Ever build an explorer vessel with max jump range? It's like flying a bare naked Titanium skelett with absolutly no power, no weapons, no defence... and when interdicted, FSA Cooldown -> 99% Chance for not getting away :/
General Remove private Lobby and single Player
- Thread starter Black White
- Start date
A comment I made at the time: we need to nerf NPCs. Give them weak shields, low speed and hardly any weapons. Because that's what those "PvPers" want as a challenge.
OK, I know there are proper PvPers, I'm just talking about the DG ones.
Good example is the Community Goal events, if there is a CG requiring cargo hauling it is IMPOSSIBLE to do it in Open. There is at least 4-5 gangers at all time in that system just waiting for cargo ships to jump in, even with fleet carrier it is extremely hard because you must be lucky to park your carrier close enough to destination station, even then you must have a lot of luck to make it
Very much this, I fly a T9 in open duing CGs getting 10% consistently. Obviously built like a brick **** house gankers are essentially speed bumps (or hull decoration in the case of suicidewinders) The NPCs interdicting whilst jumping elsewhere in the bubble generally cause more issues.
Jeez you took that personally didn't ya?
But no, I wasn't judging you or whatever, what caught my attention was the '... majority of players in open do not engage in PvP' part, and I simply expressed what, in my opinion might be the cause.
But yeah, maybe I should've worded that differently.
Ofc i did.
I was just trying to point out the disparity between the 2 events... the pve event gathered 13000+ participants, the "pvp" event gathered 75. (*)
But we already knew how popular is PVP with the general ED populations
Edit:
*(and those 75 managed to ruin the fun for 1300+ commanders)
That is part of the thing. There is no clear answer to how dangerous it is, or how impossible it might be, etc
It comes down to lots of smaller things, like time of day, where in the world are you located, and platform, all of these things plays a role in how the game instance you... if you are really unlucky and play at the same time as some gankers is out hunting, and also being "close" to their physical location, you are much more likely to instance with those players...
Add to this, how instancing works and how the instance is moved between players are player enters/exit the instance, and if the current instance holder have a very restrictive network settings, new players with restrictive network settings cannot join the instance, then instance is tansfered to antoehr player, with less restricitive network settings and now just about anyone can join the instance. Also is the current online gankers busy with attacking other players, so you simply fly past them while some ot5her players got unlucky and targetted by the gankers...
So there is no way to measure or predict the danger level of playing in open. it is simply unpredictably. We can make generic predictions about hot spots where we have increase likelihood to encounter other players, like community goals, some engineers, founders worlds etc. but still, in the end, it comes down to individual god/bad luck. I had visited founder world many times in open and never got attacked. But I have a friend who got attacked his first 3 times to Founder world? so how dangerous is it really?
And we can keep on digging into how unpredictably the netcode and instancing etc in Elite are, and that is even before we start to consider how block lists affect instancing...
As flying with a huge block list, or teamed up with a friend with a huge block list, can have a huge effect on how you instance with others, especially in hot spots, with many players.
Trade CGs in Open are difficult and dangerous.
To build to get a decent amount of cargo, but survive a Gank attempt is a gamble.
Once in system you need to watch that scanner like a hawk and manoeuvre to avoid nasties and have an escape plan.
Then rinse and repeat.
With the lack of Comms and only ED Recon to help, I can't say how many CMDRs I have successfully avoided in supercruise - certainly there have been wanted criminals in system that I have evaded - or at least have given up trying to chase.
Once interdiction hits I would say I have a 50/50 chance of getting out there (the aforementioned destruction I had around 2 secs on the clock - so they hit me bloody hard with something)
None of this is in dispute. If that doesn't sound like your cup of tea and you choose to haul in PG or solo then good for you.
But to say it's "impossible" is simply not true, and that is what we were responding too.
To build to get a decent amount of cargo, but survive a Gank attempt is a gamble.
Once in system you need to watch that scanner like a hawk and manoeuvre to avoid nasties and have an escape plan.
Then rinse and repeat.
With the lack of Comms and only ED Recon to help, I can't say how many CMDRs I have successfully avoided in supercruise - certainly there have been wanted criminals in system that I have evaded - or at least have given up trying to chase.
Once interdiction hits I would say I have a 50/50 chance of getting out there (the aforementioned destruction I had around 2 secs on the clock - so they hit me bloody hard with something)
None of this is in dispute. If that doesn't sound like your cup of tea and you choose to haul in PG or solo then good for you.
But to say it's "impossible" is simply not true, and that is what we were responding too.
bullet sponges aren't a challenge either though, they're just boring and make weapons feel more weak than anything.
the lack of damage models is probably the worst aspect of combat in this game, along with weapons being so homogenous.
Good point, but forecasting the same it is going to happen in an open-only galaxy isn't that straighforward (given there will be much many systems becoming popular in that way) [btw I am still thinking to open-mode only limited for certain activities, as I've said in one of my previous recaps].
Also, I was in open on EDH just moments ago in a non-popular system and have 12-13 contacts of low-ranked ships... no one marked as "enemy" (I've also helped a couple CMDRs doing their bounty runs in a RES and gave advice on ship builds to five or six players) such a lot of potential interaction totally missed by the ones who don't want to be annoyed by "PvP".
Ok, you said. We're ready to run the risk to lose ANY BGS war if we can admire enemy players' ships go boom 24/7.
And again, to me who voluntarly hides in solo/PG when hammering enemy factions/powers is a pixel-coward (personal opinion, take as it is.. not as statement).
If PvP is not desired by majority of players, I am still not really getting why there's such big opposition to open-play given the numbers reported (like 75 vs 13k+) say players had less than 1% probability to engage a PvPer (I've read also the other posts and can't stop laughing sincerely) in that event... just read what I've said before, if you need further examples I'm ready to provide my diary of player encounters in the last weeks.
your faction is Serklich Crimson Raiders ??Good point, but forecasting the same it is going to happen in an open-only galaxy isn't that straighforward (given there will be much many systems becoming popular in that way) [btw I am still thinking to open-mode only limited for certain activities, as I've said in one of my previous recaps].
Also, I was in open on EDH just moments ago in a non-popular system and have 12-13 contacts of low-ranked ships... no one marked as "enemy" (I've also helped a couple CMDRs doing their bounty runs in a RES and gave advice on ship builds to five or six players) such a lot of potential interaction totally missed by the ones who don't want to be annoyed by "PvP".
Ok, you said. We're ready to run the risk to lose ANY BGS war if we can admire enemy players' ships go boom 24/7.
And again, to me who voluntarly hides in solo/PG when hammering enemy factions/powers is a pixel-coward (personal opinion, take as it is.. not as statement).
If PvP is not desired by majority of players, I am still not really getting why there's such big opposition to open-play given the numbers reported (like 75 vs 13k+) say players had less than 1% probability to engage a PvPer (I've read also the other posts and can't stop laughing sincerely) in that event... just read what I've said before, if you need further examples I'm ready to provide my diary of player encounters in the last weeks.
We have many factions, or none... it depends from the point of view.
I will take that as yes
Ok, you said. We're ready to run the risk to lose ANY BGS war if we can admire enemy players' ships go boom 24/7.
And again, to me who voluntarly hides in solo/PG when hammering enemy factions/powers is a pixel-coward (personal opinion, take as it is.. not as statement).
So, what i'm hearing is, you don't really care about the BGS. Therefore the whole reason for making it open only in the first place is undermined.
If you just want to see ships go boom, just fight against other people who want to see player ships go boom.
May the best player win!
It's virtual. There is a rebuy and poof. You respawn. It's not real. There is no threat. No ability to physically harm or be harmed.
So it can't possibly be about cowardice or bravery.
I stopped playing mostly in open after Distant World 2 Expedition. I have had it two times I got been killed by another player crushing in my ship right after login within the first second giving me no chance to even react to it start my engines and fight back.
When playing in the bubble there also should spawn more policeships when mercenarys got killed often in systems which are controlled by one of the powers in game.
When playing in the bubble there also should spawn more policeships when mercenarys got killed often in systems which are controlled by one of the powers in game.
Because some people don't want to play in Open regardless of how safe it is. There are players who wouldn't play in Open even if PvP wasn't possible at all, they don't want to mix with other players, they don't want to be fielding messages from other players, they don't want to be interacting with other players regardless of the situation. These are the players who were looking forward to offline play, but once that was removed and replaced by Solo that's what they play. Try to force them into Open and they will simply stop playing.
What you are essentially saying is "you don't care about these players, only my desires matter" and you wonder why they get annoyed!
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... because, to some players, PvP is a tediously predictable waste of limited game time - time that would be better spent doing something else in game. Open is a PvP-enabled game mode where any player one instances with may choose to attack (noting that the probability of attack might be low even then).
PvP is an optional extra in the game we all bought - whether some players accept that, or not. Frontier consciously implemented the game with three game modes sharing the galaxy state - to permit each player to "play the way they want to" which, for some, means without instancing with other players, ever. The design of the game has attracted both those who enjoy PvP and those who don't - and some of those who do seem to have difficulty accepting that they can't force those who don't to play with them.
Those who enjoy PvP need other players - as targets - and some of those who enjoy PvP don't seem to care whether their targets want to participate, or not, in the engagement.
There's no requirement for those who don't enjoy PvP to provide content for those players.
The simplest reason is because not all players find PvP to be "fun" - and we play games for fun, specifically our own fun.
Last edited:
Lets change the qustion, to be about playing together...
In Elite, you cannot force anyone else to play with you. You can invite other players to play with you, and other players can accept your invitation or refuse it.
It all starts with the design of game modes...
Solo - players do not want to interact with you. for any reason.
Private Group - You can invite me to your private group, but I do not have to accept that. This is for players who only want to play with other players that they want to play with, and it is an invite system. You either need to invite the player or get invited. So that means that there is a mutual consent here, and at any time, can either party leave this arrangement, you un-invite someone from your private group, or you can leave a private group you have been invited to, or simply not play in that private group.
Open - You can now see and interact with other players that you encounter, and you can invite those players to PvP, by messaging/interdicting/shooting at them
But in Open, another function have been made more powerful, and that is the BLOCK function. That is a function any player can use to refuse to play with any other player. Some PvE players, was really upset about the forced PvP upon them, to make it more bearable, it was suggested to them, take one loss, then block the other player who killed you. sort of reverse ironman playstyle, you get to kill this target ONE TIME, then you are blocked, and you will never see this player again. They do not have to like the unwanted PvP, but atleast they got a better way to manage this, and can still play in Open and encounter other players for that random O7 encounters that they like.
Exit to menu, another function, that have been in heated discussions, that have got several statements from FDev, that exit to menu is perfectly OK todo, regardless of what is shooting at you todo. Wait (survive) the timer and press exit, and that's it.
Can you point out any game mechanics, that gives you, or anyone else, the power to force any other player to play with you? That the other player do not have the option to say, "thanks, by no thanks" to your desire to play with that player?
As you wishI will take that as yes
This is not what I've said... and there's no need to discuss about obviousness.
Indeed, that's why I said "pixel-"... I'm first one to say it's not real.
Perfect! That's super OK... and it would be even better if it would be possible to just remove to those players any possibility to "interact" with anything external to their "galaxy" (i.e. they do missions = no impact on INF, they massacre civilians ships = no impact on security, they deliver merits for a PP = no gain for the power... and so on). Since here it is where the copy&paste of the "shared" bla bla starts, no need to make another loop around it (so I am not going to waste any more time on it).
The finger I'm pointing [if it is not clear, again] is toward the ones who are not part of that kind of players, the ones who are capable to fly in open and go PvP, but exploit solo/PG modes to hide.
[...] here we go again, no.
I give up buddy
sorry but it's a waste of time 
I will not reply again to argue about something that is under your nose but unfortunately you can't smell.I am trying to find out how all the above, which is perfectly clear, is somehow linked to my post... anyway, as the last sentence is a question, no one is forced by default (my answer) it just looks to me contradictory (if not "pixel-cowardish") to say "I am going to smash your faction" and saying at the same time "I am not willing to play with you".
It's like someone comes to have a lunch at your home and says "since I don't like you, pls. leave the door open and the dinner on the table".
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It smells bad, to some - so some people choose not to engage in that optional activity.[...] here we go again, no.
I give up buddy
What there is is a failure to agree rather than any misunderstanding.
Last edited: