Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Jack Schitt]

From my experience, higher ranked NPCs, especially in bigger ships, use SCBs almost as often as you could expect from a human player. They usually don't carry as many SCBs, though (rarely more than two – banks, that is, with several charges, not just cells).

I did of course mean single banks with multiple charges, on which I should have been clearer. If you have evidence that NPCs seem to be "stacking" SCBs then that might be a bug because I'm fairly certain that SJA confirmed they never fit more than one. I'm ready to stand corrected, though, because there are a lot of threads these days and I don't read them all.

I like the ideas except the last one that you feel is the most important. It is not a balancer in any way, instead it would be a mechanic that can be easily abused.

It's not that it's "the most important", more that it would be absolutely vital to get all the other bits right before anything like it was introduced otherwise it would make things worse as you rightly say.

It's a way of mitigating the argument that the actions of players in Open don't directly affect the moment-to-moment gameplay of those in Solo (BGS and PP notwithstanding). It was something that was discussed in the DDF, mostly in the context of blockades IIRC, and I was quite in favour of it when we thought we'd be getting properly balanced political and military law enforcement in populated systems. Once the game descended into a virtual free-for-all it became a bit moot, but I think there's still a place for it. But only if everything else was working first, and only if any emerging exploits (and there always are, no matter how much you plan and test) were quashed immediately rather than being semi-tolerated and giving birth to yet another tweakathon that serves nobody well.

As for your prior post to this one, I do kind of take exception to it.

[...]

I'm not trying to be evasive but I'm genuinely not sure which of my comments you're addressing there. It almost sounds as though you've mixed up a couple of posters. If I'm wrong I apologise, but I'll need a quote for context.

 

[Magic Man]

As above. For many, open is ruined because of those players that treat it as nothing more than guns in space.

 

[Janichsan]

How about not being lazy and actually bothering to make your contribution relevant to the thread?

This is not a thread about shield cell banks. Your entire post was about shield cell banks. This entire thread is about open Vs. groups Vs. solo modes. If you feel your contribution is relevant, it behoves you to demonstrate it. For the record, I still think it isn't. Deal with it.

Who exactly made you the forum police? My contribution has more relevancy to this discussion than your self-appointed thread moderation.

 

[Jockey79]

My posts have been entirely truthful.

Really?

Because all I've seen are insults and aggressive trolling.
Perhaps you need to go back and read your first half a dozen posts in this thread, let me help you with that;

*********************

...Going to accuse me of being an alt or a mindless Pew Pew?

...If you ignore the few players that continuously try and dominate this thread (easily identifiable by the amount they post) and the 2 threads before it ....

You can drop the "nice" act.

I do not care what you do in solo or group or even open if FD are unwilling to change that.

You've made it quite clear to all (not just in this thread either), you do not care what the majority of players want, you do not care what the Developers want, you dislike anyone trying to be nice to you - you just want to come here, be nasty and throw a tantrum that ED isn't what you thought it should be.

*********************

I am not alone in my point of view

No, out of over 600,000 copies sold - 20 of you (at most, I'm feeling generous) regularly post on the topic and then lots of 1 off posts by people who apparently only cared for 2 minutes, enough time to post and leave.

I find it interesting that a long time forumer has suddenly weighed in.

Use the links in my sig to filter all 3 of the threads, he has posted a lot on this topic - in defence of the modes and switching.
Click a link, find his name - then click the number of posts at the of the line - it will show just his posts in the thread.

I meant that it has now become an issue for him/her.

See above. Wi Fi is not new to this. 24 posts in just this thread and 53 in Mk2

 

[Roland2]

Bounty hunting in Open is bugged.

I have NEVER seen a large wanted cruiser spawn in Open when I have been hunting in a wing at either a RES or NAV beacon.

If the cr received was the same in Open as in Solo I would play in Open all the time, as I would enjoy the greater challenge AND the camaraderie between myself and my wingmen friends.

Its a bit disappointing that you have to play Solo to make enough cr to buy the bigger ships.

Just my noobish opinion.

What makes you think the credits received are different between open group and solo? The different modes are just match making filters. They don't change the bounty on an npc. If you are saying that an individual doesn't make as much per hour because of bounty sharing in a wing, that has to do with spawn rate, not modes. Spawn rates are not consistant. At my favorite RES, I've had spawn rates so high, I could continually shoot until I run out of bullets, with the only delay being targeting and aligning. At the same RES, I've sat around for 10 minutes waiting for npc's to spawn. It's all RNG, and has nothing to do with modes.

 

[Janichsan]

No, out of over 600,000 copies sold …

Probably closer to 800,000–900,000 by now…

 

[Nighthaunter]

Everything's so damned convoluted at this point that it's almost impossible to come up with a working solution to this, but the fundamentals haven't really changed since last year. For what it's worth, buried as it will be in the noise of this thread, this is the roadmap I'd start with:

• Limit SCBs to one per ship
  I can hear the wailing already, but since SCBs were dropped into the game without any warning or consultation they have become the single biggest factor in widening the gulf between the modes, and between NPCs and players, and thus bringing about the self-fulfilling prophecy that Solo would become "easy mode". NPCs use them rarely, and singly. Players should be similarly restricted. They should be a one-off "oops" button, not a backpack full of health potions.

Agree - Make it that the higher the class, the more you have.

• Bolster the authority response to aggressive acts in high-security, rich systems
  I feel as though I'm banging my head on a wall with this one, but until the risk is balanced across different star systems in the same way it was in Frontier and FFE then there's no strategy when it comes to avoiding risk. Anarchy systems? Anything goes. Rich, high-tech democracies? Instant and overwhelming authority response to illegal aggression. With a sliding scale between them. I don't care how "unrealistic" instantly-spawning police ships are, it's what's needed. In a single-player game you would simply never spawn the aggressors in a "safe" system. In a multiplayer game where the aggressors are players, authority hammers are the only way.

High Security systems already have a quick response. Try pirating a ship, use a limpet for it to drop cargo, destroy it because the AI has no self preservation whatsoever and you might have 15 to 30 seconds to try scoop cargo that is floating all over the place. BTW, npcs already spawn in front of you. I was lucky with one T7 - NPC - It dropped a lot of gold. Security came and I decided to fight for it. As soon as I killed 2, another 2 instantly appeared. Killed another 2 and 2 more. I'm flying a cobra, trying to scoop cargo with respawning enemies. Lazy programming.

• Balance the credit rewards according to risk
  Once there's a sensible distinction between anarchies, democracies and everything in between, profits should scale accordingly. Trading milk runs in safe systems should pay barely enough to cover a ship's running costs. Bounty hunting missions should be rare and low-paying simply because criminals would be rare, and wouldn't live long enough to amass large bounties. In troubled and lawless systems the opposite would apply.

Agreed. Would be nice to see the value of products depend on the system itself, a high population industry system should need copious amounts of food to function.

• Fix player-on-NPC piracy so it becomes as viable as player piracy
  There's a whole bunch of things that need addressing here, from a proper "declare piracy" mode to better limpets and more valuable NPC cargo. At the moment even those people RPing "proper" pirates are basically having to target players just to make the numbers work, which is crazy. Of course some people will always want to pirate players, and that's their choice, but it shouldn't be a forced choice because the game doesn't offer anything as a sensible alternative.

Here is an idea. Make it that you only need one limpet controller but depending on class it can only control a certain amount at a time. We have phones that allow us to do multiple things. Why do we need different limpet controllers? This would make npc piracy more attractive.

 

[Jockey79]

Probably closer to 800,000–900,000 by now…

Still, that's over 600,000

lol.

Is there anyway to find out the actual number?
Be nice to see if it is still selling and see if any spikes happen in seasonal sales etc.

 

[Roland2]

First disprove that players in solo have not ruined the game for those in open. Spaghetti monster right back at you. The simple fact that this thread exists proves solo has indeed ruined the experience for some open players. You either understand this or you don't. Its odd you bring up being a child because not understanding their actions can effect other is a childish trait.

Since it hasn't even been shown that the game has been ruined for players in open, it's impossible to prove, or disprove a cause. I have read just about every post in this thread, and the previous parts, and don't recall many, if any saying the game has been ruined for them because of the modes. Maybe if you quoted some it would refresh my memory. The only thing this thread proves, is that people posted in this thread. That's it, it doesn't prove that any of the sides are right or wrong, just that people posted.

A lot of the posters who are against the different modes for whatever reason, are not saying their game has been ruining, actually a lot have said they like the game, but that it would be "better if...".

 

[Clanky Munge]

What makes you think the credits received are different between open group and solo? The different modes are just match making filters. They don't change the bounty on an npc. If you are saying that an individual doesn't make as much per hour because of bounty sharing in a wing, that has to do with spawn rate, not modes. Spawn rates are not consistant. At my favorite RES, I've had spawn rates so high, I could continually shoot until I run out of bullets, with the only delay being targeting and aligning. At the same RES, I've sat around for 10 minutes waiting for npc's to spawn. It's all RNG, and has nothing to do with modes.

In Solo I make 6 million per fuel tank, in Open barely 1 million. The spawns and rewards for bounties are nerves in Open. Deal with it.

- - - Updated - - -

In Solo I make 6 million per fuel tank, in Open barely 1 million. The spawns and rewards for bounties are nerves in Open. Deal with it.

Nerfed not nerves.

 

[Clanky Munge]

What makes you think the credits received are different between open group and solo? The different modes are just match making filters. They don't change the bounty on an npc. If you are saying that an individual doesn't make as much per hour because of bounty sharing in a wing, that has to do with spawn rate, not modes. Spawn rates are not consistant. At my favorite RES, I've had spawn rates so high, I could continually shoot until I run out of bullets, with the only delay being targeting and aligning. At the same RES, I've sat around for 10 minutes waiting for npc's to spawn. It's all RNG, and has nothing to do with modes.

dont get me wrong, I think the game is excellent but unfortunately leans more towards Solo play than Open due to the ease of server hopping till you find the right RNG.

i hope the introduction of hazardous res will balance the game more evenly.

I think it was posted in another thread that the RNG rolls once on loading the server, hence calling it a bug, although an exploit might be a better description.

 

[Janichsan]

Still, that's over 600,000

lol.

Is there anyway to find out the actual number?
Be nice to see if it is still selling and see if any spikes happen in seasonal sales etc.

Good question. I don't know if the counter of the old backer portal is still available somewhere, but on Steam, there are currently about 250,000–275,000 owners. Though that might include Kickstarter/Beta backers and those who bought the game on Frontier's store and then requested the complimentary Steam key. But I guess we won't get another really official number until either the game hits an important benchmark (e.g. 1 million sold copies) or Frontier's next annual report.

 

[JosiahD]

dont get me wrong, I think the game is excellent but unfortunately leans more towards Solo play than Open due to the ease of server hopping till you find the right RNG.

Not quite - it actually leans more towards PvE rather than specifically solo. Which, by the way in case you missed it, is by design, from the start. A point that many PvP zealots continue to either be blissfully unaware of or conveniently choose to ignore because it isn't compatible with their point of view.
.
The whole point behind the mode switching was to allow people to play their own way BECAUSE the focus was ALWAYS on PvE (including cooperative), be it solo, in small private groups or in the all-in open mode. Whether the PvP crowd like it or not is irrelevant - PvP was always intended to be possible (in open or private groups) BUT rare by comparison. In part this was ALWAYS going to be the case anyway simply because of the size of the galaxy as it leads to the playerbase spreading out far more than would be the case if we were restricted to, say, only 100 systems or so. Spread the playerbase out and of course PvP will be harder to come by - doesn't take a rocket scientist to work that out. Maybe it's about time that certain PvP zealots finally came to understand that Elite: Dangerous was never intended to provide the degree of PvP-focused gameplay they seek. The mode switching suits the PvE focus yet still enables people to partake of PvP action when they wish (and are prepared to go to some effort to seek it out if they are looking for it in open instead of via a private group) without having it forced upon them. A most elegant and flexible solution.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

First disprove that players in solo have not ruined the game for those in open. Spaghetti monster right back at you. The simple fact that this thread exists proves solo has indeed ruined the experience for some open players. You either understand this or you don't. Its odd you bring up being a child because not understanding their actions can effect other is a childish trait.

but you knew or at least had the opportunity to know this before you bought or backed. You are essentially trying to royally destroy the game for people who bought because of the promised modes and mode switching.

I can concede that you not being able to interact with some players may spoil it for you, but Cest la vie. I would NEVER go over to EVE and demand changes be made to suit me as a gamer.... I did my homework on the game, had a little dabble before deciding the game was not for me. If a minority of players had their way in this game, then I would no longer want to play the game because it would be completely changed from the game I backed.

my question to those saying the game is rubbish due to mode switching, whjy in gods name did you buy it? and is it not a bit arrogant to expect FD to change it for you?

Caveat emptor and all that.

 

[Mouse]

I did of course mean single banks with multiple charges, on which I should have been clearer. If you have evidence that NPCs seem to be "stacking" SCBs then that might be a bug because I'm fairly certain that SJA confirmed they never fit more than one. I'm ready to stand corrected, though, because there are a lot of threads these days and I don't read them all.



It's not that it's "the most important", more that it would be absolutely vital to get all the other bits right before anything like it was introduced otherwise it would make things worse as you rightly say.

It's a way of mitigating the argument that the actions of players in Open don't directly affect the moment-to-moment gameplay of those in Solo (BGS and PP notwithstanding). It was something that was discussed in the DDF, mostly in the context of blockades IIRC, and I was quite in favour of it when we thought we'd be getting properly balanced political and military law enforcement in populated systems. Once the game descended into a virtual free-for-all it became a bit moot, but I think there's still a place for it. But only if everything else was working first, and only if any emerging exploits (and there always are, no matter how much you plan and test) were quashed immediately rather than being semi-tolerated and giving birth to yet another tweakathon that serves nobody well.


I'm not trying to be evasive but I'm genuinely not sure which of my comments you're addressing there. It almost sounds as though you've mixed up a couple of posters. If I'm wrong I apologise, but I'll need a quote for context.

The issue though Jack is that it would not bring balance because for one there already is a balance at least as much balance as there can be. Open players play in open for the interaction, the pvp, hostility, or other reasons than complain that those who play in solo are in "easy" mode. People in opened wanted the extra hassle than complain that others don't have it too, it makes no sense. Also something like that is highly susceptible to abuse, especially by the element that don't take fun in playing a game but screwing with others.

And yes I was tired and got my wires crossed thinking you wrote both posts, I apologize for the mix-up.

- - - Updated - - -

I can only speak for myself, but from my perspective I see it as being fine that players get to play how they feel comfortable in having fun. If that means playing alone in Solo or with a limited number in a Private Group, that is completely acceptable. I wouldn't want to force players to play something that isn't fun for them. A long time ago I realized that forcing players to play a game that isn't fun just so I can have fun, isn't fun for me either. It's only fun for me if it's fun for everyone.

That's the same argument that I've seen stated by proponents of Solo and Private Group, that they shouldn't have to play in Open Mode if they don't want to. And they are correct.


However, here's the thing and perhaps something that gets overlooked. Solo and Group players get to play the game they want. It's the Open Mode players who are not getting to play the way they have fun. It's not because players choose not to play in Open, but in Solo/Private Groups.

The reason to play Open is to challenge yourself and your decisions directly against other players in a way that your actions can be measured in their influence on the game. That's not currently how Elite Dangerous is structured, everyone plays against a game that is designed to marginalize players influence over the background simulation. That works just fine for Solo and Private Groups because players are focused on playing directly against the game itself. Open Mode players want to feel like they play against other players as much as they do against the game. That also includes playing with other players, against other players. They want a game that in some basic way, acknowledges what they do and the effort they put into playing it.

That can't happen as long as Solo and Private Group activities influence everything that happens to the simulation that Open Mode players also share. Part of the disparity of views between players on this matter is partly because I do not think some players and FDev themselves fully appreciate what is wrong with Open Mode. The Open Mode inflicts a condition that culminates in a feeling of insignificance to an Open Mode player. No matter what you do in the open mode, your actions can not be measured for their influence. You are still ultimately playing a Solo/Private Group game mode under the guise of a proper Open Mode feeling.

In the end, it would be great in my opinion if we could find some compromise that allowed Solo/Group and Open players to all coexist in one mode. However, that ideally won't happen. So, instead of battling to win players who are set to play the game a certain way, it should focus on getting the players who play neither to come back or start playing.

Solo/Group Modes work well enough for the players who play those game modes. It is Open Mode that needs adjustment to improve the environment. We don't need to convince players to play the game differently, because there are still enough players who do not play at all to populate open mode if it was simply more appealing.

This opportunity is being drowned out by the protectionist motive to defend what is working for some at the expense of not accepting what isn't working for others.

I don't want to fix the way any of you play. I don't want to force you to play the way I play. I just want to improve the way I play, because it isn't as fun as I think it could be.

And I think the way I like to play is fun enough to convince a lot of players to come play Elite Dangerous.

And that would make Elite Dangerous better for every one of us.

I do kind of take exception to this. It would be great if more people played in Open, the game is for people to have fun. But you are coming from the premise of "The reason to play Open is to challenge yourself and your decisions directly against other players in a way that your actions can be measured in their influence on the game." Now that may be the reason that you are in open, but not ever other player plays in open for this reason. And even IF everyone in open played for the exact same reason as you mentioned there is still no reason to separate BGS of the modes. I really wish I understood why some in Open really think that the BGS is such a game breaking and evil thing. So you can't see every single ship that may influence a system minutely, neither can someone in solo or in a private group. Even if everyone was in open, you'd still never see every ship, even if you stayed awake and monitored the system 24/7. Separating the BGS would not be some magical fix all that would make Open more appealing.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

First disprove that players in solo have not ruined the game for those in open. Spaghetti monster right back at you. The simple fact that this thread exists proves solo has indeed ruined the experience for some open players. You either understand this or you don't. Its odd you bring up being a child because not understanding their actions can effect other is a childish trait.

Research is your friend. You could make the argument that lack of multiplayer ruined Skyrim for you and be perfectly accurate in that assessment as only you can declare what does and does not ruin your experience.

However, the fault would rest with you, not Bethesda. Likewise, the vast majority of pvp centric complaints about ED could have just as easily been avoided, if the so inclined had merely done 30 minutes of research beforehand. I bought the game Dec 26th, the very day a friend told me about it, but before I made that final click, I already knew about all three modes and all they entailed. I have no sympathy for players who didn't do their own due diligence and are now upset because they didn't get the game that they had dreamed up all by their lonesome.

Speaking just for myself, I don't own a single title (out of 200 or so) that is exclusively multiplayer. I wouldn't have purchased it if it were.

 

[Stigbob]

First disprove that players in solo have not ruined the game for those in open. Spaghetti monster right back at you. The simple fact that this thread exists proves solo has indeed ruined the experience for some open players. You either understand this or you don't. Its odd you bring up being a child because not understanding their actions can effect other is a childish trait.

I chose not to play EVE because I don't like guild heavy games where open is the only mode.

I chose to play ED because I like to have the option of playing guild free games and solo when I feel like it.

Research = happy with purchase, not agitating for changes.

Why is it important to you to remove a mode you don't use, that was always intended as one of the three modes ?.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

indeed. infact this is the reason why I am interested in ARK and have zero interest in starwars battlefront.

ARK (like elite) has PvP and PvE servers. I must admit as i have not researched much yet as am only buying when out of early access, but i do not know if you can migrate from one to the other.

if you can great, if you cant, great, either way it will not be a show stopper for me, and either way i will not be asking for it to be changed, so long as the info is out there to let me know in advance

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

indeed. infact this is the reason why I am interested in ARK and have zero interest in starwars battlefront.

ARK (like elite) has PvP and PvE servers. I must admit as i have not researched much yet as am only buying when out of early access, but i do not know if you can migrate from one to the other.

if you can great, if you cant, great, either way it will not be a show stopper for me, and either way i will not be asking for it to be changed, so long as the info is out there to let me know in advance

You can't swap your character between servers. Every server uses a different save. Well there is a way I think but the official servers don't support it. Even then it only transfers your level not what you built.

I played ark for a while but it got kind of boring. It's too much of "clan" game for my tastes. If you play as a lone wolf you're at a huge disadvantage. Not even combat wise, on pve servers you're still not going to be able to unlock all or most of the buildables. It's going to take a lot longer to get your house and dinosaurs up and running. You'll also have trouble taming or just not dying to the bigger ones by yourself.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

You can't swap your character between servers. Every server uses a different save. Well there is a way I think but the official servers don't support it.

I played ark for a while but it got kind of boring. It's too much of "clan" game for my tastes. If you play as a lone wolf you're at a huge disadvantage. Not even combat wise, on pve servers you're still not going to be able to unlock all or most of the buildables. It's going to take a lot longer to get your house and dinosaurs up and running. You'll also have trouble taming the bigger ones alone.

Thanks for the info...... in which case i may not bother then...... but so long as the info is out there come release that is the main thing (though sounds like a shame, the engine looks like it has has great potential for a fantastic Robinson Crusoe type stranded on your own but with dinosaurs type game.)

anyway sorry, i did not mean to take this thread OT... i seem to have a habit of that