The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
Git gud noob, no reason to fly unfortified noobboat in open....and so on...Yeah I understand.
Mobius has improved this game for many of us.
Well there is no reason to fly a noob-boat anywhere really.
But Open is hard when you start, because its difficulty is far above anything NPCs can dish out- either you can deal with it, learn how to avoid trouble or you can't.
There is the problem caused by totally gimped security response. In FFE danger was localised, some regions were safe for new commander and his noobboat, some were so and so, and some were totally no-go zones. Current games version is: One mode is basically one big no-go zone.
The issue is that even if every sec ship was ATR class you will still have to survive 30 seconds or so. EDs C+P is reactive and that someone has to either be destroyed or harmed for it to kick off. That requires everyone in Open to build that survivability into how and what they fly.
Commander Commanderi Gankus
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... but some of them choose to, at little or no risk to themselves....Well they don't have to
But they don't have to (build defensively). It is advice. You can find your own solution & as I'm sure you can appreciate, if you find a solution that works for you, by all means recommend it. That's something most of us in this thread are doing. Those that aren't just complaining about the way other people choose to play of course
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Those who don't like gankers or those who don't like the fact that some game features are pan-modal?Those that aren't just complaining about the way other people choose to play of course
.... of course, the answer to that question could be a simple "yes".
Last edited:
Because the setting features an approximation of a physical reality that allows for interactions between physical objects as well as between objects and certain forms of directed energy.
That's a loaded question containing presumptions I do not agree with.
Longer than that, because even though ATR--who are about as powerful as they can plausibly be made (they are all G5 to the gills and always have been), and even feature comically overpowered reverberating cascade burst lasers and the ability to teleport--still can't shoot down an HRP brick in any reasonable amount of time.
Anyway, I still think the security response is terrible. However, the problem isn't one of ship potency or response time, both of which are already incredible to the point of incredulity. The problem is, as you say, that C&P is reactive, rather than proactive, and has negligible persistence. They should be waiting to ambush offenders inside docking tubes, hounding them across the galaxy, impounding ships, and jumping people on station concourses or drowning them in the toilet while their body cams are switched off.
You fail to account for those that are inspired to become gankers themselves and imo the largest demographic and the one I count myself among, those that just get on with it & learn from the experience without complaint.
But of course it is a spectrum not a series of boxes, for (imo) most it is enough to read the varying advice offered & choose some combination that works for them.
You know this all of course.
Players are free to take advice offered or discard it. I don't use the block list for example, you (I assume) don't play in Open. each of us found a solution & advocate it to others.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not at all - some of them are in the "don't like the fact that some game features are pan-modal" group, for obvious reasons.
That group weren't complaining, so didn't need to be included....
I can imagine that kind of draconian enforcement would frustrate many PvE activities & severely curtail a lot of criminal activities & I'm not sure that's what the game designers are going for.
I one proposed that Cmdrs with high notoriety be denied the ability to dock (it was more nuanced than just that). If nothing else it would limit the number of HRPs because of the need for a fuel scoop, AMFU etc.
In principle I like the idea that ATR encourage a rogue Cmdr to move on & agree they should be more persistent though.
They would be complainers too
I am not an open only advocate. I do accept however, that an open only game is viable in a way that an open PvE mode is not (open only is an achievable design, open PvE is an ideal to aim for (in both cases for those that want such things).My approach to 'dealing with' the risk of PvP does not require the game to me changed. Naturally I would recommend it to anyone, in part or entirely
This is one of the reasons why the C&P system will never be an effective solution to ganking.
The C&P system exists within the context of PvE activities, and unless you start straight out of the gate by acknowledging that players and NPCs are different, anything you do to C&P to affect player-on-player activity is going to have a severe knockon effect on everything else in the game.
"We should make C&P harsher and make bounties never expire to ensure gankers are punished" is how we ended up with people in solo getting millions-of-credits module cleaning fees over a 400cr loitering fine.
Meanwhile, I have never racked up more than a single point of notoriety against other players, yet a single PvE mission in odyssey can easily get me 2-3 points.
In the end though only the pilot can protect themselves, and that only other players can really harm / protect others.
Gankers and griefing would be much less a thing if players knew what to do and mitigated the risk proactively, rather than flying about thinking in PvE terms (and refusing to do things differently next time).
I can think of a number of ways via the BGS, money, superpowers etc to make C+P work better, but sadly these could only work from day 1 because ED has evolved into a two tier game, that of neutered PvE and unforgiving PvP.