Modes Open PVE mode - partial solution to community division?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
I've been thinking about the flag idea and how it's functionally identical to a new mode.. except you have to create rules around when someone can/cannot alter their flag setting and I think you basically come back to wanting to limit it to a login/logout scenario, so perhaps simply making it a mode is easier/simpler to understand and actually a little better as you can leverage the existing in-combat logout timer to prevent a flag switch in combat.

But, I do like the players appear as NPCs idea, it would have to tie in with instancing tho as the PvP player (or wing) would have to see the real player signature disappear as it is being replaced by the NPC (rather then it splitting in two). I think you'd also have to ensure you never instance PvP on and PvP off players in the same realspace instance because performing the same switcheroo there might be problematic from a technical standpoint, I know Frontier have said they cannot spawn in an NPC when someone combat logs, for example.

I was thinking of another off the wall idea.

After watching this video where David Braben effectively said he would like a OpenPVE mode but the big issue was how to deal with the ramming and other potentially accidental "kills" without making players effectively invulnerable and breaking immersion.

I thought...

Imagine a Co-op mode which is identical to Open, with one change. Players in this mode are never instanced with Open players. Of course, this doesn't solve anything, right.. the PvP player will simply enter that mode and engage players. Ok, agreed, but now imagine if Sandro has implemented his Karma system in Open, in all it's glory, such that it tracks player behaviour and can confidently apply mode bans for bad behaviour like ramming, logging, etc. Now, apply Karma to the Co-op mode but increase it's reactiveness 10x so that it applies a mode ban for Co-op for a relatively small number of infractions, next we include a few extra infraction specific to Co-Op and not Open, and PvP action we want to avoid in the mode, like attacking another player outside a CZ, for example.

This idea avoids the issues David was worried about, by not actually removing them altogether but relying on the fact that serial offenders will be mode banned in relatively short order. This mode ban can be thought of, from the perspective of other players in Co-op as being a bit like a prison sentence for crimes committed, except the terms (length of mode ban) would be much shorter.. something like a couple of weeks or so. Sure, some players might accidentally trigger the mode ban, reckless flying causing deaths being the most likely, but the price they pay is perhaps 2 weeks ban from one mode and they still have Open, PG and solo to play in so it's not the end of the world for them.

It's crazy, but it just might work. And.. it doesn't appear to me to require a lot of extra work over and above the already proposed Karma system and a small (hopefully) tweak to instancing. It doesn't break immersion, and yet it still manages to strongly discourage PvP behaviours.


The point is, however, that I suspect (I don't know) that there is a technical limitation which will prevent them ever being as good as a Co-op mode would be.

Or they are lazy or unwilling to take the risk and change it. What ever it is, i don't care to be perfectly honest.

They've shown to be reluctant to new ideas for the best. How long have we been having these discussions about this particular issue? for years now.

OK, we clearly have a different opinion, so at this point I will just agree to disagree. Further discussion is pointless, as we'll never reach the consensus. You won't convince me and vice versa.

Thanks for a constructive discussion though. It's always good to see that rather than handbags.

(I do partially agree with you on lack of meaningful content. We could use some proper improvements to the existing features. See what the rest of this season brings - but that's offtopic.)

::EDIT::

Also, just to add, Steam stats are pretty much irrelevant, as those users are only a subset of the whole community. Only FDEV have any meaningful stats when it comes to players activity and other MI.

Did you expect David Braben to drop from his T-Rex Shaped ASP and change open tomorrow, we've been discussing this for years and nothing is changing. I remember the exact same suggestions in this topic from years ago. If they really valued player feedback on this topic they would have done something by now.

Also, steam stats are quite relevant, the majority of their sales is done on that platform. 60% of the their sales for Horizon alone was done on the platform. Which platform you think is more popular elite dangerous banana store or steam with 67 million monthly users?

The reality is, they have bigger priorities... like selling banana skins in their virtual online shop.
 
Last edited:

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
I was thinking of another off the wall idea.

After watching this video where David Braben effectively said he would like a OpenPVE mode but the big issue was how to deal with the ramming and other potentially accidental "kills" without making players effectively invulnerable and breaking immersion.

I thought...

Imagine a Co-op mode which is identical to Open, with one change. Players in this mode are never instanced with Open players. Of course, this doesn't solve anything, right.. the PvP player will simply enter that mode and engage players. Ok, agreed, but now imagine if Sandro has implemented his Karma system in Open, in all it's glory, such that it tracks player behaviour and can confidently apply mode bans for bad behaviour like ramming, logging, etc. Now, apply Karma to the Co-op mode but increase it's reactiveness 10x so that it applies a mode ban for Co-op for a relatively small number of infractions, next we include a few extra infraction specific to Co-Op and not Open, and PvP action we want to avoid in the mode, like attacking another player outside a CZ, for example.

This idea avoids the issues David was worried about, by not actually removing them altogether but relying on the fact that serial offenders will be mode banned in relatively short order. This mode ban can be thought of, from the perspective of other players in Co-op as being a bit like a prison sentence for crimes committed, except the terms (length of mode ban) would be much shorter.. something like a couple of weeks or so. Sure, some players might accidentally trigger the mode ban, reckless flying causing deaths being the most likely, but the price they pay is perhaps 2 weeks ban from one mode and they still have Open, PG and solo to play in so it's not the end of the world for them.

It's crazy, but it just might work. And.. it doesn't appear to me to require a lot of extra work over and above the already proposed Karma system and a small (hopefully) tweak to instancing. It doesn't break immersion, and yet it still manages to strongly discourage PvP behaviours.

Not bad at all. I like it.
 
I can do tomorrow, I'm in a hurry as of now and don't have the time for research.

Seems like I have been mistaken, the majority voted for an Open PvE mode but the reason why it didn't happen was because of the problems it would cause (according to some of this thread's posts): https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...UNITE!-Do-you-want-an-Open-PVE-Mode?p=4814536

How to you justify immunity against players (immersion)?
If player's would be immune to others, they could troll and grief in totally different way (gate blocking, pad slamming, NPC baiting, etc.) how would it be solved?
The reason why players want Open PvE is because they not only get destroyed but a random CMDR but also because this CMDR doesn't face consequences. A point that neither the PvP community appreciates.
-> rather than a new mode a proper C&P system was needed and we got a small overhault so far but this isn't enough yet (where are the ATRs?).

Also nice links I stumbled across:

Mega survey: https://odysseus1.typeform.com/report/ITdIHn/wm2i
Modes to play in: https://www./13875988/r
Google version: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...q5P2h4_GtIO5EOeXaI1HI8GMvQ/edit#gid=208356425
 
Last edited:
Why not go the full monty and do what they should have done from the beginning.

Open
Private servers
offline

instead of

open
group
solo
 
Thanks for taking the time to find that.

I went hunting for polls last night - and found that one and some others.

Still the point stands, Open PvE would come with utterly unrealistic gamerules and shift the game away from a space sim more towards a realm based MMO. Furthermore it would split up the player base and has a huge impact on existing game systems/mechanics such as BGS, PvE combat, politics, player groups and incoming features such as squadrons and fleet carriers.
Lastly, alot of potential implementations would not be possible due to sheer immunity to players which largely goes towards a singleplayer experience and would drive a big part of the playerbase away.

I believe that ED will either be what it is now, a mixed gameplay where everything can happen or a purely PvE, singlepalyer focused game where everyone minds their own business and large scale palyer interactions won't be a thing due to lack of interest.
Star Citizen will then offer the content ED wouldn't.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Still the point stands, Open PvE would come with utterly unrealistic gamerules and shift the game away from a space sim more towards a realm based MMO. Furthermore it would split up the player base and has a huge impact on existing game systems/mechanics such as BGS, PvE combat, politics, player groups and incoming features such as squadrons and fleet carriers.
Lastly, alot of potential implementations would not be possible due to sheer immunity to players which largely goes towards a singleplayer experience and would drive a big part of the playerbase away.

More unrealistic than healing beams or the experimental effect that disables damage to untargeted ships?

The player-base was split before the game even launched - permitting players who prefer PvE to coalesce from an unknown number of existing Private Groups into an official game mode where their play-style was supported would not necessarily reduce the population in Open. It would also make no change whatsoever to the fact that players in all three game modes affect the BGS.

How Squadrons and Carriers are implemented remains to be seen.
 
...It's been almost 5 years since the release of this game and there's barely any meaningful content that was developed in the last year...

Snippety snip.
Just to be that tangent guy; I'm fairly sure you mean gameplay not content. Content is just what is in the game (planets etc) you can't have meaningful content anymore than you get a meaningful moon ina game. Gameplay is the player experience of that content it via the use of connected mechanics, literally playing the game.
 
More unrealistic than healing beams or the experimental effect that disables damage to untargeted ships?

The player-base was split before the game even launched - permitting players who prefer PvE to coalesce from an unknown number of existing Private Groups into an official game mode where their play-style was supported would not necessarily reduce the population in Open. It would also make no change whatsoever to the fact that players in all three game modes affect the BGS.

How Squadrons and Carriers are implemented remains to be seen.

Healing beams are as dumb as it gets.
Other favorites are guns that modifies the properties of the ammunisjon and Shield boosters that magically scales with the shield, without added weight or power requirement.
SCBs that can bypass the power distributor and armour you can put inside the ship with better weight/hitpoint ratio than external armour are also interesting.

The top spot has to go to premium ammo though. Home made bullets and even missiles that are way better than what the pros make and sell in the shop. :D
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Healing beams are as dumb as it gets.
Other favorites are guns that modifies the properties of the ammunisjon and Shield boosters that magically scales with the shield, without added weight or power requirement.
SCBs that can bypass the power distributor and armour you can put inside the ship with better weight/hitpoint ratio than external armour are also interesting.

The top spot has to go to premium ammo though. Home made bullets and even missiles that are way better than what the pros make and sell in the shop. :D

Indeed.

The fact that healing beams would seem to have been a facilitator in two exploits, so far, would seem to make a strong case for their removal, in my opinion of course.
 
Seems like I have been mistaken, the majority voted for an Open PvE mode but the reason why it didn't happen was because of the problems it would cause (according to some of this thread's posts): https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...UNITE!-Do-you-want-an-Open-PVE-Mode?p=4814536

How to you justify immunity against players (immersion)?
If player's would be immune to others, they could troll and grief in totally different way (gate blocking, pad slamming, NPC baiting, etc.) how would it be solved?
The reason why players want Open PvE is because they not only get destroyed but a random CMDR but also because this CMDR doesn't face consequences. A point that neither the PvP community appreciates.
-> rather than a new mode a proper C&P system was needed and we got a small overhault so far but this isn't enough yet (where are the ATRs?).

Also nice links I stumbled across:

Mega survey: https://odysseus1.typeform.com/report/ITdIHn/wm2i
Modes to play in: https://www./13875988/r
Google version: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...q5P2h4_GtIO5EOeXaI1HI8GMvQ/edit#gid=208356425

I think only Sandro's proposed Karma(TM) system can address the undesirable behaviours. Based on this, I had the following idea:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/428782-Co-op-mode-Open-PvP?p=6726689#post6726689
 
Indeed.

The fact that healing beams would seem to have been a facilitator in two exploits, so far, would seem to make a strong case for their removal, in my opinion of course.

Healing beams are just as broken as the heat meta was. No idea why they don't take community solutions and tweak some values right into the code. As I'm coding myself, I do not understand what's so difficult to do this during a small patch. Sure it may be influencing other values but this is where the QA team comes in, no?
 
How to you justify immunity against players (immersion)?
We're all in the Pilot's Federation - for immersion purposes they install an IFF on all member ships to avoid friendly fire.

If player's would be immune to others, they could troll and grief in totally different way (gate blocking, pad slamming, NPC baiting, etc.) how would it be solved?
I'm not sure you can avoid this - even if FD could plug specific issues, the griefers will always come up with something new.
The Block function has always been there as a last resort to remove ASBO types from my instances.

The reason why players want Open PvE is because they not only get destroyed but a random CMDR but also because this CMDR doesn't face consequences. A point that neither the PvP community appreciates.
-> rather than a new mode a proper C&P system was needed and we got a small overhault so far but this isn't enough yet (where are the ATRs?).
This is key - I'm far from convinced that the C&P system does what it needs to.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Without the unpredictability of open, ED would be no better than NMS (or any of the many other single player space sim type games out there).

Yet many players are quite content to play this game in Solo or Private Groups - which suggests that not everyone is seeking the unpredictability of Open as part of their gameplay.
 
But solo is a mostly stagnant game mode.
I think this very much depends on what the player is hoping to get from the game, for example..

Sure, you can affect the BGS from solo, but almost anything you do will be imperceptible to almost everyone else.
But this is exactly what I want (as a player) a lot of the time. I'm not a social player, I don't want player interaction (for the most part), I don't want to affect anyone else's game. I mostly just want to improve my commander, ships, etc.

While the game does cater to solo players, it's only notable because of the things that happen in open.

Without the unpredictability of open, ED would be no better than NMS (or any of the many other single player space sim type games out there).
I enjoy NMS too :)

But, I do take your point, Elite is more interesting for social players because of the interaction. SC will be the same, only more so I suspect.
 

rootsrat

Volunteer Moderator
As for functionality, why not ask for something relatively simple like improving private group management in the areas where it is flawed?

That's something everyone would support.

I don't know, I never thought of asking for that. It's a great idea as well and I assure you that if there was a sufficient functionality for Groups, I would never ask for Open PVE mode.

The main point and the principle of my idea is to provide an unlimited (aka Open) environment for players that want to socialise, but don't want PVP. Whether it is via Private Groups or Open PVE mode is really not that important IMHO.

The only downside I see with doing this via PG's is still relying on a single individual to organise and manage a PG. That would be more like a lot of private servers with their own rules, but if the owner goes AWOL, that's it, the PG is dead, because it would just degrade due to lack of management.

That's why Open PVE will always be better. It's just another official mode that you can join.

Really, I don't understand why you would support improved PGs and not Open PVE - it would be essentially the same thing, when it comes to the effect on your experience.
 
Ever hears of private and mobius? Yeah, that's the safe mode you guys are requesting here. Open PvE mode would put a MASSIVE strain on the game's engine and simply would NOT be worth it development/funding wise, nor would it be a viable or efficient solution to any issue as it would cause countless problems with the game itself. This is a terrible idea, people need to stop suggesting it, you have private, if you want a safe mode, that's it.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Ever hears of private and mobius?

Of course - however neither of them have an unlimited population, nor do they permit the Private Group creator to disable particular PvP activities (i.e. interdiction, wake following, wake dropping, etc.).

Conditional damage is already in-game - so adding one flag check (i.e. is PvP-flag false) to an already comprehensive list of resistances, damage augments, etc. is hardly going to tax the game engine too much, in my opinion, especially as the game seems to be GPU rather than CPU limited.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom