Wish Maynard and Riverside would kiss already. The tension is... palpable. Kek
The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
This is why no incentive for playing in Open must ever be offered. It would be an incentive to all Solo players to chainsaw instancing for everyone by moving into Open and blocking every player they see.Another thing is the block list, even open with a full block list is the same as Solo as you wont aee anyone in the game
With this I'm really replying to some people who are posting about Hotel California over in the wrong thread ATM.
Sometimes I wonder whether the game would have been more popular if it had been open only. Obviously there are lots of players that wouldn't have bought the game, but maybe others would have, maybe more overall, maybe less. Maybe not enough to get the project off the ground. Same works for a solo only game, or one without Open, I mean why restrict an already small potential market even further, right?
I think there's plenty to do, plenty of reasons to fly the ships, but maybe you have done all the things you want to do & need to try something else. Get out of your comfort zone. Rather than looking for danger, look for a different kind of challenge. That's what I do when I get bored with whatever I'm doing.
ED would even be more niche than it is now. Full-loot (in this case loss of credits, modules and in worst case ship) open world PvP is unforgiving to less skilled and late coming players.
The problem on unrestricted PvP is that human nature has the predilection to gain any advantage at any cost. Hence the preference for easier player enemies. As long as that instinct exists, there will always be seal clubbers and griefers, which exacerbates the erosion of newer and weaker players and causes a slow death for any open world PvP focused game, especially if defeat means lost progress.
Thankfully, as the modes and (preemptive) blocking does exist, players are optional content (save for CQC), and therefore PvP is optional as well.
Last edited:
ED is hardly full loot as you only lose credits on death and can rebuy everything after death. A "full loot" game is something like rust lol. Not to mention that ships have insurance and so you only pay like 5% of this ships actual value. So, at best, maybe 5% of the time the game is 100% full loot lol
Killing new or young players was already addressed in part with newbie zones in elite, other such "limited" zones could be implemented so long as it doesn't impact BGS or Power Play. But if people want hand holding have them play in a non-competitive mode (solo/PG) that has little to no impact on the over world. If a player wishes to compete with other players on the greater landscape of things they should have to do so in open.
Killing new or young players was already addressed in part with newbie zones in elite, other such "limited" zones could be implemented so long as it doesn't impact BGS or Power Play. But if people want hand holding have them play in a non-competitive mode (solo/PG) that has little to no impact on the over world. If a player wishes to compete with other players on the greater landscape of things they should have to do so in open.
Do not marginalize. It's lost assets on defeat, hence synonymous in effect with full loot even if the attacker doesn't receive any. Especially new players are vulnerable to lose everything because they aren't set for the credit pinata grinds.
Seal clubbers lie in wait on the outer rims of that zone. Very useful (not).
Frontier chose to put the onus on player moderation to ourselves. It's the best of both worlds (least headaches for FDev, most autonomy for the individual player). Those who wish to provide salt to gankers, griefers and seal clubbers can choose to stay in open with an empty blocklist. Anyone else can decide whom to meet with as they wish.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The losses from losing a ship can exceed the cost of the ship - the rebuy may be a small percentage of the total loss.
Competition, in this game, via pan-modal game features does not require PvP - as other players, like PvP, are an optional extra whereas experiencing and affecting the shared galaxy, while playing in any game mode, is "by design".
Players don't have the ability to force other players to play the way they want them to when engaged in mode shared game features.
Lol, don't marginalize even if the attacker gets nothing, it's still full loot. I love that argument... Point is, it's not full loot as you just so clearly pointed out so thank you.
Nice job on ignoring my entire response for dealing with new players and totally not cherry picking your responses. Please respond to the entire statement and not one sentence of the thought.
Nice job on ignoring my entire response for dealing with new players and totally not cherry picking your responses. Please respond to the entire statement and not one sentence of the thought.
As Robert said, it's lost assets which is an aspect of full loot. Whether the void gets the loot or the attacker does doesn't matter. It's full loot.
Frontier chose to put the onus on player moderation to ourselves. It's the best of both worlds (least headaches for FDev, most autonomy for the individual player). Those who wish to provide salt to gankers, griefers and seal clubbers can choose to stay in open with an empty blocklist. Anyone else can decide whom to meet with as they wish.
As such, I don't have to play with you if I don't want forced PvP. Deal with it and get your salt elsewhere.
By default, players in solo encourage open players into their solo/PG mentality. If the goal is to win in PP or BGS, why would I or anyone choose open where I can be stalled in my progress and not simply do the most efficient grind in solo/BG.
You talk about how you don't effect others, but, no cap, you do.
Everyone has the same tools. Killing CMDRs is even worse for your faction (lowered security rating), especially if it's a blue on blue attack (failed missions your faction issued to the victim). You do not know who the CMDR works for.
If you seek absolute territorial control, EVE online would be the better game for you.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Some players who prefer PvP may choose efficiency over fun and play in Solo / Private Groups - however some players don't prefer PvP, and don't have to tolerate the unwanted attention of those who do.
Players in all game modes share the same tools to affect the shared galaxy. Those who want to force their opposition to engage in PvP aren't able to do so however.
We all have the same tools... so everyone should do the most effective form of being competitive and simply never play in open. Great multiplayer game, love it. Totally wouldn't kill a game that most people prefer to be in open and actively play in open on. Not at all would it cause resentment or generate an argument about modes since the games inception. Clearly my logic is flawed, thank you.
We all get the game we paid for. This includes the ability to play with anyone whom you want to and to excise whom you don't want to play with, including playing entirely on your own. The galaxy is shared, therefore everyone, no matter their playstyle, may affect it as they please.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Everyone is free to choose whichever game mode best suits their gameplay preference on a session by session basis (subject to being able to play in the multi-player game modes at all that is - console players without premium platform access can only play in Solo).
Even if most people play in Open (as Sandro indicated in what seems to have been his last communication with the player-base, in a live-stream) some of the time at least, that does not necessarily mean that most people like PvP (as one Dev indicated some time ago that Frontier were "well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP").
Some of those who can't accept that other players don't need to play with them to affect the game have been making their displeasure at the game's design known for nearly ten years, i.e. since about the time the game design was published at the start of the Kickstarter.
I admitted, your right. Anyone who wants to be as competitive as those players in solo/PG should just play in solo/PG as those groups have no effect on anyone else or how they play the game. It's just how the game is, open is just less effective and can lower security status in a system through PvP.
The equality and equity of all models is both clear and evident to me now. I appreciate the education.
(Also, if you can't read my sarcasm it's likely not a me issue)
The equality and equity of all models is both clear and evident to me now. I appreciate the education.
(Also, if you can't read my sarcasm it's likely not a me issue)