- Status
Out of rep so... kudos.
<grins> Think of this thread as a sump - close it, and the will start bubbling-up all over the place!
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The thread is not locked simply because it is the merge target for new threads relating to this very old debate.
Unfortunately, reading the same requests/demands for change many times seems to make respondents a little terse in their replies. The debate has been running since the beginning of the Kickstarter (one week short of three years ago) - and Frontier has not changed its stance regarding the three game modes, single shared galaxy state (between all game modes and platforms) and mode mobility. Recent statements from Frontier (Zac, Michael Brookes) have reiterated their position that the three game modes are equal and valid and that they are aware that some players disagree.
Buck I wasn't singling you out to be rude to you, if you took it that way I apologize, I was using your post as to why some of us repeat things so often. Always enjoy new people joining in, hoping they have new ideas. It is just the arguments that are old, though some people come up with good ideas and we try to nurture that even though the likelihood of Devs seeing it is slim and none.
As for the comments someone else said about influences should only be changed in Open. Why should only one section of the populace effect the background for everyone else? People in solo and in groups have every right to effect the background and do so in the same way that open does. Having the ability to shoot someone does not mean that your opinion or actions should be the only one that counts.
As for the comments someone else said about influences should only be changed in Open. Why should only one section of the populace effect the background for everyone else? People in solo and in groups have every right to effect the background and do so in the same way that open does. Having the ability to shoot someone does not mean that your opinion or actions should be the only one that counts.
This is why many people here keep asking for an Open PvE mode. Many people want the interaction, but won't stand for the PvP.
Depends. Do you want to penalize Solo/Group to get more players into Open? Or give Open bonuses or exclusive content, which is basically the same? That would be basically asking for the devs to intentionally make the game worse for any and everyone that either dislikes PvP or want to have control over when it can happen to them, so I would expect less than thrilled responses from those thus affected.
I do wonder how the game would pan out if next Tuesday they bluntly informed us all they were locking Open and unless you logged in there next you would be unable to join without clearing your save.
I suppose a huge weight on that would be if it got its own BGS or not... how many would go, how many would stay?
Personally if FDev could afford the finance and resources to do it I would say "split and be damned". So long as Solo and private group were switchable it would be good enough for me.
I appreciate it would change things drastically for others.
My general position to defend the status quo is due to concerns about how much it would take from FDev to administer a split.
I suppose a huge weight on that would be if it got its own BGS or not... how many would go, how many would stay?
Personally if FDev could afford the finance and resources to do it I would say "split and be damned". So long as Solo and private group were switchable it would be good enough for me.
I appreciate it would change things drastically for others.
My general position to defend the status quo is due to concerns about how much it would take from FDev to administer a split.
Last edited:
From what sifting I can do, the community is split 40% want them split, 40% don't, and 10% don't care. It's a pretty even split, folks, so this is, most likely, the argument that will never end, and will never make progress.
<chortles> It would certainly be interesting, if such a thing were to happen!
That is just the forums I assume ??
Don't forget, only around 10% of the actual player base come to the forums, and not all of them post - no one can know what the players who do not come here think.
We also do not know out of all the one off posters or old accounts that suddenly post and leave again (see the break down of thread users in my sig, the red links) - who is an alt abusing the lack of account key needed to post here, or who is a real player that just does not use forums very often.
I am assuming nothing. I am making a statement (or, stating my opinion). If it applies to you, then so be it. You still haven't answered my question, but I will answer yours. As has been stated, people keep posting the same thing over and over again. This thread is the dumping ground so the rest of the forums don't get clogged up with the open/group/solo topic.
Last edited:
Since I've turned that off, my game is as smooth as it was before.
You do seem to assume Roland2. You state I reposted what I had read. I didn't, I posted my own formative opinion on the current setup. It's accidental if it bears any or exact relation to prior detail. If the repetition had been intentional then I agree it would be stupid 
As for what my post aimed to accomplish. Like most posts in any forum, contribution of ideas (albeit Unknown repetition of other members prior posts), participation and positive activity. Forums are fun
As for what my post aimed to accomplish. Like most posts in any forum, contribution of ideas (albeit Unknown repetition of other members prior posts), participation and positive activity. Forums are fun
Last edited:
What's your point?
The reason for this is simple; player supported factions. Frontier has decided that players should have the ability to associate with factions, support them, and ultimately influence them. This will inevitably result in players coming into conflict with each other, and competing via the influence system and the BGS. Currently that conflict can be circumvented via solo/group play, and in my opinion that's poor game design. If player A wants to harm a group associated with player B, player B should have a way of preventing that directly. I have no problem with X-Box players being able to influence the game via open, since other X-Box players can interact with them. I am opposed to solo play having any ability to modify faction influence whatsoever.
If a player can't play in open then they should not be able to influence factions. If you consider that a penalty then I can respect your opinion if I don't agree with it. My reason for this is stated above; if a player is going to influence a faction then another player should have the opportunity to directly prevent them. Players who would be using offline mode anyway will still have everything else available within Elite, including Power Play and community goals. The only thing they wouldn't be able to do is affect a faction's influence.
Interesting, so did Kermit leave the goons to join you or are the ED goons using a new name now?
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=194108&highlight=diamond+frogs
Ahh I reread, you have Tex too, Goons re-branded, tell Tex I said hi
Yes, I am a Goon. As far as I know that's the SA group.
How did we miss this !!!11!!1!1
This needs quoting again, people you are sleepwalking though this thread, the posters in this thread are getting a little "sloppy", myself included, I don't think anyone noticed this is actually a new idea, it might have been used in other arguments but never against solo and groups being able to affect minor factions (obviously player sponsored ones).
We should recognise and discuss, this comes from the hive like mind of the ED Goons https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=169599&page=517&p=3023503&viewfull=1#post3023503, sorry a Diamond Frog paint skin just became transparent on a goon lol.
My opinion, keep it as it is, unless the frog goons decide to go on a rampage and annoy a load of people I am sure they will get left alone, I mean they are nice, quite friendly ED goons, its not like they are code pad campers.
I think I am psychic, that paragraph got my spidey senses going.
Dave
Normally an OK guy, can turn into the "voice of solo undermining and asymmetrical warfare" if riled.
Often riled my the voice of open / original Mobius invader!
This needs quoting again, people you are sleepwalking though this thread
, the posters in this thread are getting a little "sloppy", myself included, I don't think anyone noticed this is actually a new idea, it might have been used in other arguments but never against solo and groups being able to affect minor factions (obviously player sponsored ones).We should recognise and discuss, this comes from the hive like mind of the ED Goons https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=169599&page=517&p=3023503&viewfull=1#post3023503, sorry a Diamond Frog paint skin just became transparent on a goon lol.
My opinion, keep it as it is, unless the frog goons decide to go on a rampage and annoy a load of people I am sure they will get left alone, I mean they are nice, quite friendly ED goons, its not like they are code pad campers.
I think I am psychic, that paragraph got my spidey senses going.
Dave
Normally an OK guy, can turn into the "voice of solo undermining and asymmetrical warfare" if riled.
Often riled my the voice of open / original Mobius invader!
And what about the instancing ?
Open can have a max of 32 people including yourself in 1 instance island - after that, another persons instance island is used.
If you have too many people defending and my latency won't take it, then the match maker will just d rop me into a single instance in Open mode.
Can you post where / how pls, ta
Maybe they can get all their members to pony up another $10 each and buy a PVP-open only mode
- Status