Didn't derail it. Said we already have a player group for PVE - Mobius.
Don't need wasted development time on it.
Don't need another thread on it.
Case closed. Move on.
- Status
Didn't derail it. Said we already have a player group for PVE - Mobius.
Don't need wasted development time on it.
Don't need another thread on it.
Case closed. Move on.
sounds like an official Mobius mode with no membership limits and actual enforcement of rules that are now only achieved through a gentleman's agreement amongst the members.
sounds good to me. I don't think FDev will do it because they KNOW it will remove all unsuspecting cannon fodder from open that a certain subset of players require for their entertainment but its nice to want things.
sounds good to me. I don't think FDev will do it because they KNOW it will remove all unsuspecting cannon fodder from open that a certain subset of players require for their entertainment but its nice to want things.
Agreed. Have indeed floated this idea many times in the past few years, usually in the "Hotel", because that's where ideas like this usually get relegated to.
It doesn't even have to be a "4th" mode- it would almost completely alleviate the need for PG's whatsoever- because people could still group up in either PvP or PvE mode as they wish. Then you'd only need three menu choices that encompass most styles of play- Open PvE, Open PvP and Solo. (the latter of which would be for those who wanted "offline single player") All you're exchanging is PG's for Open PvE. Groups such as Mobius formed out of the lack of a cooperative PvE mode, and it proved that there was a need for one almost immediately with the number of players who participate.
As to coding, it really shouldn't be all that difficult considering the Wings system has a mechanic for ignoring Friendly Fire damage. Set to -100% and voila! Only difference is instead of each player having to be involved in a "Wing" each player in that mode is affected by the same rule. So arguments of "waste of development time", etc. are completely false and irrelevant- takes a whole hell of a lot less time to code this up than say making PP exclusive to Open.
It's long past due.
Just as PP -> Open "should have been from it's introduction", a PvE mode and not just a PG (limited player size group that still doesn't negate player/player damage) should have been from release.
The long overused "justification" (which is just an excuse) is that it would fragment the community, however the community has remained fragmented for years and they still haven't figured out how to "resolve" it... perhaps because there's no resolution in pigeonholing everyone into a single playstyle?
At this point, what does Frontier really stand to lose that they haven't already?
It doesn't even have to be a "4th" mode- it would almost completely alleviate the need for PG's whatsoever- because people could still group up in either PvP or PvE mode as they wish. Then you'd only need three menu choices that encompass most styles of play- Open PvE, Open PvP and Solo. (the latter of which would be for those who wanted "offline single player") All you're exchanging is PG's for Open PvE. Groups such as Mobius formed out of the lack of a cooperative PvE mode, and it proved that there was a need for one almost immediately with the number of players who participate.
As to coding, it really shouldn't be all that difficult considering the Wings system has a mechanic for ignoring Friendly Fire damage. Set to -100% and voila! Only difference is instead of each player having to be involved in a "Wing" each player in that mode is affected by the same rule. So arguments of "waste of development time", etc. are completely false and irrelevant- takes a whole hell of a lot less time to code this up than say making PP exclusive to Open.
It's long past due.
Just as PP -> Open "should have been from it's introduction", a PvE mode and not just a PG (limited player size group that still doesn't negate player/player damage) should have been from release.
The long overused "justification" (which is just an excuse) is that it would fragment the community, however the community has remained fragmented for years and they still haven't figured out how to "resolve" it... perhaps because there's no resolution in pigeonholing everyone into a single playstyle?
At this point, what does Frontier really stand to lose that they haven't already?
Last edited:
Your opinion has been noted and carefully filed under useless.
Ozric
Volunteer Moderator
No thanks.
There are plenty of people who play in Open but don't partake in PvP, that doesn't mean that we despise it, or even want to hide from it. There are already other modes for that, adding another one is just a pointless waste of development time, which considering your recent posts I would have thought you'd consider.
Why not suggest a PvP flag instead.
There are plenty of people who play in Open but don't partake in PvP, that doesn't mean that we despise it, or even want to hide from it. There are already other modes for that, adding another one is just a pointless waste of development time, which considering your recent posts I would have thought you'd consider.
Why not suggest a PvP flag instead.
Last edited:
Because PvP players shout it down with the "hollow box" theory and that not being able to shoot at another player because of some magical function doesn't make sense to them. So if there's no willingness to compromise on this, a different mode should be made available.
Last edited:
Plus it would make them even more angry than the current 'mode-dodging' - being able to see them but not shoot them, can you imagine!?
I would support such a game mode, if the following changes are made to other features and game modes:
- Powerplay moves to Open only
- All activities in Open only receives bonuses (credits, influence, reputation, etc) compared to other game modes, balancing risk/reward of encountering "unfriendly CMDRs":
- Bonus begins after a minimum time in Open, e.g. 1hr
- Changing to a different game mode resets the time counter
- Bonus increases linearly for continuous time in Open: e.g. 10% after 1hr, 20% after 2hr, 30% after 3hr, etc.
- Bonus capped at a maximum, e.g. 100%
- Private Groups reduced in size to match Squadron's size, currently 250 members maximum (the 10000 cap was only introduced to meet Mobius PvE's expanding membership)
- Open PvE has PvP disabled everywhere, including CZs, HazRES', CompromisedNavs, etc.
Open PvE won't stop the most common type of griefing. Kill Stealing. In fact, it would increase it due to the loss of any way to stop the griefers. You won't be able to attack them or go silent and fly into their line of fire so they're wanted. Those are the only ways of stopping them. Talking does nothing.
For this reason, I'm against Open PvE.
For this reason, I'm against Open PvE.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
I used to be a massive fan of an open PvE mode however I have been convinced by others it would not work.
1) some would go out of their way to break the spirit of it.
2) solution to 1 would be removing ramming or friendly fire... both solutions which cause more harm than they fix imo.
3) it absolutely would not mitigate the lack of npc wingmates or crew at all, not 1 bit imo...... i only really play in a group when i play now... but i still want npc wingmates and crew far more than any MP content.
Note I am not against the mode at all, I just do not think it would work.
I doubt i would be in it, its too high a price to pay if you want to mitgate the itchynipples of the game, such as losing policing fire, flying careflly around stations and furballs etc.
PS imo a PvP flag would be the most immersion breaking of the lot imo and i think you would get pve folk and current open folk complaining.. IF there is a ship in my instance and i fire at it... i expect to hit it, no magic bullets thanks.
if i fly in the path of a ship i expect to hit it, no ghost ships for me i am afraid.
Last edited:
ats will be ats in any mode - that's why Block exists.
Agreed. It's a completely separate problem to be resolved, just as "griefing" (and not PvP) is.
Some just seem to think their sole purpose is to cause problems for others. Call them "catalysts" I suppose.
Just remember, all of these issues can occur in PG's currently too.
As such, it makes no sense to downvote a proposal just because some can interfere with others gameplay if they so choose.
Just remember, all of these issues can occur in PG's currently too.
As such, it makes no sense to downvote a proposal just because some can interfere with others gameplay if they so choose.
Yeah, nothings perfect but I still like PvE Open.
No ta.
Dev time could be better spent.
Cat-bobbleheads for a start.
Dev time could be better spent.
Cat-bobbleheads for a start.
Just remember, all of these issues can occur in PG's currently too.
As such, it makes no sense to downvote a proposal just because some can interfere with others gameplay if they so choose.
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).
Don't get me wrong, I'd be for it if a huge PVE group didn't already exist.
I support this idea of open PvE due to the fact not all players are good at PvP (myself included), besides giving us another option to play with our friends without the worry of engaging in PvP combat doesn’t sound bad at all
- Status