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

Given the main things wont change, what i would like is the option to restrict landing on my carrier to open only.

I dont often use it for trade as i dont need credits, but i did so to help out at the Colonia bridge CG. I was very disappointed to see all my stocks vanishing but seeing absolutely no commanders actually landing on my carrier, so i assume they were all in solo. (And no, i was not intending to attack anyone. I was sitting there in a Dolphin to make that absolutely clear to anyone who showed up)

Due to this experience, i will not be doing that again, unless i can enforce open only usage.

And i just mean it should be a setting available to each carrier owner. Not telling other people what to do with theirs.
And another one who doesn't understand how instancing works.
 
When complaining about non open players affecting PP/BGS, shouldn't one take into account the fact that even if we're all in open, instancing will divide us so that we'll never all be in the same instance?
Well that and the fact that certain BGS players don't understand the system and wind up damaging their own faction.
 
Given the main things wont change, what i would like is the option to restrict landing on my carrier to open only.

I dont often use it for trade as i dont need credits, but i did so to help out at the Colonia bridge CG. I was very disappointed to see all my stocks vanishing but seeing absolutely no commanders actually landing on my carrier, so i assume they were all in solo. (And no, i was not intending to attack anyone. I was sitting there in a Dolphin to make that absolutely clear to anyone who showed up)

Due to this experience, i will not be doing that again, unless i can enforce open only usage.

And i just mean it should be a setting available to each carrier owner. Not telling other people what to do with theirs.
Very few were in open at Alcor.
Those that were were operating from carriers in system.
Even with a decent block list there were too many campers for open to really be viable.
 
Even with a decent block list there were too many campers for open to really be viable.
hahaha.

We have different definitions of viable. I was in open exclusively, delivered about 30k tons. Got interdicted once, where they absolutely failed to even slightly dent my shields.

I have zero commanders on my block list.

Edit: That's always been my point. People see enemy players and just instantly give up / flee to solo when all the need to do is take some very basic steps to be 100% safe in open. The ability to switch stops people learning how to play the game. I accept that i cant change that attitude, but i think its stupid and my carrier will be squadron only from now on until such time as i can make it open only

(i do know that, given the number of other carriers, that wont have any effect, but its all i can do, and i dont see the point of wasting my time filling the carrier with goods to sell at a loss when the people benefitting arent even playing the same game as i am).
 
Last edited:
Knowing that not only the in-game crime and punishment system worked as it 'should'(tm), but that all the players wanting to experience a life of crime were able to do so in-character (not all captain pugwashes off course!) that did not break game immersion or game narrative and never used cheesy tactics (like orca ramming, letter box/landing pad camping and all the other MMO type anti-social, anti-game trolling) but actually used their skills and talents to make Open ED feel more like a believable Elite game world and less like a troll the newbies for the lolz situation. Granted it is hard to play that role, especially when the game gives you zero incentive to do so......hmm maybe do it for the honour of helping create a great game experience we could all play together? That WOULD be novel in an MMO.

Having said that, and having plenty of on-line game experience (even a little MMO via World of Warcraft back in the day), i won't hold my breath over this possible evolution as to be frank the kind of personality/personal growth this requires is far beyond the majority sadly (age plays a part in this also). A crime and punishment system could encourage the change, but well like i said most would leave to other MMO's where the anti-social behaviour is 100% part of the game and the dopamine hit instant.

Trying to craft a believable sim (as Elite has long striven to do i would say) in an MMO type framework, where typical MMO players are used to a certain format (of exploits to boost griefing etc) and get them to change their behaviour to fit in with crafting that believable sim is hard, nearly impossible perhaps. It's why i gave up on MMO's in the early stages of WoW as it just did not offer me the depth of game experience i was looking for. Luckily ED has Solo mode so i don't need to play it as an MMO which would ruin it for me (as it currently stands).
That's the really sad part unfortunately.

You could build really cool pirate features into the game, so players could play notorious pirate XYZ and would be hunted everywhere.
Except for their Anarchy systems secret pirate bases. Maybe add some pirate tech you can only get when you are a criminal.
But the first thing that would happen: They'd try to find a loophole.

And that's the second thing that ruins it. I think no-one cares if he is professionally robbed by a well-played pirate player, unless said player haunts the same poor trader/miner the whole time.

But I do care to be destroyed with no cargo or warning by Trollolos. They don't deserve it, as they add nothing to my own experience, selfish louts. :) So I only play PVP on RPG-PVP servers or when the game is so shallow that I really don't care what happens to my character. Or in EVE... ;)
 
Last edited:
Knowing that not only the in-game crime and punishment system worked as it 'should'(tm), but that all the players wanting to experience a life of crime were able to do so in-character (not all captain pugwashes off course!) that did not break game immersion or game narrative and never used cheesy tactics (like orca ramming, letter box/landing pad camping and all the other MMO type anti-social, anti-game trolling) but actually used their skills and talents to make Open ED feel more like a believable Elite game world and less like a troll the newbies for the lolz situation. Granted it is hard to play that role, especially when the game gives you zero incentive to do so......hmm maybe do it for the honour of helping create a great game experience we could all play together? That WOULD be novel in an MMO.

Having said that, and having plenty of on-line game experience (even a little MMO via World of Warcraft back in the day), i won't hold my breath over this possible evolution as to be frank the kind of personality/personal growth this requires is far beyond the majority sadly (age plays a part in this also). A crime and punishment system could encourage the change, but well like i said most would leave to other MMO's where the anti-social behaviour is 100% part of the game and the dopamine hit instant.

Trying to craft a believable sim (as Elite has long striven to do i would say) in an MMO type framework, where typical MMO players are used to a certain format (of exploits to boost griefing etc) and get them to change their behaviour to fit in with crafting that believable sim is hard, nearly impossible perhaps. It's why i gave up on MMO's in the early stages of WoW as it just did not offer me the depth of game experience i was looking for. Luckily ED has Solo mode so i don't need to play it as an MMO which would ruin it for me (as it currently stands).
Lots of stuff I agree with there, although the closing paragraph implies to me that there is little can be done that is actually feasible as far as you are concerned.

A crime and punishment system could encourage the change

I believe the following would help, yes:
- immediate scan by cops (in SC) on entering any high sec system
- if you are wanted or notorious, chain interdictions in SC
- if you are clean, offer by NPCs to escort you to your station (which you can refuse)
- if you get attacked by a player at a station or base, immediate ATR style reply and offer of full refund (no rebuy) by local authorities if they fail to protect you
- a notorious player, if caught, would have to pay compensation to all players killed, and would risk financial bankrupcy (a number of gankers have actually promoted this)
- piracy in these systems could still be possible if the trader stray off the shipping lanes, where the local cops would take longer to arrive, and opportunities for a big heist would exist for those that dare.
This would of course gradually scale down as you get to anarchy.
In addition, I would add clearer more 'in your face' warnings when jumping to a populated anarchy, and I would add a filter to the galmap to filter out system which have recent reports of attacks.

In anarchies controlled by pirates (via power play for example) I would expect any trader to be treated mercilessly by the NPCs, such that even a wing of players would not expect to escape without loss if they don't comply. In these systems there would be random attacks by killers as well.

most would leave to other MMO's where the anti-social behaviour is 100% part of the game
I don't think so, many would relish the challenge of a robust C&P system, and many of the current gankers (by no means all youngsters) despise it.
 
Sadly, only a minority actually stop and read the chat, most just expect the worst.

I interdicted a player some time ago that replied "don't blow me up, I've had a really bad day, and just want to relax": i was so glad he replied we just had a chat.
To be honest, the chat interface is to blame here. The number of times ive had it just delete what ive typed before i can hit enter because someone else made a comment in the chat is absurd.. Also the number of times when ive had system chat selected and just not noticed that stuff happened in local chat.

So if i was flying a ship that was at all possible to destroy, i dont think i would want to stop and type, since it would enormously increase the chances of getting killed, compared to flying the ship.
 
Sadly, only a minority actually stop and read the chat, most just expect the worst.

I interdicted a player some time ago that replied "don't blow me up, I've had a really bad day, and just want to relax": i was so glad he replied we just had a chat.
It's a pitty. I always watch the chat and be happy if it's a pirate. I got a lot of my customers for my RP Logistic company due to relations with pirates. But it's a not very often encounter this days.
 
To be honest, the chat interface is to blame here. The number of times ive had it just delete what ive typed before i can hit enter because someone else made a comment in the chat is absurd.. Also the number of times when ive had system chat selected and just not noticed that stuff happened in local chat.

So if i was flying a ship that was at all possible to destroy, i dont think i would want to stop and type, since it would enormously increase the chances of getting killed, compared to flying the ship.
I'd love to see a language agnostic graphical dialog system with just basic negotiation functions that could also be used to negotiate with NPCs.
 
hahaha.

We have different definitions of viable. I was in open exclusively, delivered about 30k tons. Got interdicted once, where they absolutely failed to even slightly dent my shields.

I have zero commanders on my block list.

Edit: That's always been my point. People see enemy players and just instantly give up / flee to solo when all the need to do is take some very basic steps to be 100% safe in open. The ability to switch stops people learning how to play the game. I accept that i cant change that attitude, but i think its stupid and my carrier will be squadron only from now on until such time as i can make it open only

(i do know that, given the number of other carriers, that wont have any effect, but its all i can do, and i dont see the point of wasting my time filling the carrier with goods to sell at a loss when the people benefitting arent even playing the same game as i am).
I haven't seen a large number of cmdrs in open at a CG since about June.
They aren't in Mobius either. That's even more dead.
 
When complaining about non open players affecting PP/BGS, shouldn't one take into account the fact that even if we're all in open, instancing will divide us so that we'll never all be in the same instance?

Instancing issues within Open are rarely an absolute prohibition. Most people will be able to connect with most others at least some of the time.

When it comes to other modes, it's intended to be, and almost always is, an absolute prohibition.

Well that and the fact that certain BGS players don't understand the system and wind up damaging their own faction.

I did this early on in my CMDR's career. If anyone else had been around, they could have saved my CMDR from himself by shooting him down a few times.
 
I haven't seen a large number of cmdrs in open at a CG since about June.
They aren't in Mobius either. That's even more dead.

I thought you said there were too many commanders ganking in Alcor for open to be viable, which is it?

I actually did see a fair few commanders in Alcor myself, maybe the issue is your block list?
 
That unfortunately makes you the exception, not the rule. ;)
I have also blown people up just because they were rude, or aligned to a different power, and many pirates will stop to chat if they have time and even compensate for loss of cargo if the player is a beginner (it's often not possible)
 
I thought you said there were too many commanders ganking in Alcor for open to be viable, which is it?

I actually did see a fair few commanders in Alcor myself, maybe the issue is your block list?
I did the Alcor CG in a shieldless T9, and got pirated just once, attempted ganks about 3 or 4, and then saw no other gankers as they were all blocked by whoever of the traders I found myself instanced with.
 
I did the Alcor CG in a shieldless T9, and got pirated just once, attempted ganks about 3 or 4, and then saw no other gankers as they were all blocked by whoever of the traders I found myself instanced with.

Yeah, i was using my 6A Prismatic Cutter - one person pulled me, i laughed and left with like 97% shields. No one tried again.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Edit: That's always been my point. People see enemy players and just instantly give up / flee to solo when all the need to do is take some very basic steps to be 100% safe in open. The ability to switch stops people learning how to play the game. I accept that i cant change that attitude, but i think its stupid and my carrier will be squadron only from now on until such time as i can make it open only
If one needed to take those steps because Solo and Private Groups did not exist then some players would not have considered buying or backing the game in the first place - as there are those with zero inclination to engage / be engaged in a PvP interaction or change their gameplay to accommodate those who want to attack them.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom