Open PvE

[[VR] Mad Mike]

It thrives because it is still considerably small, in the sense that not a lot of people access the forum and not all Cmdr in Mobius' total player count are active, actually a small portion of it is active from what I understand (I could be wrong). When it becomes an official mode, it will see much more "undermining," if you know what I mean.

You are right that the bigger it gets the more chance you will get of prats slipping in to grief but that being said whilst I do not know numbers of active players in the group I always see a number of players. I even randomly met a forum member fairly off the beaten path. In open I would have been wary..... In Mobius tho it was a delight and we could chat for 5 mins before going on our way. Imo this is exactly how MP was sold to us back in the early days and I applaud it

 

[Roguey]

Please be aware of your diction, calling non-PvE content "bad" is just asking for more flame. Though I am in full support of a flag system.

Well im not a fan of PvP, never have been - never will be. In other 'MMOs' I enjoy playing with random's (or PUG's) - helping each other, in a PvE environment (completing dungeons, looking for loot etc.). However in most MMO's you have the choice if you want to play in PvP mode or not.

However, in Elite we dont have that choice; its either mix with everyone (most do their own thing, with the possibility of other commanders attacking me) or avoid everyone - stay solo. So staying solo makes more sense for me (it removes the risk without any penalty for doing so). I feel for an always online game, solo seams a bit defeatist. I would like to play with others for fun, and PvP isnt fun for me. The human pirates ive come across in open work in wings, and how is it fair when you get 4 vs 1? as they are organized group of players - with probably voice-chat, so one rams you (to knock-out your shield, whilst the other 3 kill you).

I know some people enjoy pvp, and thats fine for them. However you should be able choose that type of gameplay. That way if you want to do PvP you can (so those guys are happy), and if you dont then you dont have too. Offering an Coop mode would gladly make me switch from solo, to coop. Mobius is proof that commanders do want a coop mode.

I do feel we lacking common enemy although, we should be uniting against a common foe. I guess power-play was an attempt at this, but didnt quite work out how FD planned. Awhile back I had the same feelings here.

For now the only solution is solo. hmmm.. might look at joining Mobius (but it would be better if ED had its own coop mode).

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

I'm not opposed to a pve mode, but I hate the idea of a pvp flag system. The only thing worse than not seeing any traders when you're trying to pirate, is seeing dozens but you can't pull them over.

There would also be the need to restrictions on it to prevent gaming the system. Bounty hunters or pirates hiding behind the a pve only flag just to remove the flag after they find a target they like. Traders not using the pve flag until they get in a situation they don't like then activating it like an invincible shield to defend themselves.

 

[Globusdiablo]

The lack of an officially supported Open access PvE mode that is clearly advertised on the start menu is, in my opinion, a drawback. Players who do not wish to PvP cannot select a mode that allows them to play with random strangers - only the existing Open mode allows that.

I approved this message.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

oooohhh dodged that question like a politician.

i'll put words in your mouth, "it was the voices made me do it!"

i like the idea of the letter for permission to pirate, and weapons and ramming just pass through player ships with no damage.

if all the griefers rage quit over this it will only improve the player experience for non-psycho killers.

Lol, so your image of a playable Open PvE is one where the other players are just ornaments below the quality of an asteroid, which at least has collision? The only way you're going to stop griefing on public servers is to remove all forms of player interaction, and that mode already exists. It's called Solo.
|
By the way, "Griefers" don't rage quit. I spent three weeks hunting one person because they made a snarky comment after I bumped them at a gate in EvE. I bumped them again 3 weeks later at the perfect moment to ensure that the real dogs of the game would get their shots in and destroy him just for being slow, even though it cost me my ship in the process because I was KOS with them too. I had a nice chat with the guy about acting sub-human over unavoidable game mechanics faux pas' before he logged out for a week.
|
It's a two way street, and PvE players are typically the ones that rage quit. That's the reward. See also: Combat Logging.

Players who contravene the rules of an Open-PvE mode would not need to be removed from the game, just that mode. We instance change all the time - after a breach of the rules, the offending player could simply be moved to Open at the next instance change. All damage / insurance costs for a player attacked by another player could be reimbursed in full as well as full retention of cargo, booty, bounty vouchers, merits vouchers, exploration data, etc.. While using game mechanics (i.e. oldest temporary object is deleted when the instance limit is exceeded) to annoy others is possible, I would expect that video evidence of the dumper in action could gain that player a holiday from Open-PvE. Regarding bumping ships - if one is stopped then it's fairly obvious who has rammed who.

I do appreciate that EvE would seem to be a breeding ground for "anything goes" tactics designed to adversely affect other players - it's more than a bit sad that some players get their kicks simply thwarting others and not actually playing the game.

Private Group management tools would be a very welcome addition - along with the promised ability to affect the rules of the PG.

My point is you don't have to break the rules to grief in a PvE environment. Not by any remote stretch of the imagination. If you want to stop griefing, see the reply I made above.
|
Your success with a PvE environment in a private group is unmatched and unheard of in these circumstances. Build on that instead of throwing everything away and hoping FD can be bothered to cater to your needs to fix what you'll lose by going Public.
|
Edit: Maybe I should elaborate a little further. When a guy like me is offering you free advice on how to avoid being harassed, it's probably advice well taken. Imagine if you were leaving your home one day and a guy strolled up and said "Excuse me sir, this may seem a bit odd but it's been bugging me for days now and I've just got to tell you. Your house is begging for me to break into it. As a retired cat burglar every time I see the old locks on the windows, the gap in the door hinges, the corner of the welcome mat that shows that it's been getting lifted up to grab the spare key for years, I can't help but think that I could be in and out of there before your pug woke up with everything worth more than a pound. Here is what you need to do to keep people like me from cleaning you out...."
|
Now if instead of taking this kind advice you left the window cracked and the key sticking out from under the mat don't be surprised to find your house picked clean when you get back.
|
Myself and thousands of other people can't be bothered to harass Mobius because it's not worth the effort. Our attention span has shifted elsewhere before we finally decide we're bored enough to scheme our way in. Put your community one click away and we'll be in there every day after we've had our fill bounty hunting, exploring, trading, running the PowerPlay circle or whatever. It will not stop.
|
I say this out of my own interest, mind you. I tend to get really involved for arbitrary reasons and I'm getting too old to spend weeks of sleepless nights hounding people because one of their wingmen bumped me in the letterbox, or I've decided that the Purple United Federation of Axlaal is completely justified in their holy vendetta against Heike Bottled Dog Water or whatever, and run off every trader who shows up with a load. Arbitrary rules that try and prevent this type of gameplay just make it more challenging and rewarding when you do it without breaking them.
|
And once again, remember that you will immediately draw every cheater that people are complaining about in Open. Your tears taste better.

 

[Dave1235]

I'm not opposed to a pve mode, but I hate the idea of a pvp flag system. The only thing worse than not seeing any traders when you're trying to pirate, is seeing dozens but you can't pull them over.

There would also be the need to restrictions on it to prevent gaming the system. Bounty hunters or pirates hiding behind the a pve only flag just to remove the flag after they find a target they like. Traders not using the pve flag until they get in a situation they don't like then activating it like an invincible shield to defend themselves.

I agree, I wouldn't want to be flying around seeing people not in the same mode, I am pretty sure that FD designed it this way to avoid magic shields etc.

Ban anyone who kills another player outside of a conflict zone, refund the victim for all their losses and fine the PKer 10 or 100 times the value of the damage they did.

From the second post on the Mobius group thread "To each their own". "Do not spoil another players game", FD could quite easily add a tick box to confirm people have read and understood the rules, those that break them are dealt with accordingly. I would love to see the rage posts from the first people to go ganking in PVE mode if FD implemented proper consequences.

 

[Mouse]

Lol, so your image of a playable Open PvE is one where the other players are just ornaments below the quality of an asteroid, which at least has collision? The only way you're going to stop griefing on public servers is to remove all forms of player interaction, and that mode already exists. It's called Solo.
|
By the way, "Griefers" don't rage quit. I spent three weeks hunting one person because they made a snarky comment after I bumped them at a gate in EvE. I bumped them again 3 weeks later at the perfect moment to ensure that the real dogs of the game would get their shots in and destroy him just for being slow, even though it cost me my ship in the process because I was KOS with them too. I had a nice chat with the guy about acting sub-human over unavoidable game mechanics faux pas' before he logged out for a week.
|
It's a two way street, and PvE players are typically the ones that rage quit. That's the reward. See also: Combat Logging.



My point is you don't have to break the rules to grief in a PvE environment. Not by any remote stretch of the imagination. If you want to stop griefing, see the reply I made above.
|
Your success with a PvE environment in a private group is unmatched and unheard of in these circumstances. Build on that instead of throwing everything away and hoping FD can be bothered to cater to your needs to fix what you'll lose by going Public.
|
Edit: Maybe I should elaborate a little further. When a guy like me is offering you free advice on how to avoid being harassed, it's probably advice well taken. Imagine if you were leaving your home one day and a guy strolled up and said "Excuse me sir, this may seem a bit odd but it's been bugging me for days now and I've just got to tell you. Your house is begging for me to break into it. As a retired cat burglar every time I see the old locks on the windows, the gap in the door hinges, the corner of the welcome mat that shows that it's been getting lifted up to grab the spare key for years, I can't help but think that I could be in and out of there before your pug woke up with everything worth more than a pound. Here is what you need to do to keep people like me from cleaning you out...."
|
Now if instead of taking this kind advice you left the window cracked and the key sticking out from under the mat don't be surprised to find your house picked clean when you get back.
|
Myself and thousands of other people can't be bothered to harass Mobius because it's not worth the effort. Our attention span has shifted elsewhere before we finally decide we're bored enough to scheme our way in. Put your community one click away and we'll be in there every day after we've had our fill bounty hunting, exploring, trading, running the PowerPlay circle or whatever. It will not stop.
|
I say this out of my own interest, mind you. I tend to get really involved for arbitrary reasons and I'm getting too old to spend weeks of sleepless nights hounding people because one of their wingmen bumped me in the letterbox, or I've decided that the Purple United Federation of Axlaal is completely justified in their holy vendetta against Heike Bottled Dog Water or whatever, and run off every trader who shows up with a load. Arbitrary rules that try and prevent this type of gameplay just make it more challenging and rewarding when you do it without breaking them.
|
And once again, remember that you will immediately draw every cheater that people are complaining about in Open. Your tears taste better.

Why.. what enjoyment do you get from griefing others? That is what I'm trying to understand.

I agree, I wouldn't want to be flying around seeing people not in the same mode, I am pretty sure that FD designed it this way to avoid magic shields etc.

Ban anyone who kills another player outside of a conflict zone, refund the victim for all their losses and fine the PKer 10 or 100 times the value of the damage they did.

From the second post on the Mobius group thread "To each their own". "Do not spoil another players game", FD could quite easily add a tick box to confirm people have read and understood the rules, those that break them are dealt with accordingly. I would love to see the rage posts from the first people to go ganking in PVE mode if FD implemented proper consequences.

^this^

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

Why.. what enjoyment do you get from griefing others? That is what I'm trying to understand.



^this^

It has nothing to do with griefing, is what you don't want to realize. It's just playing the game. I'll continue to play your game though and call it griefing, it's not hurting my feelings being accused of somehow maligning people in a video game.

ED players really need to stop labelling anything that doesn't fall within their very narrow perspective of what they personally think people should do as griefing. This accomplishes nothing but perpetuating a problem that is entirely self created. Using that same logic I could label Fuel Rats as griefers, they're inflating the currency by reducing insurance payouts. Traders are griefers, they're constantly destabilizing the economy and making my trading less enjoyable. Miners are griefers, anyone in a RES should be bounty hunting, miners are getting in the way and slowing spawns. Etc...

Your grief is self inflicted. You are in no way obligated to be emotionally invested in a video game to the extent that random occurences cause you psychological distress. You insist that everyone around you should comply to your special rules, to the extent that you resort to berating and demeaning them if they don't act the way you want them to. I do not impose any such arbitrary rules on the people around me. It's their game. I didn't buy it for them, nor do they need my permission to play it however they please. There is only one set of rules, and that's Frontier's. They coded them into the game.

Likewise, I will pursue my entertainment in the game as I see fit within the guidelines that FD has laid out for me. That entertainment does not involve your personal distress, but if you make yourself the butt of the joke by insisting that your personal distress over an internet spaceship is somehow my fault when you knew in their entirety the boundaries of gameplay that are acceptable and allowed within the rules then yes I will laugh. I will find amusement in your rejection of the only piece of reality involved in a fantastical, whimsical game of imagination and escapism, because only through ridicule will you understand your own hubris.

If I didn't view all of you as my peers and treat you as I expect to be treated - like a competent and rational person - then I'd play solo. It'd be less hassle.

 

[Mr_Blastman]

Well im not a fan of PvP, never have been - never will be. In other 'MMOs' I enjoy playing with random's (or PUG's) - helping each other, in a PvE environment (completing dungeons, looking for loot etc.). However in most MMO's you have the choice if you want to play in PvP mode or not.

However, in Elite we dont have that choice; its either mix with everyone (most do their own thing, with the possibility of other commanders attacking me) or avoid everyone - stay solo. So staying solo makes more sense for me (it removes the risk without any penalty for doing so). I feel for an always online game, solo seams a bit defeatist. I would like to play with others for fun, and PvP isnt fun for me. The human pirates ive come across in open work in wings, and how is it fair when you get 4 vs 1? as they are organized group of players - with probably voice-chat, so one rams you (to knock-out your shield, whilst the other 3 kill you).

I know some people enjoy pvp, and thats fine for them. However you should be able choose that type of gameplay. That way if you want to do PvP you can (so those guys are happy), and if you dont then you dont have too. Offering an Coop mode would gladly make me switch from solo, to coop. Mobius is proof that commanders do want a coop mode.

I do feel we lacking common enemy although, we should be uniting against a common foe. I guess power-play was an attempt at this, but didnt quite work out how FD planned. Awhile back I had the same feelings here.

For now the only solution is solo. hmmm.. might look at joining Mobius (but it would be better if ED had its own coop mode).

Hark! Those that quaff the fire of death inherit the souls of life! Fear not, brothers! For we are now alive!

 

[Mouse]

It has nothing to do with griefing, is what you don't want to realize. It's just playing the game. I'll continue to play your game though and call it griefing, it's not hurting my feelings being accused of somehow maligning people in a video game.

ED players really need to stop labelling anything that doesn't fall within their very narrow perspective of what they personally think people should do as griefing. This accomplishes nothing but perpetuating a problem that is entirely self created. Using that same logic I could label Fuel Rats as griefers, they're inflating the currency by reducing insurance payouts. Traders are griefers, they're constantly destabilizing the economy and making my trading less enjoyable. Miners are griefers, anyone in a RES should be bounty hunting, miners are getting in the way and slowing spawns. Etc...

Your grief is self inflicted. You are in no way obligated to be emotionally invested in a video game to the extent that random occurences cause you psychological distress. You insist that everyone around you should comply to your special rules, to the extent that you resort to berating and demeaning them if they don't act the way you want them to. I do not impose any such arbitrary rules on the people around me. It's their game. I didn't buy it for them, nor do they need my permission to play it however they please. There is only one set of rules, and that's Frontier's. They coded them into the game.

Likewise, I will pursue my entertainment in the game as I see fit within the guidelines that FD has laid out for me. That entertainment does not involve your personal distress, but if you make yourself the butt of the joke by insisting that your personal distress over an internet spaceship is somehow my fault when you knew in their entirety the boundaries of gameplay that are acceptable and allowed within the rules then yes I will laugh. I will find amusement in your rejection of the only piece of reality involved in a fantastical, whimsical game of imagination and escapism, because only through ridicule will you understand your own hubris.

If I didn't view all of you as my peers and treat you as I expect to be treated - like a competent and rational person - then I'd play solo. It'd be less hassle.

if you look through your posts you are the one admitting you are griefing, you've even used the words. This is not COD in space, it is ED. And there is a huge difference in can do something and should. If there is a PVE server and people are happy to play in it. If someone comes in and tries to screw everything up, you don't blame the players who were in there with legitimate reasons as you are doing. You blame the person who took it upon themselves to twist rules or do what ever they can to screw up other people's gametime.

 

[why fi at all]

Players who contravene the rules of an Open-PvE mode would not need to be removed from the game, just that mode.

or even worse restricted to the dreaded SOLO for the next ten or twenty hours of in game time.

 

[Mouse]

or even worse restricted to the dreaded SOLO for the next ten or twenty hours of in game time.

A week ^,^

 

[Dave1235]

Just in case GluttonyFang or Majinvash missed it I will ask for a second (and last time).

PS on a scale of 1 to ten, 1 being "I don't care" and 10 being "I really regret it" it would the Mobius gankers be if if their actions had a RL consequence on one of their victims?

What on earth did I walk into...

Something of your own making?

Hold on, before you start targeting your collective Solo/Group rage at me, I would like to clarify that I don't hold particular grudges against Mobius, since Cmdr Beltane showed me that Mobius deserves to be respected to a degree.

Why now? and why only to a degree?", I will hold my grudge against CODE for ever, I could deal with you taking over an old worlds rares system, but the moment Veg&mash and his buddy invaded Mobius you lost all integrity, people have stood up and posted personal info here, that they have serious issues due to military service for example (you know those hero's that have fought for their country's, lost friends in battle (not pixel . real people with familys), the same ones the "open only" crowd refer to as "Cowards" for avoiding non consential PVP or Open, by a bunch of fracking kidiots, they avoid it for their mental health and well being, not to rob you of giggles, some people make my blood boil

However I feel that as much as it hinges quite a lot on a single player to maintain a large group, the said group should have very detailed and organized succession system that it will function on its own. Therefore the concern of a sudden collapse is not the fault of anyone but the organization/group itself lack proper constitution/regulation that handle these situations.

The possible "sudden collapse" is not an issue, making all players aware of a PVE option in the game (something FD advertised at KS as an option), via the menu rather than the forums, facebook, twitter (or reddit, the one FD don't use), why should CMDR's have to find out about a PVE option via forums (when less than 10% use the forums, this option should be available to all via the log in screen (why does the CQC which we never backed, asked for or told about get a separate login but not an established group of 10k players, are they worried too many will choose it?)

Creating a PvE mode on top of everything we currently have will further thin-out the number of players available in Open. As my reputation presents me, I am a well-known Open mode supporter. Thus allow me to protest against this further dilution of Open Play population.

Really, so what!, players that want your type of interaction can click Open others can click Open PVE, why are you so worried about advertising a PVE option to the 90% that don't use the forums, surely it is better they know all the options and choose, rather than click Open due to ignorance of the options they have.

If I was FD, I would question the integrity and functionality of your group considering its size for not having a set of policies and settled clauses that deal with exceptional situations instead of going through the trouble of making another mode.

Mobius ma, I am sure FD can replicate it, its part of the game already, they could even run it on an honour system just like Mobius (here you go, I know you don't get it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honour), FD could control the group better, they can check facts and ban people (no need for flags or magic shields), I believe Mobius banned 4 people so far, 2 were from CODE, 2 unknown (in 6 fracking months, CODE are half the Mobius ban list! Tossers!

Because as it stands, I understand Mobius' ideology is that it despises PvP and wishes to annihilate it from the face of the planet. Really you don't have a clue, you should really do some research, you only make yourself look stupid with such comments Therefore creating a mode that disables the ability for Cmdrs to shoot at one another or damage one another seem to call for an additional mode labelled PvP if we honor FD's stance of equal and valid. All this work to compensate proper player group management/set up seems to not be worth the time, to me. If anything, it puts another dent in the community.

Wrong again, Mobius group is not anti PVP at all, anyone can PVP in a combat zone, not done it myself yet but personally I will PM the other CMDR first to ask if they would like a fight or join me in a wing to cooperate against the AI (laugh all you like it happened all through Beta in Open).

Basically we are looking at:

PvP
PvE
Open
Group
Solo

I feel that this do nothing but further separate the playerbase, causing even more fragmentation within the community. If we delete Open/Group form the equation, we are looking at disgruntled Open players who want unexpected player interaction outside of PvP, and disgruntled Group players that want to be able to shoot one another without going into PvP. If we don't delete said modes, we are looking at slicing the playerbase even thinner. I understand that some players came in this game looking for PvE/Group restricted experience, but I would like to think we are not catering to it at the expense of other players.

You can arrange a fight with anyone you want any time, I think you are worried people that people who have no interest in being your content might realise ED was build in a way to let them avoid it, I only fly in open in my type6 running rares, because I want to be pirated, the rest of the time I use groups or solo, why should anyone who is not on the forum lose that choice, it needs to be a menu option for all not just forum users who read a post about it!

Again, I will clarify that I hold no grudges against Mobius, I understand that my syndicate has particular disputes with your player group, but I wish to put that aside in this discussion.

Why the Frack would you hold a grudge against Mobius group? Really why what did the Mobius group do to you? they did nothing to you!, CODE disrespected Mobius, Veg&mash overstepped the line not giving a crap about other players, you will reap what you sow, I hope your harvest is ten fold what you plant.

I speak for myself only OFC but you on your chips, 2 CODE members screwed it up for all CODE members, I fly in open in my type6 looking to share rares, the only thing U will see from me is an in game log off or self destruct, I will not give any of you a ton of fish or a single word or second of my life online.

I never left open due to ganking etc (and I have run via lave, Diso & leesti for a month, never got robbed), I left open because I met "some" obnoxious people on the forum that I would not want to spend a moment of my in game time with, welcome to the list, you earned your place!, you are right behind Veg&mash. If I could block "you few" in game I might play in open a whole lot more. Shame as I am sure there are some decent Code pilots out there.

I never met any of you in open & I spent enough time on your doorstep in the last month, but no more, I would like to apologise to any decent CODE pirates, I am sure there are many but a couple of gobby agressive pricks with no morals messed it up for all of you!

Fly safe, and continue to wonder why Open seem empty. When you are gone many may return!

 

[Mr_Blastman]

A separate group mode would fracture the community. No. It is fine like it is. There are enough folks around here that can't handle human interactions. We don't need to encourage even more hole hiding.

 

[Mouse]

A separate group mode would fracture the community. No. It is fine like it is. There are enough folks around here that can't handle human interactions. We don't need to encourage even more hole hiding.

Why is it you cannot understand that people are not all like you and if they are in solo or groups they are not "hole hiding".

 

[Jockey79]

A separate group mode would fracture the community. No. It is fine like it is. There are enough folks around here that can't handle human interactions. We don't need to encourage even more hole hiding.

You fail to understand, an open PvE mode would bring people out of their groups into a mode where they can see/ interact with other random members of the community.

It would not fracture the community, it will reinforce it if people can freely join a real PvE mode and not rely on Mobius for player interaction away from PvP.

 

[Cody]

Hole-hiding? Ooh, I like that! A possible candidate for the list, is that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

A separate group mode would fracture the community. No. It is fine like it is. There are enough folks around here that can't handle human interactions. We don't need to encourage even more hole hiding.

If players can't handle all human interactions then they'll probably stay in Solo. If players don't like some of the interactions forced upon them by other players, then an Open-PvE mode would allow them to interact with players who (if the no-loss/expulsion approach to PvP was adopted) can't adversely affect their game.

The community exists in all three game modes at the moment - an Open-PvE mode would, in my opinion, allow some of the fragments to coalesce into a larger portion of the community and would allow those players to interact with many more players.

 

[Windscreen Smudge]

if you look through your posts you are the one admitting you are griefing, you've even used the words. This is not COD in space, it is ED. And there is a huge difference in can do something and should. If there is a PVE server and people are happy to play in it. If someone comes in and tries to screw everything up, you don't blame the players who were in there with legitimate reasons as you are doing. You blame the person who took it upon themselves to twist rules or do what ever they can to screw up other people's gametime.

No, I'm just simply describing it as you expect it to be described. Doing otherwise would result in a failure to communicate.

"Screwing it up" Is your arbitrary definition that you apply to how you expect people to act in a PvE server. That's your fault for expecting the unreasonable. If you expect humans to act like humans, then you'll get what you expect.

Nobody is twisting the rules. There is not a single person sitting across the table from David saying "Yes, but if you go by the Latin root, Invulnerabilis or Volnero when cleaned up, we have to English synonyms of Wound, Harm, and Injure. Limpets do none of these things so it is reasonable to expect to be able to open cargo hatches on a PvE server." The rules are set. The players are playing by them. Your interpretation of how players should act within those guidelines is moot. You are just another player, it is not your game that you designed therefore it is not your place to decide acceptable behavior. This is why YOU don't have a ban button to click beside people's names, and that delegation is left to Frontier and their staff.

Your perspective was argued unto death during the entire development phase for the entirety of open play, and yet open play is what it is today. That is because Frontier values player choice over tailored experiences. Open PvE is redundant in that it removes an extra set of rules given to you by Frontier to enable you to create your own tailored experience. That set of rules is called Private Groups. Asking for Open PvE is just asking for a less tailored experience. The less the experience is tailored to your specific desires, the less you can expect to enjoy it.

If players can't handle all human interactions then they'll probably stay in Solo. If players don't like some of the interactions forced upon them by other players, then an Open-PvE mode would allow them to interact with players who (if the no-loss/expulsion approach to PvP was adopted) can't adversely affect their game.

The community exists in all three game modes at the moment - an Open-PvE mode would, in my opinion, allow some of the fragments to coalesce into a larger portion of the community and would allow those players to interact with many more players.

This is going under the huge assumption that players wouldn't be able to adversely affect your game. "Where there is a will, there is a way." Open PvE may give you a larger community as a whole, but the assumption that they would coalesce into one group is just an assumption. You could very easily end up segmenting the community into players with different perspectives on what is fair play in the PvE mode and what isn't, which will immediately result in the more aggressive part of the population preying upon the more passive. Such is human nature. The moment you start accepting everybody, you have to accept everybody, and all that that entails.

CODE is a segment of Eve players that moonlight in Elite: Dangerous doing PvP and piratey things. In Eve online, CODE specializes in preying upon PvE players in high security space where PvE players are supposed to be protected from forced interactions with other players. If an Open PvE mode were to go live tomorrow, you would have their full attention. We would never see another CODE player in Open PvP again.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This is going under the huge assumption that players wouldn't be able to adversely affect your game. "Where there is a will, there is a way." Open PvE may give you a larger community as a whole, but the assumption that they would coalesce into one group is just an assumption. You could very easily end up segmenting the community into players with different perspectives on what is fair play in the PvE mode and what isn't, which will immediately result in the more aggressive part of the population preying upon the more passive. Such is human nature. The moment you start accepting everybody, you have to accept everybody, and all that that entails.

CODE is a segment of Eve players that moonlight in Elite: Dangerous doing PvP and piratey things. In Eve online, CODE specializes in preying upon PvE players in high security space where PvE players are supposed to be protected from forced interactions with other players. If an Open PvE mode were to go live tomorrow, you would have their full attention. We would never see another CODE player in Open PvP again.

If players could adversely affect other players game in Open-PvE it would seem that something would need to be done to discourage those players.

How do other games with separate PvP and PvE servers handle it?

Players would need to want to play in Open-PvE for its potential community to coalesce.

Open-PvE would, presumably, accept everybody - however if someone were to break its simple rule then they could be expelled from that mode for a period of time (dependent on severity of non-compliance and whether the player in question has a history of such transgressions).

We've been assured that CODE in E: D is no relation to CODE in EvE - was that assurance incorrect?