The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[SteveWW57]

It really isnt and the PvP community are justifiably scared to death of one being implemented because it would fast become the most played mode.

I agree and believe that an open PvE mode would be the more popular, and that that the gankers etc do not want such a mode as the PvP mode would see a much reduced number of targets, making their play style much, much less productive (in terms of kills) for them.

The most successful MMOs are those where the environment is mainly PVE with pvp blocked or a separate instance altogether.

O7

Never having played one such game I have no experience, but if I did I would want one that is mosty PvE with PvP areas set aside for those wishing to challenge others (and not putting quest destinations etc in them would be a must!).

Steve

 

[Felix DiCestria]

I've played a couple of MMOs, I think Elite is actually quite tame in comparison.
Regarding station rammers, straight to blocklist.
Pad blockers currently have me going to Solo, if the option wasn't there it would likely be abandon mission and go do something else.
BGS and PP are more explicit in being about PvP (whether direct or indirect), I tend to avoid both, except for some module shopping early on.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

My stance is essentially git gud, but without being so crass as to phrase it that way. I want to save you from yourself by encouraging you to cross the rickety bridge rather than to stay on one side looking at all my greener grass.

Greener grass?
The griefer problem seems endemic to MMOs, Elites scale means we can almost forget that it is an MMO for some time.
Looking at other MMOs I've played a couple (Fallout 76 and Elder Scrolls Online) are based on previous single player games.
In both cases the single player game is more immersive and has far greater depth of narrative than the MMO.
In certain cases griefers can gate content, particularly from newer players.
Pitted against this is the possibility of some co-op play, though this only tends to occur with players with who you have a previously established relationship.
I think Darrack might actually be right, Solo/PG is the "greener grass".
(Actually single player offline, or as X series does it)

 

[Rubbernuke]

It really isnt and the PvP community are justifiably scared to death of one being implemented because it would fast become the most played mode.
The most successful MMOs are those where the environment is mainly PVE with pvp blocked or a separate instance altogether.

O7

I'm actually fine with an Open PvE mode, however I'm also in favour of rewards scaling to the danger and that Open PvP mode rewards the most, since its by far the most dangerous mode. Powerplay in Open for example in capitals, expansions etc is much more dicey.

The issue is finding an effective way to quantify that risk, since hypothetically three modes only have NPC foes while the last is NPCs + players (players having the most dangerous ships, weapons and tactics).

 

[Riverside]

I'm actually fine with an Open PvE mode, however I'm also in favour of rewards scaling to the danger and that Open PvP mode rewards the most, since its by far the most dangerous mode. Powerplay in Open for example in capitals, expansions etc is much more dicey.

The issue is finding an effective way to quantify that risk, since hypothetically three modes only have NPC foes while the last is NPCs + players (players having the most dangerous ships, weapons and tactics).

Quantifying it is easy, PvP or the risk of it is it's own reward.

The issue with an Open PvE mode (and corresponding Open PvP enabled mode) is that it removes the risk. Another Cmdr is either definitely not an immediate threat, or definitely is. The overwhelming majority of interactions in open are benign, but they might not be. That's what makes it interesting (to those who are interested).

 

[Rubbernuke]

Quantifying it is easy, PvP or the risk of it is it's own reward.

The issue with an Open PvE mode (and corresponding Open PvP enabled mode) is that it removes the risk. Another Cmdr is either definitely not an immediate threat, or definitely is. The overwhelming majority of interactions in open are benign, but they might not be. That's what makes it interesting (to those who are interested).

Any game where you gamble more needs a tangible benefit to do it- this is where Powerplay falls down (which is the closest to an ideal setup for such play). PvE missions price in risk via the difficulty of that mission, PvP could be some form of death / criminal heatmap (like the trade one) so based on local actions / location (such as engineer bases / powerplay capitals) missions or activity reward better.

 

[Riverside]

Any game where you gamble more needs a tangible benefit to do it- this is where Powerplay falls down (which is the closest to an ideal setup for such play). PvE missions price in risk via the difficulty of that mission, PvP could be some form of death / criminal heatmap (like the trade one) so based on local actions / location (such as engineer bases / powerplay capitals) missions or activity reward better.

If you pledge to powerplay it used to be you put a target on your back. I understand the appeal, but I have never pledged. I help keep the Hudson team sweet by supporting their feudals & working with them rather than around them, not because I am Fed inclined but simply because the systems I care about are largely within Hudson space & I have met quite a few Hudson supporters (because I play in Open). At that level, Powerplay works. As far as all the merits & stuff are concerned I recognise that it could be a lot more engaging but making a heatmap would require the game to distinguish PP motivated kills from module shoppers shooting at each other so extra steps would be needed.

I don't need a heatmap of kills, I have several ganker-types on my friend list (that I have met & interacted with in some way, some have blown me up, many have shot at me), I have a good idea where trouble lies from that. Patterns emerge, I don't think the game needs to hand that info to me on a silver platter.

Virtually everything I do is PvE, but I do it for the inf - indirect PvP with other players & player groups. On the rare occasion I meet others diplomacy usually happens. Sometimes gunboat diplomacy, but diplomacy nevertheless. I appreciate the battlelines are more clearly drawn in PP, I prefer the grey area of never really being sure who my allies are frankly it's just more interesting to me than pick a side & blatter anyone not on your side.

Something I'm currently working on is to 'demotivate' a 5c Cmdr. He/she appears to be playing in a similar way to me, I am hoping to persuade them to join my 'cause' or at least better understand why they are working against my own goals in some systems & persuade them they are wasting their time and mine, not Hudsons.

 

[Darrack]

Any game where you gamble more needs a tangible benefit to do it- this is where Powerplay falls down (which is the closest to an ideal setup for such play). PvE missions price in risk via the difficulty of that mission, PvP could be some form of death / criminal heatmap (like the trade one) so based on local actions / location (such as engineer bases / powerplay capitals) missions or activity reward better.

ive said before i would prolly have no objection to PP being PvP as ironically the times ive tested it out in Open i haven't come across a single sole trying to stop me so its a non issue.
The only caveat i would have is that our home system (in my case POLEVNIC) would have to be a 'safe' zone (pvp disabled) or it would be gank central and us Solo'ers would have no chance vs Station camper wings which would end up being the norm and drive folks like me away.

O7

 

[Rubbernuke]

ive said before i would prolly have no objection to PP being PvP as ironically the times ive tested it out in Open i haven't come across a single sole trying to stop me so its a non issue.
The only caveat i would have is that our home system (in my case POLEVNIC) would have to be a 'safe' zone (pvp disabled) or it would be gank central and us Solo'ers would have no chance vs Station camper wings which would end up being the norm and drive folks like me away.

O7

1: Join a power that has others wanting to attack it For example in Harma there are two semi hostile PMFs in proximity plus angry Imperials.....

2: If FD keep the design of PP as it is (i.e. capitals are the end point), and unify fort direction (i.e. outbound is removed) then capitals should be a choke point.

3: Powerplay would then be a proper team based PvP game where you have to work together or work smarter.

4: A compromise for station ganking would be to remove stations as end points and use Hidden Trader POI mechanics- you scan the NAV for a POI, go to the random POI (so no pad blocking since they are all individual) and fly close to the T-9. The advantage here is that a savvy enemy could attack the POI if they find it (with an FSS) so it puts the onus on defence- but this system can also be used for solo and PG (weighted less if in Open PvE) because cargo could be dished out via missions that 'price in' graded hostile NPCs (so a top end mission would have engineered enemies perhaps).

In the end (for me) Open is a driver for making Powerplay more interesting and war / gang fight like (as it should be really). I would be equally happy if PvE was made significantly harder (as per my suggestion here) where people who do more are targetted by NPCs more, because otherwise Powerplay devolves into mindless cargo and fish farming, and outside of the collection zones is.....empty.

 

[Rebel Yell]

The only caveat i would have is that our home system (in my case POLEVNIC) would have to be a 'safe' zone (pvp disabled) or it would be gank central and us Solo'ers would have no chance vs Station camper wings which would end up being the norm and drive folks like me away.

HQ being "safe" zones doesn't really suit with current PP game mechanics... anyway, IMHO powerplayers must cope with the risk of PvP engagements 24/7 (i.e. hauling forts in shieldless T9 isn't a good idea) what's the challenge of doing that avoiding any kind of interactions with enemies?

 

[Brrokk]

I'm actually fine with an Open PvE mode, however I'm also in favour of rewards scaling to the danger and that Open PvP mode rewards the most, since its by far the most dangerous mode. Powerplay in Open for example in capitals, expansions etc is much more dicey.
...

I see you're really addressing PowerPlay and in that limited context I would agree, but the comment about the technical possibility of an Open-PvE mode was more general than that.

Throughout most of the game I don't agree that greater risk merits greater rewards. I have three problems with the idea applying generally to Open play:

• Usually Open is no more dangerous than other modes. An increased reward which accurately reflected the increased danger would IMO be less than 1% and therefore not really worth implementing.
• The type of risk is important. In Open it's usually just the risk of meaningless destruction by gankers or stupidity in stations. I don't see that risk as part of gameplay; it's not people playing ED with me, it's RL people trying to irritate me by stopping me playing ED. If this merits an extra reward, so does playing on a flaky internet connection, having family members who want me to stop playing and do something else, or just limited leisure time interrupted by phone calls.
• Any significant increased reward for playing in Open will break the game. ATM someone who doesn't want to engage with other players can simply play in Solo. Don't give them an incentive to switch to Open and block every player they ever instance with! All of our instancing would suffer.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I see you're really addressing PowerPlay and in that limited context I would agree, but the comment about the technical possibility of an Open-PvE mode was more general than that.

Throughout most of the game I don't agree that greater risk merits greater rewards. I have three problems with the idea applying generally to Open play:

• Usually Open is no more dangerous than other modes. An increased reward which accurately reflected the increased danger would IMO be less than 1% and therefore not really worth implementing.
• The type of risk is important. In Open it's usually just the risk of meaningless destruction by gankers or stupidity in stations. I don't see that risk as part of gameplay; it's not people playing ED with me, it's RL people trying to irritate me by stopping me playing ED. If this merits an extra reward, so does playing on a flaky internet connection, having family members who want me to stop playing and do something else, or just limited leisure time interrupted by phone calls.
• Any significant increased reward for playing in Open will break the game. ATM someone who doesn't want to engage with other players can simply play in Solo. Don't give them an incentive to switch to Open and block every player they ever instance with! All of our instancing would suffer.

In general play (BGS wise) where the game is geared around aggregate actions I'd agree with you to a point- however the point of contention for me is that there is hardly any situation in ED (bar Thargoid motherships) that push me out of my comfort zone.

As I remarked before I'm certain a great number of people who want Open are really wanting a much harder day to day game where enemies are stronger, more intelligent and pose a risk. I'm certainly one of them because for the whole game once you have a decent ship it becomes far too easy and interest wanes. Its why Powerplay highlights this- solo v open is night and day- a rivals FdL at G5 v an unengineered Eagle (sometimes two )- and that in Powerplay actions are 1:1 and not aggregated.

In an earlier post I mentioned pricing in PvE danger for missions- FD really really need to add several tiers above what is considered 'hard' because if they did a lot more people would be happy. Randomise pirate Lord wings, add random engineering, have more aggressive BGS responses...FD could do a hell of a lot (and ironically have in the past only to abandon it). All of this can be done fairly via missions, various BGS conditions etc. I also solved station ganking / stupidity too

I fully expect FD to use Goid War as a template for a BGS led Powerplay now, and really hope FD dial up the PvE danger because if they don't its really going to be anopther case of stack and stack, farm and farm rather than having minute by minute excitement of making it past hard enemies.

 

[Darrack]

Open is a driver for making Powerplay more interesting and war / gang fight like (as it should be really)

IMHO powerplayers must cope with the risk of PvP engagements 24/7

The problem with these are that most folks arnt interested in PvP (including me) so PP will never get much interest outside of dedicated groups.
Any game mechanic that isn't popular wont get any time spent on development, its not very popular as it is without PvP, adding that danger would make it even less so.
Future development and improvements to get more people involved in PP would fall flat in they were forced into Open whether that aspect of the game should be about contested open warfare or not.

O7

 

[Rubbernuke]

The problem with these are that most folks arnt interested in PvP (including me) so PP will never get much interest outside of dedicated groups.
Any game mechanic that isn't popular wont get any time spent on development, its not very popular as it is without PvP, adding that danger would make it even less so.
Future development and improvements to get more people involved in PP would fall flat in they were forced into Open whether that aspect of the game should be about contested open warfare or not.

O7

The trouble is the current Powerplay setup is geared more towards open than solo, at least on a conceptual level because NPCs just don't do anything to stop you.

Like I keep on saying someone has to rally against you in Powerplay to make it worth playing- that can be NPCs or players but it has to be there for it (PP) to be anything more than a glorified mini CG.

You can solve this in many ways- have dedicated Open jobs and dovetailled Solo (the hybrid approach), you can make all cargo allocations via missions and price in actual NPC danger are two that I'd be happy with- so, by doing more you actually get graded NPC enemies (as it should be).

The very worst FD could do is keep it (and the danger) as it is- the main reason people don't play PP is because they feel its grindy, boring and pointless. Ironically Open is the only real gameplay in Powerplay, because it involves restricted jobs in defined areas and players in high end ships.

 

[Rebel Yell]

The problem with these are that most folks arnt interested in PvP (including me) so PP will never get much interest outside of dedicated groups.
Any game mechanic that isn't popular wont get any time spent on development, its not very popular as it is without PvP, adding that danger would make it even less so.
Future development and improvements to get more people involved in PP would fall flat in they were forced into Open whether that aspect of the game should be about contested open warfare or not.

I take your point, but there are some elements to be considered which contrubute to keep powerplay on the sideline... (I exclude PvP because by definition pledging to a power marks automatically a player as "enemy" toward players picking opposing powers). Among these: the module shopping (annoying 4 weeks wait and a one-off grind for the majority of players), the relative complexity of the mechanics vs. what tools the game actually provides [including the need of rely of 3rd party resources], the grind for merits and the harsh decay of merits vs. overall poor rewards / time required, the FDEV side failure to translate the players narrative into GalNet/CG lore stuff [i.e. the recent fierce confrontation between Fed/Alliance and Imp/Fed, with hundreds of players involved, have been completely ignored].

As Rubber said, we all hope the new Tharg War mechanics could provide some kind of inspiration to make powerplay more dynamic and engaging.

 

[Rubbernuke]

As Rubber said, we all hope the new Tharg War mechanics could provide some kind of inspiration to make powerplay more dynamic and engaging.

If you swap Goids for engineered enemy vessels (dependent on ranks / merits moved that cycle) and priced in opposition through Powerplay themed missions FD would be about 60% there. If you made it hard enough for Rank 5 30,000+ merit boyz it would make co-op teamwork actually important and make sense too because loner wolf guys would hit a ceiling in solo (since they would be pushing what even a G5 ship can deal with).

In fact I'm salivating a little thinking about having a proper NPC enemy now, along with Powerplay themed missions that replace tired old PP CZs and plain cargo moving.

 

[Darrack]

If you swap Goids for engineered enemy vessels (dependent on ranks / merits moved that cycle) and priced in opposition through Powerplay themed missions FD would be about 60% there. If you made it hard enough for Rank 5 30,000+ merit boyz it would make co-op teamwork actually important and make sense too because loner wolf guys would hit a ceiling in solo (since they would be pushing what even a G5 ship can deal with).

In fact I'm salivating a little thinking about having a proper NPC enemy now, along with Powerplay themed missions that replace tired old PP CZs and plain cargo moving.

Whatever happens it still needs to be doable and enjoyable for soloer's, not just soloer's in 'Solo mode' but also in Open.
I don't have set play times, i work for myself so often im on late at night and into the early hours with no friends online, if im in the bubble this is when i do PP and i enjoy the grind solo.
Im pretty sure there are many like me who don't have the luxury to organise a wing for PP, there still needs to be a challenge but balanced.
lets face it PvP never really effects PP anyway, i can play in Open moving Dissidents by the cutter load for termination re-education without seeing a single player ship.
Fortifying at risk systems for merits is what i do and unless you know my flight route interdiction aint gonna happen.

O7

 

[Rubbernuke]

Whatever happens it still needs to be doable and enjoyable for soloer's, not just soloer's in 'Solo mode' but also in Open.
I don't have set play times, i work for myself so often im on late at night and into the early hours with no friends online, if im in the bubble this is when i do PP and i enjoy the grind solo.
Im pretty sure there are many like me who don't have the luxury to organise a wing for PP, there still needs to be a challenge but balanced.
lets face it PvP never really effects PP anyway, i can play in Open moving Dissidents by the cutter load for termination re-education without seeing a single player ship.
Fortifying at risk systems for merits is what i do and unless you know my flight route interdiction aint gonna happen.

O7

And nothing I said prevents solo people from participating, what it does is ramp up NPC opposition the more you do. So if you are pushing 20k merits a week the NPCs are going to get more interested in you than someone who only does the lower ranks- as it should be. If you don't want to attract attention do less- again, as it should be- that or fly/ equip better and deal with the heat.

And again pledge to a power that actually fights. I've known powers sniping have players sat on 30k merits get shot down and lose the cycles objective for the group- and thats down to other players and not the anemic NPCs that do exactly nothing. Also I don't have to know your flight route if everyone is inbound to a capital, or if your power is expanding. Singular choke points add to uncertainty rather than keeping everything grind racing which is what puts people off.

 

[Rebel Yell]

Whatever happens it still needs to be doable and enjoyable for soloer's, not just soloer's in 'Solo mode' but also in Open.
I don't have set play times, i work for myself so often im on late at night and into the early hours with no friends online, if im in the bubble this is when i do PP and i enjoy the grind solo.
Im pretty sure there are many like me who don't have the luxury to organise a wing for PP, there still needs to be a challenge but balanced.
lets face it PvP never really effects PP anyway, i can play in Open moving Dissidents by the cutter load for termination re-education without seeing a single player ship.
Fortifying at risk systems for merits is what i do and unless you know my flight route interdiction aint gonna happen.

May be it doesn't affect the "big picture" but at least it does offer a break to the grind routines (depending on power specific statuses ofc... turmoil, expansions I mean).

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Oh wow, when this thread did become a Powerplay mechanics thread? :O

Anyway, there's something I need to say as always: people still confound "PvP" with "Open Only".

"PvP" is often associated with the "duel" PvP mechanic, while the beauty of "Open Only" is the thrill that makes you (for example) think and strategize in supercruise, or makes you try to elaborate an alternate ship build to just hit hard and fast traders hauling powerplay commodities and evade combat against bigger (but slower) ships.

The human factor is the best way to gain variability in an otherwise far less variable game.

This said, I think that Powerplay issues are far beyond the Open/Solo/gGroup debate.

I think that right now what keeps people afar of Powerplay is how poorly it is integrated with the other game mechanics, especially the new gameplay.

We need a decentralized, overhead free, powerplay-flavoured mission centered Powerplay, with Powerplay missions covering as many game mechanics they can (from combat, to hauling, to exploration... of course according to any Power context and lore (for example, obviously Torval should offer mostly mining-themed missions, but they could be like "killing pirates to protect miners" missions too for example).

Right now being an active Powerplayer means necessairly ignoring most of the game to kill dumb NPCs, haul commodities and nothing else. THAT is what keeps people away from Powerplay mostly.

Then the Open Only factor could be a variability factor, what makes it different from BGS (for example).

And it's a damn shame, the sorry state Powerplay is in. Powerplay could be one of the main features of the game, it's basically the best way to have a feeling of "membership" in the game.

Let's just hope that Thargoid War mechanics will be moved to Powerplay too soon. Not very confident about that honestly, FDev never showed nothing but superficial interest on the matter.