Why is being a "prey" of a pirate in open a bad game design...

[Robert Maynard]

The concept of one or more additional Open modes, where the rules affecting the block feature and menu exit might possibly be altered (among other things) has already been raised in the thread. Maybe that could be a starting point for a discussion relating to the search for a "fully open" mode?

 

[MadSinUN]

Look at any advertising and I think you will see that it only ever give a very cursory and limited description of the features. Unless the product is exceptionally simple there just is not enough room on such advertising to go into the specifics.

Correct me if I am wrong but you seem to be saying that the brief advertising blurb about Elite is misleading because it did not tell you about the details of something you now consider to be important.

Understanding all this forbids me to be dissatisfied with it?

 

[MarkAusten]

Let's go back again. I suggest that we jointly find a solution that will suit everyone. Those players who are satisfied with everything, the solution found should not touch and spoil their game. Discussing such issues earlier does not prevent us from discussing them again. As well as does not stop players who bring such problems to the discussion. If anyone present is annoyed by my presence here, please say so directly. If the author of the topic is against my presence in this branch, please let me know directly. If you do not have the above requirements. Then please proceed exclusively to the search for interesting constructive mechanics and discussion of constructive proposals. If such discussions are not interesting to any of those present then I personally have no right to keep them here.

I personally consider that your statement "I suggest that we jointly find a solution that will suit everyone" is impossible since there are players who find nothing wrong with the existing game. Therefore, any change as far as they are concerned is not good and will not suit them.

 

[MarkAusten]

Understanding all this forbids me to be dissatisfied with it?

You can be anything you want, but to build an entire argument based upon it is not very constructive.

 

[MadSinUN]

The concept of one or more additional Open modes, where the rules affecting the block feature and menu exit might possibly be altered (among other things) has already been raised in the thread. Maybe that could be a starting point for a discussion relating to the search for a "fully open" mode?

Of course it can! I don't understand why these starting points are often lost in a bunch of messages and arguments. I also tried to make it clear that I just want such a starting point to finally appear and not get lost.

 

[MarkAusten]

It's been an interesting discussion today but it's late and I have to be up early tomorrow in case the weekend processing has broken the servers again.

So I bid you all good night.

Fly safe, commanders.

 

[MadSinUN]

I personally consider that your statement "I suggest that we jointly find a solution that will suit everyone" is impossible since there are players who find nothing wrong with the existing game. Therefore, any change as far as they are concerned is not good and will not suit them.

But if this change does not interfere with their game in any way, they will not object to this change? Theoretically? Those who were against "blocking" were not asked right? It's just that a more organized group of people convinced the developers to implement this mechanic.

 

[LanceLord]

I strongly believe if the game went to fully Open, we'd see a massive exodus of players.

Yes.

Is mobious available on Xbox?

Yes.

Elite: Dangerous PvE - Mobius - Join the Elite: Dangerous PvE group

I'd love to interact with real players but know that I'm reasonably safe from gankers. If I am to be attacked, then let it be for a good reason such as being wanted or having a cargo hold full of LTDs. At least give me the choice to give you it instead of forcing your way in with hatch breakers.

Yes.

 

[Mohrgan]

But if this change does not interfere with their game in any way, they will not object to this change? Theoretically? Those who were against "blocking" were not asked right? It's just that a more organized group of people convinced the developers to implement this mechanic.

Mythology.

It's more likely that FD put in rules that express their views on this game's design.

 

[Mogen Teras]

I'm honestly baffled people are so scared of PVPers that they play in Solo. Why? Because the player population is so thinly scattered across the two inhabited zones (Bubble and Colonia) that the odds of actually running into a player are pretty damn low. In all my hours in Open (probably 30% of my 400 hours), i encountered another commander maybe four or five times. And half of those were just via chat and not from actually physically seeing their ship.

IDK where y'all are flying that you are getting ganked by players so often that it forces you into Solo.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I'm honestly baffled people are so scared of PVPers that they play in Solo.

I expect that, for some at least, it's because interacting with PvPers isn't "fun" in their experience and is therefore a complete waste of their game time. Statements like this one only go to confirm that decision:

I dont really have any "spots". I see a commander, I shoot. There's no system or reason to it. I run into you in open? You gon die.

 

[MarkAusten]

I'm honestly baffled people are so scared of PVPers that they play in Solo. Why? Because the player population is so thinly scattered across the two inhabited zones (Bubble and Colonia) that the odds of actually running into a player are pretty damn low. In all my hours in Open (probably 30% of my 400 hours), i encountered another commander maybe four or five times. And half of those were just via chat and not from actually physically seeing their ship.

IDK where y'all are flying that you are getting ganked by players so often that it forces you into Solo.

Your idea of why people play in Solo is far from being correct.

This might be the reason why you would play in Solo but you should never judge the actions of others based upon how you would react.

 

[Brrokk]

I'm honestly baffled people are so scared of PVPers that they play in Solo. Why? Because the player population is so thinly scattered across the two inhabited zones (Bubble and Colonia) that the odds of actually running into a player are pretty damn low. In all my hours in Open (probably 30% of my 400 hours), i encountered another commander maybe four or five times. And half of those were just via chat and not from actually physically seeing their ship.

IDK where y'all are flying that you are getting ganked by players so often that it forces you into Solo.

As said above: this is not why people fly in Solo.

I'll offer my dangerously controversial idea again: I think everyone should use the game modes to get the game experience they want.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

I'm currently still playing in Open, but only mining. I'm testing my project of a self-sufficient miner/explorer where mining plays a vital part. Now I'm pretty much in a situation of PvP players who optimise their ship for PvP combat. When I'm doing the same for mining there would be way too much compromises to build an optimised mining ship that still can do any thing else than running away. I would have to seriously hamper my build, just to be ready for this extremely rare case where someone actually would attack me. Pretty much the same goes for any other profession, other but combat.

You see where the problem is and why I can't stop thinking what I do in Open is pure gambling but doesn't really make sense?

You do kind of hit the nail on the head here ..
As an 'open' player myself it can be a bit frustrating to see some of the advice from more expert open mode players that propose builds that yes, should survive no problem, but do in fact obblige compromises in the build that are 'unacceptable' for most miners, perhaps understandably. The fact that NPC pirates are no real threat to a miner in a hal engineered big ship or even a python only makes it worse. Engineering has a lot to answer for, and I agree with Rubbernuke (and others) that is should be scaled back., but I'll grow my hair back before that happens ...

 

[Leper Messiah]

What if those players that now play in Solo/PG only progress those characters locked into Solo or a PG, or not decide to have an open commander? We're right back to where we are now....

Well I was replying to a specific issue that Madsinun said about "magic transistion to solo".

But then you'd get a chance to pop the Ganker when they're in their mining ship and you're in a PvP ship, because they can't pop to solo and raise funds in peace? It wouldn't "solve" the problem of the OP, but it would mitigate some of the issues around the problem.

 

[Cosmik_Debris]

Because, frankly, why would they?
course, you get nothingout of that experience, besides being annoyed that you just took this kind of risk for no potential gain.

Thus, as the title stated- Being a "prey" of a pirate is not fun, gives no reward for the risk taken

This is exactly the problem in my opinion. Going into open is seen as risk with no hope of reward, because it is. If there are going to be 'safe' modes in the game, there should be an incentive of some sort to be in the 'unsafe' modes. Something to make it worth doing. What that should be.. i dont know exactly, but there should be something.

A lot of people will vehemently disagree. And thats fine, its just my opinion - not like there is any possibility of it changing (Frontier adds something to incentivise being in Open and all of the Solo players will be up in arms with pitchforks, even if it has exactly zero impact on the gameplay in Solo)

 

[Deleted member 182079]

Kind of funny how gaming has evolved over the years...

Imagine booting up Sonic or Mario and considering starting the first level as too high a risk of losing a life. And refusing to get better at the game in order to reach level two.

 

[CaptainPugwash]

This is exactly the problem in my opinion. Going into open is seen as risk with no hope of reward, because it is. If there are going to be 'safe' modes in the game, there should be an incentive of some sort to be in the 'unsafe' modes. Something to make it worth doing. What that should be.. i dont know exactly, but there should be something.

A lot of people will vehemently disagree. And thats fine, its just my opinion - not like there is any possibility of it changing (Frontier adds something to incentivise being in Open and all of the Solo players will be up in arms with pitchforks, even if it has exactly zero impact on the gameplay in Solo)

I do think that open has an inherent reward for those that like the unpredicatbility that it brings.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Kind of funny how gaming has evolved over the years...

Imagine booting up Sonic or Mario and considering starting the first level as too high a risk of losing a life. And refusing to get better at the game in order to reach level two.

It'd depend on whether one actually wanted to play that game.

Then there's the consideration that all players are playing at some level in the game - and aren't about to let other players decide what level they should be playing at.

 

[Cosmik_Debris]

I do think that open has an inherent reward for those that like the unpredicatbility that it brings.

I only play in Open and agree. But if you wanted it to be more populated, having some form of material incentive wouldn't go amiss.