Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread [See new thread]

[Zplintz]

because some people are just opposed to the idea of 'grouping' at all. they want to play solo mode space trucking and shoot the npc simulator in space and never deal with other people.

the mistake FD has made here is that they are trying to create a game that is both multiplayer and not multiplayer at the same time. that is an MMO and a 'private server' group simultaneously, but with only one nd simulation.

the whole concept is so obviously broken one wonders how it got out of the design stage. simply creating a single open universe, and a single group/solo universe would have solved all of these issues, but apparently nobody considered this before launch, or people chose not to listen.

i get they wanted to 'try something new' but it was put simply a stupid idea that has resulted in a crummy solo experience, where an online connection is required, and a crummy multiplayer experience where people who want to play the multiplayer game are being sidestepped by the efforts of people in solo/group.

i waggle my finger at the game designed who allowed the colossaly stupid idea to fly in the first place.

I wasn't arguing against anyone playing in solo if they want to - that is part of playing the way you want to.

I have never seen anyone prove that their Solo game has been negatively affected by MP players. I have heard plenty of claims but not a single byte of evidence to back those claims up. Just seems like something to complain about from people who like to play the victim and go to any length to convince others that they are being hard done by, that their game is lessened by some imaginary negative effect or even that they think other players' actions are pointless and therefore those actions should be stopped.

I see nothing wrong with the fundamental ideas of the MP, Grouping or that it is online only. There is work to be done and it will improve, expand and change over time. Wouldn't expect anything else.

If you want MP but not PvP join a PvE group. If you want solo, play solo. If you don't like ED then stop playing it but please don't whine about how 'crummy' it is and carry on playing - what is the point of that?

 

[Robert Maynard]

moderating the subject into a 276 page threadnaught isn't going to make it go away.

It's time for FD to realize that there is a reason this thread is 276 pages long and take steps to correct this design flaw in the game.

It it not intended to try to make the topic "go away", merely to contain it to one thread. Regarding your opinion that the game design is flawed, here are some recent answers from Michael Brookes to direct questions on the topic:

Will at any time solo and private group play be separated into a different universe/database from open play? It's kind of cheap that you can be safe from many things in solo, like player blockades and so on, and still affect the same universe.

No.

Michael

Thanks for that clarity Michael.

Are you in a position to confirm that group switching between the three game modes will remain as a feature of the game?

We're not planning on changing that.

Michael

Hi Micheal

I know you said that solo/group and open will always use the same universe, can you also say that there will be no specific perks in playing in one mode over another? i.e bigger profit from trading in open or bigger bounties?

None are planned at the moment.

Michael

 

[Traven Mayhem]

I'm well aware of Michael's thoughts on the matter. Either he's a poor game designer, or whoever is feeding him those canned responses (coughDBcough) is.

The model is flawed, and the communnity has spent 275 pages trying to tell you guys why. It's seriously gimping the long term potential of your game.

It's unfortunate that you either a) don't see that or b) are under orders not to.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm well aware of Michael's thoughts on the matter. Either he's a poor game designer, or whoever is feeding him those canned responses (coughDBcough) is.

The model is flawed, and the communnity has spent 275 pages trying to tell you guys why. It's seriously gimping the long term potential of your game.

It's unfortunate that you either a) don't see that or b) are under orders not to.

If you read my posts prior to the beginning of February (i.e. before I became a Moderator) you will see that I have accepted and supported the game features that allow players to make their own choice as to which game mode to play in on a session by session basis - nothing to do with toeing a party line.

Again, the game design is what it is - there will be differing opinions as to the merits (or not) of the three online game modes and group switching - these opinions have been expressed for over two years now (i.e. these features have formed part of the stated game design from the start of the Kickstarter) and Frontier have not changed them. If anything was to be changed, I would have expected that it would have happened before launch (as happened with the contentious removal of offline mode).

Some community members dislike the features in question; some community members like them, yet others are probably ambivalent and just get on with playing the game the way that they want to.

 

[ChrisUK27]

This has just blown it wide open: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAwmbvRJkzM

Published on Mar 4, 2015 Available now on PC and in spring on Mac, Elite: Dangerous is the definitive massively multiplayer space epic, bringing gaming’s original open world adventure into the modern generation with a connected galaxy, evolving narrative and the entirety of the Milky Way re-created at its full galactic proportions.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

The thread wouldn't be 276 pages if everyone agreed.

Lets not act as if there's consensus on the matter thank you very much. You do not represent me. Don't act as if you do.

Thanks.

By the way, love the term: threadnaught

If you don't agree with me, that likely means you enjoy being able to hide in solo play. I'm not trying to take that away from you.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

?

I'm stating my opinions stongly. If you disagree with them, disagree with them. Don't come down on my because you disapprove of how I stated them, thanks. Do we really need this to devolve into pedantically stating that me saying 'the community has gfiven you 274 pages of etc' was a hyperbolized statement?

Make your argument.

 

[Jorlin]

One problem with trying to force people into "open" (and seperating savegames is exactly that):

The game would change drastically in regards of PvP.
If you think THIS is a threadnaught you'd be shown one then

PvP would be nerfed untill it's barely possible at all.
And i would have fun making sure that exactly this happens
Sensless killing is absolutely possible at the moment... and i'd do exactly this as long as i could do it.
Of course not people that want to fight, only those that are easy prey and will demand changes to the PvP system.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

Ok.

The community is split between those who feel the way Open, Solo and Group have been arranged. There is no consensus in the community. It therefore is rubbish, false, erroneous and wrong to state: "The model is flawed, and the communnity has spent 275 pages trying to tell you guys why.", because about half of those 276 pages was spent on people arguing against the premise that the model is flawed.

Clear enough?

So give us an open mode that is not connected to the existing open/solo/group mode -- one that is truly open only.

Problem solvedd == everybody is happy.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So give us an open mode that is not connected to the existing open/solo/group mode -- one that is truly open only.

Problem solvedd == everybody is happy.

Did you read Michael's first post that I quoted? It clearly states, i.e. a simple "no", that the background simulation will continue to be shared between the three game modes. My supplementary question elicited a response that suggests that group switching is here to stay.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

Did you read Michael's first post that I quoted? It clearly states, i.e. a simple "no", that the background simulation will continue to be shared between the three game modes. My supplementary question elicited a response that suggests that group switching is here to stay.

Been playing MMO's since 1996. These design decisions tend to change in the face of vocal opposition from the community.

As for Ziggy's comment: they already cheaped out on server infrastrcture with P2P architecture. and pulled in 15 million and counting in their fist month of launch. Not to mention the huge boon the xbox release will be.

If you think they can't afford a second backend server, you are kidding yourself. The back end of this game is tiny compared to most MMO's.

edit: they are clinging to this decision for ideological reasons, not technical ones.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Been playing MMO's since 1996. These design decisions tend to change in the face of vocal opposition from the community.

As for Ziggy's comment: they already cheaped out on server infrastrcture with P2P architecture. and pulled in 15 million and counting in their fist month of launch. Not to mention the huge boon the xbox release will be.

If you think they can't afford a second backend server, you are kidding yourself. The back end of this game is tiny compared to most MMO's.

Would those MMOs have been subscription based? All that vocal players can do for E: D is to refuse to buy expansions and skins - there's no scope for forcing an issue by banding together and threatening to stop paying subscriptions.

It's not that I don't think that FD cannot afford a second background simulation - more that their vision for the game does not segregate the game modes and has every player contributing to the background simulation.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

Would those MMOs have been subscription based? All that vocal players can do for E: D is to refuse to buy expansions and skins - there's no scope for forcing an issue by banding together and threatening to stop paying subscriptions.

It's not that I don't think that FD cannot afford a second background simulation - more that their vision for the game does not segregate the game modes and has every player contributing to the background simulation.

At a rate of one expansion a year, and 60 dollars an expansion ED is subscription based -- 5 dollars a month. A reasonable amount considering their bandwidth costs are a fraction of those of a traditional MMO. It's dollars in and dollars out, the model is just different.

And no, many of the early MMO type games were not subscription based. Some were P2p, some were volunteer or privately funded.

Anyways, I've said my piece. Done here.

 

[DarkWalker]

Been playing MMO's since 1996. These design decisions tend to change in the face of vocal opposition from the community.

As for Ziggy's comment: they already cheaped out on server infrastrcture with P2P architecture. and pulled in 15 million and counting in their fist month of launch. Not to mention the huge boon the xbox release will be.

If you think they can't afford a second backend server, you are kidding yourself. The back end of this game is tiny compared to most MMO's.

edit: they are clinging to this decision for ideological reasons, not technical ones.

It's not that they can't afford it, it's that it would be meaningless, detrimental even, because:

- You can easily set your router or firewall to prevent connecting to others even when you choose open mode. It's so easy to do it that many players did so while attempting to increase their network safety, and some routers and modems come configured to block the kind of peer to peer connection ED needs for players to see each other. In other words, players can, for all intents and purposes, play solo even when choosing open.

- Being able to change modes without any drawbacks according to real world concerns, mood, etc, is seen as a very positive element by many players, and it was even advertised as a game feature. Locking mode changing in any way would basically be removing promised features and would make the game objectively worse for a number of players, likely leading to a nasty backlash.

In other words, removing or segregating solo not only would give Frontier a nasty headache, it would be ineffectual.

BTW, in case it wasn't clear, not everyone thinks like you. Effortless and free mode changing, for people like me, makes the game far better than the crappy PvP gankfest it would likely become without such escape venues. The same way I consider the original version of Ultima Online a crappy gankfest of a game that wasn't worth playing, and the version after the Trammel/Felucca split (and, thus, when players became able to just opt out of any PvP conflict) as one of the best games ever created.

And, of course, people like me were among the main targets of ED. After all, the main aspect of multiplayer, whenever it was described, was how players would be able to effortlessly choose who they would allow to play with them.

 

[ChrisUK27]

With today's announcement of ED (The definitive massively multiplayer space epic) coming to Mac and XBox One their money stream may be better than anyone on here anticipated.

 

[Shadow_Frost]

Am I the only one who remembers that traders can equip weapons and shields and survive these interdictions? When I was running cargo, I put a PDF and mine dropper and did my thing. If I got interdicted, I rolled and picked up boost and dropped a mine. They have to pause a second to get around it or fire through it which opens up the lead. Seriously, it's not difficult to negate a pirate's craft if you're smart and actually remember you have hard points for a reason and, instead of putting that extra cargo shelf in, you equip a shield and chaff.

 

[CMDR Cillian Raynor]

I don't like dealing with the vast segment of the gaming population that are basically sociopaths (a few have popped up in this thread so far). I haven't tried open play in this game but i've played just enough mmo's to know that i do not care for it. The potential for aggravation outweighs the possible reward. I thought mmo's sounded like a terrific idea in 1995. Then they happened and i was faced with reality and the reality is that...if i don't care to socalize with 90% of the population irl..why would i want them to interact with me in virtual world?

If i want to interact with other people, there's real life. Gaming is escapism time. I want nothing of the real world in it. Certainly not people. Having to deal with people breaks that immersion and in fact frequently aggravates.

To each their own, but solo player for life here.

 

[LaserFace]

That didn't come across as angry to me. The OP was just stating his reasons for going in to solo play. The two groups were trying to blockade the system, which won't work, unlike in EVE. He also never blamed anyone for anything.

The closest thing he blamed was the buggy as all get out interdiction system. I see plenty of NPC Eagles (It's always Eagles for some reason so far that can do this...) both military and pirate where even when you are lined up on the escape vector the whole time, you just lose bars. Then when you submit, it says you submitted, but gives you the max cooldown and hull damage. As he said, he was on the ball with plenty of blue bar when it pulled him out of supercruise against that player.

Open or Solo, there is no running from buggy mechanics.

 

[OVMorat]

I don't like dealing with the vast segment of the gaming population that are basically sociopaths (a few have popped up in this thread so far). I haven't tried open play in this game but i've played just enough mmo's to know that i do not care for it. The potential for aggravation outweighs the possible reward. I thought mmo's sounded like a terrific idea in 1995. Then they happened and i was faced with reality and the reality is that...if i don't care to socalize with 90% of the population irl..why would i want them to interact with me in virtual world?

If i want to interact with other people, there's real life. Gaming is escapism time. I want nothing of the real world in it. Certainly not people. Having to deal with people breaks that immersion and in fact frequently aggravates.

To each their own, but solo player for life here.

So would we both be happy if the game modes were separated?

 

[Tusler]

I played all day yesterday in open and about two hours today. But this last hour has been reading "bro hard" messages and being repeatedly interdicted by a sore loser. This was all fun up to part where im interdicted a million times and then it just got ridiculous.... I can do without this kind of "interaction".

When i logged back in i left myself in the NAV Beacon in Neto. I noticed another Clean Viper Commander and said "Yo" with no reply, oh well. I initiated combat with an NPC Dropship with only a 30k bounty and stripped away all its shields and ate half its health and then the other commander decided to join. I honestly dont care about the bounty because i have more than enough money for a hunter, i really just want to raise my rank at this point. Anyways, im using fixed beams and there is only a 300m gap between me and the dropship and the other Commander flies into my fire therefore i become wanted.

(this is where it starts)
*now enemy CMDR*
"Nice bounty..."
(uhh yea sure... i guess it is if you are 600 short of a Python)

He starts going blinky on my radar indicating hes shooting me now, which i was in the process of typing what had happended but since he was using 2 Small Gimbal Pulse and 2 Medium Gimbal Beams..... my shields were falling pretty fast. (Im also in a Viper) And since this happened before the Dropship died i now have system police, an enemy commander, and a NPC dropship spamming me with lasers. I get out of the NAV beacon... but not fast enough to miss a few messages stating.

Enemy CMDR:
"yea thats right, run *beep* and dont ever come back bla bla bla"

Me to myself:
U wut m8? That was not necessary. I fully intended on clearing my bounty and come back to patch things up but i think you need a spanking.

Im a hunter, i intentionally kit for PvP action, ECM and Chaff included. I know what he has and how to beat it. I dont clear my bounty, i immediately go back in the NAV beacon. This resets the Dropships hostility as well as keep the Police Off until im scanned again.
I start regularly popping chaff and using 'Skill Cells' (They are using them too) just before they disappear... i dont think i couldve cut it any closer before they fell.
The now enemy commander exhibited typical turreting behavior, probably had 3 pips in shields and 3 in weapons and more or less flew in circles and aimlessly spun in FA Off expecting their weapons to do all the hard work... well, gimbals only make up for so much. Eventually they slipped up and didnt activate their Shield Cells in time in turn letting me unleash....

THE FURY OF TWIN MEDIUM FIXED MULTI CANNONS!!!!

They immediately turned tail and attempted to run. They almost got away... until their Thrusters and FSD blew up at the same time leaving them to drift forever until they eventually went into the Sun. At this point i stopped firing to see if they had anything to say.... and OH BOY did they. Everything from "THIS GAME IS SO BROKE" "YOU ARE SUCH A BAD PLAYER BRO" "YOU SHOULD JUST STOP PLAYING THE GAME" and several kinds of expletives. And so i told them why i had a Wanted status and why things turned out the way they did and they were silent.

10 seconds later, they self destructed. Anything they had gained in Vouchers is gone, any missions left to be completed.... gone. Feels good knowing someone with a sour attitude get what they done got AND i didnt incur a 6k bounty.

At this point i already know whats going to happen. They are going to respawn, re-kit and resupply and keep interdicting me and keep spamming me with messages to try to illicit a response until they get some form of satisfaction. I only have 400 Rounds of Multi Cannon left (i was low when the fight started) and im not gonna go for a round two and attempt at killing another player who really isnt that bad of a fighter with just two Beams. Regardless of your alls opinion on the subject i keep a spare C1 Shield Cell for this type of occasion and plenty chaff left as well as ECM in case they fitted Seeking Torps. Because the one who lives to fight another day is the true victor, or something like that. Im interdicted i dont know how many times getting to the station but its going very slowly... The connection problems in SC are blatantly noticeable when i have no time to evade because im immediately brought back into space forcing me to submit every single time.

I know i need to actually jump to a different system at this point but i havent scouted the surrounding ones yet. I pick a random one close enough for a round trip (one i chose, no station fuuu) and jump out of system then back in so i can get a running start. It works and im now closer than i was before but still getting interdicted but i manage to evade one and make back into Citroen Hub.

Hope the story was a good read. Im just glad i could deliver justice in the name of CMDR DEAD HARTT (me ingame)

As they say, "If a noob rages in space, does anyone hear it?".
Yes, the answer is yes.

Bump+ this is well said and why I only play solo on almost all my pc titles, years ago i learned my lesson about people being jerks and messing up a good game online, so if a game is multiplayer only I do not purchase it.
That being said, i have been playing ED in solo mode since I bought it and once I learned how it works have been having a great time. The NPC interdict me enough and the AI is plenty good for me.