Why play online?

[Zenicetus]

Preventing this switching (IMO prevent it completely - ie, different saves. Or at least add some other balancing feature.

The balancing feature is already planned, and it's designed around preventing mode switch in combat. There is a full discussion in the design doc archive about this. I think the main idea was to have the ship float without a pilot for a brief time, so it could still be destroyed after the player logged out of the game, or tried to log into a different mode.

Isn't that enough? If a player chooses to be in All Online and gets into trouble, they can't escape by switching modes.

This doesn't impact the ability to earn Cr's in Solo Online and then switch to All Online with a better ship. But nobody in Solo Online is getting any P2P combat practice, like they would be in All Online. For me, that's the other way this is balanced. Someone who grinds up to an Anaconda in Solo Online is still a green pilot if they switch to All Online, and they aren't going to keep that ship for long.

 

[Seonid]

Unless they weight the NPCs differently in each mode, it will still leave the fundamental problem of trading in solo, pvp in open. Even then, it would require them to make AI more intelligent than human players, something I have yet to see in a game yet.

And the inconvenient fact that All has the potential to be far safer than Solo could ever be is just ignored, right?

 

[hydraSlav]

Agreed. I even suggested a few pages back that the current mechanic will deliver a PvE game with Arena PvP. Thats a long way from Sandbox/open world IMO.

I didn't read the whole thread (like I said, there is new one every day). But a few of us had brought exactly that up in other threads.

Solo is fine
Private group is fine
All open (iron man or not) is fine.

being able to switch between them all practically instantly massively detracts from the all open game's potential.

That's exactly what I had said! If I didn't know any better, I'd say you were my alt character that I created to give our stance "more votes".

...Now watch the witch-hunt

 

[macdog]

That's exactly what I had said! If I didn't know any better, I'd say you were my alt character that I created to give our stance "more votes".

...Now watch the witch-hunt

haha. I felt I had to say that since my perception is that some people assume we are trying to "nerf" their game style/fun/etc.. which couldn't be further from the truth. Keep solo, solo, but make the on-line game a truly great and online experience please! It would honestly seem to me like a missed opportunity otherwise!

 

[macdog]

And the inconvenient fact that All has the potential to be far safer than Solo could ever be is just ignored, right?

Well, it does get quite complex here, as one decision can have an impact on the next.

So for example. If you couldn't use the same save in open and solo it would be extremely simple.

solo - hard NPCs in Anarchy
open - hard NPCs and players in Anarchy

So it really depends. If you think I am advocating an overall position that makes open easier you really have misunderstood me. You are correct though, a truly committee based approach to game design, trying to please everyone, could lead to pleasing no one and bizarre scenarios such as the one you suggest where open is easier could happen.

 

[hydraSlav]

Spoiler

carebear

Oooooh, careful there. They can call you a griefer (as in a person causing grieve equal to that of a loss of a loved one) in front of a moderator, but God forbid you call them a fluffy furry cutesy animal that loves to care for others and you will be the one that's insulting and patronizing (and will have your post removed)

 

[Seonid]

could lead to pleasing no one and bizarre scenarios such as the one you suggest where open is easier could happen.

Could happen? When Friends List works properly and slaved drives are implemented you will see it happen. That won't affect the "Solo is easy/cheating/exploiting" baying mob, but as none of them will actually be playing the game anyway at Release, it's no bid deal.

 

[macdog]

The balancing feature is already planned, and it's designed around preventing mode switch in combat. There is a full discussion in the design doc archive about this.

Thanks for pointing this out, I'll hunt down that thread (don't worry I wont shoot it). (sorry couldn't resist, just joking)

Anyway, it doesn't really address the issue. Its basically an anti combat log off feature by the sounds of it. An absolute minimum in any combat pvp game. So standard that calling it a feature is pretty laughable. For example, the logon box is also a feature, but is hardly worth mentioning! Dont get me wrong, without it would be worse, but I don't know any other game that is even mildly successful that doesn't have this.

(again, I'm sure there will be one out there to prove me wrong)

 

[macdog]

Could happen? When Friends List works properly and slaved drives are implemented you will see it happen.

Sorry I don't follow.

Yes, in solo, any helpful features that require other players will of course not be possible. Thats a no brainer and the only reply I can give here is that the "easiness" of not having other hostile players around should somewhat balance that.

In private group. Well that really will be easy mode. All the perks of friend helping you out, but without the risk of getting attacked or double crossed by other players. Still though, if some people want the group mode and FD are happy to implement, you will hear no complaints from me.

Open. There is definately balance here. Yes you can use the advantages that some mutiplayer features bring. But you are inherently running the risk of getting attacked by other players (something that doesn't exist in the other 2 modes). I would guess in open you might find relative strangers working together. This adds the back-stab risk into the mix (and makes the game more dynamic as a result).

That won't affect the "Solo is easy/cheating/exploiting" baying mob, but as none of them will actually be playing the game anyway at Release, it's no bid deal

Not sure why you have to reduce the conversation to this tone? Do you count me in that baying mob? I also dont follow why this mob, who in general will have paid as much for the game as you (I don't know who is and isnt an alpha backer, etc...) wont play the game on release?

 

[Zenicetus]

Well, it does get quite complex here, as one decision can have an impact on the next.

So for example. If you couldn't use the same save in open and solo it would be extremely simple.

solo - hard NPCs in Anarchy
open - hard NPCs and players in Anarchy

So it really depends. If you think I am advocating an overall position that makes open easier you really have misunderstood me. You are correct though, a truly committee based approach to game design, trying to please everyone, could lead to pleasing no one and bizarre scenarios such as the one you suggest where open is easier could happen.

That example above assumes different levels of AI difficulty and the same number of NPC's in each case. That's not the only way to do it though. It could be based on having each area populated with the same average number of ships, whether they're NPC or PC ships. If you're in All Online, you get more players and fewer NPC's. Play in Solo Online, and there are no players, therefore many NPC's (including the dangerous ones).

That's an easy way to make it tough on Solo Online players by sheer number of NPC's to deal with. They might even have an incentive to switch to All Online, where it might be easier dealing with other players... or just fewer enemy ships.

 

[Seonid]

Not sure why you have to reduce the conversation to this tone? Do you count me in that baying mob?

No, you just assumed that I did. Read the OP again, then read the hundreds of threads and thousands of posts on this very subject that appear again and again on an almost weekly basis.

 

[macdog]

That example above assumes different levels of AI difficulty and the same number of NPC's in each case. That's not the only way to do it though. It could be based on having each area populated with the same average number of ships, whether they're NPC or PC ships. If you're in All Online, you get more players and fewer NPC's. Play in Solo Online, and there are no players, therefore many NPC's (including the dangerous ones).

That's an easy way to make it tough on Solo Online players by sheer number of NPC's to deal with. They might even have an incentive to switch to All Online, where it might be easier dealing with other players... or just fewer enemy ships.

I think you missed one of my posts above, where I kinda explained things in the same way you did, but it was pointed out to me that this could make open easier. I also pointed out there would be various (and relatively simple ways of achieving the goal).

The post you responded to was my response to that being pointed out to me, so I simply gave an example of how online could be harder with a very simple design.

Sorry of the above is confusing, your post just read to me like you had taken a single post out of context and I am trying to point out where that particular discussion started.

edit: this is where I think this specific snippit started:https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showpost.php?p=768134&postcount=238

 

[macdog]

No, you just assumed that I did. Read the OP again, then read the hundreds of threads and thousands of posts on this very subject that appear again and again on an almost weekly basis.

Apologies. I didn't quite assume it (that's why I asked the question). I asked the question as it could come off that way, since what you posted seemed quite emotive and didn't provide any reason.

I have read the OP and some other threads that cover some of these topics. But I haven't read all of them and I certainly haven't mentally marked players in one camp or the other!

 

[Seonid]

I have read the OP and some other threads that cover some of these topics. But I haven't read all of them and I certainly haven't mentally marked players in one camp or the other!

Like faction rep and pilot rating, that will come in time.

 

[macdog]

Like faction rep and pilot rating, that will come in time.

I guess that is inevitable, but as long as people don't reduce the conversation to abusive and personal insults I'll be more than happy to respect their view and extend the same courtesy in return. (not suggesting you are doing so by the way)

 

[Zenicetus]

I think you missed one of my posts above, where I kinda explained things in the same way you did, but it was pointed out to me that this could make open easier. I also pointed out there would be various (and relatively simple ways of achieving the goal).

Sorry, I guess I blew past it. At any rate, it will be interesting to see how this all finally balances out (or doesn't). The current state of the game is skewing player attitudes in ways that may not happen once it goes final.

 

[Adept]

Wrong


Source: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/06/13/live_chat_david_braben/

Thank you for proving my argument

In practice so far they are. Fighting a skilled NPC in a viper with my Cobra is no joke. Many NPCs carry missiles that can quickly turn the fight against you... and the average human players is a peaceful sort and not an active threat.

 

[macdog]

The current state of the game is skewing player attitudes in ways that may not happen once it goes final.

couldnt agree more. My first posts in this thread basically said FD will do as they wish, and they are smart enough to have an idea of the effect, just the current mechanics didnt match what I thought they wanted to create, so personally I do expect things to change. How though is anyone's guess

 

[Jorlin]

I'm looking for PvP.
I hang around Freeport for weeks now (just for consentual PvP)
I planned to play SP only.
PvP made me switch to MP

And still i absolutely defend the option to play SP online with the same char you play MP.

PvP can be so much fun...with people that feel the same.
Slaughtering "n00bs" or "C-Bears" is NOT.

 

[Seonid]

I do expect things to change. How though is anyone's guess

The DDF archives gives a good indication of their intent and ethos, one of the main ones being that players have a choice of how they play the game at any given time.