Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Ziggy Stardust]

I have yet to see a post in the line of:
"I have been playing in open for some time... and absolutely nothing bad happened to me beyond the ordinary... no player attacks... no profit loss... But one morning, I realized that I was not happy in open, and so, I changed to solo and now I'm a much more happy and self-fulfilled person".
.
Sure, I will wait a for post like that, and then I'll start to believe that people change game mode only for his personal self-fulfillment. In the meantime, I can show you a myriad of posts in the line of:
"I was in open but someone destroyed my ship and I changed to solo, never to return to open"
"I never logged in open because I fear who I'll meet there"... etc etc... you know the song.
.
Oh, but let's not forget that there is absolutely no additional risk in Open... That's a falacy, of course.

If you're flying Solo in Open there can be additional risk. Those who've played this game for a while know where to go, and where not to go to avoid that risk. I played in the bubble for a little over a month with nothing but NPC interdictions since I found myself a nice quite corner of the galaxy. A corner I still use to sell my exploration-data.

The fallacy is stating: Playing in Open means more risk. Risk is determined to where you are inside the bubble. Risk is also determined whether you fly alone or in a Wing in Open. And to what extend you have progressed in the Game.

Summarized:
* In Open you can easily find spots inside the bubble without other CMDRs bothering you. Which brings the risk on par with Solo.
* The ability to wing up in Open means that playing in Open can be less risky than playing in Solo, dependant on the earlier factors I mentioned.
* If you're flying an A-spec Anaconda your risk of being interdicted is closer to the risk in solo than when you're starting out in a Sidey.
* When you've been playing for longer, you learn how to avoid risk, it's the new players who stumble into the dangerzones, and it's just those players who will come here to complain about it.

In my 7 months career of Elite, I have been attacked by players when:
Doing a rare trade route run. (3 times)
Fighting a RES in 70 Virginis, got WANTED by shooting at a cop.

After that I moved to quieter pastures and have yet to experience a player interdiction in 3 months. Because I know how to avoid risk in Open.

 

[Seonid]

If you're flying Solo in Open there can be additional risk. Those who've played this game for a while know where to go, and where not to go to avoid that risk.

All of this ^. I've been in Open since Gamma and my quiet bit of the galaxy is just that. I've been interdicted by a player once in all that time and it was obvious that the player was gifted the cash for their blinged up Vulture as they were utterly clueless and probably (in previous games) used to get shouted at a lot for standing in fire. On average (when not Fuel Ratting) I see another player about once a month. Space is big.

 

[stripealipe]

I dont wish to interact with Players as I think everyone is obnoxious and I'm too, shall we say, relaxed whilst playing. I'm more than happy with just chuffing along minding my own business pretending to rule the universe. NCP's are my fodder and I'm more than happy with that. I dont wish to upset anyone by blasting their ship or be forced to write to my MP due to some bounder shooting at me. People have a choice and thats great.

Everyone is obnoxious eh? Yeah, yeah, we all *love* a sweeping generalisation.... nice.

Fact is, NPCs coming down on you all the time and shooting you is exactly the same as some CMDR doing it. It's just that you'll get CMDRs doing this once in a blue moon compared to the incessant NPC interdictions and encounters. None of your arguments stack up...

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Everyone is obnoxious eh? Yeah, yeah, we all *love* a sweeping generalisation.... nice.

Fact is, NPCs coming down on you all the time and shooting you is exactly the same as some CMDR doing it. It's just that you'll get CMDRs doing this once in a blue moon compared to the incessant NPC interdictions and encounters. None of your arguments stack up...

his reasons are his alone, whether you agree with him or not is irrelevant, when it comes to making a choice, which the game advertised that we could make, it is perfectly ok for his reasons to be completely subjective, and it is perfectly ok for you to disagree and make different choices. It does not make him wrong however (I think he is if you must know, I only think SOME players in open are the type i have no interest in playing with).

He said what he THOUGHT and last time I looked it is not some Orwellian state where the thought police can lock us up....

Elite WAS launched in 1984 however........ maybe you are on to something

 

[Julissa Silver]

Fact is, NPCs coming down on you all the time and shooting you is exactly the same as some CMDR doing it. It's just that you'll get CMDRs doing this once in a blue moon compared to the incessant NPC interdictions and encounters. None of your arguments stack up...

Well there go all the arguments about 'extra risk' in open mode. I mean, assuming all the logic presented in the quoted post are applied in the opposite direction. They are, right? We're allowed to do that? Oh good.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

Everyone is obnoxious eh? Yeah, yeah, we all *love* a sweeping generalisation.... nice.
.

I don't love a sweeping generalisation. In fact I hate all of them! Your point does seem to be a comprehensive take down of the idea, that there is a measurable increase in risk and therefore a need for increased reward, for clicking Open doesn't it?

 

[Jockey79]

I totally agree with you in this part and had nothing to argue with this. What I tried to argue about in my previous post, were not the reasons to choose a game mode in first place, but the reason to change to another (the post has been edited and I hope my meaning clarified). I must apologize for my poor chosing of words.
.
My line of reasoning was more in line of that most people who switch from open solo display a common trend that usually has little to do with true self-fulfillness or genuine desire to experience other modes (although many facade it as that), and more with the rage and frustration of having unexpectedly lost their assets due to other player's intervention.

"most people" ??
Since when did people start explaining their actions to you?

Have their been threads about people leaving open mode - yes
Do they represent "most people" who mode switch - no

I can sit here and say most open players are griefers, does not make me right and is unfair to those who do not conform to that standard.
So, while people do leave open due to bad experiences, you have no idea what "most people" do - or how long people leave open for. It's not as if those who make those threads and come back to tell us they've calmed down and gone back to open, but I bet some people do once they've chilled out.

Everyone is obnoxious eh? Yeah, yeah, we all *love* a sweeping generalisation.... nice.

Fact is, NPCs coming down on you all the time and shooting you is exactly the same as some CMDR doing it. It's just that you'll get CMDRs doing this once in a blue moon compared to the incessant NPC interdictions and encounters. None of your arguments stack up...

No, NPCs are not the same as humans.

NPCs won't interdict out of malice, NPCs wont interdict due to me being the only human near by.
NPC don't give preference to human players over othe NPCs as targets (I seen NPCs interdict other NPCs quite often while ignoring my T9).

And if NPCs are so much like humans, then why all the fuss to get more humans in to open when NPCs are the same?

And, quick question then as NPCs are like humans - why did you interdict me and not any of the NPCs that were near by ?
After all, if humans and NPCs are "exactly the same" - why me in my T6 and not one of the bigger NPC ships?

Yes NPCs now give chase, yes NPCs are much better than they were and yes they are a bit more relentless than they used to be.
But NPCs are just NPCs, no feelings, no emotions and no agenda / malice / grief is conveyed when they pull you over.

[Note for any one else reading this: stripealipe is a decent and true pirate, not one of those idiots who just interdicts and shoots. Also, the night I documented my rare run in Open Mode, he was the only person to speak to me or have any sort of contact with me in 6 hours of game play, despite me going to every hot spot and busy area - if it had not been for that one interdiction, I would not have seen the difference between open and solo]

 

[bootsam]

Hey, I'm not fussed if he could not spot the 'tongue in cheek' jibe. As has been pointed out umpteen times to death, everyone plays games for their own reasons. I took no offence from his post as I dont really mind what he thinks. Theyre his thoughts. Not mine. Mine are altogether less stressed and a bit more cheery.

 

[stripealipe]

I don't love a sweeping generalisation. In fact I hate all of them! Your point does seem to be a comprehensive take down of the idea, that there is a measurable increase in risk and therefore a need for increased reward, for clicking Open doesn't it?

No, no.. my main gripe overall is simply that the game has moved on since it's birth.
Since powerplay came into the fray things have changed massively and now i simply feel that the joined universe cannot work fairly.

The powerplay struggle is constantly being abused by large numbers of Open players going into Solo with a decrease in overall risk in order to undermine, fortify etc out of sight of other Open players. The increased risk in Open powerplay is purely because one power will know another power is trying to maybe undermine one of their systems and it will be able to mobilise forces and possibly oppose in some way. Or indeed take some other tactic.
And even though NPCs *are* incessant and try and constantly kill you, human players can be a little more resourceful and clever in their tactics. Besides NPCs don't really have much bearing on the powerplay aspect of the game overall.

I have no problem on people wanting to do their thing in Solo or private groups if they so wish. Of course i don't. But currently the Solo mode is being abused by Open players in order to gain an advantage and that makes a bit of a farce of the whole powerplay mechanic and it's pretty frustrating.

If Solo players enjoy their own universe devoid of other CMDRs, it's cool of course. But do you really, honestly still need the open players influence encroaching on your universe?
If Solo was a separate instance of the universe, with it's own dynamic and flow for those that want to frequent it, i don't see what the problem would be?
I'm not sure why you want to fly in solo, yet be a part of a dynamic that goes on somewhere else?

 

[stripealipe]

"most people" ??
No, NPCs are not the same as humans.

NPCs won't interdict out of malice, NPCs wont interdict due to me being the only human near by.
NPC don't give preference to human players over othe NPCs as targets (I seen NPCs interdict other NPCs quite often while ignoring my T9).

And if NPCs are so much like humans, then why all the fuss to get more humans in to open when NPCs are the same?

And, quick question then as NPCs are like humans - why did you interdict me and not any of the NPCs that were near by ?
After all, if humans and NPCs are "exactly the same" - why me in my T6 and not one of the bigger NPC ships?

Yes NPCs now give chase, yes NPCs are much better than they were and yes they are a bit more relentless than they used to be.
But NPCs are just NPCs, no feelings, no emotions and no agenda / malice / grief is conveyed when they pull you over.

[Note for any one else reading this: stripealipe is a decent and true pirate, not one of those idiots who just interdicts and shoots. Also, the night I documented my rare run in Open Mode, he was the only person to speak to me or have any sort of contact with me in 6 hours of game play, despite me going to every hot spot and busy area - if it had not been for that one interdiction, I would not have seen the difference between open and solo]

Ok Jock, there is one thing we really need to get clear first and foremost. It was never me that interdicted you!
You said in an earlier thread, months ago now, that you were going to go try Open for a bit.
So what did i do? I went straight online and sent a friend request in order to chat and maybe meet up. In a nice friendly manner. A welcome to Open kinda thing.
Think back... that's how it was. We chatted for quite a while..

And NPCs are as malicious as any commander lol. They chat, and snipe and all sorts. They interdict you and they try and kill you. No come back, no chat, no mercy, nothing. Ever.
A CMDR on the other hand may well chat, may well not, may kill you, may let you go at the last second, might get you to sing for your life. But that's the human mind for you. You never know what's going to happen..
But you definitely end up with more possible options than any NPC encounter, that's for sure.

Also, i never said NPCs and human CMDRs were exactly the same. I asked what the difference was between incessantly getting interdicted by NPCs vs CMDRs.
They're both an annoyance, nothing more. I think you hate the idea that the human might be laughing or something?!
I'm sure the hair-brained NPC pirates laugh at you as well dude...

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

If you're flying Solo in Open there can be additional risk. Those who've played this game for a while know where to go, and where not to go to avoid that risk. I played in the bubble for a little over a month with nothing but NPC interdictions since I found myself a nice quite corner of the galaxy. A corner I still use to sell my exploration-data.

<Snip>

After that I moved to quieter pastures and have yet to experience a player interdiction in 3 months. Because I know how to avoid risk in Open.

You can never completely negate the risk in open. You can lower it, but it's always there. The risk that someone in a massively powerful ship will come and blow you up. That's a risk in solo but there's a cap on the strength, and skill of npcs, not on players. That's the increased risk everyone is talking about.

Besides that, you don't "have" to do anything of the stuff you mentioned, when you can switch to solo. You can stay on the outskirts of the galaxy, avoid rare systems, and watch your six, or just go solo. I think that's the problem most people have with it. You can reduce the risk with careful planning, and play in open or, not change a thing and go to solo.

To me it just seems massively imbalanced, open is fine if you have a combat profession, in a combat ship, but terrible if you have a non combat profession, in a trade ship.

 

[ianw]

You can never completely negate the risk in open. You can lower it, but it's always there. The risk that someone in a massively powerful ship will come and blow you up. That's a risk in solo but there's a cap on the strength, and skill of npcs, not on players. That's the increased risk everyone is talking about.

Besides that, you don't "have" to do anything of the stuff you mentioned, when you can switch to solo. You can stay on the outskirts of the galaxy, avoid rare systems, and watch your six, or just go solo. I think that's the problem most people have with it. You can reduce the risk with careful planning, and play in open or, not change a thing and go to solo.

To me it just seems massively imbalanced, open is fine if you have a combat profession, in a combat ship, but terrible if you have a non combat profession, in a trade ship.

At the risk (no pun intended) of sounding like Mr Contrary I have to say this doesn't match my experience of trading in open - which is the thing I have done more than anything else in this game to date.

1st rule of trading in open - don't get interdicted. It's a lot simpler than it sounds once you know how.

2nd rule of trading in open - if your route gets a player pirate infestation - change it. It's trivial to find a route trading the same stuff for the same amounts if you use the external trade tools.

3rd rule of trading in open - if someone gets a tether on you (say you fell asleep or something) submit - 4 pips to shields - press the button to select to pre-defined Hyperspace jump and high wake it as soon as the timer clears. You won't be followed.

Risk in open averted/eradicated - no problem. I didn't even know about high waking till a few months ago. And most of the time I don't see any player pirates anyway (just traders). And I'm about 100 ly from Founders so hardly in the sticks.

 

[Mouse]

No, I'm not complaining about being hunted down by battle-hardened wings, when I'm simply trading. I'm only saying the risk/reward ratio is now so heavily biased as to make me choose Solo, which is a shame, because I enjoyed meeting other players in space, friendly and not so friendly.

The thing is, the risk/reward was never biased. The actions of other players are.

Missed this one yesterday... I do not ignore the word 'choice', in fact I have it very present in all my posts. Precisely one of the things I'm trying to argue is that by their decisions, FD made (is making) Solo a BETTER choice than Open.... When according to everyone, all choices should be equal and equivalent.
.
That's what the mountain example was for. To illustrate that when aiming for the same rewards (The 5k bucks, and not just personal fulfillment as our brave forumite climber), you have absolutely no reason to choose to do it unprotected, or with people that could cut your ropes. (Though to be even an even more fair comparison, we could ask to our climber if given the choice to climb the mountain between being alone or being behind some suspicious strangers he doesn't know anything about, what of those choices he would take... even doing it only for his personal fulfillment...)
.
I have yet to see a post in the line of:
"I have been playing in open for some time... and absolutely nothing bad happened to me beyond the ordinary... no player attacks... no profit loss... But one morning, I realized that I was not happy in open, and so, I changed to solo and now I'm a much more happy and self-fulfilled person".
.
Sure, I will wait a for post like that, and then I'll start to believe that people change game mode only for his personal self-fulfillment. In the meantime, I can show you a myriad of posts in the line of:
"I was in open but someone destroyed my ship and I changed to solo, never to return to open"
"I never logged in open because I fear who I'll meet there"... etc etc... you know the song.
.
Oh, but let's not forget that there is absolutely no additional risk in Open... That's a falacy, of course.

What you seem to miss completely is that FD never made Solo a better choice than open, they are equal. What is happening is certain PLAYERS who are heavily influencing the choice and others now are claiming FD did it. FD just offered styles of play. And there is no additional risk in open that is true, just different types of risk. Ziggy said it best I think.

The fallacy is stating: Playing in Open means more risk. Risk is determined to where you are inside the bubble. Risk is also determined whether you fly alone or in a Wing in Open. And to what extend you have progressed in the Game.

You can never completely negate the risk in open. You can lower it, but it's always there.

You can never completly negate it in solo either

- - - Updated - - -

Solo may be a better choice if your only goal is to grind. I don;t argue that the modes should be equal end equivalent, I say that the field is leveled because everyone has equal and equivalent access to all of the modes. If you are looking for some PvP action, Open is surly the way to go. If you want to concentrate on a PvE goal, open may be better suited. That you feel that open is your preferred mode, then you have to accept the results of that choice.

There is a parade of "where is everyone", "where can I find a fight", "we need to incentivize open" threads. I dare say just as many "I got ganked, so I'm going to solo" threads. I've seen open referred to as a "wasteland', 'ghost town', and 'deserted' by others frequently, so I think you may have to readjust your view there.

In this thread alone, there are a number of players that have said they just plain prefer solo. Because of connections, disabilities, shyness, or just a quiet place to wind down from the trials of everyday life. There is even a large group of players that expected to get a completely offline version of Elite, but were offered SOlo as a reasonable substitution. Players may just prefer to control the people who they interact with. That's all we're talking about here. Just a choice of whom we spend our game time with.

You must have skipped the myriad posts in this very thread, and/or it's cousins, expressing that very sentiment. Read back through the Threadnaught and you just may change your mind. The 'I'm going to solo' threads aren't from established players who fear an insurance claim. It's from new players being preyed upon by the bullies looking for an easy kill. It's not hard to understand their motivation. Leaving the modes available to all even gives those guys a later chance, when they have their 'space legs', for some revenge. When I want to mix it up with other commanders I have to jump dozens of times to find anyone up for a fight.

What extra risk there may be in open is totally selective. You can, as evidenced by many posts, effectively play 'solo' in open if you avoid the hot spots. SPace is vast and many times this thread has been given advice on how to 'stay safe' in open, just to encourage participation. The fact that the games instancing rules can 'hide' you from potential adversaries for any of the uncountable reasons within the matchmaking code, brings the risks in open and solo much closer together. Finally, with the 'submit, boost, jump' mechanic firmly in place, just about anyone can avoid combat more often than not. Any extra risk in open seems so minimal, to an experienced player, that it hardly deserves a reward.

A very well worded post.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

At the risk (no pun intended) of sounding like Mr Contrary I have to say this doesn't match my experience of trading in open - which is the thing I have done more than anything else in this game to date.

1st rule of trading in open - don't get interdicted. It's a lot simpler than it sounds once you know how.

2nd rule of trading in open - if your route gets a player pirate infestation - change it. It's trivial to find a route trading the same stuff for the same amounts if you use the external trade tools.

3rd rule of trading in open - if someone gets a tether on you (say you fell asleep or something) submit - 4 pips to shields - press the button to select to pre-defined Hyperspace jump and high wake it as soon as the timer clears. You won't be followed.

Risk in open averted/eradicated - no problem. I didn't even know about high waking till a few months ago. And most of the time I don't see any player pirates anyway (just traders). And I'm about 100 ly from Founders so hardly in the sticks.

I'm not saying open is insanely risky, it's not. What im saying is, it's riskier than solo, npcs scale to your skill level, and there's no blockades, or hotspots with npcs. Traders could follow your 3 rules or just, the one. Always trade in solo.

Bounty hunters and pirates have a reason to play in open, more potential reward than just farming npcs. It's harder to find and catch targets but when you do they generally pay more. For miners, traders, and explorers (tho not as much as the first 2), it's just more risk and inconvenience for zero potential gain. That's where the imbalance exists.

- - - Updated - - -

You can never completly negate it in solo either

I was talking purely about the added player risk, the npc risk is the same since they are in both modes.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Is Open in a Wing in backwaters of the galaxy also riskier than solo?

 

[Schpam]

If I had a say in what mode Elite should focus on, it would be that the game was focused on Open-Mode play. However, then we'd have to address the valid issues players have with being forced into playing solely in the Open-mode environment. I think players who find a hardcore environment that is exclusively driven by PvP uncomfortable and not fun are perfectly valid in their feelings. It's not natural to be combative and competitive all the time, but is that what Open-Mode should be centered around? It might be in the current reality of E, but I don't think it should be. It is only this way because of how shallow the virtual world of E really is. It takes a very simple approach to how players interact with each other and it appears (to me, at least) to favor an outcome that isn't the natural inclination of people, that of a confrontation (ie: combat).

If I put two human beings in a closed room and told them that there is only one way out of this room, I bet these two people would default to a state of cooperation with each other to solve this mutual problem together. That is because I think people are naturally inclined to cooperate unless specifically motivated to do otherwise.

Now, if I put the same two people in a room with the same instructions, "there is only one way out of this room", but then stuck a knife into table between them, now what do you think the likely outcome might be? The solution hasn't changed, it doesn't involve violence, but the longer the problem goes unresolved I would predict the likelihood of violence increases. By sticking the knife in the table I've primed the situation and implied violence is the ideal solution.

Video games are great at putting people into virtual rooms and then sticking a knife in the table to encourage a confrontation. Elite Dangerous does this too, even if it isn't supposed to be intentional. It is because of this that the Open-Mode will remain bias towards the least natural and most uncomfortable reduction of human interactions to the lowest common denominator, that of confrontation and violence.


To me... when every thing always predictably ends in violence, it can be just as boring and uninteresting as playing entirely in Solo-Mode with nothing but the predictable behavior of NPC's. That's not really a good model for a praise worthy open world sandbox game. Even if it has 4 billion star systems to explore.

 

[Mouse]

I'm not saying open is insanely risky, it's not. What im saying is, it's riskier than solo, npcs scale to your skill level, and there's no blockades, or hotspots with npcs. Traders could follow your 3 rules or just, the one. Always trade in solo.

Bounty hunters and pirates have a reason to play in open, more potential reward than just farming npcs. It's harder to find and catch targets but when you do they generally pay more. For miners, traders, and explorers (tho not as much as the first 2), it's just more risk and inconvenience for zero potential gain. That's where the imbalance exists.

- - - Updated - - -

I was talking purely about the added player risk, the npc risk is the same since they are in both modes.

But what added risk? Annoyance isn't a risk, And everything humans can do NPCs can as well. What humans choose to do is different so yes the risks are different, but there is no added risk. And as Ziggy said it is selective.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Is Open in a Wing in backwaters of the galaxy also riskier than solo?

less risky, but also less reward. 4 people can easily clear a CZ or a high res forcing you to wait on more to spawn in.

- - - Updated - - -

But what added risk? Annoyance isn't a risk, And everything humans can do NPCs can as well. What humans choose to do is different so yes the risks are different, but there is no added risk. And as Ziggy said it is selective.

Like I said, npcs take into account your skill level, ship power level and spawn according, Players don't. There's also player created, "hotspots" for lack of a better term, that don't exist in solo.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

If open or solo or group cannot determine risk or reward, should the discussion not turn towards or at least include the other factors?

 

[Tuub t Tute]

I can see how from the perspective of a player happy to engage in non-consensual pvp, that PowerPlay might have given rise to the idea that more opportunities would be available.

Give me a little latitude to try and make an example. I will agree to say that for players that are at least neutral about the idea of pvp, Open may have suggested to them more opportunities than they find within the game.

Elite was always a solo game. ED gave the opportunity to try and achieve things in co-op with trusted friends.
-
ED also gave the opportunity, for players that were okay with it, that they could expose themselves to combative pvp situations. If they could find other players who were suitably predisposed, they could play miniature games of capture the flag, or base defence, or other variants of games you play at Laser Tag or Paintball.

The important thing, is that these were only ever offered as games within games. They were the possibility for small groups to test themselves against "the opposition". There was no possibility that these skirmishes could amount to anything beyond the sum of the enjoyment of the participants.
-
I can imagine for a pvp positive CMDR, that the realisation of the very real limitations of pvp in the Elite galaxy must be galling. I am not wanting to be all smug and gloaty about it. I can only suppose it must have caused several players to quit the game in disgust at its lack of confrontational pvp. That is before we even get anywhere near the issue of blockades being impossible due to instancing and the free mode movement.

I'm not going to say I sympathise with pvpers, because I don't. I can have a level of understanding of their annoyance and desire to change the game, even though I steadfastly oppose their position.