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

Get rid of solo and groups and just have pve open and pvp open.
Console tax. Solo has to stay or those that don't want to pay monthly to their console manufacturer won't be able to play the game anymore.
PGs should stay as well as an option to only instance with an organized group of players for whichever activities they want to undergo.

It would be an interesting experiment I would further add that you pick one mode of open and stick with it.
What's the purpose of removing mode fluidity? Forcing players who want to only PvP casually (not 24/7, mind you) to be your victim at all times or to be barred from it forever?
 
Last edited:
Plus it requires going through additional hoops such as filling out a form and waiting for manual approval whereas all the other modes just require a single press of a button. Nor is it in any way, shape or form advertised in-game which in addition limits the potential audience.
It takes a few minutes to apply if your accepted you get the mobius button. Google search and 2 clicks got me to the sign up form. It takes no time at all to create a private group. It's normally mentioned in the first 3 answers to any gank post on any forum so most people know about it fairly quickly.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
It would be an interesting experiment I would further add that you pick one mode of open and stick with it. Get rid of solo and groups and just have pve open and pvp open. If you want to change you reset your account. I would think a lot of people would run 2 separate accounts.
Mode mobility has been part of the pitch for as long as the modes have - and the fallout from the cancellation of Offline mode rather suggests that Solo won't be removed.

There's no compelling reason to remove either Solo or Private Groups in a game where other players have always been an optional extra.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Plus it requires going through additional hoops such as filling out a form and waiting for manual approval whereas all the other modes just require a single press of a button. Nor is it in any way, shape or form advertised in-game which in addition limits the potential audience.
Lots of hoops to go through (after finding out about a suitable Private Group out-of-game, because the game does not advertise Private Groups) to then play in a way that is guaranteed to be among fewer players than the only game mode with an unlimited population.
 
Console tax. Solo has to stay or those that don't want to pay monthly to their console manufacturer won't be able to play the game anymore.
PGs should stay as well as an option to only instance with an organized group of players for whichever activities they want to undergo.


What's the purpose of removing mode fluidity? Forcing players who want to only PvP casually (not 24/7, mind you) to be your victim at all times or to be barred from it forever?
Not for ever you can start again in PVE open or PVP open. Because open now is open with anything can happen which from what I'm reading a lot of people cant accept. So basically have 2 games 1 for people that don't want to get shot at and one for people that don't mind. You do your engineering, trading, mining, exploring in the mode you choose. The pvp mode they get to fight each other and the AI. If you want casual pvp do CQC. I did also state I would run 2 separate accounts more than likely. It would be interesting to see who would choose what numbers wise.
 
So to change the mode you have to reset or use a different CMDR? That's a no then.
Of course it is but it would still be an interesting experiment from a numbers point of view. Which button would you press? As to the game now Open is called open for a reason it's open. What it's not is open with no PVP which actually wouldn't be open. Frontier even gave you a block list and a menu log out timer!! which to this day still amazes me considering how broken instancing can be at the best of times.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Not for ever you can start again in PVE open or PVP open.
If a one-time choice of game mode, per CMDR, was implemented, how many of those who choose to play in Open sometimes would be expected to choose PvP-Open as their only way to play?
Because open now is open with anything can happen which from what I'm reading a lot of people cant accept.
Open isn't as open as some would want it to be, i.e. they can't accept that, in Open, delayed menu exit and the block feature exist - and that the galaxy is shared by all players, regardless of game platform or game mode, even if they enjoy the fact that they can shoot at anything they instance with..
.
 
Of course it is but it would still be an interesting experiment from a numbers point of view.
Even Blizzard abandoned that hard, permanent progress segregation with the release of Battle for Azeroth.

Which button would you press? As to the game now Open is called open for a reason it's open. What it's not is open with no PVP which actually wouldn't be open. which to this day still amazes me considering how broken instancing can be at the best of times.
In most games it has been shown where PvP is optional or tied to your progress (meaning enabling/disabling PvP requiring a restart) most player will just stick to PvE. Time and time again.
Frontier even gave you a block list and a menu log out timer!!
It was the most economical option for Frontier to keep a non-niche playerbase and have least pressure on support.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34RPwDfLpKg


which to this day still amazes me considering how broken instancing can be at the best of times.
Blame your ISP for not giving you a dedicated/public IPv4 address, not Frontier for not paying for more TURN servers. It's peer to peer. You know what that entails. Also don't blame the player for blocking you if they are the only one that can host an instance. It's on you only.
 
Last edited:
There is a rather large gap between NPCs passing a Turing test and NPCs with a bit more verisimilitude. As it stands a given NPC may as well not even exist beyond a momentary tactical encounter, and even within those laser-beam-narrow confines, still don't seem real. They ill-disguised props and stage dressing...flying pinatas of materials and credits that vanish or are swapped out should the spotlight drift from them for even a moment.

I can excuse the inability of being able to hold a protracted conversation with an NPC, or not simulating their entire virtual lives in minutiae, but this game revolves around mercantile activity and combat, yet NPCs are asleep at the wheel even here.
IMO the AI is more of an autopilot than a personality. I'd actually prefer APs - Artificial Persons. In fact, you can kinda blame me for the NPC mining and passenger ships that drop mines and run when attacked, because I specifically requested this feature back in the day when all NPCs reacted the exact same way when attacked - they all would turn and fight as if they were all clones of Tom Cruise. I suggested that a typical pilot of a passenger ship or mining vessel would not be Tom Cruise and would more likely run than fight, and in this case Frontier listened and adapted the AI accordingly. Me, I like the new change!

I would love to see multiple AI algorithms created based on a small subset of personality traits assigned to APs when ships are spawned. Is the pilot aggressive, timid, or an outright coward? They should also have different attack patterns. Something I notice is that all AIs behave the same for a given combat rank, to the point where they have to position themselves in the exact same quadrant on my ship's axis, which becomes very predictable and robotic. Higher ranking AI also tend to have inhuman reflexes all the time, performing perfect flips and PIP-management. I'd love to see an AP who is sometimes distracted because an AC (artificial cat) jumps on his / her lap, LOL.

These days I actually prefer to fly smaller, weaker ships against lower-ranking AI, because in my opinion the lower ranking AI fly more believably compared to the Elite aimbot AIs. From an immersion perspective, it feels more like I'm flying against a real person when going against a competent / master / dangerous (or even mostly harmless) AI than it does when I go against an Elite AI. Granted, I need to fly something like an Eagle or shieldess Cobra to still give myself a challenge, but I prefer this over flying a G5 FDL against a bunch of bullet-sponge aimbots.

And then there's the terrible comms from AI, which are an MVP effort. Though sometimes I actually prefer the repetitive "I'll boil you up!" threats over some of the things real players type in chat....
 
Or you accept the risks or you don't, can't have it both ways I'm afraid.

What many fail to realise is that the fear of being attacked also adds to the experience when you manage to escape the attackers or meet someone friendly, it doesn't have to be a 100% guaranteed bad experience.
 
Never had a NPC try to blow me up for no reason. Sure, the game allows you to play as a murderer, but it also allows us to not play with you. Sort of evens out.
Ganker behaviour is why people use block, and pick other modes. It's a direct response to gank life.
The attempts to shame, bribe, disenfranchise, or some how penalize players that don't want to play with PvPers sort of makes a point all on it's own.
 
You can do these in any private group or MOBIUS without changing anything. MOBIUS is strictly zero PVP under any circumstances.

Why should I organize escort flights / secured convois in solo or PG? NPC's are no threat. A somehow skilled pilot can escape every interdiction attempt even in a T-9. I don't like gankers for sure... But I gladly accept pirates as a threat or RP Players who try to attack me for a reason (BGS, PP or similar).
Additional my squadron needs to stay in open, so that we could interact with our (human) buisnesspartners.
 
What could deter random mindless attacks would be actual harsh consequences like reputation hits and blocking the use of services, but then again Frontier would probably need to tie reputations around the many accounts each one has. It's a tricky area.
 

PM

Banned
Does anyone who got destroyed by another player has contacted with SPEAR for punishment those player? If yes, could you share your experience please
 
Back
Top Bottom