Modes "Open Play" Should be the Ideal Mode

[Robert Maynard]

Sounds like the solution might be to learn evasive skills and outfit properly.

Ah - of course - outfit ones ship sub-optimally for its intended role to deal with the unwanted attentions of players intent on the destruction of ones ship....

.... whereas they can and will outfit their ships optimally for its intended role, i.e. to destroy other ships.

Is interdictor stacking still a thing?

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

Ah - of course - outfit ones ship sub-optimally for its intended role to deal with the unwanted attentions of players intent on the destruction of ones ship....

.... whereas they can and will outfit their ships optimally for its intended role, i.e. to destroy other ships.

Is interdictor stacking still a thing?

Sounds like the solution might be to learn evasive skills and outfit properly.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Sounds like the solution might be to learn evasive skills and outfit properly.

Sounds like the proposed solution is "play my way, not your way".

 

[Perseus]

Ah - of course - outfit ones ship sub-optimally for its intended role to deal with the unwanted attentions of players intent on the destruction of ones ship....

.... whereas they can and will outfit their ships optimally for its intended role, i.e. to destroy other ships.

Is interdictor stacking still a thing?

It's intended role can be thought of as delivering a set amount of cargo whilst being able to defensively weather enemy attacks.
Playing in solo colours the notion on maximising cargo capacity (including not using a shield - those killer NPCs, eh?) but this mentality has no place in a mode where an enemy CMDR might be waiting for you. Yes, enemy interceptors are likely to be designed for destroying ships but we can also design our traders to survive too. There has to be a little bit of sacrifice of internals away from maximum cargo capacity.
Perfect for open PP - where the grind to high numbers is replaced by effective delivery and merit completion.
Competition in a very direct sense, just like the Devs have suggested.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's intended role can be thought of as delivering a set amount of cargo whilst being able to defensively weather enemy attacks.

It can be - however cargo delivery is not the only non-combat role.

Playing in solo colours the notion on maximising cargo capacity (including not using a shield - those killer NPCs, eh?) but this mentality has no place in a mode where an enemy CMDR might be waiting for you.

Indeed. Running shieldless in any mode seems to be risky. On "those killer NPCs" - Frontier set the difficulty level of NPCs for all players, not just those who have greater than median combat skills.

Yes, enemy interceptors are likely to be designed for destroying ships but we can also design our traders to survive too. There has to be a little bit of sacrifice of internals away from maximum cargo capacity.

Indeed - for those who tolerate PvP, even if they don't seek it out. Not every player is PvP tolerant, however.

Perfect for open PP - where the grind to high numbers is replaced by effective delivery and merit completion.
Competition in a very direct sense, just like the Devs have suggested.

The OP relates to the whole game, not just the potential change to PowerPlay. The potential change to PowerPlay with regard to Open only may, or may not, happen.

The rest of the game would seem not to be being considered for Open only, however.

 

[Perseus]

It can be - however cargo delivery is not the only non-combat role.



Indeed. Running shieldless in any mode seems to be risky. On "those killer NPCs" - Frontier set the difficulty level of NPCs for all players, not just those who have greater than median combat skills.



Indeed - for those who tolerate PvP, even if they don't seek it out. Not every player is PvP tolerant, however.



The OP relates to the whole game, not just the potential change to PowerPlay. The potential change to PowerPlay with regard to Open only may, or may not, happen.

The rest of the game would seem not to be being considered for Open only, however.

I'm of the hope that open PP becomes a reality so that the waters may be tested for future 'development'.
Having a ship that was capable in defensive terms and at risk of a significant attack, be that by PC or NPC, should be an obvious game mechanic. Running shieldless is not a risk at all in solo. You say the average player is being challenged by the current difficulty - can you link the source?

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm of the hope that open PP becomes a reality so that the waters may be tested for future 'development'.

As long as that development does not further remove content from those who engage in it in Solo and Private Groups....

It may be that PowerPlay is only a potential candidate for Open only due to low player participation in the first place (and the fact that it is designed to offer consensual PvP). The BGS, on the other hand, is participated in by all players (whether they intend to, or not).

You say the average player is being challenged by the current difficulty - can you link the source?

No, I can't. I should have made it clear that that is my opinion.

 

[Perseus]

As long as that development does not further remove content from those who engage in it in Solo and Private Groups....



No, I can't. I should have made it clear that that is my opinion.

No worries, thought I might have missed some info.
The NPCs being too easy is my opinion too, of course, and I admit I liked them best way back (2.1?) when they were packing engineered equipment and jumping on us in packs.

 

[Robert Maynard]

No worries, thought I might have missed some info.

The NPCs being too easy is my opinion too, of course, and I admit I liked them best way back (2.1?) when they were packing engineered equipment and jumping on us in packs.

While that might be desirable by those players who prefer combat (and have access to Engineers), neither is true of all players.

Two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot, after all....

 

[Perseus]

While that might be desirable by those players who prefer combat (and have access to Engineers), neither is true of all players.

Two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot, after all....

Sorry, I disagree about that. Piracy is a deliberate mechanic in the game, be that by free trading or some of the trading/passenger missions. Exploration not so much, although it would be good if deeper challenge and function were to be added to exploration.
The game is about ships and shooting to a very large extent. It's where most of the in game risk is applied to a player.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Sorry, I disagree about that. Piracy is a deliberate mechanic in the game, be that by free trading or some of the trading/passenger missions. Exploration not so much, although it would be good if deeper challenge and function were to be added to exploration.
The game is about ships and shooting to a very large extent. It's where most of the in game risk is applied to a player.

Which bit are you disagreeing with?

1) the fact that not all players prefer combat;
2) the fact that not all players have access to Engineers?
3) the fact that two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot?

Piracy exists, of course - one does not need to either engage in it proactively nor fire back if attacked by one.

I agree that the game is mainly about ships and that risk in the game is provided by, among other, other ships that attack. Other hazards exist, of course. Shooting at other ships, however, is entirely optional.

 

[Sunleader]

I was just sitting thinking about it.

Part of the reason why the Play Modes are controversial are because of other issues within the game. However, to make Open-Only really work for the best, a lot of those problems would need to vanish. In this sense, Open Play is actually the best future that the game has, assuming that certain things change.

An ideal Open-Only scenario would look like this:

1. Combat Logging No longer exists. Instancing issues are mostly non-existent. Dedicated servers allow large numbers of players to be in the same instance.
2. Progression through the game is balanced and fair. Skill determines progression rather than time spent in-game. There are meaningful rewards for every profession and playstyle, and players earn greater rewards as they go along.
3. PVP and Combat are balanced. The rewards and losses associated with PvP and Combat fit the skill level of a player. No loss or victory feels easy.
4. The ship roster is balanced. There are no seemingly perfect or "must buy" ships. There are ships at nearly every price point. No ship ever feels invincible.
5. Player groups and Multiplayer actions have a huge impact on the game. Players are rewarded sufficiently for all multiplayer activities. Unique rewards can also be found in playing alone. There's a functioning and useful multiplayer element for each playstyle and profession.

These things aren't strictly missing from the game, but to make Open-Only work without having half of the community rage quit will require a lot of work. But if FDEV could pull it off, I'd never log out. Some things that aren't included in this list are the grinding time, credits-per-hour, and such. When a game is balanced so that players feel rewarded for playing, people don't complain about "the grind". At the moment, the game rewards time spent in-game over skill, and it doesn't offer any incentive to participate in riskier activities. For example, a guy in an Eagle could potentially earn only a few pennies for managing to take down an Anaconda, but if he loses, he loses EVERYTHING. Thus the Meta is to turtle-up or run from any dangerous activities. Which then leads to people doing things to get credits to avoid losing everything from fruitless encounters. And That's reinforced by the flowchart-like meta in the ship progression. And it goes on and on and on.

I honestly doubt that any of these will happen, though. I haven't seen any indication that the experience in-game is ever going to change from what it is today.
But, hey, it'd be nice, right?

You missed 3 importand Points.

1.
Instances are either removed or 100 times bigger so You actually got people around and people actually being somewhere matters.
2.
Stations get vastly increased Hangars so you dont constantly wait for a landing pad.
3.
We get a working crime and punishment system where if you go Pirate and ruin someones day you are a Pirate and cant just store your Ship to the station and go on with your other ship like nothing ever happened.

 

[Perseus]

Which bit are you disagreeing with?

1) the fact that not all players prefer combat;
2) the fact that not all players have access to Engineers?
3) the fact that two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot?

Piracy exists, of course - one does not need to either engage in it proactively nor fire back if attacked by one.

I agree that the game is mainly about ships and that risk in the game is provided by, among other, other ships that attack. Other hazards exist, of course. Shooting at other ships, however, is entirely optional.

I disagree about the comment 'not firing a shot'. Your implication is that 'shooting' is 1/3 of the gameplay in terms of acquiring an Elite badge - as dubious as that is in itself as a game meaning.
A PC trader might very well choose not to carry offensive weapons or indeed any at all but they absolutely should expect to be shot at. Being shot at shouldn't be optional! It's the primary risk of the game. It would be good if explorers maybe faced some of these same risks too.
With this in mind, let's get back to the idea of NPC attacks being weak and the proposed concept of challenge being raised. Defensive capability should be part of a traders build, even in solo mode, unless the said pilot was exceptionaly able. As it is, maxing for cargo seems to be the norm and makes trading simplistic and bland.

 

[Sunleader]

Sorry, I disagree about that. Piracy is a deliberate mechanic in the game, be that by free trading or some of the trading/passenger missions. Exploration not so much, although it would be good if deeper challenge and function were to be added to exploration.
The game is about ships and shooting to a very large extent. It's where most of the in game risk is applied to a player.

On that I would Disagree.
There is no actual Piracy Mechanic for Players.
Its in a sense not even part of the game.
The players Roleplaying by talking in chat and dropping cargo is entirely player driven.

The Game does allow for stealing cargo and/or killing others.
By using Weapons and Hatch Breakers.
But its not actually adding Piracy.


Exploration and Trading meanwhile has full mechanical support of the game.
And Exploration is in fact the biggest point of this Game.
Or do you think they made a 4 billion stars Galaxy for Fighting ?

In General. This Game has no PvP Matchmaking, extremely level based Combat Power to the point where skill is completely irrelevant, is heavily instanced in very small instances, has far too high losses on death as for newer players to possibly sustain PvP, has a crime and punishment system that is screaming that its meant for singleplayer and barely got a slapped on makeshift part for pvp.

Sorry.
But seriously.
Combat against NPCs is clearly a Main Part of this Game.
But PvP Combat in this Game is at best an halfheartedly implemented side part.
The Game is not only not laid out for PvP.
Its mechanics are almost entirely aimed to discourage PvP.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Being shot at shouldn't be optional! It's the primary risk of the game. It would be good if explorers maybe faced some of these same risks too.

Because ...

 

[Sunleader]

Because ...

Because he is one of these Players which have the idea that Games equal Violence. ^^
Anything that does not include shooting at something cant possibly be fun ^^

 

[Robert Maynard]

I disagree about the comment 'not firing a shot'. Your implication is that 'shooting' is 1/3 of the gameplay in terms of acquiring an Elite badge - as dubious as that is in itself as a game meaning.

Elite Combat is the only rank that requires the player to fire a shot. It's that simple.

A PC trader might very well choose not to carry offensive weapons or indeed any at all but they absolutely should expect to be shot at.

I did not suggest otherwise.

Being shot at shouldn't be optional! It's the primary risk of the game.

It isn't, sort of.

It would be good if explorers maybe faced some of these same risks too.
With this in mind, let's get back to the idea of NPC attacks being weak and the proposed concept of challenge being raised.

Not all players find NPC attacks to be weak. Therefore opinions vary as to the need, or not, to change their difficulty.

Defensive capability should be part of a traders build, even in solo mode, unless the said pilot was exceptionaly able. As it is, maxing for cargo seems to be the norm and makes trading simplistic and bland.

In the opinion of some, maybe - however there will always be risk takers who choose to squeeze in more cargo at the expense of the size (or existence) of the Shield Generator.

Not everyone plays the game for an adrenaline fix.

 

[Perseus]

On that I would Disagree.
There is no actual Piracy Mechanic for Players.
Its in a sense not even part of the game.
The players Roleplaying by talking in chat and dropping cargo is entirely player driven.

The Game does allow for stealing cargo and/or killing others.
By using Weapons and Hatch Breakers.
But its not actually adding Piracy.


Exploration and Trading meanwhile has full mechanical support of the game.
And Exploration is in fact the biggest point of this Game.
Or do you think they made a 4 billion stars Galaxy for Fighting ?

In General. This Game has no PvP Matchmaking, extremely level based Combat Power to the point where skill is completely irrelevant, is heavily instanced in very small instances, has far too high losses on death as for newer players to possibly sustain PvP, has a crime and punishment system that is screaming that its meant for singleplayer and barely got a slapped on makeshift part for pvp.

Sorry.
But seriously.
Combat against NPCs is clearly a Main Part of this Game.
But PvP Combat in this Game is at best an halfheartedly implemented side part.
The Game is not only not laid out for PvP.
Its mechanics are almost entirely aimed to discourage PvP.

Not sure if you're agreeing with me or not about piracy.
I'd like to address your point about exploration being the focus of the game (biggest point) and having full mechanical support. If that's true then the game is lacklustre to the point of meaningless. Honking and pressing J is exploring? Even with an imagination, the actual mechanics are pretty dull and uninspired. The things that can be found out in the black are also limited in the extreme.
I really believe the 4 billion star galaxy was mostly DB showing off! In addition to his love of astronomy, of course.
Trading is also pretty handicapped and simplistic as a mechanic. No trading licences to acquire, no fees, no alternative markets in systems, no bartering and a poorly implemented sense of a black market.

 

[Perseus]

Because ...

Challenge!
Also, it would be good if exploration data had a value beyond player based graffiti on unknown systems.

Because he is one of these Players which have the idea that Games equal Violence. ^^
Anything that does not include shooting at something cant possibly be fun ^^

Speak for yourself and not for me, thanks very much.

 

[Perseus]

. . .In the opinion of some, maybe - however there will always be risk takers who choose to squeeze in more cargo at the expense of the size (or existence) of the Shield Generator.

Not everyone plays the game for an adrenaline fix.

With the current NPC mechanics, soloist flying shieldless are not taking a risk at all. They would be taking a risk flying shieldless in open however.