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

[Jockey79]

The majority of the thread is rubbish imo. I only came here to talk about community goals due to my direct experiences with them. I assumed that if I had started a new thread about it it would have ended up in here anyway

It would have, I think there was a merger about CG 2 weeks ago.

I did say then, it sounded to me like the main problem was respawn rates sounded like they were a bit broken in Open - so Open players we left standing around a lot (so to speak), so perhaps that could be a problem solver, have dynamic respawn rates. The more people there, the faster things spawn.

A few of us agreed, then the thread died for a few days, and back it came - same old same old.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Totally agree with that a bunch of players should never be stood around waiting for enemy to spawn in a warzone regardless of the mode and should be somewhat flexible what spawns unlike it was in lugh IMO

 

[Jorlin]

It would have, I think there was a merger about CG 2 weeks ago.

I did say then, it sounded to me like the main problem was respawn rates sounded like they were a bit broken in Open - so Open players we left standing around a lot (so to speak), so perhaps that could be a problem solver, have dynamic respawn rates. The more people there, the faster things spawn.

A few of us agreed, then the thread died for a few days, and back it came - same old same old.

it wasn't just about the respawn rates.
no way i could have made 45 million in bounties at the lugh event in open play.
but since a big part of the "open" group called me a cheater and voted for ruining solo gaming in CG, i gave up to find a solution and joined the "no inch back" faction on the "solo" side.

Edit: and i never even had a look on the cap ship....

 

[Jockey79]

it wasn't just about the respawn rates.
no way i could have made 45 million in bounties at the lugh event in open play.
but since a big part of the "open" group called me a cheater and voted for ruining solo gaming in CG, i gave up to find a solution and joined the "no inch back" faction on the "solo" side.

Edit: and i never even had a look on the cap ship....

I know the feeling, after being called "cheater", "exploiter" and "coward" several times - I'm past trying to care about what those players want.
As long as I'm not forced to endure the company of people I don't want to be around (As I know how my router works, aint ever gonna happen) and as long as nothing more than these competitions are the only real advantage Open get - I'll be quite happy to play and pay for ED and extras.

 

[Distance]

It would have, I think there was a merger about CG 2 weeks ago.

I did say then, it sounded to me like the main problem was respawn rates sounded like they were a bit broken in Open - so Open players we left standing around a lot (so to speak), so perhaps that could be a problem solver, have dynamic respawn rates. The more people there, the faster things spawn.

A few of us agreed, then the thread died for a few days, and back it came - same old same old.

My problems were more about the trade goals but I have tried the others.

The main problem with the combat goals in combat zones has been the lopsidedness. In Lugh you couldn't survive in a cz without a wing and you'd jump in, clear out the opposing cmdrs and then get to work. This was actually fun but got real laggy at times and as you were in a wing you earned less. The combat goal was won by players camping the capitol ship in solo whilst the Lugh side were fighting in normal cz (impossible to tackle a cap ship and enemy players in open). I'm hoping that with the pp update and players having to choose factions before hand these might be improved.

The Bounty hunting (farming) goals are hard in open as there's less spawns to go around, lag and a stray shot makes all players go nuts and kill the guy with the 200cr bounty for accidentally hitting a friendly. I played one in a wing in a private group and we earned less than we would have done if we were both playing separately in solo.

There's no conspiracy about people saying solo is an advantage in cg it's just fact. When we complain about the cg from an open perspective the complaints aren't directed against solo players themselves who wouldn't have run in to these issues and find them fine.

I only have ideas about how to improve the trade goals so I don't know how the others could be made valid in open.

 

[Jorlin]

I know the feeling, after being called "cheater", "exploiter" and "coward" several times - I'm past trying to care about what those players want.
As long as I'm not forced to endure the company of people I don't want to be around (As I know how my router works, aint ever gonna happen) and as long as nothing more than these competitions are the only real advantage Open get - I'll be quite happy to play and pay for ED and extras.

I don't even would have to touch my router.
Tab, mouseklick, silence... or more annoying: lagfest

But that isn't the solution that i want.
Even if i wanted to ruin open experiance for others as revenge, i would do other approaches besides messing with the network.
Doing anything to give open play a bad name and showing up it's weaknesses would be the first choice

 

[SteveLaw]

My problems were more about the trade goals but I have tried the others.

The main problem with the combat goals in combat zones has been the lopsidedness. In Lugh you couldn't survive in a cz without a wing and you'd jump in, clear out the opposing cmdrs and then get to work. This was actually fun but got real laggy at times and as you were in a wing you earned less. The combat goal was won by players camping the capitol ship in solo whilst the Lugh side were fighting in normal cz (impossible to tackle a cap ship and enemy players in open). I'm hoping that with the pp update and players having to choose factions before hand these might be improved.

The Bounty hunting (farming) goals are hard in open as there's less spawns to go around, lag and a stray shot makes all players go nuts and kill the guy with the 200cr bounty for accidentally hitting a friendly. I played one in a wing in a private group and we earned less than we would have done if we were both playing separately in solo.

There's no conspiracy about people saying solo is an advantage in cg it's just fact. When we complain about the cg from an open perspective the complaints aren't directed against solo players themselves who wouldn't have run in to these issues and find them fine.

I only have ideas about how to improve the trade goals so I don't know how the others could be made valid in open.

Kept clear, focused and neutral like that I can't see any reason not to have separate leaderboards for open, solo and group. Totals would have to be averaged, or just totalled, to determine overall outcome (if that's a thing in CG) but individual leaderboards could certainly be separate.

Edit: what happens if a player contributes in different modes in the same CG?

 

[Jorlin]

I only have ideas about how to improve the trade goals so I don't know how the others could be made valid in open.

I don't think there will be much need to alter trade goals. The "powers" relying on military actions will be the ones with the most players supporting them anyway

 

[Distance]

I don't think there will be much need to alter trade goals. The "powers" relying on military actions will be the ones with the most players supporting them anyway

That's fine if the traders are in open . . .

- - - Updated - - -

Kept clear, focused and neutral like that I can't see any reason not to have separate leaderboards for open, solo and group. Totals would have to be averaged, or just totalled, to determine overall outcome (if that's a thing in CG) but individual leaderboards could certainly be separate.

Edit: what happens if a player contributes in different modes in the same CG?

Right now you can switch as you choose. In Lugh once Fed cmdrs has finished their combat goals they went and swapped to the Lugh side to keep making more money as well.

 

[Jorlin]

That's fine if the traders are in open . . .

they don't need to.
they are already at a disadvantage.

and that's what i think David wanted to tell: there is more than one location in every conflict. it's balanced by solo vs. solo on both sides.
if you force trading in open, every power relying on trades primary would vanish very soon... noone would join them.

- - - Updated - - -

Right now you can switch as you choose. In Lugh once Fed cmdrs has finished their combat goals they went and swapped to the Lugh side to keep making more money as well.

don't generalize...

as soon as i had my money from the feds i left

 

[Distance]

they don't need to.
they are already at a disadvantage.

and that's what i think David wanted to tell: there is more than one location in every conflict. it's balanced by solo vs. solo on both sides.
if you force trading in open, every power relying on trades primary would vanish very soon... noone would join them.

- - - Updated - - -



don't generalize...

as soon as i had my money from the feds i left

That's why we have to wait and see. If they think they can get around it by having all open pvp players killing npcs and traders trading against npcs in solo we're back to square 1

 

[Jorlin]

That's why we have to wait and see. If they think they can get around it by having all open pvp players killing npcs and traders trading against npcs in solo we're back to square 1

indeed....

 

[SteveLaw]

Right now you can switch as you choose. In Lugh once Fed cmdrs has finished their combat goals they went and swapped to the Lugh side to keep making more money as well.

I meant in the context of having separate leaderboards. I know you can switch now.

 

[Distance]

I meant in the context of having separate leaderboards. I know you can switch now.

There aren't separate leaderboards right now which has cause a lot of problems as it looks like some cheaters have been getting impossible scores in some of the current cg. If they did allow separate board then I'd assume you'd be locked in as that would only be fair.

 

[Dave1235]

oh, there we were before the thread got derailed by some lunatics...

3, 2, 1 and back in the room lol

 

[SCADVID]

I've never played any of those games you listed. The last game I played "competitively" was quake.

Any way I always assumed "on topic" was when you brought a chocolate bar and used it on your partner but that might be going a bit far for this forum . . .

Some games are a life of their own with a culture all their own. Terms like 6.1 have no meaning to those who don't play WoW, but for those who do, 6.1 = no new content update which means 3-4 months of being bored to death for over 7 million gamers worldwide.

That's when Steam is opened and it's time to look for something ELSE to play.

Now people gravitate to games like ED because of RL interests (I always wanted to be an optical astronomer), but the Buck Rogers aspects just isn't going to "fly" (there's EvE already for space combat with 10 years of polish, for example). So PvP and the game theory concepts of "risk vs reward" doesn't appeal to me here. But I don't like the usual PvP smacktalk that playing solo is due to being some "carebear" and "easy mode". After all these years playing in MMO mode, I'm simply tired of it. Devs didn't help when they refused to create anything BUT MP/MMO style games (immersion be damned all to prove putting GOATS on even mountain peaks to show "danger" in a pixelated world), either.

I didn't realize ED had an actual star catalog that is real, not just space fantasy, and THAT changed how I play the game completely (ED is sooooooo miss represented as a game when something this huge isn't even mentioned but as 480 billion star systems [never telling that it represents actual astronomical data! Not some EvE make believe universe stuff]). $60 is a bargain for that in itself. That turned ED from Buck Rogers to a NASA like sim to me, and I don't see this game even as a game anymore, I see it as a literal space sim more like astronauts train upon, not fighter pilots.

ED has to be solo mode for me, as anything else (even trade) breaks the total immersion of exploration. When the "oh, neat!" is about solar flares and star classes, not what C2 weapon (or even ships) matters...yeah!!!

Seriously, this is a AAVASO member's star party sim. Only thing missing are observation tools to find/track variable stars. XD

Took a WoW break to discover not only ED (it is unknown in the USA), finding a sim that is totally fitting to my life long interests in an accessible game format! W00t!

 

[CMDR Beltane]

There aren't separate leaderboards right now which has cause a lot of problems as it looks like some cheaters have been getting impossible scores in some of the current cg. If they did allow separate board then I'd assume you'd be locked in as that would only be fair.

Hmm... i am not sure thats possible in a reasonable fashion in terms of input and effort required. To have seperate leaderboards you would need to have different data sources, meaning the CGs would have to be independent. While for itself it would be possible - at least i guess it would - even if not as easy as it may sound, that would lead to another set of problems like different timelines in terms of events as open events will most problably finish sooner. I could continue, but i need some sleep and i guess you can figure out how deep this goes down, once you think about it. Another thing, regarding cheaters you mentioned. I guess we both are very well aware of at least one exploit that exists that even in open would work just fine and would put you into a situation were no pirate army on earth could stop you. So in that case even seperate leaderboards won't "safe" you.

Anyways, i really hope FD figures a way out to satisfy at least most people so threads like this one can be finally put to rest. That they need to act is a matter of fact, but how has to be evaluated carefully. On both ends there is the pretty real risk of loosing portions of the playerbase. But thats also the case if they do nothing at all. Personally i am fine with mostly anything, as long as it doesn't result in any extra sausages for any of the game modes. Thats a door every developer, at least imho, should keep shut tight - you don't know if you will be able to close it again...

As always, just my 2 cent - fly safe pilots

 

[W0OCQCK]

3, 2, 1 and back in the room lol

Jollyfingers are you calling me a Lunatic......?

 

[gravityztr]

Look, i wont read a 540 pages long topic, but my ''2 cents'' is that its an online game. you cant choose who you'll stumble upon ... you deal with it.

its cheap that people can choose to play the same galaxy as multiplayer, but choosin to disable other players.

my 2 cents boys annd gurlahss

 

[Asp Explorer]

Look, i wont read a 540 pages long topic, but my ''2 cents'' is that its an online game. you cant choose who you'll stumble upon ... you deal with it.

its cheap that people can choose to play the same galaxy as multiplayer, but choosin to disable other players.

my 2 cents boys annd gurlahss

If you have a click through the previous pages at random, you'll find that argument debated and all the reasons given why it's not "cheap" over, and over, and over, and over, and over....