Simple Solution to Gankers versus Carebears

How much silent running helps against night vision?
It helps a lot against subsystem targeting, lead indicators, and missile locks. Even a crack rail shot has trouble eyeballing the FSD or drives, on an evasively maneuvering target, purely by memory and without that microgimbal effect.

Of course, if they have emissive it's ruined, and heatsinks can usually substitute for silent running long enough to high wake, but decent shield generators normally eat up more cargo than even thousands of extra hull integrity.

I also forgot to ask you in the other thread which HOTAS do you use?
Full CH setup.
 
Given that few players frequent the forums, I doubt it can be assumed that most players know about a series of PvE Private Groups that are not advertised on the launcher....

.... which rather undermines the assumption upon which the rest of the post is based.
But they are aware of the invention called Google search. Searching for elite dangerous pve returns articles about Mobius, so your assumption is slightly skewed.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
But they are aware of the invention called Google search. Searching for elite dangerous pve returns articles about Mobius, so your assumption is slightly skewed.
More so than the assumption that "most players know about the existence of Mobius"?

We can only guess - which is all that assumptions really are.
 
More so than the assumption that "most players know about the existence of Mobius"?

We can only guess - which is all that assumptions really are.
We are talking about a specific group here: social players. I think it's safe to assume they'll try to contact other players, either in the game or out of it.
What I see as problematic is bad experience for new players and FD tried to remedy that with the introduction of the newbie zones.
Personally I would add a warning to Open written in big, red letters: WARNING! Open has no restrictions in player interaction and you can and most probably will be shot at by other players. ;)
 
most players choose to play in open (according to Sandro).
I don't think this is fully correct. Sandro stated that open is the most popular mode. I've seen data suggesting something like 40% open, 35% Solo and 25% PG.
Solo is more popular than PG, so I doubt that Open PvE would be a huge hit.

A substantial portion of those PG players are probably just using it for coop with a few friends.

I bet that half the players in ED have no interest in interacting with the general community att all. Open or Open PvE wouldn't make a difference to them.
 
We are talking about a specific group here: social players. I think it's safe to assume they'll try to contact other players, either in the game or out of it.
What I see as problematic is bad experience for new players and FD tried to remedy that with the introduction of the newbie zones.
Personally I would add a warning to Open written in big, red letters: WARNING! Open has no restrictions in player interaction and you can and most probably will be shot at by other players. ;)
Should be called 'Murder Death Kill' mode.
And you should have to sign some kind of disclaimer before you can select it.
And it says 'Are you sure? Y/N', like five times or something.
 
I don't think this is fully correct. Sandro stated that open is the most popular mode. I've seen data suggesting something like 40% open, 35% Solo and 25% PG.
Solo is more popular than PG, so I doubt that Open PvE would be a huge hit.

A substantial portion of those PG players are probably just using it for coop with a few friends.

I bet that half the players in ED have no interest in interacting with the general community att all. Open or Open PvE wouldn't make a difference to them.
I can only quote him: "People who play Open versus other modes are the majority, by a significant margin."
 
I can only quote him: "People who play Open versus other modes are the majority, by a significant margin."
It's impossible to know, but since that was before the end of board flipping and squadrons creating their own PGs, I guess it's no longer the case.
 
Which is, depending on whether he was using the term "majority" correctly (or whether he was actually referring to a "plurality") still delightfully ambiguous.
As a general rule, I don't trust any statistics I have not falsified myself. ;)
But as a software developer I don't trust even my own software.
Therefore I trust only statistics I have falsified myself and that are reviewed by others. :)
 
Then complain that players in Solo and Private Groups are affecting the BGS, Powerplay, etc?

.... that seems to be the way that it has gone up to now.
I don't care at all about BGS, PP, etc so that's a miss on that one

Anyway it was a tongue in cheek post as evidenced by the silly closing phrase. Clearly it will never happen no matter how much ganking happens.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I don't care at all about BGS, PP, etc so that's a miss on that one
Not in your case, maybe - however there are certainly others who have offered the advice "git gud or go Solo" and then complained about players in Solo affecting "their" game.
Anyway it was a tongue in cheek post as evidenced by the silly closing phrase. Clearly it will never happen no matter how much ganking happens.
Ah. Clearer now. Ta.
 
Who knows....

If the ability to play co-operatively among an unlimited number of players was available without the social-penalty that is PvP then I'd expect that some of the players who currently play in Open might shift to an Open PvE mode.

(not that I expect an Open-PvE mode to be offered, for reasons well discussed in this thread).
Playing co-operatively in not exclusive to PVE and is one of the main aspect of PvP (e.g. ganking). Not to mention the indisputable social aspect added by PvP.
Anti-social behavior is actually coming from people who wants an Open PVE only in order to restrict themself and others.

Anyone can already PvE in the actually existing Open mode but it is not restricted to that.
 
Top Bottom