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

[rekina]

You have no right to define what kind of game ED is lol that's hilarious that you actually think you can define it. Who gave you the right to define it again? Obviously not from me.

You say ED is not pvp game, but there are FSD interdictors and anarchy systems for a reason. There is "Fine" instead of simply prohibiting people from shooting others in non-anarchy systems.

Edit: If devs already stated ED is not pvp oriented game, which I would be really disappointed to, it sounds like they are mixing something horribly here. You can't have everything you want. Non-pvp oriented game and pvp elements in the same time, trading, taking risks of losing cargo and solo-easy mode at the same time... this sounds just disastrous game design for me.

 

[muppetuppet]

Community goals, well it's in the wording isn't it? it's about community, achieving something together or even opposing an achievement.

Playing this solo by nature defeats the point, there is little opposition or community dynamic when everyone is just playing an event solo. This does take away from the living universe feel.

That said, I really enjoy the solo side of things. The fact that I can optionally jump into a PvP of PvE enviroment but aren't required to is a great feature to myself.

So why not have tru community goals, especially around warzones, that require players to fight players and co-operate with players. Honest to goodness events focused on getting people into a live shared event. But then also have Co-operative or combat events that can be solo, different events for different type of situations. I see no reason why one should exclude the other. And I can see fun in both solo or true live community events.


What I desire most, is to see the effects of the storyline, systems changing, evolving a living univers. And that there are event restricted to open gameplay and others that aren't makes perfect sense to me.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

You have no right to define what kind of game ED is lol that's hilarious that you actually think you can define it. Who gave you the right to define it again? Obviously not from me.

You say ED is not pvp game, but there are FSD interdictors and anarchy systems for a reason. There is "Fine" instead of simply prohibiting people from shooting others in non-anarchy systems.

Me? No right at all, but I suggest you take it up with David Braben as it was his interviews where he stated the game would be balanced to encourage co-operation and DISCOURAGE PvP outside of certain instances, to make PvP possible, but rare and meaningful (his words not mine) and with severe consequences for those who choose to kill clean players.

I would suggest that the advertisment of the options to switch modes at will to DODGE PvP when ever you want should give you a hint that we all get to define how we play the game.
The fact that if there may not be enough human targets for you to blow up really isnt my concern.

You can't have everything you want. Non-pvp oriented game and pvp elements in the same time, trading, taking risks of losing cargo and solo-easy mode at the same time....

really??? and yet that is EXACTLY what I have got at the moment. Sorry it is not what you want to hear but it is what was advertised from the start!.

 

[Joe Spivey]

You have no right to define what kind of game ED is lol that's hilarious that you actually think you can define it. Who gave you the right to define it again? Obviously not from me.

You say ED is not pvp game, but there are FSD interdictors and anarchy systems for a reason. There is "Fine" instead of simply prohibiting people from shooting others in non-anarchy systems.

Ummm, you may want to do some research before posting. DB is on record as saying that ED is a player co-op game where players will work together against or with the background simulation. PvP is meant to be RARE and meaningful and measures are in place to actively discourage PvP.

 

[rekina]

Well I had the hunch of that as soon as I discovered there were Solo mode and it affects on Open play server too anyways. I never thought ED as super pvp oriented game for this reason, but devs directly mentioning about it is just nailing me in the head lol

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

Ummm, you may want to do some research before posting. DB is on record as saying that ED is a player co-op game where players will work together against or with the background simulation. PvP is meant to be RARE and meaningful and measures are in place to actively discourage PvP.

I don't have to do research I have you guys here telling me everything devs said. Handy.

 

[CMDR Sheehy]

Community goals, well it's in the wording isn't it? it's about community, achieving something together or even opposing an achievement.

Playing this solo by nature defeats the point, there is little opposition or community dynamic when everyone is just playing an event solo. This does take away from the living universe feel.

That said, I really enjoy the solo side of things. The fact that I can optionally jump into a PvP of PvE enviroment but aren't required to is a great feature to myself.

So why not have tru community goals, especially around warzones, that require players to fight players and co-operate with players. Honest to goodness events focused on getting people into a live shared event. But then also have Co-operative or combat events that can be solo, different events for different type of situations. I see no reason why one should exclude the other. And I can see fun in both solo or true live community events.


What I desire most, is to see the effects of the storyline, systems changing, evolving a living univers. And that there are event restricted to open gameplay and others that aren't makes perfect sense to me.

Is it so dull to imagine that someone working as part of a community might actually be doing so in Solo because that's the only mode they are able to operate in and yet still be a part of the community? Or does imagination only stretch as far as the eye can see (in which case instancing is not your friend.)

These arguments are so full of straw we're in danger of setting the web aflame.

 

[Asp Explorer]

This is exactly why we are having this discussion lol - the game currently is supposed to have CMDR's cooperating to create a fun and enjoyable game, with NPC battles being the main focus for those oriented towards combat. However, we have a vocal minority of people who want pure PvP in this game, and NPC's are a useless distraction from the real goal of shooting up as many other real players as possible.
It doesn't seem to be understood that PvP encounters were meant to be rare and meaningful, they are actively trying to make them plentiful and consequence-free, as Elite is all about the pew-pew, innit guv? Everything that takes away from exploding everyone else up on sight, for no reason, is an unwanted game element that needs to be purged.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

I don't have to do research I have you guys here telling me everything devs said. Handy.

Not meaning to defeat my own argument here but there is a chance of bias tho........ am sure if you dig deep enough you will find quotes from other devs who contradict what DB says.... certainly others in this thread believe DB just said that to get the Core elite players to hand over their money to get the KS to pass and who were predominantly not interested in PvP, and now they have their (our) money it should go out of the window and change direction to cater to the warthunder players - some say complete with 3rd person mode too, but that is another argument in another monster thread

 

[Schpam]

The are different levels of "community" when comes to classifying players.


I would say that just buying the game does not make you apart of the community. It certainly makes you a fan of the game if you enjoy playing it as much as anyone else does, but lots of people have bought this game and really can't be considered a fan or a member of the community. For there to be a community, there needs to be active participation with others on some level for it to exist by spirit of definition.

If you bought the game and play solo mode exclusively, but participate on the fourms and in discussions, then I'd say you are a part of a community. The question is, which level of community are you apart of? I've played many games that have members that could be said to be apart of the community, but they dont actually play the game and only participate in discussions of the community forums.

When it comes to game play elements, we should focus on the segment of the community involved with playing the game. Since "Community Goal" implies (to me anyways) a goal to be accomplished by players together, then it should be directed to the portion of the community that is playing the game together. As a player in Solo-Mode, you are still a member of the community, but you are not participating with your community in playing the game together. You are in fact, deliberately isolating yourself from the communal portion of the greater community.

That's not to say that I think that players in Solo Mode should not be acknowledged for playing the game on some level, but maybe the game needs to separate and make distinctions between where contributions to a community goal are coming from.


One recent Galnet post about the progress of an on-going community goal signled out a CMDR for having destroyed 14,000 enemy units. Is such a thing even possible outside of farming NPC's in solo mode? That's a ship destroyed every 6 minutes constantly for 90 days straight. Is that an accomplishment worth distinguisging over a CMDR would defeated 140 unique players in 1v1 combat while exclusively in Open mode? How do you weigh each contribution and merit within the context of a community goal? If the game isn't going to make the distinction, and the gameplay ultimately revolves around earning as much reward as possible from "Community Goals", we all may as well just ignore open mode play and farm criteria from solo mode since it is apparently far more statistically efficient to do so.

I really don't think the game should revolve around a static number on a database spreadsheet hosted by the server. It's not about amassing 1,000,000 tons of cargo in X number of hours, but what stories come from the attempt at everyone trying to contribute to that total with in the limited time period. It's ultimately about the story. Your story. My Story. Our Story most of all. What other point could a "Community Goal" have if not to get the community playing the game together regardless of the criteria on someones spreadsheet? If everyone forgets that and focuses strictly on the static criteria, which I think Solo mode can be exploited for, we are ultimately missing the entire point of being a community playing Elite Dangerous together.

 

[Jorlin]

Finally a good idea, and a post that isn't, "if this change happens I'll leave". +rep to you. This, at the very least, should be done.

Not the first time i tried something like this in this thread.
Yet, as you can see, bashing each others heads in is much more interesting as it seems

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

That's not to say that I think that players in Solo Mode should not be acknowledged for playing the game on some level, but maybe the game needs to separate and make distinctions between where contributions to a community goal are coming from.

fair points I guess..... where would the mobius co-op PvE group fit in then? that is a pretty huge community in my book.

 

[Sim Maker]

fair points I guess..... where would the mobius co-op PvE group fit in then? that is a pretty huge community in my book.

Huge? lol.....
.
Put 100 owners of Elite in a room, and ONE of them will belong to Mobius.........

 

[Obsidian Ant]

Come on guys, what really is the difference between the following examples:

1) Player A gets interdicted. He combat logs, waits a minute then logs back on in open. Chances are he will get into a different instance.
2) Player B gets interdicted. He combat logs and then logs back in on solo.

Another example:

1) Player A sees a blockade at Station XYZ, he logs out, waits a few minutes then logs back in on open. Chances are he will get into a different instance.
2) Player B sees a blockade at Station XYZ, he logs out and then switches to solo.

Far as I see it, there is no difference here at all due to the fact the game is built upon instances.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Huge? lol.....
.
Put 100 owners of Elite in a room, and ONE of them will belong to Mobius.........

yep huge...... I think its over 6000 now.

so tell me, how many of the entire owner base still play elite regularly?

how many of them play in solo and are not interested in ALL OR in mobius?

how many are in a different private group?

I do not know the answers to that & neither do you, but I do know only 5 - 7K have participated in the community goals at Lugh - or at least the 2 I was/am in.

clearly you think that the numbers not playing in ALL are significant otherwise you would not be so worried about us. The fact that those 6000 bothered to learn about the existence of the group would suggest at least that they are more likely to play than other players, given that you cant exactly just join mobius without knowing about it. I am 100% convinced if it was an official mode linked on the main page it would probably be 5 times bigger at least. (and yet that number is plucked out of my ass just like your pick 100 players and only 1 would be in mobius)

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

This is exactly why we are having this discussion lol - the game currently is supposed to have CMDR's cooperating to create a fun and enjoyable game, with NPC battles being the main focus for those oriented towards combat. However, we have a vocal minority of people who want pure PvP in this game, and NPC's are a useless distraction from the real goal of shooting up as many other real players as possible.
It doesn't seem to be understood that PvP encounters were meant to be rare and meaningful, they are actively trying to make them plentiful and consequence-free, as Elite is all about the pew-pew, innit guv? Everything that takes away from exploding everyone else up on sight, for no reason, is an unwanted game element that needs to be purged.

I'd be perfectly fine with pvp being "rare and meaningful", if npcs were intelligent and challenging. Right now pvp is the only thing this game has going for it. Npcs are brain dead ships that barely understand their own game.

Oh and they never carry any good cargo, I pulled over an npc type 9, the other day. It had just 12 tons of basic meds on it. How is a pirate supposed to live off of npcs?

 

[Kaeldian]

So much deep-seated rage on both sides of the argument..... over something that should really bring us joy. This whole thread is stopped making me angry a long time ago... now it just makes me sad.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

Come on guys, what really is the difference between the following examples:

1) Player A gets interdicted. He combat logs, waits a minute then logs back on in open. Chances are he will get into a different instance.
2) Player B gets interdicted. He combat logs and then logs back in on solo.

Another example:

1) Player A sees a blockade at Station XYZ, he logs out, waits a few minutes then logs back in on open. Chances are he will get into a different instance.
2) Player B sees a blockade at Station XYZ, he logs out and then switches to solo.

Far as I see it, there is no difference here at all due to the fact the game is built upon instances.

Not that I care much either way, but "chances are" isn't a guarantee, solo is.

Oh and your first example shouldn't happen at all.

So much deep-seated rage on both sides of the argument..... over something that should really bring us joy. This whole thread is stopped making me angry a long time ago... now it just makes me sad.

I don't have a problem either way, solo has it's place in the game, I don't wamt to see it removed or hindered.

What I care about is open play blockades. They should be able to have at least some impact on community goals.

 

[Demiga]

So much deep-seated rage on both sides of the argument..... over something that should really bring us joy. This whole thread is stopped making me angry a long time ago... now it just makes me sad.

I know...me too...Im getting a headache - everyone wants to die defending "their mode" - no one will budge an inch - an inch...thats all thats needed by both sides...budge an inch for the time being...compromise just a tad bit - wait for ameaningful fix....it is sad - because FDEV was right...this community goal was supposed to bring players together...not drive us to different sides

 

[Joe Spivey]

Oh and they never carry any good cargo, I pulled over an npc type 9 the other day. It had just 12 tons of basic meds on it. How is a pirate supposed to live off of npcs?

Actually a very good point. I think a bit of tweaking is in order here.

 

[Jockey79]

10k is 10k but now imagine how hard it was to get that bond in each. Solo players only have to npcs. Mobius has to deal with people stealing kills and npcs. Open has to deal with people stealing kills, people trying to kill them, and npcs. So are you now going to tell me all effort it takes to get that 10k is equal?

Why do I need a wing? I can handle myself just fine alone. It's called open play not join a wing play. Even in a wing open play still slows you down compared to solo or even mobius.

But that is YOUR choice to play in open, not mine, not FDs, not John Doe from over the road - YOURS.
Why should anyone else have penalties placed on them for the choices YOU make about YOUR time in game.

If you cannot earn as much in open as someone in solo can, well that is YOUR fault for playing in the wrong mode.
I don't see solo players moaning because they cannot chat to people in local - they chose to play without local chat.

I think it's time people took responsibility for their actions, if you choose open - then you choose to play at a slower pace due to other people being about.
You made the choice, so suck it up or change modes (this is the argument people used to defend ganking in open, so it's fitting to be used to defend the modes imo).