Independent Players?

[Oliver H. Perry]

If you see no point to the "worry" posted here - perhaps you could move along to a thread about the best way to do ... whatever it is YOU want to do and quit off topic-ing this thread?

 

Disagreeing that a perceived problem may not be a problem doesn't mean he must be mute.  Personally, I think it's ok to post that you don't think the problem that the poster is worried about is a problem at all, especially if you explain why - it provides a counterpoint.

 

There are many games that provide a rich experience for the individual player while allowing groups of players to have different experiences.  Eve, for example, pretty much bars a single player from building a super capital ship.  The single player will have nearly an impossible time trying to hold their own star system.  Those are both provinces reserved for alliances of players.  At the same time, there are all kinds of other ships that are quite useful that the single player can own, with enough ISK, and missions and other activities that an individual player can enjoy.  Heck, some of the default corporations in Eve have a very rich player support structure, with players in that computer corporation helping each other out.

 

I have to agree that there should be some things that the individual player has problems doing.  To avoid SOL bloat, I don't personally think a non-Navy player, like a Merchant, lone Pirate or Privateer should be able to afford to operate an SOL.  I think they should be treated far more like Super Capitals in Eve, along with high maintenance costs that will require National Navy membership, or a large alliance, to support.  Similarly, there should be plenty of targets and useful things for an individual player to do on their own. 

 

But I don't think that restricting certain higher-end game features only to larger alliances is necessarily a bad thing.  The idea that everyone can do everything makes for an extremely boring, unchallenging game, and will result in a sea full of Victorys and Santissimas.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Thomas Hardy

[Guest raat]

Does he have to have an answer or solution for the question he asks? Of course not! This is a place to discuss and bring forwards your thoughts about the game and its future. 

Why are you being so harsh on him for no clear reason? Disagreeing is fine and good for the conversation, but confronting him with questions like "But what's your solution?  What is it that you actually want?  Or are you just wailing publicly, "woe is the little guy"?  Give us a solution to your perceived problem with the game."  is not OK Imho.    

 

I'm not being harsh for no reason.  He's already stated his case the exact same way in several posts.  Almost every commenter has said that his worries are unfounded, and as a community, there's no plans on pushing out the individual player.  Yet, he keeps arguing the same point.

 

Seeing that both sides keep talking to brick walls apparently, my question is what is his idea of a solution or a compromise?  How it is a discussion at all if we all keep saying the same thing at one another...

 

So, in order to facilitate discussion, my question prods us to move past the impasse.  Since I see no need for improvement, then the onus is on the OP to provide a solution to the perceived problem so we can discuss it.  Otherwise, I'm happy to ignore this altogether and consider there to be no problem at all...

[Magnum]

Well, I certainly feel better knowing you have a good reason for being harsh.

 

As Thomas Hardy posted - Personally, I think it's ok to post that you don't think the problem that the poster is worried about is a problem at all, especially if you explain why - it provides a counterpoint.

 

Let's hear your counterpoint, please explain why.....

Edited March 19, 2015 by ampaholic

[William the Drake]

I mean, unless all these clans are planning on being pirate clans, which none of them are, then there is no point to the worry posted here.

 

*Whistles innocently as the crew steels the rum stores from your ship* 

 

 

Anyway, as far as the rhetoric as an argument goes, the inability to provide a solution to a problem does not entail that said problem does not exist (especially if you are requiring not only that said solution be derived from a single person, and the fact that the source you are relying on is the one who is presenting the problem). Technically he can express any amount of problems that he wishes, as long as they have sound reasons.

 

(if you want to get really technical, the argument I see is that one party is claiming a problem, A, and the other is claiming that A doesn't exist. If you wanted to debunk him, what you want to do is prove that the predicates for his conclusion of A are not sound and thus invalid, i.e. that there is no problem/"A" doesn't exist. His logic could be unsound, yet by compelling him to provide a solution, you are agreeing with the unsound argument)

 

Anyway, back on topic. As someone who intents to not only play pirate but also lead an almost exclusively pirate society, I have no doubts that I will come across some fellow buccaneers who wish to go it alone. Again, the mechanic and the incentive is there: you won't lose anything from going alone, but accessibility to some aspects of the game may become easier within the organization of a society. 

 

The soc./clan mechanic is also probably still very much in the air as it could mean a lot of things with the open world, which we also don't know much about.

[Guest raat]

Well, I certainly feel better knowing you have a good reason for being harsh.

 

As Thomas Hardy posted - Personally, I think it's ok to post that you don't think the problem that the poster is worried about is a problem at all, especially if you explain why - it provides a counterpoint.

 

Let's hear your counterpoint, please explain why.....

 

I've already explained why it's not a problem.  If your point to the thread is to say there is a problem with clans ganging up on the individual player, then I would say, no, there is not. 

 

It's not a problem because 1) the game doesn't exist yet, 2) no clans other than pirate clans have any intention to hunt individual players, 3) the proposed world will be huge, 4) there's opportunities for individual players to sail for nations and be instantly part of a protected group, 5) a single ship should be no match for a fleet....Should I go on?  Probably not.

 

So if this thread has no other point to make, then I'll happily abandon it.

[Guest raat]

(if you want to get really technical, the argument I see is that one party is claiming a problem, A, and the other is claiming that A doesn't exist. If you wanted to debunk him, what you want to do is prove that the predicates for his conclusion of A are not sound and thus invalid, i.e. that there is no problem/"A" doesn't exist. His logic could be unsound, yet by compelling him to provide a solution, you are agreeing with the unsound argument)

 

Not to get really really technical, but wouldn't the proponent of the problem be required to prove that the problem exists first to the side not recognizing a problem?  I don't need to prove the problem doesn't exist.  A problem needs to be proven that it exists at all before it can be called a problem.  The burden of proof is on the prosecution, my friend.

[Henry d'Esterre Darby]

Umm...let's get back on topic please.  The topic is:

 

Can I do well in this game without sailing around in the company of a dozen friends?  Is a ship sailing by itself going to be too weak to defend against roaming squads of coordinated players?

 

And I'll add:  "Can/should the individual player have the same opportunities as groups of players?"

[Prater]

2) no clans other than pirate clans have any intention to hunt individual players,

In other words, TDA and I assume TAA and SLVF have no plans to purposefully hunt unaffiliated individual players just for the heck of it.  If the nation I am at war with is at war with the nation of an unaffiliated individual player and they look worth my time, then yes I'll probably pursue if my mission/task allows for it.

 

However, I assume once the game gets up and going and people are established, at lot of that time will be spent waring other societies, making power moves, establishing bases, etc.  Individual players might not be big enough fish for us to worry about or we might not have time to chase them if we come across them.  Don't sail what you can't afford to lose, and don't make yourself such a juicy target if you don't want to be attacked by organized groups.

 

It's kinda hard to say at this moment.  I think it will be a lot similar to Eve though.

 

However, like I said, referring to TDA or SLVF or TAA or any of the other major groups as goonswarm is unwarrented.  At least at this point in time.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Prater

[Grim DeGrim]

Can I do well in this game without sailing around in the company of a dozen friends?

Yes

Is a ship sailing by itself going to be too weak to defend against roaming squads of coordinated players?

Yes

"Can/should the individual player have the same opportunities as groups of players?

Yes. The caveat is that the opportunities are always available to them... If they join a group.

[Prater]

Umm...let's get back on topic please.  The topic is:

 

 

Quote

Can I do well in this game without sailing around in the company of a dozen friends?  Is a ship sailing by itself going to be too weak to defend against roaming squads of coordinated players?

 

And I'll add:  "Can/should the individual player have the same opportunities as groups of players?"

 

 

If the individual player is smart enough yes, but the individual should not have a handicap.  People group up in real life and in games because people are better together and in a group than they are by themselves.  They can accomplish a lot more and have a better chance at attack and defending when working together.

If an individual is sailing in a 1st rate alone, they should suspect to get ganked and killed.  If they are in a Trinc, Constitution, Navy Brig, or Privateer/Lynx/Yacht they should be fine if they play it smart.

[Magnum]

I really wanted to talk about this from the individuals point of view. But I appreciate the posts from "grouped up" players as well.

 

I don't think ANY player as an individual should have an SOL, or even a Frigate. Those should be for Navy's only.

 

I think you "should" be able to go to dinner without giving up all you have worked for over the last few days.

 

I think you "should" be able to "easily" avoid all but the most determined gankers.

Edited March 19, 2015 by ampaholic

[Guest raat]

Umm...let's get back on topic please.  The topic is:

 

 

And I'll add:  "Can/should the individual player have the same opportunities as groups of players?"

 

Well, that's the thing.

 

Individuals do have the same opportunities as everyone else.  Everyone starts as an unaffiliated, single ship Captain.  So how you play the game is up to you.  Want to be a lone trader?  Go for it, but be wary of pirates.  Want to conquest ports/resources in hotly contested areas?  Well, you'll probably need more than just yourself to do so so join a group of players.  Want to engage in PvP combat, but want to do it alone?  Cool, be a pirate or join the National Navies.

 

Regardless, everyone has the same opportunities.  How you choose to play the game is dependent (like all MMO's) on whether you want to do content that requires the assistance of others or does not require other players.  Either way, that content is ALWAYS different.  You can't do the newest Mythic raids in WoW alone.  You can't do 16-man Nightmare mode Ops in SWTOR alone.  You have to just do the standard single player content.

 

Point is, NA will have opportunities that only larger navies can accomplish.  And that's fine, it's an intriguing element of gameplay that encourages participation in groups.  Which is healthy for the game.

 

The single ship Captain should not expect he/she can conquer the world alone.  But if you want to sail, trade, and battle the occasional pirate as a trader or privateer and make a profitable living doing so, go for it.  That opportunity awaits you.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Raatha

[Grim DeGrim]

What of a solo player in the Navy, if they've worked up to it? Can they have frigates? Assuming the National Navies are npc controlled, like the faction warfare in eve.

[Guest raat]

I really wanted to talk about this from the individuals point of view. But I appreciate the posts from "grouped up" players as well.

 

I don't think ANY player as an individual should have an SOL, or even a Frigate. Those should be for Navy's only.

 

I think you "should" be able to go to dinner without giving up all you have worked for over the last few days.

 

I think you "should" be able to "easily" avoid all but the most determined gankers.

 

Well, there we are in agreement.  I think that's what everyone wants.

 

As for the going to dinner part, I've never heard any mention that your possessions will be at risk when safely stored in port.  I doubt that's an issue, but I suppose I don't know what the intended mechanic is for that.  If Admin has said, someone please let us know.

Edited March 19, 2015 by Raatha

[Prater]

I think you "should" be able to go to dinner without giving up all you have worked for over the last few days.

 

I agree.  Not from just an individual point of view but also a person in a group view as well.

As for easily avoiding the most determined gankers.  I guess I don't see what you mean.  If anyone can "easily" avoid all but the most determined gankers, this means that EVERYONE can easily avoid EVERYONE except the most determined of players.  This means this game will mostly be pvp only if both parties are actively seeking the battle.  What is the point of open sea then?  Might as well have Open Sea for traveling only - no combat - and then the ability to join a pvp queue and sail until the battle starts.  No point in chasing other ships, because you will always escape.  No excitement, etc.  I got bored on PotBS because there wasn't enough excitement.  Going into Low Sec and Null Sec and Wormholes in Eve, now that was exciting (as a mostly individual player.  Only joined a 2 man corp).

Edited March 19, 2015 by Prater

[Sir Darric Vandhelm]

 But I don't think that restricting certain higher-end game features only to larger alliances is necessarily a bad thing.  The idea that everyone can do everything makes for an extremely boring, unchallenging game, and will result in a sea full of Victorys and Santissimas.

I'm on the other side of the fence. I think good balance and game design should limit the use of SOL rather than arbitrary costs. Would you rather limit unguilded players to second class ships? How does this make the game more challenging in a game about naval action.

We don't know either mechanism yet to get a SOL, you may just be rated to get a SOL when you hit a certain level of rank in the navy for all we know.

[Magnum]

I've already explained why it's not a problem.  If your point to the thread is to say there is a problem with clans ganging up on the individual player, then I would say, no, there is not. 

 

It's not a problem because 1) the game doesn't exist yet, 2) no clans other than pirate clans have any intention to hunt individual players, 3) the proposed world will be huge, 4) there's opportunities for individual players to sail for nations and be instantly part of a protected group, 5) a single ship should be no match for a fleet....Should I go on?  Probably not.

 

So if this thread has no other point to make, then I'll happily abandon it.

 

1) is true, doesn't mean we can't discuss it. 2) Your own team mate disagrees with that as do I. 3) It will get small FAST. 4) To a point, perhaps less so than you think. 5) Absolutely, I agree.

 

edit to add: See I am too slow - even for my own thread - damn!

Edited March 19, 2015 by ampaholic

[Sir Darric Vandhelm]

Umm...let's get back on topic please.  The topic is:

 

 

And I'll add:  "Can/should the individual player have the same opportunities as groups of players?"

My belief is yes. You should be able to do anything. However sailing victory solo and getting stern camped by surprise should be the risk.

In eve I had battleships blown up by frigates because my ship was just not designed to fight them. Should be possible here too, even if it's Frustrating as hell...

[Jeremiah O'Brien]

We should all keep in mind the difference between "clans/guilds/fleets" and "Nations". It is reasonable to assume that the majority of the playerbase will be affiliated with a nation in some way or another. That being said, you will never really be "alone," you will always have allies who aren't necessarily your online friends, but will fight on your side. "Clans/guilds/fleets" will exist within nations,  and will work together to help each other, but ultimately the nation as well.

Also, just because you aren't a Navy captain, you will still have a nation. If you want to be a trader, there will most likely be one Nation with which you have the closest ties. So regardless, you will never be alone, and you don't have to join a clan to benefit from this system.

[Magnum]

I agree.  Not from just an individual point of view but also a person in a group view as well.

As for easily avoiding the most determined gankers.  I guess I don't see what you mean.  If anyone can "easily" avoid all but the most determined gankers, this means that EVERYONE can easily avoid EVERYONE except the most determined of players.  This means this game will mostly be pvp only if both parties are actively seeking the battle.  What is the point of open sea then?  Might as well have Open Sea for traveling only - no combat - and then the ability to join a pvp queue and sail until the battle starts.  No point in chasing other ships, because you will always escape.  No excitement, etc.  I got bored on PotBS because there wasn't enough excitement.  Going into Low Sec and Null Sec and Wormholes in Eve, now that was exciting (as a mostly individual player.  Only joined a 2 man corp).

 

I have not played EVE so I only have ideas picked up off the floor, heck I couldn't even get the term Goonswarm right I see your point that if a "prize" can always escape - what's the point of hunting prizes.

 

However from the "prizes" point of view - always getting sunk/captured would lack a certain amount of fun if it were a forgone conclusion - yes?

 

I do plan on traveling in a small(ish) fore/aft ship so I hope to at least have a 50/50 shot at escape if I meet you and Leviathan and Raatha on the open sea (you know say if I am sailing under a British flag)

Edited March 19, 2015 by ampaholic

[Oliver H. Perry]

What of a solo player in the Navy, if they've worked up to it? Can they have frigates? Assuming the National Navies are npc controlled, like the faction warfare in eve.

 

I believe I saw it mentioned that you could "earn" a high-rate ship in a National Navy.  I mainly want to avoid allowing anyone to operate a First Rate without breaking a sweat.  They were incredibly expensive to build, operate, and maintain, I think they should also be so in the game.

 

I'm on the other side of the fence. I think good balance and game design should limit the use of SOL rather than arbitrary costs. Would you rather limit unguilded players to second class ships? How does this make the game more challenging in a game about naval action.

We don't know either mechanism yet to get a SOL, you may just be rated to get a SOL when you hit a certain level of rank in the navy for all we know.

 

I think unguilded players who are not a member in extremely good standing of a computer controlled National Navy should not have the wherewithal to operate a Fourth Rate or above, and expenses should rise accordingly as one chooses to operate a larger ship.  I didn't sit around in Eve crying my eyes out because I couldn't have a Titan or a Carrier.  In fact, very little I did required such ships as I wasn't in a huge alliance out in nullsec.  I simply flew battleships in missions, ran freight in Industrials, and mined a bit instead.  When I chose to enter into more PvP prone areas, I flew with friends and/or chose ships I could afford to replace.  Occasionally, I ran around the fringes of nullsec in a heavily warp stabilized frigate or interceptor - granted, that didn't excuse me from the occasional gate camp. 

[Magnum]

I have heard that in EVE their are ships that have to be guarded all the time (no "harbor" for them) and this becomes a big part of the guild/clan existence - I hope we don't get too much of that here.

Edited March 19, 2015 by ampaholic

[Kao1808]

 

On your question

Good solo gameplay is the main focus of the game. Sheer size of the world underpins this vision. You will not be forced into a guild or a clan and we will provide enough tools to help you do your own thing. If you want to move up and participate in the conquest it will be your choice.. not design choice. 

 

I believe that post made pretty clear that not only there will be room for independent players but in fact good solo gameplay is the basis for the game.

 

I don't see much of a problem with the existance of guilds and clans as open world will be huge and clans will probably have to do a lot of organized fighting to make any impact. Also even as an independent player you wil have the protection from your nation or navy. Besides I would assume solo play gives you more possibilities for spontaneous combat.

 

If the ai can get improved to a good level (with good and bad ai captains/various tactics) for me it would also not matter to much wether I am fighting pve or pvp. 

[Sir Darric Vandhelm]

I believe I saw it mentioned that you could "earn" a high-rate ship in a National Navy.  I mainly want to avoid allowing anyone to operate a First Rate without breaking a sweat.  They were incredibly expensive to build, operate, and maintain, I think they should also be so in the game.

 

 

I think unguilded players who are not a member in extremely good standing of a computer controlled National Navy should not have the wherewithal to operate a Fourth Rate or above, and expenses should rise accordingly as one chooses to operate a larger ship.  I didn't sit around in Eve crying my eyes out because I couldn't have a Titan or a Carrier.  In fact, very little I did required such ships as I wasn't in a huge alliance out in nullsec.  I simply flew battleships in missions, ran freight in Industrials, and mined a bit instead.  When I chose to enter into more PvP prone areas, I flew with friends and/or chose ships I could afford to replace.  Occasionally, I ran around the fringes of nullsec in a heavily warp stabilized frigate or interceptor - granted, that didn't excuse me from the occasional gate camp. 

I'm hoping this isn't eve though, mainly due to "real life ™".

I don't think being guilded should be an issue for anything, it should be down to navy rank or cost only, granted, it will probably be easier to increase navy rank and make money as part of a coordinated and familiar group.

Gate camping was alway the thing giving me nightmares.. Problem mining for a living.

[Oliver H. Perry]

I have heard that in EVE their are ships that have to be guarded all the time (no "harbor" for them) and this becomes a big part of the guild/clan existence - I hope we don't get too much of that here.

 

Just the super capitals - they are "too large to dock", so they can't be stashed in a station to be safe when logged in.  It's less about guarding them all the time, and more about having a dedicated "titan account" - a character who solely exists to fly the Titan.  That character logs in and out under very controlled conditions.

 

So, you have "Bobby Titan" in your Corp.  He flies one of your Titans.  He logs out in a safe spot that is kept pretty secret in a certain system.  Before he logs in (and he only logs in if the Titan is going to be needed in the immediate future, like the next 5 minutes), someone in the corp gets eyes in that system to see if anyone is about. Coast is clear?  Bobby logs in, and you jump him to where he needs to melt some face.  After the battle, you jump him out, he takes up a safe spot in a friendly system with no spies, and he logs out.  After a certain period of time, the ship disappears and is "safe" until Bobby logs on again. This opposed to a "regular" ship, where when you're done playing, you dock in a station and are safe once inside from attack.  You can then log out happily.

 

I don't see how that will be the case in this game.  Any deep water harbor could be a safe spot for a high-rated ship, allowing you to go to dinner in peace and without losing your shirt. 

Edited March 19, 2015 by Thomas Hardy