The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... other than placing eight year old base game content, albeit the new and long awaited (by all players, not just those who enjoy PvP) game feature rework version of it, behind a PvP-gate.
It would remove the choice of game mode when engaging in what is currently a mode shared game feature - that's a penalty (although I don't expect that those who have previously variously called for Solo and PG to be removed, or for players in those modes to have no effect, or reduced effect, on the shared galaxy, will see it as a penalty).
I've never called for solo or PG to be removed.
It's not a penalty if you choose not to engage in gameplay, only a self inflicted one.
I could claim if you only chose Solo or PG that you are penalised by not enjoying exciting PvP in Open. That is clearly absurd.
A penalty would be DLC or gameplay conferring an in game advantage, or items giving such an advantage locked behind a paywall.
It's not a penalty if you choose not to engage in gameplay, only a self inflicted one.
I could claim if you only chose Solo or PG that you are penalised by not enjoying exciting PvP in Open. That is clearly absurd.
A penalty would be DLC or gameplay conferring an in game advantage, or items giving such an advantage locked behind a paywall.
Yeah, in games where PvP is "optional" it's always caused problems when in-game content, especially in-game content that's useful for PvE, is gated behind PvP.
It just gets the classic situation we see in current powerplay of people screaming GANKER when a fed player in fed space blows them up without consequences because they're pledged for access to prismatics.
Imagine if something actually important was gated behind CQC rank?
IIRC the wording used was that PvP would have a more prominent or important position in the new PP.
This would imply that the PvE element isn't being removed and thus that Open Only isn't on the cards.
I've certainly never heard anyone on the Dev side speak of penalising Solo/PG.
This would imply that the PvE element isn't being removed and thus that Open Only isn't on the cards.
I've certainly never heard anyone on the Dev side speak of penalising Solo/PG.
The fact that there's a PvE element, shouldn't be used as a justification (as it has been the case so far) to avoid open play to save one's underpants from being burnt.
Why someone who's not willing (or ready) to play in open is looking for a game activity which is been designed to encourage PvP?
It seems quite illogical...
On the other hand, if an activity can be completed in Solo or PG then perhaps the Dev's intended that players should do the activity in Solo or PG if they so wished.
Item 1) Cytoscramblers
Sure, but there's no reason to do that unless such players are willing to exploit the other game modes at their advantage (= no enemy / no problem).
Something that within powerplay groups shoulnd't be even condoned (yes I'm pretty much "radical" on this stance).
Currently, only module shoppers could have some reason to play in that modes... and given this bucket contribution to powerplay is close to zero, game mode makes no difference.
Last edited:
Module shoppers are not powerplayes, all powerplay groups just struggle to contain them somewhere to avoid potential/collateral damage.
On the other side, they're marked as enemies if/when spotted in open >>> legit targets >>> complain about being gonked.
And thus we wind up back in the Hotel...
Another potential source of activity could be PMFs that feel a Power could be against their interests.
Last edited:
Nvm who can who can't whys n wherefores, let's discuss what it could actually be. Speculate.
Theres a coming PP 2.0 and pvp has a hand in it as per fdev quote. Don't ask me to find the quote I'm spamming pirate Lords atm and using a viper. Getting it handed to me hehehe.
Open only advocate but I'm in a minority.
Theres a coming PP 2.0 and pvp has a hand in it as per fdev quote. Don't ask me to find the quote I'm spamming pirate Lords atm and using a viper. Getting it handed to me hehehe.
Open only advocate but I'm in a minority.
I only have and ever will, play solo. If I play with mates, we play private.
After yrs and yrs of dealing with online gamers, I just don't have the patience to engage with other humans on the gaming interwebs.
After yrs and yrs of dealing with online gamers, I just don't have the patience to engage with other humans on the gaming interwebs.
Last edited:
Yes, this is already an issue in PP 1.0 and one of the sources of BGS-drama (and game break-up).
Ah you see, and this is what Solo and PG players get from PvP'ers, exploit, a nasty word that, like, you know, you guys are cheating. And then they wonder why other players get a bit short with them. It's not an exploit if it's specifically allowed in the games rules and code, it's acceptable game play!
I, for one, do not understand this attitude. I want more people engaging in PowerPlay, not less. And more importantly, I want those people to be fun to play with, not so thoroughly unpleasant that people quit playing PowerPlay altogether.
Currently, we have a situation where the cohort of players who are not fun to play with do so in Solo/PG, because the players they most want to mess are also in solo/PG. Yes, that cohort is engaging in Fifth Column activities, but that is the fault of the rules, not the modes. Hopefully, PP 2.0 will fix this situation.
5C players are already cheating. Do you think they’d stop cheating just because Solo/PGs are unavailable to them? Especially in a game where you have to jump through hoops to get instanced with the players you care about in the first place? And of course, there’s the PvE players who have no interest in even the potential of interacting with that most troublesome cohort. They’ll also cheat to preserve gameplay they enjoy… or just quit playing altogether. That isn’t a recipe for fun IMO. It’s a recipe for frustration.
Losing players is never a good thing, whether it’s a game, server, or feature. Player Engagement leads to fixes and improvements. We have no idea how big the Power Playerbase (PPB) is, nor do we know how big the PvE-only PP population is. Every Power claims that everyone else is hiding in Solo/PG, while they bravely do their work in Open.
Perhaps the PPB is mostly made up of hypocritical liars who tell others to do as they say, not at they do. More likely, the PPB is similar to the general population, where the significant majority of which play in Open. Most likely in my opinion? The PPB in general mostly do play in Open, and instancing is simply that bad. At least, when it comes to the needs of PvP.
You want more and better PvP. I get that. You won’t get that through Open Only. You’ll just get more frustrated by the increase of combat loggers, firewall spoofers, and other unsportsmanlike players who simply aren’t fun to play with.
What you should want is a change that brings meaningful PvP gameplay. Gameplay that isn’t PvE, but rewarding enough that PvP-adjacent players like me will be tempted to engage in it, vs the status quo where it’s better not to engage at all. What you should want is a change in the instancing rules to more heavily weigh those pledged to a Power with each other, as opposed to the current priorities of the status quo: friends first, connectivity second, and PowerPlay not at all.
But most of all, what you should want is for PowerPlay 2.0 in general to be fun and engaging enough for more of the general player base to want to join in. That’s how you get fixes and improvements in the future. And that's how you get a larger player-base, which in turn leads to more and better PvP. Not by forcing everyone into Open, but by making PvP so tempting to the general population that only the most hard-core of PvE players will stay in Solo/PG, and a population in Open that is PvP savy enough to frustrate the desires of those who only play to ruin the gameplay of others.