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

[CMDR Bansidhe]

It's more nuanced than that. I don't consider being blown up to necessarily be 'ruining anothers' gameplay.' But peoples' tolerance for being blown up by another player-character is very subjective. One person's limit could be getting interdicted and blown up a dozen times in a single day; another's could be just a bad encounter at a bad moment. One might not mind a "Stand and deliver!" type of pirate but go have no tolerance for wannabe-"psychopath" players. That escape hatch has to be there and it has to remain available based on the subjective experience of the player. We can't just reload from a saved game or checkpoint here.

Couldn't the reason that so many of us don't see eye to eye on this be, though, that a lot of us do not see anything that happens within a game to be ruinous or, and this is a key point, in any way the fault of anyone but ourselves?

If I lose at chess the fault is not my opponents for winning it is mine for losing. If I am playing snakes and ladders I love it if I land on a ladder, this does not make the snake a fun-ruining so-and-so.

I can understand that without the possibility of loss, victory becomes less exciting. How can anyone feel they are doing well if it is impossible to do badly? How can you feel good for winning if had never been possible for you to lose? It's like we still need to have our dad's let us beat them at stuff so we won't get upset.

This is a game and as such there should be victories and losses, successes and failures. If not it's little more than an interactive movie. A pop-up book.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

Don't forget that EVE is run on ONE server. All 50.000(or whatever playerbase they got) EVE players could, in theory at least, gather in one huge battle at the same time.

They can't .. an un-reinforced server node caps out and denies entry after about 2500 players pile in.. a reinforced node (ie a planned battle where CCP is notified of the location 24-48 hours in advance) can support somewhere between that and 10,000.. It's not limitless, it's just got a much higher limit than ED... In the early days of EVE it essentially capped out at about 500 before server lag made it unplayable if more people entered the fray. It's not un-realistic to expect ED to be able to cram 200-300 people in an instance once they have had a few years to tune the code.

 

[Faded Glory]

And that is why you should be able to create a purely solo-cmdr (no open play) in a solo play mode so you can play with other players of like mind that don't like non-consensual pvp. Such a solo play mode could include a pvp flag option so you could engage in consensual pvp if you wanted to. Similarly you should be able to also create a purely open-cmdr (no solo play) if you wanted to. Really, that would solve the issue and meet the wishes of both solo- and open minded players (excuse the pun).

As to the abuse issue. This is only a real issue due to almost zero consequence, even for 1st degree murder. 6K-9K bounty for murder of civilians? 13K bounty for murder on authority vessels? Game might as well not give me any punishment. No. The consequences needs to be 10 fold. Or 50 fold. At least so in appropriate government and higher security systems. Murder in anarchy systems or low sec systems could still result in much less consequence. Traders and players would know this and if they chose to go to these systems, know forehand the risks they would bear. However it would still require that any player pirates was there. Much of ED's systems are void of players; so it is allready quite easy for traders to avoid other players. Just don't go where the action is.... But heinous acts in 'proper' civilized governed systems should be taxed much much higher. There could be implemented a number of other consequences than just fines/bounties. I am sure creative FD designers can think something up. How about groups of elite NPC bounty hunters stalking criminal players through hyperspace, suddenly ambushing and hard to kill. Of course AI skill needs to be tweaked and increased. Weapon loadout could be made more serious for these bounty hunters. Etc. I think there are much to improve upon.

Not trying to be inflammatory, but a purely solo CMDR, no open play, to play with other players? He wouldn't be playing with other players, at least would have no direct interaction. And anyway, as has been said before, we don't need another CMDR save, as our CMDRs can go where they please. Why are open players so scared of my solo CMDR visiting?

I actually agree with the rest of what you say. There should be consequences for destroying the ship of a clean CMDR, and I'd be all for anarchy systems being more dangerous, and wanted pirates being hunted down. Of course, they'd have to actually be wanted long enough for either NPC or CMDR bounty hunters to find them.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's not realistic to expect ED to be able to cram 200-300 people in an instance once they have had a few years to tune the code.

I suspect that you meant "unrealistic", however your statement as written is probably correct. The 32-players in an instance limitation stems from the number of simultaneous connections that each player can handle with a suitable bandwidth for each. This will probably not change dramatically for years - until we're all on <insert very large number here> megabit connections that aren't traffic shaped.

 

[Bomba Luigi]

Couldn't the reason that so many of us don't see eye to eye on this be, though, that a lot of us do not see anything that happens within a game to be ruinous or, and this is a key point, in any way the fault of anyone but ourselves?

If I lose at chess the fault is not my opponents for winning it is mine for losing. If I am playing snakes and ladders I love it if I land on a ladder, this does not make the snake a fun-ruining so-and-so.

I can understand that without the possibility of loss, victory becomes less exciting. How can anyone feel they are doing well if it is impossible to do badly? How can you feel good for winning if had never been possible for you to lose? It's like we still need to have our dad's let us beat them at stuff so we won't get upset.

This is a game and as such there should be victories and losses, successes and failures. If not it's little more than an interactive movie. A pop-up book.

It depends on how you look at the Game and what you want to achieve. You seem to look at it in a very combat Focused way that there is only winning and loosing in the form of Combat.

As a Trader, my view is a bit diffrent. How good I am doing depends on how good I am at trading, not Combat. I will always be bad in combat with a T7.

 

[Commander Edison]

Why are open players so scared of my solo CMDR visiting? snip

I've been reading this thread, in various incarnations, for going on for six months now. And I still have no idea what the answer to this question is. I've heard some suggestions, but that there's no traders in open can't be true, because I'm a trader in open. And that you can grind in solo and then unleash your mighty PvP fury in open is also nonsense, since I've got a great big stack of cash from trading...in open. So what is the problem? Genuine question here, looking to learn.

 

[Traven Mayhem]

A computer and broadband internet connection can handle a lot more than 32 connections, each one passing some XYZ and action coordinates around.. They've started conservatively, as any good online gaming company would do. Their player base will want more, if they listen, they'll figure out how to deliver more.

 

[Mikkel Toxwenius]

Not trying to be inflammatory, but a purely solo CMDR, no open play, to play with other players? He wouldn't be playing with other players, at least would have no direct interaction. And anyway, as has been said before, we don't need another CMDR save, as our CMDRs can go where they please. Why are open players so scared of my solo CMDR visiting?

I actually agree with the rest of what you say. There should be consequences for destroying the ship of a clean CMDR, and I'd be all for anarchy systems being more dangerous, and wanted pirates being hunted down. Of course, they'd have to actually be wanted long enough for either NPC or CMDR bounty hunters to find them.

Well, my bad on the formulation. I mean that the solo cmdr should be able to group with other solo players and engage in pvp if they wanted to. So kind of implementing consensual pvp for solo players.

To your question: I am are scared that a good dynamic pvp play won't come to exist because traders will do all their trading in solo, because there they can be left alone to rake in the millions by grinding high profit trade routes with basically no risks. The pirate vs. trader game play, that I quite frankly expects from ED, as do many others, won't exist if traders can just do all their trading in solo. Then when they have millions they can buy their python + upgrades and go open to pvp... and when they need money again, back to trading in solo. Theres no incentive for traders to not use solo; unless of course said trader absolutely loves danger more than in game progress. I don't think many of those traders that go to solo do though.

I could perhaps agree to keeping the current solo/open switchting on the following two conditions:

1. Traders would somehow be able to make more profit in open, and conversely, less profit in solo.
2. Psycho, griefer, pirate, whatever pvp players should espxerience much MUCH more consequense of comitting henious acts. Especially player murder in appropriate governed systems/high sec systems.

 

[DogTailRed2]

You can play in solo mode while playing online.
Just fly 50 ly from Eravate. I've not seen another human all week.

BTW I never play solo. What's the point in no danger? That's why I have guns!

 

[Mikkel Toxwenius]

I've been reading this thread, in various incarnations, for going on for six months now. And I still have no idea what the answer to this question is. I've heard some suggestions, but that there's no traders in open can't be true, because I'm a trader in open. And that you can grind in solo and then unleash your mighty PvP fury in open is also nonsense, since I've got a great big stack of cash from trading...in open. So what is the problem? Genuine question here, looking to learn.

It's not like there is NO traders in open. It's just that... there seem to be few around. Of course I have no access to the game servers player statistics so I can't say how many player trader ships are actually playing in solo contra open. From playing the game it feels like there is few traders in open.

 

[Antmax]

A computer and broadband internet connection can handle a lot more than 32 connections, each one passing some XYZ and action coordinates around.. They've started conservatively, as any good online gaming company would do. Their player base will want more, if they listen, they'll figure out how to deliver more.

Sure simple transforms for a spaceship is easy. But there needs to be prediction for spotty glitches and hit detection over a network is not that trivial when you have hundreds of projectiles being registered across the network. Missing, hitting, depleting shields, hull etc. Plus all the other data that might be changing in realtime. It suddenly gets quite complicated. Mostly in combat of course, which is where the bandwidth gets used the most. They have to figure some people won't have that great connections and scale it down so that even those people can take part without dragging everyone elses performance down too far.

It's not like there is NO traders in open. It's just that... there seem to be few around. Of course I have no access to the game servers player statistics so I can't say how many player trader ships are actually playing in solo contra open. From playing the game it feels like there is few traders in open.

Where I am at there is few of anyone around. Stats at stations typically say 60 - 250 players over a 24 hour period. But I haven't seem much difference between my 3100 player PvE group and open play here in alliance space. I'm lucky to see 2 people at day (lets assume 2 hours of actual play time). Some days I see none (usually in the PvE group).

 

[Faded Glory]

Well, my bad on the formulation. I mean that the solo cmdr should be able to group with other solo players and engage in pvp if they wanted to. So kind of implementing consensual pvp for solo players.

To your question: I am are scared that a good dynamic pvp play won't come to exist because traders will do all their trading in solo, because there they can be left alone to rake in the millions by grinding high profit trade routes with basically no risks. The pirate vs. trader game play, that I quite frankly expects from ED, as do many others, won't exist if traders can just do all their trading in solo. Then when they have millions they can buy their python + upgrades and go open to pvp... and when they need money again, back to trading in solo. Theres no incentive for traders to not use solo; unless of course said trader absolutely loves danger more than in game progress. I don't think many of those traders that go to solo do though.

I could perhaps agree to keeping the current solo/open switchting on the following two conditions:

1. Traders would somehow be able to make more profit in open, and conversely, less profit in solo.
2. Psycho, griefer, pirate, whatever pvp players should espxerience much MUCH more consequense of comitting henious acts. Especially player murder in appropriate governed systems/high sec systems.

Well, as CMDR Edison points out, he has bundles of cash from trading in open, and players in solo can also get interdicted, albeit only by NPC's, which I accept are not always the greatest challenge. I don't really trade, other than a couple of rare goods runs, and deliveries for various factions I'm friendly with, but I do that sometimes open, sometimes solo, and while I don't have a huge pile of credits, I have enough for what I want. I play open/solo in either of my ships, no, not a Python or Anaconda, a Cobra and a Viper.

As to your 'conditions', I really don't think it would make very much difference being able to make more profit in open, as obviously lots of CMDRs are doing just fine anyway in solo, so they'd not have a great incentive to change. As to your second point, I already said I agree with that in principal, and have posted numerous times to that effect.

 

[Commander Edison]

It's not like there is NO traders in open. It's just that... there seem to be few around. Of course I have no access to the game servers player statistics so I can't say how many player trader ships are actually playing in solo contra open. From playing the game it feels like there is few traders in open.

Like I've been saying for many months, player density will never support organic PvP as a playstyle. I say organic because I think there is plenty of scope for both traders and pirates to make sure that PvP happens if they want it. I started a thread on convoys a few months ago with the idea in mind that traders could be safer in numbers and enjoy open more by playing with others. On the flip side it'd allow pirates large concentrations of traders who are prepared for some player based interaction.

As for seeing few players in open, I suspect thats more to do with player density as an absolute than everyone being in solo. I played for 6 hours earlier in open, didn't see a soul. Like you say, without numbers from FDEV we can't be sure, but the maths are pretty simple. There are currently more inhabited systems than players. If you take into account those out exploring you aren't going to see too many players. DB once said the design intention was for encounters with players to be rare, and he seems to have been 100% successful.

 

[ViciousMink]

Couldn't the reason that so many of us don't see eye to eye on this be, though, that a lot of us do not see anything that happens within a game to be ruinous or, and this is a key point, in any way the fault of anyone but ourselves?

If I lose at chess the fault is not my opponents for winning it is mine for losing. If I am playing snakes and ladders I love it if I land on a ladder, this does not make the snake a fun-ruining so-and-so.

I can understand that without the possibility of loss, victory becomes less exciting. How can anyone feel they are doing well if it is impossible to do badly? How can you feel good for winning if had never been possible for you to lose? It's like we still need to have our dad's let us beat them at stuff so we won't get upset.

This is a game and as such there should be victories and losses, successes and failures. If not it's little more than an interactive movie. A pop-up book.

At the same time, though, there are different dynamics of interaction in place. How much risk a person is willing to accept is much different than another's, as is everyones' relative skill levels. For some people the risk of the AI NPCs is enough; for others, they won't be satisfied unless they're facing the best of the best, every time, all the time. And of course everything in between. But that's a really broad spectrum there. It's not acceptable to just turn the risk up to 11 and say that everyone has to suck it up. The goals of the game, if I'm reading the devs' comments right, is to make ED accessible and enjoyable to as many people as possible. The designer, in an often-quoted quote, acknowledged that some styles of play, some desired ways to play the game, are mutually exclusive. I do not think that this is a bad design goal or "pandering to the unskilled" as some might call it; the devs played the original Elite, they enjoyed it, they want to make a successor to Elite that others can enjoy, too. Obviously there are players who can blow the average player out of the stars with just a stern glance (and some lasers) and who want a bigger challenge. And some of those players want everyone to be on the same starting level, with the same opportunities and resources that everyone has.

This is the core of the solo vs. open debate, not that the two 'modes' exist but that the ability to switch between them relatively easily. I, personally, do not want to see that switch removed for the reasons I've given. But I do, at the same time, want to see a fairly level playing field as well -- what's good for the goose is good for the gander, and what's good for the trader -- hassle-free trading -- is good for the player who blows everything up for 'rEAsoNs, HOneSt.' (In that the potential griefer/PKer can also build up a massive war chest in solo/group *or in the remote parts of charted space* without getting hassled and then storm about in a Python or Anaconda with impunity.) So I feel we come back to the same question I raised before, that is, how to make playing and staying in Open appealing without breaking the universe as it is and without penalizing solo/group players (and without making people feel the need or desire to resort to the network shenanigans mentioned before.) This is very difficult to do with the network decisions FDev has made with ED, with the high reliance on P2P instancing, and I don't have any ready answers. But I think if this line of thought can be followed, a generally acceptable solution can be found and this topic can be laid to (relative) rest. At least until the next full moon. =)

 

[Mikkel Toxwenius]

Well, as CMDR Edison points out, he has bundles of cash from trading in open, and players in solo can also get interdicted, albeit only by NPC's, which I accept are not always the greatest challenge. I don't really trade, other than a couple of rare goods runs, and deliveries for various factions I'm friendly with, but I do that sometimes open, sometimes solo, and while I don't have a huge pile of credits, I have enough for what I want. I play open/solo in either of my ships, no, not a Python or Anaconda, a Cobra and a Viper.

As to your 'conditions', I really don't think it would make very much difference being able to make more profit in open, as obviously lots of CMDRs are doing just fine anyway in solo, so they'd not have a great incentive to change. As to your second point, I already said I agree with that in principal, and have posted numerous times to that effect.

He probably has bundles of cash because trading in open is still very much the easiest, and most profitable way to earn le big bugs. And it is still quite safe too, especially if you got to more remote places. I think even so, traders go solo just because it eliminates even the slight risk of other players that there are in open, thus maximizing profit even further.

Trade profit in solo should imo be reduced considerably. Trade profit in open should also be reduced, just not as much as in solo, so there is still a considerable incentive to trade in open.

 

[Cowboy Bats]

A computer and broadband internet connection can handle a lot more than 32 connections, each one passing some XYZ and action coordinates around.. They've started conservatively, as any good online gaming company would do. Their player base will want more, if they listen, they'll figure out how to deliver more.

I don't know the particulars about where you live, but I've been 'investigated' by my ISP for having too many open connections at one time. The reasoning my isp gave me was that if I was running a server I'd have to pay the higher commercial rate. I really wouldn't expect a huge jump in p2p connections if I were you. Might be technically possible, but don't expect anyone to implement it. Publishers and developers who want that brand of massive online will just continue to save themselves the headache and use the client server model, and p2p will continue to be small scale.

 

[Mikkel Toxwenius]

He probably has bundles of cash because trading in open is still very much the easiest, and most profitable way to earn le big bugs. And it is still quite safe too, especially if you got to more remote places. I think even so, traders go solo just because it eliminates even the slight risk of other players that there are in open, thus maximizing profit even further.

Trade profit in solo should imo be reduced considerably. Trade profit in open should also be reduced, just not as much as in solo, so there is still a considerable incentive to trade in open.

Just wanted to show you this screenshot from the Turir system (open playmode). Look at the amount of Type 6 and 7. It's pretty huge numbers. However I can tell you from supercruising around in that system earlier this evening that there was not many transporters in the system. I have seen a good deal of players of mostly cobras and some asps also. From this I can almost only gather that all those traders are mostly solo playing in this system.

 

[Commander Edison]

He probably has bundles of cash because trading in open is still very much the easiest, and most profitable way to earn le big bugs. And it is still quite safe too, especially if you got to more remote places. I think even so, traders go solo just because it eliminates even the slight risk of other players that there are in open, thus maximizing profit even further.

Trade profit in solo should imo be reduced considerably. Trade profit in open should also be reduced, just not as much as in solo, so there is still a considerable incentive to trade in open.

Started off exploring actually. That got me to an Adder, then it was solely missions and bounty hunting until a T6. After that, yeah, all about the trading. But that 's Elite, that's where the money comes from. You want to go out shooting up authority ships? Then you pay for your milspec cobra by hammering a milk run.

If I'm honest, I'd say trading profits do need a mild nerfin', but I don't see the point of nerfing profits differently in solo or open. If people are in solo, they aren't going to come out because you shaved 100cr a can off their progentior cells run. Besides, if I understand how the the background sim works, (probably not) it'd require a completely different market simulation to make that work. So we'd be back to seperate modes.

 

[ViciousMink]

Just wanted to show you this screenshot from the Turir system (open playmode). Look at the amount of Type 6 and 7. It's pretty huge numbers. However I can tell you from supercruising around in that system earlier this evening that there was not many transporters in the system. I have seen a good deal of players of mostly cobras and some asps also. From this I can almost only gather that all those traders are mostly solo playing in this system.

Some/many/most may have also been ships that jumped in, aligned for the next leg of their route, and jumped out, spending a total of maybe 30 seconds in the system. Also, does it count *unique* visits, or does every time a ship pass through is that counted as a 'new' entry in the traffic report?

ETA: Just pointing out, the traffic reports are a bit of a shibboleth. Does it also count NPC ships? And... 101 clippers?! O_O

 

[ChrisUK27]

I didn't claim anything of the sort Dave, nice try though. Statements made by the CEO when? 9 months before release? So they are set in stone right? They will never change? Like offline mode right? You seem to think you are more intelligent than you actually are. What i actually said was that pvp is one aspect of the game, which it clearly is. Not sure what made you think i said its the focus of the game apart from the fact you constantly comment half cocked on peoples posts and you maybe don't read so well.

I never said it was my vision, get over yourself. Yes pvp is a part of ED, well done, very observant of you. I have no issue with the game mechanics to punish people for murder and the like being strengthened, they are already too weak, and they are being strengthened which is good new. Though they aren't doing it to actively discourage pvp, they are doing it to make being a real nasty guy realistic. Its fracking obvious.

It won't affect pirates, because pirates shouldn't have to murder, unless the trader has no concept of risk vs reward as Sandro already touched on in that post. Hauling is not supposed to be risk free. It might be in solo but it shouldn't be in a dynamic player populated galaxy. Trading should require preparation, caution and situational awareness. Right now its over flowing with morons who fly right into rare trading areas in open mode then cry when they get interdicted and try and run from a ship that mass locks them. Its like the most simple concept, yet people constantly fail at it, and therefore they all want to play solo rather than put slightly more effort in to avoid interdiction and obvious high risk areas. Solo mode is for these people.

Which is what Sandro was getting at in his post i linked. Its not hard to understand.

As for your naive statement about how easy it is to avoid pvp if you want, have you seen a trader in a type 6 or lower interdicted by an asp? Obviously not. When the game was released and all the new players were in small ships then yeah, easy as pie. Now lots of players are making money, buying asps etc. And this will only increase. When all the pirates are in asps instead of vipers, maybe you wont be so flippant about it.

For your information, i bought the game thinking it was an MMO in a spaceship. Right now its neither that nor a pvp centric game. I don't care so much about pvp, i make my money through trading like most people that want to actually make money. However, i want to be in a dynamic universe, not some cookie cutter safe haven where everyone picks space flowers together, threads them into each others hair, and then laughs hysterically at the abysmal, easy mode, non threatening AI. If this game was all solo, the only reason anyone would would ever die is from stupidity.

Spot on. You forgot the bit where they were watching a film at the time.

The following post is also spot on (Text below) https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=102042

Just made the biggest mistake of my playing career so far.

After a 170LY trip with a cargo hold full of rares I dropped into the last system where I intended to sell them. I was interdicted by a player in a Cobra, like me, and decided to submit and take him on. That was the big mistake, he had better weapons. It was a hot fight, but a short one. I tried running when my shields went down, but didn't make it.

So what am I going to do? Well, I'll tell you what I'm not going to do:

• I am not going to complain that ED is too hard because I had no auto-win button. (And I won't be switching to solo!)
• I am not going to complain about griefing: he was playing as a pirate with a 10k bounty on his head, staking out a system on a known rare trade route and he was shooting at my cargo hatch to get the cargo.
• I am not going back to a sidewinder because I was flying with enough insurance to replace my ship.
• I am going to remember his name. I took his shields down and did some hull damage and he didn't get my cargo. Next time...

I'm down about 400k including cargo and insurance, but I'll get it back with a couple of hours playing time. That's the way this game goes and I wouldn't want it any other way!

This post needs me to reply:

Exactly. Why do so many people completely and utterly fail to understand this basic concept?

Let me help as you obviously couldn't type your outrage fast enough: 'but in years to come' - That means not now.

Next: Oh yes a few pages back people were writing how poor old traders were getting the thin end. Seriously, have a word. Trading is simple. Goto http://www.elitetradingtool.co.uk/ or the multiple other Trading tools. Type in requirements, leave station, start watching film, land, re-stock and repeat - A fine immersive spreadsheet game. If that's what you want fine, knock yourself out...or fall asleep. The websites Trading vrs well anything else (let alone PvP) is probably 10 to 1.

Oh and just to point out another good point raised earlier, trading is competitive. Looking for the best runs, the most profit, the most hull space, oh can I drop that module and go faster? The only thing missing from Solo is a risk greater than the player losing concentration and hitting boost inside the station. Imagine if the AI were programmed like real players?

Also as I've said before I played this game in the 80's and like Open. Elite aka the Solo game has been done, it was good fun but an updated version with a bigger playspace and better graphics has a shorter lifespan than a multiplayer game. I carried on playing from the 80's so have seen all the changes in gaming and what players are after now is Multiplayer, immersive games. You only have to look at games like Destiny, the Campaign was very so-so and slated on forums etc, but it's all about the multiplayer. The CoD and BF games, why are they popular? The campaign, no, the multiplayer. Why does this matter I hear you say, we are different! Well we and more importantly FD need these new players to keep the game going. I've also played EvE on and off since it began, that game is very very different to how it started so saying FD 'Will never' is pointless.

Where I am in the Open game for me is pretty ideal. I've found a system with a player count 1 - 4 (That's right I left the starting system and found 'somewhere else') and I can PvE to my hearts content but if 'I CHOOSE' (You guys use this statement allot can I borrow it please?), I can head for the popular systems and see what's going on, if a player interdicts fine let's fight. I CHOSE to go there. More often that not we have a quick chat or simply fly by. Now if I'd decided to do the get-rich-quick this may have been a problem as the rare runs are popular with players, maybe even some with guns who shoot! Hell I'd have to consider flying a suitable ship with a suitable fit (But that does take some time and effort). Oh that sounds like PvP is possible but not as people like to think inevitable. Nor is it a massive part of the game, it is however as essential as trading, exploring, etc.

During the Beta phase the forums were packed with posts full of players worried that they would never meet. How can they do it? said many a poster. The answer was simple, create hubs of interest 'Sol, Beta Hydri etc' and add rares. Now what we have is players flocking to them, especially the rare runs and lo and behold they don't like the fact that the hunters have clocked onto the routes aswell. Remember 'The Hunters stay close to the herd'. As for these so called suicide players, are there thousands of them, the killers (Although I read you're in an escape pod not dead?) are there thousands or a few. I'd guess at the latter, another forum I follow posts when these players appear and guess what it tends to be the same CMDR xyz that appears, they deploy their militia on teamspeak, job done. I could go join them as afterall it's my choice. The game has loads of potential if it's allowed to flourish, the closed ranks of Solo are already asking for restrictions on it. Now that FD have delivered it's full of people wanting to be in the same place but on their own which is restricting my gameplay.

I like Open, don't force me to play Solo, it's MY CHOICE.