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

[Osric]

Aye, mobius effectively doesn't exist for people who play open and i'm fine w/ that.

they have *chosen* to exclude themselves from the larger game because :reasons: .. What is completely ludicrous is that they can continue to effect the economy, sovreignty, and community goal outcomes of the open server even though they want absolutely nothing to do with it.

It's only ludicrous because you want to set up an adversarial PvP sort of scenario between CMDRs, and you're pretending this is both the only and best way to play the game. Neither of those are true.

You're afraid your consequences laden game will be made less so by the actions of players doing things who you cannot destroy. This is true. But ED is not the consequence laden game you want it to be, it never will be. Play the ball where it lands or go home, to put it bluntly.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Log in to game in solo - mark up all ip - log back in open, block all but those from solo, game client says I'm in open - my router says other wise. Job done.
[Edit - this is the simple way of putting it]

Honestly, how many people do you think would go through that trouble? I can't see anybody doing it. They could but very very few actually will.

 

[Asp Explorer]

It's no trouble at all, can be completely automated, and kicked off at any time by voice command or macro.

 

[fademist]

Honestly, how many people do you think would go through that trouble? I can't see anybody doing it. They could but very very few actually will.

is always the chance to choose the uninstall button

 

[Druid]

Honestly, how many people do you think would go through that trouble? I can't see anybody doing it. They could but very very few actually will.

Wont take long for someone to write a batch file to do it for you though.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

This all assumes that people flying in Solo:

A. Always choose to fly in solo/groups (which is not always the case.)
B. Are not part of a community.

I fly solo because when I am in open ED turns in to a slideshow. However I am part of a community that actively work together towards certain goals. Just because My friends are in Open and I am in solo does not mean we are not working to the same goals.

So this proposal means that my contribution to our shared goals is actually less substantial than that of my friends even though we expend the same amount of time and effort? How long before one group says "Sorry, if you are going to be part of our group you have to do it in Open" and people like me get left out in the cold?

Not everyone has high end gear, Joystick and throttle. Some people use Keyboard and mouse or just even keyboard. Some people are disabled and play this game and wouldn't stand a snowball's hope in hell of PvP against an impulsive 4 year old like for like. In these cases Solo is about the only mode they can use. Whilst you say well the solo person gets the same rewards but that does not matter when you are working towards a community goal and your half contribution just lost the war!!!

Nothing stopping capable players blockading and other's trying to run the blockade. You only get a 32 instance to play with and if you like that sort of thing and get lucky with the instance - go for it. Just stop dumping on the rest of us who are not so capable.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

It's no trouble at all, can be completely automated, and kicked off at any time by voice command or macro.

Wont take long for someone to write a batch file to do it for you though.

I wasn't commenting on how difficult it was, but rather how pointless and most people won't bother, or even care. Hell if they don't announce the change I don't think anyone would notice.

 

[Antmax]

Well if the people came out of Solo and Private, one would dearly hope so.

Quite a few people playing in solo are morally and ethically opposed to attacking other players in a game where there is a real tangible loss of time and in game resources. Most PvP games do not punish you in this manner. In fact, most just give you rewards for taking part that you spend on an immortal entity or collection building them up.

The other game I play is war thunder. When you lose a plane it has to be repaired. You can pay to repair it or wait from 2 minutes to 1.5 weeks for a plane to be repaired. But you never actually lose. Every hit gives you points, every crit and kill gives you more points. Assisting a team mate or saving a bomber or ground vehicle gives you a bonus as does winning the uptimate battle.

War Thunder is a proper PvP game where this one is not and in this game there are real consequences for dying that do not exist in most pvp games.

Personally I'm opposed to games that let you gank on others, for the same reasons I think games like GTA, Manhunt and bully should be banned. How you behave in a game says a lot about your character. When you strip away the restraints that society imposes on you so you can do whatever you like without punishment. Your true underlying character comes out.

In your case, you got banned from the Mobius group for ganking on PvE players indiscriminately with your buddy and and then proceeded to gloat about it all over the forums... Hardly good sporting behavior. And you wonder why many people don't fancy playing in open.

Also, I've played with wings in Mobius and open and it is very easy to make money, generally easier than in solo if you have the right ships. Vultures in the right hands are almost invulnerable, especially when working in packs of 2 or 3. You can take out multiple foes that attack simultaneously without much fear of dying. Where a solo player would most likely have to run in the same situation. And all members that fired upon a ship share the wealth and can hunt and farm prey much quicker than a solo player.

In my last stint in open I teamed up with another vulture and we traveled from alioth and 78 ursae majoris to the wolf 406 area and had a lot of fun without seeing another soul. Often open is not much different than the pve group and you spend most of your time playing alone. I don't expect community goals to be quite the same. But I'm not interested in those and haven't taken part.

My group sets it's own goals. The one glaring problem being you can flip a system in a few hours with a concentrated effort. Boost an alliance faction from 3% to 90% in 24 hours. But the background sim isn't updated frequently enough to show you your progress. Either progress needs to be slowed or the background sim needs to be updated more frequently. I'm secretly hoping Powerplay might change this somewhat in a future update.

 

[KRISXR]

This is my first post to theses forums. I have been playing since the end of January. My family and peers consider me an avid video game fan. I'm a 42yr. old male. When people ask when i started, i tell them "I've played video games since pinball." I remember when they got invented and have been hooked since. I love just about all games, and pinball is still one of my favorites.

On to topic. When I'm online with anyone, friends or people just in a lobby, it's consuming. It's hard to interact with family, phone calls, someone needs me, if I'm online with others. We could be right in the middle of something, and I need a break. might be 5 mins., might be until the next day. Is it fun? you bet. Is it practical? Actually rarely for me, cause I'm also interested in whats going on with the person who's across the room from me. I see lips moving but my headphones are cranked. So I pause and engage in whatever the conversation is. In open play it's inconvenient for my buds if every 5 mins I'm afk. Reason number one for me why i shouldn't be punished because i spend most of my time solo.

My next point has been hashed over a thousand times on the forum. Any one who accuses or attacks another person for playing solo is as transparent as glass. Other than wanting to dominate noobs, others less skilled, or whah! "He has 300 million cr.", what in the world would motivate you to openly fling comments about how others play? Who cares if someone is grinding solo to help a faction. Grind harder, if you oppose. What, do you actually need to see them taking off and landing, or do you need to hunt them down and ruin their game? Are you having fun? Does it help melt the stress of life? Do you find yourself happy with any game? Then awesome! Play your heart out, have a blast. I do believe that's what games are about. Don't like a game? Don't play it. If you need human canon fodder to make you happy, have at it. 99% of the games on the market are just that. You need some PVE co-op with buds, get some! Like to watch t.v. and casually cruise around, by all means, sit back and let the good times roll. If your out to prove something to the community or the world by playing a video game, your confused. Remember it's a game, not a career. Don't take it so seriously.

I've seen this sort of confrontation for other game forums early in their start, and I have seen other developers give in to the instant gratification generation. It's lame. Grinding, farming, taking notes, figuring stuff out, thinking about what you could do better, that's part of the game. That's what makes that uber ship you got worth it. If you can just hop in the best stuff in a game, whats the point? That's what builds value for that 200 million cr. anaconda. Because you played your azz off to get it. Don't like the grind, well you don't like the game. I mean that's gaming 101. The players that put their time and effort into studying, learning, and aspire to be better are the ones who get uber stuff. I know some, key word "some", balancing is in order for economies. However; no one has forced you not to try other game elements other than yourself. Exploring is fun, and dangerous, and profitable now (excluding bugs), trading is fun, dangerous, and always has been profitable (hint, that's the fun part of trading, the profits. cause trading is a grind lol), I've been playing in Lugh and holy cow, fun, dangerous, and profitable. Really what difference does it make if people are solo, open, or private?

If FD gives into the "gimme nows" and the "no fair he has uber stuff but plays solo" crowd, then FD what your really saying is your intimidated by this crowd. Why? Stick to your guns, keep with your original gut feelings you had when you created this game. Because your gut is right. You have a unique galaxy simulator, one that offers every possible way to play. Solo was the deciding factor that made me push the "buy now button" Don't punish any ones game style just because one group of players holds animosity towards another.

In closing I'd like to add, I really like this game, and have got a feeling that when all the other cool stuff comes out over time, I'll love this game. Kudos to FD for a great remake of a cult classic. Good times. Fly safe.

-Cmdr. H.M. Murdock

 

[Joe Spivey]

Please. Few blockades in history of the world were airtight. That's what blockade running is for. Heard of it? Even in games with artificial chokepoints such as EvE you can never have an airtight blockade.



You do not play with me, you do not exist in my game. As I said, might as well talk about playing some other game. Normally it doesn't matter. Most of the PvP stuff we do in open doesn't have anything to do with whatever you do solo. Obvious exception are community goals, and as I said, FD is clearly aware that there is an issue. As far as I'm concerned, mission accomplished.



Well, see above. An armed trader, or a fast ship has a better chance of running their blockade. Which is kinda the point of both the blockade (prevent mass and unfettered transit by deterring big, slow haulers from even attempting the run) and the blockade-running (trump the blockade by using heavily armed traders, such as the Anaconda, or fast ones that are not easy to catch such as the Clipper). So in Open, it works quite nicely, both ways.

"Few blockades in the world were airtight" So what? We are talking about this game, not world history and blockades in this game are impossible. They are only possible in whatever instances you can raise the ships to guard, for as long as they are playing... which, as blockades go, is, well, pretty rubbish really.

So let me get this right, you are just denying the existence of solo because it doesn't fit in with your imagined view of how things 'should be'... but then you go on to acknowledge the existence of solo and claim it is unfair. Look, how about instead of all this you just accept the game the way it is and live with it? How many more times do you want to go round and round the roundabout? This is why this thread is here. The decision has been made a long time ago and this thread is just FD's version of Bedlam where you guys can expound on your imaginary world to your heart's content while everyone gets on with playing the game they designed.

 

[Andrew Sayers]

Correct me if I'm wrong, if I'm reading this right, community goals need a re-think, and adjust them for quality, not quantity of play, and as a result should have no bearing on the actual mode of play.

I'm not sure if I follow.

I would certainly argue that players who want to play solo have different requirements than those that play open - for example, neither winning nor losing against other people give me much pleasure, so I value the opportunity to cut out that "noise" (I realise some people will consider this insanity, but that's the way my brain's wired). If you're saying different events should be tailored towards different types of player, I'd have no objection to that.

I'd also argue the focus on mode-switching is a red herring. Aside from the aforementioned hackery, I could run a blockade by playing at unusual hours, by flying my route in solo then switching to open when docking, or any other number of other tricks. People have generally resisted ideas that artificially inflate the profitability of piracy, but I also wouldn't object to e.g. making one community goal "deliver medicine to Soholia" and another "steal medicine in Soholia and deliver it to Somewheria" so PvP counterplay could generate value of its own. I suspect Sandro's eyebrow is spasming at the amount of work that would involve though

Was that what you were referring to?

 

[SpaceToast]

I personally don't lose any sleep over SOLO & OPEN players affecting each others' games without interacting directly. I think its best for ED's future financial viability to allow each player to decide how they want to play. I started in SOLO, and even with its flaws, I enjoy it enough to stay there. I certainly enjoy SOLO more than the brief time I have spent in Open Play! I logged in to Open play for the first time about a week ago, and I have tried it 4 times over the past week. Unfortunately all of those Open play attempts have been UNPLEASANT experiences, with 3 of them offering absolutely NO enjoyment whatsoever. In my attempts to enjoy open-play, I have been attacked and destroyed by 3 steaming-hot piles of griefers and 1 WING of Players, the last event was almost understandable, since I actually made it into a conflict zone around Lugh 3. A CMDR kind of realizes there's a chance of dying in a place like that, and of course we expect (or at least hope for) human opponents to be more of a challenge than the game AI. What puzzles me is the difference in conflict zone game mechanics between SOLO and Open play that I experienced. In SOLO play, I have ALWAYS dropped out of SC at a distance from the actual fighting that allows me to configure my ship, choose my faction, and engage the AI ship(s) that seem to key on me immediately after I choose. In my Open play scenario, by the time I chose a faction, I was surrounded by a large cloud of red triangles - I was quite literally the ONLY "Federation" ship there (how many ways can you spell _!OOPS!_ ??). I tried to get outta dodge, but the metric butt-load of incoming I drew immediately killed my shields, and a wing of 3 players chased me and finished me off well before my FSD could charge. Sure, it was 3-on-1, but I entered a conflict zone, so I can hardly call it griefing. And since I have never experienced anything close to that in SOLO, I'm not sure whether that was a fair representation of an Open-play conflict zone or just a stroke of bad luck of the IMMEDIATELY, irrefutably, fatal kind?

The other 3 Open play encounters, however, leave me with no doubt that they were griefer pile attacks. There was no reason behind them - I had no cargo to jack, no bounty on me to claim, and no communication took place. So, it seems to me that the fears many of us had about the kinds of players that Open/P-V-P (or more accurately P-V-PPPP) play attracts have sadly been realized. And in fact, the damage that griefers with diminished mental capacity can do to the game has multiplied with their ability to band together in piles. Yes, I'm well-aware that griefing is how some kids get their jollies. Luckily, with SOLO play, I don't have to waste my game-time and effort participating in their adolescent delusions of adequacy (griefers: you can look the big words up online).

I know that there are players who love the game, and advocate for "Open-Play-Only" for all the right reasons, with the best of intentions, and I respect their opinions. But unless / until FD implements penalties painful enough to help reduce the "griefing" element that has been such a disappointment to so many of us in so many games, don't expect that everyone will continue playing the part of the Pinata and pretending everything is fine.

 

[Meritz]

"Few blockades in the world were airtight" So what? We are talking about this game, not world history and blockades in this game are impossible. They are only possible in whatever instances you can raise the ships to guard, for as long as they are playing... which, as blockades go, is, well, pretty rubbish really.

As I said, get a big expensive ship and go to Leesti or Lave. In Open. If you're so certain instancing will prevent you from being interdicted and blown to pieces, go ahead. Let's see how long you last.

And that's just a couple of pirates. Imagine if 50, or 100 players decided to blockade a system. What are the chances you would avoid every single one of them? As I said, in Open, blockading works pretty well.

So let me get this right, you are just denying the existence of solo because it doesn't fit in with your imagined view of how things 'should be'... but then you go on to acknowledge the existence of solo and claim it is unfair. Look, how about instead of all this you just accept the game the way it is and live with it? How many more times do you want to go round and round the roundabout? This is why this thread is here. The decision has been made a long time ago and this thread is just FD's version of Bedlam where you guys can expound on your imaginary world to your heart's content while everyone gets on with playing the game they designed.

What decision? FD devs just commented on this very issue (impact of solo players on community goals) and stated they are aware of the issue, that the solution is not an easy one but that it something they need to chew on for a while before they come up with a definitive answer. You act as if everything is set in stone and will never change.

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

It's no trouble at all, can be completely automated, and kicked off at any time by voice command or macro.

I'm sure the client could be modified to log any occurrences of the client computer refusing a connection offered by the matchmaker algorithm. Do it too much and your account is switched to solo since that is obviously where you want to be.

 

[Wicz]

I don't want to see group and solo hobbled. I want to see open have a chance to have an impact in community goals. It doesn't have to be a fixed %, I liked the idea of, comparing the avg open players impact vs the avg solo/group players impact and changing the percentage accordingly. I'd like to see blockades be effective and not just a boring waste of time.

This is off topic but, where have you been? This game is mostly about limiting one group to keep another happy. Pirates vs traders, pirates paying off bounties vs bounty hunters, traders ability to escape vs pirates. This game has very much been about conflicting roles, and trying to balance them.

I don't expect anyone to be happy about it but can you not at least see the logic? Pve group and solo players can do the community goal without being bothered. Whereas, if you tried that in open, you'd have to deal with pirates, blockades, or just psychos. Any individual open player's impact is hindered compared to the individual solo or pve group players.

My point about choice was referring to the solo/open/group system, choice for all of us. I also don't see any logic in making that kind of change when those of you that are complaining can simply play in a different mode when required and stop complaining - Choice again

However, this is going to go on and on so let's just agree to differ.

One last point, all of the non open players could move to open tomorrow and still be untouchable ( as others have already mentioned ) without very much effort at all. When people are pushed they tend to push back, and P2P is P2P.

Where would that leave us?

 

[Asp Explorer]

As I said, get a big expensive ship and go to Leesti or Lave. In Open. If you're so certain instancing will prevent you from being interdicted and blown to pieces, go ahead. Let's see how long you last.

Which is precisely why some players may want to go to Leesti or Lave, and not get interdicted and blown to pieces for no reason whatsoever. And they can

 

[chagnampra]

As long as they fix penalty's for murder, then I'm all up for going back to OPEN full time because cmdr pew pew has to account for his actions

^^This needs to happen before I, and no doubt many others, will be enticed back to Open. I was also an Open player, but settled on Mobius due to the lack of real consequences for "CMDR pew pew", making the game more frustrating than fun.

 

[Meritz]

Which is precisely why some players may want to go to Leesti or Lave, and not get interdicted and blown to pieces for no reason whatsoever. And they can

You should pay attention. Joe is arguing you can't blockade systems in Open. I say you can. Solo warriors are not a factor in that argument. For us in Open, solo players do not exist. The only context where their influence is felt are community goals, and FD will be looking at those.

 

[Majinvash]

I personally don't lose any sleep over SOLO & OPEN players affecting each others' games without interacting directly. I think its best for ED's future financial viability to allow each player to decide how they want to play. I started in SOLO, and even with its flaws, I enjoy it enough to stay there. I certainly enjoy SOLO more than the brief time I have spent in Open Play! I logged in to Open play for the first time about a week ago, and I have tried it 4 times over the past week. Unfortunately all of those Open play attempts have been UNPLEASANT experiences, with 3 of them offering absolutely NO enjoyment whatsoever. In my attempts to enjoy open-play, I have been attacked and destroyed by 3 steaming-hot piles of griefers and 1 WING of Players, the last event was almost understandable, since I actually made it into a conflict zone around Lugh 3. A CMDR kind of realizes there's a chance of dying in a place like that, and of course we expect (or at least hope for) human opponents to be more of a challenge than the game AI. What puzzles me is the difference in conflict zone game mechanics between SOLO and Open play that I experienced. In SOLO play, I have ALWAYS dropped out of SC at a distance from the actual fighting that allows me to configure my ship, choose my faction, and engage the AI ship(s) that seem to key on me immediately after I choose. In my Open play scenario, by the time I chose a faction, I was surrounded by a large cloud of red triangles - I was quite literally the ONLY "Federation" ship there (how many ways can you spell _!OOPS!_ ??). I tried to get outta dodge, but the metric butt-load of incoming I drew immediately killed my shields, and a wing of 3 players chased me and finished me off well before my FSD could charge. Sure, it was 3-on-1, but I entered a conflict zone, so I can hardly call it griefing. And since I have never experienced anything close to that in SOLO, I'm not sure whether that was a fair representation of an Open-play conflict zone or just a stroke of bad luck of the IMMEDIATELY, irrefutably, fatal kind?

The other 3 Open play encounters, however, leave me with no doubt that they were griefer pile attacks. There was no reason behind them - I had no cargo to jack, no bounty on me to claim, and no communication took place. So, it seems to me that the fears many of us had about the kinds of players that Open/P-V-P (or more accurately P-V-PPPP) play attracts have sadly been realized. And in fact, the damage that griefers with diminished mental capacity can do to the game has multiplied with their ability to band together in piles. Yes, I'm well-aware that griefing is how some kids get their jollies. Luckily, with SOLO play, I don't have to waste my game-time and effort participating in their adolescent delusions of adequacy (griefers: you can look the big words up online).

I know that there are players who love the game, and advocate for "Open-Play-Only" for all the right reasons, with the best of intentions, and I respect their opinions. But unless / until FD implements penalties painful enough to help reduce the "griefing" element that has been such a disappointment to so many of us in so many games, don't expect that everyone will continue playing the part of the Pinata and pretending everything is fine.

Jeeze, the word griefer and the personal attacks on the players.. *glass houses*

You don't hear true open players calling other open players griefers.. They call them better or had an unlucky encounter with them. ( Yes there are a few people who use small exploits to do nothing more that break the game ) BUT if they are not using an exploit, they are working with in the game design.
If they are murders... That is totally fine... I get moaned at for being a griefer but if you ask any of the players I killed, truthfully they will admit that before i killed them, I sent them a message asking for 15 Tonnes of cargo. At which point that decided to boost and not send any form of communication.
You speak to everyone else, that stopped or that I manually retrieved cargo from and bar anyone that told me to go F myself for being a pirate, would have gotten away with their ship.

Anyone who ran or fought back got shot down.

I have have been chased around systems by Wings of players and as yet, I haven't died. ( Had a few PVP straight up 1v1s and lost a few of them sure )
There are plenty of players I see, who I know will be hard to get cargo from or even better than me and I run away from them. Because I can and plan ahead.

WHEN I do die and I will.

I will have had a great fight and know that I got beaten by the better player or just was unlucky.
At no point will i scream GRIEFER and run to Solo/Private ( I left Mobius way before any ban was placed because it was really boring and all the Experts and Masters in their big boy ships, either failed to put up any challenge or combat logged ) .

So yeah just because you don't like it or cant defend yourself from someone with EXACTLY the same game options as you. Doesn't make them a griefer.

You wouldn't play a football match and complain to the ref when someone tackled you, would you?

 

[EUS]

I'm not sure if I follow.

I would certainly argue that players who want to play solo have different requirements than those that play open - for example, neither winning nor losing against other people give me much pleasure, so I value the opportunity to cut out that "noise" (I realise some people will consider this insanity, but that's the way my brain's wired). If you're saying different events should be tailored towards different types of player, I'd have no objection to that.

I'd also argue the focus on mode-switching is a red herring. Aside from the aforementioned hackery, I could run a blockade by playing at unusual hours, by flying my route in solo then switching to open when docking, or any other number of other tricks. People have generally resisted ideas that artificially inflate the profitability of piracy, but I also wouldn't object to e.g. making one community goal "deliver medicine to Soholia" and another "steal medicine in Soholia and deliver it to Somewheria" so PvP counterplay could generate value of its own. I suspect Sandro's eyebrow is spasming at the amount of work that would involve though

Was that what you were referring to?

Yes, kind of, I thought you were saying that there was an advantage to solo players with regards to community goals because solo players were able to do more of (x things in y hours) than those in open. To which I was replying (unclearly) that the game mode is irrelevant, as the players with the most time on their hands will always come out on top (with those types of community goals), regardless of how they play.

 

[Jockey79]

You should pay attention. Joe is arguing you can't blockade systems in Open. I say you can. Solo warriors are not a factor in that argument. For us in Open, solo players do not exist. The only context where their influence is felt are community goals, and FD will be looking at those.

You do know, that the game has an in game block feature right?

I can just throw all the names of the blockade people in to my block list = still play open and never see any of you - and that is using the game client features to avoid a blockade