Why exactly want some players that open mode players that better rewards?
Same as my reply to mouse, but other than that I don't know, ask fd, it's their game, they offered the money, not me.
- Status
Same as my reply to mouse, but other than that I don't know, ask fd, it's their game, they offered the money, not me.
The race to elite event was not a community building event. It was a contest sponsored by a third party (if I remember correctly). And if you will notice I am not replying to your whole comment, because it is talking about two different things. The first part is the contest, the second part is you talking about Fdev building a community around a product and your comments to Robert with the implication you made.
Last edited by a moderator:
Your comment to my comment to someone' else's comment about the # of pirates vs traders.
Right there, you just negated every argument in all the mega threads from those who play open that there is issues in open that "require" Fdev to give Open special treatment with buffs, rewards, and the like. If there is no problem.. than all the cries of "Open is a wasteland", "We need incentives", "Solo is ruining open" are all .. smoke screens by some to get things that are clearly not needed. I did not say you made the suggestions, but the post that I replied to that you replied to me over, did.
And it is interesting that Zadian said pretty much the same thing as I did and you again assumed it was directed at your comment about the competition, and not the myriad of "OPEN NEEDS TO BE SPECIAL" type posts or the one that was being replied to when you added your reply.
And who will chuckle and guffaw at posts when you left eh? You provide a unique public service on these forums.
That doesn't preclude they wouldn't do the same for group mode. It is a response to the pushback on fd trying to build any community, doing it for either open or group leaves it not equal to solo. Like I said you are trying to be offended and pick a fight.
You can play how you want, but you ain't getting paid in solo, make of that what you will. And no the event wasn't sponsored. If you want to twist yourself into a pretzel arguing that wasn't an incentive to play open have at it, I'm done arguing with you.
- - - Updated - - -
????????
One I rarely play in solo, Two the competition was ages ago in march.. why would I get paid for it now. And I don't need to twist myself into a pretzel to argue that it doesn't mean that because your twisting yourself into one trying to prove that it does. And we don't have to argue, but expect when you give your opinion that others who do not share your opinion and disagree will speak up. If you don't like the answer you don't have to respond.
Open, group and solo are valued the same, but there are obviously differences in mechanics.
Could it have been an attempt to level the playing field of the participants, pre-empt future complaints about modes, rather than promote one mode? The most obvious mode to chose would be Open.
Could it have been all of the above?
Exactly what Mouse said.
Even Daffan, another hard core 'open advocate' says he watches Netflix while trading.
It's kinda laughable that they are demanding more rewards, for doing what I have no idea.
Sure, but it's not black and white. Unless you want to admit npc and human threats are the same.
I don't see many people raging about NPC's randomly interdicting and killing compared to humans.
I have fun playing the forums. While listening to the vice city GTA soundtrack
I'd advise a system like this as well. BUT you may come to the problem where it's not even worth paying people because your losing a cut of profit and might as well play in a different mode.
The trade wing bonus seemed easier to stomach for people because it's a bonus on the top - everyone wins and nobody in the wing loses.
I would love a Open PVE mode as long as the NPC's were actually relevant. That's why i like real people so much.
You put in the risk, you get a reward. It's just fundamental game design theory.
People keep saying they are getting "Griefed" in open. So i made a suggestion to entice bounty hunters, good guys and escorts to be viable. People would rather grind by themselves than escort traders because of the current system.
The race to elite was a Frontier Sponsored OPEN only event
The Nvidia black box event was open only as well.
Not that i really care - but just helping out Dogoncrook.
I trade in solo because it's easy [masked swearing redacted - please avoid this thank you] and no point to do it in open. Well, i haven't actually traded since Jan/Feb
No escorts means no protection. Yay risk for no point....
Bad crime system means no threat/repurcussion to pvpers
I've already also made 3 sentence guides on how to "grief" as they call it - but don't mean i do it. (Just to show how bad the open system is right now for standard players)
Just because i'm a hardcore open adovcate don't mean i want to kill everyone - I want to make it a great game-play experience for everyone that is not grindy. So i also made 2 nice suggestions that don't do anything to solo/private and still get shot down by fundamentalists.
Last edited by a moderator:
The answers to risk / reward however are;
The "Risk" is the "Reward" - otherwise why play there to start with?
or;
Open has no more "Risk" than any other mode (proven by myself twice, once with a video on my YouTube).
Which others in this thread have also argued, that everyone should play open as there is no more risk than groups or solo.
My "Wall of Information" counters that with; it was backed with this design from the start - why buy a game that fundamentally will not work how you want it to?
(See how long I've been at this
It's just not entirely true. as everyone started elite the "risk" of facng many A rate equipped ships was low, so the reward of the galaxy was a lot more juicy. Now a new player has to meet all those nicely equipped on a giant pile of money sitting players that do not risk their existence by losing one ship.
No the worlds differ between the players.
When you have more CR's than you will ever need, nothing is a risk, all is just a giant piece of fun and party.
It's clear what you would like to see Daffan, and I honestly respect your point of view and your hopes for the game.
However, there is one small thing you don't seem to recognize. There are people who like to play computer games, but who don't enjoy playing them with other people. Being forced into doing so would not make the game better for them, not at all. Trying to entice them into a play mode or style that doesn't appeal to them won't work.
As I've said before, the people who feel the same as you are presumably all there in Open right now, all you need to do is to reach out to them and get together and play.
I think this is where the wear and tear system was supposed to help - so bigger ships cost money to use and whittle down peoples fortunes.
Alas, every time FD kick it in to gear properly - people go mental over it.
Something needs putting in place for drain cash from people, so those with almost limitless funds have reasons not to abuse the system by using disposable ships.
Of course, that only matters if in the secure areas of space the security forces had teeth and response times to back them up....
Lots to do, lots to tweak before the modes can be blamed for anything other than allowing people to avoid unwanted people / play (which is what it is there for to start with)
for the events was only to open cause was easier for fd to check the ppl.....
if u wanted that u wouldnt try to have ur way .....u would accept other ppl choices....
Last edited:
Kickstarter runs on trust. Break the trust once and good luck ever getting it back. To this day I still make sure everyone that I know who shows any interest in any Frontier game is made aware of the whole Offline fiasco.
BTW, while the core of a KS campaign doesn't seem to have the strength of a contract, other parts — namely, the promised rewards — have been deemed in more than one lawsuit to have the same legal strength as an actual sale, with all the same protections against fraud that a sale enjoys. I know of at least one case where someone made a Kickstart, failed to deliver the promised rewards, and as a result was sued into giving enough refunds to send him into bankruptcy.
This would likely land them on the losing side of a lawsuit unless they offered unconditional refunds for those that don't want the vehicle with the changed specs anymore. Like Frontier was more or less forced to do with the removal of offline; to the best of my knowledge, they even in one case paid the full refund, including a refund of the legal fees to open a lawsuit, to avoid one such lawsuit from starting (and it getting to that point was likely a processing error, as every other known case where Frontier was served a letter before action due to the removal of offline was immediately met by the offer of a full refund to prevent the case from being opened).It's all comments. They are expressing their vision for a product they wanted to build.
It's like a car manufacturer saying that they want to build Vehicle X. They start a KS campaign to gauge support and to provide a boost to the production budget. In KS they promote that they want to build Vehicle X - this is the vehicle they've always wanted to build, it will be awesome. Oh, and it's going to run on petrol and have a manual gearbox, as well as a selection of colours, etc. They then release a manual, petrol, Vehicle X. But down the track they announce that due to discussions with part suppliers, environmental legislation, community feedback, etc, they are going to move Vehicle X to an automatic gearbox running on diesel.
The specs may have changed slightly, but they still delivered and continue to deliver... Vehicle X. You are not purchasing a product based on advertised specifications, you are supporting a vision with proposed specifications.
I did a bit of research back then, when I was tempted to sue Frontier myself.
Come on dude. Come on. Come on. There are not that many pirates. And I did mention I was interdicting plenty of AI, didn't I? Well I am now. You get squat from them. Type-9? Sweet! Right? Wrong. 100 tonnes of bio waste and 1 slaves. Uwotm8.
Has anyone mentioned a money incentive? 2-5% bonus on all earnings for everything always on things earned in open play.
Last edited:
What's wrong with 100 tons of biowaste and some slaves? It's cargo you didn't have before, and you pirated an NPC to get it.
I'm not sure why you couldn't race to elite in any mode. I don't recall them ever saying why.
Yes, it get's mentioned over and over again.
Not a good idea because:
Apparently there is no real risk and very few pirates in Open mode (that's what the open mode advocates say). A bonus for playing open can't be a compensation for that perceived risk. Adding a bonus to motivate more players into Open mode is based on the false assumption that players play Solo or Group mode to earn money easier.
Players not playing in Open mode have their reasons and often it is not the perceived easiness of earning credits in solo or group mode. Adding a bonus to the profits wouldn't change anything for them.
On top of that earning credits in Open mode is as difficult or easy as it is in Solo Mode (it might be even easier as it is possible to form trade wings). If a player wants to absolutely maximize the profits the best way is to do it in Open Mode or Group Mode in a wing.
If your intention is to motivate more players to join Open Mode, then the best way - in my opinion - would be to fix the problems with piracy, PvP and player behavior. Better crime system, working bounty system, working security system (high vs. low security solar systems), working piracy - without the need of forced cooperation and finally a transparent, strict and harsh punishment of unwanted player behavior like cheating, exploiting and hacking.
The players need to know that certain activities increases the chance of PvP or piracy and other activities almost remove the chance of PvP. What these activities are and it has to be logical and reproducible. That way players who want PvP could do things that will give them what they want and players who don't want PvP can do things that reduce the chance of PvP to a level that is comfortable to them.
This won't motivate all players to join Open Mode, but it might motivate some who currently play solo or group mode to join Open Mode more often.
I realized that about the third time I read the requotes. I plead not enough coffee; I've been selling it all to Bacon City. Derp >.<
It just takes the pirates to wise up and realize that their profession is taking a black eye from the murderer/serial killer crowd. If the pirates would worry more about what people were doing in their name, rather than trying to convince people that Open is 'fun for all, including their targets'...a lot of those in other modes that are avoiding the problems with the above, would be minimized.
- Status