Many of us only worry when others decide their way is the way everyone should play and try to get changes made that effects the balancing of the modes.. otherwise we are happy to let everyone be in their area. Would liek a PVE mode though.. that way don't have to rely on groups for PWP PVE
- Status
Many of us only worry when others decide their way is the way everyone should play and try to get changes made that effects the balancing of the modes.. otherwise we are happy to let everyone be in their area. Would liek a PVE mode though.. that way don't have to rely on groups for PWP PVE
But....but....wait a minute...no way...it couldn't be...
Ok, Alexander, how do you propose to...no way...
Well if people weren't so worried that the devs might drastically change the game to Eve with WoW and Gw2...then I am pretty sure this would have stopped months ago!
Last edited:
Hey you know, with people around to "enlighten" us for everything to remain "status quo" what could go wrong? I mean, it's not like the Open game will just die off while people move off to Star Citizen or anything later, and FD milks those who stick around for expansion money or anything right?
Hey you know, with people around to "enlighten" us for everything to remain "status quo" what could go wrong? I mean, it's not like the Open game will just die off while people move off to Star Citizen or anything later, and FD milks those who stick around for expansion money or anything right?
If Open dies off...well, ultimately, what difference would it make if everyone played where they wanted and minded their own business in the part they play in? >
If they were planning on changing things so much that it would rip apart the fundemental vision of the game with regards to all 3 modes being equal and valid... it would be 'Elite : Dangerous 2 Redux HD 4k Battle Amongst the Stars in Technicolour Widescreen'... and we would be left with this game as it is. Because that would be the only way they could accomplish such a change.
In all seriousness, its just a game, get over it, go outside and get some sun on your face, have a cup of tea, have several, put the phone down and go talk to someone at a bus stop.
This thread is dangerous. Like a soap opera. Once you start watching you cant take your eyes away. When your friends intervene, drag you away and then you return several years later...
Its the same monkey poo with the same same monkeys flinging it the same old way and nothing has changed. Apart from fake , plastic lips and painted on suntan. Which looks ridiculous on monkeys flinging poo.
In all seriousness, its just a game, get over it, go outside and get some sun on your face, have a cup of tea, have several, put the phone down and go talk to someone at a bus stop.
This thread is dangerous. Like a soap opera. Once you start watching you cant take your eyes away. When your friends intervene, drag you away and then you return several years later...
Its the same monkey poo with the same same monkeys flinging it the same old way and nothing has changed. Apart from fake , plastic lips and painted on suntan. Which looks ridiculous on monkeys flinging poo.
Satisfied? An assumption at best.
This is the open v groups v solo thread. That was my opinion on it and the arguments surrounding open v groups v solo. The 3 modes are an essential, fundemental part of the game. Attempting to change that in any way, form or factor is moot.
There are bugs and exploits that I have issues with... fixing these allows forward movement.
There are balance issues and similiar that might be carefully considered in allowing forward movement.
There is room for expansion and the delivery of content for all modes that will move the game forward.
Arguing about which mode is better, which mode deserves this or that, which mode is easy or hard... absolutely pointless.
This is not moving forward.
FD in my opinion have developed a very clever and intuitive way to reach a broad spectrum of gamers with different needs and desires.
It is the very foundation of the game. Everything else should be strengthening and building upon that foundation.
If you stop worrying about what everybody else is doing in the other modes and just embrace the differences, respect that other players have different perspectives on what constitutes engaging gameplay and get on with your game... you might actually have some fun.
This is the open v groups v solo thread. That was my opinion on it and the arguments surrounding open v groups v solo. The 3 modes are an essential, fundemental part of the game. Attempting to change that in any way, form or factor is moot.
There are bugs and exploits that I have issues with... fixing these allows forward movement.
There are balance issues and similiar that might be carefully considered in allowing forward movement.
There is room for expansion and the delivery of content for all modes that will move the game forward.
Arguing about which mode is better, which mode deserves this or that, which mode is easy or hard... absolutely pointless.
This is not moving forward.
FD in my opinion have developed a very clever and intuitive way to reach a broad spectrum of gamers with different needs and desires.
It is the very foundation of the game. Everything else should be strengthening and building upon that foundation.
If you stop worrying about what everybody else is doing in the other modes and just embrace the differences, respect that other players have different perspectives on what constitutes engaging gameplay and get on with your game... you might actually have some fun.
I am pretty confident your pretend spaceship starts just as well as mine.
This whole ground-looping topic only serves one purpose- as a receptacle for a multitude of often repeated opinions of would be game designers who all have black belts in internet. Personally my interest in this was sparked by those who decided that their opinions were far better than anything FD could come up with and I would be much better of if I got the game they (in their ultimate wisdom) thought would be better for me. I have a vibrant dictionary of words I would like to use to respond to that concept but apparently the morality police don't like it so I won't.
The game is FD's interpretation of a space sim, the modes are part of that concept and......that's it. Many people bought into that before there was even a game to play (myself included) and like it. Apart from the fact that 'mode tinkerers' are clearly on a hiding to nothing I think that should be given a little respect.
It's obvious you think it's "working as intended", so therefore we'll agree to disagree. Not everyone shares your view- and not everyone shares mine, either.
Same old strawman. If we wish the modes to remain as they are, we must also argue for 'everything to remain "status quo" '.Hey you know, with people around to "enlighten" us for everything to remain "status quo" what could go wrong? I mean, it's not like the Open game will just die off while people move off to Star Citizen or anything later, and FD milks those who stick around for expansion money or anything right?
It's also rather easy to try to make your point through faulty analogies. Since we're both driving the same car. A better analogy would be is that we both drive a car which was specced to be stick shift, but people are having buyers remorse because they'd rather have an automatic.
I still would like to know what all of you think of this idea:
Increased player reward:
It works like this: For example bounty, when a player kills another clean player he gets a special kind of bounty that can be paid off but does not expire nor does it decay. This special bounty is tremendously higher than when killing a NPC. For example: A player kills a clean trader, depending on the worth of the destructed ship, the killer gets a bounty equal to the rebuy cost (let's say 1 million credits). It doesn't have to be the rebuy cost, it also could be a flat amount or rank rependent, etc. this is just an example.
The player can now decide wheather to pay off this bounty (which is expensive over time) or to keep it. If kept, the bounty can still increase into very high heights which means that PvP will be encouraged.
The bounty should not only be visible in the system, but in the whole major faction (e.g. if a clean palyer was killed in the alliance territory, the player will be wanted in all the alliance systems.
In addition, when killed by a NPC or suicide, the bounty will remain or if some think that may be unfair, a part of the bounty is taken away (dependent on rank, rebuy costs, whatever ... feel free to add your suggestions).
A player, however, can theoretically claim all the bounty at once if the ship is expensive enough (so we prevent players from stacking bounties, hopping into a sidey and getting killed by a friend to give him/her credits and to get rid of the wanted status).
While the special, let's call it 'player bounty' is not paid off or claimed by another commander, NPCs will hunt the player just like in the case of having a normal bounty.
Please remember that this is a general suggestion and not the final uber solution of the problem, but the general idea should be clear and can be customized for balancing purposes.
Feel free to share your thoughts, suggestions and critique regarding my suggestion.
Increased player reward:
It works like this: For example bounty, when a player kills another clean player he gets a special kind of bounty that can be paid off but does not expire nor does it decay. This special bounty is tremendously higher than when killing a NPC. For example: A player kills a clean trader, depending on the worth of the destructed ship, the killer gets a bounty equal to the rebuy cost (let's say 1 million credits). It doesn't have to be the rebuy cost, it also could be a flat amount or rank rependent, etc. this is just an example.
The player can now decide wheather to pay off this bounty (which is expensive over time) or to keep it. If kept, the bounty can still increase into very high heights which means that PvP will be encouraged.
The bounty should not only be visible in the system, but in the whole major faction (e.g. if a clean palyer was killed in the alliance territory, the player will be wanted in all the alliance systems.
In addition, when killed by a NPC or suicide, the bounty will remain or if some think that may be unfair, a part of the bounty is taken away (dependent on rank, rebuy costs, whatever ... feel free to add your suggestions).
A player, however, can theoretically claim all the bounty at once if the ship is expensive enough (so we prevent players from stacking bounties, hopping into a sidey and getting killed by a friend to give him/her credits and to get rid of the wanted status).
While the special, let's call it 'player bounty' is not paid off or claimed by another commander, NPCs will hunt the player just like in the case of having a normal bounty.
Please remember that this is a general suggestion and not the final uber solution of the problem, but the general idea should be clear and can be customized for balancing purposes.
Feel free to share your thoughts, suggestions and critique regarding my suggestion.
Last edited:
I'd sooner just play what FD puts in front of me. They're the designers. That's what I pay them for. If I wanted a game I designed, I'd design one. But I don't, so I haven't. FD are far more suitably qualified to provide enhancements and upgrades to the current game as time goes by as they understand it intrinsically. To the nth degree as they have the code and the variables.
Whilst its nice to muse upon things that might enhance the game oneself, it is important to understand that one variable affects another and so on. So suggesting x might have an unforeseen consequence of y. That's why FD make the changes as they can play the variables game and see what happens. What sounds good to us, may be bad elsewhere. There are a great many good sounding ideas but without proper testing and a good understanding of the algorithms interactions with each other, thats all they are ideas. They're not solutions.
I'm fairly confident FD know what they are doing and how to deliver. It may take time but things happen in increments. I'm playing the long haul game. I am excited to see how this game develops. But I hope its how FD want it to develop and that they are not dictated to and are free to go in the direction they choose. I chose, with my money, to follow their guidance. I'm reasonably happy to tag along and see how it all pans out.
Whilst its nice to muse upon things that might enhance the game oneself, it is important to understand that one variable affects another and so on. So suggesting x might have an unforeseen consequence of y. That's why FD make the changes as they can play the variables game and see what happens. What sounds good to us, may be bad elsewhere. There are a great many good sounding ideas but without proper testing and a good understanding of the algorithms interactions with each other, thats all they are ideas. They're not solutions.
I'm fairly confident FD know what they are doing and how to deliver. It may take time but things happen in increments. I'm playing the long haul game. I am excited to see how this game develops. But I hope its how FD want it to develop and that they are not dictated to and are free to go in the direction they choose. I chose, with my money, to follow their guidance. I'm reasonably happy to tag along and see how it all pans out.
I seriously doubt that anyone on any side of any of the arguments in ED is entirely satisfied judging from all threads.
"Open being removed suggestion (by me) "
I heard Roybe and Pv both claim it was THEIR suggestion (I may be mistaken though), but it does not matter i suppose. But I do think you are one of about only 3 people who think that, so i guess it is probably not something that is ever likely to happen. Only 2 voted for it in the above poll ^^^^. Not once have I heard anyone referring to Open as a "wasteland" (other than you) in the last week or so either, so maybe the problem is fixed now. Who knows, no one seems to have the statistics to back up their claims
"you seem to have found a great area for yourself."
Well it is not hard to find, it is in the main menu!
I never made that claim nor do I endorse it.
-Pv-
Someone else seems to think it is though.
Here https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=183178
Opinions vary considerably it would seem!
I will just leave this here Pv
"Open being removed suggestion (by me) is in direct response to 2 previous mega threads worth of people asking for Solo and Group "
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I will just leave this here Pv
"Open being removed suggestion (by me) is in direct response to 2 previous mega threads worth of people asking for Solo and Group "
Could you please include a proper quote so that the quoted text can be viewed in the original post from which it was quoted?
Thanks.
Hope this clears things up Robert
Hope you did not think I would ever misquote someone lol
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Hope this clears things up Robert
You quoted someone quoting (note the quotation marks around the first paragraph in the quoted post) someone else.
.... which just goes to re-emphasise why quoting other posts correctly (i.e. with quote tags) is important.
Last edited:
haha yes! I see it now. Well I don't think I am FULLY to blame for that one, we both were a little unclear
This is why I usually put the whole body at the top, to prevent such confusion. Thx for pointing it out anyways
Last edited:
- Status