Official Open PvE server

[Sterling MH]

The purpose of this poll is not to find out who doesn't want an Open PvE server, but who does and what limits would make it, from the purpose of the one asking, a PvE server. It doesn't matter if 1% or 80% want it and the rest don't. If there's enough people wanting one of the options to make it worth dev time, then that is far more important than how many people DNW.

Options
1 Friendly Fire Off
Players just can't play PvP. It's not a choice, it's the game play. Not expecting this a popular choice.
2) Friendly Fire Off except in Anarchy.
Players can PvP, but you're in danger only if you go where there's no law. Still stricter than I'd accept personally.
3) Friendly Fire Off except in Anarchy, Combat mission zones and "pirate-friendly" systems
Pretty much PvP can happen in many Private PvE groups.
4) C&P
The first one that isn't enforcing PvP off. Some form of Crime and Punishment over and above the grief cage and temporary bounties.
5) Gentleman's Agreement
Pretty much the same as if it were the current Open, but not implicitly accepting PvP explicitly. Most PvE groups have to do this because there's no mechanism to enforce the PvE status.

Option 5 is no work other than making a new group that's managed like Open. The other options add work, from little work (option 1) to quite a lot (options 3&4).

 

[Loskene]

While I understand the desire to have a more private hugbox, the last thing this game needs is an even further fragmented playerbase. The more people divide themselves into camps the more problems we're going to have unifying the game into a more cohesive experience. The devs need to put the foot down and say what this game is and is not supposed to be, so we can stop having these pointless back and forths over things they're probably not going to do.

 

[Yaffle]

Not again, please. Closing as a duplicate, url to follow.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-PVE-Only-toggle-would-solve-all-our-problems for example.