There clearly is a want for such a mode, but if you can do that already in groups, is a mode necessary?
- Status
There clearly is a want for such a mode, but if you can do that already in groups, is a mode necessary?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Private Groups are not advertised from the start menu - they have to be identified using out-of-game means and joined (and maintained - a not insignificant task).
The fact that we have a single "anything goes" open access mode is used as a justification, to an extent, for some of the behaviour that occurs in it - if one wants to play among strangers, one has to play in Open.
If there was another open access mode, available from the start menu, with a restriction on PvP then there'd be no reason for Mobius' to spend so much time maintaining the group he created - and everyone would have the option of playing PvP&E or just PvE.
(by PvP in this case, I refer to direct PvP, i.e. player vs player combat / piracy / etc., rather than indirect PvP, i.e. trading, PowerPlay, etc.)
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Some people think that there is a need for an incentive (other than player interaction) to play in Open. (although that was a small point in the list of demands for more content)
If you are able to provide more 'proof', preferably that isn't from a fairly guild centric, (as far as games are concerned), medium like Reddit, I will happily read it.
My reason for that statement is that I realize this makes the game feel as shallow as it does. The mode interaction means there is only one way to play against others, you have to out-grind them. CG's and Power Play are perfect examples of this. <shrug> Acceptance of this makes playing a lot easier. FDev won't change the way they design the game, so there's really only one way to compete against others.
Another strawman, you're on a roll.
Not at all, just not particularly impressed with clearly biased 'evidence'.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Players who choose to place themselves in direct competition with others will choose to play in Open regardless - however, it takes both sides of the contest to choose to do so for it to work. That it would seem that many players eschew Open and move to Solo or Private Groups for CGs and/or Powerplay would seem to say as much about their approach to the game as it does about the game modes and switching feature.
I agree that it is very unlikely that Frontier will change the game design this late in the day - the three game modes and mode switching give players the promised freedom to select who they play with / among when they want to and the shared galaxy state is a core feature of the game that allows all players, regardless of game mode or platform, to experience the player-affected galaxy.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I play mostly in open (except for times when lag in super-cruise in Open makes the game barely respond to control inputs making it unplayable) - just last night I was in a trading Wing - extra credits from trade dividends that can't be gained in Solo....
No! Playing in a contested area, where player density is high, means those that are playing to 'win'/collect more PvE trophies go to Private. Those that are looking for Role Playing/PK'ing/PvP go to Open.
Any 'player interaction' is a waste of time in any grind game. It slows down collection. Maybe this is about people's approaches. If I get involved with CG's, PP, or BGS, it's with one goal in mind...to get the best reward from the game for my efforts--or attain a self created goal. If any of these involve others, it inevitably means grinding out more than the opposition. In this games design, grind is the equalizer.<shrug>
Last edited:
So if I've understood this right, the new crack of the whip is;
Leave the game as it is, then add one more mode on top of the current set up - that once joined you are locked in to.
You can only see / interact with others who have joined the locked open (?) so this way, you know everyone around you played and earnt things under
the same conditions as yourself (?)
Apart from FD clearly stating they are only having having one BGS, and they are not willing to budge on that - that whole idea would be built on the same BGS as the other modes.
Leave the game as it is, then add one more mode on top of the current set up - that once joined you are locked in to.
You can only see / interact with others who have joined the locked open (?) so this way, you know everyone around you played and earnt things under
the same conditions as yourself (?)
Apart from FD clearly stating they are only having having one BGS, and they are not willing to budge on that - that whole idea would be built on the same BGS as the other modes.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's what I meant when I referred to "direct" competition (as opposed to indirect from another game mode)....
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The request for another Open-Only mode is usually joined with a requirement that the new mode has a totally separate galaxy state so that those players who choose to inhabit Open-Only only compete with players that they can directly interact with.
A new locked-in mode would, I expect, be relatively cheap and simple to implement - it would be a one-time flag setting on a commander's records and another group setting for the matchmaking system.
A new separate galaxy state (and all the server requirements and curation / maintenance that that would entail) would neither, I expect, be cheap or simple to implement.
Well you seemed to state the converse..I'm rushing trying to get out of the house...so my bad if I misinterpreted!
Just a follow up...or reiteration (?!) The mode switching design is the reason for the grind....and lack of face to face PvP. It is the only way all 3 modes can maintain equal footing. The choice of allowing face to face PvP (pew pew) could be argued as a poor decision, since the two worst (least profitable) professions, currently, appear to directly rely on it (pirates and bounty hunters), but really are expected to be PvE based, like all the other professions.
Again, this is designed this way and there is nothing that will be done to change it...but everyone (20-30 different gamers, with thousands of hours in hundreds of games) that I know that I explain this to, says the same thing...'bad design'. All I can do is <shrug> and say...'yeah but once you get past this, the game isn't bad...it's just real grindy'.
We know FD won't have another BGS on the go, they made that quite clear.
That being said, if people want to ask for something to be added to the game (without the calls for nerfs / changes to the current modes / unfair buffs and so on) then I do not have a problem with that. People can ask for extra stuff all they like, I fully support more choices / options in any game.
If those same people want to ignore FDs stance on the BGS, then to be honest - it is their free time they are wasting asking for another BGS to go with the new things they want, so let them ask. I do not work for FD, so it's not really down to me to say "no" to requests for new / extra things being added, so FD can remind them that they only want 1 BGS.
Now when people revert back (or a new thread is merged) to the old whining that the current set up needs changing - can someone shout me up, I'm going to have a snooze in Codys cupboard, while people talk about the benefits of adding something without taking anything away
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The existence of mode switching allows players the freedom of choice as to which mode to play in. If there is no face-to-face PvP then that is because one side or the other (or possibly even both) have chosen to play in a mode other than Open - is that the "fault" of the mode switching feature or the players themselves?
It's only bad design for those who feel that anyone they ever encounter (along with their assets) should be locked into the same mode that they encountered them in. For those players who do not rely on knowing that other players cannot escape them it's not, in my estimation, a problem....
In the latest Dev update, FD have again stated that everyone will remain in the same background simulation, no matter their mode of play or which "season" of content they have bought up to. Makes sense to me, and I can't find any way of making a Purest Open Only mode work around that wouldn't require fundamental changes to the game.
- Status