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

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
The problem seems to be that certain groups want content that caters only for their style of play to the exclusion of others, but who then suggest that those feeling irked by the possibility of being 'left out' are selfish.

As one of my favourite actors would have quipped: Most illogical!
 
... I am interested in what they do, not what they say. And the Open game is PvP centric...

The question I would ask in response to this is: If the game was not designed to be PvP-centric, but open mode has effectively become so, how did this happen?

To a very large extent I think it is because the highly populated areas in open are largely populated by PvP-centric players. FD didn't "do it" - All you hardcore PvPers did it. You moved in and imposed your play style on open in spite of FDs intent. Now you're griping about design "flaws" that are only flaws if FDs intent was to build a PvP-centric game, instead of competitive PvP being a square peg that you relentlessly hammered into the round hole of FD's design.

Just because PvPers move in places no mandate on FD to make PvP "better" - if anything I would expect them to make the game less hospitable to gratuitous PvP as that would move the open gameplay more in the direction that they intended.

You probably wouldn't regard that as "improving" the game, though.
 
I've got the impression that the arguments for change surrounding PvP and open play are a result of "baggage" brought from other games.
I would have thought that PvP fans (and there are plenty of them) would naturally play open all the time and get their PvP kicks from fellow, like-minded players, in which case, where's the big problem?

/confused


They have a need to feel superior and change things so they have a higher status than other players.

Thats the problem.
 
The problem seems to be that certain groups want content that caters only for their style of play to the exclusion of others, but who then suggest that those feeling irked by the possibility of being 'left out' are selfish.

As one of my favourite actors would have quipped: Most illogical!

I would have thought that content should be available universally to all, how much fun you get out of it would be a case of playing the game the way you prefer best. Which is what we have now - is it not?
How can someone playing solo feel the thrill of defeating or escaping an attack from another skilled human pilot - they can't, and they probably don't want to anyway.
But I would always suggest to any player to at least try a bit of PvP (connection allowing) - you may like it, in which case you've discovered another entertaining way to play - or you may not like it, in which case you really know why.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

They have a need to feel superior and change things so they have a higher status than other players.

Thats the problem.


I would be more generous and suggest they are more competetive than others, and as they get a lot of fun out of that, sometimes lack the empathy to see why others would not want the same thing.
 
It seems to me that those seeking change are on the crusade - those resisting are defending the status quo.

Crusaders can be defending the castle as well as trying to break down the doors.

I suggest PvP only goals, as in warzones in WoW or the PvP battlefields in many other games. PvE players can participate, or not, it's their choice. More content, more options, more variety. And people argue.

This last round of arguments reminded me of the times we asked for the option to turn on chat bubbles in SWTOR, only to have these unbelievably selfish people come along as say that it would "ruin it for them". An option would ruin their game. How do you even comprehend a mind that feels slighted by other people's freedom of choice?
 
The question I would ask in response to this is: If the game was not designed to be PvP-centric, but open mode has effectively become so, how did this happen?

To a very large extent I think it is because the highly populated areas in open are largely populated by PvP-centric players. FD didn't "do it" - All you hardcore PvPers did it. You moved in and imposed your play style on open in spite of FDs intent.

See, we don't care about their intent, or better said, we don't give a damn about your interpretation of it. We care about the way the game plays, and what we can do in the game. If their "intent" was to prevent PvP and make the game Co-op only, there is a very simple solution to that - disable PvP damage.

What they made is a game that is intrinsically attractive to PvPers. What, didn't they see it coming? I think they did, but you have this fixation that PvP is to be discouraged. PvP is a big part of this game and in Open it can and often does define entire areas. FD designed the game for PvP as much as anything else. Intentionally or not.
 
I like the Idea. Let those not able, interested in pvp, or, like me, find partying up without a que system too tedious or non-viable to play solo and benefit from the credit rewards and enjoy the game play mechanic/grind while letting the pvp wings, who probably have the most interest in the outcome, decide the war.

I'd be happy with this too. But I wonder how tiered rewards would be complicated by this. Do I contribute to getting the tier moved higher by playing in solo? If not, then am I able to get higher tier rewards than the baseline in solo? Otherwise, you'd have pilots in open who did all the work of advancing the tier, but pilots in solo who weren't distracted by being blown up by the enemy players dominating the top tier of rewards (top 5%). One way to mitigate against that is to let open play determine what tier the progress is at and then the rankings for rewards are grouped by "solo/private" vs "open." So it's up to open to push the event forward, but solo can get the rewards without edging out all the open who contributed a ton...
 
Combat logging is perfectly valid in Mobius since the groups is specifically a PvE group (with some PvP in conflict zones only) the players in this thread who stated they went into the Mobius group and attacked players there are the ones FD should take harsh measures against, the rules of the group are there when you sign up and by doing that you are griefing, if you want PvP go to Open.


To this statement I would like to bring attention to the combat loggers within Mobius this post


Hello Commanders!

This is a quick update to let you guys know what we’re looking at regarding the issue of “combat logging”.

For clarity’s sake, “combat logging” is when a Commander ungracefully exits the game (e.g. using ALT + F4 then shutting down the game process) to avoid defeat, destruction and damage.

Commanders might use this exploit the moment they are interdicted or the moment before they are about to be destroyed.

Although this is flagged primarily as a multiplayer concern, the issues (and solutions) apply equally to the single player game.

First things first: we do consider this an undesirable exploit. It’s not “part of the game”.

Because we don’t have an all powerful server running the moment-to-moment game play simulation, there is no infallible arbiter to take control of a player’s ship when they ungracefully exit.

So what we’re doing is logging telemetry that will help us detect when this exploit is explicitly being used.

Right now, all we’re doing (and have already started doing) is looking at and implementing methods of collecting and analysing data.

At some point, however, we will start to take action against Commanders using this exploit. I can only suggest that you should avoid using this exploit if you want to avoid any penalties issued for its use. I'll just repeat: please avoid combat logging - we're taking this issue very seriously.

On a related, but separate track, we’re looking at introducing benefits to Commanders that persevere and stick it out through dangerous encounters, as well as general credit costs and rewards balancing.

I’m not quite ready to talk about these in more detail just now. Obviously though, they can never counter the potential costs of ship destruction, but we want to look at a range of disincentives and incentives both to counter this issue.

I hope this helps clarify our position a little.


It says combat logging is considered an exploit and as I would see it no private groups rules can change FD rule policy. It even states that it is a concern in solo which means that your statement of "Combat logging is perfectly valid in Mobius since the groups is specifically a PvE group" is invalid and against the policy of FD in this case. Regardless of your groups sign up rules FD should not take action against players unless they are breaking FD rules just as you have claimed is endorsed in Mobius when you use the exploit of combat logging.
 
Last edited:
I would have thought that content should be available universally to all, how much fun you get out of it would be a case of playing the game the way you prefer best. Which is what we have now - is it not?

Thats true, we have plenty of choices to playa nd have fun depending on the style you like.

in my case what i dont like is people trying to shift the status quo on their side just because they decide a most difficult way to play the game and think they deserve something for because is unfair how things are in the present.


I would be more generous and suggest they are more competetive than others, and as they get a lot of fun out of that, sometimes lack the empathy to see why others would not want the same thing.

Yeah some of them are more competitive than others but the most of them have that superiority complex that makes them think they are rigth and things should go their way.
 
+1, well said. Solo mode with "Open" consequences is just like cheating. If you can affect my universe, take your risks.

Well...............we support "Game Mechanics" when it suits us in open, so we have to support the Game Mechanics when players elect to go back and forth between the two, to my mind at least?
 
It seems to me that those seeking change are on the crusade - those resisting are defending the status quo.

As he all ready declared he knows better than the people making the game a few pages back - I could have told you that ages ago :p
Lets face it, 2 people joined a PvE group for the sole purpose of forcing PvP on those who didn't want it - just to "prove" the game allows PvP any time, that smacks of zealots on a crusade to me.


All they did is show FD that they need to add some sort of PvP flag system, where we can toggle PvP on or off, either in the group settings or on our individual clients.
Imaging the fun we will have, when we can play in open, doing community goals where these folks can see us clearly, but we have PvP turned off - they think it is bad now, just wait until we can sit in their local chat teasing them about how their actions forced FD to add a PvP flag system in to the game. At least the current system lets them shoot people in open, shame they just provided people with the proof greifing needs to be dealt with.
 
Like the idea of incrementing a bonus for each hour you play in Open Play as the OP states, but instead of resetting any bonuses made; decrement them instead, for each hour a player plays in Solo. Any bonuses gained whilst in Open Play, gradually decreases to a zero bonus. +1

Just to clarify: 3/ The bonus is reset back to x 1.0 if the Cmdr at any point logs in to Solo or Group mode.

The reason I think it should reset completely if they go to solo/group mode is that otherwise you would probably get groups that would exploit the system by only logging in to open when they know they have a clear advantage over the opposition, ie when the opposing side are in a different timezone mostly sleeping and would otherwise hide in solo when they don't hold the advantage.

At least if it resets completely then it is all or nothing and a Cmdr who frequently switches between modes to avoid conflict when it suits them would not make any more difference to influence in open than anyone who plays solo.
 
All they did is show FD that they need to add some sort of PvP flag system, where we can toggle PvP on or off, either in the group settings or on our individual clients.
Imaging the fun we will have, when we can play in open, doing community goals where these folks can see us clearly, but we have PvP turned off - they think it is bad now, just wait until we can sit in their local chat teasing them about how their actions forced FD to add a PvP flag system in to the game. At least the current system lets them shoot people in open, shame they just provided people with the proof greifing needs to be dealt with.

Haha, aren't we passive aggressive today. You remind me of those church going people prattling about how god loves everyone... but you'll burn in hell for all eternity while we laugh at you! :D

BTW, that idea was floated a long time ago and promptly shot down.
 
Haha, aren't we passive aggressive today. You remind me of those church going people prattling about how god loves everyone... but you'll burn in hell for all eternity while we laugh at you! :D

BTW, that idea was floated a long time ago and promptly shot down.


Maybe so but with enough people asking for a pvp switch, it could go back to the project table xD
 
Haha, aren't we passive aggressive today. You remind me of those church going people prattling about how god loves everyone... but you'll burn in hell for all eternity while we laugh at you! :D

BTW, that idea was floated a long time ago and promptly shot down.

It was shot down, because we have groups where we can play with others safely - something you've proven, does not work....

Thank you for that. Now we have something to bring to the table with the new request for it.
 
See, we don't care about their intent, or better said, we don't give a damn about your interpretation of it. <snip>

Now that's just the kind of remark that makes people love you and want to support your *vision* of the game.

You say the game was designed for PvP but you also have said that it's a broken/bad design? Logical? Not! You said it my friend, not me.

So either it is designed as a PvP game or it is designed as a Coop game that includes some non-exclusive PvP. You want to put the Big part there to make it seem like the whole thing was about you. It's a point but that is what is called a strawman argument, because there is no evidence that it is as big as you suggest. In fact the most content in the game is PvE, the missions, the system, the factions, the alliances. Even if you jump in to a Combat Zone and only intend to PvP, the AI will turn on you.

You and Zaphod Beeblebrox have something in common in that the Total Perpective Vortex has no effect on your when you are living in your own universe. Instead, why don't you come over to reality and join the rest of us enjoying the game for what it is?

PvP is not a BIG part of the game, by design, and by the Lore, and by their intent.

The "We" you are referring yo can ignore that until the cows come home but because there is a reality you are refusing to join in, it matters not the amount of strawman arguments you make.
 
Last edited:
It was shot down, because we have groups where we can play with others safely - something you've proven, does not work....

Thank you for that. Now we have something to bring to the table with the new request for it.

hmmm, a few players 'infiltrating' the Mobius PvE group to cause a bit of mischief was inevitable - it's up to the group admin to remove those players from the group - that's what groups are all about. I don't see it as a good enough reason to introduce PvP flags or switches. But I don't make those decisions....
 
hmmm, a few players 'infiltrating' the Mobius PvE group to cause a bit of mischief was inevitable - it's up to the group admin to remove those players from the group - that's what groups are all about. I don't see it as a good enough reason to introduce PvP flags or switches. But I don't make those decisions....

Hope that does not happen. Maybe, however, a switch in the group to say it is PvE, and you only get hit by another Human if you have entered a CZ and chosen a side... or are wanted maybe...
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom