Modes Restrict or remove PvE from the game, making Open a nicer place

[Robert Maynard]

Your argument is that, oh but people simply won't want to PvP, hence you're proposing content that is locked away for them

In a nutshell, yes.

.... and not wanting to engage in PvP is just as valid a play-style as wanting to engage in PvP.

Then the restrictions come from their minds, not the game.

Many players don't fancy exploration, will never go to SagA*. The requirement for doing so is: lots of time (unless you Brentnall-fit an Annie for BB Racing), and tolerance to repetitive black screens. Would you agree that this content is being locked away from those people?

That content is not locked away behind a PvP-gate, no. Any player can choose to engage in it whenever they choose - in any game mode.

 

[EvE4evah]

In a nutshell, yes.

.... and not wanting to engage in PvP is just as valid a play-style as wanting to engage in PvP.

That content is not locked away behind a PvP-gate, no. Any player can choose to engage in it whenever they choose - in any game mode.

Unwillingness to PvP and unwillingness to explore are both the player choice, yes. Then again, I'd be locked away from SagA*, BP and such if I'm unwilling to explore…

You're being biased against PvP, m8

 

[StiTch]

why can't you do the same?

Because combat logging is cheating. It is against the game's terms of service. Murder is simply something you don't like, among others. And until FD designate murder as cheating, you have no right to base whether an argument is reasonable based on the denouncement of players that do so. It's no more reasonable than me refusing to engage in reasonable discourse with PvE players "because I don't like trading".

However, I definitely have reasonable moments alongside my facetious ones anyway. I want to see this game progress. It's difficult though when it's met with painfully poor objections to PvP content existing at all - the selfishness is incredible.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Unwillingness to PvP and unwillingness to explore are both the player choice, yes. The again, I'd be locked away from SagA*, BP and such if I'm unwilling to explore…

You're being biased against PvP, m8

I have no interest in engaging in PvP (i.e. I do not enjoy engaging in it - either initiating or defending - it's not "fun" to me) - and the design of this game makes it rather clear that there is no requirement to engage in PvP, which is why I backed it.

I'm playing the game how I want to, using the game options that Frontier provided, not how others might prefer me to.

.... and those proposing PvP-only content would seem to be biased towards PvP - which is their choice.

There's no requirement to like PvP to play this game, just as there is no requirement to engage in it to play this game.

 

[EvE4evah]

Because combat logging is cheating. It is against the game's terms of service. Murder is simply something you don't like, among others. And until FD designate murder as cheating, you have no right to base whether an argument is reasonable based on the denouncement of players that do so. It's no more reasonable than me refusing to engage in reasonable discourse with PvE players "because I don't like trading".

However, I definitely have reasonable moments alongside my facetious ones anyway. I want to see this game progress. It's difficult though when it's met with painfully poor objections to PvP content existing at all - the selfishness is incredible.

They're just afraid that PvP improvements will ruin their game in the long run.
What with lots of new players joining/or staying in the game, tweaking the statistics from a PvE majority to a PvP majority, possibly leading to a complete switching in the dev focus…

 

[EvE4evah]

I have no interest in engaging in PvP (i.e. I do not enjoy engaging in it - either initiating or defending - it's not "fun" to me) - and the design of this game makes it rather clear that there is no requirement to engage in PvP, which is why I backed it.

I'm playing the game how I want to, using the game options that Frontier provided, not how others might prefer me to.

.... and those proposing PvP-only content would seem to be biased towards PvP - which is their choice.

There's no requirement to like PvP to play this game, just as there is no requirement to engage in it to play this game.

Right.
The same way, there's no requirement to enjoy exploration in this game, still there's much stuff you'll never see if you don't enjoy it.
I know, you'll say "it's this way by design"
But monolithic defense of the status quo doesn't do any good for ED.

If any person is proposing that existing features be locked away from the PvE crowd, I'm against it. Let them haul their PP stuff in S/PG all they want. But add ways for me to influence it with PvP, meaningfully . That's all I ask.

 

[Theodrid]

Because combat logging is cheating. It is against the game's terms of service. Murder is simply something you don't like, among others. And until FD designate murder as cheating, you have no right to base whether an argument is reasonable based on the denouncement of players that do so. It's no more reasonable than me refusing to engage in reasonable discourse with PvE players "because I don't like trading".

However, I definitely have reasonable moments alongside my facetious ones anyway. I want to see this game progress. It's difficult though when it's met with painfully poor objections to PvP content existing at all - the selfishness is incredible.

That's a cop out stitch and you know it, combat logging and some of the more toxic behaviours that go on in game both have the same effect - they ruin the experience for people. And I know you are a fairly switched on guy Stitch, you don't need Frontier to tell you that the thing over there barking and urinating against a lamppost is a dog - you can make your own mind up. Please, drop the 'must unite with PVP manifesto' lines and think about this objectively, you know as well as I do that there are some in the PVP community that are out to ruin someones day or use exploits and circumvent rules just as much as combat loggers do.

 

[EvE4evah]

That's a cop out stitch and you know it, combat logging and some of the more toxic behaviours that go on in game both have the same effect - they ruin the experience for people. And I know you are a fairly switched on guy Stitch, you don't need Frontier to tell you that the thing over there barking and urinating against a lamppost is a dog - you can make your own mind up. Please, drop the 'must unite with PVP manifesto' lines and think about this objectively, you know as well as I do that there are some in the PVP community that are out to ruin someones day or use exploits and circumvent rules just as much as combat loggers do.

Theo, are you saying that, because certain (minority) segments of the PvP crowd engage in toxic behavior, you're not prone to support PvP features?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Right.
The same way, there's no requirement to enjoy exploration in this game, still there's much stuff you'll never see if you don't enjoy it.
I know, you'll say "it's this way by design"

There's no requirement to enjoy exploration in this game - but choosing to explore doesn't really spoil others' game.

But monolithic defense of the status quo doesn't do any good for ED.

The game has changed since launch and continues to change - what we know of Beyond is a clear indication that it is going to continue changing over the next year (with Squadrons being an eagerly anticipated feature).

If any person is proposing that existing features be locked away from the PvE crowd, I'm against it. Let them haul their PP stuff in S/PG all they want. But add ways for me to influence it with PvP, meaningfully . That's all I ask.

Remarkably close to my opinion. With "ways for me to influence it with PvP, meaningfully" being just that, influence, as in "in competition with PvE activities", not domination.

 

[Jimblob]

No you are wrong.

 

[StiTch]

That's a cop out stitch and you know it, combat logging and some of the more toxic behaviours that go on in game both have the same effect

Sorry bud but I simply don't agree with you on this sentiment.

I personally find "seal clubbing" bland. I don't do it because if I want my daily dose of violence, I'll do it on something that a) might give me a good fight back or b) has purpose. AA have probably never even seen me in the starter systems.

However, again as it's well within rules, I won't personally object to it...and far less will I accept having to get on my knees and apologise to the PvE base for the gameplay of seal clubbers so I am allowed some "reasonable discourse". The notion is frankly humongously-headed.

If we want to reduce mindless murder, give them something to do (this extending to PvP bounty hunting; give us our damn consequence!) - don't think it's going to be solved by witholding reasonable discourse until they sate the PvE base's hatred.

 

[Mobediah Jones]

Unwillingness to PvP and unwillingness to explore are both the player choice, yes. Then again, I'd be locked away from SagA*, BP and such if I'm unwilling to explore…

You're being biased against PvP, m8

You've clearly not thought this one thru, m8.

Everything is available to you, if you want to do it.
Nothing is locked away, it's just not possible for you to force a game-play style onto someone else.

The only thing that is 'locked' is for people who likes blowing up other people, from blowing up people who has absolutely zero interest in it.
Be if for any reason, credits, time, latency, social phobia, zero interest in fighting, whatever.

People like to play this game differently.
That's the really simple fact some people can't get their head around.
And I find it hilarious when people can't accept that with whatever text they choose to type. To me, it's all the same: 'You're not playing the game my way, and I don't like that.'

 

[EvE4evah]

There's no requirement to enjoy exploration in this game - but choosing to explore doesn't really spoil others' game.

Enabling PvP to have influence in PP/BGS results won't spoil any person's game. Adversaries already fight over space using indirect PvP, right

The game has changed since launch and continues to change - what we know of Beyond is a clear indication that it is going to continue changing over the next year (with Squadrons being an eagerly anticipated feature).

I unironically commend your resilience and classiness.

Remarkably close to my opinion. With "ways for me to influence it with PvP, meaningfully" being just that, influence, as in "in competition with PvE activities", not domination.

We're finally making progress…

 

[Robert Maynard]

Enabling PvP to have influence in PP/BGS results won't spoil any person's game. Adversaries already fight over space using indirect PvP, right

The "problem" with PvP influencing PP / BGS results is the ability for players to collude to gain the influence with no opposition (in an adversarial system that assumes opposition) - a single player with two accounts could probably do it on one PC.

We're finally making progress…

Possibly - that's just my opinion though.

 

[Theodrid]

Sorry bud but I simply don't agree with you on this sentiment.

I personally find "seal clubbing" bland. I don't do it because if I want my daily dose of violence, I'll do it on something that a) might give me a good fight back or b) has purpose. AA have probably never even seen me in the starter systems.

However, again as it's well within rules, I won't personally object to it...and far less will I accept having to get on my knees and apologise to the PvE base for the gameplay of seal clubbers so I am allowed some "reasonable discourse". The notion is frankly humongously-headed.

Stitch, as I said, not all behaviours are equal, I'm not sure why you've zeroed in on 'seal clubbing' - we both know there is dodgier stuff than that going on. For gods sake mate, nobody is asking you to 'get on your knees' here, just recognise some stuff for what is is and call folk out on it occasionally, you are quite willing to do so to non PVP orientated players. You must be familiar with the concept of giving a bit and getting some back, lets be honest here, no post or suggestion is taken in isolation, the poster and their views, rightly or wrongly, play a part. My point is this, if you/others want fair and balanced discussion on some PVP issues from those outside the PVP community then you/others need to stop being so blinkered and entrenched - something that gets slung about a lot in the opposite direction, don't expect an inch from people if you are not willing to concede an inch yourself.

 

[EvE4evah]

The "problem" with PvP influencing PP / BGS results is the ability for players to collude to gain the influence with no opposition (in an adversarial system that assumes opposition) - a single player with two accounts could probably do it on one PC.

But groups already do exactly that from PG… unopposed. And I'm against removing their ability to play the BGS from Solo.

Phosphora himself said: "I want to influence the BGS from Solo, not control it"

 

[Robert Maynard]

But groups already do exactly that from PG… unopposed. And I'm against removing their ability to play the BGS from Solo.

Phosphora himself said: "I want to influence the BGS from Solo, not control it"

Players in PG or Solo or Open are not colluding to use (not yet implemented) PvP means of influencing the BGS, etc. - they are using the same means as any player in any mode to affect the BGS, etc., i.e. engaging in PvE actions. They can be opposed - just not necessarily through PvP - which remains an optional play-style choice.

No mode controls the BGS - all players in all modes (and on all platforms) both affect and experience it.

 

[EvE4evah]

Players in PG or Solo or Open are not colluding to use (not yet implemented) PvP means of influencing the BGS, etc. - they are using the same means as any player in any mode to affect the BGS, etc., i.e. engaging in PvE actions. They can be opposed - just not necessarily through PvP - which remains an optional play-style choice.

No mode controls the BGS - all players in all modes (and on all platforms) both affect and experience it.

Exactly.
Then, you still agree to have an additional way of influencing BGS/PP through PvP?

 

[StiTch]

Stitch, as I said, not all behaviours are equal, I'm not sure why you've zeroed in on 'seal clubbing' - we both know there is dodgier stuff than that going on. For gods sake mate, nobody is asking you to 'get on your knees' here, just recognise some stuff for what is is and call folk out on it occasionally

Sorry, I misunderstood you then.

I get what you mean from a conversational point of view, and I don't object. Hell, I don't know the legitimacy of it - for all I know it might have been a publicity stunt - but if the recent vid was something to go off, an SDC member got kicked and shamed for combat logging. I've personally lost my own crap at two PP factions that tried to involve me in a PvP war. Hell, I'll let you know if I find any examples, but I've posted on threads for gank videos before firstly telling people to stop losing their minds over it, but secondarily asserting that the kill in the video was frankly beyond uninspiring.

I'll always be reasonable as I can, and generally require provocation to go into full-on facetious plank mode. But it's hard to give an inch when PvP doesn't have an inch to give

Direct PvP can be fun so can BGS influencing.

But...I don't want to BGS influence Don't tell me how to play my way! *tantrums*

Srs bsns, I wouldn't mind quite so much if it weren't for the fact that the play modes are not equal. But as it stands, open is "influence the BGS like players in PG/Solo but with the risk of being shot down by a player of the opposing side". It is actively disadvantaged, let alone allowing players to contribute via their own playstyle equally.

That's what I liked about Ziggy's proposal. I don't entertain the idea ED will actually ever favour continuity in gameplay, or get an Open-only BGS - but content that allows Open/PG to participate equally, remembering that it's totally okay to produce different content/activities/objectives for the two, would be one hell of a step in the right direction to "blazing one's own trail".

 

[Shinji Ikari]

...usually followed by a list of advice on how to git gud, including technique and loadout assistance alongside offers for direct training from the GCI.

[haha]

I never got such information the two or three times I got ganked many months ago when I was still a noob.