General Remove private Lobby and single Player

If affecting the game "should be played WITH OTHER PLAYERS" then players in Solo and Private Groups would not be able to affect the game, i.e. Frontier are in control of which players affect the game - as all players affect the game, iit suggests that those who insist that players must play among other players to affect the game bought a game that does not support their gaming needs.
No hard feelings, I found that my suggestions is one that keeps people affecting game in all modes, lets say in solo/private you only affect 1/3 of influence, so you would be tempted to go open to optimize your contribution, but in this case you would face "defenders" on the system.

So in all modes you affect the game, but the ones who risk more, win more.

There's also the thing of "fight for your faction" but you only can "fight" against NPCs, as your opponents act in the shadow and you feel (i suppose, no pvp fan) that you can't do nothing to prevent those hidden attacks

I think Im not understood, I never said that X players should not affect the game, I say that this should be a tactical decission Risk <-> Benefit

We are 30 guys on faction... should we go 30 in solo winning less but safer? should we split 15/15? 20/10?

I know this could come with more features, maybe a "Faction bank" so you could say your guys: "Hey, the ships destroyed to those who play in open go on Faction account", and similar things that help on some tactical decissions, faction play and leadership
 
Last edited:
No hard feelings, I found that my suggestions is one that keeps people affecting game in all modes, lets say in solo/private you only affect 1/3 of influence, so you would be tempted to go open to optimize your contribution, but in this case you would face "defenders" on the system.

So in all modes you affect the game, but the ones who risk more, win more.

There's also the thing of "fight for your faction" but you only can "fight" against NPCs, as your opponents act in the shadow and you feel (i suppose, no pvp fan) that you can't do nothing to prevent those hidden attacks
And this is one of the fun inversions of Powerplay- the less you risk the more you get and the easier it is.
 
so you would be tempted to go open to optimize your contribution, but in this case you would face "defenders" on the system.
Eh, have you heard of timezones and different platforms?
Anyway, all this is useless, it's all been said too many times already:
 
Which has never stopped people in Powerplay. Each platform has its players, and that groups play to the feature (i.e. get up before the tick/ organize).
Lol, never said it would "stop people in Powerplay", whatever you mean by that.

I just find the notion of elevating open mode to higher position regarding BackGroundSimulation ridiculous.
Biggest problem the BGS has isn't equal influence regarding which mode you play in (in fact that's not a problem at all), the problem is that BGS is all too (at least 1000 times or more) flimsy. It's supposed to simulate all the NPC activity in the Galaxy, vastly outnumbering players, not being something that players or groups of players radically influence on a whim. That would be something where PP comes in.
 
Eh, have you heard of timezones and different platforms?
Anyway, all this is useless, it's all been said too many times already:
In EVE online people organized themselves with people all around the globe to do the "night shift" (day shift in that other part of the globe), so this is always going to be an issue.

And I know that this discussion has been made several times, but I launch my suggestion anyway, if its not ok would be scrapped. Just my 2 cents.
 
In EVE online people organized themselves with people all around the globe to do the "night shift" (day shift in that other part of the globe), so this is always going to be an issue.

And I know that this discussion has been made several times, but I launch my suggestion anyway, if its not ok would be scrapped. Just my 2 cents.
EVE is EVE and E: D is E: D.
EVE was designed and created as a competitive PvP multiplayer from the get go, E: D's roots lie in single player games (ELITE, FE2, FFE) it was built after, multiplayer being a tacked-on optional feature.
 
Lol, never said it would "stop people in Powerplay", whatever you mean by that.

I just find the notion of elevating open mode to higher position regarding BackGroundSimulation ridiculous.
Biggest problem the BGS has isn't equal influence regarding which mode you play in (in fact that's not a problem at all), the problem is that BGS is all too (at least 1000 times or more) flimsy. It's supposed to simulate all the NPC activity in the Galaxy, vastly outnumbering players, not being something that players or groups of players radically influence on a whim. That would be something where PP comes in.

And as far as the BGS is concerned its great as it is, as I've explained many times before. I'm speaking from a PP standpoint where (IMO) it would benefit from more Open based content if FD are unwilling or unable to sort out its woeful PvE layer.
 
And as far as the BGS is concerned its great as it is, as I've explained many times before. I'm speaking from a PP standpoint where (IMO) it would benefit from more Open based content if FD are unwilling or unable to sort out its woeful PvE layer.
Agreed.

If PP goes open-only, FDEV need only move the PP modules to engineers, so most complaints about being shot at while moving the tokens and about hiding behind block or whatever will disappear, as then the module shoppers won't be around to disturb PP of those who actively engage in it.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
No hard feelings, I found that my suggestions is one that keeps people affecting game in all modes, lets say in solo/private you only affect 1/3 of influence, so you would be tempted to go open to optimize your contribution, but in this case you would face "defenders" on the system.
.... and in doing so penalises those who choose not to play among those who would engage them in the optional activity that is PvP.
So in all modes you affect the game, but the ones who risk more, win more.
We all affect the game equally from any game mode - what is proposed is to penalise some players for no compelling reason.
There's also the thing of "fight for your faction" but you only can "fight" against NPCs, as your opponents act in the shadow and you feel (i suppose, no pvp fan) that you can't do nothing to prevent those hidden attacks

I think Im not understood, I never said that X players should not affect the game, I say that this should be a tactical decission Risk <-> Benefit

We are 30 guys on faction... should we go 30 in solo winning less but safer? should we split 15/15? 20/10?
It's up to each player to select which game mode they wish to play in - given that no game feature (except CQC) requires them to play among other players to affect it. Michael Brookes was quite clear regarding players affecting Factions from any game mode:
Is there planned to be any defense against the possibility that player created minor factions could be destroyed with no possible recourse through Private Groups or Solo play?

From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices. While we are aware that some players disagree, this hasn't changed for us.

Michael
Zac Antonaci commented similarly on Powerplay:
According to some members of the community, Solo players should have a limited or no effect on Powerplay - or, alternatively, playing in Open should offer Powerplay bonuses. Is this something you are considering?

No. For us Solo, Groups and Open are all valid and equal ways to play the game.
More recently we had Will Flanagan's post in the recap thread for the Background Simulation & Scenarios stream:
BGS (Background Simulation) Changes

The Background Simulation (BGS) is a representation of how the actions of all players, no matter on which platform or mode, impact the galaxy. The factions that inhabit these system battle for influence over the population and control of the starports, installations and outposts. Player actions can push these factions into various states; such as economy, security, health and influence. With concerted effort players can help grow a faction's economy, destroy its security status, or help win a war.
I know this could come with more features, maybe a "Faction bank" so you could say your guys: "Hey, the ships destroyed to those who play in open go on Faction account", and similar things that help on some tactical decissions, faction play and leadership
Sounds Guild-like - and, given that Squadrons seem to be Frontiers implementation of a large player group mechanic (that does not include a bank), seems unlikely.
 
So if you are a PC player you would get a higher influence than say Xbox or PS ? Because there is a higher number of PC players so therefore the risk in "open" would be higher ? Makes sense ???🤪
 
As the title says: Remove private Lobby and single Player. Why? Because right now people are having influences on the galaxy and you can't stop them from having it. Best examples are Community events and Powerplay. My power was expanding into a system and I sat there for over an hour and couldn't find one player, yet the undermining bar goes higher and higher because people are hiding in single Player or private Lobby. This shouldn't be the case, if enemys are undermining a system, we should be able to fight back the undermining (maybe even add Powerplay missions?). Same goes for Community events.

The upside of this would be, that people are getting more encourage and/or forced to interact more with the community, play together and/or thinks twice before they engaging into enemy Powerplay territory or Communty events, having influence while they can't hide in private Lobby or single Player anymore. It would help to make the overall game expierence more realistic; forcing people to equip theier ships more realistic and not going on full cargo racks only. Plus games are much more fun with peoples and achieving things together. No one likes to play or fly alone all day.

The only downside of it, it would give griefers and gankers a bigger play field and newer players an even harder time to get used to the game. But as I always say to developer: The focus should not be on players, who are playing a game for two weeks, leave and never coming back. We simply should not focus on those players for obvious reasons. For griefer/gankers there should be counter measures, for example, that the FSD-Interdictor does not work in systems, where Ingenieurs are placed and/or the security forces are increased (maybe by a lot).

If you want PvP, go play CQC-Arena then!
I do. I've unlocked all achievements and my current rank is "Champion".

But I want to explore and do cargo missions!
You can do this in Open.

But I don't want to get griefed or ganked!
The chances that you find players in this big *** galaxy is super low, as long as you avoid hotspots like Community events, Powerplay systems, etc.. I play in Open for most of the time. Tip: If you find someone out there, send him a wing invite. Is he accepting it, everything is fine. If not and he flys straight to you, you should be becareful. Here is a link to some more tips: LINK. One time I randomly found someone at the Guardian site and I send him an invite. It ended up, that he joined my wing, we did the Guardians together and he gave me some tips about how to get the Guardian blueprints. Remember: Not everyone is your enemy.

You are a griefer/ganker and only want to kill weaker players!
I don't like them either and I am not one of them. I bought this game last year so I don't have the biggest or strongest ships yet. I am all for fair PvP play and realistic piracy, when there is a reason for it.

I have no friends to play with!
Use the ingame chat, ask people you randomly find, join a squadron, (on Xbox) open a multiplayer-post, just generally interact more with the community. They don't need to stay to be your friends, sometimes all it takes is just to play with some peoples together, who have the same goal as you.

Maybe there should be crossplay between different platforms (Xbox, PC, etc.) for population boost, if this isn't the case yet.

I hope this get some attention. This game is designed to be an open multiplayer game and it should treated as such one.
Feel free to add more ideas to make Open play more enjoyable for everyone.

Edit: Man, so many people are upset about getting pulled out of theier comfort zone. If these modes really exist since release (playing since 2020), maybe it's really to late to change this, I don't know. But what definitely should be changed, is the fact that people, who play in private or solo should not have influence on such things as Powerplay, Community events, etc., this should only be doable in Open. As someone mentioned, you fight most of the time against "invisible" players (not including timezones), which you all have to admit, is just simply lame and bad game design.

Edit 2: Man, so many people who are afraid of that they could meet a griefer in over 400 billion star systems, smh. How high are the chances, especially while exploring more of the empty areas of the galaxy? People act like it's the end of the world, when they die and lose cargo or exploration data.



OP should do a search and should also research the kickstarter premises and goals.
 
So cater to both? It's not casuals that turn the tide in big powerplay operations, for instance. Easy solution with that patented open-only flavour? Let the first 1000 merits be earned in any mode (module shoppers' sweat subsides), any more have to be in open to affect territory. Don't worry, I think even FDev are more creative thinking than the average forum Status Quo superfan.

Some companies cater to both. They create separate gameworlds (servers) for them.

What usually happens is within a few years the PvP servers are dead, the PvPers are crying there is nobody playing them, and they get shut down while the PvE servers continue.

Its always the same. The PvPers need the casuals. The casuals don't need the PvPers. Its a parasitic relationship, and casuals don't want to be part of that relationship.

Really, watch the video, Joshua goes into this with facts and statistic.

Mixing PvPers in the same environment with casuals is not usually a good recipe for success either. And providing bigger rewards to cater to the PvPers just disenfranchises the casuals who want no part in such gameplay, and again, its the casuals that bring in the money.

Joshua goes into what happened with New World, they catered to the PvPers during the alpha. The feedback was overwhelmingly negative. Now PvP is strictly opt in.

As he notes, you can make PvP centric MMOs, but the market is small. The market for casual/cooperative play MMOs is much bigger. FD are a business, they have to know where their interests lie.

PvPers want to make every MMO all about the PvP, yet if companies listened to them, most would fail. Too small a demographic, not enough money to be made. And PvPers will jump ship fast if another game comes along that offers them a new experience much quicker than casuals will. (I have no proof to back up that final statement, but i think its probably quite true - look how PvPers jumped from PUBG to Fortnite or other games once a new experience came along).

Star Citizen is shaping up to be PvP friendly, but i'd be willing to bet good money that if CIG want SC to grow post-release (assuming it ever releases) they will either need to double down on the PvP friendliness and make it more like EvE or they will start listening to the casuals and the PvP will gradually be eroded with the addition of more punishment for PvP and more safe zones. But if they go the EvE route, it will have to be damn good, otherwise the game will die as the casuals leave in droves.
 
As the title says: Remove private Lobby and single Player. Why? Because right now people are having influences on the galaxy and you can't stop them from having it. Best examples are Community events and Powerplay. My power was expanding into a system and I sat there for over an hour and couldn't find one player, yet the undermining bar goes higher and higher because people are hiding in single Player or private Lobby. This shouldn't be the case, if enemys are undermining a system, we should be able to fight back the undermining (maybe even add Powerplay missions?). Same goes for Community events.

The upside of this would be, that people are getting more encourage and/or forced to interact more with the community, play together and/or thinks twice before they engaging into enemy Powerplay territory or Communty events, having influence while they can't hide in private Lobby or single Player anymore. It would help to make the overall game expierence more realistic; forcing people to equip theier ships more realistic and not going on full cargo racks only. Plus games are much more fun with peoples and achieving things together. No one likes to play or fly alone all day.

The only downside of it, it would give griefers and gankers a bigger play field and newer players an even harder time to get used to the game. But as I always say to developer: The focus should not be on players, who are playing a game for two weeks, leave and never coming back. We simply should not focus on those players for obvious reasons. For griefer/gankers there should be counter measures, for example, that the FSD-Interdictor does not work in systems, where Ingenieurs are placed and/or the security forces are increased (maybe by a lot).

If you want PvP, go play CQC-Arena then!
I do. I've unlocked all achievements and my current rank is "Champion".

But I want to explore and do cargo missions!
You can do this in Open.

But I don't want to get griefed or ganked!
The chances that you find players in this big *** galaxy is super low, as long as you avoid hotspots like Community events, Powerplay systems, etc.. I play in Open for most of the time. Tip: If you find someone out there, send him a wing invite. Is he accepting it, everything is fine. If not and he flys straight to you, you should be becareful. Here is a link to some more tips: LINK. One time I randomly found someone at the Guardian site and I send him an invite. It ended up, that he joined my wing, we did the Guardians together and he gave me some tips about how to get the Guardian blueprints. Remember: Not everyone is your enemy.

You are a griefer/ganker and only want to kill weaker players!
I don't like them either and I am not one of them. I bought this game last year so I don't have the biggest or strongest ships yet. I am all for fair PvP play and realistic piracy, when there is a reason for it.

I have no friends to play with!
Use the ingame chat, ask people you randomly find, join a squadron, (on Xbox) open a multiplayer-post, just generally interact more with the community. They don't need to stay to be your friends, sometimes all it takes is just to play with some peoples together, who have the same goal as you.

Maybe there should be crossplay between different platforms (Xbox, PC, etc.) for population boost, if this isn't the case yet.

I hope this get some attention. This game is designed to be an open multiplayer game and it should treated as such one.
Feel free to add more ideas to make Open play more enjoyable for everyone.

Edit: Man, so many people are upset about getting pulled out of theier comfort zone. If these modes really exist since release (playing since 2020), maybe it's really to late to change this, I don't know. But what definitely should be changed, is the fact that people, who play in private or solo should not have influence on such things as Powerplay, Community events, etc., this should only be doable in Open. As someone mentioned, you fight most of the time against "invisible" players (not including timezones), which you all have to admit, is just simply lame and bad game design.

Edit 2: Man, so many people who are afraid of that they could meet a griefer in over 400 billion star systems, smh. How high are the chances, especially while exploring more of the empty areas of the galaxy? People act like it's the end of the world, when they die and lose cargo or exploration data.
Regarding edits: Other games that have community goals often don't lock them to "open" only. Ghost recon wildlands and middle earth shadow of war.

And people get their nose out of joint if someone dares login in anything but open. Spends hours on forums insisting we care.
 
Some companies cater to both. They create separate gameworlds (servers) for them.

What usually happens is within a few years the PvP servers are dead, the PvPers are crying there is nobody playing them, and they get shut down while the PvE servers continue.

Its always the same. The PvPers need the casuals. The casuals don't need the PvPers. Its a parasitic relationship, and casuals don't want to be part of that relationship.

Really, watch the video, Joshua goes into this with facts and statistic.

Mixing PvPers in the same environment with casuals is not usually a good recipe for success either. And providing bigger rewards to cater to the PvPers just disenfranchises the casuals who want no part in such gameplay, and again, its the casuals that bring in the money.

Joshua goes into what happened with New World, they catered to the PvPers during the alpha. The feedback was overwhelmingly negative. Now PvP is strictly opt in.

As he notes, you can make PvP centric MMOs, but the market is small. The market for casual/cooperative play MMOs is much bigger. FD are a business, they have to know where their interests lie.

PvPers want to make every MMO all about the PvP, yet if companies listened to them, most would fail. Too small a demographic, not enough money to be made. And PvPers will jump ship fast if another game comes along that offers them a new experience much quicker than casuals will. (I have no proof to back up that final statement, but i think its probably quite true - look how PvPers jumped from PUBG to Fortnite or other games once a new experience came along).

Star Citizen is shaping up to be PvP friendly, but i'd be willing to bet good money that if CIG want SC to grow post-release (assuming it ever releases) they will either need to double down on the PvP friendliness and make it more like EvE or they will start listening to the casuals and the PvP will gradually be eroded with the addition of more punishment for PvP and more safe zones. But if they go the EvE route, it will have to be damn good, otherwise the game will die as the casuals leave in droves.
Yeah well, I'm not for a split universe, and I have already acknowledged above the idea that there's merit in casuals and more hardcore players having some possibility of separation.

So I'm not sure who you're arguing with. Maybe the open-PvE mode advocates? Whose suggestion of a no-PvP open mode in parallel with the current open mode is, according to your link, simply a strategy to kill the latter, supplanting it with the hug-gated version.

Although it's interesting that what Elite in its current form does is keep at least a good portion of PvPers and casuals interested in the same activities (e.g. powerplay, CGs) while giving them options to play their way. I guess something I move toward is the idea that part of the optionality of a way of playing is the choice you make of how invested to be. And that the pushback you get could be optionally players or NPCs. Did 50000 merits in powerplay last week? Well, either the majority need to be done in open, or, in an alternative version, you've opted in to some much harder NPC pushback.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Although it's interesting that what Elite in its current form does is keep at least a good portion of PvPers and casuals interested in the same activities (e.g. powerplay, CGs) while giving them options to play their way. I guess something I move toward is the idea that part of the optionality of a way of playing is the choice you make of how invested to be. And that the pushback you get could be optionally players or NPCs. Did 50000 merits in powerplay last week? Well, either the majority need to be done in open, or, in an alternative version, you've opted in to some much harder NPC pushback.
While players from different subsets of the player-base may be interested in the same activities, the complaints that those who don't engage in PvP are "permitted" (just as those who enjoy PvP are "permitted") to affect the game persist. We've all been told to "blaze your own trail" and to "play how you want to" - yet some can't accept that others don't choose (or need) to play the way they want them to.

There's no current requirement to earn merits in Open whatsoever - and Frontier set the challenge posed by NPCs in all game modes (and don't set it as high as some want it to be)..
 
Last edited:
Yeah well, I'm not for a split universe, and I have already acknowledged above the idea that there's merit in casuals and more hardcore players having some possibility of separation.

So I'm not sure who you're arguing with. Maybe the open-PvE mode advocates? Whose suggestion of a no-PvP open mode in parallel with the current open mode is, according to your link, simply a strategy to kill the latter, supplanting it with the hug-gated version.

Although it's interesting that what Elite in its current form does is keep at least a good portion of PvPers and casuals interested in the same activities (e.g. powerplay, CGs) while giving them options to play their way. I guess something I move toward is the idea that part of the optionality of a way of playing is the choice you make of how invested to be. And that the pushback you get could be optionally players or NPCs. Did 50000 merits in powerplay last week? Well, either the majority need to be done in open, or, in an alternative version, you've opted in to some much harder NPC pushback.

I actually posited two variants. Split or merged. I highlighted the issues with both as well as the issue with catering to the PvPers who want things to be the way they want.
 
Back
Top Bottom