Open-Only in PP2.0?

Having only Open play would take Solo and Private Groups away from all players, noting that some would not mourn their loss. That is a difference.

If a PvP flag were to be implemented there would be even less reason to remove Solo and Private Groups.
You mean more reason to remove solo/PG, not less; or less reason to play in solo/PG. that is exactly the point.

Those playing in solo/PG would not have the slightest change to anything other than seeing the occasional commander. It would be just like solo/PG mode.

The only difference between solo and open is there are no other commanders in solo. By implementing a PvP flag, why would someone join solo when it would be exactly the same as Open with PvP flag off?

Fdev could use those resources for server stability or other necessities.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
You mean more reason to remove solo/PG, not less; or less reason to play in solo/PG. that is exactly the point.
Nope. A PvP-flag added to the multi-player game modes is not a reason to attempt to force players to play among other players. Different things entirely - and just because some players want to see more players in-game does not mean that other players should not be able to make their own choice as to how many or few other players they wish to play among.
Those playing in solo/PG would not have the slightest change to anything other than seeing the occasional commander. It would be just like solo/PG mode.
Wanting to meet zero players and actually meeting other players would represent a fundamental change.
The only difference between solo and open is there are no other commanders in solo. By implementing a PvP flag, why would someone join solo when it would be exactly the same as Open with PvP flag off?
Some players have no interest in what other players have to offer and don't want to interact with them in any way.
Fdev could use those resources for server stability or other necessities.
What "resources"? The three game modes are simply settings on the matchmaking system....
 
Last edited:
PvP flags don't remove pad blocking or other nefarious actions some players could dream up - e.g. blocking the slot etc etc

The modes are fine, just need some carrots to encourage PvP for PP so those who are interested can give it a go.
 
PvP flags don't remove pad blocking or other nefarious actions some players could dream up - e.g. blocking the slot etc etc

The modes are fine, just need some carrots to encourage PvP for PP so those who are interested can give it a go.
The modes really are fine. In a game built on P2P networking with limited numbers of players instancing together, controlling player encounters at the instancing level makes perfect sense. A PvP flag or similar would be vastly over-complicated in comparison.
 
PvP flags don't remove pad blocking or other nefarious actions some players could dream up - e.g. blocking the slot etc etc

The modes are fine, just need some carrots to encourage PvP for PP so those who are interested can give it a go.
Those that are interested can give it a go now. That's not the issue.

The issue is that so few are interested. The question is why.

People love to pretend others are afraid to lose ships/credits. Do you think it would be any different if FDev gave an option to just type in a value for the number of credits you have? Go to some website, build a ship, press "send"; go back in game and you have that ship. Do you think people would then be interested in PvP?

I'd bet they'd see a large uptick in pvp. I also bet they'd see little change in pvp that occurs in powerplay, bgs, cgs, etc. (i.e. elements that revolve completely around PvE objectives). I'd bet you'd see more new prismatic cutters in solo/pg than you'd see in open. It would be an interesting experiment.
 
The issue is that so few are interested. The question is why.

People love to pretend others are afraid to lose ships/credits. Do you think it would be any different if FDev gave an option to just type in a value for the number of credits you have? Go to some website, build a ship, press "send"; go back in game and you have that ship. Do you think people would then be interested in PvP?
Regarding these couple of points.

One is almost certainly due to poor balancing. Currently only shield tanks are really viable choices, and certain weapon blueprints and effects are significantly more overbearing than they should be.

The second one holds some truth, but people seem to be worried about time for some strange reason, which, to me at least, seems exceptionally odd now we have SCO drives.

Like so you get popped, in times of old, you'd be potentially making another 20 min trip across a big system to get back to what you were doing, nowdays, thats been reduced to like 5 min, tops. I don't see it as a viable thing to apply any longer, between the longer jump ranges than ever before and the SCO drives, the time element has all but been removed from the equation.

Throw in the aspect that you're unlikely, if ever, to see a PvP ship en route to the really long travel time destination, like Hutton for example, its a bit of a weird thing to feel like you need to care about as they're the only ones where the SCO speed increase does'nt really come into effect as much. Like it still does of course, but not to the degree crossing a 5kls system does.
 
The second one holds some truth, but people seem to be worried about time for some strange reason, which, to me at least, seems exceptionally odd now we have SCO drives.
Time is the primary currency in the game.

Asking people to spend time on worthless game play will never work. Remember; you're the one that wants the interaction. The petty role play you want isn't worth 5 of my seconds. It offers nothing of value. The game is better without it.

I'm sure there's some little kid that wants to role play as a pirate. I truly find it adorable and I hope he finds someone to play with; but it's not going to be me - at least not with the current design.

You'll never be able to incentivize the current design. You can only incentivize finding more creative way to remove it. You can incentivize having and winning the interaciton; if you simply make a two sided interaction instead of the lopsided nonsense that exists now.

The design of the interaction is broken. People need to focus there. To put another way: If the only way the devs can get people to participate is by making it obligatory; they've failed miserably.
 
I think that's the issue we gave - PvP is simply poorly implemented.

There's no (game) organised PvP - by this I mean there's no particular incentive for it to happen in PP (or BGS) as it stands.

There's no "levelling" supported in game - so a CMDRs first experience with PvP is likely to be assymetric - punishing not challenging.

PvP piracy is poor, in that it very much depends on the pirated ship complying, and no guarantee you won't be destroyed anyway.

So yeah, without some fundamental game redesign - which is unlikely - it seems PvP isn't on the agenda anytime soon
 
I think that's the issue we gave - PvP is simply poorly implemented.

Didn't used to be.

Before SCBs, before SBs, before engineering, PvP was pretty exciting, fly by the seat of your pants, and death could be a moment away. You could do PvP in a range of ships, although of course the FdL was the meta (it did get nerfed though) and big ship vs small ship wasn't so one sided. There was a lot more skill to it.

Watching PvP battles from the 1.x days was actually quite engaging. Try watching a PvP battle these days between two tricked out ships and its an absoloute snoozefest.
 
Didn't used to be.

Before SCBs, before SBs, before engineering, PvP was pretty exciting, fly by the seat of your pants, and death could be a moment away. You could do PvP in a range of ships, although of course the FdL was the meta (it did get nerfed though) and big ship vs small ship wasn't so one sided. There was a lot more skill to it.

Watching PvP battles from the 1.x days was actually quite engaging. Try watching a PvP battle these days between two tricked out ships and its an absoloute snoozefest.

Indeed, the good old days!

Now it does indeed seem like a slugfest - I'm not surprised people hunt ships that go pop much easier and quicker
 
Indeed, the good old days!

Now it does indeed seem like a slugfest - I'm not surprised people hunt ships that go pop much easier and quicker
Oh don't worry, I'm gonna write up a big old essay on why the balance sucks at some point this week. Because it does effect both sides negatively.

If FDev are showing renewed interest in the development of the title, makes sense to strike whilst the iron is hot.

Shields are massively overbearing, as are the multitude of special weapon effects that allow for extra application of damage, missiles are broken due to lack of effective counters, etc..

Though people popping ships, seemingly at random, is a symptom of there not being any gameplay, its not really related to engineering.
PvPer's, most at least, play because the flight model is so good, and we've always found ways of at least mitigating the broken nature of engineering, its why you don't see all that many PvP ships running seeker missiles for example; Most people find their lack of counters and their super consistent module damage to be rather unfair and thusly avoid their use. (Just for one example)
Another would be why Plasma is so meta, IE: ships have such ridiculous shields nowdays, that absolute damage is for the most part, the best way of mitigating that overblown health pool and due to their "shoot and move" style gameplay, the often end up more effective for dealing damage and allowing the firing ship to remain evasive, despite on paper lasers being better for the low-thermal resistance, high capacity meta. The trouble is, lasers require consistent time on target, which for most pilots, is going to hamper thier ability to remain evasive at the same time, and thusly they'll probably lose to a plasma boat.
 
Last edited:
Didn't used to be.

Before SCBs, before SBs, before engineering, PvP was pretty exciting, fly by the seat of your pants, and death could be a moment away. You could do PvP in a range of ships, although of course the FdL was the meta (it did get nerfed though) and big ship vs small ship wasn't so one sided. There was a lot more skill to it.

Watching PvP battles from the 1.x days was actually quite engaging. Try watching a PvP battle these days between two tricked out ships and its an absoloute snoozefest.

^^^
This.

Even the gap between C and A equipped ships wasn't that great, and the difference was easily spanned by superior skills. The C-rated version of ships cost a fraction of the A-rated version, so the minimum entry point for PvP was about one sixth the cost of optimal build.

Contrast that sheer amount of grind, even today, that is required to close the chasm between G3 and G5 enginineering, which still requires over twenty times more effort to acquire... as opposed to the on average 50x more effort required before the latest Engineering rework.
 
I think that's the issue we gave - PvP is simply poorly implemented.

There's no (game) organised PvP - by this I mean there's no particular incentive for it to happen in PP (or BGS) as it stands.

There's no "levelling" supported in game - so a CMDRs first experience with PvP is likely to be assymetric - punishing not challenging.

PvP piracy is poor, in that it very much depends on the pirated ship complying, and no guarantee you won't be destroyed anyway.

So yeah, without some fundamental game redesign - which is unlikely - it seems PvP isn't on the agenda anytime soon

The way to fix most of the PvP introduction problems is to expand CQC so players can try PvP out without it hitting their credit balances too much. What I mean by that is allowing 1v1 duels and wing-fights in full-size ships (optional engineering/ ammo types / ship sizes etc) rather than just fighters-only in a couple of 2000s style deathmatch or capture the flag game modes.

The current CQC has always felt very 'Unreal Tournament', not reflecting the main game in any way, thus not preparing players for PvP in open.
 
I see all this back and forth about Open/Solo/PG and a PvP flag.

1. So having Open play (PvP risk) and solo (no PvP risk)

2. Having only Open play with a PvP flag.

What is the fundamental difference between either of the above scenarios?
NOTHING!

Playing in hypothetical Open with PvP flag set OFF. Guess what? It is exactly the same as Solo play, mechanically, except I may pass/see other commanders at times doing their thing…

Turn the PvP flag on, and it is 100% exactly the same as Open is right now.

Instances would be full of invincible players, that's no good for those of us looking for PvP powerplay/piracy/bounty hunting. It also exposes those players running No-PvP flags to potential taunting and non-combat disruption (pad blocking, ramming, kill stealing etc).

Those that argue that there is risk in Open are completely forgetting that a lot of the players are in Solo/PG mode because they don’t want to deal with PvP at all. Why prevent them from seeing other commanders flying around? You’re in a PvP squadron? Great, turn your PvP flag on and others will surely join in the PvP. Those that don’t, won’t.

I have enough stress at work; clients, budgets, deadlines; I don’t want more stress when I am playing in my downtime.

Again see above, just because they can't shoot you doesn't mean they cannot annoy you or cause you problems. Think about it, if a rival powerplay player sees a PvP-Off player doing undermining activities against their power, that's a huge recipe for toxicity/being called out etc...

I don’t disapprove of PvP; sometimes, I’m just not in the mood to deal with it though.

This is a fairly common sentiment in the community... flags aren't the solution though.

IMO Powerplay (at the very least undermining activities) should be off the menu for those who do not want to deal with direct player opposition.
 
In any game where eliminating opponents is integral to the gameplay, a PvP flag system simply doesn’t work.

Imagine how great Warzone would be with a PvP flag 🤪

Weighting risk/rewards let players choose the risk they are comfortable with.
 
Integral to whose gameplay?
Integral to the gameplay designed by the developers.
If the core mechanics, progression, or objectives revolve around competing with other players (directly or indirectly) then PvP isn't just an option, it's the foundation of the experience.
Removing or flagging PvP in such games would break the intended dynamics, turning them into something fundamentally different from what they were designed to be.
 
Back
Top Bottom