Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Who doesn't play in Open?
Modes Reworking the game modes
- Thread starter Haggbad Celine
- Start date
Who doesn't play in Open?
Because it has nothing to do with ED except that its on the menu. It a different game and I wouldn't touch it even if we had our own ships in there. Its unrealistic, arcady, and un immersive.
I like surprise attacks, planned wing attacks chasing in SC, escaping, high/low waking. Pure 1 v 1 is only a portion of the whole PvP aspect.
When I say YOU I mean all the SOLO / PG advocates.
I am an Open player, and in my day-to-day gameplay, I rarely do anything that truly deserves an extra reward. Even in CGs, I can make a run in the ‘Deposit and be reasonably sure I won’t be threatened by another player, let alone actually interdicted. The last time I was interdicted, the “pirate” lost shields when they collided with my ship, and then “lost connection” when I deployed hardpoints. My ship is unarmed.
I don’t need a reward to play in Open, as long as it’s fun to do so
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
You can get that in Open - just not with those uninterested in that play-style.
Why *should* players be rewarded simply for clicking one particular mode on the launcher?
According to YOU (No, I'm not going to dig up the exact quote) Open is nearly as safe as PG. You have repeatedly posted open is safe (but then you post gank videos as well, so which is it???) so if it's as safe as you say, why does it need some kind of bonus?
Because it is a waste of time and effort.
Apart from the game design from the very start going against this, with little to no effort I can tick a box in my router settings or just install Zone Alarm and I can play open with a 100% chance of never seeing you or your ilk.
So why waste Dev time on something so stupid?
It's pure Player versus Player. To argue agasint CQC is to show you don't want PvP, you want ganking targets.
It is tied in to the game as I've shown you again and again. Choosing to ignore that doesn't make it go away.
You can earn A grade Corvette money in CQC
You can unlock a special station to buy a 'Vette in CQC.
Who doesn't play open?
Quite a few of us play open, we just don't play open with you.
It's a big universe out there.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Will you stop it already. With the propaganda nonsense.
you're really getting out of hand jockey. Go play the game for once.
There's no reason to.
So you wouldn't mind Solo getting extra benefits?
Well, there's your reward.
Last edited:
Its safe for me because I know what I am doing based on lots of research, trial and error and practice. Solo is a god mode for me without the possibility of any risk whatsoever. At least in open I can die if I want to, in solo even this is impossible.
There's no reason to.
So you wouldn't mind Solo getting extra benefits?
Well, there's your reward.
I wouldn't mind SOLO getting extra stuff, give them more aliens, more ships more srvs and anything they want as long as they will stop affecting the BGS and PP.
Cheating. Modifying your own hardware to benefit you when playing directly with others is pure cheating. Nothing to discuss. Itd worse than task killing because noone knows you are doing it.
Not going to happen.
Do I need to explain why solo player would care about game mechanics being taken from them?
Ok. How about giving extra rewards in OPEN, it wont affect the SOLO player.
Taking would be to incentivize open play via increased influence.
Increased mission/trade payouts are not taking as it doesn't affect players in PG/solo.
The giving part is making open more accessible to players by giving PvP meaning, prime reason to do so via PvP is because it's not optional in open.
The current developments of C&P seem to aim into that direction and should be developed further to fully achieve the goal of making open more accessible.
This could be achieved by various measures, like notoriety only decreasing in game modes of higher connectivity they were created in.
This doesn't affect solo players at all as they still would be able to get rid of their notoriety in all modes.
And would only slightly influence PG players as they only loose the option of decreasing notoriety in solo and other PG's.
Optimally this could be complimented by Assassination Missions that update Cmdrs on the location of very notorious murderers, so they can't hide very easily.
Both are taking from murderers and giving to bounty hunters and aim to establish an equilibrium between crime and law enforcement.
As a result the barrier for meaningless murder is increased, which should make open safer and in combination with incentives of open play make it more interesting to a broader playerbase.
The current reworks of C&P did that to some extent but can be 'cheated' by switching modes and being relativly safe.
It can be argued this is all taking from PG, which is true.
But PG/solo players are already given an increased safety by nature of their game mode.
There is also nothing to give to PG as the goal is to make open more inviting and interesting to create a more living galaxy and to do so the threat of meaningless murder must be minimal, while still providing a reason to expose oneself to a potential threat. Having confidence that law enforcement is able to catch a terrorist lowers the frustration of getting killed even if you are not yourself interested in combat.
The current system disincentivices PvE open play and therefore whoever requires to have somekind of incentive for a trader willing to achieve lets say a CG in open.
It's not forcing players towards a playstyle, it's equalizing risk/reward of different games modes.
So a PG/solo'er doesn't have less impact as they will have less trouble achieving their goal compared to an open player.
It's about leveling the playing field.
Whoever bother with the hassle should at least have the same impact.
Currently they probably have less as they will get interdicted and destroyed from time to time.
Regarding hidden BGS/PP/UA attacks, a mechanic would be welcome to at least identify who is responsible for it.
So whenever someone UA bombs a wings starport they at least have the option of returning the favor.
Yes. PvP within the context of the game is so optional it's redundant.
I am not talking about reward.
I am talking about impact, like having an outcry on the forums as SDC attempted to achieve with a variety of their operations. I.e. healies for feelies.
And Yes this is kind of negative feedback loop you describe 'I can't have fun, so I have fun making them have no fun'
Sure what they do doesn't make them brightest among the stars, but how else can the game satisfy their need?
->Make 'em busy fighting capable Cmdrs and they're happy.
Well obviously PvP content can never be entered from solo, so that's a restriction by default.
Arguing that case therefore doesn't make much sense, am I right?
And yes I do agree that meaningful PvP content should be reserved for open, prime reason because it's less exploitable than PG.
If it's a requirement for PvP Events to be entered via PG/solo the players should be matched against the whole pool including other PG's/solo'ers and open players.
An example would be a PvP community goal complementing the PvE community goals.
Like a combat zone that starts as soon as a certain number of participants have signed up and ends as soon as a certain goal is achieved.
Or like escort haulers, while the opposing faction attempts to stop them.
This would also work for player faction wars, so whenever two player factions are in a state of war with each other GalNet could announce the option of PvP CZ's or Events within certain timeframes.
This also has the potential of taking away PvP pressure (gankers) from the PvE community goal and could serve to make open more enjoyable for PvE players.
Powers also provide opportunity to provide such gameplay.
If FDev is really clever they combine this with the request for gold-rushes and let the risk be the balance for an increase of income.
I am glad you put that into quotes.
Ahh, here comes the thing. The likelihood of PvP might increase, but the likelihood of meaningless murder decreases at the same time.
Sure there is a guarantee when playing in open, join a PG or play solo if you really would never want to be on the receiving end.
Getting ganked is no fun. Commiting crime and getting caught, still no fun but more fun than getting killed for no reason.
Getting blasted by a notorious murderer while attempting to catch him? GF
If FDev wants to increase the population of open they need to increase the options of player interactions.
Wing Missions are a nice step, I do really appreciate them.
Squadrons looks like a promising concept to deliver player interactions either hostile or non-hostile on a broader scale.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
How many players stick to a single game mode every time they play the game?
Rewards like ...?
The argument against enhanced benefits for operating in open is that this is just a means of enticing players into open. It's like that guy in the van with a stained mattress in the back hanging around schools waving a bag of sweets at kids.
I can assure you that I have played in open a lot - before "Engineers" I mainly played in open except when the rubber-banding was too bad. I am not a combat type but I never was destroyed by a player (well OK one ram-gank at a CG which was refunded as I was on DC so shouldn't have been penalised) - then "Engineers" comes along and I find myself two-shotted by uber-engineered players.
I like to keep insurance claims=0 so all it takes is one occurrence in many hundreds (or thousands) of jumps for my demise by an over-engineered battle-wagon and I am left starting over again - just so some chump can have a notch on their joystick. No thanks. So no Open in CG, Engineers or Rares station systems for me.
Live with it - go shoot each other.
Last edited:
Some service providers don't support uPnP, also plenty of security sites suggest turning off uPnP.
It's not cheating if your provider doesn't support or your security adviser tells you to turn something off that will cut 99% of the player base out of your game.
That's just an unfortunate side effect, that would allow someone to play open, get the bonus and still play as if they were solo.
I mean, even Frontier released the game with uPnP turned off, we had to "hack" the game to turn it on
Even the gankers are using Mobius to fund their ganking where they cannot be shot at by their own kind.
I'll get behind "Open Only" rewards just as soon as FD introduces an "Open PvE" mode instead of the lack of PvP/PvE controls restricted player capped PG's we have currently.
Until such time... playing in Open is it's own "reward". Some didn't even have the choice or option because they have a different playstyle that some use to prey upon instead of respecting.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Increased reward in one mode equates to a relative penalty for the other two modes - that's taking away from those modes (by giving more in one mode).
Not everyone in Open engages in direct PvP (regardless of it being optional) - it rather depends on who one meets. My current principal alt-CMDR has played almost all of its game time in Open (apart from a number of laps of Dav's Hope) - without any untoward interaction with any of the players encountered.
Open is the only game mode with an unlimited population and is shared between all players, regardless of play-style. While that remains the case, those who eschew direct PvP still have a stake in Open (and how Open develops) - that would change if Frontier were to offer an Open-PvE analog to Open, in my opinion.
An interesting idea - whether Frontier consider it as a case for change is another matter.
Assists for Bounty Hunters have been requested many times. However mode freedom does not discriminate between CMDRs based on their criminality (or lack thereof).
Some of the players in Open provide sufficient disincentive to playing in Open - simply by the way that they interact with other players, followed by "git gud or go Solo".
As the "hassle" is completely optional (i.e. the player chose to make themselves available for the possibility of it occurring), why should there be additional reward?
Possibly - not definitely.
There is only a CMDR name in that context, not the name of their Faction to (as there is no in-game link, other than factional reputation, with any Faction).
Hence the conflict regarding the game modes. Every single player bought access to the game and all of its features - regardless of which game mode they play in (noting that only Wings and Multi-Crew are unavailable in Solo).
Interestingly, with the release of 3.0, we now have Wing missions - which I understand are available in all three game modes (which isn't as odd as it may initially seem as Wing missions can be completed by an individual).
Why should such players be be rewarded with content aimed at them for what can be considered to be "poor" behaviour?
.... especially as it sets a precedent that they'll get more treats if they behave badly enough....
Similarly obviously, PvP content can be engaged in in a Private Group with only two members - as Frontier have not limited any of the multi-player content in the game to a single game mode.
I don't agree that any existing multi-player content should be restricted to Open only.
A PvP community goal would presumably be entirely reliant on players to provide both sides in terms of opposition - if not then it's not a PvP community goal.
There are only Factions - each Faction that a player group requested to be inserted into the game is subject to the BGS and players have no control over who supports the Faction - in that regard they are just like NPC Factions (apart from the name and lore).
Potential - no guarantees as not all gankers seek challenge from their selected targets.
Unrestricted PvP in Open was only really ever going to result in one outcome, in my opinion....
If Frontier want to increase the population of Open then they need to ensure that more players find playing in Open to provide more "fun" - which, given that the apparent majority of the player-base does not engage in PvP, suggests that some restrictions on PvP could be necessary to achieve that goal.
so true,
pure human behavior. Pure jealousy with combination of stubbornness. Caring to much for things they not play.
Because when they increasing benefits in OPEN. Wave of hate stand up, crucify all programmers, devs and players on this forum who are responsible for that.