But this is the common opinion that many here and in other threads are spreading. "Oh, i have been attacked by another cmdr, he killed me, i lost my ship and my cargo". "Just came back from a long trip, been killed by a psycho, poor me". We don't want that. We don't want to be bothered by those people... Not that the AI attacks you too. But that is ok, because they are not humans. Shenanigans.
Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].
- Thread starter Robert Maynard
- Start date
- Status
The more times we read "hiding in solo", "run away to solo", "avoid risk", "no danger", "coward", "carebear", etc., the more times players are attacked, without warning or dialogue by a wing of more powerful ships against their single trader, the more that players want to avoid these people and these situations. In Solo. Just think about it. This is why Solo exists and similar options in many other games. It is because some people want to inflict their own game on others.
You want danger? Then only attack more powerful ships or wings, on your own. Anything else is just "easy mode" and you are in no position to talk.
Last edited:
It's been said many times before but for some people the difference between being killed by a player versus AI is that for some people they want stuff that happens in game to have an in game meaning - so when they are blown up by an NPC that is okay because that is the game that's blowing them up for an in game reason.
That is different to being killed by someone who just likes to blow stuff up just because they can regardless of whether it makes sense in game.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Given that the shadowban mode exists and it would simply seem to be a setting of the matchmaking system (with a flag such that shadowbanned players do not affect the shared galaxy state), Ironman would similarly seem to be a relatively simple implementation.
What might be stopping Frontier at the moment is the likelihood that Ironman may well have much fewer players than the normal game mode, therefore making the galaxy seem even emptier.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If being adversely affected by another player is all it takes for some players to choose to remove themselves from Open then that is their choice. Whether other players agree with the reasoning behind the decision making process is moot - we cannot dictate to other players how to play the game.
It is perfectly reasonable, in a game advertised as Single-Player (as well as Multi-Player), for players to choose to play Solo.
You miss two points, the first Steve covers above so I'm leaving that.
The second is, the AI holds no malice and takes no enjoyment - it is controlled by SJA and does not act upon its own free will.
We also bought the game knowing there would be AI ships attacking us as part of the game.
Arrogant half wits who only get enjoyment from upsetting others, wasn't advertised on the box - in fact the Devs specifically state we can choose who we play with out of the human player base.
If you want to be invited in to my game and enjoy my company - then you will have to behave in a certain way. After all, the Devs gave me the choice to let you in to my game just like you have the choice not to let me in to your game.
- - - Updated - - -
Shadow ban is on another server isn't it?
Wasn't stated that those under shadow ban could not impact the BGS as theirs was static :S
As Robert describes it could use the same galaxy but as a "read only" sort of set up. We affect them but they don't affect anyone else. I find that more amusing than a completely separate server anyway.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I would need to trawl through a number of Dev posts to find it....
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
Hardline is the perfect example of why personally I do not trust real humans in my game unless I am in the mood.
Hardline is sold as a cops and robbers kind of game.... and yet you would never know it to look at it. police suiciding themselves in choppers etc basically makes it a total joke and removes any semblance of believability for said cops and robbers.
(on the other hand payday 2 now there is a cops and robbers game done really really well imo, and this is largely because you know the AI will do what they are programmed to do, and not just do what they want for lolz)
I find private groups to offer an experience far closer to the one advertised than what is offered IME in open (to be fair I have not been back to open in 1.3, maybe things have changed?). If you prefer open that is fine... if you find open lacking in numbers and feel that is becasue we are all in solo or private... I am sorry for you. Sadly whilst you may need me, I do NOT need you.
force everyone into open and you may find, for many reasons, that you STILL wont get the interaction you crave as many will just move to another game.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If you have a bounty on your head and i want to claim it- That's because of in game reasons.
If you are a Trader with precious cargo and i am a pirate- I will attack you because of in game reasons.
If you ask for support and i am going to support you- That is because of in game reasons.
If i am in your territory and you do not want that- you will attack me, because of in game reasons.
Every action that i do in game is because of in game reasons.
What would be the reason to put a player in said shadowban, where he is being revoked his right to influence the galaxy? And please don't tell me that any actions i might take for in game reasons would be a reason to shadowban me. Because then i really can not play the way i supposedly can.
What can an individual do to loose his privilege to affect the galaxy, to be excluded, while every individual who decides to play in Solo/Group already refused this multiplayer environment, but still can affect it.
And Ironman might make the galaxy seem emptier? what does Solo/Group make the galaxy to seem? It is empty for everyone who plays Solo and empty for everyone who plays in group, plus a hand full of people that are invited. But the playerbase in Open has to be punished with the decisions others make. They complain that it is even empty in Open and that they have to live and accept the changes made in a singleplayer environment.
Where is the Multiplayer part when there is barely someone in Multiplayer. Just out of curiosity. Do numbers exist how many people in average played the game in Solo/Group compared to those who played exclusively in Open?
If this game would be like every other game with a single player and a multi player optional i wouldn't even care when Solo/Group outnumber Open players by a factor of 100. Because in the regular game with those modes the single player doesn't affect my multiplayer experience. He won't change the state of anything, he won't drain any trade routes, he won't change a controlling faction over something. If you want to make a change in a multi player environment you should do this in a multi player environment. Not in a semi "we share the same galaxy, so it is multi player" environment.
And please don't reject my argumentation simply with "because that's how Fdev has created it". Because that would be beyond any logical sense.
Last edited:
First off, what argument? I was providing information, not arguing. Specifically addressing your comment "I'd just have liked it even more on an Ironman server or something similar." that I quoted.
If your Ironman mode comments are not relevant to solo/group/open, why are you making them in the solo/group/open thread?
I think the last time someone had a really new argument about this topic was in August 2014… since then, the same opinions just get re-phrased and re-hashed.Recursive, with the exit condition never being met
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Cheating, mainly. Abusing game mechanics too, I think.
Frontier gave us all the freedom to choose which mode to play in on a session-by-session basis. If Open appears to be empty then either players are not where you are; have not been matched with you because of mutual ping times; are offline; may be playing in another game mode.
I am certain that Frontier have statistics as to how many players play and in which mode - I expect that they do not release them as such information is proprietary to the company (and would probably only cause arguments if it was released).
The single shared galaxy state is one of the core features of the game - all players, in all game modes and, now, on all platforms affect the same galaxy. Frontier made this decision prior to launching the game on Kickstarter and have retained that core feature throughout the game's development and launch.
This game is not like other games in that respect.
Last edited:
But don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to.
Last edited:
I expect the numbers exist but I doubt that Frontier want to release them. I suspect the number of people playing exclusively in open has dropped like a stone. That's what happens when you allow people to avoid the douchebaggery of people killing them for no other reason than "tears". You give them the ability to avoid being killed for no reason and they take it. This is why groups like Modius exist.
Perhaps those people, like yourself, who decry the seemingly lowering numbers in open should take a look at why those numbers are seemingly dropping and realise that open is being ruined for all by a few. It's not the players' fault that after they get burned a couple of times they decide not to get burned again.
If crime against players had real consequences that couldn't just be worked around then more people would probably play in Open but whilst someone can simply kill you for no reason and then hop in a sidewinder to get rid of the bounty (or simply ignore the fact they have a bounty on them as it doesn't seem to really matter) a lot of people will just play in solo/group.
Frontier put the tools out there. Whether the "people" use them is up to them. The game is most certainly multiplayer however, I see loads of people on my travels when I am in certain core systems - less so out in the big black
and that is in a group of only ~9000 players which I am told by some is a bordering on irrelevant group size!.
Take sensible soccer on the xbox and speedball 2 HD on the PC... hardly anyone plays these online any more (actually I cant play sensible soccer any more due to live, but i digress)..
the point is, just because few people play them online anymore does not mean they are NOT multiplayer... The tools are there its just not enough use them but it is not on FD to FORCE people to play multiplayer.
whilst you may not speak for everyone, I can pretty much say you have got my view covered nicely!.
That being said I would also add I want to play in a game where if I see another pilots federation member it is generally a GOOD thing and where me scanning them to see who they are and if it is someone I recognise is NOT seen as a hostile act where they need to open fire to defend themselves before i attack them. I have that but it is not in open.
Last edited:
The only way Solo can affect Open is through indirect influence. Open affects Solo in EXACTLY the same way.
Open works for a faction, the faction influence goes up for Solo players. Solo Undermines a system, Open fortifies a system. The Open action cancels the Solo action. Open saturates a market, Solo market is ruined.
No, Open players can't shoot Solo players, but Solo players can't shoot open players either. There is no difference in how players influence each other in either mode.
Last edited:
- Status