMU. I used to be able to turn on repair on undamaged modules. If the module got damaged, the AFMU started repairing it.
FD removed the auto repair. I still have the content, but it works slightly different.

Any balancing of a game does sometimes require nerfing. Personally I don't put anything concerning the modes, high on the list of areas needing balance. Some players are however very eager to get a platform for direct PvP. The BGS will never be PvP only or Open only. You don't need a crystal ball to see that. Power play on the other hand, is a feature that could potentially be used as a PvP platform.

If all new features has to be available in all modes and all old features have to stay the way they are, there will never be a platform for direct PvP.

 

[Robert Maynard]

No its not, well it kinda is. But only after they introduced player factions. And even then it was a little while before people started using it against each other.

Player supported Factions are treated just like NPC factions by the game - and have been for about three years.

It really picked up in colonia though. And lots of changes stemmed from some happenings in colonia.

For the subset of players (who engage in Faction play in Colonia) of the subset of the players that has made the trek out to Colonia.

What game changes? Must have missed them.

But just like I explained earlier about the one click stuff. This games core mechanics was not designed for player group vs player group play. Even though we are technically using it. It was never balanced around it. Its been band-aided forever. Ask anyone thats been involved with the BGS they will probably tell you the same things. Bandaides everywhere lol.

It was made for single player co op. Thats why transactions were a thing. It was never meant to be adversarial on release. Powerplay was though, and they used to reward merits for PVP kills. They used to reward that gameplay. They could have done much better things like diminishing returns instead of completely turning off PVP rewards.

At any rate. People are now using the BGS against each other. Everyone knows this. And people are using a bandaided version of the BGS that somewhat was balancing player group vs player group stuff.

So honestly I see them reworking the whole damn thing like they did engineers and crime and punishment. Around the players. And not the NPC's like the game started out as. NPC's mattered when it was a single player Co -op game. Now the game is geared towards player actions. ALL OF THEM.

The BGS has fallen behind. And im sure they will catch it up and tie it in to todays existing and upcoming features. Just like every other game in history has done before this one. I said it once, Ill say it a million times. Dont think Elite is special where there will never be any change for this stuff.

My take on transactions vs. value is that it has been designed not to simply end up in a "bigger is better" scenario - which could alienate those players that don't yet have the required assets to participate.

People have been using the BGS against each other for a long time - well before the opportunity to inject a Player Supported Faction, if memory serves.

If it is reworked around the players then I'm not too worried - as players in all game modes are players.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Player supported Factions are treated just like NPC factions by the game - and have been for about three years.



For the subset of players (who engage in Faction play in Colonia) of the subset of the players that has made the trek out to Colonia.

What game changes? Must have missed them.



My take on transactions vs. value is that it has been designed not to simply end up in a "bigger is better" scenario - which could alienate those players that don't yet have the required assets to participate.

People have been using the BGS against each other for a long time - well before the opportunity to inject a Player Supported Faction, if memory serves.

If it is reworked around the players then I'm not too worried - as players in all game modes are players.

Which brings us to risk and reward during multiplayer gameplay.

And if you missed them. And I know about them? Then why are you still talking?

 

[Robert Maynard]

There is no requirement now. That does not mean that content is removed if it's added.

It's like the AFMU. I used to be able to turn on repair on undamaged modules. If the module got damaged, the AFMU started repairing it.
FD removed the auto repair. I still have the content, but it works slightly different.

Any balancing of a game does sometimes require nerfing. Personally I don't put anything concerning the modes, high on the list of areas needing balance. Some players are however very eager to get a platform for direct PvP. The BGS will never be PvP only or Open only. You don't need a crystal ball to see that. Power play on the other hand, is a feature that could potentially be used as a PvP platform.

If all new features has to be available in all modes and all old features have to stay the way they are, there will never be a platform for direct PvP.

If being forced, through changes to matchmaking, into an unfiltered multi-player game mode were to be a new requirement of engaging in existing content then that content would have been removed from Solo and Private Groups.

Was the game ever designed to be a platform for direct PvP? (given that, for some, to qualify as direct PvP a feature must only be available in Open)

That some players are eager does not mean that Frontier will necessarily remove access to that content from other players who prefer not to play in Open.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Which brings us to risk and reward during multiplayer gameplay.

And if you missed them. And I know about them? Then why are you still talking?

I'm not averse to considering risk when evaluating reward - however that goes much further than just considering whether one is playing among other players.

Can you provide links to the relevant Dev posts / release change logs, please?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Everything you just said contradicts itself when that guy that wasnt to be in a single player game like its predecessors starts intentionally effecting a player faction. They are no longer playing for themselves now are they?

You're worried about a solo player, just bimbling along, doing their own thing, affecting the BGS?

Regardless, it doesn't affect the point i was making. They are still playing alone, and while some solo players might be part of player groups for role play, or indeed, working the BGS, they are free to choose their own level of interactions with other players.

I see no problem here.

 

[Han_Zen]

If being forced, through changes to matchmaking, into an unfiltered multi-player game mode were to be a new requirement of engaging in existing content then that content would have been removed from Solo and Private Groups.

Was the game ever designed to be a platform for direct PvP? (given that, for some, to qualify as direct PvP a feature must only be available in Open)

That some players are eager does not mean that Frontier will necessarily remove access to that content from other players who prefer not to play in Open.

The game was designed with the option for direct PvP. It has always been there and was a major part of the Alpha tests. Some players play the game, just for the PvP element.
Those players have no effective way to use their skill set, to significantly affect anything in the game. They lack a platform to 'score points' and be counted. Every element of the game that can be influenced by PvP, is more efficient using it's PvE counterpart.

There is no doubt in my mind that this leads to a lot of PvP energy being applied to activities that has a negative impact on the environment in open.
Power play is a feature in stagnation, in need of an overhaul. Making it PvP focused by either removing the influence of PvE activities or forcing multiplayer when actively participating, could actually give it a boost. It's not like it's a feature most players care about anyway.

I'm all for the current modes. I can still se why some players get annoyed, when they are used as tactical tools in indirect PvP. This is unavoidable when it comes to the BGS, but for PP it's not.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

There is no doubt in my mind that this leads to a lot of PvP energy being applied to activities that has a negative impact on the environment in open.

If one thing my 40+ years as a human being has taught me is, jerks will be jerks without the need for reason, and people who aren't jerks don't tend to behave like jerks just because they are lacking some reason to not be a jerk.

Sure, some incentive for PvP might be fine, and some means of scoring so people can wave their epeens in each others faces, as long as those who don't want to do that sort of stuff are not compelled to do that sort of stuff.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The game was designed with the option for direct PvP.

Indeed - it has always been optional.

It has always been there and was a major part of the Alpha tests. Some players play the game, just for the PvP element.

True - and the fact that the largest known PvE Private Group was started before launch suggests (if such a suggestion needs to be made) that not all players enjoyed it even then.

Those players have no effective way to use their skill set, to significantly affect anything in the game. They lack a platform to 'score points' and be counted. Every element of the game that can be influenced by PvP, is more efficient using it's PvE counterpart.

Frontier did offer CQC as a pure-PvP feature - however it has proved to be unpopular.

What they did not do is place any permanent in-game features behind a PvP-gate, nor did they make the game such that it would be dominated by those that prefer direct PvP.

There is no doubt in my mind that this leads to a lot of PvP energy being applied to activities that has a negative impact on the environment in open.
Power play is a feature in stagnation, in need of an overhaul. Making it PvP focused by either removing the influence of PvE activities or forcing multiplayer when actively participating, could actually give it a boost. It's not like it's a feature most players care about anyway.

Making any existing or new game feature Open only would not rid the game of those who seek to achieve a negative impact on other players in Open play. Reduce - possibly, remove - nope.

That's as maybe - however what is not known is whether those players (not those who are the public face of the players that support PowerPlay) want it to change.

We can speculate it would give PowerPlay a boost or sign its death warrant, in terms of active player numbers.

I'm all for the current modes. I can still se why some players get annoyed, when they are used as tactical tools in indirect PvP. This is unavoidable when it comes to the BGS, but for PP it's not.

Which all comes back to Frontier's conscious choice to implement PowerPlay in all three game modes. Whether it was the right choice, or not, is moot - the fact that it was implemented in all three game modes means that it belongs to all players - as all players bought the base game that PowerPlay forms part of.

 

[Han_Zen]

If one thing my 40+ years as a human being has taught me is, jerks will be jerks without the need for reason, and people who aren't jerks don't tend to behave like jerks just because they are lacking some reason to not be a jerk.

Sure, some incentive for PvP might be fine, and some means of scoring so people can wave their epeens in each others faces, as long as those who don't want to do that sort of stuff are not compelled to do that sort of stuff.

I fully agree. The problem is that in ED you might play the game in a way you think is intended and people will still regard you as a jerk. I you get called a jerk repeatedly, it's a fair chance you accept the title. If you start playing ED with the intention of being a player pirate, there is a fair chance that you will see plenty of verbal abuse and combat logging. If you vent your frustration over this on the forum you will probably get labeled a jerk, here as well.

 

[krylite]

I'd think some of this, game modes sharing the same background galaxy, stems from the KS and early expectations before ED began. Frontier has been very fair otherwise. Many wanted or expected ED to have an offline solo-mode similar to the past Elite games. But ED was made to be online only which also serves as the best copy protection and also an MMO with an indefinite dev-controlled development continuation. From the current stats, there's still a major segment of players who go private/solo in order to opt out of forced PvP. FDev to their credit has worked on "balancing" out PvP to make griefing have more consequences ala Beyond's new C&P. I'd think they could scrap CQC and make in-game "arenas" with automated management and refereeing where single or team groups can pvp in a controlled battle space. Which could also be incentivized with a feature to allow outside observers to bet credits, and having the pvp participants incur much lower insurance rebuy costs, etc.

 

[Dietger]

I'm not averse to considering risk when evaluating reward - however that goes much further than just considering whether one is playing among other players.

Can you provide links to the relevant Dev posts / release change logs, please?

Maynard, being at it.
While you can't stop change, knowing what we are, purposefully changing attitude, your ever in denial.

Sounds complicated Maynard?

Risk, reward, encourages opposition.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I fully agree. The problem is that in ED you might play the game in a way you think is intended and people will still regard you as a jerk. I you get called a jerk repeatedly, it's a fair chance you accept the title. If you start playing ED with the intention of being a player pirate, there is a fair chance that you will see plenty of verbal abuse and combat logging. If you vent your frustration over this on the forum you will probably get labeled a jerk, here as well.

I think you'd have to be a bit thin skinned to become a jerk just because people are calling you names.

I've been called plenty of names and i'm not a jerk... in game

 

[Mouse]

Maynard, being at it.
While you can't stop change, knowing what we are, purposefully changing attitude, your ever in denial.

Sounds complicated Maynard?

Risk, reward, encourages opposition.

Robert isn't trying to stop change and he definitely isn't the one in denial. You have your risk and the reward of competition, being on top if you win... and if you need a "reward" because of the chance you may lose. Think about all those who don't PVP and are shot to heck felt.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

No AA we both know its not the solo player and personal progression making an impact on the bgs.

Weve been over this numerous times.

You know damn well whats happening here.