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

[Jordan Cobalt]

No offense, but a few people doing it doesn't make it a larger issue. You first need evidence this is happening on a large scale if you're going to use this as an argument to screw up a system people have litterally bought into.
.

I don't work at Frontier, I can't give you the proper stats of how many farm solo, then kill people in open. Just like people who say the majority bought the game for mode switching, for all anyone knows, the number who play open as well as solo or group is miniscule.

Edit:

What you are overlooking is I mentioned persistent fugutive states. This does not only affect PvP, but would also affect docking permissions in non-Anarchy systems. So it's all well and good being a sneaky Pirate and going solo, and logging off to avoid BHs, but you cannot avoid the concequences of your actions.

Losing docking in the systems were you're wanted doesn't even mean anything. 90% of the time there is another jurisdiction within 10LY or at least an independent/anarchy station to go to. Pirates already have to find black markets to sell goods, now we'll just have to make sure it's independent or anarchy.

The real punishment for pirates is vigilante justice.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

This is a question to everyone, it was mentioned in an other thread. How will all the people who are defending keeping mode switching, feel if it was forced on killers or pirates? I'm against it, I'm just wondering if people will defend it if it doesn't effect them.

But first and foremost, do we agree that splitting Open/Solo does not solve the issue for reasons I mentioned?

Not we can not agree. While instance hopping and logging out(whether legit or not) help they are not a 100% certainty that solo mode is. Pirates would still have to move around in open, they'd still have to avoid people in open. They are also forced to inconvenience themselves anytime someone jumps into their instance. With my way they'd have to log out numerous times in a play session, with yours they'd only have to do it once.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This is a question to everyone, it was mentioned in an other thread. How will all the people who are defending keeping mode switching, feel if it was forced on killers or pirates? I'm against it, I'm just wondering if people will defend it if it doesn't effect them.

If what "was forced on killers and pirates"?

 

[ianw]

This is a question to everyone, it was mentioned in an other thread. How will all the people who are defending keeping mode switching, feel if it was forced on killers or pirates? I'm against it, I'm just wondering if people will defend it if it doesn't effect them.

Well that is what was always proposed as part of the meaningful PVP/making mindless destruction cost a lot, so that would be fine by me. But then I play in open all the time anyway.

ETA - I assumed I was answering whether I'd be happy if people with bounties were forced into open (I should clarify - bounties earned for crimes committed in open) - if not please ignore the above in relation to the post I quoted..

I'll guess we'll know more this week...

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

If what "was forced on killers and pirates"?

Locked to open.

 

[SteveLaw]

This is a question to everyone, it was mentioned in an other thread. How will all the people who are defending keeping mode switching, feel if it was forced on killers or pirates? I'm against it, I'm just wondering if people will defend it if it doesn't effect them.

Mode switching doesn't affect me as it is. I play Open, hunt NPCs. I'm not arguing out of self-interest here.

Like Ziggy, as far I'm personally concerned you can lock the modes. I have less and less inclination to play in Open the longer I spend on these forums, locking me to Solo/Group would make zero difference to my game.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

This is a question to everyone, it was mentioned in an other thread. How will all the people who are defending keeping mode switching, feel if it was forced on killers or pirates? I'm against it, I'm just wondering if people will defend it if it doesn't effect them.



Not we can not agree. While instance hopping and logging out(whether legit or not) help they are not a 100% certainty that solo mode is. Pirates would still have to move around in open, they'd still have to avoid people in open. They are also forced to inconvenience themselves anytime someone jumps into their instance. With my way they'd have to log out numerous times in a play session, with yours they'd only have to do it once.

I believe the original plan was IF you pick up a bounty against a CMDR in open, you were going to be locked to open for a set amount of time, thus giving said CMDR time to retaliate, and stop people acting an psycho then dropping to solo and rinsing off.

if that is what you mean then I am all for it.... for a set time................ however if you mean if you play the role of a pirate in open you are permenantly locked to open, then I am not sure why that is any more fair than stopping a trader from mode switching.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Locked to open.

While being locked into a particular mode for a period of time, as a consequence for actions taken by the player, may not be appealing to some players, it is, in my opinion, quite reasonable if those actions involved gaining a bounty for the attack / destruction of another player. If a player chooses to engage another in PvP and gains a bounty then it is reasonable that players (not limited to the targeted player) have the chance to collect on the bounty.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

While being locked into a particular mode for a period of time, as a consequence for actions taken by the player, may not be appealing to some players, it is, in my opinion, quite reasonable if those actions involved gaining a bounty for the attack / destruction of another player. If a player chooses to engage another in PvP and gains a bounty then it is reasonable that players (not limited to the targeted player) have the chance to collect on the bounty.

So the general consensus is its ok to be a punishment but not ok to be a balance. Seems a little hipocritical to me.

 

[SteveLaw]

So the general consensus is its ok to be a punishment but not ok to be a balance. Seems a little hipocritical to me.

You can't take a general consensus from one reply. Also a temporary lock caused by your own actions isn't the same as a permanent lock for everyone all the time.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So the general consensus is its ok to be a punishment but not ok to be a balance. Seems a little hipocritical to me.

Given the number of comments about players ducking out of open on gaining a PvP related bounty to avoid other players, I would expect that it would be a welcome change to the game. Players who only target NPCs, in any mode, would have nothing to worry about.

Basically, if a player commits a crime against another player, why should they be allowed to hide from player delivered retribution?

Regarding balance - I remain of the opinion that balance in a game with so many ships and ship / equipment permutations is a near impossible task. Specifically regarding community goals / powerplay - it has been confirmed at least once that all players in all modes can contribute - it is up to each player to choose from which mode they contribute and for which reasons - we are all told to "play the game how you want to" not "play the game how other players want you to"....

 

[CMDR M Kozak]

Persitant bounties will not remove any griefing or whatever you are afraid of. Criminals WANT the bounty. They know the scare factor it has on players that fear the ingame death. They know the psychological effect is has when you are interdicted by someone with a flashy "WANTED" sign.

Give people some gameplay reasons to shoot other people. From what I read of the 1.3 annoucement it sounds like some of that will come around. Because most "griefers" are bored PvP'ers doing the last few things to get the most of the game before leaving it for good.

Still, I think a multiplayer game where you can sign off other players are a bit daft. But its what we got and Im pretty fine with it now.

EDIT: Oh, crime is part of ED too. Its not a side effect.

 

[Joe Spivey]

You can't take a general consensus from reply. Also a temporary lock caused by your own actions isn't the same as a permanent lock for everyone all the time.

This ^^^. How can you assume a GENERAL consensus from this little conversation? Also, comparing a punishment to a 'balance' does not work because of the wildly differing criteria and the lack of an accepted definition of what the balance may be. You are close to errecting a straw man here.

 

[Distance]

Given the number of comments about players ducking out of open on gaining a PvP related bounty to avoid other players, I would expect that it would be a welcome change to the game. Players who only target NPCs, in any mode, would have nothing to worry about.

Basically, if a player commits a crime against another player, why should they be allowed to hide from player delivered retribution?

Regarding balance - I remain of the opinion that balance in a game with so many ships and ship / equipment permutations is a near impossible task. Specifically regarding community goals / powerplay - it has been confirmed at least once that all players in all modes can contribute - it is up to each player to choose from which mode they contribute and for which reasons - we are all told to "play the game how you want to" not "play the game how other players want you to"....

I don't think people have a problem with balance regarding weapon/ship/etc but people being able to gain advantages due to the mode system and this is the whole crux of the solo vs open debate.

The same with regards to cg blockades, everyone knows that people play in different timezones and there are different instances. It's the fact that players can drop to an untouchable area that is the problem.

 

[SteveLaw]

The same with regards to cg blockades, everyone knows that people play in different timezones and there are different instances. It's the fact that players can drop to an untouchable area that is the problem.

What's the difference? If, instead of dropping to Solo, I started to play at a strange time when next to no-one else was playing, what is the actual practical difference?

 

[ianw]

So the general consensus is its ok to be a punishment but not ok to be a balance. Seems a little hipocritical to me.

Well I suppose it depends how pedantic we can get.

If, it's intended as a punishment then that's a different thing to normal gameplay/mode switching.

That said the bounty thing doesn't work that well in it's current guise so it's probably useless as a punishment in any case.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I don't think people have a problem with balance regarding weapon/ship/etc but people being able to gain advantages due tot he mode system and this is the whole crux of the solo vs open debate.

The same with regards to cg blockades, everyone knows that people play in different timezones and there are different instances. It's the fact that players can drop to an untouchable area that is the problem.

Contributions to community goals have only (comparatively) recently been introduced as "the reason" for change in the Solo vs Open debate. Frontier have said that they are not going to separate the background simulations - every player in any mode and platform will affect the same galactic background simulation and community goals / PowerPlay. This being the case, removing mode switching would simply be an unnecessary restriction on player choice and would not change the fact that players in solo / private groups / other platforms would continue to contribute to the same CG / PP.

I would expect that player blockades were not a primary design consideration for the game - otherwise we would probably have a different network model and would not have instances in multi-player modes. So, while being unable to prosecute a blockade may irk some players, it's a side-effect of the network model / instancing system (as well as the other two game modes) and therefore no reason, in my opinion, to segregate the game modes or remove the mode switching feature. Indeed, in DBOBE's Q&A at EGX 2014 he specifically mentions "don't go here or we'll kill you" in a way that would tend to suggest that he doesn't particularly care for the practice.

 

[Jordan Cobalt]

You can't take a general consensus from one reply. Also a temporary lock caused by your own actions isn't the same as a permanent lock for everyone all the time.

Concensus was the wrong term. I didn't mean to imply everyone thought that way. I just meant it's in the ddf there for an approved mechanic.

 

[SteveLaw]

Contributions to community goals have only (comparatively) recently been introduced as "the reason" for change in the Solo vs Open debate.

It's interesting that when the discussion seems to be closing towards general agreement (on this thread/forum at least) of a potential problem with modes and CGs the focus very quickly broadens again.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Concensus was the wrong term. I didn't mean to imply everyone thought that way. I just meant it's in the ddf there for an approved mechanic.

seems fair to me, and totally not hypocritical.

if I CHOOSE to go on a killing spree and run up a bounty for murder, then I think it is fair to be locked into open to allow the CMDR I killed to come back at me, or put a bounty on me**

If I do not want to get locked into open then I should not go on a killing spree.

a warzone is a little different imo as you do not pick up bounties for that, indeed and everyone is there by choice with the sole intention of battle.

slight aside...... I think there is an argument for warzones to be changed such that, on signing up to a faction, we are locked in for the period of that warzone to that side, and whilst fighting for that faction, we STOP broadcasting our username....... kind of like when the police have covered their ID tags in a riot.... in a way when we are in a warzone, we are no longer operating as a civilian, we are being employed by the military and are operating on their behalf. Seeing as our "crimes" do not count inside a warzone then there is no need to broadcast our names imo. (though still show as a hollow box maybe)

**even though this mechanic didnt make it either (yet?)