Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Mk III

Do you want a Open PvE

  • Yes, I want a Open PvE

    Votes: 54 51.4%

  • No, I don't want a Open PvE

    Votes: 49 46.7%

  • I want only Open PvE and PvP only in groups

    Votes: 2 1.9%
  • Total voters
    105
  • Poll closed .
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

adrensnyder

A
Solo/private group mode

I know that this ask was make many times maybe.... but i want to understand....

If i play SOLO or PRIVATE GROUP it's not normal that my actions reflect on systems expansions (price ok could have a logic)...

It's more correct that any thing that have influences to this things are possibles only on OPEN PLAY...

If we have an Indipendent Faction (example a community recognized from Frontier) we could not defend from expansion from players that use the game only in SOLO or PRIVATE GROUP.. It's more realistic if we could see this players.. intimate to go away or engage battle...


Is my thinking wrong??
Thanks Frontiers..
 
Last edited:

DarkWalker

D
adrensnyder said:
If we have an Indipendent Faction (example a community recognized from Frontier) we could not defend from expansion from players that use the game only in SOLO or PRIVATE GROUP.. It's more realistic if we could see this players.. intimate to go away or engage battle...
Click to expand...

You couldn't anyway. Thanks to the game's peer to peer networking model, and how its matchmaking system works, you would never be able to "defend" your turf against all players, even if everyone was playing in Open and your faction was able to keep a 24/7 defense force flying. For example, you won't be matched to anyone from too far away from you in order to prevent lag from impacting the game for both you and the other player, so anyone that lives far away from you won't even acknowledge that you are trying to defend a system or faction, even when playing in Open.

Changing the networking model isn't feasible, BTW. No way to have a single global server for a twitch-based game, so a change in the model would both require Frontier to spread servers across the world and to segregate players based on geographical location.

And that doesn't even start delving into how the modes, and mode switching, were at the core of the game's early Kickstart push, and still part of the advertisement. Restricting any feature or content to a single mode goes against much of what Frontier has promised about the game. Also, changing something so central a year after the game launched is a recipe for disaster.
 

CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost

C
adrensnyder said:
…
…

If we have an Indipendent Faction (example a community recognized from Frontier) we could not defend from expansion from players that use the game only in SOLO or PRIVATE GROUP.. It's more realistic if we could see this players.. intimate to go away or engage battle...


Is my thinking wrong??
…
Click to expand...

Yes, your thinking is wrong. Fight PvE with PvE methods.

And:
a) Do you have patrols 24/7?
b) Can you control all instances?
c) By intimidating CMDRs or engaging CMDRs in battle you don't affect the influence of your minor-faction
d) one CMDR lures you away form PvE by interdicting or just running away luring you away from what you need to do (PvE) while an other CMDR influences the BGS

e) simply ignore influence of minor factions, the BGS is broken. It's possible to "nuke" the influence without much effort (don't know how, that's what others write)
…
 

Jordan Cobalt

Jordan Cobalt
adrensnyder said:
I know that this ask was make many times maybe.... but i want to understand....

If i play SOLO or PRIVATE GROUP it's not normal that my actions reflect on systems expansions (price ok could have a logic)...

It's more correct that any thing that have influences to this things are possibles only on OPEN PLAY...

If we have an Indipendent Faction (example a community recognized from Frontier) we could not defend from expansion from players that use the game only in SOLO or PRIVATE GROUP.. It's more realistic if we could see this players.. intimate to go away or engage battle...


Is my thinking wrong??
Thanks Frontiers..
Click to expand...
I agree with you, however good luck convincing the few die hards in this swamp of sadness that it's anything other than the greatest thing ever.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Robert Maynard
Jordan Cobalt said:
I agree with you, however good luck convincing the few die hards in this swamp of sadness that it's anything other than the greatest thing ever.
Click to expand...

It's not those who choose to resist changes to the coer game features to suit a PvP play-style that need to be convinced - it's Frontier....
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
Jordan Cobalt said:
...that it's anything other than the greatest thing ever.
Click to expand...

Really Jordan?

You know better than that. Some of us are here for the sole reason, we knew what we were buying BEFORE we bought it - and that's what we want to keep.
People shouldn't blindly buy something then moan about features advertised 3 years ago.
 

Jockey79

Jockey79
Theodrid said:
I'm much more 'Stig of the dump' than swampy thank you very much Ziggy - and it is clearly raspberry ripple at no. 1..............
Click to expand...

Stan of the Swamp here;

Stan_of_the_Swamp.png
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom