The only true statement is that BGS is Background simulation. It is affected only by player actions. With solo and PG a single player can turret boat multiple accounts while he is at work and you will have 0 chance to find about that. Very fair and balnced, don't you think?
The Open v Solo v Groups thread
- Thread starter Ozric
- Start date
And camping our home port with wings of murder boats to stop fortification runs in open is?
O7
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... one of the things that the design of the game makes irrelevant.
Totally fair. Because BGS was conceived as affectable from all modes equally.
While turret boating is possible, FDev has built in stealth nerfs like stronger pirate spawns over time which forces those AFK builds to factor that in which in turn may or may not diminish the build capabilities. And some builds are not made for everlasting unattended combat.
There's always the chance that unattended farming is met either with the rebuy screen or the desktop (as the game gets increasingly unstable the longer it runs uninterrupted).
I don't think there's much doubt that BGS and PowerPlay are fundamentally PvP activities; you're objectively competing against the efforts of other players for the benefit of your own powers or factions.
From there, there's a certain elegance to the idea that a PvP activity at its core should be built with the possibility of direct interaction.
It's certainly not a far-fetched one; Powerplay arguably mirrors territorial PvP modes from other MMOs, and the idea of open-only PowerPlay was discussed extensively a couple years back.
I think we're also too keen on lumping PvP enthusiasts in with Deciat gankers, since it makes for an easy strawman. That's hardly representative of what our community is or wants; StellarKnight is about as far from a career ganker as you could imagine.
Instead, the threat of being attacked in Powerplay (and, by extension, BGS) turns a numbing grind exciting. Far from leaving good players to the wolves, we send defensive wings to ward off gankers; in the end, everyone gets their share of content, and there's so much positive interaction in the process, both within and across communities.
It's a genuinely exciting way to play, and I encourage you to give it a try before disparaging PvP as a whole!
From there, there's a certain elegance to the idea that a PvP activity at its core should be built with the possibility of direct interaction.
It's certainly not a far-fetched one; Powerplay arguably mirrors territorial PvP modes from other MMOs, and the idea of open-only PowerPlay was discussed extensively a couple years back.
I think we're also too keen on lumping PvP enthusiasts in with Deciat gankers, since it makes for an easy strawman. That's hardly representative of what our community is or wants; StellarKnight is about as far from a career ganker as you could imagine.
Instead, the threat of being attacked in Powerplay (and, by extension, BGS) turns a numbing grind exciting. Far from leaving good players to the wolves, we send defensive wings to ward off gankers; in the end, everyone gets their share of content, and there's so much positive interaction in the process, both within and across communities.
It's a genuinely exciting way to play, and I encourage you to give it a try before disparaging PvP as a whole!
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Player driven does not mean "requires PvP" - they are indirect asynchronous competition where no player actions directly affect another player, unlike in-the-same-instance PvP.
The possibility of direct interaction already exists in both BGS and Powerplay - however, as it is not forced, that's not enough for some of the PvP proponents.
PvPers seem to be rather tolerant of the gankers in their midst - and that tolerance leads to them being lumped together.
What the PvP community wants disregards what the PvE community wants - so can be just as easily disregarded.
Some players like attacking the herd, some like to defend the herd - neither seems to consider what the herd wants.
.... and I expect that most of the players involved in these discussions have experienced PvP, whether voluntarily or not. PvPers are free to choose their targets - they are not in control of the consequences of their actions in terms of how their targets perceive the attacks.
Well, that's very much the point: making the possibility of direct interaction a mandatory part of PvP activities seems to many of us like an elegant design choice.
The fact that it has been officially discussed in the past simply lends credence to the idea.
Look, all I'm saying to the PvE folks is, give it a try! There's a wonderful community behind it all that'll make it worth your while.
The fact that it has been officially discussed in the past simply lends credence to the idea.
Isn't the point of this thread to foster discussion about open play, without disregarding anyone's opinions?
Look, all I'm saying to the PvE folks is, give it a try! There's a wonderful community behind it all that'll make it worth your while.
Not everyone wants PvP ans not everyone wants content being taken away from them.
Fair? Balanced?
Those words have no meaning with BGS. Unless you want to game it. It wasn't meant to be gamed, but people (being people) do.
Given we all affect the BGS with virtually every action I can't see it as 'fundamentally PvP' as that includes unaligned rando cmdrs carrying out normal gameplay.
It also assumes all factions are supported by player groups which is obviously false.
It also assumes all factions are supported by player groups which is obviously false.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
While that may be the point for PvP proponents, it disregards what players who don't tolerate / participate in PvP want - and there's no requirement to even tolerate PvP to buy and play this game as other players, and therefore PvP, are optional extras that no player needs to play among when engaged in pan-modal game features.
No more than the thread is to foster discussion about Solo and Private Groups, the other two game modes that have been part of the game for as long as Open has.
That proponents of Open disregard the opinions of players in Solo and Private Groups is obvious - from the proposals to variously remove Solo and Private Groups and / or retrospectively PvP-gate existing pan-modal game features to Open-only.
.... and after that, when the PvE folks still don't enjoy PvP?
The "wonderful community behind it" includes the gankers after all.
Tried it mate, done CGs and PP in Open, waste of my time.
As i said before the times i got interdicted doing PP was by gankers not anyone involved in PP.
And CGs? Don't get me started, your PvP community aint no gentlemen highway types.
O7
Becouse pve difficulty subjectively is 1/10 and objectively 3/10, anybody who take risk of having competetive combat with enemies having same toys as you have, should get something extra, or rather balance their effort with increased reward, espeically that open is preffered mode by most players, accoriding to official data, and player who build MMO experiance should be rewarded, but most imp[ortant part is FAIR PLAY
hire your own sqd of murder boats to get rid of them, or take seat in your murder boat and kill them, arent they just idiots after all?
Juust a reminder.... NPC's dont use dirty drives, even ATR vultures are slower t han palyer Vultures- YES!, npc's dont have FC rails, dispersal field ammo, they dont use screening shell frags or SR plasma accelerators, in short npc's have no options to harm player in engineeered ship, you cant be touched in pve, it's not the case against other player.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Players don't get set set the difficulty level for players who choose not to instance with them.
While Sandro indicated that the majority of players play in Open (some of the time at least - there was no statement regarding whether that majority played exclusively in Open), another Dev has indicated that Frontier are "well aware" that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP. Data recently extracted from Inara supports the latter, i.e. less than 10% of players initiate or are the target of PvP in a month (https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/the-open-v-solo-v-groups-thread.607291/post-9925426).
even engineered t-9 have 100% chance to escape ganker, i been in t-9 many times against a lot of ganks, as i m power play player, if you are dying in a t-9 it's becouse your outfitting optins were bad, or your situational awerness wasnt great, or you lack undesanding of some game mechanics that frontier is doing rather poor job promoting. pvp in bgs and pp is all about territory control, ganking is just collateral damage, but it's not a goal in itself, and most of vets who are hiding in solo/pg and do power play knw this, but not tell this openly in this thread. Why? Becouse this would ruin common narrative of ganker who only want to kill weak player hiding every corner.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
No-one needs to play the ganker mini-game in this game - regardless of whether other players want them to.
At EGX 2014, DBOBE expressed his take on the possibility of player groups denying access to areas of space:
Last edited:
Gankers have no idea where they can find power players. You got interdicted by an enemy Power Player - this is ganking for you?!
TLDR Very few pvp-ers do ganking as it is boring and not challenging. What pvp-ers do is wing fights in rings or out in the open against other pvp groups. Gankers are actually really bad at pvp and some of them even run from pvp-ers.
Which was never part of E: D by FDEV.