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

[Dave1235]

Personally I don't even bother with the open game. I just play in solo mode. I loved the original game and I don't see the point in going into an open universe to get abused by idiots, blown up by morons that either deliberately crash into me or destroy my ship "just because I can" as one Cobra pilot put it just before he anhiolated my hauler. Nor do I see the point in waiting an hour to get into a station especially if I am on a timed mission.

I do however see how some are upset about people jumping between online and solo when it suits them. Solo is an easier option currently due to the simple fact that the human pilot is capable of thinking whereas an AI pilot cannot, making the human pilot a much more deadly adversary.

I have no interest whatsoever in this idiot filled online hell pit that you have created but I am thourghly enjoying the game as it was back in the eighties. On my own in space making cash!

I think that solo and open play should be two separate saves. Your open progress should be separate from the solo because if you are into the open play then you have chosen that world. You should not be allowed to duck out of a fight or jump a queue by naffing off to solo. It is effectively a form of cheating when you pick at its bones.

So you don't play in open you don't want to be "abused by idiots, blown up by morons" but want to lock others into open play, "allowed to duck out of a fight or jump a queue by naffing off to solo" is actually part of the game design (although it is described differently lol).

Can you explain (I don't get it) how as a solo only player this issue / non issue affects your in game experience?

 

[Asp Explorer]

Conclusion - Unfair advantage over those who play only on Open Play Mode
In my view, a certain group is certainly gaining more advantage over the other which means that this upsets the balance of the game which needs to be fixed.

You are kidding, right? Solo players have no chance of picking up any of those huge bounties from psycho PvP pirates. From that one data point, it is only possible to conclude that Open players are at a game-breaking unfair advantage.

 

[Dabba]

Let's understand the benefit of allowing players to switch between single player mode and open play mode.

For those who prefers switching at will:
- Less risk being attacked by a human pirate, trading at lesser risk.
- Trading with lesser risk means progressing into the game faster

Conclusion - Unfair advantage over those who play only on Open Play Mode


For those who play only on Open Play mode:
- No benefit at all

So why is this a feature that only benefits one single group of players?

Do you see this as being balanced?

In my view, a certain group is certainly gaining more advantage over the other which means that this upsets the balance of the game which needs to be fixed.

In my opinion it would be best to seperate Single Player mode and Open Play mode. Whatever you get (CR, progression, etc) in Single Player mode SHOULD stay in Single Player Mode. Open Play needs to have a separate shard.

I do see it as balanced, because everyone has the same options. You are choosing to play only in Open mode, but that is your choice. I have a job and a family, and so I am choosing to only play a couple hours a day, that is my choice. Anyone that is choosing to play 10 hours a day has a clear advantage over me, but I am not asking for a mode where play time is limited to 2 hours daily because they have an advantage over me, because I am choosing to only play 2 hours a day, just as people who only play in Open are choosing to only play in Open. Just like I have the choice to play more hours at the expense of job and family, everyone has the choice to play on Solo at any time they want. Just as nobody is forcing me to only play a few hours a day, nobody is forcing you to only play on Open. We all have the same options, it all comes down to a choice.

There is only one group of players, its the group of players that gets to choose whether they play Open, Solo, or Group in any session they play. We all fall into that group. So yes, I see it as balanced.

 

[AJ79]

I'm afraid you've misread or misunderstood the post you're quoting.

Point 1 is specifically (and only) about factions expanding into unsettled space. It has nothing to do with 'flipping' the faction that controls a station (or through that, flipping the faction that controls a system).

Point 2 is clarifying that the background simulation cannot (at least at the moment) add new stations to an already settled system. It has nothing to do with whether you can flip a station or system.

Point 3 is clarifying that the background simulation cannot (at least at the moment) upgrade a station (ie, an outpost becoming a full station, or a station that didn't have a market gaining one). It has nothing to do with whether you can flip a station or system.

None of these points has anything to do with flipping an existing station or inhabited system. Station and system flipping are automated and do not require manual input from the devs. There are a couple of bugs that have come to light that the devs are currently working to fix, which are interfering with this automated process.

Sorry, I missed that other part - reading when tired is not a good thing it seems lol.h
Cheers, good to know.

 

[W0OCQCK]

So if I notice that a small, independent faction has control of 3 star systems that are all next to eachother... I could get a bunch of friends together, go over there, and flip the systems back over to some other faction. What if that was a solo player who put in tons of work to get those systems the way they were? I guess that solo guy just has to deal with it.

This is why I think solo players and private groups should get their own copy of the universe, with it's own influence ratings.

I think most of us understand your position. However you did forget to reference "Risk vs Reward", and the need for a "balanced Game".

I think they have struck a beautiful balance, with most of the options we expected. How ever know matter how brilliantly this game has been balanced, it doesn't seem to meet your needs.

Additionally, Frontier has seen there way clearly to provide all (3) modes with the same amount of risk, and allow us to remove people we choose not to play with, from our gaming experience. I'm sorry I don't have anything against you personally, but I don't know you, and choose not to invite you to my gaming experience.

However please feel free to carry on, I wish you the best of luck with all your future endeavors.

 

[Dave1235]

Indeed. From my standpoint, all I want for this game is for me to be able to PvP when I want to, and PvE when I don't. I've just noticed, in the three days I have been a member of this forum, that not only is there a very vocal, excessively pro-PvP party, but also a very vocal, excessively anti-PvP party. Like I said in a previous post, both are wrong, IMO at least. I think it would be very sad for the game going forward if either party got their way, especially when, as you have pointed out already, the tools for both to get what they want exist already. No offence guys, but I really believe this thread has gone as far as it can go, for me at least. I'd rather spend my time in space. Here's hoping we can all get what we want. Fly safe, and see you in space o7

Nice post & as soon as my BB is fixed I will be "in space" again too.

There will be no winner or loser in this situation, nothing will change, we have had open / group / solo since beta, we have it after launch, its here to stay, its in the game, a dozen people calling it cheating wont change it..

We will be able to "play it your way", unfortunately a few people don't understand the context (play a trader, pirate, bounty hunter, miner, play it in open, group, solo, play it your way) not "my way is every one is in open because I want to hunt sheep mode". That is playing it someone else's way, not your own way.

I agree this thread has gone as far as it should go, but its the interweb and its not up to us.

Edit, the anti PVP people are not really that vocal, they just play in a private group / solo and have fun (and I guess spend less time on the forums).

 

[Faded Glory]

I do see it as balanced, because everyone has the same options. You are choosing to play only in Open mode, but that is your choice. I have a job and a family, and so I am choosing to only play a couple hours a day, that is my choice. Anyone that is choosing to play 10 hours a day has a clear advantage over me, but I am not asking for a mode where play time is limited to 2 hours daily because they have an advantage over me, because I am choosing to only play 2 hours a day, just as people who only play in Open are choosing to only play in Open. Just like I have the choice to play more hours at the expense of job and family, everyone has the choice to play on Solo at any time they want. Just as nobody is forcing me to only play a few hours a day, nobody is forcing you to only play on Open. We all have the same options, it all comes down to a choice.

There is only one group of players, its the group of players that gets to choose whether they play Open, Solo, or Group in any session they play. We all fall into that group. So yes, I see it as balanced.

Rep. Who'd have thought that choices were such a good thing to have in this game.

 

[BigBadB]

Conclusion - Unfair advantage over those who play only on Open Play Mode

Do you see this as being balanced if a certain feature creates a unfair advantage to a certain group of players?

In my view, a certain group is certainly gaining more advantage over the other which means that this upsets the balance of the game which needs to be fixed.

In my opinion it would be best to seperate Single Player mode and Open Play mode. Whatever you get (CR, progression, etc) in Single Player mode SHOULD stay in Single Player Mode. Open Play needs to have a separate shard.

First, I think it's highly dubious whether there really is much 'advantage' to playing in Solo. It's perfectly possible to play in Open, avoid the few areas with heavy player traffic, and trade to your heart's content. The inhabited area of the Galaxy is enormous in and of itself, far larger than the play areas of most online games, and it's easy to find places to get lost in, if you want to avoid other players.

Second, this alleged advantage, even if it exists, applies only to making credits. There is a significant proportion of the player base for whom making the most money as quickly as they can is not a major focus.

Third, the mere concept of 'gaining an advantage' over other players is tenuous at best in ED. The game is not directly competitive in the way that more focussed PvP games can be. For many players (I rather suspect the majority), it really makes no difference whether someone else has more or less cash than they do.

Fourth, even if this advantage exists, credit income is how you judge success and you do care about how your bank balance compares with others, there's absolutely nothing 'unfair' because anyone can choose to play in Solo mode if they wish.

So what's the big deal, again?

 

[Asp Explorer]

So what's the big deal, again?

Having no unwilling and feeble targets to pew-pew makes some players feel inadequate I suppose

 

[Ghostickles]

Honest Sociopaths get upset when you log right before they frag you, so if you want the last lol do this and profit. It doesn't effect my game in the least. If you log they can count it as win, they don't get it recorded but w/e. As Ive said before, the model works fine in GTAV, it will work here.

 

[Dave1235]

Not sure what there is to debate really?

There are three play modes which is great IMO as it allows everyone to have fun in the manner they feel like at the moment.

win/win for everyone methinks.

Please stay on topic, there is no place for logic or common sense here

You would have thought that it was almost part of the design of the game, like the DDF members asked for it, as its been here from beta to post launch.

I heard FD asked people for money to make the game, and took their opinions into account too, and then used them in the design of the game, then much later "we" (me included) bought the game they made, and some unfortunately did not do any research first, and want to change it into what they thought they bought.

 

[ianstrauss]

I do see it as balanced, because everyone has the same options. You are choosing to play only in Open mode, but that is your choice. I have a job and a family, and so I am choosing to only play a couple hours a day, that is my choice. Anyone that is choosing to play 10 hours a day has a clear advantage over me, but I am not asking for a mode where play time is limited to 2 hours daily because they have an advantage over me, because I am choosing to only play 2 hours a day, just as people who only play in Open are choosing to only play in Open. Just like I have the choice to play more hours at the expense of job and family, everyone has the choice to play on Solo at any time they want. Just as nobody is forcing me to only play a few hours a day, nobody is forcing you to only play on Open. We all have the same options, it all comes down to a choice.

There is only one group of players, its the group of players that gets to choose whether they play Open, Solo, or Group in any session they play. We all fall into that group. So yes, I see it as balanced.

Having a lot of options and choices are all and good, who doesn't want to have a lot choices anyway? As long as you don't get any unfair advantage over another player it should be fine. However in a game design perspective, once a feature is implemented and it only benefits a certain group then game balancing needs to be done as it is prone to exploit.

I also want to have a lot of choices but I want those choices to be FAIR to EVERYONE not only to a certain group of people who prefers to swtich modes and hide in a blanket of security everytime a human pirate arrives. This defeats the purpose of some core game mechanics and it totally unfair to the other side who are left out to certain risks playing solely on Open Play.

 

[Zenicetus]

You are kidding, right? Solo players have no chance of picking up any of those huge bounties from psycho PvP pirates. From that one data point, it is only possible to conclude that Open players are at a game-breaking unfair advantage.

And let's not forget the other advantage of Wings (when that arrives), which no Solo player can fly in.

Two or more competent players in a Wing are an "I win" button against any other single NP or player ship. Yes, even one of those mythical "tooled up Anacondas bought in Solo mode" that always show up in these discussions. This game strongly favors strength in numbers during combat, and players in Wings will have that advantage. Solo players will not.

 

[Gorodd]

Ok a little off the wall re Open Play.

Why not increase Faction interest in players? A player is killed, said faction(s) he is allied with do not look kindly on the attacking player...negative rep. on all factions that player is 'friendly' or 'allied' with. 'Allied' being significant rep. damage. Bad enough rep. means 'enemy' (or whatever the rating is) and faction treats attacking player accordingly. Rep of course can't be wiped clean and reset like bounties - the attacking player would need to work hard to get it neutral or positive.

You can see where this leads right? Factions going after players, those factions allied with the 'killing player' may be forced to retaliate...all manner of hell breaks lose. Attacking player has to watch which systems he enters or else etc.

It would mean that the wiser 'kill player' types would want to choose their targets carefully - it would also mean that scans would need to provide way more info. on the target to reveal faction reps and possibly provide automatic alerts to help reduce killing the wrong player . Likewise, it would also stimulate the 'non-kill player' types to get positive rep. with every faction possible to help reduce the chance of becoming a victim.

That being said, there are always those who will go in for a thrill and kill without regard - that should create a good deal of carnage based on faction responses...would make for a real interesting set of unpredictable results.

 

[ianstrauss]

And let's not forget the other advantage of Wings (when that arrives), which no Solo player can fly in.

Two or more competent players in a Wing are an "I win" button against any other single NP or player ship. Yes, even one of those mythical "tooled up Anacondas bought in Solo mode" that always show up in these discussions. This game strongly favors strength in numbers during combat, and players in Wings will have that advantage. Solo players will not.

Which is why there is really a need for Single Player Mode and Open Play Mode to have a seperate unique shards. This will alleviate some imbalances to the game and to upcoming features like wings.

 

[Ghostickles]

And let's not forget the other advantage of Wings (when that arrives), which no Solo player can fly in.

Two or more competent players in a Wing are an "I win" button against any other single NP or player ship. Yes, even one of those mythical "tooled up Anacondas bought in Solo mode" that always show up in these discussions. This game strongly favors strength in numbers during combat, and players in Wings will have that advantage. Solo players will not.

This I had not heard, and if Wings is a Wings only game mode that is brilliant, KUDOS, and bring the dog pile!

 

[StarTux]

Which is why there is really a need for Single Player Mode and Open Play Mode to have a seperate unique shards. This will alleviate some imbalances to the game and to upcoming features like wings.

How so? What imbalance? You mean someone going from solo to open and getting hit by a Wing of players? Well, they can also team up.

Seriously, why not just cut down the galaxy to a few thousand systems which we have to use gateways to get through, remove P2P and make it online only? This way you'd get the PVP competitive game you'd so desire.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Which is why there is really a need for Single Player Mode and Open Play Mode to have a seperate unique shards. This will alleviate some imbalances to the game and to upcoming features like wings.

In Elite's infrastructure - there is no such concept as a "shard" - so that idea isn't going to go anywhere. The universe is shared between all players, all the time, and any and all changes to it affect every and all players.

Your only immediate concern is what goes on in the instance bubble you are in. That is all. If it helps you to understand things better, consider each instance bubble a "shard".

 

[ianstrauss]

How so? What imbalance? You mean someone going from solo to open and getting hit by a Wing of players? Well, they can also team up.

Seriously, why not just cut down the galaxy to a few thousand systems which we have to use gateways to get through, remove P2P and make it online only? This way you'd get the PVP competitive game you'd so desire.

Sorry I don't PVP, I absolutely hate it.

I do love the thrill of doing trading and mining while staying alert on Open Plan though.

To answer your question, I'll give you a premise:

Player A - Only plays on Open Play and do rare trading on Leesti et al, whether he sees other players on screen or not he stays Open Play.

Player B - Switches between Single Player Mode and Open Play whenever he sees another player. He's also doing rare trading on Leesti et al.

Both Player plays 3 hours a day.
Both Player has the same ship and ship components.
Both player has the same latency connection
Both player sells rares in the same trade routes, following the same route
Both player buys the same number of rares and same type

Question: Who do you think will will gather more CR in a week/month?


It's a very simple but real scenario on how unbalance the game is because of allowing players to switch mode from Open Play to Single Player at will.

This is not rocket science and its very obvious that the one whos just playing Open Play is severely disadvantaged due to the risk of human piracy on Open Play.

As I said, if a certain group of player is having unfair advantage over another, game needs to be balanced to be fair for everyone.

 

[AJ79]

Having a lot of options and choices are all and good, who doesn't want to have a lot choices anyway? As long as you don't get any unfair advantage over another player it should be fine. However in a game design perspective, once a feature is implemented and it only benefits a certain group then game balancing needs to be done as it is prone to exploit.

I also want to have a lot of choices but I want those choices to be FAIR to EVERYONE not only to a certain group of people who prefers to swtich modes and hide in a blanket of security everytime a human pirate arrives. This defeats the purpose of some core game mechanics and it totally unfair to the other side who are left out to certain risks playing solely on Open Play.

Did you even read the posts with the KS info, the DDA info or the Dev stuff?
At no point were any "core mechanics" designed for PvP.
All professions were designed and balanced around PvE due to seeing other humans being "rare"
The core game is there as intended.