The Open v Solo v Groups thread

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Anyway, there's something I need to say as always: people still confound "PvP" with "Open Only".
As Open is a PvP-enabled game mode, restricting any feature to Open would force participants in that feature to play among those who may choose to engage them in PvP. Hence the clear link between Open only and PvP.
"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.
... and the gank and grief "mechanics". Not all players get their thrills from the possibility / actuality of PvP as part of their gameplay.
 
Pledging to a power marks the player as "enemy" to opposing powers... this is a game feature.

Every powerplay action is PvP, either direct or indirect, this is a game feature as well (and to some extent this is also the case for BGS).

Engaging, and possibily destroying, enemy players' ships is absolutely legit.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Pledging to a power marks the player as "enemy" to opposing powers... this is a game feature.

Every powerplay action is PvP, either direct or indirect, this is a game feature as well (and to some extent this is also the case for BGS).

Engaging, and possibily destroying, enemy players' ships is absolutely legit.
Indeed - noting that, even when pledged, there's no requirement for any player to play with players who may wish to shoot at them.
 
Indeed - noting that, even when pledged, there's no requirement for any player to play with players who may wish to shoot at them.
The irony being..........only players can stop other players and thus make Powerplay an actual ship flying competition. Otherwise its a Supermarket Sweep in SPAAAACCCEEEEEE.....

1673627830920.png


So it comes down to: either players fill in for NPCs, or NPCs become like players.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
The irony being..........only players can stop other players and thus make Powerplay an actual ship flying competition. Otherwise its a Supermarket Sweep in SPAAAACCCEEEEEE.....
It's not so much "ironic" as "how PvE features work in games where PvP is either absent or optional".
So it comes down to: either players fill in for NPCs, or NPCs become like players.
In the opinion of some, certainly, however players aren't in any position to set the challenge posed by the game for players who don't choose to play among other players.
 
It's not so much "ironic" as "how PvE features work in games where PvP is either absent or optional".
Its ironic because the PvE NPC element that supposedly attenuates player efficiency in solo / PG is totally dysfunctional. In this case PvP (i.e. player ships which are unrestricted) has taken that mantle.

In the opinion of some, certainly, however players aren't in any position to set the challenge posed by the game for players who don't choose to play among other players.
If you read back a few pages I talk about this and go into PvE design solutions- in short removing discreet cargo allocations / CZs and make it linked to missions which can have associated risk. The more you do, the harder it gets.

It all goes back to

So it comes down to: either players fill in for NPCs, or NPCs become like players.

In that suggestion NPCs become like players in having scaled difficulty via engineering / situations.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Its ironic because the PvE NPC element that supposedly attenuates player efficiency in solo / PG is totally dysfunctional. In this case PvP (i.e. player ships which are unrestricted) has taken that mantle.
For those inclined to play among them, maybe.
If you read back a few pages I talk about this and go into PvE design solutions- in short removing discreet cargo allocations / CZs and make it linked to missions which can have associated risk. The more you do, the harder it gets.
I'll take a look.
It all goes back to
There's no absolute requirement for either - noting that some increase in challenge posed by Powerplay NPCs does not seem to be contentious - it's the degree of the change that remains up for debate.
 
Oh, NPCs are a complete joke, especially in Powerplay.

Anyhow we are not focusing on the real current issue in Powerplay (and the reason why people tend to ignore it or abandon it after they gave it a try): to play Powerplay properly (or at least to keep your rating) you must ignore most features of the game.

We need missions applied to Powerplay and other activities too possibly. The merits earned that way need to be very accurately balanced by difficulty, time invested into completing those, possibility to fail (and de facto waste time).

Then we need to get rid of Powerplay modules (moving those to tech brokers), module shopping is BAD. Extremly bad.

But we are going OT, and the "topic" has been so talked about over and over again that only the devs could really do something about it. Will they do something about it at some point? Probably. I do not think so honestly.
 
For those inclined to play among them, maybe.
? NPCs are in all modes, are all equally useless unengineered panda cars. For an all mode PP to work the NPCs need to bite back.

There's no absolute requirement for either - noting that some increase in challenge posed by Powerplay NPCs does not seem to be contentious - it's the degree of the change that remains up for debate.
There is though: the more you do and the higher the rank the more of a target you become. Using missions and ranks can easily price in actual opposition difficulty.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
? NPCs are in all modes, are all equally useless unengineered panda cars. For an all mode PP to work the NPCs need to bite back.
Of course - it was the "In this case PvP (i.e. player ships which are unrestricted) has taken that mantle." bit that was being responded to.
There is though: the more you do and the higher the rank the more of a target you become. Using missions and ranks can easily price in actual opposition difficulty.
That's a desire expressed by some, not a requirement.
 
Of course - it was the "In this case PvP (i.e. player ships which are unrestricted) has taken that mantle." bit that was being responded to.
But thats why Open is the only mode Powerplay conceptually works in- because its populated by bad boy chad ships that have a chance of stopping the flow of PP cargo and merits.

I'm saying Players as NPCs or NPCs like players for a reason- its got to be one or the other for something as competitive and player driven to function. The Goid war is a good example of this.

That's a desire expressed by some, not a requirement.
Well FD have done this with the Thargoid war. And for Powerplay, the Game of Thrones explicitly combative feature to work someone (NPC or player) has to biff you up at some point.
 
Problems with generally beefed up NPC's:
Rank progression is automatic in Elite. Play game long enough and your ranks do go up. It is NOT same as opt in difficulty level selector.
Something like Thargoids are still opt in stuff, you choose to join the war against them. Not so if general NPC levels are upgraded. Unless we talk only about PP or certain high grade missions.
 
Problems with generally beefed up NPC's:
Rank progression is automatic in Elite. Play game long enough and your ranks do go up. It is NOT same as opt in difficulty level selector.
Something like Thargoids are still opt in stuff, you choose to join the war against them. Not so if general NPC levels are upgraded. Unless we talk only about PP or certain high grade missions.

I think that's more a "general" problem: difficulty should be calibrated not considering ranks (which is just a linear progression, you donpt have to be particularly good, you just need to be sturdy and play a lot), environment should be the most important factor in my opinion.
For example, system security levels should be a factor in spawning high ranked lawful and unlawful ships, then if you are a low experienced lawful/unlawful player will be your choice to try do your stuff in more or less difficult systems. I wrote some thread about it in the past if I remember well, bit I do not want to go and check where it is honestly. :p

I think that more than difficulty "per se", it should be important to balance personal rewards and consequences over the environment (being them both BGS and Powerplay) considering the actual difficulty of the action completed (and the time such action needs to be completed).

That would mean a complete rethinking about how rewards are administrated right now in Elite Dangerous, and I think it would make it more challenging, exciting and finally more fair (and less grindy, which is most important imho).

Considering Powerplay alone well... you did the example with Thargoids, which are, as you said, completely optional.

Powerplay is optional too. You chose to pledge for a Power even for some modules, but that's not mandatory, that's optional. You can still play the game even without never being pledged.

If you think about it everything is actually optional in the game. :p But that's sheer "philosophy" eheh.

The key element that I always hoped FDev would have considered some point (and they never really did sadly) is balancement, that's all, the real core problem in Elite Dangerous that we deal with since Horizons (first vanilla ED was far less unbalanced, but it was a much simplier game too, with far less features, s oit was easier to keep the personal progression decent, for example).

But I am afraid we are really going out of topic. Even considering the sub-argument (Open in Powerplay).

I think that one of the key features fdev should address is the effects of system security over gameplay, making almost impossible for unlawful or wanted players to even fly in very high security systems if they are wanted by that jurisdiction and on the other side making extremly dangerous for players to go in low security ones, of course leaving the possibility to survive, giving high rewards to both if they succeed.
 
Oh and about ranks: wouldn't have it much more cooler if ranks would have been given like achievements, completing a set of tasks? A little bit too late for that I guess, probably something that will be considered for the future game, some years from now. :p
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I wrote some thread about it in the past if I remember well, bit I do not want to go and check where it is honestly. :p
Maybe this one?


.... that sought to gate all influence behind missions, among other things.
But I am afraid we are really going out of topic. Even considering the sub-argument (Open in Powerplay).
Increasing challenge posed by the game seems to be a quite common fall-back position from some participants in these discussions, i.e. if players can't be forced to play with those who want to shoot at them then the challenge they face by the game should be increased for "reasons".

Sandro commented on the challenge posed by the game, in relation to the different game modes, some time before he left the project:
Hello Commander Ozram!

I think you are perhaps conflating two separate issues: the amount of challenge present in each game mode, and player versus player interactions. I think these are so fundamentally different that comparisons might not be particularly useful.

The challenge of playing in solo being too low (without taking sides) is a valid argument to make, although it might better be phrased as "the opportunities for challenge are too low in Elite Dangerous". It's actually something we are interested in looking at.

However, cranking up difficulty will not make Open more enticing. Conflict between actual people, even within a game, is a very different matter to taking on NPC ships. It has many psychological and social elements that would otherwise not be present. Incidentally, increasing the difficulty of NPC engagements would also make Open harder rather than fairer, so there's also that.

Perhaps the bottom line is the different modes are there to enable Commanders to play how they want to. We don't want everyone to play in Open because we want some sort of Armageddon PvP scenario. We just think that playing with other people, both cooperatively and adversarial, can be more fun, which is why we advocate Open play.

So in the context of a karma system, people playing in Private Group or Solo mode are not relevant. Why should folk in Open be interested in what goes on there? This is about making player versus player interactions more equitable in Open, getting more folk in there, surely?
Frontier have added activities that are more challenging since then, of course.
 
Also when it comes to NPC "difficulty level" there are some pretty low skill and player irritating ways to do it. And considering how much Fdev likes minimum effort solutions one should be wary about what they wish. One of the easiest, crank up NPC accuracy and reaction times to inhuman level.
Once I played certain WW2 themed flightsim, and npc gunners on bomber machineguns were like that. Even on rookie level they had uncanny ability to snipe certain critical systems of even armored plane with puny normal rifle caliber MG's. When compared to multiplayer where players manned those MG's. Against humans took way more time and lots more hits before human gunner scored some critical hit. Like oil cooler and so on...

It might not be very surprising when I say those NPC gunners were not my favourites.
 
And here you go:

Forgot I was in open as I came back from deep space on the carrier. Figured I'd try to run some basic refugee missions in the Thargoid fight.

Got ganked. Running refugees in a shieldless Beluga trying to help out.

THAT is why nobody plays in open anymore. It's just stupid. If you're going to do it, do it for a reason. Piracy. A grudge match. Something.

But no. You sit there in an FDL to kill an unarmed ship hauling refugees from a Thargoid invasion. That sums it all up right there.
 
Back
Top Bottom