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

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Which IMO should be the long term goal, I hope we can get the games mechanics to a point where most of the players play open. You advertised an online (mmo) space sim game, yet the community splits up more and more with each day. Its rather sad every argument ends with "we don't want to play open to be killed by griefers, so don't tell me how to play" instead of thinking about how to discourage griefing. Im pretty sure most people in Mobius would rather play open given the right circumstances. After all player interaction is what people pay for when they buy an online game.

The fact that people resort to private groups and im some cases solo mode is a symptom of many bad design decisions which need to be corrected asap.

While I agree that having as many players in open as possible is a desirable goal, I remain fundamentally opposed to any proposal that would make solo or private group play less attractive / desirable.

If players can be encouraged in some way to play in open, whether it be by better system security, cargo insurance, bounties that can't be paid off immediately, etc., then all well and good - however the emphasis, for me, should be on encouragement rather than force.

.... and no, not everyone bought this game for multi-player.
 
What some people pay for, yes!

If bob sees an advertisement for elite saying "online space game" he expects to play with other people. Im talking about the future of the game here not the few elite old timers who just wanna play solo pve (which I respect btw)

While I agree that having as many players in open as possible is a desirable goal, I remain fundamentally opposed to any proposal that would make solo or private group play less attractive / desirable.
If players can be encouraged in some way to play in open, whether it be by better system security, cargo insurance, bounties that can't be paid off immediately, etc., then all well and good - however the emphasis, for me, should be on encouragement rather than force.


I completely agree, thats why I edited my post, saying that people leaving open is mostly due to bad design of the general game. I truly believe there can be a way for everyone to play in same mode (ignoring cases of bad connection for the sake of argument here). Splitting a community is never a good thing and that shows in threads like this, if we could just accept this and try to find a way to get everyone together we would be one step closer.

.... and no, not everyone bought this game for multi-player.

No not everyone did, but most will given it is marketed as it is. If those people see this cluster* that is open/solo/hundreds of private groups, many are going to be very disappointed.
 
Last edited:
If bob sees an advertisement for elite saying "online space game" he expects to play with other people. Im talking about the future of the game here not the few elite old timers who just wanna play solo pve (which I respect btw)



I completely agree, thats why I edited my post, saying that people leaving open is mostly due to bad design of the general game. I truly believe there can be a way for everyone to play in same mode (ignoring cases of bad connection for the sake of argument here). Splitting a community is never a good thing and that shows in threads like this, if we could just accept this and try to find a way to get everyone together we would be one step closer.
better idea remove psuchopaths from open and u will have more ppl there ;)
 
better idea remove psuchopaths from open and u will have more ppl there ;)

*facepalm*

Psychopaths are just a result of bad design. They are not punished. Murder sprees shouldnt be possible in high pop system like Lave, even if everyone hates EvE around here, the high-null sec mechanic is something elite could learn from.

There are many ways to work against random killing, sadly non were implemented.
 
Last edited:
*facepalm*

Psychopaths are just a result of bad design. They are not punished. Murder sprees shouldnt be possible in high pop system like Lave, even if everyone hates EvE around here, the high-null sec mechanic is something elite could learn from.
high - null mechanic?? u serius? i wonder the hulkmaggedon--or the suicide gangs on high u choose to ignore it?
 
*facepalm*

Psychopaths are just a result of bad design. They are not punished. Murder sprees shouldnt be possible in high pop system like Lave, even if everyone hates EvE around here, the high-null sec mechanic is something elite could learn from.


The high null sec where bored PvPers buy cheap ships and go n00b ganking and being disruptive... sure, we REALLY need that :rolleyes:
 
Are you people even willing to discuss or are you just here to shoot down every argument?

No they are not. I've put out a compromise several times to discuss that doesnt touch solo/private open yet no one even mentioned it. (well maybe one person)

Here it is again this time pasted in. Maybe people are too lazy to click links. :p

Solution to open being forced to grind in solo in order to be effective

Solo, private, and open don’t need to be changed in order to avoid discouraging open players into solo.

Proposal:
In combat zones, the combat bond increases according to the difficulty of the ship type. As players are more difficult, recognize the increase in difficulty level and boost how much killing a player contributes to the war effort – keep combat bond reward the same, but have the amount it contributes toward the community goal equal to or some factor less than the rebuy of the ship destroyed. Keeping the contribution to the war effort less than or equal to the rebuy of the ship prevents exploits where a player joins a faction and purposely dies to help the other faction. This can still be done but at great expense to the commander… unless he’s doing it in a sidewinder in which case the contribution is hardly helping since its equal or less than the rebuy. He might as well be grinding out a mil per hour in solo.

Analysis:
Let’s take the example where the contribution of killing a commander’s ship is equal to his rebuy. You kill a commander in a cobra worth 1 million. You get 8000 in combat bonds, his rebuy is 20,000, and that counts 20,000 towards the war effort.

A second example would be destroying a vulture with a rebuy of 700,000. You would get 20,000 in bonds, he would lose 700,000 but it would go to your war effort. Does this seem like a little much? If you play in open you know how often those commanders escape. If you are lucky you might get two an hour assuming you don’t die yourself. Two an hour would be 1.4 mill an hour, split that among the likely four players that hit him and that’s 350,000 per hour. Stack what you are probably getting in open (200k to 300k) and now you are at 750,000 if you are lucky. This is all assuming you haven’t died and it’s still less than a mil per hour in solo. Remember this is contribution to the community goal, and the player only made 5k off splitting the Vulture’s combat bonds with friends. Still too much? Well you can always apply diminishing returns as the rebuy cost increases reducing it by an increasing percentage to keep it in check.

Wrap up:

  • Players are the hardest thing to kill so benefit of killing them is increased to reflect this.
  • Combat bond profit remains the same
  • Contribution towards the war effort is equal to or less than rebuy to prevent exploits
  • Solo/private/open is unchanged
 
Last edited:
Are you people even willing to discuss or are you just here to shoot down every argument?

I've been in the mega thread since page 3... bring something new and I'm open to discuss it.
Otherwise, read the thread and see all my answers on daft and unfair ideas.
 
I've been in the mega thread since page 3... bring something new and I'm open to discuss it.
Otherwise, read the thread and see all my answers on daft and unfair ideas.

Given your signature, I don't think you are open to any, much needed, mechanic changes to make open more appealing to everyone.
 
*facepalm*

Psychopaths are just a result of bad design. They are not punished. Murder sprees shouldnt be possible in high pop system like Lave, even if everyone hates EvE around here, the high-null sec mechanic is something elite could learn from.

There are many ways to work against random killing, sadly non were implemented.

Why? NPC psychopaths are *everywhere* in elite, and have been in every iteration of the game. they interdict you and try to kill you in all systems and don't give a damn about their bounties. so why should players be prevented from doing so? it's not like they are everywhere. I've been playing actively for what.. 3 months now. I can probably count the number of 'psychopath' commanders I have encountered on two hands -- and I go looking for them, in the busiest systems in the game.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
I completely agree, thats why I edited my post, saying that people leaving open is mostly due to bad design of the general game. I truly believe there can be a way for everyone to play in same mode (ignoring cases of bad connection for the sake of argument here). Splitting a community is never a good thing and that shows in threads like this, if we could just accept this and try to find a way to get everyone together we would be one step closer.

I would counter with the opinion that a significant proportion of players who choose not to play in open do so because of the way that other players continue to play in open. It can't all be blamed on the game design.

Again, there may be a way that everyone can play in the same mode - as long as the option remains to switch to the other modes as players see fit.

Players seem to be managing to split the community all by themselves - it's not the game that is doing it (necessarily). Finding the solution to the fractured community is, I would expect, a fruitless task as there are players with diametrically opposed opinions regarding how the game is best played.
 
Why? NPC psychopaths are *everywhere* in elite, and have been in every iteration of the game. they interdict you and try to kill you in all systems and don't give a damn about their bounties. so why should players be prevented from doing so? it's not like they are everywhere. I've been playing actively for what.. 3 months now. I can probably count the number of 'psychopath' commanders I have encountered on two hands -- and I go looking for them, in the busiest systems in the game.

They shouldnt be prevented, but they should be punished. Several ways to do that which im not going to write down here since its just gonna get buried in "hurr durr don't change the game" anyway.
 
Which IMO should be the long term goal, I hope we can get the games mechanics to a point where most of the players play open. You advertised an online (mmo) space sim game, yet the community splits up more and more with each day. Its rather sad every argument ends with "we don't want to play open to be killed by griefers, so don't tell me how to play" instead of thinking about how to discourage griefing. .

totally agree. The very existence of the game mode divide, hides, rather than addresses the issues.
Many people choose to swap to solo for certain tasks as they perceive it as safer, or more rewarding.
If someone is trying to trade in open, and they are doing it right, they should be able to lead a happy existence (even if it is punctuated by the occasional catastrophic asset loss). The decision to play solo or open should be based on other factors than difficulty.
I would prefer a situation where everyone is in open. You decide how much risk you take by your in game decisions.
.
Imagine a pair of community goals. One is to transport goods between two stations 100ly apart. The other is to intercept and take down (perhaps even only steal cargo, and you are punished if you kill) those cargo ships. Assume that the goals have been set at the correct level to provide decent rewards for all the risks taken.
Then allow some to do the missions in solo...
It is a fundamentally game-breaking mechanic. It denies everyone the immersive and rich experience that is possible.
.
When the solo/open concept was conceived, what were its objectives?
I believe it was to allow people the choice of whether they wanted to interact with others. I don't believe there were any intentions to separate play styles into different modes, and provide tactical workarounds to in game situations.
 
Last edited:
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom