But you still seem to be unable to acknowledge that the thing that decides these PP and CG events is relative number of players on each side, pure and simple. That's far and away the biggest imbalance - the decider - even if everyone was in open at the same time and everything else was perfect - that everyone seems happy to ignore.
- Status
But you still seem to be unable to acknowledge that the thing that decides these PP and CG events is relative number of players on each side, pure and simple. That's far and away the biggest imbalance - the decider - even if everyone was in open at the same time and everything else was perfect - that everyone seems happy to ignore.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Mode switching, for whatever reason (i.e. it is completely up to the player) has been a core game feature from the start, just as the three game modes and single shared galaxy state.
There are those who would like that one of these features was removed and another duplicated.
I don't expect that Frontier will do either.
Last edited:
Ok. It makes perfect sense that the number of players on each side would have a massive (if not defining) influence on an outcome. I don't know if I've ever said that it doesn't.
But what happens if those numbers are fairly close? Better still, what happens if those numbers are exactly the same? Now, forgive me if I misunderstand the aspects of PP here. Let's take a scenario...
Faction X has 100 willing participants. They carry widgets from point A to point B in order to help their faction. Faction Y has 100 willing participants too. They carry widgets from point C to point D (or are they going B to A?) in order to help their faction. So far, in theory, this should come to pretty close a tie (ignoring travel time, and all other variances).
Now, what happens if 10 of Faction X's players decide to start picking off Faction Y pilots heading to point D? The numbers are still the same. But some interesting possibilities come to play. Clearly, Faction X has 10 fewer players delivering widgets. That's a disadvantage - let's get that out of the way. But now it becomes known that Faction X is killing around point D. What if a Faction Y player starts thinking "I'd like to deliver these widgets, but I also like my ship. Maybe I might sit this one out?" What if 10 Faction Y players start thinking that way? What if more? What if they don't but every time Faction X makes a kill, that Faction Y player has to start from scratch at point C? Since there is only Open, the option to fly Solo to avoid Faction X isn't available.
I honestly don't know how much of a difference it would make. PvP may very well be a futile exercise. But the effectiveness of PvP or relative numbers per faction weren't really the points in discussion.
Last edited:
Got it. Updated my other post.
- - - Updated - - -
Indeed. One of the big reasons why I think having mode switching as it is outweighs any minor problems with it.
Indeed. One of the big reasons why I think having mode switching as it is outweighs any minor problems with it.
Simple exercise, compare the small number of people complaining about mode switching to the tens of thousands (at least) that don't.
And this is exactly the kind of gameplay players were basically promised they wouldn't be forced into, thanks to the promise of being able to exclude anyone we wanted, for whichever reason, from meeting us. If others were allowed to negatively impact what I wanted to do, I wouldn't be here at all, and I doubt I'm the only one.
Also, for the players that do want to engage in that kind of gameplay, it exists as an option by merely choosing to play in Open. Those players are just prevented from ruining the game for the ones that don't want to be forced into PvP.
Simple exercise, compare the small number of people complaining about mode switching to the tens of thousands (at least) that don't.
Ha. I don't think comparing forum numbers will get you far. As I have said before though, there is a reason why this topic keeps on coming up.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
As I have said before though, there is a reason why this topic keeps on coming up.
There are several reasons - yet every single player who pledged or bought the game did so with the potential for them to read up on the fact that it is flexi-player rather than locked in to a particular mode and that all modes (and now platforms) share the same galaxy state....
The main reason that proposals for change keep coming up, in my opinion, is that Frontier have stuck to their design intent from the outset, through development, to release - and beyond. Some players don't like it and will continue to petition for change. Other players are quite happy with the current arrangement and push back against proposals for change.
.... and thus it continues....
Got it. Updated my other post.
You being forced into this kind of gameplay is irrelevant for the purposes of the scenario. We were discussing whether Open with its own BGS would make any difference. The scenario was based on a situation where Solo was not available (either because it didn't exist or because Solo did not affect the same BGS) because that was required to consider the effect of PvP actions in an Open mode with its own BGS.
What stirs my chowder is the amount of open-only-and-no-other-mode players who come here to argue that position & eventually say something like, "I ground in solo to build up cash reserves, then came into open" or "I was destroying many ships so I ducked into solo to rearm & refuel." It isn't everyone in open, but it pops up pretty regularly. Aren't these exactly the kind of players people in open denigrate as 'exploiters'?
It's a player problem, not a mode problem.
It's a player problem, not a mode problem.
Last edited:
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
No one knows whether an Open only mode with it's own BGS would be different, well it probably would be, but no one knows how different, or in what way different. The players advocating such a mode believe their actions would count for more... That's debatable, as they are referring to shooting other players as a means to influence events, and of course, they'd have to find said players in order to shoot them.
If you are talking simply about PP, then as I think I have said before, the modes very likely balance each other out, those playing Open can engage in the offensive / defensive skirmishes they want, while those in Groups or Solo can get on and deliver widgets. The fact is, in an Open only mode, there probably wouldn't be any widgets delivered, so the actual power struggle would likely stagnate.
I believe that playing a game in such an open ended manner would soon become tedious. Open only advocates claim that fighting NPCs is so boring, but at least you get to fight them, they are spawned for you, and if you are bounty hunting, you will get some fights and some bounties by the end of your session. No such assurance can be there in an Open only mode, especially an instanced one where there is never any guarantee that you will ever meet your RL opponents.
Much of the 'richness' in the game comes from the environment and the content that the game creates / spawns for you. PvP is an added ingredient for those who want it, and there seem to be quite a few people out there PvP'ing happily and consensually. You might want to ask why those complaining so persistently about this subject aren't out there doing the same.
I have a confession to make.
I mode switched last night.
I was flying about in the Bacon Cats group for a while, playing with friends and doing the usual bacony things...Then, on the spur of the moment, I decided to switch to Mobius and cheer on all the commanders shuttling bacon to Bacon City.
I mode switched and... and... I don't feel sad about it one bit!
I mode switched last night.
I was flying about in the Bacon Cats group for a while, playing with friends and doing the usual bacony things...Then, on the spur of the moment, I decided to switch to Mobius and cheer on all the commanders shuttling bacon to Bacon City.
I mode switched and... and... I don't feel sad about it one bit!
The irony is that an open-only mode would be even emptier than the open mode we have now. Force the mode choice and there are many who, for reasons of their own, would choose other modes than open (and already do but at least they currently have the option to come back). The difference is that you would lose a (probably significant) proportion of those who swap modes regularly to suit their mood but would not choose open as their fulltime mode. So we KNOW that a segregated open mode WOULD be different in at least that way. Is that what we want? The actions and attitudes of some players are already driving some others to avoid open (either permanently, or at least for certain activities). Do we really want to exacerbate that further by depopulating open even more by actually forcing people to make a choice?
Particularly, I believe that at first the result would very likely be decided by who have the largest number of dedicated players anyway; players afraid of engaging in PvP exist in every power, so it would even out, the change in the results would be minimal if any. But, without the buffer of being able to opt out of PvP without negative consequences, I believe the balance of power between the Powers would quickly devolve into a few Powers that aren't in conflict becoming exceptionally large and the rest being more or less abandoned, the same way nearly every single factional PvP I've seen in a MMO devolved into one-sided fights because one faction got more populous enough that it wasn't even a contest.
It is my belief that, for a factional PvP system to remain balanced, the game must provide enough of a bonus for playing in the less populated factions that, if the imbalance becomes large enough, it starts being better to fight and lose for the smaller faction than to be carried to a win in the larger faction. Very few games implement something even close, and ED isn't among those. IMHO the only thing currently preventing a gross imbalance in Power Play is that players can fight for a Power even if they completely eschew PvP, which makes being in a less popular power not much of a disadvantage.
Please mister music, will you play?
laffing 2 bank... plz lets just kill all and every game with timezones+mmo then..
ridiculous pov + counter argument really.
These are RL issues , having a Klingon cloaking device in a game can be changed
It would be ok-ish, because people would not want to be locked to solo or private groups forever - because in the long run, Open play is the more interesting mode. However, not as high relatively with the current crime-system.
The current open-play shows us exactly this. People are afraid of open because of rampant ganking and murdering with no penalty. And given the choice between risk-free netflix grinding and open-play grinding they are going to choose the easier option every time. Inb4 influx of people ganking new players in Eravate, Kremm and other places with zero risk - oh wait...
Last edited:
It is interesting that you bring up other games where it already has proven that your style of game play is not sustainable nor enjoyable for the masses, and his point of view and argument are far from ridiculous, in fact they are rather spot on.. which is why you responded the way you did.. if you can't counter a logical argument.. ridicule it to try and make others believe it is stupid... or ignore it as you have done before as well. But sorry, that won't work. It was a pretty good point that Zadian made.
People are not "afraid" of open, to say so shows your mindset and explains why you cannot understand why people do NOT WANT TO PLAY YOUR WAY. People don't want to play in the same mode as jerks so they found better pastures. Implements to the crime system will help, but jerks will still try to be jerks. Leave them with an empty mode and they will either go after each other or maybe realize their play style makes it so they end up with an empty playground.
And there are no easier options.. every player has a different skill ability and level.. what you deem easy some feel is hard.. Plus you've already shown that you will abuse a system you deem "easy" to get what you want so that you can go into open with the nice shiny toys and then lamblaste and ridicule anyone who plays in ways other than your current play style .
- Status