The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[Kyokushin]

I am always playing private group, its name is "Open", feel free to join.

Solo/PG only used for relogs. 6 years in open only, no issues, i like it. It should be only mode, for me - solo and pg are breaking the fundaments of game, no reason to play cg, pp or any clan-clan activities because of that.
Commander slot, inventory, progress and galaxy should be split for people who are playing in open and for the rest.

 

[Riverside]

Not everyone enjoys forced interactions with others - something that those doing the forcing don't seem to care about (or do so specifically because they know it won't be enjoyable for the targeted player).

Nobody is being forced to interact though that's a strawman. You always have a choice & can set your personal risk at whatever level you feel comfortable with once you have enough experience of the game to know what that level is for you. Part of finding out where your personal limit is, is pushing past it & finding out what happens when you do

 

[Robert Maynard]

Nobody is being forced to interact though that's a strawman.

Have players lost the ability to initiate combative interactions upon players disinterested in their offerings?

 

[Darrack]

Think of the mass blockers the next time you get stuck in a Braben tunnel because the matchmaking servers take too long to respond.

No think of the gankers its their fault

O7

 

[Fizzatron]

Not everyone enjoys forced interactions with others - something that those doing the forcing don't seem to care about (or do so specifically because they know it won't be enjoyable for the targeted player).

The term 'forced interaction' isn't what I would use to describe it. I mean, you're on a team playing a football game, you have the ball, can you describe an opposing player coming up to you to tackle the ball away from you a 'forced interaction'? I mean, I guess you could, but it would not appropriately describe what is happening. Being tackled when you have the ball is part of the game, and partaking in Open in Elite, the potential to get shot at randomly for no reason is also part of the game.

That's what I explained to him, he didn't want that, understandably, so he plays in Private - though that didn't stop him from randomly running me over in his SRV, go figure... lol I would imagine that if/when he gets to be more competent overall he may change his stance. It was a pretty long time ago and he was pretty young so there was that aspect of it too. o7

 

[Riverside]

Have players lost the ability to initiate combative interactions upon players disinterested in their offerings?

Have players lost the ability to avoid hotspots or evade being interdicted in the first place?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Commander slot, inventory, progress and galaxy should be split for people who are playing in open and for the rest.

If Frontier were to create an Open only mode, complete with its own CMDR and galaxy state (not shared with players in the existing three modes) that'd be an improvement for those seeking Open only and those who don't want to play among those who don't want to share the galaxy with others.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Have players lost the ability to avoid hotspots or evade being interdicted in the first place?

The "don't go there" approach means that the interesting places are effectively off limits to those who don't want to play the game anticipating an attack at any moment.

 

[Darrack]

I am always playing private group, its name is "Open", feel free to join.

Solo/PG only used for relogs. 6 years in open only, no issues, i like it. It should be only mode, for me - solo and pg are breaking the fundaments of game, no reason to play cg, pp or any clan-clan activities because of that.
Commander slot, inventory, progress and galaxy should be split for people who are playing in open and for the rest.

O7

 

[Riverside]

The "don't go there" approach means that the interesting places are effectively off limits to those who don't want to play the game anticipating an attack at any moment.

Yes, that's the point of creating a hotspot (CGs for example). It is motivation for players to meet others, with the unsurprising caveat that not everyone you meet will be friendly or supporting the same goal as you.

If you want to go there without risk the downside is that you won't meet as many other players because (obviously) you are applying a filter to who you can meet.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The term 'forced interaction' isn't what I would use to describe it. I mean, you're on a team playing a football game, you have the ball, can you describe an opposing player coming up to you to tackle the ball away from you a 'forced interaction'? I mean, I guess you could, but it would not appropriately describe what is happening. Being tackled when you have the ball is part of the game, and partaking in Open in Elite, the potential to get shot at randomly for no reason is also part of the game.

If one player initiates the encounter without asking, it's forced. There is no single ball to be fighting over.

That's what I explained to him, he didn't want that, understandably, so he plays in Private - though that didn't stop him from randomly running me over in his SRV, go figure... lol I would imagine that if/when he gets to be more competent overall he may change his stance. It was a pretty long time ago and he was pretty young so there was that aspect of it too. o7

It's not just down to competence, it's down to inclination - some are not inclined to initiate / be targeted in PvP encounters.

 

[Fizzatron]

If Frontier were to create an Open only mode, complete with its own CMDR and galaxy state (not shared with players in the existing three modes) that'd be an improvement for those seeking Open only and those who don't want to play among those who don't want to share the galaxy with others.

I would like that, only after some of the suggested improvements to system security are made to make it more reasonable overall. If that were to happen I would also advocate a hardcore mode too where you lose everything if you die and have to restart with a new character.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes, that's the point of creating a hotspot (CGs for example). It is motivation for players to meet others, with the unsurprising caveat that not everyone you meet will be friendly or supporting the same goal as you.

While hotspots may encourage players to go to a system there's still no requirement to do so in Open - so it's not necessarily a motivating factor in relation to meeting others, especially due to those who go out of their way to spoil the experience for those disinterested in their play-style offerings.

If you want to go there without risk the downside is that you won't meet as many other players because (obviously) you are applying a filter to who you can meet.

There's still system chat to remind those in the other modes of the antics of some of those in Open.

 

[Riverside]

If one player initiates the encounter without asking, it's forced. There is no single ball to be fighting over.

You overlook the several opportunities to avoid that 'forced' interaction. This is a strawman argument Robert, you always have a choice.

If I am not in the mood to interact I can switch to solo before jumping into a busy system. But the way I find out what the risk level is and whether I am going to be comfortable with it is from personal experience. Many do this, get popped & base future decisions on that experience.

 

[Riverside]

I would like that, only after some of the suggested improvements to system security are made to make it more reasonable overall. If that were to happen I would also advocate a hardcore mode too where you lose everything if you die and have to restart with a new character.

As with open only proposals I'd play an enforced hardcore mode now, but I wouldn't have bought the game in the first place if it didn't offer a way to familiarise myself with the game in relative safety.

The game already offers players the option to not use insurance on the rebuy screen.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You overlook the several opportunities to avoid that 'forced' interaction. This is a strawman argument Robert, you always have a choice.

Requiring to manoeuver to avoid interdiction is arguably a tenuous form of interaction, i.e. if the intended target did not initiate manoeuvers then the attacker could get in position to interdict (where the interdictor enjoys a massive advantage over the target). It is, as suggested, probably less unwanted hassle to stick to PG rather than bothering with Open in particular locations.

 

[Fizzatron]

If one player initiates the encounter without asking, it's forced. There is no single ball to be fighting over.

That is true, but is also missing the point. Being marked when you don't have the ball could also fall under this category, or someone stopping you from getting the ball that's being passed to you - it's not just about that one example of a singular interaction within the game. The point relates specifically to the game's overall structure and rules that enforce what is and what isn't permissible, is the point being made.

It's not just down to competence, it's down to inclination - some are not inclined to initiate / be targeted in PvP encounters.

I would then be inclined to switch to private group that only allows PvE. There are those who play Rugby, Football, or Golf, and generally based on the inclination of what experience they want to engage in.

 

[Riverside]

While hotspots may encourage players to go to a system there's still no requirement to do so in Open - so it's not necessarily a motivating factor in relation to meeting others, especially due to those who go out of their way to spoil the experience for those disinterested in their play-style offerings.

There's still system chat to remind those in the other modes of the antics of some of those in Open.

What's your definition of a white hotspot?

Those that go out of their way to spoil the experience of some are going out of their way to provide content for themselves and others.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That is true, but is also missing the point. Being marked when you don't have the ball could also fall under this category, or someone stopping you from getting the ball that's being passed to you - it's not just about that one example of a singular interaction within the game. The point relates specifically to the game's overall structure and rules that enforce what is and what isn't permissible, is the point being made.

Which circles back round to what the rules of Open actually are rather than what some want them to be.

 

[Fizzatron]

As with open only proposals I'd play an enforced hardcore mode now, but I wouldn't have bought the game in the first place if it didn't offer a way to familiarise myself with the game in relative safety.

Agreed, though I imagine hardcore mode being mostly popular with 'endgamers' anyway.

The game already offers players the option to not use insurance on the rebuy screen.

A hardcore mode would ensure a level playing field when it comes to what happens in that instance.