I've really only played open since I've bought the game, and haven't had a lot of trouble with the pirates or griefers... In fact I like the fact that at least in open, there's an element of risk. My only problem with open is that while the traders take on most of the risk, the gankers get basically none at all. most traders are easy prey, and the penalties for murdeing randoms is non-existent. For that reason, I don't blame people for preferring to play in solo, and I hardly think a tax makes it fair on those that prefer solo, or are pushed in by bad experiences. An arbitrary penalty for choosing to play in solo certainly won't bring players into open, it will likely just alienate them and they'll leave the game altogether.
- Status
As a primarily trader/explorer in-game I can say from my point of view, I will return to open play when the criminality in-game of piracy has a proper in-game consequence. Being able to avoid the consequences (bounty hunters) by nipping off to your local anarchy station and paying off fines/bounties is in my opinion just as poor a mechanic as the boost and jump to avoid interdiction.
I think it would be very unfair to create a tax on Solo traders. That said, there is more risk in Open, so more reward is also fair.
Ultimately, Solo isn't competative, so having some kind of bonus in Open shouldn't be a problem.
Ultimately, Solo isn't competative, so having some kind of bonus in Open shouldn't be a problem.
How about if the bounty for killing a vessel was linked to the value of rebuy plus cargo. This should minimise traders getting griefed / ganked. Say a vulture attacks and destroys t7 with palladium. That poor trader is going to be out of pocket 3 plus million. 1and 1/2 hrs grind.
Quick question do bounties get cleared when killed by another player or do you still have to pay your bounty off. If bounty didnt getpayed off when you died you would find players that killed clean players would be quickly back in free sidewinders.
Quick question do bounties get cleared when killed by another player or do you still have to pay your bounty off. If bounty didnt getpayed off when you died you would find players that killed clean players would be quickly back in free sidewinders.
I think both are right in a way. Solo was, yes, planned from before offline was even considered, but it gained in importance when offline was canceled. Which makes any limitation on either solo or switching to or from it even less likely.
Hi CMDRS. While reading through the threads, I still can't understand the lack of intervention by the Dev of ED. If you commit a crime in OPEN PLAY by shooting clean players etc, why hasn't the program automatically changed that players status to Wanted. More so then band them from docking at any space stations. Then have numerous Ai police ships come at them to kill them!!!!!. Giving them the limited option of only been able to dock at Anarchy type systems. If they continue with these actions, there Wanted listing becomes Fugitive!!!!!!!. This will invoke, a serious bounty reward, Galactic wide Ai Police attention, and 0% insurance. If these players can survive in OPEN PLAY at this level, Hell, well done to there skills. In reality, the childish, single celled players will die,run out of cash and not even have a Free-ship to fall back on. GAME OVER. To the players who wish to run this gauntlet, again it would limit there actions as to how many times they could out run the LAW!!!!. As for Trading in OPEN PLAY, why not give the Trade Ships ie T7 -T9 an EMP for (PvP) as standard. This will at least stop any PvP in its tracks for a while..... Thanks for reading.
Define "successful".
Anyways: even if the majority of the players were gankers and griefers and some pirates. That dosent change the fact that the game is PROMISED to have the different modes.
And the different playstyles. And i dont see any problem at all with that. If you dont find any targets you should think why that is. And not try to punish players that play
with a different mindset into being your victims. Because you are ion no way the center of the world.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
+rep
bullseye here ;-)
Snakebite
Banned
I've said this before and i'l say it again. Open is the primary way ED should be played it was always envisaged as an MMO, but playing in solo is also a perfectly acceptable alternative for those who shy from open play.
What is not acceptable is the ability to constantly swap between the two modes that is what is causing , and will continue to cause such strife IMO mode swapping is just as bad as combat logging.
When I am trading, I know I am being targeted by human pirates for no reason other than the fact I appear as a hollow blip on their scanner. This is not immersive play. So rather than saying it's far too easy for human traders to avoid pirates, I would suggest it's far too easy for pirates to single out human traders.
I have no problem with the concept of piracy in an open environment where their actions are well-balanced, and whereby ganking / griefing is not something anyone wants to do as the consequences are just too severe to make it worth anyone's while to bother. I await FD delivering such an environment.
So do people really switch as that seems pointless if they're trading and don't want to be bothered they'd just stay in solo, they wouldn't just switch for a run or swap when interdicted, they'd just play solo, they know the increased risk of open so I don't see why they'd just suddenly go oh I'm swapping to solo for this run then come back to open.
You mean being trigger happy in open?
No not at all; David Braben said in an early video that he personally prefers Solo...
Lets punish everyone else not playing in Open... blah blah blah.
I. Choose. Solo.
Not because Im scared.
Not because Im shy.
Not because Im lacking in skill.
Not because Im dysfunctional.
Not because Im anti social.
Not because there is a lack of incentive to do otherwise.
Not because its easier.
Not because I can grind more credits.
Not because I can 'exploit' the game.
But because I can.
I bought the game for Solo play.
Everybody makes their choice. If you want more traders to shoot at start your own group and all you 'pirates can take turns at being traders.
Really. Simple.
I. Choose. Solo.
Not because Im scared.
Not because Im shy.
Not because Im lacking in skill.
Not because Im dysfunctional.
Not because Im anti social.
Not because there is a lack of incentive to do otherwise.
Not because its easier.
Not because I can grind more credits.
Not because I can 'exploit' the game.
But because I can.
I bought the game for Solo play.
Everybody makes their choice. If you want more traders to shoot at start your own group and all you 'pirates can take turns at being traders.
Really. Simple.
Snakebite
Banned
The dilemma is that many people do go into solo so that they can get on with a bit of trading unmolested and not have to worry about the PvP, the same people will then go into Open to engage in pvp and molest others.
The way that the mechanics of it are set up leads people to behave in a way which was not intended. and which is not healthy for the game.
Its very sad, but FD have to deal with human psychology I firmly believe that there are a number of things that need adjusting, but the one overarching issue is that of mode swapping, it is going to have to be stopped at some point or the game will continue to suffer. anything else that they do is just fiddling around the edges until this is fixed.
Hello to everybody, I think that it is not necessary to punish " one and the other one one " that they play solo or in the opened game, he would be still unfavourable to Elite: Dangerous, a problem is really a bound(connected) problem (connected) to the IA of the game which needs a serious revision. Voila what I propose, it is a point of seen personal, and each can have a miscellaneous to leave without for it discussion turns in "vineyard".
Example of what I expects from Elite: Dangerous:
1. I am " Sailor " and I help the Union, I him(it,her) trade, the inquiry and sometimes the fight .Donc I would not want when I pass from a star to the other one to sell my products to a base (in that case of the Union) which I am to protect effectively by the force of the order of the Union (IA or players) until time .Une of base to arrive at the base, I sells my products to a price slightly more interesting that on another station other than the Union .Avec evidement favors them to help the Union.
2. Now, let us imagine that the attacks of the Empire (affects) all the vessels (business(cases), serviceman, explorer etc.) what makes that it is in the end of certain times if the base should not be supplied any more, and well it(he) has to have consequences:
During more three in the day * more the base is to supply:
* I give this figure at random by what it will be in switches schedules of Elite: Dangerous to fix time.
3. For everybody, one could not make any more for her(it) all the height of fuel, to repair, to buy possessions, to buy a vessel in shipyards etc.... Until the base is again to supply enough!...
Evidement this principle would apply to all: Union, deteriorates(aggravates), Alliance etc....
Quite world " pirate, hirelings, servicemen, etc. " would win at her(it) and his(its,her) ( sound, her(it)) has to raise (to turn out) the level of the game.
In what for example the interest of the Empire in the example which I give should to come in the zone of the Union to destroy(annul) (to cancel) allowing logistics has the base to survive, and it il) has to it(he) be the same for the Union against the Empire or of the other watch.
Pirate will also have interest to be protected the "anarchistic" bases to be capable of repairing their vessel or the other one. And they would have also an interest to justify to attack(affect) (incidence) of the logistics of the other base (it is an example).
So, all the watches would have real interests to be defended(be forbidden) (speechless) or to attack(affect) (incidence) in the game.
I have for it is necessary a reduction (delivery) for level to contain of the IA of the game which lacks strategy.
Example so far " " Details(rooms) police " partially to put you fines and to keep(guard) (of nurse) hands in their pocket instead of making the work protect the company, tourism, etc.... They left with you die!
4. All the categories of the reader will be more to imply and responsible for the evolution of the close future and fates of the galactic world of Elite: Dangerous..
Even though I make many of the inquiry, it(he) will be sometimes necessary for me " to put hands in the pâté " if I want to continue to be capable of selling my to give inquiries, or my goods or to repair my or my vessels.
Voila what I propose, it is only a point of view, you can not share my opinion and it(he) is normal and even interesting, she(it) il), it(he) can be in better ideas than mine when time on the forum one remains courteous and when one does not make an infringement on the person.
I think that the ideas which I have just exposed(explained) (explained) are more interesting than to punish or not the players of "Solo" or in " opened game ".
Awaiting for your ideas and propositions opinion, I thank you.
I hope as well as the persons of Elite: Dangerous will read these lines.
NEO-X-01.
Last edited:
With a large enough player base having all three modes is completely viable, playable and enjoyable. GTAV does it all day every day with huge success, why is this still a topic?
I started off in Solo mode, until I got comfortable with controlling my ship, and managing missions for faction points, etc.
For the last month, I've been playing in open. As a trader, most of that time was in a Type-6. I recently upgraded to an Asp, so I could fight back a bit during interdictions.
I've yet to actually interact with another player. I can see some players online when I visit Yembo, but they always seem to be docking or jumping, and don't respond to hails.
The other dozen or so systems I visit during my mission runs seem to never have players at them, so for me there's little difference between solo or open. The only factor is that at some point I may get interdicted/attacked by a player.
So I'll continue to trade in open, maybe one day a player and stop by and even offer to fly cover for my mission
For the last month, I've been playing in open. As a trader, most of that time was in a Type-6. I recently upgraded to an Asp, so I could fight back a bit during interdictions.
I've yet to actually interact with another player. I can see some players online when I visit Yembo, but they always seem to be docking or jumping, and don't respond to hails.
The other dozen or so systems I visit during my mission runs seem to never have players at them, so for me there's little difference between solo or open. The only factor is that at some point I may get interdicted/attacked by a player.
So I'll continue to trade in open, maybe one day a player and stop by and even offer to fly cover for my mission
You forgot to mention that this is simply your opinion. It is my opinion to disagree with what you are stating here. The game is fine, I love playing it, it just doesn't cater to PVP'ers the way EvE did, that's all. Also David Braben, and FD were very animate from the very beginning. They wanted every play style to enjoy the game. Thus is why they provided mode switching at will, and the different modes at the very beginning of the kick starter.
Once again, your opinion only. The game isn't suffering, your agenda is suffering. Frontier doesn't have to change a thing, especially things that were in since the very beginning of the development. As I've said in the past, the mode switching, and different modes are the intent, not a mistake, not bad design, but a truly brilliant design to allow many more people, other than just the PVP crowd to greatly enjoy the game.
Every time I see one of these threads all I ever seem to read between the lines is "Please I want to kill poorly armoured defenceless ships so I can feel awesome about myself, come be my cannon fodder so I enjoy the game not you" Can this just be merged with the other round in circles threads?
- Status