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

[TiberiusDuval]

Any player in Open is (by design) fair game. Noobs, traders, explorers, Fuel Rats, PvPers. Everyone.

And there lies that problem. You keep playing like that, and others react on your gameplay on various ways. One is making suggestions about changing situation, one is abandoning open for good, one is blocking you and all of your kind (with resulting instancing problems), one frustrating your gameplay with legit gank evasion, menulog, or illegit combat log....Nobody is happy.

And even more or less gentlemanny pvp'ers get flak. Pirates are thought to be gankers, all pvp'ers are classed as gankers and so on and on.

Having separate mode making OPEN really that PVP mode would be fine solution.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Yes. IMO the OP suggestion of PvP flagging in Open is a bad idea, and the downsides have been clearly brought out in this thread. It can even be seen as "removing" PvP which some have suggested it amounts to. On the other hand, a separate Open-PvE mode is a brilliant idea which should satisfy almost everyone as it has no real downsides. I still think that FD will eventually be driven by "market forces" to one of these alternatives as it's the trajectory similar games have followed. I fervently hope they pick the right one.

Would this be before or after Fdev announces anything new regarding consoles?

 

[Brrokk]

Would this be before or after Fdev announces anything new regarding consoles?

Shortly after.

 

[Nathan84]

Would this be before or after Fdev announces anything new regarding consoles?

I was going to answer yes but then I realized I don't remember exactly when Fdev is going to announce stuff on consoles.
I think they will after we get the FSDs but before the Panther Clipper.
...
Or is it before the FSDs ?

 

[CMDR Egmont]

And there lies that problem. You keep playing like that, and others react on your gameplay on various ways. One is making suggestions about changing situation, one is abandoning open for good, one is blocking you and all of your kind (with resulting instancing problems), one frustrating your gameplay with legit gank evasion, menulog, or illegit combat log....Nobody is happy.

And even more or less gentlemanny pvp'ers get flak. Pirates are thought to be gankers, all pvp'ers are classed as gankers and so on and on.

Having separate mode making OPEN really that PVP mode would be fine solution.

Huge assumptions. Not all new players disappear into Solo after being targeted. I know because I was one and I was utterly bored with the game until one day I decided I would try to land cargo at a CG in Open. The game came alive for me at that point. Ship build, tactics, and choices on every level mattered more than they did versus NPCs.

 

[Helvellyn]

This thread still going? Thought it would be time for a new PvP argument by now.

 

[Helvellyn]

Huge assumptions. Not all new players disappear into Solo after being targeted. I know because I was one and I was utterly bored with the game until one day I decided I would try to land cargo at a CG in Open. The game came alive for me at that point. Ship build, tactics, and choices on every level mattered more than they did versus NPCs.

Not everyone, no, but some. Enough to damage the game?

I'm wondering just what would happen if the game was Open only but death had significant consequences, with no options like blocking to avoid other players either. The occasional destruction would only be a minor nuisance, frequent ones much more so. In-game behaviour could have real in-game consequences. Not sure whether it would be great or a total disaster. I'd hope you'd get real player group struggles for control. Probably make hotspots either massive warzones or they'd fizzle out entirely and leave it unlikely to meet anyone.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Riiight.
So new PvP thread, then FSDs, then panther clippers, then news on consoles, then new mode, then heat death of the universe, then beta for Star Citizen...

 

[Sylveria]

In-game behaviour could have real in-game consequences.

And last time this was suggested, almost the entire PVP community railed against it because they felt like their gameplay style was being "punished".

Some actually embraced the idea of C&P changes, because it would make gameplay more interactive and difficult, but most didn't because they felt murder was supposed to be allowed.

That's basically how we ended up with the weaksauce C&P changes instead. No real system security changes, relatively no impact on consequence. Etc.

"Waaaaaaaahhhh I can't be a criminal!!!"

I also remember discussions with so-called "pirates", who said that theft wasn't enough for their options, that if they felt like blowing someone's ship up they should be allowed to, even if someone gave up the cargo.

There's simply no consensus on what should be allowed and what shouldn't. Like I said that's the double-edged sword of having the complete freedom of a "sandbox" gameplay. People will rail against this no matter what, because they feel it removes their freedom.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Huge assumptions. Not all new players disappear into Solo after being targeted. I know because I was one and I was utterly bored with the game until one day I decided I would try to land cargo at a CG in Open. The game came alive for me at that point. Ship build, tactics, and choices on every level mattered more than they did versus NPCs.

And some rage quit for good.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

And last time this was suggested, almost the entire PVP community railed against it because they felt like their gameplay style was being "punished".

Some actually embraced the idea of C&P changes, because it would make gameplay more interactive and difficult, but most didn't because they felt murder was supposed to be allowed.

That's basically how we ended up with the weaksauce C&P changes instead. No real system security changes, relatively no impact on consequence. Etc.

"Waaaaaaaahhhh I can't be a criminal!!!"

I also remember discussions with so-called "pirates", who said that theft wasn't enough for their options, that if they felt like blowing someone's ship up they should be allowed to, even if someone gave up the cargo.

There's simply no consensus on what should be allowed and what shouldn't. Like I said that's the double-edged sword of having the complete freedom of a "sandbox" gameplay. People will rail against this no matter what, because they feel it removes their freedom.

Basic problem is that some people feel free to be a complete common name for male organ used for urinating and fun's. *also familiar form of name Richard...

 

[Ettanin]

Basic problem is that some people feel free to be a complete common name for male organ used for urinating and fun's. *also familiar form of name Richard...

also a german word for something thick

 

[SteveWW57]

Is "Star Citizen" open only? Rumour has it that a number of Elite players have gone over. But not the "Open play only" ones still playing this game. If they did, problem solved and those of us that like the three modes can continue to play the game in the way we like.

Steve 07.

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Is "Star Citizen" open only? Rumour has it that a number of Elite players have gone over. But not the "Open play only" ones still playing this game. If they did, problem solved and those of us that like the three modes can continue to play the game in the way we like.

Steve 07.

It is. But it is also eternal alpha/tech demo....See this forums thread https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/star-citizen-discussion-thread-v12.548510/

 

[Helvellyn]

And last time this was suggested, almost the entire PVP community railed against it because they felt like their gameplay style was being "punished".

Some actually embraced the idea of C&P changes, because it would make gameplay more interactive and difficult, but most didn't because they felt murder was supposed to be allowed.

Murder would still be allowed. Just got to expect to get murdered back; part of the problem is that it's actually pretty darned easy to avoid being killed, especially for anyone with half an idea of what they're doing with a vaguely non-paper ship (although most of the time even the paper ship's fine because no-one will be able to find you if you don't want them to).

 

[TiberiusDuval]

Murder would still be allowed. Just got to expect to get murdered back; part of the problem is that it's actually pretty darned easy to avoid being killed, especially for anyone with half an idea of what they're doing with a vaguely non-paper ship (although most of the time even the paper ship's fine because no-one will be able to find you if you don't want them to).

Basically have a ship that can take punishment untill it can either high jump or menu log, whichever is faster.

 

[Sylveria]

Murder would still be allowed. Just got to expect to get murdered back; part of the problem is that it's actually pretty darned easy to avoid being killed, especially for anyone with half an idea of what they're doing with a vaguely non-paper ship (although most of the time even the paper ship's fine because no-one will be able to find you if you don't want them to).

And I'd trade this sort of for Tat "gameplay" for more engaging and immersive game play any day, as it's all rather pointless. You kill me, I kill you. Lather, rinse, repeat. Lather, rinse, repeat. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Doesn't that get a bit boring after a while?

 

[Rebel Yell]

Murder would still be allowed. Just got to expect to get murdered back; part of the problem is that it's actually pretty darned easy to avoid being killed, especially for anyone with half an idea of what they're doing with a vaguely non-paper ship (although most of the time even the paper ship's fine because no-one will be able to find you if you don't want them to).

There's still a thing called, more or less: game progression in this specific challenge, learning by doing.

First time: bruttal gank. Second time: charged hyperdrive, almost low waked damn. Third time: almost hi-waked, damn grom bombs I died. Fourth time: hi-waked!!!

...some time after: fight back, ganker down.

If at first time: brutal gank >>> block or go solo/PG... ok, fine that's avalid choice (that means "challenge" not accepted).

To the broader "economy" of the game that doesn't change that much, but makes a lot of difference for such player's gameplay.

 

[TobiasFuzz]

There's still a thing called, more or less: game progression in this specific challenge, learning by doing.

First time: bruttal gank. Second time: charged hyperdrive, almost low waked damn. Third time: almost hi-waked, damn grom bombs I died. Fourth time: hi-waked!!!

...some time after: fight back, ganker down.

If at first time: brutal gank >>> block or go solo/PG... ok, fine that's avalid choice (that means "challenge" not accepted).

To the broader "economy" of the game that doesn't change that much, but makes a lot of difference for such player's gameplay.

This is more or less what I have done. But I am a part of a very minor player base. Most players did not have the nerv, the time or in the appeal for this. I respect that.

It took me almost 1600 hours to reach the point where I can fight back with a little outlook of winning. And that means hours of grind for engineering mats or getting access to the engineers, flying around in Deciat or at CGs just for the purpose of getting interdicted to test builds and train evasive manouvers etc.

You can't expect the casual player, who wants just a little hauling or mining to go through this just for open play.
Yes, it bothers me also that this is the state of art in the game because I want more players in open to cooperate with, but it is as it is.

 

[varonica]

This is more or less what I have done. But I am a part of a very minor player base. Most players did not have the nerv, the time or in the appeal for this. I respect that.

Or didn't actually purchase the game to take part in PvP, so why should they bother?