The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[Robert Maynard]

And by the way, what makes you think it will stop anyone from doing a gank if they want to?

You can always make the first gank, you can get kicked out of the group. In an open game you can be blacklisted. There's essentially no difference.

There's quite a significant difference. If players choose to block a particular player in Open then every player needs to do so to remove them from a group's game, i.e. one action per player, with no guarantee that no members of the group will encounter the player (due to matchmaking weightings for instancing). In a Private Group, kicking the particular player removes them from the group for all of those who play in the group - with one player action - with a guarantee that no players in that PG will encounter the kicked CMDR when playing in that PG.

 

[SergMx]

I usually hate that argument, but I am going to make it anyway: Blocking a player influences instancing, even for third parties. Kicking a player from a closed group does not.

Aren't the other players in the group third parties?

 

[SergMx]

There's quite a significant difference. If players choose to block a particular player in Open then every player needs to do so to remove them from a group's game, i.e. one action per player, with no guarantee that no members of the group will encounter the player (due to matchmaking weightings for instancing). In a Private Group, kicking the particular player removes them from the group for all of those who play in the group - with one player action - with a guarantee that no players in that PG will encounter the kicked CMDR when playing in that PG.

Yes, I do. But it adds to the host of the group to also investigate the incident since the person who reported the attack may turn out to be just a prankster ...

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes, I do. But it adds to the host of the group to also investigate the incident since the person who reported the attack may turn out to be just a prankster ...

Indeed - which, if the same person reports a number of attacks causing members to be ejected that are subsequently appealed, may affect the reporting user's membership of the Private Group. Sadly not every person can be trusted.

 

[Bigmaec]

And by the way, what makes you think it will stop anyone from doing a gank if they want to?

You can always make the first gank, you can get kicked out of the group. In an open game you can be blacklisted. There's essentially no difference.

There are basically two types of PG:

1) a big unpersonal one like Mobius or Fleetcom, which is generally curated and moderated. You can get ganked there, but it is extremely rare.

2) a personal PG where everyone knows each other. My personal PG, or Operation Ida in the humble beginnings where everyone knew the other, are examples. You can get ganked there too, but it is even rarer, will get moderated even faster and if your* idea of fun is betraying friends, good riddance.

* not you personally of course.

 

[Darrack]

the person who reported the attack may turn out to be just a prankster

In Mobius you need to provide evidence to have someone removed

O7

 

[AngryAntz]

I just went into Solo by accident, now I feel dirty and have to go take a shower

 

[Darrack]

I just went into Solo by accident, now I feel dirty and have to go take a shower

Well the other mode isnt rated PG for nothing

O7

 

[Escalona]

I've been playing Elite Dangerous for many years. From the moment I tried it, the immersion was spectacular. It's always been marketed as a galaxy simulator (supposedly at a 1:1 scale). Right away, I understood that the galaxy is a dangerous place (IT'S IN THE GAME'S NAME!). With those conditions in mind, I started playing.


Over time, I learned about the different game modes (solo/groups). It was something I didn't understand. The galaxy is the same for everyone, so why would some people want to avoid that? It's like walking through the favelas of Brazil without worrying about getting mugged. Is it risky? It is. Is it sometimes frustrating? Yes, sometimes it is. But for a simulator to be realistic, you have to encounter all kinds of people and situations. Depending on your skills in facing them or finding an alternative solution, your results will vary.


But well, apparently, not everyone thinks that way. Some want to live in a "safe" galaxy where no one attacks or bothers them—a Disney galaxy. Okay, to each their own taste and passion. I'm not here to judge people's weakness or different ways of thinking.


Where I do disagree is when those people influence the game's most important activities, like PowerPlay or the BGS. These mechanics are usually played in groups (somewhat experienced) and with a strong focus on combat, whether in wars, ship missions, or on-foot operations. Those who prefer a Disney galaxy should live out their fantasy without affecting those of us who take the risk of not coming back every day. It's a cowardly approach that takes all the fun out of the game and, personally, one of the things that has disappointed me the most.


And before anyone comes at me: I'm not a ganker, I'm not a PvP expert, but if you interdict me, one of us is ending up in an escape pod. I accept the consequences of my actions. I accept both winning and losing. And just to be clear, I don't support those griefing groups either, but this is how real life works. Many times, you're just going about your business, and suddenly some lunatic ruins your day—or, if you're unlucky, your life. If this game aims to be a simulator, it has to include those risks.


Right now, the faction I belong to is anarchic, and the Imperial and Federal powers want to take over one of our biggest systems. Of course, we're not going to let them. We've been at war for two days, and we're winning. We've played countless scenarios, and in not one—NOT A SINGLE ONE—have we encountered a commander fighting us. How? What's the point of that? You want to take my system, and you don't even show up to measure your strength against mine? If you beat me, it's yours, but at least let me have the satisfaction of a good fight and some fun in the process.


At the end of the day, this is a simulation game. I want that simulation. I'm not playing Tetris; I'm playing a game that has the word DANGEROUS in its name. In the end, this has been one of Frontier’s biggest failures, and most commanders share the disappointment. Those who want to play Elite Disney shouldn't influence the game's major mechanics. They want their world of colors and flowers, but the galaxy isn't like that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Given that those being complained about in the preceding post seem to form the majority of the player-base, i.e. Frontier are well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP (even if they have stated that the majority of players play in Open), it seems that Frontier got it right at the outset when they decided to make other players, and therefore in-the-same-instance PvP, entirely optional while offering every player the ability to experience and affect the mode shared galaxy.

Put differently, we are all given the ability to play the way we want to - but no ability to force others to instance with us.

Quite interesting that Colonisation has also been stated by Zac on a recent stream to not be a PvP feature, isn't it....

Regarding the point about "satisfaction of a good fight" - why should any player even consider how the other player wants to play given that some of those who enjoy PvP rather obviously don't care about the satisfaction of their chosen player targets when preferentially selecting non-combat ships?

The name of the game is something of a meme now - its meaning was explained over a decade ago:

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOYhoFYIWmw&t=477s

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I understood that the galaxy is a dangerous place (IT'S IN THE GAME'S NAME!).

No Man's Sky definitely has skies that anyone can fly through. In Crusader Kings you don't have to play as a king and you don't need to go on crusades. Also, danger has different meanings and levels for different people, it doesn't have to come from PvP. Exploration has its own dangers, such as landing on high G worlds.

Some want to live in a "safe" galaxy where no one attacks or bothers them—a Disney galaxy. Okay, to each their own taste and passion. I'm not here to judge people's weakness or different ways of thinking.

Some may do, but by no means most players, including PvE players. We just don't want that danger to come from other players whose only motivation is to ruin someone else's day. Getting blown up by an NPC is fine. It happens and you know its just the game doing what its programmed to do. As for the "Disney galaxy" comment, its an unworthy statement, you're belittling those who don't want to partake in PvP.

It doesn't help that the game is so unbalanced when it comes to flying different ships and different loadouts. Yes, you can build a ship to survive a gank attempt. I've got a Cutter fitted with mine launchers and over 8000 mj of shields with resistances up the wazoo. All without making too many compromises to cargo space. Still doesn't mean I care to be interdicted by someone whose only joy is to make other players go boom, i'm happy I can choose to not interact with such people. Which is a shame for the PvP pirates, because being pirated by another player can be a good bit of fun and roleplay. Problem is, you can't determine which players will ask for cargo and which will immediately open fire if you stop for them.

I'll add one more comment about it being "dangerous". You know who the game isn't dangerous for? The gankers. They face zero risk blowing attacking players in trade or exploration loadouts, and not even much risk from players in combat ships configured for PvE combat.

So, if you want to preach about how the game should be dangerous, go preach it to the gankers, because they sure as hell don't like facing danger. They have a habit of running the moment they face a real challenge.

 

[Brrokk]

...Over time, I learned about the different game modes (solo/groups). It was something I didn't understand. The galaxy is the same for everyone, so why would some people want to avoid that? It's like walking through the favelas of Brazil without worrying about getting mugged. Is it risky? It is. Is it sometimes frustrating? Yes, sometimes it is. But for a simulator to be realistic, you have to encounter all kinds of people and situations. Depending on your skills in facing them or finding an alternative solution, your results will vary.

My initial reaction was different. I looked at the login choices and immediately thought, "Huh, one's missing. Where's co-op play?"

But well, apparently, not everyone thinks that way. Some want to live in a "safe" galaxy where no one attacks or bothers them—a Disney galaxy. ...

I've never seen anyone ask for a "Disney" galaxy, I think that's just a trope. No-one minds danger, but it needs to be danger that makes sense in-game.

Where I do disagree is when those people influence the game's most important activities, like PowerPlay or the BGS. These mechanics are usually played in groups (somewhat experienced) and with a strong focus on combat, whether in wars, ship missions, or on-foot operations. ...

I disagree there in several respects.
(1) I don't think PP or BGS are "important activities";
(2) if they're activities at all, I don't think they're usually played in groups with a focus on combat;
(3) if you're "playing" BGS and you focus on PvP combat, you lose;
(4) BGS isn't meant to be played at all - it's stated purpose is to make the galaxy respond to all player actions so that it will seem "alive". But all this has been debated over and over again in this immense thread.

But when you say "each to their own taste and passion" I agree totally. (Sorry that's not shown as a quote from you; I'm having trouble with the quoting thing). I don't want any PvP combat options to be removed from the game. I always say that PvE players and PvP players need each other. Whether you want to play "Fortnite in Space" or "Space Trucking Simulator" or anything in-between, neither extreme would be viable on its own and the combination we have makes financial sense and gives us all what we want.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

(3) if you're "playing" BGS and you focus on PvP combat, you lose;

Its something some people refuse to accept/acknowledge in these conversations. One could do opportunistic PvP while doing PvE to work the BGS. You'll still generally speaking be less efficient, but you can still make progress moving those numbers. But if someone is hoping to "win" at the BGS using PvP they are kidding themselves. However, i don't think most of them really care about the BGS, its just an argument they make.

 

[angusmadmac1]

I've been playing Elite Dangerous for many years. From the moment I tried it, the immersion was spectacular. It's always been marketed as a galaxy simulator (supposedly at a 1:1 scale). Right away, I understood that the galaxy is a dangerous place (IT'S IN THE GAME'S NAME!). With those conditions in mind, I started playing.


Over time, I learned about the different game modes (solo/groups). It was something I didn't understand. The galaxy is the same for everyone, so why would some people want to avoid that? It's like walking through the favelas of Brazil without worrying about getting mugged. Is it risky? It is. Is it sometimes frustrating? Yes, sometimes it is. But for a simulator to be realistic, you have to encounter all kinds of people and situations. Depending on your skills in facing them or finding an alternative solution, your results will vary.


But well, apparently, not everyone thinks that way. Some want to live in a "safe" galaxy where no one attacks or bothers them—a Disney galaxy. Okay, to each their own taste and passion. I'm not here to judge people's weakness or different ways of thinking.


Where I do disagree is when those people influence the game's most important activities, like PowerPlay or the BGS. These mechanics are usually played in groups (somewhat experienced) and with a strong focus on combat, whether in wars, ship missions, or on-foot operations. Those who prefer a Disney galaxy should live out their fantasy without affecting those of us who take the risk of not coming back every day. It's a cowardly approach that takes all the fun out of the game and, personally, one of the things that has disappointed me the most.


And before anyone comes at me: I'm not a ganker, I'm not a PvP expert, but if you interdict me, one of us is ending up in an escape pod. I accept the consequences of my actions. I accept both winning and losing. And just to be clear, I don't support those griefing groups either, but this is how real life works. Many times, you're just going about your business, and suddenly some lunatic ruins your day—or, if you're unlucky, your life. If this game aims to be a simulator, it has to include those risks.


Right now, the faction I belong to is anarchic, and the Imperial and Federal powers want to take over one of our biggest systems. Of course, we're not going to let them. We've been at war for two days, and we're winning. We've played countless scenarios, and in not one—NOT A SINGLE ONE—have we encountered a commander fighting us. How? What's the point of that? You want to take my system, and you don't even show up to measure your strength against mine? If you beat me, it's yours, but at least let me have the satisfaction of a good fight and some fun in the process.


At the end of the day, this is a simulation game. I want that simulation. I'm not playing Tetris; I'm playing a game that has the word DANGEROUS in its name. In the end, this has been one of Frontier’s biggest failures, and most commanders share the disappointment. Those who want to play Elite Disney shouldn't influence the game's major mechanics. They want their world of colors and flowers, but the galaxy isn't like that.

Elite dangerous was named for the rank not because it's a " dangerous" galaxy and Elite 4 just sucked as a name.
I can play open and undermine any player group without ever instancing with them it's the way the game is. It couldn't work any other way .
Just because you can't see the other team doesn't automatically make them playing in Pg or solo , they may well be thinking that about you and your squadron .
BGS isn't PvP you get best results doing non PvP stuff . You lose because you haven't done enough BGS stuff (trade inf bounty exploration) .
If it was PvP orientated your rewards would be better but they aren't.
Peer 2 Peer is the issue not the modes. timezones whether your connection can handle P2P .
Then add playing in open 4.0 it's still a thing, still being used so now you are playing in the wrong open.
If open was truly open then i would agree but open as it stands is a series of PG which depends on your connection criteria .
Every person assumes that the other team are using PG or Solo and use the well I don't see them so they must be ......

 

[Capitan SATA]

Normally, whenever there are rival commanders, they either flee or there's a fight, but it doesn't really matter whether you win or not, since whoever gets the most influence points wins or loses the day. The important thing in this system is to do a lot with a lot of commanders.
I hope they tweak this system in the summer, or at least I hope so, that PVP combat will be worth more than just "fun," although I have to admit it's not my specialty.

 

[Rudo Strife]

I read comments and it is increasingly clear to me that the problem is with the community and many players who seem to have a heart attack when they meet another player in open mode. In no massively multiplayer game does something similar happen as in Elite Dangerous, as simple as that the INF rewards in BGS and the merits in powerplay or literally that in those modes (Private and Solitaire) does not affect BGS at all and powerplay giving the possibility to defend yourself, not fighting ghosts, would make the mechanics of BGS and powerplay more logical and fun and if you don't like the PVP no do BGS or powerplay because it is related and for the rest you would have the other modes, private and solo, it is very simple but many pilots seem not to understand something as simple as this, because they do not come out of their caves, no one is talking about simple PVP they are talking about there being no rewards of influence missions in private and solo mode, Don't read what you want.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The "problem", for the PvP players is that they chose to buy a game where their preferred playstyle is an optional extra that no player needs to engage in to affect the mode shared game features available to all players.

For those players with no interest in in-the-same-instance PvP the game they bought works well, with other players being an optional extra that they can choose to play among, or not, as they see fit.

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

I've been playing Elite Dangerous for many years. From the moment I tried it, the immersion was spectacular. It's always been marketed as a galaxy simulator (supposedly at a 1:1 scale). Right away, I understood that the galaxy is a dangerous place (IT'S IN THE GAME'S NAME!). With those conditions in mind, I started playing.


Over time, I learned about the different game modes (solo/groups). It was something I didn't understand. The galaxy is the same for everyone, so why would some people want to avoid that? It's like walking through the favelas of Brazil without worrying about getting mugged. Is it risky? It is. Is it sometimes frustrating? Yes, sometimes it is. But for a simulator to be realistic, you have to encounter all kinds of people and situations. Depending on your skills in facing them or finding an alternative solution, your results will vary.


But well, apparently, not everyone thinks that way. Some want to live in a "safe" galaxy where no one attacks or bothers them—a Disney galaxy. Okay, to each their own taste and passion. I'm not here to judge people's weakness or different ways of thinking.


Where I do disagree is when those people influence the game's most important activities, like PowerPlay or the BGS. These mechanics are usually played in groups (somewhat experienced) and with a strong focus on combat, whether in wars, ship missions, or on-foot operations. Those who prefer a Disney galaxy should live out their fantasy without affecting those of us who take the risk of not coming back every day. It's a cowardly approach that takes all the fun out of the game and, personally, one of the things that has disappointed me the most.


And before anyone comes at me: I'm not a ganker, I'm not a PvP expert, but if you interdict me, one of us is ending up in an escape pod. I accept the consequences of my actions. I accept both winning and losing. And just to be clear, I don't support those griefing groups either, but this is how real life works. Many times, you're just going about your business, and suddenly some lunatic ruins your day—or, if you're unlucky, your life. If this game aims to be a simulator, it has to include those risks.


Right now, the faction I belong to is anarchic, and the Imperial and Federal powers want to take over one of our biggest systems. Of course, we're not going to let them. We've been at war for two days, and we're winning. We've played countless scenarios, and in not one—NOT A SINGLE ONE—have we encountered a commander fighting us. How? What's the point of that? You want to take my system, and you don't even show up to measure your strength against mine? If you beat me, it's yours, but at least let me have the satisfaction of a good fight and some fun in the process.


At the end of the day, this is a simulation game. I want that simulation. I'm not playing Tetris; I'm playing a game that has the word DANGEROUS in its name. In the end, this has been one of Frontier’s biggest failures, and most commanders share the disappointment. Those who want to play Elite Disney shouldn't influence the game's major mechanics. They want their world of colors and flowers, but the galaxy isn't like that.

First of all, your post might be taken a little bit more seriously if you had avoided the usual clichés ("Dangerous is in the name") or, worse, had not stooped down to be derogatory to those who do not share your play style ("Elite Disney") or calling other people's choice of gameplay a "weakness". The only term missing from your post was "hiding in solo" to make it perfect. You have your preferences, and I have mine, and that's okay. And funniily enough, the game provides both of our preferences to us.

I love this game, and maybe for some of the same reasons you do, and probably for some other reasons than you. I don't care for " the satisfaction of a good fight", I mostly really don't care for other players or the MMO aspects of the game, I don't care about "git gud or go home", and I really don't care for any kind of PvP competitive aspect, symmetrical or asymmetrical.

I DO care a lot for the immersion this game offers, mostly about flying around in your space ship - that is why I play in VR exclusively, and I kind of like the fact that the galaxy isn't static and everyone can influence it, even if I might not want to play with them. And that's my prerogative - it is my game time, and I am the one determining who I play with. If you choose to play in open, that's fine, I might too, I might not. Gatekeeping content or influence away from those who do not share other people's play style is something I deeply dispise and resent.

I kind of DO like PP 2.0 even though I didn't even care the least bit for its predecessor, even though I don't see it as a direct PvP feature (and clearly Frontier doesn't either, because contrary to all the shouting and demanding, it is still not open only). I am not too territorial in my gameplay, but I do like that powerplay now gives me something to do, something to tie my favorite gameplay loops to.

At some point, the open only proponents have to accept the reality that this game is not designed as a PvP game, and never will be. The design of the living, changing galaxy is kind of brilliant, as is the decision not to gate it behind some kind of skill check. Forcing others to play with you when they don't want to will do only one thing: Drive them away.

And I also agree with Robert that putting a weight or importance on certain gameplay loops is somewhat misguided. And way to go to speak for "most" CMDRs. In reality, I think most CMDRs care very little about those open only squabbles, they just play the game. "Most" CMDRs never set foot in this forum, Reddit or Discord. To paraphrase the late great FZ, they just shut up and play their game.

(Edited for spelling because words is hard)

 

[Rudo Strife]

Let's see... what you're saying doesn't make any sense, you're diverting the topic or I'm explaining myself poorly.

If I have been working my influence in my system for 1 month and then 4 commanders in 4 days in private mode knock me down that work in BGS for 1 month, does it seem fair and logical to you? I am not a PVP player, I do many more things, the times I have done PVP it has been very fun, I don't cry like most people. We are not talking about Elite PVP, we are talking about the BGS and powerplay. I see that they do not want to understand it no matter how much the evidence is shoved in their faces, because many use those modes and of course, what are they going to defend? Don't make more excuses, I think it's simpler to understand, don't confuse the players. Is it so difficult to understand? hahaha this is laughable now, the problem is with the community I have it very clear hahahaha

 

[Helmut Grokenberger]

Let's see... what you're saying doesn't make any sense, you're diverting the topic or I'm explaining myself poorly.

If I have been working my influence in my system for 1 month and then 4 commanders in 4 days in private mode knock me down that work in BGS for 1 month, does it seem fair and logical to you?

How do you know they did it in solo, and not from the other side of the world while you were sleepinig? You don't, and neither does it matter. The BGS bucket filling game isn't fair, never was, and never will be. That's what CMDRs chose when they made a background feature not designed to be played the focus of their game play. There is always the possibility that someone somewhere will fill the bucket faster than you, or with more people or.... If you have an issue with that, better don't play the BGS.