Open-Only in PP2.0?

[WhiteHaulerMan]

All modes are equal, once you star pushing the position that some modes are more equal than others it never stops, no matter how asymmetric it gets between solo and open there will always be people pushing for more Open Only. There have in fact been plenty of players in the past who have requested, even demanded, that solo and PG modes be dispensed with altogether and only Open be left. Basically it never ends, just that little bit more please, they keep asking. All modes are equal, all modes affect the galaxy!

All modes are equal till a player is reached out and touched by something outwith the mode system.

I remember the outrage from the 'all modes are equal' forum consensus over UAs affecting stations that were being used by Solo/PG players, and when 4 players loosely affiliated with SDC tanked the Modius PMF factions influence whilst in open. All of a sudden, pan-modal BGS interactions were a bad thing.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I remember the outrage from the 'all modes are equal' forum consensus over UAs affecting stations that were being used by Solo/PG players, and when 4 players loosely affiliated with SDC tanked the Modius PMF factions influence whilst in open. All of a sudden, pan-modal BGS interactions were a bad thing.

The complaints when UA effects on stations were removed overnight were interesting to read.

As I remember it the 4 players rather amusingly seemed to think they had "won the BGS against the whole of the Mobius PG" - when the reality was that only a few players actually supported the PMF, i.e. it was not an "official" PMF of the whole PG. What those who "won" did do was put the lie to the claim that players engaging in mode shared features in Solo and Private Groups can't be countered....

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

But they aren't trying to force/encourage you to play solo!

Ironically, in a roundabout way they are. If we're competing in a PP hauling war, and you're able to haul (simple numbers for sake of clarity) 100t of cargo in your unchallenged shieldless trader in solo, whilst I am only able to haul 75t (due to having to make provisions with my build for potential encounters in open), for me to be competitive, I have to use Solo as otherwise its taking me 4 runs to match your 3.

 

[Mr Jack Burton]

Those in Open only "have to deal with the risk of being attacked by other players" because they choose to play in Open - so it's more accurate to say that those in Open "choose to deal with the risk of being attacked by other players" - then they want a special reward for their choice.

Noting that there's nothing "unfair" about not engaging in PvP while affecting mode shared game features when the game is literally designed around a mode shared galaxy where other players, and therefore PvP, are optional extras - except in the opinion of those who prefer PvP and can't accept that others don't need to engage in it / can't be forced to engage in it.

Weighting is literally the industry standard when you have a mix of PvE and PvP. Denying this would be dishonest, and failing to recognize the reasons it has been implemented in literally hundreds of modern titles is equally disingenuous. With minimal effort, I can easily compile a list of examples.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Weighting is literally the industry standard when you have a mix of PvE and PvP. Denying this would be dishonest, and failing to recognize the reasons it has been implemented in literally hundreds of modern titles is equally disingenuous. With minimal effort, I can easily compile a list of examples.

In other games, certainly. This game does not require to follow the tropes of those other games.

How many of those games have all players experience and affect a single game world with no requirement for players to play among other players? How many of them have PvP-flagging?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Ironically, in a roundabout way they are. If we're competing in a PP hauling war, and you're able to haul (simple numbers for sake of clarity) 100t of cargo in your unchallenged shieldless trader in solo, whilst I am only able to haul 75t (due to having to make provisions with my build for potential encounters in open), for me to be competitive, I have to use Solo as otherwise its taking me 4 runs to match your 3.

The issue always comes that (in FDs own words) larger territories are harder to maintain (paraphrased from FU-4). If its easier and efficient to maintain large areas without meaningful opposition its going to aid large powers.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

The complaints when UA effects on stations were removed overnight were interesting to read.

For me, it was a sad moment. I miss my 'Little Masters'. About the only time smuggling or small cargo deliveries were profitable and impactful on the gameworld.

.

 

[Mr Jack Burton]

In other games, certainly. This game does not require to follow the tropes of those other games.

This game is no different from others and requires the same game design principles to be met in order to be engaging and retain all types of players. This is a design perspective, not a player perspective.

How many of those games have all players experience and affect a single game world with no requirement for players to play among other players? How many of them have PvP-flagging?

Eve Online is enough ? We are talking about weighting anyway, not PvP flagging (which is weighted too in most of titles)

 

[varonica]

Ironically, in a roundabout way they are.

No, they are playing the game according to the rules, you want to change the rules to benefit yourself, you see why these two things are not the same don't you?

 

[Robert Maynard]

This game is no different from others and requires the same game design principles to be met in order to be engaging and retain all types of players. This is a design perspective, not a player perspective.

Where is it written that a game developer must follow other games design decisions? Noting that the original game broke the mould in terms of what it offered players.

Eve Online is enough ? We are talking about weighting anyway, not PvP flagging (which is weighted too in most of titles)

EVE Online is a datapoint, not a standard that must be adhered to - and is a game that this game is clearly not attempting to be in many ways, not least because there is only one game mode in EVE.

 

[Rebel Yell]

Discussed on this forum? Interesting, never seen it in these sorts of discussion. Still, we are at over 100 pages now, easy for me to have missed.

Or you mean it actually happens in game? PvPers escorting a trade ship? Really? Pinky swear? I find it hard to believe that PvPers will happily babysit a trade ship as it flies back and forth and most of the time you're going to be sat doing nothing.

Happens in game, happened yesterday night... lol may be that says a lot about the wasted time, space and words on this sub.

 

[Mr Jack Burton]

Where is it written that a game developer must follow other games design decisions? Noting that the original game broke the mould in terms of what it offered players.

No one can force you to fix a building, but acknowledging that there are areas that could be improved is not a crime. Being able to have a polite and pragmatic discussion about potential improvements should be the norm.
I also think that being passive/aggressive in discussions doesn't help anyone. We should aim for constructive and respectful conversations, where different perspectives can be shared openly and solutions can be explored together.

EVE Online is a datapoint, not a standard that must be adhered to - and is a game that this game is clearly not attempting to be in many ways, not least because there is only one game mode in EVE.

the point isn't about copying EVE or any other game, but about recognizing broader game design principles that work across various genres. The idea of balancing risk and reward, which we see in EVE and many other games, can be beneficial without changing the core identity of ED.

 

[Rebel Yell]

We should aim for constructive and respectful conversations, where different perspectives can be shared openly and solutions can be explored together.

JACK FOR THE WHIPS SAKE PICK UP YAR MURDERBOAT AND LISSEN TO MEEE!!!

 

[Mr Jack Burton]

JACK FOR THE WHIPS SAKE PICK UP YAR MURDERBOAT AND LISSEN TO MEEE!!!

ARRR, I’D LOVE TO LET LOOSE WITH ME MURDERBOAT, BUT ALAS, ME PIRATE HEART BE SHACKLED BY THE CODE OF CONDUCT, LEST I FIND MESELF WALKIN’ THE PLANK! SO AYE, I’M ALL EARS, MATEY, SPEAK YOUR WISDOM BEFORE THE MODS MAKE ME KEELHAUL MYSELF FOR GOOD MANNERS!

 

[Wily Rites]

When interdicted trying to get to a port of call, by some opposition, retreating to another system to hook up with a wing of skilled combat pilots, seems like a superb way to get through a blockade. That said, the games networking model is clearly not designed for this type of play, as there is no assurance that you would be in the same instance as a blockade when you arrive there.

But then again, is that due to the networking model or is it a quirk of spacetime, the very real fact that UT (universal time) is total fantasy? Either way, it is arguably even more immersive than a blockade being temporally easy to create.

Love this game and its nuances, the networking model is so cool. I really love the way it is more realistic than one big shared server with a universal time that would serve to oversimplify galactic combat logistics!

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Ah another Eve-alike, despite how many of us that would drive away.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

This game is no different from others and requires the same game design principles to be met in order to be engaging and retain all types of players. This is a design perspective, not a player perspective.

Eve Online is enough ? We are talking about weighting anyway, not PvP flagging (which is weighted too in most of titles)

Now you've gone and done it, you've mentioned Eve.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Ironically, in a roundabout way they are. If we're competing in a PP hauling war, and you're able to haul (simple numbers for sake of clarity) 100t of cargo in your unchallenged shieldless trader in solo, whilst I am only able to haul 75t (due to having to make provisions with my build for potential encounters in open), for me to be competitive, I have to use Solo as otherwise its taking me 4 runs to match your 3.

And in my experience, that 100t unshielded trader will only do one run my two because I fly like I’m running a blockade, and I can remove all the risk of doing so by adding that shield. As an added bonus, that shield will protect me if I get interdicted in Open by an opposing player. Furthermore, by flying the way I do, it’s extremely rare I ever get interdicted. The closest ever I’ve come to death at an Open trade-CG was a station camper, and I still landed before they got in a second Alpha, in a G3 Type-9 heavy.

This whole unshielded trader thing is simply a boogieman. If a player is so risk-averse that they willingly fly in Solo despite a natural inclination towards Open, then they’re risk-averse enough to sabotage any advantage running shieldless could possibly give them.

 

[Robert Maynard]

No one can force you to fix a building, but acknowledging that there are areas that could be improved is not a crime. Being able to have a polite and pragmatic discussion about potential improvements should be the norm.
I also think that being passive/aggressive in discussions doesn't help anyone. We should aim for constructive and respectful conversations, where different perspectives can be shared openly and solutions can be explored together.

The presumption of some players is that there is something that must be fixed, i.e. changed to favour their preferred play-style. Not all players agree on that fundamental point.

the point isn't about copying EVE or any other game, but about recognizing broader game design principles that work across various genres. The idea of balancing risk and reward, which we see in EVE and many other games, can be beneficial without changing the core identity of ED.

The point seems to promote copying design decisions that are not necessarily relevant to this game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Now you've gone and done it, you've mentioned Eve.

If players want to play EVE as well as this game they are more than welcome to so do - noting that it appears to be free to play (up to a point).

If players want to change this game so that it more closely resembles EVE then that's where the conflict between players of different play-style preferences exists.