Modes Open PVE mode - partial solution to community division?

[Vasious]

Open PVE mode characteristics:

• A 4th mode on the list (Solo, Group, Open PVE, Open PVP). Another equally valid choice in addition to other modes.
• All player-to-player damage is disabled and is completely ignored, including ramming damage and SLF damage, regardless of who's controlling them
• All player-to-player hostile modules are not activated (example: pressing fire on Hatch Breaker Limpet Controller when a player's ship is targetted does nothing)
• All player-to-player non-hostile modules still work normally (repair limpets, refuelling limpets etc.)
• If Open Only Power Play goes through, it would not be available for Open PVE (in other words, OOPP would ONLY be available for Open PVP mode)
• All the other parts of the game work normally (BGS etc.)

Benefits:

• An option for all players that prefer PVE playstyle and still want to have a social multiplayer experience to have their own environment where they could enjoy company of others without the PVP risk.
• Multiplayer features would be used more (Wings, Multi Crew), which would effectively mean more development focus on those
• More cooperative play between players, effectively having a positive effect on the community as a whole
• Less players in Solo
• Less demands for NPC equivalents of Multiplayer features (NPC wings, NPC multicrew)
• Generally positive effect on the community

Cons:

• Some players that currently play in Open would probably move to Open PVE mode, effectively meaning less players in Open PVP mode
• Inevitable complaints from the PVP (sorry PVP-ers, didn't really mean you!) gankers community
• A lot more strain on the net code, required to cater for the origin of every shot fired (i.e. in a CZ if the shot came from an NPC or a player)
• Not very immersive

I think this would fix a lot of the current salt and vitriol going on in the community. Most of the division comes from the fact that there are players who want to play with others, but don't enjoy the PVP part of the game. Why not give those players their own mode, effectively leaving Open PVP for PVP-ers and those hard core players that want to have the full experience?

There seems to be a trend for FDEV to implement more of the MMO specific features that lots of other games have and PVE servers are nothing unusual in any other MMO game.

Of course those PVP players who just want to see the world burn will complain, but hey - they are not the only ones that paid for the game and if it so happens that majority will prefer Open PVE mode, then so be it. They will just have to suck it up, just as the PVE players currently have to suck it up that you have a choice of either going Solo or playing in full-PVP Open mode.

It's a double-edged sword.

I honestly think that the overall effect of having an Open PVE mode would be very beneficial to the community and the game as a whole.


Your thoughts Commanders?

This wouldn't be a new mode
Modes are match making settings
We dont know how much work would be needed to implement as we dont know what infrastructure is in place to have the No player vs player damage etc

You say it will help fix the division created by the Open only PP but since your proposed "mode" still would be exempt to that, it changes very little, as those that wanted PP but not in PVP Open still are in the same state as now.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

There's no reason the flag couldn't ensure you're never instanced with them tho, right?

That sounds like more work than a separate mode to be honest.
But if it works, sure, why not.

 

[nrage]

ats will be ats in any mode - that's why Block exists.

Plus the Karma system might be able to notice a trend of blocks placed against a player in OpePVE mode and ban them from it, for example

That sounds like more work than a separate mode to be honest.
But if it works, sure, why not.

Actually, I think addressing it at the instancing level makes it simpler. The way instancing currently works, I believe, is that it attempts to instance players and only fails/gives up if there are problems. This would simply short-circuit that and not even try to instance players when the PvP flags don't match.

 

[nrage]

Difference with Mobius is they get booted from the group after being reported.
Open PVE wouldn't sort this issue as they could still be ats to other people (apart from the ones that blocked them).

Until Karma (TM) banned them from OpenPVE.. this is definitely something the proposed Karma system might address.

What about players who want to play with others, but don't enjoy the PVE part of the game ?

That's what multi-crew is for.

 

[rootsrat]

as if a private group wasn't already providing the same benefits as this ridiculous idea.

No it doesn't. It severely lacks the basic management functionality to be a convenient choice. Read my post a few above yours.

But it won't do anything to mitigate against those PvPers who are not using weapons.

But they are also present in Open currently, so in that respect nothing will change. It's irrelevant.

This wouldn't be a new mode
Modes are match making settings
We dont know how much work would be needed to implement as we dont know what infrastructure is in place to have the No player vs player damage etc

You say it will help fix the division created by the Open only PP but since your proposed "mode" still would be exempt to that, it changes very little, as those that wanted PP but not in PVP Open still are in the same state as now.

My proposal has NOTHING to do with OOPP, not sure where you got that idea from.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Plus the Karma system might be able to notice a trend of blocks placed against a player in OpePVE mode and ban them from it, for example


Actually, I think addressing it at the instancing level makes it simpler. The way instancing currently works, I believe, is that it attempts to instance players and only fails/gives up if there are problems. This would simply short-circuit that and not even try to instance players when the PvP flags don't match.

I think it would break the intent of the Open-only PP change, so there's that.

 

[True Phoenix]

For what do you need BGS ?
If there would be open pve and open pvp, who of you would bother with bgs ?

Clearly you fail to understand how the BGS works, as do many.

PvE open = private groups. If you want it, do it. You want open? Then its for everyone and entails all that comes with it. Fiddling with definitions doesn't cut it. Player interaction is the only way this game will go forward, splitting off into ever smaller segments, driven by "my version of ihmurrsion" will lead to the collapse of the BGS, PP, Superpowers, et al. It is inevitable. The Romans had it, in fact study Islamic revolutionaries in N Africa in the 50's / 60's, that too shows the outcome. In the end, we all end up in our own individual instances with our own rules, utter isolation. Not for me.

Get rid of all modes, except open. Group up, protect traders, run blockades, destroy ganks. Do it together, not alone in some sterile of this game.

 

[rootsrat]

PvE open = private groups.

Not really, how many times...?

Groups are missing any management functionality whatsoever + there is no way to impose PVE only in groups apart from asking nicely. Group mode is nowhere near Open PVE.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Clearly you fail to understand how the BGS works, as do many.

PvE open = private groups. If you want it, do it. You want open? Then its for everyone and entails all that comes with it. Fiddling with definitions doesn't cut it. Player interaction is the only way this game will go forward, splitting off into ever smaller segments, driven by "my version of ihmurrsion" will lead to the collapse of the BGS, PP, Superpowers, et al. It is inevitable. The Romans had it, in fact study Islamic revolutionaries in N Africa in the 50's / 60's, that too shows the outcome. In the end, we all end up in our own individual instances with our own rules, utter isolation. Not for me.

Get rid of all modes, except open. Group up, protect traders, run blockades, destroy ganks. Do it together, not alone in some sterile of this game.

I'm failing to follow your logic.
Open PvE would attract at least 3 or 4 of the largest PGs to it at a minimum, and maybe a chunk of Solo players as well.

That's 1 segment instead of dozens, unifying a large chunk of the player base.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

There's no reason the flag couldn't ensure you're never instanced with them tho, right?

true, that would work for me but is that then not 2 modes just with a different name.

(for the 2nd time this week on these forums i am reminded of this pun from a few years back http://www.davidpbrown.co.uk/jokes/european-commission.html

seriously.. whilst i am personally fin e with open pve I think asking for more tools when creating a PG is perhaps a more winnable battle (despite multple open modes with their own rule sets beiing part of the original design).

 

[nrage]

I think it would break the intent of the Open-only PP change, so there's that.

How? If the flag was off (PvE) you would not be able to power play. It should not change anything.

 

[MadDogMurdock]

How? If the flag was off (PvE) you would not be able to power play. It should not change anything.

Maybe. I think the suggestion was that mode change would lose the merits.

Whatever, if the end result is the same does it matter?

 

[nrage]

true, that would work for me but is that then not 2 modes just with a different name.

Yes, that's why I said it was functionally equivalent, and that most of the code changes would be identical, except for how it's presented in the GUI.

Just had a thought..

The new mode should not be called OpenPVE, it should be call Co-Op because that's actually what it's for. A multiplayer co-operative only experience.

 

[Gusty]

Not really, how many times...?

Groups are missing any management functionality whatsoever + there is no way to impose PVE only in groups apart from asking nicely. Group mode is nowhere near Open PVE.

Thats right as group mode is here and open pve is on the other side of the galaxy.
Nice to speak about it, but at the end wasted time.

 

[nrage]

Maybe. I think the suggestion was that mode change would lose the merits.

Whatever, if the end result is the same does it matter?

Nope, not unless one is actually easier to implement for some reason.

 

[CMDR RubberStig]

Yes. I would play in PVE most of the time except when occasionally in private groups.

 

[nrage]

People interested in this topic should probably hear what DB said in the topic. It starts at about 42:30 in this vid from 2.1 launch:

"I would like it" -- David Braben OBE
"I would definitely like to see that" -- David Braben OBE

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Yes, that's why I said it was functionally equivalent, and that most of the code changes would be identical, except for how it's presented in the GUI.

Just had a thought..

The new mode should not be called OpenPVE, it should be call Co-Op because that's actually what it's for. A multiplayer co-operative only experience.

Good idea, but I think I'd get Mobius in the name to mark their contribution to the game.

 

[nrage]

Ok, so the damage is removed, but the physics of collisions still exists, right?
So people could still pin you on a pad or jam the mailslot, or any number of other things. Griefers can get quite creative when they want to.

Bans, Karma, etc In fact Karma ought to address this nonsense in every multiplayer mode.

 

[CMDR M. Lehman]

What is the spirit of a game that has offered players the choice of other players as an optional component of their gameplay from the outset?

The spirit of the game is that the universe is a dangerous place, not one where you can magically make yourself invulnerable to weapons fire-regardless of where it comes from.