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

[Robert Maynard]

I myself don't like PVP. What made you think that Open play is only for PVP?

While Open is not only for PvP, it is a PvP enabled game mode - any player one encounters may choose to attack whether one enjoys PvP or not - and being the unwilling target of such attacks is completely optional in this game as other players are themselves optional.

Some players have complained that other players don't need to play with them to play the game since the game design was published over nine years ago - that does not see to have changed Frontier's stance on the topic.

 

[ianstrauss]

Given that, from the Inara stats posted earlier in the thread, less than 10% of players engage in PvP, what compelling reason would there be to remove the game modes other than Open?

The shared galaxy is the same in all game modes - the difference is the likelihood of meeting other players. Even in Open, particular CMDRs can be blocked, effectively removing them from ones gameplay.

I myself dont like PVP. I just think that having different modes breaks some of the games intended mechanics and somehow creates an unfair advantage for Solo Players i.e. Power Play. I just think there are ways to make Open Only which doesn't force anyone to engage in PVP if they don't like it but rewards players who are bold enough to go through risky situations involving PVP. Because of the game modes, human piracy, bounty hunting, stealth gameplay and powerplay are not effectively implemented and balanced because of the mode switching. Just my view. That's why Im suggesting if in the future thay do consider changing this, they can do so effectively by implementing a PVP based system status (i.e. Lawless systems) with greater rewards. That way players who does not want PVP can ignore those systems while those bold enough looking for better rewards (trade and mining multiplier increase) can risk go inside a PVP lawless where piracy gameplay and bounty hunting may happen.

ex. You want to do trading with higher rewards? You have to decide if the trade route you take goes through a Lawless PVP system (fewer jumps and higher rewards but riskier) or go though another route with more than 1000 ly more and lower output.

 

[Darrack]

I have made many suggestions to fight gankers or strengthen the defense of ships. And I can understand why it is not introduced. As it can affect the role-players playing the role of villains.
But why do not introduce a means of separating pirates and gankers I do not quite understand.

There is a way of separating gankers and pirates (same thing to be fair) - its called SOLO.

O7

 

[Darrack]

I myself dont like PVP. I just think that having different modes breaks some of the games intended mechanics and somehow creates an unfair advantage for Solo Players i.e. Power Play. I just think there are ways to make Open Only which doesn't force anyone to engage in PVP if they don't like it but rewards players who are bold enough to go through risky situations involving PVP. Because of the game modes, human piracy, bounty hunting, stealth gameplay and powerplay are not effectively implemented and balanced because of the mode switching. Just my view. That's why Im suggesting if in the future thay do consider changing this, they can do so effectively by implementing a PVP based system status (i.e. Lawless systems) with greater rewards. That way players who does not want PVP can ignore those systems while those bold enough looking for better rewards can risk go inside a PVP where piracy gameplay and bounty hunting may happen.

There is no unfair advantage with solo play because its accessible to all.
Why should folks not be able to enjoy all the game has to offer without some muppet using Power Play as an excuse?

O7

 

[Robert Maynard]

I myself dont like PVP. I just think that having different modes breaks some of the games intended mechanics and somehow creates an unfair advantage for Solo Players i.e. Power Play.

In a game where playing among those who may wish to engage one in PvP is not a requirement of any game feature (except CQC - but that's out of game) the modes are not "unfair" - all players have the same tools available to them to affect the PvE based game features. That some consider it unfair because they can't necessarily shoot at other players engaged in game features is nor the fault of the game, nor those players who don't play among other players - it stems from the fact that we all bought a game where other players are optional.

I just think there are ways to make Open Only which doesn't force anyone to engage in PVP if they don't like it but rewards players who are bold enough to go through risky situations involving PVP. Because of the game modes, human piracy, bounty hunting, stealth gameplay and powerplay are not effectively implemented and balanced because of the mode switching. Just my view

Play-styles which rely on (potentially unwilling) player targets are, of course, vulnerable to those targets not choosing to play with the attacker - by design. Those who enjoy the frisson of potential player attack can choose to play in Open, those who don't don't need to play in Open (and are not penalised for not doing so).

That's why Im suggesting if in the future thay do consider changing this, they can do so effectively by implementing a PVP based system status (i.e. Lawless systems) with greater rewards. That way players who does not want PVP can ignore those systems while those bold enough looking for better rewards (trade and mining multiplier increase) can risk go inside a PVP lawless where piracy gameplay and bounty hunting may happen.

ex. You want to do trading with higher rewards? You have to decide if the trade route you take goes through a Lawless PVP system (fewer jumps and higher rewards but riskier) or go though another route with more than 1000 ly more and lower output.

There are no "PvP systems" in the game - as all systems can be visited in any game mode.

 

[Ettanin]

Now that consoles are effectively excluded from new content with regards to the Odyssey expansion and the goal for a unified PC codebase, the console tax clause shouldn't apply to new content being made open only.

However, kindly keep in mind to make this kind of content truly optional in the regard that not participating into it doesn't create a gameplay disadvantage.

That means, whatever rewards that content offers, must be available through alternative ways that are available in Solo or PGs.

Also kindly keep in mind that blocking with all its full effects needs to be considered in such new content.

 

[ianstrauss]

There is no unfair advantage with solo play because its accessible to all.
Why should folks not be able to enjoy all the game has to offer without some muppet using Power Play as an excuse?

the suggestions Im making does not prevent you from enjoying all the game has to offer and does not force you to engage on any PVP unless you consent on it. It only adds risk, rewards and reasons when engaged on a PVP system as suggested if the only mode available is Open only.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Now that consoles are effectively excluded from new content with regards to the Odyssey expansion and the goal for a unified PC codebase, the console tax clause shouldn't apply to new content being made open only.

There was no Open only content before the console versions were released - the need for console players to pay for premium platform access to play in the multi-player game modes was another reason, not the only reason, for no mode restricted content....

 

[Robert Maynard]

the suggestions Im making does not prevent you from enjoying all the game has to offer and does not force you to engage on any PVP unless you consent on it. It only adds risk, rewards and reasons when engaged on a PVP system as suggested if the only mode available is Open only.

Being forced to play in Open would prevent a not insignificant number of players from enjoying the game.

 

[ethelred]

~2600 hours, and I'm "new" to ED? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigt.... I am new to the Elite game series, yes, but not this game, which AFAIK, is the first online-centric Elite.

You are a ganker, because only gankers work as hard as you have in this thread to promote "Open" as some bastion of wholesomeness and safety. You further downplay what the actual numbers support, gaslighting the evidence - only one reason to try to convince players to play in Open when they can have an actual productive, fun, co-op ONLY time in Group Play (where they can also ban PK'ers permanently): you're a ganker and want more targets.

Furthermore, Open is not explained ANYWHERE in the tutorials or the menu that other players can (and will) be able to kill you without your consent or desire for PvP. NONE of the game modes are really explained, so new people need to be given a proper rundown of the game modes (which I and other like-minded commanders will do). There are a LOT of other players who tell new people DO NOT play in Open unless you want to get killed or fight other real players (and have full engineering), because you'll be constantly set back and frustrated thanks to said players. I don't know how many players I helped learn how to productively and cooperatively enjoy their time in ED - WITHOUT the chance of getting ganked...

"I'm doing my part!"

Ganker.

Le sigh. To quote Scout - "I don't even know where to start with you"

You are new to Hotel California, certainly.

If it matters, I'm an Open only trader - meaning I always fly in Open, regardless of system or activity. I'm pretty casual these days and most of my gaming time is spent playing Warhammer 3. My Inara profile is linked in my sig - if I am a ganker I am a terrible one, or maybe I am the best one ever as I'm using mainly trade ships to do it.

I help and encourage people to fly in Open in non-combat builds that are either survivable or using the tools available to them (in game and out) to "survive" hotspots, CGs or wherever they may encounter other CMDRs. But get this - I also am determined that players have the agency to choose whichever mode they want. If you want to play in PG or Solo when visiting Deciat - then that's absolutely fine. If you want to try in it Open - then I can help you outfit and fly so you reach your destination.

I find using my skills and experience to "beat" hostile CMDRs a very enjoyable part of the game and want others to experience this too. Does it take more skill to fly a non-PvP ship past hostile G5 murderboats? I like to think so - it's certainly adrenaline shakes inducing for me, though if my experience at the trade CGs over the last few months have proved anything it's that Open is a lot safer than it used to be.

I don't think I downplay the actual numbers (they are already pretty low) but I don't equate those numbers to mean that every PK means that someone is quitting the game forever - but I do admit I have little sympathy for those CMDRs (who are probably hypothetical) who decide to hand in a bazillion credits of explo data in Deciat, in Open and in a paper thin build.

Back in the day, there was even less info about the modes - at least now there is the "You may encounter other CMDRs..." line. I like to think that me and CMDRs like me who strongly advocated that won a little victory there. It could be better. I think a tutorial where you have to get to a station and deliver a cargo where you auto-lose the interdiction game (I think the amount of times I have heard a CMDR beating another at this I can count on one hand - and have never seen video evidence of) and have to high wake out or avoid the interdiction entirely would be useful, but as it hasn't happend since 2014 I'm not confident.

As I have said before, many times, choose the mode appropriate for you. Don't scaremonger that Open is some sort of unlivable hellhole - it is tough but it is certainly survivable.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

why not just have certain systems allow PVP like Lawless systems with certain benefits to it? For example, before you jump into a Lawless system, the system warns you that you are entering a PVP system and enter at your own risk. However, there should be benefits like mining in a Lawless system can be 100x more profitable than systems wherein PVP is disabled. That way there is risk vs rewards balance, plus PVP is consensual only to those who are bold enough to reap the rewards while in the danger zone. This will also legitimize the piracy, stealth and bounty hunting gameplay mechanics.

The game does warn you when you're jumping to am anarchy system.
Trading with them has benefits as they tend to be quiet and fully stocked.
This doesn't address the pirates who have to operate in high traffic systems.
With the PMFs flooding the Bubble's core this doesn't leave anywhere enticing for lawless cmdrs.

 

[ianstrauss]

Just an example of an emergent gameplay from my suggestion on open only game mode:

Let's say there are 2 potential profitable trade routes:

1st Trade Route: Only requires 10 jumps but it goes through 3 risky Lawless PVP system jumps. You get 300 mill credits.
2nd Trade Route: Will require you 100 jumps without the need to go through any Lawless PVP systems. You get 300 mill credits.

If you are bold enough to enter PVP and get ganked but get more credits out of it, then you would choose 1st route.
If you want to play safe, take the 2nd route but it will take more time.

• It gives reason for Piracy
• It gives reason for Bounty Hunting
• It gives reason for Stealth Gameplay
• it enhances risks vs rewards
• it creates emergent gameplay
• it doesnt force you to PVP
• You don't miss out on any content and switching modes are not needed
• etc.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Just an example of an emergent gameplay from my suggestion:

Let's say there are 2 potential profitable trade routes:

1st Trade Route: Only requires 10 jumps but it goes through 3 risky Lawless PVP systems. You get 300 mill credits.
2nd Trade Route: Will require you 100 jumps without the need to go through any Lawless PVP systems. You get 300 mill credits.

If you are bold enough to enter PVP and get ganked but get more credits out of it, then you would choose 1st route.
If you want to play safe, take the 2nd route but it will take more time.

• It gives reason for Piracy
• It gives reason for Bounty Hunting
• It gives reason for Stealth Gameplay
• it enhances risks vs rewards
• it creates emergent gameplay
• etc.

Which reads as just one more "penalise players who don't PvP" proposal to procure targets for what can be considered to be parasitic gameplay, i.e. those who have fun at the expense of others.

 

[ianstrauss]

Which reads as just one more "penalise players who don't PvP" proposal to procure targets for what can be considered to be parasitic gameplay, i.e. those who have fun at the expense of others.

I think we shouldn't be polarized and stuck about the idea that Open Only penalises those who does not want to deal with any PVP threats. The developers can always find a middleground that only creates a risk vs rewards balanced system which makes gameplay mechanics work while not forcing anyone to do PVP without their consent. We don't need to be polar opposites on the way of thinking, the developers only need a clever mechanic to make the Open play more meaningful and friendly to all types of playstyles without the need of any mode switching.

 

[Darrack]

Just an example of an emergent gameplay from my suggestion on open only game mode:

Let's say there are 2 potential profitable trade routes:

1st Trade Route: Only requires 10 jumps but it goes through 3 risky Lawless PVP system jumps. You get 300 mill credits.
2nd Trade Route: Will require you 100 jumps without the need to go through any Lawless PVP systems. You get 300 mill credits.

If you are bold enough to enter PVP and get ganked but get more credits out of it, then you would choose 1st route.
If you want to play safe, take the 2nd route but it will take more time.

• It gives reason for Piracy
• It gives reason for Bounty Hunting
• It gives reason for Stealth Gameplay
• it enhances risks vs rewards
• it creates emergent gameplay
• it doesnt force you to PVP
• You don't miss out on any content and switching modes are not needed
• etc.

Haha LOL No just No, how in the world do you consider that enjoyable game play? for gankers i suppose.

O7

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think we shouldn't be polarized and stuck about the idea that Open Only penalises those who does not want to deal with any PVP threats. The developers can always find a middleground that only creates a risk vs rewards balanced system which makes gameplay mechanics work while not forcing anyone to do PVP without their consent. We don't need to be polar opposites on the way of thinking, the developers only need a clever mechanic to make the Open play more meaningful and friendly to all types of playstyles without the need of any mode switching.

Those seeking to force all players to play in Open and to PvP-gate rewarding gameplay have already picked one side of the argument - and those who don't enjoy PvP have no need whatsoever to compromise or consider the proposals of those who seek to adversely affect their gameplay.

We bought the game on the same terms - that some can't accept that they can't force others to play with them is no-one elses' fault.

 

[Darrack]

These threads will go on and on forever.
But lets face it Fdev got this absolutely spot on, if you want a relaxing space sim and enjoy the whole game including PP there is Solo.
If you want to risk getting ganked (even if its remote) for no extra reward than roleplay then knock yourself out in Open.

Simples really, not much need for further discussion, but hey ive nowt better to do whilst shard farming

O7

 

[ethelred]

Yeah, unless and until there is a PvP orientated optional feature (that doesn't affect the BGS) you can't really reward players for choosing a certain mode for something as mundane as a trading route.

Like in earlier games, this risk reward mechanic ought to be provided by NPCs depending on system security - e.g. a milk run between two high security systems ought to pay less than a run through anarchy systems where the chance of NPC interdiction is higher.

The danger is making NPC interdictions an annoyance. It should be challenging but not punishing.

As described anon for CMDR interactions - G5 murderboats vs New CMDR #1 is punishing, especially given the lack of in game help.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Just an example of an emergent gameplay from my suggestion on open only game mode:

Let's say there are 2 potential profitable trade routes:

1st Trade Route: Only requires 10 jumps but it goes through 3 risky Lawless PVP system jumps. You get 300 mill credits.
2nd Trade Route: Will require you 100 jumps without the need to go through any Lawless PVP systems. You get 300 mill credits.

If you are bold enough to enter PVP and get ganked but get more credits out of it, then you would choose 1st route.
If you want to play safe, take the 2nd route but it will take more time.

• It gives reason for Piracy
• It gives reason for Bounty Hunting
• It gives reason for Stealth Gameplay
• it enhances risks vs rewards
• it creates emergent gameplay
• it doesnt force you to PVP
• You don't miss out on any content and switching modes are not needed
• etc.

10-100 jumps for a trade route?
Where are you going, Colonia?
I take it you don't have much experience trading.

 

[ianstrauss]

Those seeking to force all players to play in Open and to PvP-gate rewarding gameplay have already picked one side of the argument - and those who don't enjoy PvP have no need whatsoever to compromise or consider the proposals of those who seek to adversely affect their gameplay.

We bought the game on the same terms - that some can't accept that they can't force others to play with them is no-one elses' fault.

There is no "forcing" anyone on the suggestions I made unless people have a limited view that Open Mode = forced PVP mode. As I said and a lot of other people said as well, that most players who play in open do not prefer PVP. There is always a middle ground and I think switching modes breaks a lot of intended mechanics on the game which can be solved by simple and clever game mechanics that doesn't penalize anyone on Open only.