The Open v Solo v Groups thread

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I mean they provide no challenge in effective opposition to what I am trying to do - reach a station with cargo.

I've even won the NPC interdiction battle with NPCs in a T9.
It's clear that some face little challenge from background NPCs - however it's worth noting again that half of players are, by definition, at or below median skill.

Then there's which ships players choose to fly and how the build has been focused.
Only other CMDRs provide any sort of challenge
To some, certainly. The same is not the case for all players.
 
It's clear that some face little challenge from background NPCs - however it's worth noting again that half of players are, by definition, at or below median skill.

Then there's which ships players choose to fly and how the build has been focused.

To some, certainly. The same is not the case for all players.

I'm in agreement, we've discussed "difficulty" and how it's implemented before, and that's why I personally don't think setting the overall difficulty towards the median level is particularly useful.

In any case (count the caveats here):-

IF there was a "new" PvE Open AND the level of difficulty remains the same THEN I wouldn't be interested in playing it (but am not as opposed) as long as there was still a standalone Open.

Ofc YMMV

Edit:- from previous discussion you'd be more pro Open PvE Robert? Any changes you'd implement, other than the removal of PvP?
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I'm in agreement, we've discussed "difficulty" and how it's implemented before, and that's why I personally don't think setting the overall difficulty towards the median level is particularly useful.
Indeed we have.
In any case (count the caveats here):-

IF there was a "new" PvE Open AND the level of difficulty remains the same THEN I wouldn't be interested in playing it (but am not as opposed) as long as there was still a standalone Open.

Ofc YMMV
Indeed - noting that an Open-PvE mode would not be aimed at all players, as there's a subset of the player-base that enjoys / tolerates / enjoys the frisson of the possibility that they may be engaged in PvP - and adding an Open-PvE mode would not remove the existing Open(-PvP) mode.
Edit:- from previous discussion you'd be more pro Open PvE Robert? Any changes you'd implement, other than the removal of PvP?
I'd certainly be supportive of the addition of an Open-PvE game mode - as it would allow players with no interest in the optional PvP aspect of the game to play among other players with a guarantee that they would not be engaged in PvP*. PvP interdiction (and wake following?) would be removed in an Open-PvE mode, as it would remain an annoyance if left in.

*: noting that Frontier have previously indicated that identifying and removing all means of inflicting damage on another player from an Open-PvE game mode has previously been stated by Frontier (DBOBE himself in the Engineers launch stream) to be "a lot of work", effectively ruling it out as a possible addition to the game.
 
Last edited:
This is totes a humblebrag, but an issue with PvE Open would be the lack of challenge from NPCs.

As primarily a trader/smuggler it's extremely rare that NPCs provide any sort of challenge whatsoever. It's niche gameplay for sure (given what other people say here) but Open provides that additional challenge that I like.

Most of the time the risk is the same as Solo, until it very quickly isn't.

I wouldn't be against PvE Open as long as the was an appropriate challenge - not globally ofc
their-muscles-are-so-large-photo-u1


Similar to myself in that respect (though I suspect in slightly different ship types).

Nothing quite like trying to outfox someone in Supercruise and when failing, submitting to an interdiction, flipping and burning past someone at 745 m/s constant boost and popping chaff while they struggle to keep up with you/their shots go wide due to using gimbals/hurling expletives at you over chat.

Last bit of challenge I felt in ED, tbh.
 
I mean they provide no challenge in effective opposition to what I am trying to do - reach a station with cargo.

I've even won the NPC interdiction battle with NPCs in a T9.

Only other CMDRs provide any sort of challenge
TBH the CG campers were no more than nuisaance value which is why I switched to PG for CGs and similar events. It's either that or add them to a block list.
 
They are a bloody nuisance. I was so cross at FDEV for allowing someone with long range rails to snipe at me/us when coming in, especially at Deciat and especially as I had cleared the much more dangerous supercruise in.

However, I wasn't going to be pushed out of Open by some scallywag who thinks they're clever because they have found some exploit - the fun for me is in the thwarting.

Not always successfully by any means!
 
their-muscles-are-so-large-photo-u1


Similar to myself in that respect (though I suspect in slightly different ship types).

Nothing quite like trying to outfox someone in Supercruise and when failing, submitting to an interdiction, flipping and burning past someone at 745 m/s constant boost and popping chaff while they struggle to keep up with you/their shots go wide due to using gimbals/hurling expletives at you over chat.

Last bit of challenge I felt in ED, tbh.

Yeah yeah, sure.
In reality, it looks like this.

f5QXKkg.png
 
Yeah yeah, sure.
In reality, it looks like this.

f5QXKkg.png
It is hard to buy that "challenge" claim when the reality is that quite a large portion of gankers actually seem to seek the least challenge possible. Just by looking at the leaderboard and the ratio between kills and deaths on gankers.org you can infer how much of an actual challenge some of the gankers seek - virtually none.

Some of the ratios might be explainable by skill, some of the lower ratios indicate that the player actually does some real PvP and dies regularly, but when a player has a death ratio of 0.1% you kind of know that's not coming from being uber skilled and overcoming a "challenge" over and over, but from picking the weakest targets to ensure the gank succeeds. Challenge my ass.
 
Last edited:
It is hard to buy that "challenge" claim when the reality is that quite a large portion of gankers actually seem to seek the least challenge possible. Just by looking at the leaderboard and the ratio between kills and deaths on gankers.org you can infer how much of an actual challenge some of the gankers seek - virtually none.

Some of the ratios might be explainable by skill, some of the lower ratios indicate that the player actually does some real PvP and dies regularly, but when a player has a death ratio of 0.1% you kind of know that's not coming from being uber skilled and overcoming a "challenge" over and over, but from picking the weakest targets to ensure the gank succeeds. Challenge my ass.
I'm not getting into the first paragraph, but I suspect folk with the Death Ratios you mention are probably camped at Deciat and slapping Asps on approach to dock at the engineering port, which is very different from how I encountered folk back in the day, mostly due to not constantly going to Deciat constantly.
 
Care to explain, hun, where exactly the challenge and "thrill" lies in exploding a trading ship in a combat optimized one? You can't, that's why you're being condescending. As a lot of self-proclaimed "PvPers" are.
I think your desire to vent on a percieved ganker is telling here Helmut.

If you actually read my post you'll note it was (usually) me on the recieving end, at a CG or PP hotspot.
 
I think your desire to vent on a percieved ganker is telling here Helmut.
I have no desire to vent on a "perceived ganker". I am actually fine with a ganker who admits they do it because it's easy and gives them a fizz in their tinkle. I can respect an honest ganker. I despise a ganker creating the worst imbalance between attacker and, for lack of a better word, victim, and then run around talking about "unpredictability of human opponents" and "challenges".
 
I have no desire to vent on a "perceived ganker". I am actually fine with a ganker who admits they do it because it's easy and gives them a fizz in their tinkle. I can respect an honest ganker. I despise a ganker creating the worst imbalance between attacker and, for lack of a better word, victim, and then run around talking about "unpredictability of human opponents" and "challenges".
I mean, you literally do.

After me explaining the challenge and skill of evading/getting through Player maintained blockades in a trader (in my case, an Adder), your immediate response was to ask me what the challenge/skill of exploding a trading ship in a combat optimised one was, which had nothing to do with my post or playstyle.
 
In the context of Doctor Dread's image, which kind of actually represents the balance the average non-PvP player faces in open, and the condescending "okay hun". You can disagree without being condescending.

In the image I'm totally rooting for the little fellow. The objective isn't to beat the other guy, it's to stop him stomping you and you achieving your objective.

I agree that I think poorly of gankers as in the fight pictured above being the big guy is EZ mode. For me that's dull - there's no challenge there.

Better to be the small guy, at least for me.
 
Back
Top Bottom