Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].

[rckstr]

I'm sure there are very many cute girls working at grocers shops all over the world, and you will never see any of them, no matter what game mode they choose to play.
By all means, try to force all into open - end result, you still will not see the vast majority.

You just don't get my point, do you? It is not about if i see the majority. It's about to see everyone that is playing the game at the same time as i am. Of course I will not be able to stop others from doing what they do when i am logged out. But i would be able to stop everyone while i am logged in.
If you invade a country in the morning and the people there stay in bed- surely they can not do anything against the invasion. If they stand up after the invader is gone, surely it might be too late. But if they act against every invader while they are out of bed, they can make a change.

 

[Cody]

Of course I will not be able to stop others from doing what they do when i am logged out. But i would be able to stop everyone while i am logged in.

<scratches head>

 

[ianw]

You just don't get my point, do you? It is not about if i see the majority. It's about to see everyone that is playing the game at the same time as i am. Of course I will not be able to stop others from doing what they do when i am logged out. But i would be able to stop everyone while i am logged in.
If you invade a country in the morning and the people there stay in bed- surely they can not do anything against the invasion. If they stand up after the invader is gone, surely it might be too late. But if they act against every invader while they are out of bed, they can make a change.

The problem for many people is that in order to fix it for you - even though the whole game design doesn't suit what you want and won't really fix it - breaks it for other people.

 

[Jockey79]

You just don't get my point, do you? It is not about if i see the majority. It's about to see everyone that is playing the game at the same time as i am. Of course I will not be able to stop others from doing what they do when i am logged out. But i would be able to stop everyone while i am logged in.
If you invade a country in the morning and the people there stay in bed- surely they can not do anything against the invasion. If they stand up after the invader is gone, surely it might be too late. But if they act against every invader while they are out of bed, they can make a change.

You are the ignoring that, you cannot even see everyone when you are online - at absolute best the cap is 31 other people in your instance island.

So, say 1000 people in Lave (in open mode);

You and matchmaker willing (but doubtful) 31 others.
What about the 968 people - who are in the same system as you at the same time as you, but you cannot see them / stop them / talk to them.

Then what?

 

[DoctorDigital]

As a dedicated Open Only Player, I see the PowerPlay feature as something that is most valuable in Solo or Group Play. It is merely a matter of getting the right ammount of merrits to the right place at the right time. Which can be interesting, but it also lacks a great deal of strategic possibilitys: You cannot effectively block a system. Player can always carry their merrits in Solo to whatever station they want to and only have the relatively moderate threat of NPCs interdicting them. That is also the main problem, when playing in Open Mode: It just doesn't make sense to risk ship and cargo! When having the opportunity to do the same thing in Solo (or Gorup Play), you always HAVE to choose the safer way.

For myself this makes dedicated open players like myself kind of left out of powerplay. I can see SOLO and GROUP play as being basically the same game experience. But I see the OPEN mode as a totally different and more dangerous gaming experience. Therefore I pledge for seperating the open mode from solo and group play.

 

[rckstr]

Ok, lets translate this to the real world.

I don't see you when you cast your vote at election time - so your vote should be thrown away and not be counted as you did not interact with me while you were voting.
It does not matter who you vote for, if you're voting for the same person as me or for the opposition, because I cannot see you vote - your vote does not matter and should be thrown away.

So, in the next elections - remember you are not allowed to vote unless you come and speak to me first.

Okay?

This is just another imprudent argument. This is not Elite:Election. Right now the game forces me to see it and PP like that and that is just bonkers. If i go to an election you are not my enemy that i want to stop from electing.
Again i'll bring you an example. If i am about to cut your tire while you are standing next to me (logged in at the same time in the same instance) you would want to stop me. But if i choose your tire while i am in Solo mode (no matter the timezone or instance) you would have no option to stop me. Only thing you can do now is live with the fact that you have a flat tire that you have to switch with a new one.

You are the ignoring that, you cannot even see everyone when you are online - at absolute best the cap is 31 other people in your instance island.

So, say 100 people in Lave (in open mode);

You and matchmaker willing (but doubtful) 31 others.
What about the 968 people - who are in the same system as you at the same time as you, but you cannot see them / stop them / talk to them.

Then what?

This fact is owed to the decision made by Fdev with P2P and limiting instances to 32 people max. This is also the reason why i brought up the Arma franchise as example. I am not an expert in this but i can only imagine that the workload on a single instance/server of Arma with 100+ players, spread across the map, doing a lot of different stuff, spawning vehicles and loot, doing things that take an effect on all people there is bigger than the workload possibly caused by an instance of 32 players in Elite.
Also i would like to add the assumption that the mass of instances created because of all the Solo/Group players has a negative impact on performance of all players.
Just as an suggestion- Solo/Group players are still able to earn credits, merits, ranks and all of that but wouldn't be able to take influence on PP and the BGS- and this proposal is in my opinion reasonable. If you want to shift influences you need to take the risk involved with it.

 

[Spook]

You just don't get my point, do you? It is not about if i see the majority. It's about to see everyone that is playing the game at the same time as i am. Of course I will not be able to stop others from doing what they do when i am logged out. But i would be able to stop everyone while i am logged in.
If you invade a country in the morning and the people there stay in bed- surely they can not do anything against the invasion. If they stand up after the invader is gone, surely it might be too late. But if they act against every invader while they are out of bed, they can make a change.

That bolded bit is unachievable. As many have tried to show, yet you seem to want to ignore.

There was a poster earlier on in the games development who was an ex - EvE player. He tried to "influence" the design of the game way back then. Went by the name of Sisyphus - at least he understood the futility of his chosen task.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus

The game map is infinite - not going to see many players.
The backbone is P2P - not going to see many players.
Not everyone is into PvP - not going to see many players
The game is designed around PvE constructs, even the PvP has a PvE backbone.

I'd like you to introduce you to my pet rock - Terry. Terry likes reading, watching TV and being pushed up hills, which no one can ever reach the top of.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Again i'll bring you an example. If i am about to cut your tire while you are standing next to me (logged in at the same time in the same instance) you would want to stop me. But if i choose your tire while i am in Solo mode (no matter the timezone or instance) you would have no option to stop me. Only thing you can do now is live with the fact that you have a flat tire that you have to switch with a new one.

Not the best of examples - a player, along with all of their possessions, in a different mode is unable to be attacked - so the tyre slashing example fails - you would not see it to be able to slash it.

 

[ianw]

As a dedicated Open Only Player, I see the PowerPlay feature as something that is most valuable in Solo or Group Play. It is merely a matter of getting the right ammount of merrits to the right place at the right time. Which can be interesting, but it also lacks a great deal of strategic possibilitys: You cannot effectively block a system. Player can always carry their merrits in Solo to whatever station they want to and only have the relatively moderate threat of NPCs interdicting them. That is also the main problem, when playing in Open Mode: It just doesn't make sense to risk ship and cargo! When having the opportunity to do the same thing in Solo (or Gorup Play), you always HAVE to choose the safer way.

For myself this makes dedicated open players like myself kind of left out of powerplay. I can see SOLO and GROUP play as being basically the same game experience. But I see the OPEN mode as a totally different and more dangerous gaming experience. Therefore I pledge for seperating the open mode from solo and group play.

But that's the thing - you don't have to choose the safer way.

I play in open all the time because I like the idea of encountering other people for whatever reason comes up - when I did CGs I did them in open - same as when I tried PP.

Same as when I'm trading - I could make more money per trip by getting a T9 again and stripping out my shields - but I don't want to or feel the need to.

Not everyone is obsessed with progress above all else. I really don't care if someone is earning faster or slower than me.

 

[Julissa Silver]

As a dedicated Open Only Player...

Ask yourself why you play open play. The reasons for playing open play are the same as the rewards. If you think you will have more -FUN- playing in another mode then play in that mode for however long your -FUN- lasts. In doing so you will find a longer, happier, less stress-filled existence in Elite.

 

[rckstr]

That bolded bit is unachievable. As many have tried to show, yet you seem to want to ignore.

There was a poster earlier on in the games development who was an ex - EvE player. He tried to "influence" the design of the game way back then. Went by the name of Sisyphus - at least he understood the futility of his chosen task.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus

The game map is infinite - not going to see many players.
The backbone is P2P - not going to see many players.
Not everyone is into PvP - not going to see many players
The game is designed around PvE constructs, even the PvP has a PvE backbone.

I'd like you to introduce you to my pet rock - Terry. Terry likes reading, watching TV and being pushed up hills, which no one can ever reach the top of.

I already mentioned a couple of times that using P2P and instances of 32 players was a mistake, you seem to ignore that.
I agree that the galaxy is huge, but PP reduced this space if you are active at PP. Thus the chances to see others (ignoring the bad P2P and instancing) are higher to see others. Especially when it comes to the end of a cycle and there are only a couple of systems and doable activities left. There would be hotspots with a lot of players seeing each other.

Not the best of examples - a player, along with all of their possessions, in a different mode is unable to be attacked - so the tyre slashing example fails - you would not see it to be able to slash it.

Not if we assume that your car is the system i am taking influence on. I am changing a certain condition of your car/system and you have nothing to counter this. All you could do is change your tire/run deliveries.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I already mentioned a couple of times that using P2P and instances of 32 players was a mistake, you seem to ignore that.

Yet, P2P/Server-Lite is the networking system that Frontier have chosen to implement from the outset - it is extremely unlikely to change now as that would incur extra server costs, not to mention the design, development, deployment and debugging of a new networking system. Frontier have also ruled out subscriptions as a funding method for the game - could we reasonably expect them to shoulder all of these additional one-off and recurring costs from their earnings?

 

[fergal]

As a dedicated Open Only Player, I see the PowerPlay feature as something that is most valuable in Solo or Group Play. It is merely a matter of getting the right ammount of merrits to the right place at the right time. Which can be interesting, but it also lacks a great deal of strategic possibilitys: You cannot effectively block a system. Player can always carry their merrits in Solo to whatever station they want to and only have the relatively moderate threat of NPCs interdicting them. That is also the main problem, when playing in Open Mode: It just doesn't make sense to risk ship and cargo! When having the opportunity to do the same thing in Solo (or Gorup Play), you always HAVE to choose the safer way.

For myself this makes dedicated open players like myself kind of left out of powerplay. I can see SOLO and GROUP play as being basically the same game experience. But I see the OPEN mode as a totally different and more dangerous gaming experience. Therefore I pledge for seperating the open mode from solo and group play.

I've been playing PP in open for nearly 4 weeks.
I'm a bit confused by what you mean by "As a dedicated Open Only Player"

Do you mean a dedicated open player when you have a combat advantage?

This here also seems a strange comment from any player, but specifically a dedicated open player:
"It just doesn't make sense to risk ship and cargo!"

 

[Stormprooter]

You just don't get my point, do you? It is not about if i see the majority. It's about to see everyone that is playing the game at the same time as i am. Of course I will not be able to stop others from doing what they do when i am logged out. But i would be able to stop everyone while i am logged in.
If you invade a country in the morning and the people there stay in bed- surely they can not do anything against the invasion. If they stand up after the invader is gone, surely it might be too late. But if they act against every invader while they are out of bed, they can make a change.

OK, I'll rephrase

I'm sure there are very many cute girls working at grocers shops all over the world, and you will never see any of them, no matter what game mode they choose to play.
By all means, try to force all into open - end result, you still will not see the vast majority playing at the same time as you.

 

[fergal]

I already mentioned a couple of times that using P2P and instances of 32 players was a mistake, you seem to ignore that.

Are we really back at this argument? LOL

Instances of 32 players is about all that is technically feasible with the Internet.
Go complain about the Internets architecture.

 

[Jockey79]

I already mentioned a couple of times that using P2P and instances of 32 players was a mistake, you seem to ignore that.

In your opinion.

I feel it was a smart move for the game long term.

I agree that the galaxy is huge, but PP reduced this space if you are active at PP. Thus the chances to see others (ignoring the bad P2P and instancing) are higher to see others. Especially when it comes to the end of a cycle and there are only a couple of systems and doable activities left. There would be hotspots with a lot of players seeing each other.

Power Play, for a start - is "Optional" content, not forced content. People who are not taking part won't be anywhere near the hotspots.
Again, you ignore that even in hotspots, you cannot see everyone taking part regardless of what mode they are in.

Not if we assume that your car is the system i am taking influence on. I am changing a certain condition of your car/system and you have nothing to counter this. All you could do is change your tire/run deliveries.

You are so far off base it is unreal that you cannot see how you've failed.
If you cannot see a person, you cannot interact with them - so you can interact with 31 people and do nothing to anyone else in that system as you cannot see them.

 

[rckstr]

Yet, P2P/Server-Lite is the networking system that Frontier have chosen to implement from the outset - it is extremely unlikely to change now as that would incur extra server costs, not to mention the design, development, deployment and debugging of a new networking system. Frontier have also ruled out subscriptions as a funding method for the game - could we reasonably expect them to shoulder all of these additional one-off and recurring costs from their earnings?

Again i throw in the assumption that the number of all created instances needs more infrastructure and capacity. Why do so many other games don't use P2P though they are able to handle a lot of more players? If it would end up with US East/West, European and so on servers i would be fine with that. Since we all have different timezones this would match the players even more.

Are we really back at this argument? LOL

Instances of 32 players is about all that is technically feasible with the Internet.
Go complain about the Internets architecture.

Just because Elite supports only 32 players is is not said that this is the end of what is technically possible.

OK, I'll rephrase

I'm sure there are very many cute girls working at grocers shops all over the world, and you will never see any of them, no matter what game mode they choose to play.
By all means, try to force all into open - end result, you still will not see the vast majority playing at the same time as you.

You really don't get it. I don't want to see all the girls. I want to see those who are at the same time in the same location. It really is not that hard to understand.

This

I already mentioned a couple of times that using P2P and instances of 32 players was a mistake, you seem to ignore that.

In your opinion.

I feel it was a smart move for the game long term.

Is the reason we have this

.
If you cannot see a person, you cannot interact with them - so you can interact with 31 people and do nothing to anyone else in that system as you cannot see them.

 

[Stormprooter]

Are we really back at this argument? LOL

Instances of 32 players is about all that is technically feasible with the Internet.
Go complain about the Internets architecture.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but the largest multiplayer (recent) game I know of is Battlefield (3 & 4), with 64 players, and that's dedi-server and round-based play.
Going back in time about a decade - Freelancer servers supported 128 concurrent players (subsequently overcome by modders) - but that's for the entire galaxy (for whatever mod or vanilla server).

 

[Spook]

I'm hoping that the combat arenas will hold more, due to potentially reduced overheads in the information that has to go back and forth. It'll give FD another option to focus the instancing for the wider galaxy.

We can then look forwards to posts along the lines of "I can see 64/128 players in Arena Mode, but only 32 in the main game. Everybody must be hiding in solo - make their game rubbish so I can shoot them, sorry engage them in emergent gameplay."

 

[Robert Maynard]

Again i throw in the assumption that the number of all created instances needs more infrastructure and capacity. Why do so many other games don't use P2P though they are able to handle a lot of more players? If it would end up with US East/West, European and so on servers i would be fine with that. Since we all have different timezones this would match the players even more.

Per player, a traditional Server/Client networking model would require more Server throughput (i.e. cost / capacity / number of servers) than the P2P/Server-Lite model that we have.

Perhaps those other games do not have the amount of data-per-player-per-second throughput that E: D has.

Creating regional servers would absolutely guarantee that there would be players in Open that would not be able to be encountered as they would only ever play on their regional server - even if players in the other regions were playing at the same time, in the same place. Not seeing the benefit of that idea.