Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[CMDR Sheehy]

I agree with the other people in here that think that nothing needs to be done to the Game Modes as they stand.

What maybe needs to happen is an advertisement for Mobius private group to be included with every first installation of the Launcher. The whole "We need unwilling targets" thing is a load of tosh. unwilling targets = people not playing the game any more if they are not educated on where they can go to avoid being fodder.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

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

That always seemed odd to me as well. Once you're past the slot, all bets are off.

All I'm saying is that I would only support another game mode (Open PvE) if Frontier incentivized open play(regular Open play only) with a credit bonus which would discourage PvP-induced rage-quitting.

A credit bonus would not discourage rage quitting. In fact, a credit bonus would draw in people who would normally not go into Open, and those are the kind of people who are more likely to rage quit because they are lured into a mode they'd otherwise not play.

The credit bonus is only asked for when the player feels he's so much more daring for having the guts to go into open, or simply as an excuse to make more credits.

In this case it reads to me: yeah, I'll support you guys having a mode that suits you, like I have now, but what's in it for me?

 

[Lateralus]

I'm not sure if giving players in Open mode more credits would motivate those who don't like some aspects of Open Mode to stay. If somebody doesn't like something and wants to play in an other mode a bit more credits won't change the reasons to leave. Some might stay for the credits, but in the end they will become even more frustrated.

Free credits will always encourage some players to enter the mode it applies to..

The only way to keep those players in Open Mode would be to change Open Mode in a way that removes the reasons for them to quit that mode.

Then players who enjoy the risk and the unknown nature of player encounters will leave instead.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

In this case it reads to me: yeah, I'll support you guys having a mode that suits you, like I have now, but what's in it for me?

Correct

Only because what is being suggested would potentially harm the mode I currently enjoy most.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Free credits will always encourage some players to enter the mode it applies to..

As said before: People will enjoy the carrot - until it is ripped from their mouth and their butt spanked. The only person that benefits is you and people like you.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Players who prefer / need their targets to be unwilling would benefit from a lure to encourage more players to play in Open.

At first maybe, but in the long run those players will get frustrated by combat logging, accusations of griefing, players doing everything to avoid any player contact and in the end their unwilling targets would go to an other mode anyway.

For example: If everything gets a credit bonus in Open Mode, then suddenly trading between those little systems far away from any other CMDR becomes very interesting. It doesn't help players who want unwilling targets.

 

[Jockey79]

*sigh*

They're not going to remove open play, I wouldn't waste your time lobbying for it as many players enjoy it in its current format - and there would be commercial consequences for frontier if they did so, despite your dismissal of that notion. I mean lets face it, they can't even change minor features of the game without the community going nuts... can you imagine how it would react if they totally removed open play.

lol, you guys...

If FD had a pound for every time someone said what they will or will not do - they could shut the game down and retire.

The modes are nothing more than a networking switch to determine who you can or cannot see.
Removal of an option on the main menu does not change the game, it does not add or subtract any feature of the game.

Fuel Rats could just set a group to auto accept, PvE'ers already have a invite only / managed group (Mobius) - PvP'ers could make and auto accept version of Mobius without any fuss.
Hutton Truckers, EDC, Bacon Cats have their own managed groups (I'm connected to all 3) - I'm sure there are lots more player groups already.

The only people who would not benefit from that change is gankers, as anyone in a PvP group is there with guns ready for them. Apart from that, the game would be exactly the same for everyone else.

The "Open" on the menu does not do anything other than set the multiplayer flag - which you can do yourself by joining a large popular group with networking flags set to how you want to play.

 

[Lateralus]

As said before: People will enjoy the carrot - until it is ripped from their mouth and their butt spanked. The only person that benefits is you and people like you.

Well everyone on here has a perspective and argues for that perspective... All I'm asking for is a well populated open mode - whereas a lot of the PvE only crowd on here are arguing for the game mode I enjoy and play exclusively to be completely removed.

Who's in the wrong here?

 

[Robert Maynard]

At first maybe, but in the long run those players will get frustrated by combat logging, accusations of griefing, players doing everything to avoid any player contact and in the end their unwilling targets would go to an other mode anyway.

For example: If everything gets a credit bonus in Open Mode, then suddenly trading between those little systems far away from any other CMDR becomes very interesting. It doesn't help players who want unwilling targets.

A blanket bonus for Open play would be badly targeted, in my opinion. There's nothing to stop players buying cargo in Open; switch to Solo; travel to destination; switch to Open; sell cargo. Plus, Frontier are on record as not considering any form of bonus for playing in Open to be necessary and are also on record as considering all game modes equal and valid - so it is unlikely that any bonus for play in one of the three modes would be implemented.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…

Then players who enjoy the risk and the unknown nature of player encounters will leave instead.
…

That's why I think trying to keep players in a mode who don't want to play in that mode is a bad idea. As the only effective way would be to change the game in a way that would result in those who wanted more players in Open Mode would leave.

 

[Robert Maynard]

All I'm asking for is a well populated open mode

.... and that relies on other players choosing to play in Open - having a play-style that is reliant in some way on other players is always vulnerable to the choices of other players as to which game mode they play in.

 

[Jockey79]

Free credits will always encourage some players to enter the mode it applies to..

It also encourages people to join that mode for the extra free credits and set their routers to refuse all new IP connections (aka Solo mode via router settings)
Hence why people think the extra credits idea is a bad one, it is way too easy to bypass.

I could play open right now without ever seeing another person by disabling uPnP and setting my router to ignore all but FDs server.
You really want to give me bonuses knowing I'm taking them without ever having to see you ?

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…- whereas a lot of the PvE only crowd on here are arguing for the game mode I enjoy and play exclusively to be completely removed.

Who's in the wrong here?

I think you are wrong. There is one or maybe two participants who argue that Open Mode could or should be removed - and I'm not entirely sure if they are serious about it.
The majority of the participants of this thread don't want Open Mode to be removed (at least that's my impression). I could be wrong

 

[Jockey79]

I think you are wrong. There is one or maybe two participants who argue that Open Mode could or should be removed - and I'm not entirely sure if they are serious about it.
The majority of the participants of this thread don't want Open Mode to be removed (at least that's my impression). I could be wrong

When I first said (months ago) to remove Open Mode - I was turning the PvP'er argument back on them, to prove a point.

Since I've seen how hard PvP'ers are arguing to keep Mobius hush hush from the main player base, I've since come to think the whole main menu needs to be redesigned to highlight peoples choices over how to play the game.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Well everyone on here has a perspective and argues for that perspective... All I'm asking for is a well populated open mode - whereas a lot of the PvE only crowd on here are arguing for the game mode I enjoy and play exclusively to be completely removed.

Who's in the wrong here?

Since you said: "whereas a lot of the PvE only crowd on here are arguing for the game mode I enjoy and play exclusively to be completely removed", you are.

And it's strange how I always read these noble sentiments which happen to coincide with increasing one's bank account. I guess that's just a happy coincidence. But if you wish a more populated Open Playing mode, which is common ground, I'd think a PvE flag which prevents PvP interaction would draw a lot of people into Open. You just can't shoot at them.

 

[Lateralus]

If FD had a pound for every time someone said what they will or will not do - they could shut the game down and retire.

Well let's see then, I'm sure you will be waiting in vain but hey ho...

The modes are nothing more than a networking switch to determine who you can or cannot see.
Removal of an option on the main menu does not change the game, it does not add or subtract any feature of the game.

I understand that, but what your essentially asking for is PvP piracy and PvP bounty hunting to be completely removed from the game, as it would not be possible in the game mode you are suggesting (unless its consensual which is a complete yawn-fest in my opinion) - so, removing features of the game is exactly what it would do.

The only people who would not benefit from that change is gankers, as anyone in a PvP group is there with guns ready for them. Apart from that, the game would be exactly the same for everyone else.

As I said above, it would not be the same for open PvP piracy or bounty hunters, it would change the nature of the game completely for them as they would have to find willing participants (CQC already covers that base).

The "Open" on the menu does not do anything other than set the multiplayer flag - which you can do yourself by joining a large popular group with networking flags set to how you want to play.

I'm not interested in joining any groups, I like the 'wild-west' feel of the game - what you're suggesting would kill that concept completely.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Well everyone on here has a perspective and argues for that perspective... All I'm asking for is a well populated open mode - whereas a lot of the PvE only crowd on here are arguing for the game mode I enjoy and play exclusively to be completely removed.

Who's in the wrong here?

As said before: Open will be vacated by people who do not enjoy what happens in Open.

Well, excuse me if I think that's a Duh! statement. It's a game - for enjoying! If they don't enjoy it, they either put the game down or learn how to play it without they bit they don't enjoy. Fortunately the devs have the designed the game so that is exactly what happens. By definition, your playstyle - nothing wrong that that choice: to impose yourself upon unwilling players - is one that does not increase other player's enjoyment. Ergo, Open's population risks being reduced every time you destroy another player's ship. That's logical. Offering an incentive only encourages people to enter a mode that they will ultimately not enjoy and will quit, or go back to the other modes means less players for open, and risks less players for the game in general.

If you want a well populated Open, you have have to accept that some playstyles go against that principle and cause people to leave. If that's you, then you are your own worst enemy. Maybe - if you adjusted your playstyle - it would not be so punishing for your sheep and they would not mind being farmed. But that's your choice and ultimately the Open population is solely dependent on you and your style of play. You're totally in control of the population of Open... And no-one, not FDev, is going to help you with that.

It's that simple.

There's nothing wrong with the modes.

 

[Lateralus]

It also encourages people to join that mode for the extra free credits and set their routers to refuse all new IP connections (aka Solo mode via router settings)
Hence why people think the extra credits idea is a bad one, it is way too easy to bypass.

I could play open right now without ever seeing another person by disabling uPnP and setting my router to ignore all but FDs server.
You really want to give me bonuses knowing I'm taking them without ever having to see you ?

That's kind've hacky, the majority probably wouldn't bother with going to those extremes.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…But if you wish a more populated Open Playing mode, which is common ground, I'd think a PvE flag which prevents PvP interaction would draw a lot of people into Open. You just can't shoot at them.

That would be something I don't want. Being able to shoot at someone and not being able to shoot at somebody else feels wrong. I want to be able to shoot everybody or nobody - I guess I would play about the same amount of time in Open Mode and a hypothetical Open PvE mode.

 

[Lateralus]

As said before: Open will be vacated by people who do not enjoy what happens in Open.

Well, excuse me if I think that's a Duh! statement. It's a game - for enjoying! If they don't enjoy it, they either put the game down or learn how to play it without they bit they don't enjoy. Fortunately the devs have the designed the game so that is exactly what happens. By definition, your playstyle - nothing wrong that that choice: to impose yourself upon unwilling players - is one that does not increase other player's enjoyment. Ergo, Open's population risks being reduced every time you destroy another player's ship. That's logical. Offering an incentive only encourages people to enter a mode that they will ultimately not enjoy and will quit, or go back to the other modes means less players for open, and risks less players for the game in general.

If you want a well populated Open, you have have to accept that some playstyles go against that principle and cause people to leave. If that's you, then you are your own worst enemy. Maybe - if you adjusted your playstyle - it would not be so punishing for your sheep and they would not mind being farmed. But that's your choice and ultimately the Open population is solely dependent on you and your style of play. You're totally in control of the population of Open... And no-one, not FDev, is going to help you with that.

It's that simple.

There's nothing wrong with the modes.

I'm happy with things staying as they are, others on here are not however.

 

[hunvagy]

Personally, I'm not in favour of any kind of incentive for Open play.
For me, the opportunity to encounter other players is both the risk and the reward. I've made a couple of enemies and I've also made a few friends - the chance to make both is what makes Open special and appealing for me

Too bad we only have someone like you once in a while I myself will never touch open, and if the Mobius group would fall apart, I'd go back to the private group we made as friends. Back in the olden days of premium beta this exact same thing came up, and I think I still come to the same conclusion. If I had to make a choice between playing with my friends or thousands of randoms in Open, I would choose my friends 100% of the time. Right now I have the luxury of having a group that lets me do both.

But I would not mind having an official way of doing that. What I really don't understand is why people think said mode would be detrimental to the current Open, unless they really are afraid that the only reason they have people to pirate right now is because those "victims" (ugh, I wish we found a better term for it) have no other choice.