Modes These arguments are tedious.

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Been in open for a month, had no extra risk working in and around Founders.

If I choose to do a CG, the rewards for doing it are part of the CG.
You don't need more just because you picked open, as you can also choose to block anyone will slow you down.

Adding option to opt-in for bonus in open would be at the expense of block functionality, including other things. So please, remove it from your argument list.

Slight offtopic: is this situation where you are in advantage turning you into communists, or you were ones from the start?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Slight offtopic: is this situation where you are in advantage turning you into communists, or you were ones from the start?

From the start, everyone either backed or bought a game where it was very clear that direct PvP was (and remains) entirely optional.

That some people that have bought the game expected something else, when the information regarding the nature of the game is available, is unsurprising but not the fault of either Frontier or existing players.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Wow! You're a slave now? And I thought I'd heard every argument there was.

You aren't forced to play this game. Uninstall. Seriously, you're playing a game with players who don't care if they ever encounter another player, and more than a few who genuinely don't want to see other people. Myself? I'm flung out in the Formadine Rift, my next stop is... somewhere... over there. This game has no subscription base to maintain and a player base that genuinely doesn't care about "server population." Seriously, after that one-liner from you--that was way out of line, by the way--I'm sure you meant to install EVE instead of Elite. Uninstall. Seriously, there is no need for you to be here if you don't like it. Nothing is lost if you never play this game ever again.

You know only a minotity plays this game your way?

And my analogy stands. People which are in andvatageous position oppose people who want to change the status quo.
Opportunity cost is still a cost, I know that well, but can your understand that IT IS THE OTHER WAY AROUND for pvp people at the moment? We are getting less stuff that you, and try to argue with that.

Ugh...

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

From the start, everyone either backed or bought a game where it was very clear that direct PvP was (and remains) entirely optional.

That some people that have bought the game expected something else, when the information regarding the nature of the game is available, is unsurprising but not the fault of either Frontier or existing players.

Adding an optional bonus you can opt-in to would not change that. Check out link in my sig.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Adding an optional bonus you can opt-in to would not change that. Check out link in my sig.

An optional bonus to subsidise ones choice of game mode relating to an optional play-style?

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

An optional bonus to subsidise ones choice of game mode relating to an optional play-style?

Oh but we already determined that Open have some exclusive features already.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Oh but we already determined that Open have some exclusive features already.

Which exclusive features does Open *have*?

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Which exclusive features does Open *have*?

Player enemies.

And they had added CnP to add some criminal gameplay next. Being a criminal is a choice, but only of a few. So it is ok to add some content which would not benefit ALL. Or thought that they might make some content which would not benefit you directly is a wasted effort?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Player enemies.

And they had added CnP to add some criminal gameplay next. Being a criminal is a choice, but only of a few. So it is ok to add some content which would not benefit ALL. Or thought that they might make some content which would not benefit you directly is a wasted effort?

Other players exist in both multi-player game modes therefore PvP is possible in both of these modes.

Therefore the claimed exclusive feature isn't exclusive to Open (but can be removed from Private Groups with some care taken when admitting members).

Revisions to C&P were made at Frontier's instigation presumably to make Open a more attractive mode choice for those who choose not to play in it - in-keeping with Frontier's rather obvious desire to encourage players to play in Open. Previously, consequences for the clean target and the attacker were ridiculously one-sided.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Other players exist in both multi-player game modes therefore PvP is possible in both of these modes.

Therefore the claimed exclusive feature isn't exclusive to Open (but can be removed from Private Groups with some care taken when admitting members).

Revisions to C&P were made at Frontier's instigation presumably to make Open a more attractive mode choice for those who choose not to play in it - in-keeping with Frontier's rather obvious desire to encourage players to play in Open. Previously, consequences for the clean target and the attacker were ridiculously one-sided.

We are planning on adding some criminal gameplay in the future but first we need a better foundation for that.
No quote marks but it was said along those lines.

Tell me of a single PG with inconsentual PvP.

And you had just stated that this was made for Open only-so why not add some more?

 

[Robert Maynard]

We are planning on adding some criminal gameplay in the future but first we need a better foundation for that.
No quote marks but it was said along those lines.

Tell me of a single PG with inconsentual PvP.

And you had just stated that this was made for Open only-so why not add some more?

Criminal gameplay: that will almost certainly be able to be engaged with vs both CMDR and NPCs.

The "infiltrations" of the Mobius PGs are testament to the fact that even PvE oriented PGs are not immune to non-consensual PvP.

I didn't state that C&P was made for Open only - that would not be an accurate statement, as the revised C&P exists in all game modes.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Criminal gameplay: that will almost certainly be able to be engaged with vs both CMDR and NPCs.

The "infiltrations" of the Mobius PGs are testament to the fact that even PvE oriented PGs are not immune to non-consensual PvP.

I didn't state that C&P was made for Open only - that would not be an accurate statement, as the revised C&P exists in all game modes.

Not immune, maybe, while for Open it is the feature.

CnP had a lot to do with Opne exclusively.

And criminal gameplay is still for criminals. Which are a minority.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Not immune, maybe, while for Open it is the feature.

CnP had a lot to do with Opne exclusively.

And criminal gameplay is still for criminals. Which are a minority.

It has long been argued, by Open only proponents, that simply choosing to play in Open (either multi-player mode, actually) is consenting to PvP - so it can be argued that there is no non-consensual PvP in the game.

What aspects of the revised C&P apply to Open only?

Indeed, criminal gameplay is still for criminals - and criminality does not require PvP.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

It has long been argued, by Open only proponents, that simply choosing to play in Open (either multi-player mode, actually) is consenting to PvP - so it can be argued that there is no non-consensual PvP in the game.

What aspects of the revised C&P apply to Open only?

Indeed, criminal gameplay is still for criminals - and criminality does not require PvP.

First is undoubtedly true. Second question is kinda rhetorical.
And you still cannot answer why there is nothing to be done for PvP people.

Look, our mutual friend Jockey again did provided me with good arguments

Imagine that we went to the casino together. I had played roulette there and you just drank.
And even if we spend the same amount of drinks, 100% of the time I will have the same or less money than you.

What does that mean? That this casino is rigged, and should be fixed.

The fact that not everyone play casino doesn't mean that it is not a scam and should not be fixed.
And we can add to that that I have to spend more money on drinks (better modules).
Statement that ED is not a casino is just invalid.
The fact that roulette is optional is invalid as well.
And while you can play casino knowing that it is rigged, it kills most of the fun about it.

And exactly that makes open a place which is full of people who either do not know about that it is rigged or people which have nothing to lose. Exact situation we are having now.

And winrates shoud be added, and balanced in a way which will not bring people who hate gambling to it, but will satisfy people which do like gambling.

I can add that maternal instincts some people apply on players are misguided as well. PvP games/servers were always more popular.


I can add that maternal instincts some people apply on players are midguided as well. PvP games/servers were always more popular.

 

[Robert Maynard]

What does that mean? That this casino is rigged, and should be fixed.

It means that gambling costs - not that it is necessary a problem that needs to be fixed.

The simplest way to ensure that those that engage in PvP don't lose out would be to remove the rebuy when destroyed by a player.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

It means that gambling costs - not that it is necessary a problem that needs to be fixed.

The simplest way to ensure that those that engage in PvP don't lose out would be to remove the rebuy when destroyed by a player.

Cargo loss then as well?
And why do you killing casino? some people do like it. I am ok with removing risk from open, as long as there is still an optional casino, which is not rigged.

 

[Jockey79]

Adding option to opt-in for bonus in open would be at the expense of block functionality, including other things. So please, remove it from your argument list.

Slight offtopic: is this situation where you are in advantage turning you into communists, or you were ones from the start?

The block function is there to stop bullying / harassment - it will never be turned off because we don't have Games Masters to deal with bullying.
So how about you remove it form your argument.

Love how you use "communists" as an insult.

This game was not made for you to have power over people.
It's not a "Dictator" simulator, so go be a "Dictator" elsewhere.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Cargo loss then as well?

That too, maybe - then there's exploration data, combat bonds, bounty vouchers, missions, passengers, etc....

And why do you killing casino? some people do like it. I am ok with removing risk from open, as long as there is still an optional casino, which is not rigged.

Not "killing" it - just leaving it as an optional extra. The game isn't rigged - every player can affect the BGS / PowerPlay / etc. in exactly the same ways as other players. That player choices, i.e. ship, loadout, Engineering (or lack thereof) and mode change the risk profile of a particular activity is simply down to the choices that the player makes.

 

[Jockey79]

....I am ok with removing risk from open, as long as there is still an optional casino, which is not rigged.

= Arena

You find it on the main menu, there is your casino that is not rigged.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Adding an optional bonus you can opt-in to would not change that. Check out link in my sig.

Ooh, can i get an optional opt-in bonus for flying in solo then? I can't wing up, it makes the game harder than guys flying in Open and PG!