Modes These arguments are tedious.

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

The thing with "risk" is that is not a standard unit to be measured.

If you want to reward "more risk" - as I'm trader, I face more risk than you do in your engineered combat ship. So I deserve the reward and you don't.
My 8 year old plays the game, she faces more risk than I do, because she does not have 3 years of practice.

Also, what about those who have a HOTAS Vs those who do not? It's harder for someone using a keyboard and mouse, yet some have VR and HOTAS set up making it a little easier.
And what about the disabled? Do they have to send the PIP assessments to Frontier so they can claim "more risk" Vs the able bodied?

Saying Open has more risk is not just misleading, but it's an out right lie.
And of course, it's also optional. Yet again I'll point out I've been in Open in a busy area for a month and not had any extra risk.
At any time I can just block someone I think may interrupt my game, removing the so called "extra risk".

You cannot give a bonus to something that isn't constant.

And of course, we could also argue that while in your engineered combat ships you get a negative as you've made the game easier for yourselves.
Say -25% to all income per person in your Wing / Multi-crew session. So your Winf of 4 would earn -100% income as you made the game super easy?

"If you want to reward "more risk" - as I'm trader, I face more risk than you do in your engineered combat ship. So I deserve the reward and you don't."

Agreed 100%.

But everything else is pretty consistent in populated area's. See every thread ever about someone getting ganked at a CG, with that juicy link to Mobius.

I use a HOTAS and beat people using Mouse and Keyboard. Ive used a keyboard and beat people using a Hotas.

I have about a year and a half worth of streaming to back that up. Live in front of 1000's of people over this year.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well all modes arent equal. Thats pretty much been established at this point.

So now its time to address it.

It could be something as simple as changing the way influence works per mode. Not a huge change really. Seems fair.

Every action, by every player, in each of the modes - has the same effect. It doesn't get more equal than that. However players in the multi-player modes *might* carry out fewer actions, if they meet a player and if that player opposes them.

We'll see if and how Frontier choose to offer a bonus for multi-player, over and above the bonuses already available to Wings and Multi-Crew.

 

[Jockey79]

"If you want to reward "more risk" - as I'm trader, I face more risk than you do in your engineered combat ship. So I deserve the reward and you don't."

Agreed 100%.

But everything else is pretty consistent in populated area's. See every thread ever about someone getting ganked at a CG, with that juicy link to Mobius.

I use a HOTAS and beat people using Mouse and Keyboard. Ive used a keyboard and beat people using a Hotas.

I have about a year and a half worth of streaming to back that up. Live in front of 1000's of people over this year.

So regardless of hardware, you always will have less risk than most others then?
So you don't need a bonus, in fact you should have a minus then to help even the game for those not as good as you.

See, now I could get behind this idea if it cuts both ways.
If those who make the game easier with engineering, A rated modules, hundreds of hours of practice, stupid amounts of re-buy cash / assets - all get a minus to their incomes to compensate their lack of risk then I think I may change my mind and back the idea.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Every action, by every player, in each of the modes - has the same effect. It doesn't get more equal than that. However players in the multi-player modes *might* carry out fewer actions, if they meet a player and if that player opposes them.

We'll see if and how Frontier choose to offer a bonus for multi-player, over and above the bonuses already available to Wings and Multi-Crew.

Risks are different though. You dont want to be PVPd right? You dont want me to physically stopping you right?

NPC's are farming tools. We both know that.

Having the same reward for the different levels of risk between the modes is what we are talking about here. Nothing more nothing less.

If they keep it the same, thats fine. But your influence should be MUCH MUCH lower for the lesser risk. If any at all.

With player factions we are no longer effecting the broader part of the galaxy. These are targeted areas by other players.

Thats why the balance needs to come into play.

If you dont want to be around something like that. Then stay out of the hot zones. Like most do that dont want to get PVP'd during CG's.

Also, people shouldnt be able to remove themselves from a part of the player base. To intentionally effect the player base they are removing themselves from.

Again, what the game started out as, and what we have now are two different things.

Squadrons is on Tuesday, but they may not go over this. To be honest I dont expect them to. If and when they do say anything about it.


It wont be focused feed back. it will be, This is how its going to be. Deal with it sort of thing. Its way too hot of a subject to be tinkered with. Like I said before we seen what happened last time they mentioned it. And now people have the audacity to call everyone a griefer anytime something bad happens to them. Because there are no defining rules.

We need those rules defined. End of story.

The community even if they are against it reflects that.

For example, Jockey saying things like Gank single players. Its supposed to be happening. Especially in places of conflict. Were supposed to be chasing people down with Wake Scanners, Groms and so forth. They areally arent used much.

The PVP we see in the game at SanTU is player made. And not what frontier made us.

And thats all because of the imbalance to risk and reward.

Maynard this is not hard to see. I know you understand it.

Lets stop with the circlejerk man. Sooner or later its gonna change to make the features they worked on work properly.

So regardless of hardware, you always will have less risk than most others then?
So you don't need a bonus, in fact you should have a minus then to help even the game for those not as good as you.

See, now I could get behind this idea if it cuts both ways.
If those who make the game easier with engineering, A rated modules, hundreds of hours of practice, stupid amounts of re-buy cash / assets - all get a minus to their incomes to compensate their lack of risk then I think I may change my mind and back the idea.

Ive done it as a trader too though Jockey. Not just a PVPer.

If a like me can do it. So can the rest of ya. No more semantics. Get your ship together. Get out there and learn guys. Youre gonna need to one day.

 

[Jockey79]

Youre gonna need to one day.

See, this is what stops me taking you seriously.

No one is going to "need" to do anything.
This is a game, if Frontier take it in a direction players don't like - they leave (gamers are a fickle bunch).
So no, we will not "need" to do anything. If it isn't fun or if it becomes unfair to us, we uninstall and Frontier gets no more money from us.

And as a Dev did point out most people don't engage in PvP, they won't be trying to push PvP ideals on the majority who don't PvP.
Because if a company is going to risk losing customers, they will opt to lose the smallest number possible.

In this case, that's the minority group of PvP'ers (aka: you).

Now if you want to talk seriously about improvements everyone can enjoy (PvP and PvE players), I'm on board.

 

[Wolf Starslayer]

Or just maybe they've not announced a upcoming major rework of the mode sytem because there isn't one; the simplist explanations are usually the most true.

Just because you imagine FD are giving out secret messages about their intention to change to you alone does not make it fact.

 

[Powderpanic]

In this case, that's the minority group of PvP'ers (aka: you).

.

Citation needed

Powderpanic
The Voice of Griefing

 

[Robert Maynard]

Citation needed

Powderpanic
The Voice of Griefing

Here (well, stating that those that get involved in PvP are a minority of the player-base, anyway):

On PvP vs PvE
We listen to both sides. While it's true that the PvP crowd do tend to be more vocal and in previous betas have given more organised feedback, we're well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP. A few changes here are more focused on one or the other (torpedoes have no real place in PvE at the moment for starters), but overall I think they promote variety of loadouts in both styles of play, and will make both more fun. On a personal note: I play more or less entirely in PvE, so if anything my bias in favour of that .

Interestingly, this quote post-dates Sandro's musings on an Open play bonus for PowerPlay (the Power, not the player) and PowerPlay only (i.e. not the BGS) by about eight months but pre-dates Sandro's reply to my question on the December 2016 stream stating that nothing was planned (but it was still an interesting idea) by about a month.

 

[ALGOMATIC]

Says the person who can't understand what balance is because all he can see is the only way to do something is destroying ships, yet no matter what you won't be able to see everyone...

You all want this want that, look this game has PVP and it has things we want in ED. Where are the non-cosmetic micro transactions. I want to buy a huge ship I can start decorating inside, with xp boosts and all sorts of things. I mean heck if we are going demand ED change into other games lets demand changes..

The modes arent balanced when you have META modes. Same thing as healing beams in wing fights, they are OP, sure everyone can fit one on their ship, but it doesnt make them balanced with the rest of the game.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Risks are different though. You dont want to be PVPd right? You dont want me to physically stopping you right?

NPC's are farming tools. We both know that.

Having the same reward for the different levels of risk between the modes is what we are talking about here. Nothing more nothing less.

If they keep it the same, thats fine. But your influence should be MUCH MUCH lower for the lesser risk. If any at all.

With player factions we are no longer effecting the broader part of the galaxy. These are targeted areas by other players.

Thats why the balance needs to come into play.

If you dont want to be around something like that. Then stay out of the hot zones. Like most do that dont want to get PVP'd during CG's.

Also, people shouldnt be able to remove themselves from a part of the player base. To intentionally effect the player base they are removing themselves from.

Again, what the game started out as, and what we have now are two different things.

Squadrons is on Tuesday, but they may not go over this. To be honest I dont expect them to. If and when they do say anything about it.


It wont be focused feed back. it will be, This is how its going to be. Deal with it sort of thing. Its way too hot of a subject to be tinkered with. Like I said before we seen what happened last time they mentioned it. And now people have the audacity to call everyone a griefer anytime something bad happens to them. Because there are no defining rules.

We need those rules defined. End of story.

The community even if they are against it reflects that.

For example, Jockey saying things like Gank single players. Its supposed to be happening. Especially in places of conflict. Were supposed to be chasing people down with Wake Scanners, Groms and so forth. They areally arent used much.

The PVP we see in the game at SanTU is player made. And not what frontier made us.

And thats all because of the imbalance to risk and reward.

Maynard this is not hard to see. I know you understand it.

Lets stop with the circlejerk man. Sooner or later its gonna change to make the features they worked on work properly.

The fundamental choice when starting each session of this game is whether (or not) a player wants to possibly engage in direct PvP - it's that simple.

NPCs are the game - other players are an optional component.

Player supported Factions have been in the game for approaching three years - and it's quite clear that they are treated, by the BGS, just the same as NPC factions. They can't be pledged to, nor do players control them.

It's also obvious that Frontier did not design their game to be dominated by direct PvP - and that they chose to have every player affect the BGS equally.

That some players, who want this game to be PvP oriented, can't accept that is obvious - and Frontier are aware that not all players agree with them.

Players are not removing themselves from the player-base by choosing a mode other than Open - we are all players, regardless of which mode we choose to play in - all affecting the BGS, PowerPlay, etc..

PvP players have organised to facilitate their preferred play-style in San Tu - PvE players have organised to facilitate their preferred play-style in PvE Private Groups.

Whether the features are working, or not, depends on one's play-style preference and one's opinions.

We'll see, in time, what Frontier do, or not, in relation to the three game modes and the BGS, etc..

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Every action, by every player, in each of the modes - has the same effect. It doesn't get more equal than that. However players in the multi-player modes *might* carry out fewer actions, if they meet a player and if that player opposes them.

We'll see if and how Frontier choose to offer a bonus for multi-player, over and above the bonuses already available to Wings and Multi-Crew.

At last we are getting somewhere.
And all bonuses you had listed are appliable to PGs as well, lets not forget it. Especialy MC... bonus.

I'm sorry... but this is ludicrous. Again... you wanted this risk.. but you demand payment for it because you think the risk without payment is stupid... I guess I need to start demanding Fdev compensate explorers who are using none good exploring ships extra since they dealt with the hardships and all and struggled to get out to places other explorers reach easily. Or maybe Traders who have no shields should be compensated because they took that extra risk to squeeze in just that more cargo... with out ever demanding the game change because of their game choices...

I'm sorry but the "everyone else does it" excuse is just that an excuse, you bailed on your principles for the game and now that you have what you want you want to demand rewards.
If you want to do things in Open do them in Open... You claim you need a reward to do it in Open... but you want that interaction. but you don't want to suffer for that interaction. How do you think PVErs felt in Open? You got your dang reward... the PVP interaction. You want scoreboards, achievements, all that stuff... Play CQC or play another game with that crap in it. I go out I risk loosing my ship to NPCs, and it does happen. You claim NPCs are nothing... you risk against PC's fine ... we both have risk.. then we both have the same chance at a reward.

What is "ludicrous" here?
Do explorers have "remove heat damage" or any damage option? And if they had, and turning it on/off would not hold ANY consequences whatsoever and could be done instantly at any point, how would it be used?
Switched on at 5% hull. Exactly. Or those explorers would hold their principles when they have a year worth of exploration data?

Would this translate into a good gameplay? Or it would be an outright option to add?
And that is the situation we have with modes.

 

[Robert Maynard]

At last we are getting somewhere.
And all bonuses you had listed are appliable to PGs as well, lets not forget it. Especialy MC... bonus.

Indeed - however not all risk in the game comes from other players - nor does meeting another player guarantee that a hazard has been encountered.

And that is the situation we have with modes.

Not exactly - the modes only filter the number of players we might meet - the rest of the game is completely intact, with all its attendant risks.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

Indeed - however not all risk in the game comes from other players - nor does meeting another player guarantee that a hazard has been encountered.



Not exactly - the modes only filter the number of players we might meet - the rest of the game is completely intact, with all its attendant risks.

Jumping into multi-star does not guarantee that you will start to take heat damage as well. But if you have some amout of data to lose, and you have "remove heat damage" button, without ANY penalty to press it?
Let's not be naive. No risk vs some risk. With clear way to prevent it. And no penalties for doing that.

Not pressing it - good exploration (dangerous) expirience. Press it - space engine.
Why it is in the game?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Jumping into multi-star does not guarantee that you will start to take heat damage as well. But if you have some amout of data to lose, and you have "remove heat damage" button, without ANY penalty to press it?
Let's not be naive.

There is no "remove heat damage" button.

Other players, on the other hand, are an optional extra in this game and, from the published design information over five years ago, always have been.

Frontier have been clear, from the outset, that their intended single player experience includes both experiencing and affecting the shared galaxy state - without necessarily having to play multi-player.

Any naivete seems to relate to how some players expect the game to revolve around PvP. While PvP is possible in two of the three game modes, it's not special - in this game.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

There is no "remove heat damage" button.

Other players, on the other hand, are an optional extra in this game and, from the published design information over five years ago, always have been.

Frontier have been clear, from the outset, that their intended single player experience includes both experiencing and affecting the shared galaxy state - without necessarily having to play multi-player.

Any naivete seems to relate to how some players expect the game to revolve around PvP. While PvP is possible in two of the three game modes, it's not special - in this game.

Then why not add "remove potential heat damage button" if we have "remove potential PvP encounters" one?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Then why not add "remove potential heat damage button" if we have "remove potential PvP encounters" one?

.... because that'd be silly....

More seriously, Frontier control the challenge posed by the game - and offer players the option of playing among other players, each and every time they launch the game. As well as that, the vast majority of the galaxy is the same in all game modes, i.e. devoid of other players - so the game is very much PvE oriented in all game modes (apart from places where players congregate - there might possibly be a bit of PvP in those places).

This is not a forced-multi-player or (direct) PvP-required game - it has not been sold as one either - and continues to be advertised as offering players in Solo the same opportunities to affect the economy, politics and conflicts of the connected galaxy and experience the effects that other players have on it.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

.... because that'd be silly....

More seriously, Frontier control the challenge posed by the game - and offer players the option of playing among other players, each and every time they launch the game.

This is not a forced-multi-player or (direct) PvP-required game - it has not been sold as one either.

Indeed - that would be silly.
While it can be optional or whatever, Open is at top of mode selection. And that is a mode which is spiced up with potential PvP encounters.
Same as exploration, which is spiced up by potential dangers. And exploration is no doubt optional as well.

So button to switch off PvP encounters is silly as well. Yet it is here, without any penalties to press it.

And it is fixable by exactly adding some penalties to press it. And how would you do it?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Indeed - that would be silly.
While it can be optional or whatever, Open is at top of mode selection. And that is a mode which is spiced up with potential PvP encounters.
Same as exploration, which is spiced up by potential dangers. And exploration is no doubt optional as well.

So button to switch off PvP encounters is silly as well. Yet it is here, without any penalties to press it.

And it is fixable by exactly adding some penalties to press it. And how would you do it?

While the order may reflect Frontier's preference for which one players may select, it's also in alphabetical order, so the order may mean nothing. (noting that up until recently the list of options when selecting a bookmark also defaulted to alphabetical order - with "delete" being the default)

A button to switch off PvP encounters is not silly - it's quite literally at the heart of Frontier's design for the game - you know, the design that they pitched and found support for on Kickstarter all those years ago - the same design that every single player who has bought the game bought into, i.e. a game with optional direct PvP.

The opinion that modes other than Open require to be penalised is just that - an opinion - and opinions vary. Similarly opinions vary on whether, or not, the three modes affecting the single shared galaxy state is a problem that needs to be fixed.

 

[CMDR EDGEL0RD]

While the order may reflect Frontier's preference for which one players may select, it's also in alphabetical order, so the order may mean nothing. (noting that up until recently the list of options when selecting a bookmark also defaulted to alphabetical order - with "delete" being the default)

A button to switch off PvP encounters is not silly - it's quite literally at the heart of Frontier's design for the game - you know, the design that they pitched and found support for on Kickstarter all those years ago - the same design that every single player who has bought the game bought into, i.e. a game with optional direct PvP.

The opinion that modes other than Open require to be penalised is just that - an opinion - and opinions vary. Similarly opinions vary on whether, or not, the three modes affecting the single shared galaxy state is a problem that needs to be fixed.

Playing with potential PvP encounters is the same as going to explore with present there danger.
My choice was to play with PvP. Yet I have button to remove PvP damage. With no penalties.
It might not be a problem for you, and not only you, but it is for me, and not me alone.

So it needs to be fixed. Somehow.

 

[UmbraRex]

Playing with potential PvP encounters is the same as going to explore with present there danger.
My choice was to play with PvP. Yet I have button to remove PvP damage. With no penalties.
It might not be a problem for you, and not only you, but it is for me, and not me alone.

So it needs to be fixed. Somehow.

It's easily fixed.

Go play another game since you hate the way this one is designed so much.

I suggest WoW since you seem to love their game design.