Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Mouse]

Open mode has way more oppurtunity for sandbox, player interaction and emergent gamplay.

But it's totally borked because

1) you can swap from solo to open and open to solo.

2) You can PVP anywhere with no repercussions, making ganking way too common place.

3) Police, crime and negative penalties are non-existent


Make the police, crime and penalties worth a damn, combined with no save swapping and all of a sudden you'l have way more people in Open and way less ganking, however still good amounts of pvp surrounding power-play objectives.

The reason traders don't play open is because of mass ganking with no penalties. The reasons escorts and wing game play doesn't exist because you can do everything in Solo. The reason power play sucks si because you can grind faster in solo while half AFK.

end.

1. a core design and a good thing it does not bork open

2. Agree, the no repercussion is an issue which is why I had an idea:

"I think that if someone has a bounty above a certain amount (say $5000) than he can't sell his ship, modules, or even re-arm/repair in a civilized sector. He can't dock in stations only outposts (but only to refuel, maybe rearm but at a higher price), and if his ship is too big.. he's in trouble. BUT.. if he can get to a station that is controlled by pirates then he can.. though the price would probably be higher than normal to get repaired. Maybe even have station personnel who can take care of their bounty for a hefty cut allowing him access back into civilized sectors.

I mean if someone wants to play as a pirate, lets make it at least partly realistic.

I don't understand being "hostile" to a system and the station allowing me to dock and fully repair, rearm and everythin"

3. see above for penalties, but yes make police more efficient in civilized systems, but with a small window before firing when wanted status is triggered . This would keep someone who grazed a security ship or clean ship on accident while fighting against an outlaw.

adn Powerplay is a PVE mechanic not a PVP one.. so doing it in solo or group is supposed to happen just as it is done in open.

 

[Hempstead]

Open mode has way more oppurtunity for sandbox, player interaction and emergent gamplay.

But it's totally borked because

1) you can swap from solo to open and open to solo.

2) You can PVP anywhere with no repercussions, making ganking way too common place.

3) Police, crime and negative penalties are non-existent


Make the police, crime and penalties worth a damn, combined with no save swapping and all of a sudden you'l have way more people in Open and way less ganking, however still good amounts of pvp surrounding power-play objectives.

The reason traders don't play open is because of mass ganking with no penalties. The reasons escorts and wing game play doesn't exist because you can do everything in Solo. The reason power play sucks si because you can grind faster in solo while half AFK.

end.

Please.... The reason armed escort does not work is because trade secret and trust issue! Other than a few true hippies and uninitiated traders, seriuos traders know that trade route secrecy is utmost important in the limited resource trading game. You don't just hire an armed escort to escort you from A to B, you actually have to reveal your trade route to the escort. Who's to say s/he is not going to turn around and compete with you another day? Or turn pirates and rob you another day?Or, tell his/her little brothers/mates about your trade routes! Or worse, publish your trade routes in the forum/Redit!

Moreover, armed escorts currently make peanuts.... Man, if I make $6M/hr, the armed escort only makes $300K/hr. One kill in a HiRes alone might just worth that much! Talk about trading grind boring.... Watching trading grind by the armed escort must be even worse!

There are just so many safe and profitable trade routes out there that you don't need armed escorts. Armed escorts currently only "theoretically" works in well known trade routes that are populated by pirates and gankers (sorry, don't mean to lump pirates and gankers together). In practice, any sane traders, other than those looking for trouble or cluless, will avoid these trade routes!

The idea of armed escort simply does not fit in the grand scheme of the current trading game, in Open or in Solo! So, stop blaming Solo!

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Tired of all this semantic hijinks and loophole-squirming.

The problem being danced around is that open has problems. Problems with sociopaths; problems with tear-the-wings-off-flys types. The problem of open is what the players have made it. It doesn't look pretty. You can't escape that this has happened and that it is a community problem.

What is really puzzling is that the "reasonable" "pirates" try to push this under the rug, obfuscate and backhaul when this simple statistic is mentioned. "It's not our job to be the cops!" is the usual sideline. Then on and on how open is "boring" and "a wasteland" and that malicious PKers somehow are only a tiny handful of people. They aren't. The forums are full of nasty stories.

Judging only based on the forum, open is full of griefers. What you're not taking into account is, which is more likely to get a forum post about it, the 100s of encounters that ended uneventfully, or the one when they were killed by a "griefer"?

 

[Himmel Tropf]

Judging only based on the forum, open is full of griefers. What you're not taking into account is, which is more likely to get a forum post about it, the 100s of encounters that ended uneventfully, or the one when they were killed by a "griefer"?

*scans target* multiple gold and gallium
"drop your cargo and live"
'No. I'll call the cops '
*fires on target to 50%*
'Ok stop. Here'
*drops 1 gallium*
*fires on target to 20%, nothing, continues to 10%, nothing, kills target*

ballsy traders with no shields, even started flying to the planet from RES, along the debris plane...

 

[Bomba Luigi]

The whole fear thing is really tiresome. What should I be afraid of in Open? Getting shot at and destroyed? That happens in Solo too and I don't mind, a bit of credits are gone its not a big deal, credits come and go.

The reason I'm not playing in open is the same why I'm not playing in Mobius where nobody would shoot at me: I don't wanna play with others. If you shoot at me or drop 100t of Gold in front of me as a gift - I don't care, don't wanna play with you. Which is nothing personal, I just like playing alone
Thats the only reason I bought ED, because I can play alone. Nothing against people wanting someting diffrent, thats cool, but coming and asking for a Game I already paid for to be changed in a way that I would not have bought it in the first place is a bit nasty. You can't just take something away from a customer after he paid for it.

 

[CMDR Derrida]

Han Solo. Napoleon Solo. Open Sesame. Bacon. Mobius. Close sesame: UP, UP, AND AWAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!
Er...pvp is naughty...so are eagles.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

...Napoleon... Bacon....

1 mode good, but 3 modes best!

 

[Jockey79]

We could argue that point as well. I just read a post somewhere on here about ED hemorrhaging players....

That post was a lie, made up by bored griefers as people join Mobius or go Solo.

This quote is in my Wall of Information - linked in my Sig;

Originally Posted by Zac Antonaci

Originally Posted by fred
They need to be.


Look at the current posts on the subreddit and the forum. Your core player base is simply stopping playing. You might be selling copies but if your core community is splitting or stopping playing then you have a problem.

Hey Fred,


I wanted to reply to this honestly if I may.


I'm not going to be talking about active player numbers explicitally but I can tell you without question that the game has a very healthy and thriving community who enjoys hours upon hours of Elite. You really don't need to worry on that point.


<snip>


Zac

 

[DarkWalker]

Judging only based on the forum, open is full of griefers. What you're not taking into account is, which is more likely to get a forum post about it, the 100s of encounters that ended uneventfully, or the one when they were killed by a "griefer"?

And, for many players, the chance of a single encounter that ends in "griefing", perceived or real, is enough to make the hundreds of encounters that ended well simply not worth it.

My case, for example. Even if you could guarantee me that I would only be attacked by a player only once every thousandth run, I still would rather play alone than subject myself to being unwilling content to someone else.

(BTW, before someone says that there is a chance, however slim, of such an attack happening in Mobius: there I would be able to just take a screenshot before combat logging, send that screenshot to Mobius, and get the griefer banned from the group. In other words, while such an attack could theoretically also happen in Mobius, it's against the rules of the group, which changes my perception of it completely when compared with Open.)

Different persons, different preferences and tolerance levels. For someone that doesn't derive any enjoyment from the unwanted PvP encounters, the chance of them happening is a pure negative, without any redeeming quality. And ED was explicitly marketed to players that don't want anything to have with PvP when, for a very long time, it started the description of its multiplayer capabilities by stating that each player would be able to completely control who he meets, even allowing players to be completely alone if they so desired.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

And, for many players, the chance of a single encounter that ends in "griefing", perceived or real, is enough to make the hundreds of encounters that ended well simply not worth it.

My case, for example. Even if you could guarantee me that I would only be attacked by a player only once every thousandth run, I still would rather play alone than subject myself to being unwilling content to someone else.

(BTW, before someone says that there is a chance, however slim, of such an attack happening in Mobius: there I would be able to just take a screenshot before combat logging, send that screenshot to Mobius, and get the griefer banned from the group. In other words, while such an attack could theoretically also happen in Mobius, it's against the rules of the group, which changes my perception of it completely when compared with Open.)

Different persons, different preferences and tolerance levels. For someone that doesn't derive any enjoyment from the unwanted PvP encounters, the chance of them happening is a pure negative, without any redeeming quality. And ED was explicitly marketed to players that don't want anything to have with PvP when, for a very long time, it started the description of its multiplayer capabilities by stating that each player would be able to completely control who he meets, even allowing players to be completely alone if they so desired.

This is a pretty silly view imo, it's extremely unrealistic. Even in multiplayer games with the best communities, more than 1 out of 1000 will be jerks. Seriously, I can't think of any online game I played in the last 8 years that had a jerk rate lower than 1 out of 1000.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Even in multiplayer games with the best communities, more than 1 out of 1000 will be jerks. Seriously, I can't think of any online game I played in the last 8 years that had a jerk rate lower than 1 out of 1000.

Presumably that is why some players choose to play in other modes that Frontier have made available to all of us - to avoid the 1 in 1000.

 

[Jockey79]

....... And ED was explicitly marketed to players that don't want anything to have with PvP when, for a very long time, it started the description of its multiplayer capabilities by stating that each player would be able to completely control who he meets, even allowing players to be completely alone if they so desired.

You mean;

From the Kickstarter;
*And the best part - you can do all this online with your friends, or other "Elite" pilots like yourself, or even alone. The choice is yours...*
*you will be able to control who else you might encounter in your game – perhaps limit it to just your friends? Cooperate on adventures or chase your friends down to get that booty. The game will work in a seamless, lobby-less way, with the ability to rendezvous with friends
*Play it your way*
*Your reputation is affected by your personal choices. Play the game your way: dangerous pirate, famous explorer or notorious assassin - the choice is yours to make. Take on missions and affect the world around you, alone or with your friends.*
*You simply play the game, and depending on your configuration (your choice) *
*We have the concept of “groups”. They can be private groups just of your friends or open groups (that form part of the game) based on the play styles people prefer, and the rules in each can be different. Players will begin in the group “All” but can change groups at will,*


From over 2 and a half years ago, and it was reinforced a few weeks ago;

From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices. While we are aware that some players disagree, this hasn't changed for us.

Michael

Why this is so hard for some people to understand, is beyond me. The information has been there for all to see.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Presumably that is why some players choose to play in other modes that Frontier have made available to all of us - to avoid the 1 in 1000.

Because they have insanely high expectations for how all players should act that isn't realistic of any online game ever made?

 

[Jockey79]

This is a pretty silly view imo, it's extremely unrealistic. Even in multiplayer games with the best communities, more than 1 out of 1000 will be jerks. Seriously, I can't think of any online game I played in the last 8 years that had a jerk rate lower than 1 out of 1000.

We've had 4 in 11,000 in Mobius and they are gone now.

 

[Zorronov]

Ok...so the bullies are upset that their victims can leave the playground and either play by themselves or with people they like. Boo hoo...

 

[Robert Maynard]

Because they have insanely high expectations for how all players should act that isn't realistic of any online game ever made?

Whose expectations?

The players who choose not to play with the 1 in 1000?

Frontier's? Frontier fairly obviously chose to cater to those who do not wish to play with the 1 in 1000 by offering two additional modes to play in.

 

[bootsam]

Why is it so hard to accept that some people do not want any involvement in pvp? Furthermore why is it that people who do wish to involve themselves in pvp, request that solo or group be nerfed to make their perceived extra risk look all the more glamourous? What difference does it make to open, if we in group or shared pve, play in the same galaxy? Sure we may affect markets but thats just another random variation to consider and thus should make your open more real as we are in effect emulating the people you cannot control anyways.

I do not wish anything whatsoever to do with open pvp in any of its present or future incarnations. It is not to avoid the 1 in 1000. Its to avoid all of the 1000.

 

[Bomba Luigi]

Because they have insanely high expectations for how all players should act that isn't realistic of any online game ever made?

To speak for myself, anybody can act as he wants, thats a great freedom people have - I like that. I don't want to change people, I just dont wanna play with them

 

[Thebadmf]

Why? Why can't FD proceed with what has been pretty successful for them so far? What I see is open advocates complaining and the solo/group crowd defending. What complaints do you see from the Solo players? This whole argument is based on a sub set of players with the notion that open is the way the game is played, and everyone else is missing something. They are not, they are choosing to play as they want to. Accept that there are different motivations for playing, and you will be far happier.

If it were appropriate, I would ask for your hand in marriage but, alas, it's not so have some rep.

 

[DarkWalker]

This is a pretty silly view imo, it's extremely unrealistic. Even in multiplayer games with the best communities, more than 1 out of 1000 will be jerks. Seriously, I can't think of any online game I played in the last 8 years that had a jerk rate lower than 1 out of 1000.

I don't expect everyone I meet to not be a jerk. Rather, I desire the jerks out there to be powerless to hinder my gameplay, to the point I will only play a game if it provides me at least this.

Hence why I completely refuse non-consensual PvP in any shape or way, no matter how slim the chance: without being able to force me into PvP, potential jerks are powerless to hinder my game, so meeting them is at most a matter of putting them in my ignore list.

I'm not against PvP per see, mind. I actually like PvP. A lot. But only if everyone involved has explicitly consented to take part in it. Which is why I heartily welcome CQC.