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

[Juniper]

Ok so its only a game so why bother being bothered being blown up? it's a game and only a game

Time spent. For an explorer like me, that can mean the loss of ELW discoveries and a whole host of other things.

So there are a some breakers, so lets make it worse! lets add magic god mode ships to it, it won't be fun for "all" since for a portion of the player base, adding such an enormous immersion breaker is a big deal and then it's not fun for all.

If they are "god mode ships" they are toothless gods, because they can't shoot at anyone. This kinda makes the rest of your point moot IMO.

Again, I fail to see how a PvP flag is an "immersion breaker"... especially given the ganker's justification to keeping things as they are is "it's only a game". You already know there are people playing the game in other modes to you - this at least would allow you to see them and interact with them.

And again take a look at the game New World to see what kind of quagmire and balancing nightmare pvp flags are.

We're talking about Elite: Dangerous, not New World. I'm not interested in New World (whatever that is). I do know other MMO games (such as WoW) have successfully implemented a no-PvP flag though.

just like the small vocal subset pvp players that want open only, its only a small vocal subset of pve player who refuse to use the provided modes, and push for immersion destroying mechanics.

Oh no, we use them. It's just not a good substitute for Open, when a group can only have 5,000 players in a galaxy of 400 billion systems, whereas Open is unlimited.

And I'm quite used to being a small vocal subset.

 

[Red Anders]

I played a game years ago where high-level players would sit in and around new-start systems killing all the low-level players. It got so bad that groups and wings were formed with the intent of dealing with those sorts of players.

Indeed and with no small measure of success

 

[LeoBartlet]

Indeed and with no small measure of success

Sadly our attempts and others never managed to deal with Cloak and his lvl 10 maul spree killing

I still giggle whenever I think about the video he posted.

 

[Xae]

I don't much care one way or another.

But from a software point of view I imagine you could delete 99% of private groups and take a ton of work off the match making service by doing so. Managing one group or two has to be much easier than managing hundreds.

 

[Sellias]

Time spent. For an explorer like me, that can mean the loss of ELW discoveries and a whole host of other things.

Playing a game is already meaningless times spent, with pvp flags it would also be loss of time for pirates once they discover they are losing time to sift through all those pvp flags.

If they are "god mode ships" they are toothless gods, because they can't shoot at anyone. This kinda makes the rest of your point moot IMO.

Again, I fail to see how a PvP flag is an "immersion breaker"... especially given the ganker's justification to keeping things as they are is "it's only a game".

Then you clearly don't understand how suspension of disbelief works, and that knowing and seeing a magical god mode ship will break it.

We're talking about Elite: Dangerous, not New World. I'm not interested in New World (whatever that is). I do know other MMO games (such as WoW) have successfully implemented a no-PvP flag.

"those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it", Jup instead of doing vital research what problems pvp flags might bring let ignore all those cases, and enter a quagmire.

Oh no, we use them. It's just not a good substitute for Open, when a group can only have 5,000 players in a galaxy of 400 billion systems, whereas Open is unlimited.

open is already instanced, so its no unlimited, you will never meet all those players in 1 instance (it would set the servers on fire), and they will be spread around 400 billion systems, moot point

But instead of pushing for a truly separate PVE mode, that will Literally impact no one, some people push for some overcomplicated systems that is ripe for abuse and exploits while at the same will ruin the game for certain players with magic god ships.

 

[Juniper]

Playing a game is already meaningless times spent, with pvp flags it would also be loss of time for pirates once they discover they are losing time to sift through all those pvp flags.

Depends entirely on implementation.

Then you clearly don't understand how suspension of disbelief works, and that knowing and seeing a magical god mode ship will break it.

But yet you play the game knowing that others are playing in different modes, completely invisible to you, and might even be docked at the same station pad as you - impacting the same galaxy in the same way - and somehow this isn't immersion breaking? How does that even work?

More players in Open (whether PvP or otherwise) means you will have a chance of seeing them & interacting with them. More people = better.

"those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it", Jup instead of doing vital research what problems pvp flags might bring let ignore all those cases, and enter a quagmire.

"New World" (as I understand it) is a game under development right now, isn't it? So how is it related to history? How is it related to E: D's network model?

open is already instanced, so its no unlimited, you will never meet all those players in 1 instance (it would set the servers on fire), and they will be spread around 400 billion systems, moot point

The instancing works via P2P, so not really anything to do with the servers, beyond getting a list of players in your current group & in your current sphere. The group size of Open is unlimited. You have a bunch of players in the same place, say at a station, you'll see up to 64 of them (I think that's the limit now, used to be 32, but I could be wrong on that point).

Solo = group size of 1 (you).
PG = group size of 5000
Open = group size of unlimited.

That's how it works.

But instead of pushing for a truly separate PVE mode, that will Literally impact no one, some people push for some overcomplicated systems that is ripe for abuse and exploits while at the same will ruin the game for certain players with magic god ships.

As I said, I wouldn't mind a separate PVE mode... but that's a somewhat less realistic solution (i.e. it will never happen).

A PvP flag is simpler. And it would bring more people into Open, which everyone can interact with, making the galaxy feel more alive. Frontier have designed the game to make multiplayer a substitute for gameplay, so more players means a better game for all. As the saying goes, it's not rocket science.

 

[Stealthie]

We're talking about Elite: Dangerous, not New World. I'm not interested in New World (whatever that is). I do know other MMO games (such as WoW) have successfully implemented a no-PvP flag though.

Biggest hurdle, with regard to any kind of "no PvP" system is how you could implement it in a way that couldn't be abused, unfortunately.

There's nothing to actually prevent PvP in a group like Mobius.
They just boot people out if they attack another player... and that usually works, because the admin's make the effort to enforce it.

If you were trying to create some kind of "automated" system, it's going to be open to all sorts of abuse.
You're going to get players ramming other players rather than shooting at them, players deliberately flying in front of another player's weapons, players using their ships to shield a target from attack by other players and all sorts of "emergent gameplay" that nobody's yet thought of.

It sounds really simple to "just have a no PvP flag, which'd mean you can't be harmed by another player's weapons" but there's so many ways that's likely to be abused that I doubt it'd ever work properly... and almost certainly not better than the sort of system that Mobius employs.

 

[Juniper]

Biggest hurdle, with regard to any kind of "no PvP" system is how you could implement it in a way that couldn't be abused, unfortunately.

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.

 

[Viridian-]

How about and "unarmed" flag and higher consequences for destroying unarmed ships? We all know it's pretty pointless to put weapons on an exploration ship. You carry weapons into a warzone, you can expect to get shot. As for power play trucking, maybe require a cargo scan in order to identify enemy agents which you can then kill. An asp explorer engineered for long jump range is a super easy target. Maybe pay a little extra for the convenience.

 

[Rebel Yell]

More players in Open (whether PvP or otherwise) means you will have a chance of seeing them & interacting with them. More people = better.

...and way lower risk of being shot down.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Biggest hurdle, with regard to any kind of "no PvP" system is how you could implement it in a way that couldn't be abused, unfortunately.

There's nothing to actually prevent PvP in a group like Mobius.
They just boot people out if they attack another player... and that usually works, because the admin's make the effort to enforce it.

If you were trying to create some kind of "automated" system, it's going to be open to all sorts of abuse.
You're going to get players ramming other players rather than shooting at them, players deliberately flying in front of another player's weapons, players using their ships to shield a target from attack by other players and all sorts of "emergent gameplay" that nobody's yet thought of.

It sounds really simple to "just have a no PvP flag, which'd mean you can't be harmed by another player's weapons" but there's so many ways that's likely to be abused that I doubt it'd ever work properly... and almost certainly not better than the sort of system that Mobius employs.

It'd be a challenge indeed. I've posted an idea for optional Private Group rules a few times now:
For PvP:

• Enable mass-lock delay on hyper-jumps if due to player ship? [yes/no]
• Increase menu exit delay if "in danger" determination includes player attack? [yes/no]
• Disable menu exit option if "in danger" determination includes player attack? [yes/no]
• Disable weapon healing effects? [yes/no]
• Disable premium ammunition? [yes/no]
• Disable Shield Cell Boosters? [yes/no]
• Lost connection while "in danger" due to player attack results in destruction / rebuy? [yes/no]

For PvE:

• Disable player / player interdiction? [yes/no]
• Disable player / player wake following? [yes/no]
• Disable player / player wake dropping? [yes/no]
• Disable "friendly fire"? [yes/no]
• Session & PG kick player on attacking another player and move attacking player to a Solo instance? [yes/no]
• Session & PG kick player on destroying another player and move attacking player to a Solo instance? [yes/no]
• Remove menu exit delay if "in danger" flag was only set due to player attack? [yes/no]

For all play-styles:

• Move player to another instance after a period of inactivity on a landing pad.

 

[Sellias]

But yet you play the game knowing that others are playing in different modes, completely invisible to you, and might even be docked at the same station pad as you - impacting the same galaxy in the same way - and somehow this isn't immersion breaking? How does that even work?

exactly they are invisible, the galaxy is a living thing, it would be rather unrealistic if it wasn't moving. And again I don't see them so suspension of disbelief is maintained since like in a city I don't see certain things but they still impact a city. As opposed to shoving magic ships in front of me.

"New World" (as I understand it) is a game under development right now, isn't it? So how is it related to history? How is it related to E: D's network model?

maybe because they are trying it already? As in why the hell wouldn't you look at similar cases to see what kind of issues or pro's it might bring.....
That's like the one of the first thing I was taught in game design classes, when making a game, do case studies on games that tried or are trying something similar

More players in Open (whether PvP or otherwise) means you will have a chance of seeing them & interacting with them. More people = better.

I can't interact with them completely, I can't blow them up, also a lot of strictly solo players would completely disagree with "More people = better."

As I said, I wouldn't mind a separate PVE mode... but that's a somewhat less realistic solution (i.e. it will never happen).

A PvP flag is simpler. And it would bring more people into Open, which everyone can interact with, making the galaxy feel more alive. Frontier have designed the game to make multiplayer a substitute for gameplay, so more players means a better game for all. As the saying goes, it's not rocket science.

Simpler because its ripe for exploit and needs careful ? Just use your pvp flag in a separate game mode where it is always on, done PvE mode. the flags are not better for all, since it will be an immersion breaker a portion of players, it's not rocket science.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

Playing a game is already meaningless times spent, with pvp flags it would also be loss of time for pirates once they discover they are losing time to sift through all those pvp flags.

Yeah this!
The PVE mode or flag, would destroy pvp role play piracy. The only solution would be to give higher priority to instancing with cmdrs who have the pvp flag enabled, and what’s the result? The open mode we have now.

 

[Stealthie]

It'd be a challenge indeed. I've posted an idea for optional Private Group rules a few times now:
For PvP:

• Enable mass-lock delay on hyper-jumps if due to player ship? [yes/no]
• Increase menu exit delay if "in danger" determination includes player attack? [yes/no]
• Disable menu exit option if "in danger" determination includes player attack? [yes/no]
• Disable weapon healing effects? [yes/no]
• Disable premium ammunition? [yes/no]
• Disable Shield Cell Boosters? [yes/no]
• Lost connection while "in danger" due to player attack results in destruction / rebuy? [yes/no]

For PvE:

• Disable player / player interdiction? [yes/no]
• Disable player / player wake following? [yes/no]
• Disable player / player wake dropping? [yes/no]
• Disable "friendly fire"? [yes/no]
• Session & PG kick player on attacking another player and move attacking player to a Solo instance? [yes/no]
• Session & PG kick player on destroying another player and move attacking player to a Solo instance? [yes/no]
• Remove menu exit delay if "in danger" flag was only set due to player attack? [yes/no]

For all play-styles:

• Move player to another instance after a period of inactivity on a landing pad.

That sort of stuff starts to get really complex, though.

Honestly, although I suspect the whole thing is just a pipe-dream, if FDev were to implement a PvE mode, I suspect the best way to do it would simple to rely on an honour system, with players reporting any PvP attacks and then FDev issuing bans from that server after, say, three reports.

 

[Helvellyn]

The problems are more game design focussed really, a PvP flag feels like just another bodge piled on top of other bodges.

 

[Juniper]

exactly they are invisible, the galaxy is a living thing, it would be rather unrealistic if it wasn't moving. And again I don't see them so suspension of disbelief is maintained since like in a city I don't see certain things but they still impact a city. As opposed to shoving magic ships in front of me.

OK I can see that, the only issue I have with it is you using "immersion" as a reason not to have it. Invisible players impacting the galaxy are (to me) similarly immersion-breaking. It's the same argument for/against crossplay IMO.

maybe because they are trying it already? As in why the hell wouldn't you look at similar cases to see what kind of issues or pro's it might bring.....
That's like the one of the first thing I was taught in game design classes, when making a game, do case studies on games that tried or are trying something similar

So why pick an example where they are apparently having problems with it & using that as a justification to not even try? Why not look at something like WoW instead, which has managed it successfully? Maybe use the New World experience as a way to manage it better, and WoW as an example of how it can be done?

I can't interact with them completely, I can't blow them up, also a lot of strictly solo players would completely disagree with "More people = better."

Check the thread title. Aside from us all bickering about it, there's a sizeable smattering of posts from people saying they would play in Open if the risk of PvP was removed. "More people = better" as far as E: D is concerned, because Frontier created a multiplayer game rather than a game with single player depth. Solo is not as fun, but it's a necessity if you don't want PvP, which makes up a sizeable portion of the E: D player base. So people live with it, until they get bored with what the single player game has to offer. Why not instead explore ways to get people into Open, besides saying "git gud" or "fly a different ship".

As far as interaction goes, you're basically saying you can't blow them up, therefore it's not interaction & not worth pursuing. There's far more ways to interact with people besides shooting them, you know.

Simpler because its ripe for exploit and needs careful ? Just use your pvp flag in a separate game mode where it is always on, done PvE mode. the flags are not better for all, since it will be an immersion breaker a portion of players, it's not rocket science.

I don't have the numbers, but I would be very surprised if there weren't far more people in Solo or PG that would like to play in Open than there are gankers in Open. Especially since it's (apparently) so rare... even though it happened within 30 minutes of both times I've tried it.

A PvE mode isn't realistic, at least in terms of them ever implementing such a thing. Group sizes are too small at only 5000 members, making them a poor substitute, and nothing is enforced - the Mobius groups work entirely on the honour system. So what you're basically suggesting is a PvE mode of unlimited members, in which case, you might as well drop the group size limit entirely. And if that were technically possible, I'm sure they would have done that by now.

So we are back where we started.

 

[Juniper]

The only solution would be to give higher priority to instancing with cmdrs who have the pvp flag enabled, and what’s the result? The open mode we have now.

So, in other words, little to no impact on current Open players then.

Honestly, tying the flag into the instancing system sounds like a decent compromise to me.

 

[Sellias]

OK I can see that, the only issue I have with it is you using "immersion" as a reason not to have it. Invisible players impacting the galaxy are (to me) similarly immersion-breaking. It's the same argument for/against crossplay IMO.

this has nothing to do with crossplay but okay, anyway like I said in a city things are being impacted by people you don't see, same case here.

So why pick an example where they are apparently having problems with it & using that as a justification to not even try? Why not look at something like WoW instead, which has managed it successfully? Maybe use the New World experience as a way to manage it better, and WoW as an example of how it can be done?

Ok wow actually managed it by making players who don't want to PVP invisible and putting them in a different world shard.

Check the thread title. Aside from us all bickering about it, there's a sizeable smattering of posts from people saying they would play in Open if the risk of PvP was removed. "More people = better" as far as E: D is concerned, because Frontier created a multiplayer game rather than a game with single player depth. Solo is not as fun, but it's a necessity if you don't want PvP, which makes up a sizeable portion of the E: D player base. So people live with it, until they get bored with what the single player game has to offer. Why not instead explore ways to get people into Open, besides saying "git gud" or "fly a different ship".

As far as interaction goes, you're basically saying you can't blow them up, therefore it's not interaction & not worth pursuing. There's far more ways to interact with people besides shooting them, you know.

" Solo is not as fun" yeah to you, it might be perfectly fine for other players, and if people crave PVE there is still PG. I know there is far more, interaction that blowing people up, I have never blown up another player, but besides the point, you are taking a part of the interactions away. I can just as well say: "There's far more ways to interact with people besides cooperating with tem, you know."

A PvE mode isn't realistic, at least in terms of them ever implementing such a thing.

Says who? a bunch of people on the forum? I can say the same about the pvp flags.

So what you're basically suggesting is a PvE mode of unlimited members, in which case, you might as well drop the group size limit entirely. And if that were technically possible, I'm sure they would have done that by now.

Yes that is exactly what I am suggesting a just make Mobius an official game. And I am sure if pvp flags where technically possible they would have implemented by now as well

So yes here we are back where we started.

 

[Juniper]

this has nothing to do with crossplay but okay, anyway like a said in a city things are being impacted by people you don't see, same case here.

Nothing to do with crossplay, but it's a similar 'immersion' argument. That being, invisible players occupying the same space as you and impacting the game world (such as it is) in a similar way. This to me is every bit as immersion-breaking as ships & players you can do everything with except blow up or be blown up by.

Ok wow actually managed it by making players who don't want to PVP invisible and putting them in a different world shard.

I think E: D could do better than that. Do you disagree?

" Solo is not as fun" yeah to you, it might be perfectly fine for other players, and if people crave PVE there is still PG. I know there is far more, interaction that blowing people up, I have never blown up another player, but besides the point, you are taking a part of the interactions away. I can just as well say: "There's far more ways to interact with people besides cooperating with tem, you know."

It's a matter of scale. 5000 maximum visible players across a galaxy of 400 billion is not a substitute for open play, where the potential for interaction is unlimited. Even if you can only see 63 at a time, it's still a much wider pool.

These are players you can mine with, explore with, do missions with, talk with, etc. The only thing out-of-bounds is PvP combat, but that's a player choice.

Says who? a bunch of people on the forum? I can say the same about the pvp flags.

The PvP flags is a forum suggestion. But you're the one who thought that instancing happens on the server - when it patently doesn't. Hint: you are the instance.

A PvE mode won't happen because it would require a major rework of the game's networking model. And that will simply never happen, sorry. They had enough trouble getting the one they've got working at all.

If you have a better suggestion, I'd love to hear it.

Yes that is exactly what I am suggesting a just make Mobius an official game. And I am sure if pvp flags where technically possible they would have implemented by now as well

No, I think the reason it hasn't been implemented is because of all the balancing and potential exploit issues that others have mentioned. It would require serious game design skills to do properly, which Frontier aren't exactly known for.

This doesn't mean it's impossible. From a technical standpoint, I think a PvE mode probably is though.

So yes here we are back where we started.

As I said, if you have a better suggestion that would achieve the same goal (getting more people into Open safely) then I'm all ears.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Immersion: Invulnerable ship breaks immersion, 12yr olds on system chat breaks immersion, invisible events break immersion...