Why I and many others will rarely play open

[Greasetrap42]

But those who do not participate would also not affect the state for those that do, right? Isn't that one of the hypotheses, that BGS and PP is skewed by all modes affecting it?
The numbers of those that shun the experiment would also show something: that there is not that big a PvP or open-only community as sometimes proclaimed.

Trying to come to a conclusion regarding player preferences based on numbers of people that ignore an experiment is rather silly. Other than maybe determining an overall number of players that don't know, care, or have any desire to participate in the experiment.

Edit: But your experiment approach is typical for "researchers" to get the desired statistical results they are looking for. "9/10 players that participated in the study agree with our idea".

 

[vanFace]

The most interesting observation I have made is that when suggesting that PvE players get their own brand of Open, is that there are many 'alleged PvP' players decrying the idea as it would 'split the player base even further' - which is odd as the majority of those playing solely PvE are unlikely to be bothering with open anyway

I would welcome such a "one PG" approach. Preferably with in-game features that prohibit PK, e.g. not being able to do damage to other player objects. It would get rid of the need to enforce PG conventions on that matter.

 

[Rat Catcher]

I would welcome such a "one PG" approach. Preferably with in-game features that prohibit PK, e.g. not being able to do damage to other player objects. It would get rid of the need to enforce PG conventions on that matter.

The crazy thing is that I, personally, enjoy the choice we have - but can see the 'need' for an alternative (without the current size restricted PGs) for those who really do wish for a full PvE game - but have no idea of the 'how' it could be implemented effectively.

 

[Greasetrap42]

The numbers of those that shun the experiment would also show something: that there is not that big a PvP or open-only community as sometimes proclaimed.

I am quite certain FD can determine how many players prefer Open Only quite easily without conducting an experiment.

 

[Achtung-Goomba]

I can’t keep up with this thread while I’m at work, which is a shame because these are always fun and take on a life of their own!

If nothing else constructive comes out of this though, as a classic Solo-carebear-wannabe-forum-not-dad I’ve been inspired to Open-proof some of my fleet and try to be a bit more, ahem, open in my game sessions. I’m about to rank up in Imperial space and unlock a swanky speedyboi Courier which I’ll use to transfer some of my nimble Adder modules over (thanks @Bigmaec for the build advice!), and my Cargoconda is getting refitted with three large torpedo pylons which I’m hoping to get a bit of practice with to give any less-than-competent gankers a nasty surprise... if nothing else it’ll be a fun ride to a few rebuy screens and give me something to do with the pile of space-bucks I’m sitting on

 

[Brrokk]

That would honestly be a terrible solution - better that a separate "PvE Open" be created where, as now, the players interested in PvP can "interact" with any other player they see - having a visible target that is "untouchable" would be opening a can of worms of a magnitude never seen before on the forum!

The most interesting observation I have made is that when suggesting that PvE players get their own brand of Open, is that there are many 'alleged PvP' players decrying the idea as it would 'split the player base even further' - which is odd as the majority of those playing solely PvE are unlikely to be bothering with open anyway

Yes, I think having Open-PvE would unsplit the player base. Those who enjoy Open would still be there. Those who are split up into the various Mobius groups would all be together.

 

[Greasetrap42]

Open only would only work with some sort of PVP optional flag, so youd see them but not be able to interdict or shoot them at all and would still have Cross play and pay to play problems for Consoles anyway. Better that each person has the choice to do what they want as it is now as long as the game keeps running. imo

Although a separate griefer or blocked server would be interesting, due to the amounts of the same people being blocked repeatedly by many players in a forced Open, what would Open be like then I wonder?...like all the PGs added together maybe?

I agree the flag idea can work but I'm not fond of it. Only because it breaks my personal "immersion" concept. (why does an evil pirate obey my flag?)

My preference is a restructured Open with regions of space with high, medium, and low security. Rapid and significant crime consequences in high security areas. Scary dangerous missions into areas of low security. What about exploration in deep space? Deep space FCs could have a security rating, effecting local proximity, big consequences for crime, making some FCs safe havens for exploration ships. Probably tons of problems with my concept which is why FD didn't do it.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

I agree the flag idea can work but I'm not fond of it. Only because it breaks my personal "immersion" concept. (why does an evil pirate obey my flag?)

My preference is a restructured Open with regions of space with high, medium, and low security. Rapid and significant crime consequences in high security areas. Scary dangerous missions into areas of low security. What about exploration in deep space? Deep space FCs could have a security rating, effecting local proximity, big consequences for crime, making some FCs safe havens for exploration ships. Probably tons of problems with my concept which is why FD didn't do it.

I've been campaigning for this for a long time, it's mostly a question of rebalancing using existing game elements - just using ATR with zero response time in high sec system would make a big difference.

 

[Darth Ender]

These threads never have anything constructive to contribute because fdev is never going to do anything to change what they did.

This game has players playing together that have no business playing together. It should have been at least 2 separate games at launch, but Fdev in their infinite wisdom decided to put all of us in the same game.

1. a game that's canonical that is effectively open-only (though, i doubt it would be too much to wish for real networking and not stupid p2p)
2. a separate semi-canonical version of the game allowing mods and player run servers controlled by the community. (however, no additional player assets can be added so as not to compete with the shop)

That would give everyone what they want. It would also keep fdev more honest in providing a good game as they would be competing with themselves via the community efforts for players.

 

[Robert Maynard]

That would give everyone what they want.

Locking the canonical galaxy to Open only would not "give everyone what they want" - as all players bought a game where they enjoy the privilege to experience and affect the shared galaxy regardless of whether, or not, they ever choose to play in Open or even can play in Open (console players without premium platform access cannot play in either of the multi-player game modes but do, like all other players, affect the galaxy). It would certainly be supported by a subset of the player-base just as it would be opposed by another subset.

 

[Deleted member 182079]

I've been campaigning for this for a long time, it's mostly a question of rebalancing using existing game elements - just using ATR with zero response time in high sec system would make a big difference.

It would also give certain systems/regions in the bubble a bit more individual 'flair'. As it is the only difference is whether SysSec shows up at all vs various intervals of several minutes. Doesn't really make an anarchy system feel all that dangerous at all.

 

[Rat Catcher]

It would also give certain systems/regions in the bubble a bit more individual 'flair'. As it is the only difference is whether SysSec shows up at all vs various intervals of several minutes. Doesn't really make an anarchy system feel all that dangerous at all.

This and another of my accounts headed straight for one particular Anarchy system on leaving the beginner systems - It was a safer place to be than a couple of the nearby 'more attractive' options - odd really

 

[CaptainPugwash]

It would also give certain systems/regions in the bubble a bit more individual 'flair'. As it is the only difference is whether SysSec shows up at all vs various intervals of several minutes. Doesn't really make an anarchy system feel all that dangerous at all.

To balance this properly you would have to also tweak economic aspects of the BGS and the mission server so that danger is rewarded economically. I think it's mostly all in there, but there are others much more expert than me to be sure. For example I would love it if the trade routes to the anarchy systems were by far the most profitable!

 

[Greasetrap42]

This game has players playing together that have no business playing together.

Strong statement that I can't disagree with more. Everybody is welcome to play the game how they wish in whatever mode they wish. Players have choices that they can make. They are allowed to make them. And they are allowed to make bad choices.

That would give everyone what they want.

No, The active playerbase isn't large enough to populate multiple versions of the game. Player-run servers would divide-up the player base even more.
Also it appears you are assuming players either play exclusively in Open, PG, or Solo. Which is not the case at all. Your idea forces a cmdr into a fixed play mode.
I certainly don't want this.

 

[Misty_Dark]

I can’t keep up with this thread while I’m at work, which is a shame because these are always fun and take on a life of their own!

If nothing else constructive comes out of this though, as a classic Solo-carebear-wannabe-forum-not-dad I’ve been inspired to Open-proof some of my fleet and try to be a bit more, ahem, open in my game sessions. I’m about to rank up in Imperial space and unlock a swanky speedyboi Courier which I’ll use to transfer some of my nimble Adder modules over (thanks @Bigmaec for the build advice!), and my Cargoconda is getting refitted with three large torpedo pylons which I’m hoping to get a bit of practice with to give any less-than-competent gankers a nasty surprise... if nothing else it’ll be a fun ride to a few rebuy screens and give me something to do with the pile of space-bucks I’m sitting on

isn't that great! you can on your own, decide to do this, no one is forcing you to do it.

Best of luck with your new endeavour! and when you are in control and prepared, the experience can be quite different. I remember the first time I encountred another player in Open, that invited my Anaconda for a pew-pew encounter... I submitted, turned around, shot a few shots at the FDL, tried to ram him, and then i charged my FSD to highwake. I was on a mission to scan a start 250 000 LS away.. so he chased me for a while to catch up with me.... this was before I learned how bad tracking someone jumping form system to system is not a thing, so I actually feared he could come chasing after me for quite some time. I had played for a year to meet anyone else except my friends in the game at this point! I really loved that Anaconda back then...

 

[Achtung-Goomba]

isn't that great! you can on your own, decide to do this, no one is forcing you to do it.

Best of luck with your new endeavour! and when you are in control and prepared, the experience can be quite different. I remember the first time I encountred another player in Open, that invited my Anaconda for a pew-pew encounter... I submitted, turned around, shot a few shots at the FDL, tried to ram him, and then i charged my FSD to highwake. I was on a mission to scan a start 250 000 LS away.. so he chased me for a while to catch up with me.... this was before I learned how bad tracking someone jumping form system to system is not a thing, so I actually feared he could come chasing after me for quite some time. I had played for a year to meet anyone else except my friends in the game at this point! I really loved that Anaconda back then...

Oh I’ve been in Open before, and as others have said for the most part it can be fairly sparse in population outside of the known hotspots. In fact, I’m proud to call myself the madman who turned up to Ackwada for the first couple of nights defending the Marlinists in a Keelback, which was worth it just for being the centre of attention in system chat

I mostly stick to Solo and my squadron PG to be antisocial rather than worry about ganking, but to be completely honest I also like flying ‘fun’ builds which are often pretty suboptimal and don’t stand much of a chance in Open, but again, that’s a choice just like mode selection. With a bit of help from the knowledgable pilots on here and good old fashioned experience I’m finding out yet more and more about ship building, working on my Adder and learning the joys of EHP thrusters and speed as defence; you can’t get nuked by an alpha strike if you’re too fast to catch! Most of my ships are thematically very similar... fast-charging bi-weaves, an unhealthy preference for moar dakka, missiles and rail guns. But by putting a bit more thought into each build, optimising it more for the task it’s meant for, I’m pushing myself a little bit further outside my comfort zone which is easy to get stuck in I think with PvE (those darned engineers and their power creep!). So for the aforementioned Anaconda, currently a vanity ‘Expanse’ themed cargo/battleconda, I can swap the bi-weave for the beefiest A-grade shield engineered for raw strength, refit the large hardpoints with reverb cascade torpedoes, and you’ve got something that might be able to weather a ganker alpha strike and hit back with a volley of torpedos that’ll make them think twice about pressing the attack into further volleys of seekers whilst it wakes out. On all my builds I try to balance resists and hull strength with HRP and at least one MRP, because even for Solo PvE that’s just sensible isn’t it! And I’ve still got a respectable cargo capacity of at least 256 tons with a fighter and SRV hangar, and your usual bits and bobs. The end result might still be a trip to the rebuy screen, but they’re only pretend spaceships anyway and at least I can say I tried!

 

[Cmdr Eratosthenes]

Put your big boy pants on & man up. There's no reason not to play open. Who cares if you eat a couple of rebuys occasionally ?

 

[Achtung-Goomba]

Put your big boy pants on & man up. There's no reason not to play open. Who cares if you eat a couple of rebuys occasionally ?

Even as a filthy suboptimal casual I’m still swimming in credits, rebuys ain’t nothing... I just don’t like people real or virtual most of the time.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Put your big boy pants on & man up.

..... or what?

There's no reason not to play open.

That's one opinion.

Who cares if you eat a couple of rebuys occasionally ?

Who cares if some of those in Open don't get to play with players that don't want to play with them?

 

[Screemonster]

Locking the canonical galaxy to Open only would not "give everyone what they want" - as all players bought a game where they enjoy the privilege to experience and affect the shared galaxy regardless of whether, or not, they ever choose to play in Open or even can play in Open (console players without premium platform access cannot play in either of the multi-player game modes but do, like all other players, affect the galaxy). It would certainly be supported by a subset of the player-base just as it would be opposed by another subset.

It also kinda makes me wonder what the endgame would be.

Like, last summer I was kicking around the Kute system managing a bunch of little anarchy systems. Go look it up if you want to see the location (and don't get any idea of kicking over my sandcastles, I left them for the tide long ago), but suffice to say it's right out in the sticks underneath the AD powerplay bubble. It literally would not matter whether I was in open or not, or anyone else for that matter. In a lot of the systems down there, it was common for me to arrive at the station and go check the traffic report only to find there wasn't one, or that the only ship reported was my own. It's why I'll never be behind any kind of flat weighting for BGS effects - why should someone's efforts be penalised or boosted for their mode choice when visiting a system where nobody else has been for days? Because I play in open I should be able to enact bigger influence swings or something? I dunno, I don't feel like I've earned a bonus just because I picked open in a system where there's nobody else on the playing field.

And likewise - let's say private and solo vanished overnight so people can get their targets. When I was down there I likely wouldn't have noticed until I tried to take a high-res screenie. It's not like there was anyone to run into in any mode - so what would follow next? Demands to shrink the playable bubble because people are "hiding" in other systems from them?

Literally the only time mode choice and the "hiding" argument is remotely relevant is when there's a directly opposed conflict going on, like a war state where both player groups are fighting.