The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[Riverside]

What about this:

- Remove block function
- Very high cap on bounty (or no cap at all)
- When you have Notoriety > 0 you CANNOT log into PG or Solo
- When you have Notorietty > 0 a dynamic bookmark for your current location is created for all Commanders to see where you are)
- Additionally all current C&P rules apply

I think that might work if instead of notoriety it used something similar but for PvP kills where the victim had report crimes enabled.

If it were based purely on notoriety I can imagine lots of PvE only 'baddies' might have an objection to that.

 

[rootsrat]

Notoriety applies to PvE actions too.

Why should players be forced to play in Open for engaging in PvE - especially given that other players are optional in the game we all bought / backed?

.... and I very much doubt that Frontier would seriously consider removing the block feature, given "some players".

It'd be a compromise.

Or alternatively introduce another, PVP-related stat. Pilots Federation Infame™

 

[Robert Maynard]

It'd be a compromise.

Or alternatively introduce another, PVP-related stat. Pilots Federation Infame™

Being forced to play in Open for simply playing the PvE game is not a "compromise" - it's been on the wishlist of those who like to shoot at players engaging in "their" BGS / Powerplay / etc. for years.

If the mode lock related to PvP actions only it'd likely be less contentious (although those who don't want to face the consequences of their PvP actions might disagree).

 

[Rebel Yell]

- When you have Notoriety > 0 you CANNOT log into PG or Solo
- When you have Notorietty > 0 a dynamic bookmark for your current location is created for all Commanders to see where you are)

Apart for the annoying random ATRs, notoriety in the current state is a joke.

Moreover we'd consider that notoriety should be applied for clean PKs only then, but... the game wouldn't be able to distinguish between a "legit" kill (i.e. because of a conflict between squadrons/factions) vs. a straight gank. Even checking ship loadouts (i.e. a ship without hardpoints killed by a fully engineered G5) wouldn't be sufficient given the variety of situations in the game; neither the CMDR combat rank... nor the ON/OFF crimes toggle (this may work in combination with other "flags" but can still be abused).

 

[Darrack]

Remove block function

No thanks, this is the best deterrent we have in Open, use it and use it often!

O7

 

[Ettanin]

Remove block function

Add open PvE then.

 

[ethelred]

ED Recon helps somewhat with tracking wanted commanders, but that leads into an overhaul of CMDR bounty hunting being a thing.

I'd like to see mode locks for CMDR kills, and infinite bounties.

I don't think the "my mate stealing my bounty" is valid in modern times as credits are easy to come by.

More unfulfillable dreams unfortunately

 

[Sylveria]

Being forced to play in Open for simply playing the PvE game is not a "compromise" - it's been on the wishlist of those who like to shoot at players engaging in "their" BGS / Powerplay / etc. for years.

If the mode lock related to PvP actions only it'd likely be less contentious (although those who don't want to face the consequences of their PvP actions might disagree).

Then there's the fact that PKers love to be gank magnets to begin with, after all it's the reasoning for what they do to begin with... seeking attention.

Which is why block is effective, because they don't get the attention they so crave.

That's also why I don't see locking people into a single mode without an effective way to dissuade harassment as a compromise, either. If they'd do all that work to provide such mechanics, then surely they can put the same amount of effort into a PvP toggle system instead of half-arcing for a compromise.

I'm not convinced there will ever be a solution without either that, or a completely separate BGS with Open PvE.

 

[Bigmaec]

Then there's the fact that PKers love to be gank magnets to begin with, after all it's the reasoning for what they do to begin with... seeking attention.

Which is why block is effective, because they don't get the attention they so crave.

That's also why I don't see locking people into a single mode without an effective way to dissuade harassment as a compromise, either. If they'd do all that work to provide such mechanics, then surely they can put the same amount of effort into a PvP toggle system instead of half-arcing for a compromise.

I'm not convinced there will ever be a solution without either that, or a completely separate BGS with Open PvE.

I disagree, most gankers don't really crave attention, they don't even have YouTube or something Iike this. Some people do, obviously. They crave Salt though

 

[Sylveria]

I disagree, most gankers don't really crave attention, they don't even have YouTube or something Iike this. Some people do, obviously. They crave Salt though

Can't cause a scene without an audience.

 

[Avvie Rayne]

The only thing I care about is the ability to effect Powerplay in anything but Open. People should only be able to haul forts/prep, undermine, otherwise earn and hand in merits in Open ONLY. PP was made to be influenced by the actions of players so the fact that people can do it outside of Open baffles me

 

[Darrack]

The only thing I care about is the ability to effect Powerplay in anything but Open. People should only be able to haul forts/prep, undermine, otherwise earn and hand in merits in Open ONLY. PP was made to be influenced by the actions of players so the fact that people can do it outside of Open baffles me

Er no

O7

 

[Robert Maynard]

The only thing I care about is the ability to effect Powerplay in anything but Open. People should only be able to haul forts/prep, undermine, otherwise earn and hand in merits in Open ONLY. PP was made to be influenced by the actions of players so the fact that people can do it outside of Open baffles me

It should not really be at all baffling - as each player chose to buy a game where other players are an optional extra and where all players affect the connected galaxy, regardless of game mode.

 

[Avvie Rayne]

Er no

O7

It should not really be at all baffling - as each player chose to buy a game where other players are an optional extra and where all players affect the connected galaxy, regardless of game mode.

What a shame we couldn't agree on something fundamental

o7

 

[Robert Maynard]

What a shame we couldn't agree on something fundamental

o7

There's no need for those who don't enjoy PvP, who bought the game on the same terms as those who do enjoy PvP, to agree with a proposal that an existing pan-modal game feature should be retrospectively PvP-gated to Open.

 

[Avvie Rayne]

There's no need for those who don't enjoy PvP, who bought the game on the same terms as those who do enjoy PvP, to agree with a proposal that an existing pan-modal game feature should be retrospectively PvP-gated to Open.

If they don't want PvP, they can stay out of Powerplay then. There's plenty of other things they can do

 

[Robert Maynard]

If they don't want PvP, they can stay out of Powerplay then. There's plenty of other things they can do

Powerplay is not, and never has been, a game feature that requires PvP - it was consciously implemented in all three game modes for every player to engage in as they see fit.

.... and players are not in any position to tell other players what they can or cannot do - nor tell them to abide by out-of-game rules.

 

[Ettanin]

The only feature requiring players to be pitted against each other in-instance is CQC.

 

[Rebel Yell]

If they don't want PvP, they can stay out of Powerplay then. There's plenty of other things they can do

Powerplay = PvP, I like the idea (unfortunately FDEVs didn't).

 

[DULL DAVE]

Powerplay is not, and never has been, a game feature that requires PvP - it was consciously implemented in all three game modes for every player to engage in as they see fit.

I don't get the "that's not the game you bought defence". If that's true just close the thread and accept that no change should ever be made to the game and it should stay exactly as it is. I don't think there is an improvement to one side which the other side won't hate. IMO the decisions made to date predominantly favour the side of the "playing solo in open leave me alone" mindset. A bit of balance towards people who just want some more organic and dangerous player interaction would be nice. I accept many others wouldn't like it however.