Yes, IMO if PP2 is Open-only it will just fill with tumbleweed. FD must know this.
What do the player base think of the multiplayer element of Elite Dangerous?
- Thread starter Muzz UK
- Start date
That's not all black and white. It will be played if it is good. And it will be complained about when there's rewards being gated from non-pvp players. Best outcome would be if the non-competitive players need not bother about it and won't miss out on anything. All the loot that "the other mmos" reward for such gameplay, well, when I seen it it was either restricted to pvp-content or just cosmetics.
Hope springs eternal! History would lead us to be skeptical though.
There are at least a dozen forum members claiming to be very involved in PP
If, as statistics (lies, darned lies & ...) claim that 2.7% of the players (sorry, adjusted for irony) might be active on the forum for a game, there are probably a hundred or so keen on PP...
As steam claims nobody plays the game, those PP players obviously make up the majority, surely?
I do hope that FD create a dedicated PP mode with its own rules set, it would be fascinating to find out just how populated it turns out to be.
Oh no, not Grindmaster Flush again.
There definitely is increased risk of being killed in Open. PvP is much more dangerous than PvE.
No the risk is the same ( it's just assumed that open is "dangerous" ) . There is no guarantee that you will definitely meet other players and that all those players are interested in PVP.
Most of my friends list is folk I have met in open. Maybe I've been lucky in my X amount of years playing on Xbox or maybe console players are just nicer folk ?
And then do we then place a if you are in open don't instance with players or get shot at by players your rewards are downgraded ? Because it's not dangerous enough ( you may as well be in solo ) ?
Again the caveat is in my opinion .
Last edited:
No, it isn't really. But it definitely is more irritating and annoying when it happens.
You're saying there's no significant increase of risk. But obviously there is some increase.
But how much is some? Allegedly if I hug ShinDez it's a lot but out in the black? It's quite situational and given that's kinda down to design (size of game world) there could just be different modes as well. And a seriously downsized world/galaxy - to make it work better as a game. That's right, I would totally gamify the world size - purists can load Milky Way simulator instead - I rather want to play a game.
I'm saying that it is assumed that open is more "dangerous" . Penduncle Pods are dangerous, canyons are dangerous exclusion zones are dangerous ? Players arent in general dangerous so no I don't think ( in my opinion) that there is an increase of losing a ship in any mode .
There's certainly an increase in risk from that source. But that's not necessarily the same as an increase in the overall level of risk. It depends on what you're doing. For an extreme example, if what you're doing is "running out of fuel" your risk of death is somewhat lower in Open where the Fuel Rats can help you than in Solo where they can't.
The net credit gain I have from playing in Open even viewed conservatively (i.e. from chance encounters only) is substantially higher than the cost of my PvE+PvP rebuys combined even viewed non-conservatively (i.e. including planned fights), so for me Open is easier than Solo. Someone whose preferred gameplay is "flying all-cargo T-9s to trade CGs" would likely find the risk balance runs very much the other way. It's going to depend so heavily on what you're actually doing as to whether that leads to an overall increase in risk that there's probably no meaningful answer to "which is more dangerous".
There really is. PvPers are much better fighters than the NPC AI - they also have deadlier ships and are more likely to attack for no particular reason.
Indeed they are
But a player is more likely to run into (assuming their combat ranking is not very low) far more NPC AI encounters than a PvP player
The above comment assuming that one is not frivolous enough to fly a paper hauler / explorer, in open, in SD or a CG system, of course - that is stacking the odds high deliberately!
They are also rarer than NPC AI - which makes them a negligible threat most of the time.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
Surely it depends when and where you play? Maybe for you it is regional or you play at an unpopular time which is why you are not seeing other players in open however whilst some random corner of the bubble may be empty, IME as soon as you get near the engineers, or a CG area or a popular thargoid target then you will see plenty of other players, and at that point the chances of meeting a murderhobo, or player bountyhunter/pirate with a heavily engineered ship increase dramatically.
That isnt to say i am in favour of special perks for playing in open or features locked to open.... not at all, people play for enjoyment and just because i do not enjoy playing with random players does not mean i want to be locked out of content.............. but it is potentially riskier.
I generally do not play in open but when i did join open to kill some thargoids it was barely 5 mins before i was attacked by a player. Thankfully my flower picker is tough as nails and he could not make a dent.
OTOH in solo of course you dont get other players watching your back. i shudder at the idea of trying to take on a hydra on my own. that would be way harder in solo than in open with a group of players.
Last edited:
From experience you have to be in the CG system to encounter campers. Same with Spire sites.
There are no hostile encounters outside these type of locations, the ships being targeted are not geared for PvP and on the rate occasion that a ganker is sent to the rebuy screen syschat is subjected a "It's not fun if I get killed" rant.
Exactly.