Modes Should FDEV remove SOLO mode and add a PvP/PvE toggle instead?

[Phisto Sobanii]

The ‘sky is falling’ and ‘nuke it from orbit’ are such common responses to so much I think ideas like ‘FDEV removing modes’ just naturally rises out of it.

But to the OP’s point I think it’s fine the way it is. In fact, I’m coming to the conclusion Open does have its own kind of PvP/PvE flag thanks to PowerPlay. It’s just a soft flag - crime and punishment kicks in if one chooses to act outside of the PowerPlay framework.

 

[shreddog]

They do?

Where have they said this?

Genuinely curious.

Sorry, no they haven't said that. It was just the vibe I get from reading the forums lately.

But why wouldn't they want more people in open. Most MMO companies do their utmost to make sure players see other players when they log in, as not to get the usual 'the game is dead' comments. That's why they merge servers on allot of games.

 

[00nutzy]

Sorry, no they haven't said that. It was just the vibe I get from reading the forums lately.

But why wouldn't they want more people in open. Most MMO companies do their utmost to make sure players see other players when they log in, as not to get the usual 'the game is dead' comments. That's why they merge servers on allot of games.

Well according to Sandro Open is the most populated mode by a wide margin, so there is that.
They do seem to want more people to play PP although the proposed OOPP caused a lot of fires in the forum and its actual effect is questionable.
The mode system is pretty good in my opinion although the idea of a second (un connected) commander on an account would imo be nice.

 

[ethelred]

To your main point, no. No need. PG/Open/Solo is a great solution and gives people enough choice. There is no problem to solve with your proposal.

I personally do not like being ganked, and do not like ganking other people. I would however enjoy playing in open to see and communicate with other players around. And do occasional pvp activity(powerplay?).

To this specific point, it's fairly easy to avoid being ganked. I say fairly easy with the assumption that you're a player that can learn A Few Simple Tricks That Gankers Hate. Seriously, ask in the PvP forum for ways to avoid gankers and you'll be inundated. Inundated.

I also find it very unrealistic to have so called pirates in super high tech ships zooming around in civilized space killing random targets and not suffer any real consequences. In reality they would be hunted down and killed for good. Or they would have to hide in anarchic systems with access to minimal of hardware, and the most shoddy ships available.

Yeah. Numerous posts on this. We can hope one day a the career path of the terrorist, pirate and bounty hunter get some love.

Right now open is just a free for all pew pew fest that I stay out of.

That's like, totally your opinion, but it really isn't.

 

[KillaALF]

Plenty of players use solo mode because they don't want to play Elite with other people. At all.

Yup, guilty as charged. I do play in PGs from time to time, but if I had to choose (as in, pick one mode and from then on you're only allowed to play in that mode), it would be solo, no doubt about that. The modes are fine as they are, no changes necessary, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Bartizan]

I honestly don't understand why this is still a big thing to wax on about. Would a tag system have been a better idea? Probably, but after how many years with the system we have, does it really matter anymore? We can't get bugs from day one sorted or any semblence of a personal story line added or a C&P system that actually punishes criminals but we still bring up game modes. At this point, if they completely changed the game mode system, I will eat my E: D beanie.

 

[shreddog]

At this point, if they completely changed the game mode system, I will eat my E: D beanie.

 

[wrmiller]

I have played in open from time to time, but for the most part when I want to see other players I use Mobius. Which is not very often of late TBH.

My primary problem with open is that without even more grind than I have done, I can never be evenly matched wepons-wise in a head-to-head confrontation with a hard-core PvPer. I have no desire to do PP, and so I will never have access to the trinkets that doing so gives one access to. I can be out-gunned and out-shielded (is that a word?) even against the same model ship, if said ship is equipped with PP goodies.

To me, the only 'incentive' in open is PvP. And since I will always be disadvantaged against the hard-core types, there is no incentive for me to play in open. Because once you eliminate PvP, nothing exists in open that I cannot have in Mobius.

 

[Jockey79]

So apparently FDev want more people to play in open.....

Stopped reading there as you are factually incorrect.

Sandro was asking should 1 part of the game be open only and for the 2nd time it has fallen flat as an idea.

It was clearly stated that the idea was for Power Play only and that the rest of the game would remain available to all modes.

 

[Deleted member 110222]

Ok keep solo mode for the console peasants then Adding a PvE switch would still get more people to play in open.

The kickstarter also had offline play promised, remember, so it's not that they couldn't change the current modes a bit

As a 100% solo player I really can't see any issue of playing open PvE. (except the bandwidth mentioned)

Offline never actually existed though. It was just words. Solo, on the other hand, exists... Big difference.

 

[Jockey79]

Ok keep solo mode for the console peasants then Adding a PvE switch would still get more people to play in open.

The kickstarter also had offline play promised, remember, so it's not that they couldn't change the current modes a bit

As a 100% solo player I really can't see any issue of playing open PvE. (except the bandwidth mentioned)

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

Offline wasn't a KS promise, it was brought up after the KS.

From the Kickstarter Page;

*And the best part - you can do all this online with your friends, or other "Elite" pilots like yourself, or even alone. The choice is yours...*
*you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends
*Play it your way*
*Your reputation is affected by your personal choices. Play the game your way: dangerous pirate, famous explorer or notorious assassin - the choice is yours to make. Take on missions and affect the world around you, alone or with your friends.*
*You simply play the game, and depending on your configuration (your choice) *
*We have the concept of “groups”. They can be private groups just of your friends or open groups (that form part of the game) based on the play styles people prefer, and the rules in each can be different. Players will begin in the group “All” but can change groups at will,*

"alone" =/= "offline"

Frontier did also state in the DDA (I think it was there) they didn't want a PvE mode, it was some lame excuse which I've semi forgotten and I've misplaced the quote now (guess I'll spend this week looking for that now ), something to do with the work being pointless as trolls will find a way to abuse a PvE mode anyway so they might as well use their resources elsewhere.

 

[Mouse]

Well according to Sandro Open is the most populated mode by a wide margin, so there is that.
They do seem to want more people to play PP although the proposed OOPP caused a lot of fires in the forum and its actual effect is questionable.
The mode system is pretty good in my opinion although the idea of a second (un connected) commander on an account would imo be nice.

I have little to no belief in anything Sandro says... Now if David Braben says that most people play in Open then I would believe it.

 

[00nutzy]

I have little to no belief in anything Sandro says... Now if David Braben says that most people play in Open then I would believe it.

Ohhh the arguments those words have generated.

How is the majority defined, does board flipping scue the results, etc..

Regardless, removing modes is a bad idea.

 

[JohannStrauss]

Elite will never be a PvP game. As Dave Braben stated he never wanted it to be a PvP game at first place when we started to discuss "Elite 4" here on this very forum with frontier and Dave personally in the year of 2006/2007.

Elite is PvP by pure technical demand - so to say as a byproduct of the technical requirement to create a REAL Size galaxy.

I will never play PvP as long as it is massively flawed as it is by now.

1) Big ships will always get attacked by gangs up to 10+ players for no reason and the police force will never be sufficient to adequately solve this problem.
2) The punishment of Gang-Attackers is still a joke and will never prevent a fair open game.
3) The real core Elite gamers who made this game possible starting in 2004 at first place (like me) do not have any interest in PvP.
We even got the written agreement by Dave Braben back in 2007/2008 that Elite will NEVER be a MMO or PvP game.

Elite is a game of exploration and was originally designed as that.

I do not know who stated that Frontier wants more PvP players.
It would be a financially devastating decision since 90% of the solo players for whom this game was created at first place would quit.

 

[JohannStrauss]

Let me add some more things to my previous post, please. I think the solution as we have it right now is flawed but OK.
In PvP weapons, ships and tech in general must always be absolutely equally available to every player which implements a huge drawback to any individual exploration, Tech-Upgrade or even individual ship development we COULD have if Elite was a pure solo game. But pure solo-game was not possible for the size of the galaxy.

It is nice to have PvP, but it is a ridiculously unrealistic gameplay as I stated before. In reality money would buy you total security against gang-attacks and griefers. The Top Traders would never be attacked in a realistic gameplay since I would buy me a small personal army to protect me from any gang-attacks at first place and systems would do ANYTHING to make their systems absolutely safe.

We would have life-time system wide bans for gankers and criminals in a realistic PvP setting. But that would of course destroy the only fun-point PvP HAS to the mainly Pvp players: to test their power, skills and group/gang tactics upon technically stronger opponents. Or to simply have fun trolling rich, bad players who own way too big ships and too little skills. I understand that. PvP is a "little Boys troll-garden" and will always be that way. And it is GOOD that it is that way since this makes it fun for the PvP players.

Now spoiling the game for the rest of the more serious players in PvE seems not to be a good idea.

How about making the open game more realistic in terms of lifetime punishment scenarios for gang-attaks on clean ships?

Not possible since gang-attacks on other players is the CORE of the fun in the PvP. Trolling makes MMO and PvP the fun. Destroying that would get Frontier in even more trouble in terms of declining player numbers.


Thus Frontier has no chance but to keep those two worlds as they are. With all the flaws.

 

[JohannStrauss]

that you're a player that can learn A Few Simple Tricks That Gankers Hate.

The fact that you have to learn tricks to use a game mode in a way that the game politics should enforce from day ZERO on by itself, is exactly what makes me hate PvP.
I am sure we all could be the most bad-Ash PvP killing machine after learning some tricks. Sure.
My opinion on that: Gankers should be banned from the entire bubble for lifetime after the second kill.
End of discussion. Or be put in a virtual prison cell for 10 years of real game time on the moon of Lave.

THAT would be, by the way, far more realistic than a non existent police force that comes to help you with 3 weak ships against 10 player driven killer maxed out Engineered Hyperships.