No u.21 pages and multiple previous threads (one every week at least) and you still don't get it.
To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?
- Thread starter AMX-008 GaZowmn
- Start date
Open play feels like solo mode/4 player coop most of the time. It easy not to be ganked if you want.
If another player wants to attack my ship, I sometimes feel like the greifer with the cat and mouse tricks in supercruise.
Openplay has it issues, it tends to fall apart if things get competitive.
If another player wants to attack my ship, I sometimes feel like the greifer with the cat and mouse tricks in supercruise.
Openplay has it issues, it tends to fall apart if things get competitive.
No, the notion of ganking hotspots is neither a narrow nor a lopsided view. It's just how it actually is, a description of reality. Although it's way exaggerated IMO (generally speaking ganking is way more rare than people seem to think), but there actually are some players who gank and they tend to be concentrated in a few places ingame, that's what the word "hotspot" is supposed to describe.
Open is NOT only for gankers, no one here said that and ofc nobody is forcing you to Solo. That's just one of your options (the easiest one) if you want to hand in that exploration data in Deciat. You can do it in Open as well if you wish, it's quite possible, although you'll need to be better prepared (or just luckier).
But that's no different from any other things you might want to do. You always need the right equipment if you want a better chance of success. You won't just go kill Thargoid interceptors in your explorer paperplane, for example.
I used to play (and still do) Star Wars Galaxies.I'm under the impression that a lot of people, including myself, prefer to play Solo mode all the time, not because we don't want to play with others, but simply because we don't want to PVP others.
For comparison, let me talk to you about of one of the worst launches in recent years, Fallout 76, which to the surprise of some has actually redeemed itself (at least to some extent), but owes it survival to its community, which stood during awful first year fo the game, but also a community that confused Bethesda because the devs were convinced their players wanted more PVP... and they were proven wrong, best depicted through many of the ironic headlines that gaming journalism used to deliver the "shocking" revelation:
Bethesda Didn’t Get Why ‘Fallout 76’ Players Wouldn’t Kill Each Other
Bethesda Didn’t Get Why ‘Fallout 76’ Players Wouldn’t Kill Each Other
Bethesda was surprised to learn that Fallout 76 players didn't care much for PvP, and how the game has evolved reflects that.www.forbes.com
Bethesda Apparently Shocked People Didn't Like PvP in 'Fallout 76'
Bethesda Apparently Shocked People Didn't Like PvP in 'Fallout 76'
"It's a smaller percentage of our player base than we thought."www.gamingbible.co.uk
Bethesda Surprised By How Many Fallout 76 Players Didn't Want to PvP
Bethesda Surprised By How Many Fallout 76 Players Didn't Want to PvP
Bethesda VP Pete Hines reveals that the company was surprised to find that players preferred to avoid PvP in Fallout 76 in favor of PvE.gamerant.com
Bethesda was surprised how uninterested players were in Fallout 76's PvP
Bethesda was surprised how uninterested players were in Fallout 76's PvP
We just want to be friends.www.pcgamer.com
Bethesda got confused that Fallout 76 players don’t murder each other
Why is everyone being so nice?
Bethesda got confused that Fallout 76 players don't murder each other
When Bethesda was designing Fallout 76, it expected players to murder each other, but it turns out they'd rather just work together.www.pcinvasion.com
Don't misunderstand: Fallout 76 do had (still has to a small degree) griefers and gankers, but the vast majority of players simply preferred not to engage in PVP.
Keeping things short, today many of the ways to engage into PVP have been disabled, pacifist mode is a menu option that makes it almost impossible to engage in PVP, and while the game's reputation will forever be tarnished by its launch, its actually in a better than many people expected (which can't be said for games like EA's Anthem, which already threw the towel and cancelled further development). It still is no substitute for a proper Fallout 5, but as a casual time waster with a Fallout theme: it's passable.
Back to Elite Dangerous, I think a lot more people would like to try playing in Open Play with random strangers in Elite if they had the choice to opt out from PVP, like having an aforementioned pacifist mode that disabled PVP interactions.
But that's just my impression, and I would like to hear what other thinks on this matter:
Do you think that Open Play would be negatively affected if PVP could be disabled?
Do you think Elite could benefit from having more people try to play & cooperate with others in Open Play?
In that game everyone is on the same server and PVP is an option you can choose otherwise by default it's non PVP.
Simple really.
That's kind of like arguing that you shouldn't need to lock your car because theft is wrong.
You might argue that it'd be irritating, and immersion-breaking, to log out and log back into Solo to mimimise risk in a "ganking hotspot" but the alternative is that a heap of people would be flying around in invulnerable ships, with some of them, inevitably, getting up to shennanigans.... which is also going to be irritating and immersion-breaking.
Overall, I think it's probably better to have a system that allows individual players to choose to do irritating and immersion-breaking things rather than a system where irritating and immersion-breaking things are inflicted on everybody.
On the assumption that FDev might want to do something about this issue, I'd suggest it'd be far better to implement a PvE server rather than trying to shoehorn some kind of optional "no PvP" doodad into Open.
Do that and Open would almost certainly quickly become the scorched-earth wasteland that gankers deserve to inhabit.
Course, it'd probably annoy "honourable" PP participants, who fly in Open voluntarily but, hey, people interested in PP should be used to getting the poopy end of the stick by now.
Didn't see this until now.
TBH, I think a simple toggle for your "pilot's federation transponder" would be a reasonable compromise in lieu of anything more complicated, and open to abuse.
With it on, you appear as a hollow blob and you'd get a "[CMDR]" tag, identifying you as a player.
With it switched off, you're a filled blob and the "[CMDR]" tag is removed.
It'd just be up to you to "fly casual" and not draw attention to yourself in Open, which'd become a skill worthy of learning.
yes lol exactly
Which would still get you ganked over Farseer base.
Can't we just remove combat from the game altogether?
And BGS and powerplay (sorry, Rubbernuke) while we're at it.
And BGS and powerplay (sorry, Rubbernuke) while we're at it.
how about no
Elite: Space Trucking and Jump-Honk-Scoop
It's already a miracle how people notice that among all the relogging you need to do for other reasons like Orange Sidewinders.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
In which case players will continue to play in Solo and Private Groups to avoid those who aren't fun to play with in Open.
Another Open mode, whether the same one where players don't instance with players with a different PvP flag setting or another Open-PvE mode added to the launcher, would be functionally no different from the current three mode setup - those who play in Open still would not see players in the other modes.
You shouldn't need to. The fact that you do have to is a reflection on the state of society, not you. If your car gets stolen - it's still the thief's fault.
Now, imagine that car manufacturers introduced a system where your car will only respond to your biometrics. Thieves would be outraged.
And that's what we see here with the suggestion of a PvP flag.
I'll just reiterate what I've said in other threads. I would prefer it if they made the C&P rules harsher for Seal Clubbers instead of just a straight PvP flag. I quite like the notoriety system but I would prefer to change it a little ;-
1) You only get Notoriety for killing other players unless both players are on opposing Powerplay Powers.
2) Notoriety decays a lot slower.
3) If you have Notoriety, you're in open (or pvt) and the system you in is not an Anarchy, then you're position is shown to all players in the galaxy map (like your friends icon but with a red icon).
It tells players in open or the pvt group that 'Here be gankers!' and you can either avoid the system, risk making a run through the system or go for a PvP Bounty Hunting session (gather a posse to get them there varmints) to go after them.
1) You only get Notoriety for killing other players unless both players are on opposing Powerplay Powers.
2) Notoriety decays a lot slower.
3) If you have Notoriety, you're in open (or pvt) and the system you in is not an Anarchy, then you're position is shown to all players in the galaxy map (like your friends icon but with a red icon).
It tells players in open or the pvt group that 'Here be gankers!' and you can either avoid the system, risk making a run through the system or go for a PvP Bounty Hunting session (gather a posse to get them there varmints) to go after them.
I've never really understood this.
Between the ability to just nope outta there if it looks iffy, the ability to land and sneak in with an SRV, the block function and mode-switching, nobody who doesn't want hassle at Farseer base should be getting it.
Me, I just enjoy buzzing the gankers in my 900m/s Viper.
It rarely ends well, but it's fun.
You shouldn't need to. The fact that you do have to is a reflection on the state of society, not you. If your car gets stolen - it's still the thief's fault.
Now, imagine that car manufacturers introduced a system where your car will only respond to your biometrics. Thieves would be outraged.
And that's what we see here with the suggestion of a PvP flag.
It does not matter whose fault it is, you still won't have a car if you refuse to lock it only because 'thieves don't tell me that I need to use my keys'.
Gravity is an unnecessary restriction, too. The rope is nothing more than a reminder of this big injustice in bungee jumping!
You shouldn't need to. The fact that you do have to is a reflection on the state of society, not you. If your car gets stolen - it's still the thief's fault.
Now, imagine that car manufacturers introduced a system where your car will only respond to your biometrics. Thieves would be outraged.
And that's what we see here with the suggestion of a PvP flag.
Oh, I agree with the moral argument.
Fundamental issue with a "PvP flag", though is that it won't just affect you.
At best, it'd mean that other players wouldn't be able to respond in a justifiable manner in, say, CZs or during PP activities.
At worst, it could be abused for more griefing.
And yet the standard ganker's response is "fly a different ship", or "play in solo". Putting the blame entirely on the person being ganked, and shrugging their shoulders saying "That's just how it is."
It's a rubbish way of looking at things, and stops the introduction of anything that might actually fix it. Because it's a game, and it doesn't have to be like that.
No, it would affect everyone in the game who does / doesn't want to PvP.
Easily worked around in implementation. Been talked about ad nauseum in this thread. To wit - no turning off PvP flag if pledged, and putting a timer on when it takes effect when you do change it. Pretty sure any other potential holes can be filled in a similar way.
Examples?