To Solo Play Players: If You Could Disable PVP, Would You Play in Open Play Mode Instead?

[Bard Voronwe]

Well, that is an interesting observation - I've been playing around 4.5 years, and oddly enough there is sufficient 'challenge' in the activities I do in the game to keep me engaged. I don't think there is any other game I have played, regularly, for that period of time. (Yes, I still go back and play some Skyrim on occasion, but only had a couple of hundreds of hours playing there, here I have over 5,000 - so far)

Well your experience, as mine which is very similar to yours, are statistically irrelevant. It's a fact that most difficult actions simply are not remunerative enough, and they are often quite time spending, often in a useless way (massacre missions for example, it's not about ability, it's about being persistent). And it's another fact that this game saw a lot of players come and go, usually when they are done with the grind. I share with you the same passion for the game (maybe even more, being a community organizer), but the balancement is a real issue in this game, both for personal rewards and effects on the environment (BGS mostly).

 

[Bard Voronwe]

I mean the part that you feel hurt because there is some gravity from a side you cannot control. This is nuts.

Wait a second. If I can hurt you by choosing not to engage in a fight with you, does this make me a sort of psycho-ganker? Then I have one goal in game, to achieve top rank in it

A mix of a bad attempt in trolling and a lot of ignorance about simple game mechanics. Pfff

 

[Losco Nosciuto]

After all years spent on this forum and after being away a few months I see things aren't changed that much...

That's the usual cameratism going on via the usual channels, and the voice of reason get choked by the few only people who has a bit of power to suppress ideas materially because they can't just prove others wrong otherwise.

So, this is Springfield Toxic Wastes Dump back again

"Good job to all the staff who helps with the situation"

 

[Kamiyoda]

I mean the part that you feel hurt because there is some gravity from a side you cannot control. This is nuts.

Wait a second. If I can hurt you by choosing not to engage in a fight with you, does this make me a sort of psycho-ganker? Then I have one goal in game, to achieve top rank in it

Any relation to the Psycho-Gundam?

Are we going to drop some rocks on Federation fools weighed down by gravity.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

Well your experience, as mine which is very similar to yours, are statistically irrelevant. It's a fact that most difficult actions simply are not remunerative enough, and they are often quite time spending, often in a useless way (massacre missions for example, it's not about ability, it's about being persistent). And it's another fact that this game saw a lot of players come and go, usually when they are done with the grind. I share with you the same passion for the game (maybe even more, being a community organizer), but the balancement is a real issue in this game, both for personal rewards and effects on the environment (BGS mostly).

Indeed. It's a shame that the "meta" for effective PvE (in particular, powerplay) is closed modes. Just like the PvP meta FDL: people use other ships in PvP, for fun, but there is always inexorable pressure toward it if you want the best chance of winning a fight. Thankfully, for sufficiently many in PP (indeed, the majority on the whole across all powerplay, though not equitably proportioned within each power), the conclusion that it makes most sense to do it in open (be it for fun, simply fitting for the feature's design, or both) trumps the grind meta (which is particularly punishing in PP). Otherwise I might not bother at all.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Indeed. It's a shame that the "meta" for effective PvE (in particular, powerplay) is closed modes. Just like the PvP meta FDL: people use other ships in PvP, for fun, but there is always inexorable pressure toward it if you want the best chance of winning a fight. Thankfully, for sufficiently many in PP (indeed, the majority on the whole across all powerplay, though not equitably proportioned within each power), the conclusion that it makes most sense to do it in open (be it for fun, simply fitting for the feature's design, or both) trumps the grind meta (which is particularly punishing in PP). Otherwise I might not bother at all.

I think that the only opportunity we had to actually have some balancement was during Beyond: too bad people went crazy for fleet carriers and didn't care about anything else.

 

[Gleitfrosch]

I guess you missed my earlier posts then?

I continue to suggest exactly that in each of these merry-go-round threads that apparently need to be created every few days

Yes, I have not read all posts in this thread, so must have missed these posts.

Maybe one day FD will have mercy with PvE players.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Maybe one day FD will have mercy with PvE players.

If it is possible (faced with the ingenuity of humans to exploit any weakness in a game) to build a dedicated PvE mode, I can see no reason why they are not doing so, choice is not a bad thing, why are they so reluctant to provide it?

 

[babelfisch]

Thanks for the feedback. I believe it does.

Then you believe wrong.

 

[babelfisch]

I have noting to do with what others said.

If you quote me in a reply to someone else you very much have something to do with what others said.

If you don't want to have something to do with it, don't quote me.

 

[galahad2069]

But THOSE pixels count

In Odyssey maybe, in Horizons the fps is okay even in 4K

 

[Rebel Yell]

Forecast what, exactly? That players would choose to play in their preferred game mode in a game where other players are optional? That was pretty much guaranteed from the point Frontier published their design that made other players optional (and also made PvP optional). The game was designed around the free choice of each player who to play among when engaging in game content - whether other players like it, or not.

That pan-modal game features don't meet with the expectations of those who prefer an optional aspect of the game is not the fault of the game design nor those who don't enjoy the optional aspect of the game - we all bought a game where PvP is optional, after all (even if some of us don't accept it).

The persistent demands of those seeking that game features be PvP-gated to suit the preference don't seem to have swayed Frontier at all - and the demands keep coming because they haven't been successful in the nine years that the game design has been published.

Those who would PvP-gate game content to Open are no less repetitive in their proposals / demands, demands made because they chose to buy a game that is not designed to meet their needs - and don't seem to give any consideration to the fact that to PvP-gate content would adversely affect other players who are content with the game design as it is. Trying to deny other players access to game content, over six years since the game launched, just because players bought a game that is not designed around their preferred play-style, seems quite selfish....

Ironic that those who show little to no sympathy for those who would be adversely affected by their proposals are themselves seeking sympathy from those who would be adversely affected by those proposals. Little wonder that there's little sympathy forthcoming....

OPEN IS NOT PVP.

 

[Rebel Yell]

100%. I use Mobius as I still get to talk to people but without the PvP. A PvP banned mode would be great. I’d note that most PvP tends to be one person hammering someone who didn’t want PvP. This is what you need to remove from the equation.

No, the one you hear are the ones who complain or cry because their pixel ship has been kaboomed.

 

[kurush]

Let's duplicate the galaxy in a Open Only one and an hybrid with even a non-pvp open play mode. Then let's see which one will be more deserted after 6 months. I've got my idea about it. Usually the guys from the other side don't even consider the idea to make a try.

Without PvP all simulation aspects of ED play as a nice slow going game of chess. With PvP you add an option to smack your opponent when he is making his move. Because you are apparently bored with the game as it is. I can understand the urge, but I doubt you would get the game any better with this "enhancement".

 

[TiberiusDuval]

No, the one you hear are the ones who complain or cry because their pixel ship has been kaboomed.

Basic problem for PVP crowd is very simple, unless you are happy fighting each other, you DO need PVE types. What can pirate do without traders? What ganker do without easy target? On the otherside PVE players do NOT need PVP players for their game loops. Trader can trade, miner mine, smuggler smuggle, explorer explore and so on, without any need for any PVP encounter. In fact pretty many co-op features have been dismissed because of their potential misuse by PVP crowd. So I kind of understand serious dislike of Open-PVE mode...That could make empty PVP space...Perhaps I would even care, if I cared about PVP aspects. But I don't. Gankers can gank themselves....

 

[Robert Maynard]

OPEN IS NOT PVP.

Both multi-player game modes are PvP-enabled, i.e. players can shoot at anything they instance with - which includes other players.

While Open is not only PvP, it contains other players who may choose to attack when they are in the same instance.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Without PvP all simulation aspects of ED play as a nice slow going game of chess. With PvP you add an option to smack your opponent when he is making his move. Because you are apparently bored with the game as it is. I can understand the urge, but I doubt you would get the game any better with this "enhancement".

You know that chess is PvP technically right? You can eat opponent's pieces... ^_^'

 

[Robert Maynard]

You know that chess is PvP technically right? You can eat opponent's pieces... ^_^'

It depends on the opponent - and not all opponents are human.

 

[Losco Nosciuto]

Without PvP all simulation aspects of ED play as a nice slow going game of chess. With PvP you add an option to smack your opponent when he is making his move. Because you are apparently bored with the game as it is. I can understand the urge, but I doubt you would get the game any better with this "enhancement".

If we were only playing chess, we would be on a Chess Forum. The greatest of E is that you can play "chess", or "Hold'em" while in CQC, or just regular "poker" with occasional PvP on system, and in a SIMULATION (as you defined yourself) outlaws would be a part of that equation more than they are actually (ever watch the news or read a newspaper?).

E Is a game which relies on freedom, but cages player in a loop of unhappiness.

At this time Elite: Dangerous is like Italy.
In Italy, if you find a thief in your house pointing a gun at you, and you shoot him, you get arrested. If you lock him in, you're arrested too.
In E if you play BGS/PP in OPEN, you can get counterattacked in Solo, or in Private group. Where people "play chess alone so they can choose which side of their brain wins".

Well, for what concernes me, you wouldn't be pleased if I was in your house stealing something, and you had to wait for me to grab everything and show me the open door.
Wouldn't you?

 

[Bard Voronwe]

It depends on the opponent - and not all opponents are human.

But BGS is moved by human interactions only so this is not the case. We were talking about BGS as a game of chess, there's no AI involved in Elite Dangerous for that, so it would be like two players playing the same chess scenario, and the fastest to solve it wins. But again: not very relevant in this particular case.