Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[Sylveria]

...some people demonstrate by their actions/posts that they just don't care how their playstyle affects anyone even when it's obvious from the forums and from someone's loadout that they aren't looking for combat...

Nailed it. +1

- - - Updated - - -

No-one has to be the bad guy - they choose to be and justify it with the premise that there is a need to be fulfilled.

Struggle and loss are able to be found with the increasingly capable NPCs.

^ This exactly. People who consider themselves to be "doing the game a service" are no different from those solicitors you ignore who knock on your door every day, IMO.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Not long. A lot of players who are happy with the current situation would complain. As you know some complain that there are ways to successfully avoid PvP combat right now via mode switching.

Btw: The methods to avoid or flee form combat wouldn't always work. For players who absolutely don't want to get involved into anything related to PvP (including using a PvP capable ship) there should be an Open PvE mode.



Players would have to choose the right ship, the right modules, weapons and utility slot modules for their way of playing the game. They need to find the right balance between the things they want to do.

There is an open PvE group called Moebius.

 

[Sylveria]

OK... no.

Someone does not have to be the bad guy.. they can if they want to .. but they don't "Have" to be. If someone wants a player to be a bad guy instead of an NPC.. that is one thing.. ganking people and trying to ruin others gameplay isn't playing the bad guy, it is being a huge jerk.. and struggle and loss? The only one suffering loss is the trader.. there wasn't much struggle as they were completely overwhelmed.. as for a story without struggle and loss is boring.. must be a lot of bored gankers out there.. for their targets were no threat to them..

And eventually space will be cold and lonely and the wolves will end up hunting each other into extinction. I say let them continue.

 

[Robert Maynard]

There is an open PvE group called Moebius.

Mobius group is not Open. It is a Private Group that, firstly, players need to discover, then apply, be accepted, then play.

An Open-PvE mode would be officially supported in the game as a launcher menu choice, i.e.:

• Open-PvP;
• Open-PvE;
• Private Group;
• Solo

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

Different persons have different preferences. I pretty much only play PvP when it doesn't have consequences, or at least not lasting ones. And if someone else engaging in PvP can influence my PvE there is a good chance I will leave the game, any game, over it.
…

Consequences are needed in PvP as otherwise players would do what ever they want and that often includes things that a lot of other players don't like. Consequences can be harsh or not, it depends on the desired effect. It's not just about having to pay insurance, it's about motivating players not to do certain things or to do others. A consequence could be getting a bounty or getting payed for killing a wanted criminal. It could be getting reputation that results in lower cost for things at stations.
They can be punishment or rewards.

btw: consequences are needed in PvE

And yes, this game needs an open PvE mode.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

And eventually space will be cold and lonely and the wolves will end up hunting each other into extinction. I say let them continue.

Truth is many players still want to play in a "Dangerous" galaxy, kind of the original vision of the game, and it is in the name. I doubt Open PvP players will disappear because they introduce a PvE mode. Basically Moebius will just transfer over to there, and little will change. Lots of traders and explorers still like the excitement of being in a dynamic universe with an element of surprise and a real threat of destruction. Maybe they will duck into PvE instead of Solo when things get dangerous, but it still leaves the community goal system a bit lacking when it comes to blockades etc... Also, most players in Open are really just friendly, and there is a giant misconception about the actual hostility of these players.

 

[Sylveria]

Not necessarily "easily" - it depends on the defending ship and loadout - it is the attacker who decides to start the engagement after all - target selection is part of that decision making process.

As you allude to, some attackers only attack ships that are highly likely to be unable to defend themselves - so no, definitely not "easily"....

This actually highlights the "problem" when it comes to non-consent. The attacker ALWAYS has advantage over another- as they not only choose the engagement (i.e., if and when) but also they've often prepared in advance "for" an engagement.

The counter-argument to this always seems to be "you should have prepared to be attacked (i.e., "you consent when you undock, etc.") yet there is no way to prepare for the plethora of variables out there, and some "roles" are especially difficult and unbalanced for this preparation.

Show me how a T6 fit ship loaded with cargo has the ability to defend itself against an Anaconda simply by undocking. Go ahead.

Yeah, I thought not.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Mobius group is not Open. It is a Private Group that, firstly, players need to discover, then apply, be accepted, then play.

An Open-PvE mode would be officially supported in the game as a launcher menu choice, i.e.:

• Open-PvP;
• Open-PvE;
• Private Group;
• Solo

That is just semantics though. It serves the same function as an Open PvE group.

- - - Updated - - -

Mobius group is not Open. It is a Private Group that, firstly, players need to discover, then apply, be accepted, then play.

An Open-PvE mode would be officially supported in the game as a launcher menu choice, i.e.:

• Open-PvP;
• Open-PvE;
• Private Group;
• Solo

Oh is it actually coming, this PvE menu option?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Consequences are needed in PvP as otherwise players would do what ever they want and that often includes things that a lot of other players don't like. Consequences can be harsh or not, it depends on the desired effect. It's not just about having to pay insurance, it's about motivating players not to do certain things or to do others. A consequence could be getting a bounty or getting payed for killing a wanted criminal. It could be getting reputation that results in lower cost for things at stations.
They can be punishment or rewards.

btw: consequences are needed in PvE

And yes, this game needs an open PvE mode.

There are no real consequences for players who attack others in the game. Bounties are currently a bit of a joke - move one system over and it's basically irrelevant.

Financial penalties for affluent players "trading down" to a relatively small combat ship are all but meaningless. Conversely, financial penalties for traders losing their ship and a cargo that may be more valuable than the insurance excess on the ship can be high by comparison.

No disagreement on the need for an Open-PvE mode.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That is just semantics though. It serves the same function as an Open PvE group.

Oh is it actually coming, this PvE menu option?

Not semantic at all - while Mobius may serve the function it does not have the visibility to the player-base that Open does (or an Open-PvE mode would).

We have heard nothing at all from Frontier that might indicate that an Open-PvE mode is even being considered.

 

[Sylveria]

If ways to successfully avoid combat were to be introduced, how long should we expect that it would take for the asymmetric combat specialists to complain bitterly about the changes and call for the nerf bat to be wielded?



The fragility of the dedicated trading ships is one particular bugbear of mine.



Except....

There are no fixed roles - any player can adopt any role as they please - or none.

There are no fixed "roles", but the "role" you choose is highly dependent on the ship and loadout. The game has basis in this- as everything you do is dependent on your fitting.

If you undock with a trading ship, you're "prepared" for trading, therefore you are a "trader"- and equally unprepared for combat and vice versa.

If there was a way to "balance" this aspect- I suspect you'd see a lot less complaint- (note the "lots less", not negated completely) but I really don't see with current game structure and mechanics how this would be possible.

 

[Marra Morgan]

Show me how a T6 fit ship loaded with cargo has the ability to defend itself against an Anaconda simply by undocking. Go ahead.

Fit chaff launchers and a shield booster in the utility slots. Have a system to jump to highlighted in your Nav panel.
An Anaconda is less agile than a T6, so you may be able to win the interdiction attempt. If it's not going so well, submit.
Put max pips to shields, chaff and boost away whilst charging up the FSD to make a hyperspace jump outta there.
If you lose your shields, hit silent running but watch the heat build-up.

Yeah, I thought not.

You're welcome.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Not semantic at all - while Mobius may serve the function it does not have the visibility to the player-base that Open does (or an Open-PvE mode would).

We have heard nothing at all from Frontier that might indicate that an Open-PvE mode is even being considered.

I for one am against the game mode, as it further divides the community into separate blocks, and makes the galaxy a far less interesting place. If there was a mass exodus of trade only players, then it would destroy the PVP piracy aspect, as there would be no traders left to chase. Having been a trader who has survived many PvP attacks, my personal opinion is that the game would have been a lot duller without these encounters. It would be a nerf of atomic proportions, and would have detrimental long term effects on the games development. Also, as with any Online game, the one tool that all players have at their disposal is the ability to engage in communication and diplomacy. It may not always work, but it is a legitimate means of avoiding conflict. I am glad they are not considering introducing this game mode, and I hope they work on Horizons, Player Factions, Crafting, More ships, and fixing the utter mess that is Powerplay.

 

[Sylveria]

We have heard nothing at all from Frontier that might indicate that an Open-PvE mode is even being considered.

IMO it would be extremely helpful for FD's metrics to gauge just what needs to be addressed in vision moving forward. They can simply look at the statistics of players in Open in the two modes to see the importance of focus.

What's more "important" in a game? Hmm, let's take a look at the numbers, shall we? So far, there seems to be a majority of players in Solo... what does that say?

- - - Updated - - -

Fit chaff launchers and a shield booster in the utility slots. Have a system to jump to highlighted in your Nav panel.
An Anaconda is less agile than a T6, so you may be able to win the interdiction attempt. If it's not going so well, submit.
Put max pips to shields, chaff and boost away whilst charging up the FSD to make a hyperspace jump outta there.
If you lose your shields, hit silent running but watch the heat build-up.


You're welcome.

Just ROFLMAO. Seriously- it's apparent you've never actually done this.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

You do have options to evade combat, you can avoid interdiction, warp away etc.. They HAVE given you all kinds of ways to avoid confrontation. You can even talk your way out of a fight if you have the wits.

Sure, it's possible, but just having the option doesn't make it good gameplay.

There is an open PvE group called Moebius.

It's a private group that requires its members to play by the rules. It's not an open PvE mode. Huge difference.

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

Sure, it's possible, but just having the option doesn't make it good gameplay.



It's a private group that requires its members to play by the rules. It's not an open PvE mode. Huge difference.

How "Huge" is the difference? Also, what do you propose that could be introduced that would aid in your fleeing a fight, and still be "good gameplay". Is interdiction not good gameplay? Another player above highlighted all the things you can do to aid you in evasion. Sounds like fun to me

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I for one am against the game mode, as it further divides the community into separate blocks,.

imo there are 2 ways FD could go about improving the game for a huge number of people .

1) keep the game modes as they are but have a huge rethink on legal repercussions and system security in the different sec levels of space.

OR

2) implement a PvE mode, similar to Mobius but officially supported.

So long as Mobius does not leave, I can get by if FD take option 3 and do nothing... BUT the second Mobius moves on will be the time when I have a rethink of how I have to play ED (and what ever I do it will not be putting myself in front of the PvPers guns in open if the zero consequences to their actions remains in play.!)

 

[The Wallet Inspector]

IMO it would be extremely helpful for FD's metrics to gauge just what needs to be addressed in vision moving forward. They can simply look at the statistics of players in Open in the two modes to see the importance of focus.

What's more "important" in a game? Hmm, let's take a look at the numbers, shall we? So far, there seems to be a majority of players in Solo... what does that say?

- - - Updated - - -



Just ROFLMAO. Seriously- it's apparent you've never actually done this.

Also, to answer what FD should learn from the statistics regarding solo, it should indicate that the majority of players do not want to interact with other players, and prefer to play alone. To infer something more from this would be unscientific at best.

- - - Updated - - -

imo there are 2 ways FD could go about improving the game for a huge number of people .

1) keep the game modes as they are but have a huge rethink on legal repercussions and system security in the different sec levels of space.

OR

2) implement a PvE mode, similar to Mobius but officially supported.

So long as Mobius does not leave, I can get by if FD take option 3 and do nothing... BUT the second Mobius moves on will be the time when I have a rethink of how I have to play ED (and what ever I do it will not be putting myself in front of the PvPers guns in open if the zero consequences to their actions remains in play.!)

I would prefer option one, just increase the consequences for murder of other players. Perhaps make the bounty a Pilots Federation one, unless it is a Powerplay/Faction War kill. It will have the knock on effect of encouraging more PvPers to bounty hunt and protect traders. My group already does when we fly together, sometimes. Depends if there is a powerplay goal, then we will target traders who want to play in open and are fortifying our rivals. It is always good fun, we usually steal the cargo and leave them floating, singing the praises of Duval.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

How "Huge" is the difference?

Official vs. private.
No PvP possible vs. PvP possible but not done because every member agrees not to do PvP
Open for everybody vs. invite only

That are for me huge differences.

Also, what do you propose that could be introduced that would aid in your fleeing a fight, and still be "good gameplay". Is interdiction not good gameplay? Another player above highlighted all the things you can do to aid you in evasion. Sounds like fun to me

It's not so much about what is implemented as it is about how it is. In my opinion it's about the chance of evading an interdiction. It's about the shield, armor and speed values of ships. It's about how chaff or ECMs work. There are a lot of variables that can be changed and adjusted. The result can be a gameplay that is fun/interesting/entertaining for a lot of players or that only is fun for a few. In my opinion the game should be fun/interesting/entertaining for the majority of the players, if that's the case I consider it good gameplay.

And if those things others mentioned sound fun to you, you might want to try it someday

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I would prefer option one, just increase the consequences for murder of other players. Perhaps make the bounty a Pilots Federation one, unless it is a Powerplay/Faction War kill. It will have the knock on effect of encouraging more PvPers to bounty hunt and protect traders. My group already does when we fly together, sometimes. Depends if there is a powerplay goal, then we will target traders who want to play in open and are fortifying our rivals. It is always good fun, we usually steal the cargo and leave them floating, singing the praises of Duval.

Personally so would I....... Right now Mobius is a band aid... a fairly effective one mind you, and for those of us lucky enough to be in there it is ok... but a fraction of the player base know about it and there is but 1 point of failure before the whole thing falls on its ass.