To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?
- Thread starter AMX-008 GaZowmn
- Start date
Telepresence breaks immersion. The Kirk Moment (tm) breaks immersion. Multicrew breaks immersion. Lack of ship interiors breaks immersion. VR pancake mode breaks immersion...
Honestly, if 'immersion' were even a concern for Frontier at this point, they've done a poor job of showing it.
Therefore, it's more about making the game fun & accessible to all IMO.
true it is, and it is a shame it was never expanded upon. So why make it worse for certain players by shoving invincible ships in their faces?
No of course they could improve on a lot things for gods sake almost every mechanic is shallow, I would love some different trucking gameplay that involves anything other than staring at a jumping screen and docking, I would like to actually be required to make physical repairs on my ship, having actually challenging combat PVE outside of a very few instances. However in this case by either:
- making dedicated completely split game modes for PVP and PVE
- Adding more robust tools for private groups, like others suggested. But make them even more robust add things to tweak spawn rates, difficulty setting and NPC settings, etc. etc.
- Adding a complete solo mode with the same robust settings as the private servers
But not by adding some risk filled half/half solution that will change nothing but to take away for certain players. But to be honest, I would not care about some global online mode If there was a possibility for truly private servers.
. you can do those things already by just using system chat, and your substitute, wont be a substitute for the open we currently have. So again instead of taking things away from others why just no split.
ok thanks for pointing out I forgot the p2p instancing. Who says that it will require a major rework? is there a possibility? yes there is, just like there is a possibility that pvp flags will require the same major rework.
I don't see how literally copying everything, putting it another separate server, and just completely separating PVE and PVP would require a major rework since nothing would be changed besides the physical server location you will be connecting to. Hell you can do that, and use your pvp flags on the PVE server, they just will be always on without the ability to turn them off.
Even when it's by literally having separate game instances?
yes, either split the servers, completely separate PVP and PVE server or give the ability to actually make private servers that have really extensive and robust settings.
But don't implement something like pvp flags which also might not be/might be technically possible, bring serious risks of exploits, and also takes away from certain players.
Just separate it, no more salt, no more immersion breaking stuff where invisible people affect things, no more: I got ganked!? threads on the forum, and specifically and most importantly: No more pvp vs pve , and people can actually enjoy the game by their preferred playstyle without impacting each others games.
Those two different buttons for PVP and PVE should have been there from the start.......
So I am also all ears for other suggestions if splitting actually proves to be technically impossible, that provide the same goal of actually splitting PVE and PVP, and without adding immersion breaking god mode ships.
Last edited:
I think conflict zones are at a good spot but it would be unfair to apply that level to all areas of the game.Fair enough.
I was hoping you weren't trying to make the "everybody should fly a PvP capable ship" argument.
I do agree that there's some stuff that'd be a PITA if all NPCs were much tougher.
Dialling up NPC competence/equipment/tactics would require a bit of thought and a certain amount of selectivity, rather than being an across-the-board thing.
Like I said, I'd like to see FDev implement a full-time beta server where they could test stuff out and let players get familiar with it and then offer feedback.
I wouldn't want to see ALL NPC's become super-tough but I would like to see the range of capabilities of NPCs expanded upward, so there'd be a possibility you would meet challenging NPCs.
On the other hand, certain areas like anarchies are way too easy for law abiding citizens while high security systems are still way too easy for criminal players. It's almost like no balancing happened at all in that area over the last 7 years. So I would very much welcome the permanent beta server that you suggested.
The other thing that needs to happen is a drastic change of build effectiveness. Things are ten times more powerful than they are supposed to be. Prominent examples are shield tank builds with up to 13000 mj shield power. A stock Sidewinder has 52.
How can anyone balance 52 against 13000?! Sure, some people would be upset about drastic changes, but we've been upset about all kinds of things. That's no reason to keep the game in a bad state.
Report crimes off breaks immersion...
There's a lot of things about E: D's implementation that are a shame.
Great ideas, but I don't think we'll ever see that - because they are not 'servers', just a restriction on group size between the different modes. There's only one 'server' per se... and only one game client (if you ignore the Odyssey mess that one assumes is temporary).
I disagree. It would add a huge amount for the thousands of players currently forced into PG or Solo, and the only thing it would actually take away from current Open players would be the ganker's ability to gank. I see that as a win.
It would be a complete change in the way the game works according to the shared galaxy we currently have. A PvP flag is simply a game rule that says "If you shoot this player, it does no damage, and vice versa". That's not a major rework. The only issue with doing that (actually, there are many issues, it's not a simple thing) is game design & balancing. It would have to be restricted. But these are not insurmountable problems.
Yes, because that's not how the game works. Even PS4 and Xbox players are playing in the same galaxy (there is no actual split), it's just that we can't see each other. But a PS4 player affects the same BGS that PC and Xbox players do.
I think you're overstating the "god mode ships" angle, because they're not "god mode" - they just can't kill players or be killed by them. That's the only difference. They can still faceplant planets, be killed by NPCs, etc etc. Besides not being targets for gankers (who I don't think the game should accommodate at all), there's really no impact on anyone else's game... except potentially more people for you to interact with (in other ways besides combat). This is not a bad thing IMO.
As things stand, if you take the Odyssey mess out of the equation (where they have already done a hard split & intend to re-integrate One Fine Day for whatever it's worth), there are no differences in the game client between the different game modes. The only difference is group size. Solo is a group of one (you), PG is up to 5000 players, and Open is unlimited. Other than these QoL restrictions, the game client is the same across all three modes.
What you're suggesting is a game mode where the game client is different depending on the game mode, which is fine, but it's still a PvP flag, and you may as well just integrate everyone into Open to encourage social interaction if you're going down that route. And if you're putting in the PvP flag anyway, you may as well make it a toggle that the player can use, and balance it appropriately with restrictions to prevent exploits. The flag can also work in Mobius PG too, should players want that.
But they weren't, and it's too late, and it's too bad.
So now, as a direct result of that, Open is what it is, and it's unacceptable for a large group of players. That's why we have constant threads about it.
Last edited:
LOL, why should a stock Sidewinder be balanced against an engineered Cutter?
A stock Sidey should stand no chance against one of the big ships, and not even an engineered one should be capable of destroying it (although it should be able to escape from it pretty easily). That's pretty much how things stand now.
(There actually are quite a lot of balance problems in the game, it was just a bad example IMO.)
LOL, 13000 is like 250 Sidewinders. They don't need to be 'balanced' against each other, but I guess it doesn't need to be 250.
And it would take away from all the player who are not gankers and like the thrill of being ganked. So you are not only impacting the gankers... Also there are enough players who are happy in PG or Solo and won't want to move, so it will only be a portion that might be a fraction.I disagree. It would add a huge amount for the thousands of players currently forced into PG or Solo, and the only thing it would actually take away from current Open players would be the ganker's ability to gank. I see that as a win.
I know that, but I still see no actual reason why it wont be possible to copy the whole of it and put it separately.
I wouldn't see, copying everything, and just putting it on a different separate server insurmountable either.
the whole problem, is knowing and seeing a ship, that I know is somehow magically invincible in the game world because some weird way.
And no, it's not a pvp flag if I am in a completely different copied shared galaxy running on an actual different physical server. So no that is not the same as PVP flags, which reduce my chances of added danger, add risks of exploits and cheating. Rather I will have 0% chance of running into those magic invincible, I wont affect them in any way and they wont affect me in any way. I wont be able to affect their BGS and they won't be able to influence my BGS.
Again I see no actual technical reason why they can't copy and run another separate shared galaxy next to the current one.
Last edited:
If you enjoy the "thrill" of being ganked, you leave the PvP flag on. I don't see the issue there. People play the game how they like.
Money. And the enormous overhead of maintaining multiple systems. Again, money.
But it's not invincible. Just not killable by a player if they choose not to engage in PvP. The whole point is that PvP becomes wholly consensual, rather than an unbalanced gank, like it is now. And it doesn't restrict any social interaction or other ways to play the game with large groups of other people. Which is exactly what an MMO is designed to encourage.
This would be bad IMO. One of the few good things about E: D's architecture IMO is that we can all affect the BGS, regardless of game mode or platform.
I'm talking about ways in which game modes can integrate more, for the social, "emergent gameplay" aspect of the game. To make the game more fun. The thing that currently stops that is the risk of non-consensual PvP.
Remember that instancing is handled by the client, not the server. When you shoot someone, it's the client that deals with that and communicates with another client via P2P. The server only receives information on disconnect, or in regular 'ticks'. So the clients would be different in your PvE mode, which means a PvP flag.
Last edited:
Well, the Cutter costs way more than 250 stock Sideys
(Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Cutter fan at all, they could just remove it from the game for all I care, although its explosion is pretty spectacular tbh.)
Last edited:
Ok so its not a technical issue anymore. Yes money might be a problem. Question is how much more would it cost, and how many new players it might attract.
No, because you said yourself, there will be less ability to gank.If you enjoy the "thrill" of being ganked, you leave the PvP flag on. I don't see the issue there. People play the game how they like.
Then added to that pirates have less ability to pirate, therefore less criminal activity, less chances for people to get that thrill, and less targets for bounty hunters.
And I think having seperate bgs'ses would be better discoveries can still be uploaded to both across.
If instancing is handled in that way then make it so people dont ever instance if there is a difference in flag settings.
And the I still would improve upon that by seperating the BGS. One for pvp only and one for pve only. Would also solve a lot of exploits.
Just prevent alienation for either pvp and pve players by complete seperation.
Last edited:
An "OPEN without PvP" would be enticing. I wouldn't mind running into other players if I didn't need to worry about getting ganked or forced into PvP. It would certainly be a boon to their rep and to their game, why FDEV hasn't implemented such an option is beyond me. So long as regular OPEN still exists, everyone could be happy.
Sad thing is, it's also a gigantic missed opportunity.
I mean, imagine if "stuff" was in an anarchy system and every man and his dog couldn't just shuffle in, do/see/get the thing and leave again?
Maybe a profitable mining location is discovered, players might seek to turn that system into an anarchy and then it'd be difficult to mine there without support.
CGs located in anarchies would require cargo ships and combat ships to wing-up in order to successfully deliver items to the CG.
Simply plotting a course would start to require some level of thought and skill if a trader wished to avoid hazardous systems.
Of course, to make stuff like that attractive, FDev would have to develop viable methods of dividing earnings and XP between all the participants and it'd be nice if they could make high-sec systems just as scary for outlaws as anarchies became for lawful players, with other typed of system falling somewhere between those two extremes.
Said it before but, basically, everybody who ever played Elite will know that flying into Riedquat was always a "squeaky bum" experience and I'd love to see that feeling revived in ED.
How many years are people going to fret about players who prefer to play in solo mode? It seems like such a weird thing to obsess over. There's nothing to negotiate. They just prefer a single player game without annoying humans running around. You do space in your way, let 'em do it in theirs.
![[VR] TheBlackCat](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/186/186096.jpg?1636839462){kind=avatar}
Maybe you could only toggle your PVP flag while docked at a station?I completely agree. Such a flag couldn't just be toggled on/off at will, there would have to be some pretty stringent rules around its use. One that I suggested earlier would be to have it take a period of time to take effect - say 24 hours (though it needn't be that long) to prevent people showing up & suddenly turning on/off PvP mid-battle.
You could also tie it into Powerplay, so that if you've pledged, you can't change the flag until you've unpledged. Something like that.
They are not insurmountable problems though.
IIRC, World of Warcraft introduced something like that about 2 expansions ago and you could only toggle your "world PVP" flag while in a major city. I think turning it on also granted some bonuses, but that wouldn't be appropriate in EliteD.
Sure, I would prefer if PG was replaced with a PvE open mode, but this is the game we have. Yes, I would play in open PvE more often than solo if that were an option. I also would not mind if the NPC's difficulty scaled faster, and tended to start higher than it does right now in that mode. There should be some stuff that actually takes cooperative play to reliably clear outside of just Thargoids
I don't see it ever happening though. And I am going to go ahead an get my obligatory "ED has crap networking for me since EDO's launch so it does not matter what mode I am in, I still will not instance with anyone" dig in.
I don't see it ever happening though. And I am going to go ahead an get my obligatory "ED has crap networking for me since EDO's launch so it does not matter what mode I am in, I still will not instance with anyone" dig in.
I don't think that is what people are fretting about, is it?
Seems, to me, like people are irked because they'd like to maximise their opportunity for a social experience without being concerned about the possibility of being blown out of the sky by a player who's intent on a completely different style of gameplay.
I can understand that.
Personally, I feel the same way but I've learned to play in Solo when I need to (foregoing the possibility of enjoyable social interactions) and then play in Open the rest of the time.
To me, it's not a big deal but if people are less confident of their ability to survive a PvP encounter, or are simply less willing to become somebody else's "content", I can see how it might be frustrating.
You gankers are just... oh well, I won't stoop to that level, oh hell, maybe I will...
After finishing pilot school and adventuring out into the outside of Pilot Foundation area I got ganked. I am talking a Sidewinder with no engineering updates, and venturing out of the "safe" space, I got ganked. Immediately! I tried again, I got ganked a second time. Some folks say they go 1,000 hours, I got ganked three times in my first 100 hours. So I gave up on Open and went to Solo. I was so much looking forward to MMO, but now I'm stuck with Solo or private groups, just to keep you gankers out of it as I took my baby steps.
So gankers own Open, and it is just too bad for the rest of us. I don't have over engineered ships, and I don't want to concentrate on weapons just yet. One day, after the many, many, many hours of grind, I MIGHT venture into OPEN. But I don't think this was the intent of OPEN, don't venture into it unless you have an over engineered ship and get gud so you can spank the gankers.
I want my OPEN because I would like to encounter a live online universe with interesting folks, establish communications with new friends. But currently, I stay away from OPEN. Private groups with the same mind set is the way to go. OPEN is owned mostly by the gankers and no matter how many debates or how many folks argue it, it is the way they like it. You venture into OPEN, you venture into ganker land. Do not change that, it is what gankers play ED for.
That is fine, gankers need to fulfill there purpose in life, upset everyone else and feel the superior. Fine, but this made OPEN their domain. You venture into it, you face the consequences. It is more exciting with danger, don't you agree?
But there needs to be some domain that allows peaceable folks to meet, congregate, actually work together. Private groups help, CG's help. But OPEN is currently a ganker domain and keeps the number of OPEN players pretty low. Just the way they like it. It is time to stop that nonsense. Frontier needs to explore methods to "open" up OPEN and keep the kiddies from ruining it for everyone else.
Sorry, didn't mean to get insulting. I don't mean to be. Gankers rule, or at least they think they do. But congrats, you have made sure the majority of ED pilots stay away from OPEN. You rule! Feel good? Glad to hear it. But Frontier needs to do something about this, or else I'm confined to Solo till I get that uber "anti-ganker" ship one day.
Okay, I'm wrong and gankers are right, as always. I'm just not good enough, I'm a sorry ED pilot. If I can't live with the "Dangerous", then I suck. Okay, I suck. OPEN is off limits for me. Oh boy!
After finishing pilot school and adventuring out into the outside of Pilot Foundation area I got ganked. I am talking a Sidewinder with no engineering updates, and venturing out of the "safe" space, I got ganked. Immediately! I tried again, I got ganked a second time. Some folks say they go 1,000 hours, I got ganked three times in my first 100 hours. So I gave up on Open and went to Solo. I was so much looking forward to MMO, but now I'm stuck with Solo or private groups, just to keep you gankers out of it as I took my baby steps.
So gankers own Open, and it is just too bad for the rest of us. I don't have over engineered ships, and I don't want to concentrate on weapons just yet. One day, after the many, many, many hours of grind, I MIGHT venture into OPEN. But I don't think this was the intent of OPEN, don't venture into it unless you have an over engineered ship and get gud so you can spank the gankers.
I want my OPEN because I would like to encounter a live online universe with interesting folks, establish communications with new friends. But currently, I stay away from OPEN. Private groups with the same mind set is the way to go. OPEN is owned mostly by the gankers and no matter how many debates or how many folks argue it, it is the way they like it. You venture into OPEN, you venture into ganker land. Do not change that, it is what gankers play ED for.
That is fine, gankers need to fulfill there purpose in life, upset everyone else and feel the superior. Fine, but this made OPEN their domain. You venture into it, you face the consequences. It is more exciting with danger, don't you agree?
But there needs to be some domain that allows peaceable folks to meet, congregate, actually work together. Private groups help, CG's help. But OPEN is currently a ganker domain and keeps the number of OPEN players pretty low. Just the way they like it. It is time to stop that nonsense. Frontier needs to explore methods to "open" up OPEN and keep the kiddies from ruining it for everyone else.
Sorry, didn't mean to get insulting. I don't mean to be. Gankers rule, or at least they think they do. But congrats, you have made sure the majority of ED pilots stay away from OPEN. You rule! Feel good? Glad to hear it. But Frontier needs to do something about this, or else I'm confined to Solo till I get that uber "anti-ganker" ship one day.
Okay, I'm wrong and gankers are right, as always. I'm just not good enough, I'm a sorry ED pilot. If I can't live with the "Dangerous", then I suck. Okay, I suck. OPEN is off limits for me. Oh boy!
Last edited:
now what would be a better idea is an on/ off switch to pvp, instead of showing up as a player they look more like an npc who we can kill all we want and nothing will happen to them