Open: Why?
- Thread starter Masta Squidge
- Start date
- Status
Tbf, it's all gone binary (Shock horror! 
) I'm not sure it is.
Apologies to OP, but sadly, you've even allowed yourself to go off point in response to the Binary crew.
) I'm not sure it is. Apologies to OP, but sadly, you've even allowed yourself to go off point in response to the Binary crew.
He set the whole thing up as a troll thread as far as I can tell. That's great, loves me a troll thread, but he lacked the testicular fortitude to stick with it when bigger, meaner trolls then himself showed up to play and for that I cannot abide.Tbf, it's all gone binary (Shock horror!
Apologies to OP, but sadly, you've even allowed yourself to go off point in response to the Binary crew.
[inhales]
git gud
How come you know so much about enormous epeens?It should also be noted that in Solo no one can show their enormous e-peen to you. But hey, that's the forums for, right?
Speaking of which, where'd the OP go? He fled before I could give him a gander of mine.
Last edited:
Back to the original post, tbf, it works both ways. There are players who want to change solo/PG, but there are players who want to change open.
Change open? Nah.
Braben et al were on point with that.
If you don't like open, good for you, I won't see you.
Do I use other modes? Yes, yes I *%$£ do. Because CZs are a mess.
Don't want open? PG or solo? Good, I don't want to see you.
Change open? Nah.
Braben et al were on point with that.
If you don't like open, good for you, I won't see you.
Do I use other modes? Yes, yes I *%$£ do. Because CZs are a mess.
Don't want open? PG or solo? Good, I don't want to see you.
Because running into other commanders makes the game more interesting. And I'm not talking about PvP, piracy or 'ganking' (although I have no issue with any of those per-se), but just meeting another CMDR in a station, whilst mining, random wing-ups in combat zones and res sites just makes the game more enjoyable for some of us.
It should also be noted that in Solo no one can show their enormous e-peen to you. But hey, that's the forums for, right?
Mines better
Noice.
By the gods did this thread deliver between turns of Total War: Warhammer 2.
Open is the original era's fss.. ie a niche demographic with suboptimal design issues for their part of the game that doesn't have a problem calling it out at every given opportunity.
I used to look at open people with mild humor every time there was an open tantrum here or on reddit. Now i fully understand.
Whats frustrating about both issues is there are so many possible really easy solutions to cure 80% of the problems.
I used to look at open people with mild humor every time there was an open tantrum here or on reddit. Now i fully understand.
Whats frustrating about both issues is there are so many possible really easy solutions to cure 80% of the problems.
I nominate @Phisto Sobanii for MVP of the thread.
Seconded.
Maximum Viable P.enis.
I've previously posted that I enjoy open depending on what I'm up to, but in response to this comment, I can say "boy did the young me not really understand what online play would lead to!"
But I did play the original with other people: one on joystick, one on keyboard as copilot. That was great.
I disagree with the premise your resting your argument on; influencing the BGS from any mode where your opponents can't reach you because of magic is unfair, while managing the BGS through superior numbers and firepower is reasonable, fun and fair to all concerned.
Fairness. You can go get your buddies to help you, just like I can.
I am sure there will be a line up to tell me I am wrong, but isn't it true that there isn't any cross over between systems - as in someone playing on a PS4 will never be instanced with someone playing on a PC or Xbox? So if that is correct, why isn't there the same uproar that someone can affect the BGS whilst playing in Open on a PS4 and if you aren't on the PS4 there is all you can do about it.
Online games after decades of experience have all come to the conclusion to remove the outfitting distinction between pvp and pve. Once that's done, create pvp centric incentives based on current game systems. You don't have to throw the baby out as well.. while there might not even be a problem with a global multiplier of reward to play in open (say 4 engineering mats per collect instead of 3, etc), only the strongest bigot would object to having a dozen or so pvp hotspots around the bubble.. the rewards from playing the sandbox pillars in open would be like finding a mining motherload.
I have no need for pvp at all, but creating pvp specific incentive systems would be a nice optional thing to do.. and yet if i were to still demand that other players cant have a few hot systems for pvp i would look like a complete idiot and expect the greater community to argue against that. Exactly how the naysayers for the fss refactoring currently look.
I haven't looked at the powerplay side of the bgs at all.. but its a pvp system so logic is greater than equality in this case.. its a pvp system, make it open only. But then there's the technical side of it which would be impossible. So i guess it stays as it is. Yeah i haven't considered this issue to depth like the fss because i havent been interested yet so can't provide a nuanced solution to bgs vs open sorry.
Honestly what killed the bgs for me was the stupid mission board homogenization. As a joke i wanted to see if i could kick a mildly famous player faction out of controlling a particular system because they are never there. Was prepared to do the long haul, thinking it through, avoiding inefficient states, the whole thing. Then i went to the mission board and it was just stupid... not going to do those missions. So then i put it aside and went on.
EDIT: By outfitting distinction yes i would suggest a very specific balance pass that went and removed the multipurpose cost of also fitting for pvp. Or even better, distill the military slot concept into making combat modules only fit in those and go from there. Its a bit of a straight jacket, but its also pvp.
Last edited:
- Status