completely agree with you. But you fight in wrong forum, these guys do not want to hear thing about pvp.
46 pages about same thing, with people with plenty of free time to discuss about spilled milk
Modes Reworking the game modes
- Thread starter Haggbad Celine
- Start date
completely agree with you. But you fight in wrong forum, these guys do not want to hear thing about pvp.
46 pages about same thing, with people with plenty of free time to discuss about spilled milk
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
I like you Maynard. You're like a codex of stuff we already know.
WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
You're right. Im gonna go to subway, grab me sweet onion chicken teriyaki. And listen to hotel california.
o7o7 dudes.
EDIT: This post sponsored by Subway. Eat Fresh.
Slinking off in defeat never tasted better.
There are PvP private groups - so this may well happen.
I'm happy to PvP with my friends, of whom not all play Imperial - some are Federal dogs, who I'm happy to shoot with my Imperial Cutter
Context for when you want to PvP.
After salt mining, you can drop back to Solo / PG - go pay your bounties off at the I.F. contact and job done.
No one cares about a game that is a battle arena - CQC is a battle arena, so unless you want to go compare LoL with CQC
You can drop the false comparisons.
Or do I need to keep posting the CQC videos everytime you bring up LoL ?
I don't.
So my opinion counters yours.
Aint this fun
People do play CQC though.
Some rather enjoy it.
What was advertised is on "The Wall of Information" - a game where PvP is optional.
It's not what you keep demanding, forced PvP.
You got what was sold to you.
They don't. You have full access same as me.
And "advantage" would be if you were blocked from using a mode.
(Like Ps4 and XB1 players who may not have subscriptions to their premium services - you have an "advantage" over them as they cannot multiplay Elite: Dangerous)
Fun fact, ED is neither a PvP game nor a PvE game. It's a sandbox game.
PvE is as mandatory as PvP.
You can easily get to one of the big 3 without ever using a lazor or multicannon.
There is no need for adversity at all, shooting stuff in the first place is optional.
Indirect PvP is as optional as direct PvP as well.
I do not need to choose a faction or support any powers.
Sure I can choose to, but that makes it optional.
That's what a sandbox game is, you have free choice over your actions and how you progress through the game.
What people here are asking for is choices to be on par and not forcing a meta on the community.
The argument of content being locked behind a 'PvP wall' doesn't stand.
I would not expect to get an elite rank in exploration by doing combat stuff.
So why would anyone expect PvE players to play PvP content?
It doesn't make sense.
It's like saying a solo player is locked out of wings and multicrew.
Adding relevant PvP content to ED won't make this game a PvP game, because it's still a sandbox game.
If you don't agree with my argument, please explain to me if Arma 3 is a PvP or a PvE game.
An example of an open world PvE game would be WoW, your only option of progression is PvE.
But this is not the case for ED as you able to progress without any adversity.
Everything is optional, because it's a purist version of a sandbox.
The advertisement never says one way is the true way, so we get plenty of threads on the forum complaining.
It's really a thing claiming that me and all the people before me don't understand what was advertised.
You really think we are all idiots or what?
PvE is as mandatory as PvP.
You can easily get to one of the big 3 without ever using a lazor or multicannon.
There is no need for adversity at all, shooting stuff in the first place is optional.
Indirect PvP is as optional as direct PvP as well.
I do not need to choose a faction or support any powers.
Sure I can choose to, but that makes it optional.
That's what a sandbox game is, you have free choice over your actions and how you progress through the game.
What people here are asking for is choices to be on par and not forcing a meta on the community.
The argument of content being locked behind a 'PvP wall' doesn't stand.
I would not expect to get an elite rank in exploration by doing combat stuff.
So why would anyone expect PvE players to play PvP content?
It doesn't make sense.
It's like saying a solo player is locked out of wings and multicrew.
Adding relevant PvP content to ED won't make this game a PvP game, because it's still a sandbox game.
If you don't agree with my argument, please explain to me if Arma 3 is a PvP or a PvE game.
An example of an open world PvE game would be WoW, your only option of progression is PvE.
But this is not the case for ED as you able to progress without any adversity.
Everything is optional, because it's a purist version of a sandbox.
The advertisement never says one way is the true way, so we get plenty of threads on the forum complaining.
It's really a thing claiming that me and all the people before me don't understand what was advertised.
You really think we are all idiots or what?
In order to make PvP meaningfull an existing or new content must be locked in OPEN mode. End of discussion, sort of.
We have to agree here.
Whether this game a pvp or PVE it doesnt matter, everyone is aware of how things are NOW. We want a change.
PvP is not required for anything in the game - true that, also, this part makes it meaningless. If pvp content will be locked in OPEN, PvP will become a mandatory activity in order to participate in this content ( lets assume its new content, existing BGS and PP will stay like they are today).
Make sure that players cant avoid that pvp content by going to SOLO purposely to avoid consequences of this PvP content. That's the whole argument.
Current state: modes are equal = no meaningfull pvp
New state: new content locked in OPEN = meaningfull PvP
New state: PP and BGS stays as before
We have to agree here.
Whether this game a pvp or PVE it doesnt matter, everyone is aware of how things are NOW. We want a change.
PvP is not required for anything in the game - true that, also, this part makes it meaningless. If pvp content will be locked in OPEN, PvP will become a mandatory activity in order to participate in this content ( lets assume its new content, existing BGS and PP will stay like they are today).
Make sure that players cant avoid that pvp content by going to SOLO purposely to avoid consequences of this PvP content. That's the whole argument.
Current state: modes are equal = no meaningfull pvp
New state: new content locked in OPEN = meaningfull PvP
New state: PP and BGS stays as before
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
How does one achieve an Elite rank (other than combat) without engaging in PvE?
It is perfectly correct to say that both Trade and Exploration Elite ranks can be achieved without combat - and any trade or sale of exploration data affects the economy of the game which can, in and of itself, constitute both PvE and indirect PvP.
It is also correct to say that Combat Elite can be achieved without engaging in PvP.
Still no requirement to engage in direct PvP in this game.
The "problem" with relevant PvP is that, for some players, that requires that all other players can't opt out (without losing access to existing content) - hence the opposition.
While the advertising does not indicate a "true way", it clearly states that players in Solo can affect the economy, politics and conflicts in the shared galaxy. References to "hunt other commanders" can only be in context with that fact.
Regarding whether one can avoid PvE, Sandro had this to say (in a thread about, the now defunct, Pilots' Federation Bounties):
It is perfectly correct to say that both Trade and Exploration Elite ranks can be achieved without combat - and any trade or sale of exploration data affects the economy of the game which can, in and of itself, constitute both PvE and indirect PvP.
It is also correct to say that Combat Elite can be achieved without engaging in PvP.
Still no requirement to engage in direct PvP in this game.
The "problem" with relevant PvP is that, for some players, that requires that all other players can't opt out (without losing access to existing content) - hence the opposition.
While the advertising does not indicate a "true way", it clearly states that players in Solo can affect the economy, politics and conflicts in the shared galaxy. References to "hunt other commanders" can only be in context with that fact.
Regarding whether one can avoid PvE, Sandro had this to say (in a thread about, the now defunct, Pilots' Federation Bounties):
Hello Commanders!
There's a little too much unnecessary heat in this thread, which is also making it hard to extract juicy feedback.
As far as this specific change, I'm frankly not interested *at the moment* about player versus environment. It's a valid discussion for sure, but not useful right now. The ship rebuy penalty *right now* aims at making player versus player encounters a little fairer by increasing the potential cost for the aggressor.
The whole point of these kinds of changes are to make Open fairer and more enticing for everyone. This change is a tiny part of that.
Everyone faces the same rules when it comes to player versus environment, and I would suggest that all folk take part in this type of game play, so I don't really buy the outrage about "PvErs" cheating. You're all "PvErs". Yes, even you playing in Open exclusively - unless you can prove that every single credit you made was against another human Commander
So, describing how the mechanics might be exploited = awesome. Describing how folk might adjust their style (for better or worse) = awesome. But complaining that it's one "group" of players cheating = not very helpful right now.
It's also worth pointing out again that this is one of several changes that will be coming through. We have the Pilot's Federation active as well, which works in combination with the ship rebuy penalty. We've also got karma and a few other updates further down the line. Individually, none of these changes will be the uber fix. But taken together they may well have some real effect.
Last edited:
For the occasional pirate in trading I would almost accept the point of it being PvE, but how is exploration PvE?
There is no adversity at all.
ED is no PvE game. It's a sandbox game.
Sandbox games have no requirement of how to play them.
If I wouldn't want to contribute to indirect PvP, I would just sell all my stuff at a starport without player factions and any power controlling it.
The true way of playing ED is in PG.
Simply because it's the easiest way of progression.
And yes advertisement doesn't state this, hence all the posts.
If you still don't believe me read some steam reviews.
Next to an unreasonable grind more horrible than pay2win mobile games, open being the subpar mode is complained most about.
This including comments of the game being lifeless and empty.
Those can be counted towards being 'no one' playing open, bc PG is better in every aspect.
PG's suck out the life of ED and the reason for it is how badly PvP is implemented.
If 40K players exodus open it speaks worlds and should be looked into, bc modes might be broken, just sayin'.
There is no adversity at all.
ED is no PvE game. It's a sandbox game.
Sandbox games have no requirement of how to play them.
If I wouldn't want to contribute to indirect PvP, I would just sell all my stuff at a starport without player factions and any power controlling it.
The true way of playing ED is in PG.
Simply because it's the easiest way of progression.
And yes advertisement doesn't state this, hence all the posts.
If you still don't believe me read some steam reviews.
Next to an unreasonable grind more horrible than pay2win mobile games, open being the subpar mode is complained most about.
This including comments of the game being lifeless and empty.
Those can be counted towards being 'no one' playing open, bc PG is better in every aspect.
PG's suck out the life of ED and the reason for it is how badly PvP is implemented.
If 40K players exodus open it speaks worlds and should be looked into, bc modes might be broken, just sayin'.
Indeed. In der Tat.
In Open its not a choice. Far from it. So why introduce a game mechanic against players will? Doesn't sound like a sane thing. To me.
Greetings
Last edited:
Let's be clear, PvP can happen in Private Groups, if the group's rule set allows for it.
Meaningful PvP doesn't have to force people into open. More targets does not make PvP more meaningful. Giving those interested in PvP an in-game reason to contend does. Look at how the C&P rules exclude PP-PvP. That's one step towards making PvP more meaningful.
Find a Power to align with, there's a Pirate Power included, and use that framework to find others to fight with. Once you understand how PP works you can use that knowledge to find systems important to PP, and there you will/can find willing foes to challenge.
Take charge of your game time, and stop insisting FD find targets for you.
Last edited:
Not at all.
Content can be added for PvP that both PGs and Open can access / use.
Heck, even Solo gets access to Wing missions, and they cannot form a Wing.
Meaningless to you, because all you want to do is "salt mine". Being able to choose not to play with you is the answer for everyone else.
Also other people are quite happy with PvP and it has meaning to them.
PvP PGs and folks who PvP in Open without all the crying over others not being their target dummies, are getting along just fine.
The environment can kill you.
Exactly, so why do people insist on trying to force others and make it a requirement to play with them
Because a real PvE Mode was not added to the game, and those 40,000 don't want to always PvP every time they play.
Some want to chill out.
Again...the whole of the game is based on multiplayer influence (regardless of how much personal interaction you have with others)...regardless of how you choose to play....you're just failing, or refusing to see it....because you think it is very important to shoot players in the face. Your inability to accept anything else is your personal problem...not a problem with the games design. Once you accept the design, for what it is...these discussions cease.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
There are NPCs that might attack in every game mode.
In Solo there is no direct PvP - there is only PvE.
How do you know that there are no player Factions at that starport?
All the posts seem to revolve around the fact that players can choose not to play with players with whose play-styles they are at odds.
Players that don't consider whether their targets are having "fun" suck the life out of Open - as some players, whose play-style relies on other players, suffer with the lack of other players willing to play with them. Since Alpha there have been players getting their jollies just destroying other players for no apparent reason - it could be argued that those players (and those like them that came after them) did no service at all to those PvP inclined players that arrived much later.
.... or because they don't like PvP and chose to join a Private Group that initially limited it to CZs only and then had to ban it altogether because some players were joining it specifically to PvP.
Then there have been the PvP player group organised incursions into that Private Group that have been crowed about on the forums - they didn't do very much in the way of positive PR for PvP in this game. That, plus the common suggestions from the erstwhile attackers and their friends, on the forums, after a player complaint regarding being destroyed in Open, that the target "git gud or go Solo" - many of them did just that.
It could also be argued that the game rather obviously lacks an Open-PvE mode (or any multi-player PvE game mode, actually) - which, given the existence of the a group of Private Groups totalling over 40,000 members, seems to be an significant omission.
Last edited:
The ones playing the "games" as you claim are your own supposed PVPers... so look to the actual problem and not to the game or the modes which are not the problem.
HORSE HOCKEY.... you want to talk about missing the context. For you to claim that Powerplay is consensual PVP when it clearly isn't shows just how far off you are. People can join PP and NEVER WANT TO PVP... they are signing up for NOTHING TO DO WITH PVP. When I was signed to a power I had a lot more aggro on me, yet at no time was I consensually signing up for PVP. I was dealing with NPCs who attacked a LOT.
You want to talk about people being obtuse... look in a g mirror because you are full of it.
Went exploring, never had any NPC even try to harm me.
Sandbox games can be played solo, but it doesn't make them PvE games!
If you only able to progress through means of PvE, scanning planets is no PvE as the planet won't eat you.
Sailing your ship into a sun isn't PvE either... the sun doesn't adverse you in any way.
They can be looked up.
It has been mentioned plenty of times that no one is asking for targets, but for depth within engagements.
Also that the reason plenty of people might not enjoy how PvP works is because the lack of meaning.
No one enjoys getting killed for no reason, it drastically changes when you get shot for a reason.
You basically reframed what I said, that the bad implementation of PvP is the reason 40k players left open for a PG.
Blaming the playerbase and making them responsible for bad PR of PvP in this game really isn't fair, when the game provides you with the worst circumstances to do so.
When people write stuff like 'git gud or solo' what they trying to do is give PvP a meaning.
If a game provides a basis for PvP the developer is responsible to channel it in a meaningful way.
Frontier has failed on this one.
Sure it can be argued that Mobius provides players looking for an Open-PvE mode, but wasn't it founded to have a safehaven from griefers?
Which would imply that they all left open because PvP is so badly implemented?
PG's are a bad solution for a bad implementation of PvP in this game.
Best remove PvP then.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Exploring the environment of the game....
Hitting obstacles in the game is a very simple example of engaging with the environment - gravity (or temperature) can be quite an effective way to destroy a ship.
If there's no PvP then there is only PvE, i.e. if not interacting with players one is interacting with the game itself and the environment in which one plays the game.
If they are listed anywhere.
Plenty of participants in the many threads on the topic have effectively asked for targets - with insults regarding "cowards hiding in Solo / Private Groups" seemingly designed to lure players in those modes out of them to engage those doing the insulting.
The implementation of PvP in this game might well have nothing to do with the popularity of that Private Group at all - as some players just don't enjoy direct PvP (I'm one of those players).
What you perceive to be unfair is part of the history of this game and its community - some players did do these things (and relished the reaction on the forums) and other players voted with their feet and chose to play in a mode that suited them better.
Frontier aren't selling a game devoted to PvP - they are selling a game with optional PvP for those that want to engage in it - that much is abundantly clear from the existence of the game modes.
Private Groups are perfect for their intended purpose (ref. the Wings section of the current game advertising) - which is to allow groups of players to play together.
That particular Private Group was founded, well before the game launched, with restricted PvP - something that is not the case in Open. Players could avoid CZs, and therefore PvP, playing in that group. After the total ban on PvP in that group, it's simply a group of large PvE Private Groups - where players can play alone or engage in PwP - without being too concerned about being engaged in unwanted PvP (although some players "forget" and get kicked from the group).
Opinions vary regarding the benefits (or lack thereof) of Private Groups.
It can be argued that PvP in this game is simply PvE except the target is a player rather than an NPC - in that regard there's little or no implementation at all.
Last edited:
They dont want to pvp yet they are perfectely fine damaging someones property from the private modes. So do they really dont want PvP? Or they just dont want to be stopped?