Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Glad you guys like it - it may be the straw that finally pushes me away from this game!

That is a shame... Not sure why this would push you away however, other than an extra line in your right hand panel you can ignore CQC and pretend it does not exist.

And I've made over 5,000 credits in a mode no one can stop me earning in ...
What do you think people make of that, CQC funding my guns for an Anaconda
[

LOL you are such a cheat.. earning credits in an "open" type mode and then using them unfairly in solo!........ you should be locked out of solo, its not fair on the NPC 's

PS at that rate of earnings, by the time you can afford the guns for an Anaconda through CQC profit, they will probably be in your local gun shop for the real anaconda

 

[Robert Maynard]

Not sure if anyone has posted this before but I am now. Also, first post. Someone told me I should put this here.

It gets suggested from time to time.

Merged into the appropriate thread.

 

[Jockey79]

This is what I thought too, but I've been interdicted in solo twice now by aggressive wings; once by two Sidewinders and an Eagle (I think). The other "set of three" or whatever they are had a Python anchor. Just over the last week or so (pre-patch).

NPCs have wings in all modes - I was on about a Human Type 9 in Solo, does not have a support wing or the other bonus of wings.

(The bonus exists in the game right now, do you feel forced to wing?)

Yes. To be frank.

I play in a private (personal) group mainly and when I am trading in my Anaconda I constantly feel like I have to wing up with people (who I know in real life) in lesser trade ships.
They want to get the extra big money from my vouchers, yet I get a pittance from their tiny trade ships and no added protection for the group - so as well as trying to do my own trade.
I've become the group protector and had to arm my Anaconda, so for more risk to my ship - I'm getting next to nothing and having to protect people for a sum of cash that does not cover what I've lost from my own trading.

I'd sooner have a system when I can pay someone myself for a real escort ship to come with me, or at least be paid by those I'm with to cover what I have lost out on changing my config to escort them.
I have no problem handing out 100k, or 200k (per trip / each way) to someone in a full on combat ship to stay by me, I'd still be making a decent profit and they earn a decent wage.

 

[Dogoncrook]

I guess it's a matter of interpretation.

You could argue that FD have given CQC PVP a small reward with credits to be carried over to the main game.

Once again though (3rd time) they've put the competition in "open" PVP CQC mode which offers nothing for solo players who aren't into PVP - and they've given people 100,000 reasons to want to play it - which is presumably why we're already seeing threads about CQC hacks.

But on the other hand CQC is tacked on and someone playing CQC makes no "progress" in the main game.

So yeah - mixed messages!

That's a good point, they literally pay to entice people into open. While I don't think they will dramatically shift one way or the other, adding slight bonuses to open really isn't a big deal.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That's a good point, they literally pay to entice people into open. While I don't think they will dramatically shift one way or the other, adding slight bonuses to open really isn't a big deal.

Other than competitions, the only bonus that is not available in all three modes is Wing trade dividends - which are available in two modes out of three. Hopefully this will be extended to all three modes when NPC Wingmen are introduced.

 

[Dogoncrook]

Other than competitions, the only bonus that is not available in all three modes is Wing trade dividends - which are available in two modes out of three. Hopefully this will be extended to all three modes when NPC Wingmen are introduced.

Right adding an incentive for people to play together with in-game mechanics crosses the "no right way to play" line, but thousands of dollars doesn't.. I'm not sure how you can square that circle.

That's besides the point anyways, fd does look for ways to get people to play together.

It's fine if you don't want to play in open, I'm not judging or anything, but being angry that company would try and build a community around a product and encourage playing together is both hilarious and sad.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Right adding an incentive for people to play together with in-game mechanics crosses the "no right way to play" line, but thousands of dollars doesn't.. I'm not sure how you can square that circle.

That's besides the point anyways, fd does look for ways to get people to play together.

It's fine if you don't want to play in open, I'm not judging or anything, but being angry that company would try and build a community around a product and encourage playing together is both hilarious and sad.

The CQC competition could only ever be a PvP competition - in a separate game mode - as that is how CQC has been designed and implemented.

It seems, to me at least, that Frontier work to get people to want to play together rather than forcing them to play together - that's a fundamental aspect of the game's design, borne out by the freedoms afforded each player with mode mobility.

What gave you the impression that I don't play in Open or that I am angry?

 

[Mouse]

Not sure if anyone has posted this before but I am now. Also, first post. Someone told me I should put this here.

TL;DR Right now, the economy's "triangle" of players, if you will, is non-existent. I'm talking about the ecosystem where traders are being interdicted by pirates, those traders are paying bounty hunters to defend them from the pirates. Traders <- Pirates <- Bounty Hunters. With half the traders currently in solo, this ecosystem falls apart. Easiest fix would be to have each mode have its own galaxy, such that progression either mode will not progress the "save file" on the other. This way anyone who is actually interested in the multiplayer at all, will have to take part in the galaxy as they climb to whatever ship they desire instead of hiding in solo unless you have an A grade python or whatever.

I personally bought this game because of the pirating. Please don't read this as a rant, more of a suggestion. I am by no extent going to stop playing this game. Especially with mining looking good after 1.4.

As piracy is a career choice often advertised. Every career choice needs to "pay". Doesn't need to be as good as trading, because if it was, no one would trade. But it shouldn't make nothing in comparison. Pirates simply cannot progress in the game after the asp. Imagine, only by pirating, getting a decent python and trying to save up for the top power plant. Would not happen by christmas no way.


Imagine two friends playing this game together right now. Both get cobras and one gets into trading and the other pirating. The pirater will probably be still stuck in his cobra by the time the other has an anaconda. Especially considering a cobra is not a threat to big traders.


How about we start them both out in asps? Nope. Clippers? Pythons? No, no, no. If there were player traders everywhere, then it would work. Bounty hunters hunting player pirates and protecting player traders for a small fee from the trader would be so much fun. Players policing a real good trade route from the dastardly pirates.

You could have player founded, community collaborations. A really good trade route pops up, the traders know this. But so does everyone else. So on social platforms, either in game or not, traders seeking bounty hunters to defend them. Then the pirates would try to attack these traders maybe, suddenly you've got a 3 way situation of trader/bountyhunter/pirate fighting desperately for those sweet sweet profits. Those are hired hunters, then you've got the free roamers just murdering pirate scum wherever they can. Etc. Which would also be a real thing considering how much bounty pirate's have.


But those dreams are also dead because of solo and open modes. The easy way to fix it is to have separate galaxys for solo and open. Progress in solo having no effect on open progression. Then open trading would be a thing, pirating would be a thing and therefore PvP bounty hunting would be a thing. It would be this domino effect of dynamic gameplay. People who actually just want it to be a solo experience, no problem. People who treat this as an MMO can do so.


Even for the pirates in open it sucks right now so much that traders can just combat log and go solo mode, and be about their business. When you ask for only 30t of their cargo even though they are in type 7 or 9, is it because you don't want him leave the trade route? No. Its because if you demand him to fill your cargo hold with slaves or die, he will likely just defect to solo mode and not come back and guess what Mr. Pirate? You just lost your career choice. Have fun space trucking in solo or have fun flying around pretending like what you are doing is actually useful.

I've tested pirating and bounty hunting (non-RES sites etc, SC bounty hunting) extensively. I have tried so hard to make pirating work. But the amount of time it takes to even find a player trader, let alone finding one worth robbing, let alone one who will cooperate or not combat log (I know this is being looked at, hooray). For example yesterday, best trade route around pretty much, on eddb.io/trade/loops. Sure a few traders came by and i robbed them. Over about 10 hours of play. I was also interdicting NPC's on both ends of the route. I made about 500k. Now if I had've been trading on that same route for that long my profits would been 10000x that. Probably about 50 mill.

I've seen the arguments for fun vs profits and "its not about Cr/Hour min/max" etc. Seriously though? The excuse for not being able to make money is that its fun? What kind of game do we have here when, fun going up means profits going down.


In conclusion: Trading should make more money than pirating, yes. But as it stands right now, pirating is a " fun" thing to do which makes no money. Which is a real shame that the most engaging career of the game does not allow you to progress in it. Simple fix:

• Solo and Open Play now have separate progress files.

doing your choice you will have one mode with traders and one mode with pirates wondering where the traders are. Problem is not solo, the problem is as you described.pirate behavior.. but also there are so many pirates vs few traders. You make the comment about "What kind of game do we have here when, fun going up means profits going down." Well fun for the pirate and loss of profit for the trader. Seems like most everyone wants to be the pirates.. but they only want to pirate Human players.. which severely limits their options.. and as more and more traders get nicked.. for traders it becomes a game where there is really no fun or profits.. so they go to solo.. and we have people come and want the modes locked and separated thinking it will suddenly and magically give them soft targets.


Maybe if there was a requirement that anyone wanting to pirate HAS to be a trader for 3 weeks and gets 1 week of pirating.. you get to have your fun, and you get to be fun for someone else. with a 3 to 1 requirement and random picking of who gets to be a pirate for a week.. you should have plenty of targets and those pirates trading get to make profit if they can slip by. Oh.. and the 3 weeks only counts ingame.. if you log for 3 weeks and come back hoping to be a pirate.. nope.. your a trader have fun being a sheep for the wolves.

 

[Mouse]

Right adding an incentive for people to play together with in-game mechanics crosses the "no right way to play" line, but thousands of dollars doesn't.. I'm not sure how you can square that circle.

That's besides the point anyways, fd does look for ways to get people to play together.

It's fine if you don't want to play in open, I'm not judging or anything, but being angry that company would try and build a community around a product and encourage playing together is both hilarious and sad.

Actually what is both hilarious and sad is those who think only open has a a community and play together. Mobius is 12000 strong and growing. We are a good community built around ED

 

[ianw]

It seems, to me at least, that Frontier work to get people to want to play together rather than forcing them to play together - that's a fundamental aspect of the game's design, borne out by the freedoms afforded each player with mode mobility.

Yes - they seem to go down the enticement route - which is a better way to try do it than forcing people.

 

[Dogoncrook]

The CQC competition could only ever be a PvP competition - in a separate game mode - as that is how CQC has been designed and implemented.

It seems, to me at least, that Frontier work to get people to want to play together rather than forcing them to play together - that's a fundamental aspect of the game's design, borne out by the freedoms afforded each player with mode mobility.

What gave you the impression that I don't play in Open or that I am angry?

It's really the hostility to the idea that one mode can't be in anyway incentivised or it breaks some blood pact. Which that part was more of a general comment not really directed at you, sorry.

And you are right they shouldn't force playstyles or modes. But offering a wing bonus, or higher payouts as an example or other incentives isn't forcing people if they are kept within reason.

 

[Mouse]

It's really the hostility to the idea that one mode can't be in anyway incentivised or it breaks some blood pact. Which that part was more of a general comment not really directed at you, sorry.

And you are right they shouldn't force playstyles or modes. But offering a wing bonus, or higher payouts as an example or other incentives isn't forcing people if they are kept within reason.

it is promoting one mode over another

 

[Dogoncrook]

Actually what is both hilarious and sad is those who think only open has a a community and play together. Mobius is 12000 strong and growing. We are a good community built around ED

There wasn't a cash payout for group mode, and mobius isn't a mode, and it will never see incentives because it isn't official or supported. If he quits it's gone and he can arbitrarily pick and choose members if he wants to and fd can do nothing about it.
Sounds to me like you are trying to be offended. There was no reason to bring up mobius in my reply.

 

[Jockey79]

.... But offering a wing bonus, or higher payouts as an example or other incentives isn't forcing people if they are kept within reason.

That is the key, keeping things "within reason".
I'm glad it is not my call to make, I do not envy Frontier one bit trying to walk some very fine lines.

 

[Dogoncrook]

doing your choice you will have one mode with traders and one mode with pirates wondering where the traders are. Problem is not solo, the problem is as you described.pirate behavior.. but also there are so many pirates vs few traders. You make the comment about "What kind of game do we have here when, fun going up means profits going down." Well fun for the pirate and loss of profit for the trader. Seems like most everyone wants to be the pirates.. but they only want to pirate Human players.. which severely limits their options.. and as more and more traders get nicked.. for traders it becomes a game where there is really no fun or profits.. so they go to solo.. and we have people come and want the modes locked and separated thinking it will suddenly and magically give them soft targets.


Maybe if there was a requirement that anyone wanting to pirate HAS to be a trader for 3 weeks and gets 1 week of pirating.. you get to have your fun, and you get to be fun for someone else. with a 3 to 1 requirement and random picking of who gets to be a pirate for a week.. you should have plenty of targets and those pirates trading get to make profit if they can slip by. Oh.. and the 3 weeks only counts ingame.. if you log for 3 weeks and come back hoping to be a pirate.. nope.. your a trader have fun being a sheep for the wolves.

There are not more pirates than non pirates in open. Not even close. There is not a piracy problem in open at all. They are quite rare, gankers included. Most people are busy doing their thing, there is very little hostility at all. Even in the major systems. The "problem" is completely overblown by these forums.

- - - Updated - - -

That is the key, keeping things "within reason".
I'm glad it is not my call to make, I do not envy Frontier one bit trying to walk some very fine lines.

Yeah I don't either. Even though I'm open to the idea, I can't really think of anything that would actually work without fundamentally altering all the modes, or seperating the servers, both of which are clearly off the table. But there's 9 years left, so a little tweak here and there might shed some light on where to take it.

 

[Mouse]

There wasn't a cash payout for group mode, and mobius isn't a mode, and it will never see incentives because it isn't official or supported. If he quits it's gone and he can arbitrarily pick and choose members if he wants to and fd can do nothing about it.
Sounds to me like you are trying to be offended. There was no reason to bring up mobius in my reply.

Not offended, but correcting you. Again.. it can only be a community if it is in open? And if I may ask.. where is the cash pay out for open? There isn't one. CQC is arena.. gladiatorial games not a community.

And I disagree with your assessment and attempts to dismiss.. as Mobius is a private group.. Private groups are a mode.. so in a way Mobius is a mode.. and a community that is growing and strong.

 

[Mouse]

There are not more pirates than non pirates in open. Not even close. There is not a piracy problem in open at all. They are quite rare, gankers included. Most people are busy doing their thing, there is very little hostility at all. Even in the major systems. The "problem" is completely overblown by these forums.

- - - Updated - - -



Yeah I don't either. Even though I'm open to the idea, I can't really think of anything that would actually work without fundamentally altering all the modes, or seperating the servers, both of which are clearly off the table. But there's 9 years left, so a little tweak here and there might shed some light on where to take it.

if there is no problem then there is no reason for buffs, rewards, and all the other things that some claim Open needs to keep players..

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

There are not more pirates than non pirates in open. Not even close. There is not a piracy problem in open at all. They are quite rare, gankers included. Most people are busy doing their thing, there is very little hostility at all. Even in the major systems.…

Why exactly want some players that open mode players that better rewards?

 

[Dogoncrook]

Not offended, but correcting you. Again.. it can only be a community if it is in open? And if I may ask.. where is the cash pay out for open? There isn't one. CQC is arena.. gladiatorial games not a community.

And I disagree with your assessment and attempts to dismiss.. as Mobius is a private group.. Private groups are a mode.. so in a way Mobius is a mode.. and a community that is growing and strong.

I was talking about the race to elite competition, an open only cash prize. I didn't say anything about mobius not being a community or whether or not a community can only be in open. You are reaching pretty hard for an argument here, you'll have to look elsewhere.

 

[Dogoncrook]

-deleted duplicate.

- - - Updated - - -

if there is no problem then there is no reason for buffs, rewards, and all the other things that some claim Open needs to keep players..

This literally doesn't make any sense in reply to what I said. Adding incentives wasn't my idea, but it adds to the game because it makes it more interesting and dynamic, simple as that. It's content, the game lacks it.