The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[Robert Maynard]

A lot of it was hand-on-heart a genuine belief that it would have neutered a lot of the toxicity it generated within the power play community, or player groups engaging in 'BGS wars'.

If such toxicity exists it does so because player groups that want everyone to play the game their way can't force others to do so - so their solution is to force everyone to play their way (and don't seem to care much, if at all, about those who don't want to play their way) - noting that their way of playing is optional, hence why they complain about other players not playing that way.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

The moment a few people find a new trick, or a clever use of a weapon, wholop goes the Nerf bat, as no one else knows the trick or can do it, so they complain.

Which is sometimes necessary, and sometimes just lazy game development. For example, station ganking has driven a lot of nerfs. But why has the solution of: When you go though the mail slot your ships hardpoints are disabled, never been done? Or some other creative solution. Because that would require some effort on behalf of Fdev rather than just swing the bat. Solving the root of an issue rather than a symptom takes effort.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

@Aashenfox @XComanceX - the other thread is now closed, but to to clarify, it wasn't a serious suggestion, its just something i throw out from time to time when people start arguing for bonuses in Open.

Overall winging up in open (and PG) though does generally make the game more profitable and easier - you've got wing bonuses (eg: trade), you've got wing missions that can bring in more money for less effort, and combat zones and high threat missions become a walk in the park. So from that aspect open is a lot easier in a wing, plus the threat of random ganks is greatly reduced, since gankers tend to prefer solo targets and tend to operate solo.

Basically there are pros and cons in all modes and overall, i think it balances out. The risk of PvP is generally quite low except at certain locations and during events - and keep in mind, @XComanceX said nothing about bonuses only while doing CGs or similar, it was described as an always on bonus, to encourage open play in general, meaning, depending on your location of course, most of the time the "risk" of playing open isn't really a risk at all - its a bonus for no real reason, except, as described, to bribe people into playing open.

As always, who needs more people playing in open? Those already playing in open and are somehow, for their particular reasons, want to see more players. The people playing in PG/solo are happy where they are.

Keep in mind, according to FD, open is already the most popular mode, and instancing limits the number of people you can see at once anyway, so at events, its not like you'll see many more people, and outside events, the galaxy is a big place, if open got a bonus, can easily relocate to a system where PvPers almost never go, so why should one get a bonus?

There's also a number of good reasons any player, even an open only advocate, might want to jump into PG/solo, at least temporarily - congestion at stations is one. The proposed system of increasing bonus for staying in open could be wiped out due to a need to switch modes because the current station you are at has clogged up with ships in the mail slot and relogging just throws you back in the same instance.

I've also been in groups with hardcode open only advocates who were using PGs to farm materials - yes, open only advocates do use PG and solo, when it suits their needs.

 

[Aashenfox]

@Aashenfox @XComanceX - the other thread is now closed, but to to clarify, it wasn't a serious suggestion, its just something i throw out from time to time when people start arguing for bonuses in Open.

Overall winging up in open (and PG) though does generally make the game more profitable and easier - you've got wing bonuses (eg: trade), you've got wing missions that can bring in more money for less effort, and combat zones and high threat missions become a walk in the park. So from that aspect open is a lot easier in a wing, plus the threat of random ganks is greatly reduced, since gankers tend to prefer solo targets and tend to operate solo.

Basically there are pros and cons in all modes and overall, i think it balances out. The risk of PvP is generally quite low except at certain locations and during events - and keep in mind, @XComanceX said nothing about bonuses only while doing CGs or similar, it was described as an always on bonus, to encourage open play in general, meaning, depending on your location of course, most of the time the "risk" of playing open isn't really a risk at all - its a bonus for no real reason, except, as described, to bribe people into playing open.

As always, who needs more people playing in open? Those already playing in open and are somehow, for their particular reasons, want to see more players. The people playing in PG/solo are happy where they are.

Keep in mind, according to FD, open is already the most popular mode, and instancing limits the number of people you can see at once anyway, so at events, its not like you'll see many more people, and outside events, the galaxy is a big place, if open got a bonus, can easily relocate to a system where PvPers almost never go, so why should one get a bonus?

There's also a number of good reasons any player, even an open only advocate, might want to jump into PG/solo, at least temporarily - congestion at stations is one. The proposed system of increasing bonus for staying in open could be wiped out due to a need to switch modes because the current station you are at has clogged up with ships in the mail slot and relogging just throws you back in the same instance.

I've also been in groups with hardcode open only advocates who were using PGs to farm materials - yes, open only advocates do use PG and solo, when it suits their needs.

To be honest, I have no disagreement with any of these points, not that they invalidate my own either, and I appreciate your willingness to discuss. The bottom line is I know you're right, the main problem is the size of the playing area, which is why CGs that force us together are so fun and always bring up more of these kinds of threads. It is important to remember that Open is already the most popular mode after all, as you rightly say.

I do think that blocking in open is a very bad practice though (since it did come up in that thread), at the very least it might be nice if FD cleared people's blocklist every year or something so that stale or short term revenge blocks get cleared. Blocking comms from another cmdr should be a thing, but affecting instancing for all players forever with a potentially unjustified block is an actual barrier to a good multiplayer experience, imo. o7

 

[Robert Maynard]

I do think that blocking in open is a very bad practice though (since it did come up in that thread), at the very least it might be nice if FD cleared people's blocklist every year or something so that stale or short term revenge blocks get cleared. Blocking comms from another cmdr should be a thing, but affecting instancing for all players forever with a potentially unjustified block is an actual barrier to a good multiplayer experience, imo. o7

Blocking, menu exit (possibly delayed) and the ability to shoot at any player one instances with are all part and parcel of Open - and have been from the very beginning.

That some want to change one or more of these is clear (and understandable, given hat we don't all want to play the same way) however other may want one or more of them to be changed in completely different ways.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

To be honest, I have no disagreement with any of these points, not that they invalidate my own either, and I appreciate your willingness to discuss. The bottom line is I know you're right, the main problem is the size of the playing area, which is why CGs that force us together are so fun and always bring up more of these kinds of threads. It is important to remember that Open is already the most popular mode after all, as you rightly say.

I do think that blocking in open is a very bad practice though (since it did come up in that thread), at the very least it might be nice if FD cleared people's blocklist every year or something so that stale or short term revenge blocks get cleared. Blocking comms from another cmdr should be a thing, but affecting instancing for all players forever with a potentially unjustified block is an actual barrier to a good multiplayer experience, imo. o7

Blocking is a contentious subject, but its generally there for a good reason and exists in many games and even platform wide on xbox and playstation. You meet a toxic player in one game, you can ensure you don't meet them again in any game.

For this reason blocking should be possible. If people use it just to block people who attack them, while they are playing in open, i don't approve of generally. If you're in open you should be prepared for it. However, if someone kills someone through some exploity way or was toxic in chat, then they deserve the block.

 

[Aashenfox]

Blocking, menu exit (possibly delayed) and the ability to shoot at any player one instances with are all part and parcel of Open - and have been from the very beginning.

That some want to change one or more of these is clear (and understandable, given hat we don't all want to play the same way) however other may want one or more of them to be changed in completely different ways.

Fair enough. I would still speculate and focus on what is actually hurting the open experience more than improving it. I would debate with anyone why blocking instancing (instead of just comms) is one of those things. The purpose of this thread is to discuss something that will never be changed, so I guess I'm on topic

When a solo and PG mode is provided to play in, I don't see why any blocking in open (of instancing, not comms) should ever be needed. It has been wildly abused, I know many players who openly abused it by blocking people they see immediately on their travels and never unblocking them, totally unprovoked, or blocking players from other squadrons for no reason other than that squadron passes down a blocklist, or they saw them in a CZ and didn't want the competition. What this causes, is at the next CG, you find you can't instance with one or two of the populous instances, because either you or your wingman have been added to someone's blocklist 7 years ago. That player may not even know why they have you blocked or no longer hold a grudge, but they're unlikely to ever review their blocklist and start unblocking people they don't remember why they blocked, so maybe FD could at the very least encourage this to make already flaky peer to peer instancing a little better. /shrug

 

[Aashenfox]

Blocking is a contentious subject, but its generally there for a good reason and exists in many games and even platform wide on xbox and playstation. You meet a toxic player in one game, you can ensure you don't meet them again in any game.

For this reason blocking should be possible. If people use it just to block people who attack them, while they are playing in open, i don't approve of generally. If you're in open you should be prepared for it. However, if someone kills someone through some exploity way or was toxic in chat, then they deserve the block.

Again I don't disagree, but as mentioend in the post above, I fear it has been abused a lot in the past, and there is no incentive for people to re-evaluate their blocklist. Some people are very 'blocky'

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Again I don't disagree, but as mentioend in the post above, I fear it has been abused a lot in the past, and there is no incentive for people to re-evaluate their blocklist. Some people are very 'blocky'

I think any fear of block abuse would be overblown. The number of people doing it, the actual real impact most of the time, is probably not a major issue. Sure, it can reduce the chance of someone who you have blocked dropping into your instance, but there's always a chance they wouldn't anyway, because of instancing. Likewise, if someone drops into a place where there is an instance with someone they've blocked, its the blocker who might be routed to a different instance.

And, at the end of the day, someone going crazy with blocking probably just stops themselves instancing with other people more while playing in open, leading to a more solo like experience for them.

 

[Robert Maynard]

When a solo and PG mode is provided to play in, I don't see why any blocking in open (of instancing, not comms) should ever be needed. It has been wildly abused, I know many players who openly abused it by blocking people they see immediately on their travels and never unblocking them, totally unprovoked, or blocking players from other squadrons for no reason other than that squadron passes down a blocklist, or they saw them in a CZ and didn't want the competition. What this causes, is at the next CG, you find you can't instance with one or two of the populous instances, because either you or your wingman have been added to someone's blocklist 7 years ago. That player may not even know why they have you blocked or no longer hold a grudge, but they're unlikely to ever review their blocklist and start unblocking people they don't remember why they blocked, so maybe FD could at the very least encourage this to make already flaky peer to peer instancing a little better. /shrug

Whether or not players see a need for the block feature, Frontier introduced it unasked in their multi-player game.

The game notably lacks a PvE game mode without a limit on the number of players - so the first place for all players looking to play among others to play is Open (as it is the only populated multi-player game mode when one does not know about, much less be a member of the large PGs that may fit with ones preferred play-style). Put differently, it's the mode for every player, not just those players who like to shoot at one another.

While some opine that the block feature is abused, the same can be said of the ability for players to shoot at any player they instance with - both can cause one or more players to be dissatisfied with the behaviour of other players.

If players want an Open mode without a block feature then it's probably more likely that Frontier could be persuaded to add an Open(-no-block) option to the launcher than them changing the block feature.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

When @XComanceX described the recent CG as a good experience in Open I'm wondering if he was referring to the interminable queues for those trapped in Frontline transports at Bakewell or the Salvador Dali experience at Ricci's?

 

[Darrack]

When @XComanceX described the recent CG as a good experience in Open I'm wondering if he was referring to the interminable queues for those trapped in Frontline transports at Bakewell or the Salvador Dali experience at Ricci's?

There is no good CG Hauling experience in Open

O7

 

[SteveWW57]

There is no good CG Hauling experience in Open

O7

But think positively.

You will meet lots of interesting CMDRs.
You will get to hone your evasive flying and fighting skills.
You can solve the puzzle of how to make your ship better.
That pile of unused credits will actually get used.
You will be the unwanted star of a you tube vid.

Need I say more?

 

[Jockey79]

And, at the end of the day, someone going crazy with blocking probably just stops themselves instancing with other people more while playing in open, leading to a more solo like experience for them.

My friends and I did some testing with this after FDev updated the feature a while back. We got some interesting results.

Using a 3-person set-up;
If "A" blocks "B", then A and B cannot see/interact with each other at all.
"C", however, can see both A and B and interact with them both.
The view from A or B looks like C is shooting at empty space.

We tried having C Wing with A or B, but it didn't change what was happening for us.
A and B could not see each other, but C could see everyone, and A and B could see C.

These results were contrary to what was explained at the time on how the game deals with blocking and Wings.
IIRC, Wings were supposed to overrule the block list (an all-or-nothing situation, you either see all of the members of the Wing, or none of the Wing), but we didn't see that happen. We found you had to block each person in the Wing individually.

I'd also argue that until FDev defines the rules for how to use the block feature, then "abuse" of the feature cannot happen.
When they combined the chat block with the instance block (because they were separate things at the start), at no point did they say we had to use it sparingly or only when a certain event had happened. They just gave us an improved, unrestricted block feature. So if I don't want to share my game with another player, then I don't have to share my time. I can just block them (even though they have done nothing wrong) for as long as I see fit.

So if I want to block every other player in the game bar my friends, then I can. And that's within the scope of the feature and the game's rules (until FDev say otherwise).

More block list controls would be nice. Because old and stagnant lists are a thing.
So when putting someone on block, having a choice of "for one hour", "for one day" and "until further notice" would be nice.
Instead of just putting them on there forever and forgetting about them.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

To be honest, I have no disagreement with any of these points, not that they invalidate my own either, and I appreciate your willingness to discuss. The bottom line is I know you're right, the main problem is the size of the playing area, which is why CGs that force us together are so fun and always bring up more of these kinds of threads. It is important to remember that Open is already the most popular mode after all, as you rightly say.

I do think that blocking in open is a very bad practice though (since it did come up in that thread), at the very least it might be nice if FD cleared people's blocklist every year or something so that stale or short term revenge blocks get cleared. Blocking comms from another cmdr should be a thing, but affecting instancing for all players forever with a potentially unjustified block is an actual barrier to a good multiplayer experience, imo. o7

Everyone on my list was one that did not give ME a good multiplayer experience. Gone for good from my Universe.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Fair enough. I would still speculate and focus on what is actually hurting the open experience more than improving it. I would debate with anyone why blocking instancing (instead of just comms) is one of those things. The purpose of this thread is to discuss something that will never be changed, so I guess I'm on topic

When a solo and PG mode is provided to play in, I don't see why any blocking in open (of instancing, not comms) should ever be needed. It has been wildly abused, I know many players who openly abused it by blocking people they see immediately on their travels and never unblocking them, totally unprovoked, or blocking players from other squadrons for no reason other than that squadron passes down a blocklist, or they saw them in a CZ and didn't want the competition. What this causes, is at the next CG, you find you can't instance with one or two of the populous instances, because either you or your wingman have been added to someone's blocklist 7 years ago. That player may not even know why they have you blocked or no longer hold a grudge, but they're unlikely to ever review their blocklist and start unblocking people they don't remember why they blocked, so maybe FD could at the very least encourage this to make already flaky peer to peer instancing a little better. /shrug

So one should just tolerate suicidewinders, mailslot blockers, persistent interdictors, and so on and on? All I care about those is that they can go and troll somebody else.

 

[Aashenfox]

So one should just tolerate suicidewinders, mailslot blockers, persistent interdictors, and so on and on? All I care about those is that they can go and troll somebody else.

All you care about is your own experience. Got it. o7

 

[Robert Maynard]

All you care about is your own experience. Got it. o7

Do all of those who like to shoot at other players care about the experience of their targets?

 

[Aashenfox]

My friends and I did some testing with this after FDev updated the feature a while back. We got some interesting results.

Using a 3-person set-up;
If "A" blocks "B", then A and B cannot see/interact with each other at all.
"C", however, can see both A and B and interact with them both.
The view from A or B looks like C is shooting at empty space.

We tried having C Wing with A or B, but it didn't change what was happening for us.
A and B could not see each other, but C could see everyone, and A and B could see C.

These results were contrary to what was explained at the time on how the game deals with blocking and Wings.
IIRC, Wings were supposed to overrule the block list (an all-or-nothing situation, you either see all of the members of the Wing, or none of the Wing), but we didn't see that happen. We found you had to block each person in the Wing individually.

I'd also argue that until FDev defines the rules for how to use the block feature, then "abuse" of the feature cannot happen.
When they combined the chat block with the instance block (because they were separate things at the start), at no point did they say we had to use it sparingly or only when a certain event had happened. They just gave us an improved, unrestricted block feature. So if I don't want to share my game with another player, then I don't have to share my time. I can just block them (even though they have done nothing wrong) for as long as I see fit.

So if I want to block every other player in the game bar my friends, then I can. And that's within the scope of the feature and the game's rules (until FDev say otherwise).

More block list controls would be nice. Because old and stagnant lists are a thing.
So when putting someone on block, having a choice of "for one hour", "for one day" and "until further notice" would be nice.
Instead of just putting them on there forever and forgetting about them.

Nobody's arguing what the current state is, or that FD approves this, nevertheless, not reviewing your blocklist from time to time is likely to affect instancing (wings introduce confusion, but not everyone is going around in wings) if you go to a busy area, and the longer it goes on the worse it may get. I do appreciate you acknowledging that stagnant lists and people of questionable morals abusing the feature are things that exist.

Whilst I do agree with Agony Aunt in general that it's a small issue for most players, it's more of a problem the more players are brought together, so for me who I seek out engagement with other players, as I tend to get involved with wars with specific organisations, for example, the pvp group spear, who I once flew with, then flew against, had a habit of blocking the better players just to mess up instancing so they could 'gank'. Two BGS groups I had wars with, we also suspect of abusing the block system cos whenever they were out, instancing turned messy. I appreciate that for the average player it's much less of an issue, but it is still an issue. What's more, as mentioned, having players converge is difficult enough, the rest of the time you don't see anyone, so there's certainly value to doing anything to improve instancing in the areas and times when we are pushed together.

With FD getting a little more gamer friendly as the years go by, I expect and hope the blocking feature maybe revisited one day.

"If I want to block every other player except my friends, then I can" - sure, but would you acknowledge that you would be better off playing in PG with your friends if you're going to do that? And that it would be a selfish exercising of a right with more downside to the game than benefit to you (particularly if you plan to play a CG in open)? And that if you put that small benefit to you over the good of the game, that is undeniably a selfish act?

Exercising one's own right at the expense of others and then turning around and saying 'it was my right, FD approves it' does not make the act itself any less selfish or porrly considered, imo. You probably have a right to paint your house pink with green polka dots if you want to (just a silly example), but you wouldn't do it, because it would affect others around you.

I don't expect anything to change, just discussing.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Exercising one's own right at the expense of others and then turning around and saying 'it was my right, FD approves it' does not make the act itself any less selfish or porrly considered, imo.

Which, unfortunately for them, also applies to those who like to shoot at other players.