The fundamental problem with making Powerplay Open-Only.

I don't get the open only PP idea.

Why not simply make so that deliveries in open count more, so that ships carrying the cargo can fit defensive measures.
Oh, and make PP participants visible in the galmap in open.

PP always has been a sisphus style grind race in a hamster wheel. Open or Solo does not change the fundamental point of PP being poor gameplay.
 
I don't get the open only PP idea.

Why not simply make so that deliveries in open count more, so that ships carrying the cargo can fit defensive measures.
Oh, and make PP participants visible in the galmap in open.

Weighting would be the only real alternative, and was offered as a middle ground- I'd be happy with that, but then the question falls on what % reduction? You can design out the PG exploits to stop AFK turretboat / heal beam combos (if not you need a near 95% reduction to scale it back to 10k a week) but you can't make an opposition-less mode the easy path to victory.

PP always has been a sisphus style grind race in a hamster wheel. Open or Solo does not change the fundamental point of PP being poor gameplay.

It feels unending and grindy because nothing happens when you actually do the tasks of moving or shooting. NPCs should be filling this gap but can't, players can.
 
With OOPP the number of people engaging with PP will only decrease.
How do you know?

Well, we do know that if it was completely OOPP, it would be a major discouragement to all those Module Shoppers (Not such a bad thing as they distort the game), it would certainly cut down of the Botters and the 5C players who have no where to hide (also not a bad thing as they distort the game mode massively). However, the main issue would be for console players who play powerplay but haven't got access to the open mode. To be honest I have no idea how many people that would be but surely that's a very small number.

I'm still in favour of either the hybrid OOPP (where Expansion and Control are open only) or PP activities in open effect the BPPS a lot more than the Solo/Pvt option.
 
Solo has to have an actual risk attached to it, otherwise its a guaranteed way to win the feature though. A compromise is weighting open actions to solo, since player ships are vastly more capable than the non-existent NPCs.

You can thank the current state of engineering for that because the range between stock and engineered as such the PvE aspect is impossible to balance. Right now most un-engineered ships will be threatened by NPCs .

Also some ships do a lot better in combat than others and some pilots are a lot better at combat than most.

In other words your claim that NPC's don't provide enough of a challenge is untrue for, I suspect, quite a few players.

How do you know?

Because a lot of the people engaging with PP in PG and Solo will not play in Open so if PP becomes Open Only they'll have to give up on it.


We are talking about a feature within a game which has other features that do what Powerplay does but better.

That is assuming there is a feature in Elite do does what it needs to do better than Power Play and there isn't. I mean the flying around through space in your very own ship in VR is amazing but FD confusing tedium with difficulty means all features are a bit meh.

Please explain to me using what we have now (i.e. no radical change) how Powerplay can be improved? Everyone I ask seems to avoid answering the questions...I wonder why...

There is no way PP can be improved without a radical overhaul at least none that I can see.
 
Weighting would be the only real alternative, and was offered as a middle ground- I'd be happy with that, but then the question falls on what % reduction? You can design out the PG exploits to stop AFK turretboat / heal beam combos (if not you need a near 95% reduction to scale it back to 10k a week) but you can't make an opposition-less mode the easy path to victory.

I can't fix , I not a dev, and If I was I'm not doing pro-bono work XD. All I can say is that better is often the enemy of good enough. IMO PP is in such a dire state
that any change, even a risky one is a gamble worth taking. A worse it brakes PP completly, which is only slighty more broken than what we have now ;)

It feels unending and grindy because nothing happens when you actually do the tasks of moving or shooting. NPCs should be filling this gap but can't, players can.

For sure Players would spice things up quite a bit. In fact I did quite a bit of PP PvP things back in the days. It was amazing fun but 100% impractical.
 
Well, we do know that if it was completely OOPP, it would be a major discouragement to all those Module Shoppers (Not such a bad thing as they distort the game), it would certainly cut down of the Botters and the 5C players who have no where to hide (also not a bad thing as they distort the game mode massively). However, the main issue would be for console players who play powerplay but haven't got access to the open mode. To be honest I have no idea how many people that would be but surely that's a very small number.

Going from my time in Utopia and the Kumo, I've never actually came across anyone who does not have a pass. But only FD would really know- it would be interesting to see the breakdown of numbers.

I'm still in favour of either the hybrid OOPP (where Expansion and Control are open only) or PP activities in open effect the BPPS a lot more than the Solo/Pvt option.

For me, outside of Open Only weighting is the next best option. Blue sky wise I'd love my solo / PG missions generate cargo and Open moves it combo but we will have to see what FD want to tweak, since Bruce indicated its 'on the radar' (again).
 
Weighting would be the only real alternative, and was offered as a middle ground- I'd be happy with that, but then the question falls on what % reduction? You can design out the PG exploits to stop AFK turretboat / heal beam combos (if not you need a near 95% reduction to scale it back to 10k a week) but you can't make an opposition-less mode the easy path to victory.



It feels unending and grindy because nothing happens when you actually do the tasks of moving or shooting. NPCs should be filling this gap but can't, players can.

Did anyone mention the imposibility of an effective blockade due to P2P yet? You cannot know whether the opposition is playing in a mode other than Open or if they just don't get instanced with you.

Edit: And from what I've heard there are way to ensure you don't get instanced with anyone while still playing in Open...
 
You can thank the current state of engineering for that because the range between stock and engineered as such the PvE aspect is impossible to balance. Right now most un-engineered ships will be threatened by NPCs .

Which is true, but even then hauling is completely safe. Your starting station is safe, you jump out in total safety, move system to system in safety, you fly in near safety (unless you are in an unarmoured, unshielded T-9 like tin can) in your destination system (where at most you'll see one NPC, if ever) and you drop out into the safety of the stations security zone. Both start and end points are completely safe, no NPC will touch you. Thats nothing to do with engineering, its how ED is set up. You can design around it, but it requires FD to actually put more effort in, something which is hopeful at best.

Also some ships do a lot better in combat than others and some pilots are a lot better at combat than most.

In other words your claim that NPC's don't provide enough of a challenge is untrue for, I suspect, quite a few players.

Its not about combat, its about evasion- and if the average transport with a shield can tank a PP Eagles fire then they are totally safe.

Because a lot of the people engaging with PP in PG and Solo will not play in Open so if PP becomes Open Only they'll have to give up on it.

At least then it has a focus and the feature has a reason to actually exist in the game.

That is assuming there is a feature in Elite do does what it needs to do better than Power Play and there isn't. I mean the flying around through space in your very own ship in VR is amazing but FD confusing tedium with difficulty means all features are a bit meh.

The BGS is that feature- it does multi mode correctly, while Powerplay with its Open friendly features has to overlap both and pleases neither.

There is no way PP can be improved without a radical overhaul at least none that I can see.

And yet, this is the rock / hard place question. So far FD don't want to expend that energy, so what exists is what we have to work with.
 
I can't fix poopoo, I not a dev, and If I was I'm not doing pro-bono work XD. All I can say is that better is often the enemy of good enough. IMO PP is in such a dire state
that any change, even a risky one is a gamble worth taking. A worse it brakes PP completly, which is only slighty more broken than what we have now ;)

This is what I mean, a test to find out if it works. Its probably why it was suggested.

For sure Players would spice things up quite a bit. In fact I did quite a bit of PP PvP things back in the days. It was amazing fun but 100% impractical.

It is, and it should count for more than is does, because those actions have more outcomes that effect that cycle.
 
I will commit my two pennies worth to this subject.

Why is Powerplay optional?

At the very least, pilots who choose to remain independent should have to pay a levy to use services and operate in Powerplay zones.

Toodly pipsky
 
Last edited:
Did anyone mention the imposibility of an effective blockade due to P2P yet? You cannot know whether the opposition is playing in a mode other than Open or if they just don't get instanced with you.

Edit: And from what I've heard there are way to ensure you don't get instanced with anyone while still playing in Open...

The underlying technology is a question- but in the end its not about 1:1 CQC its opportunistic encounters that replicate the missing NPCs thats on offer.

I mean, the networking allows for this kind of event:


One would hope that Odyssey with its focus on physical multicrew, mixed vehicular / foot combat would mean the networking is seeing attention.

Blocking rules would need to change certainly, and an acceptance that networks are not always working.
 
Last edited:
The easiest way would be the make you choice of play permanent (you choose to play in open forever, or solo/group and can't change after your choice) then separate the two universes. That way people who want to play only with friends or solo can do it and influence a huge universe where other people like them do too, and people who want the open experience can enjoy an open only universe.
 
The entire game should be open only. The only thing we have to lose is our insured ship. No base to lose. Our cash reserves are safe.
Well, for a normal MMO, perhaps. However, how many players do you think will make it to Ms. Farseer's base alive? After 4 tries I had to switch to solo. Yes, I was new at the time, but I think you get my point.

FYI, I really wish that power play was moved to it's own private server, sort of like CQC where it would always be open and all players on all platforms are out there together. Reason: If what you do affects other powers then the players representing those other powers should be able to defend themselves and their powers against your activities. Not that this will happen, but that's just my own 2 cents.
 
It just dawned on me that maybe I don't understand what the problem with PP is. I mean I though it lacked interesting gameplay, one of my Idea's was to hook into the mission system and allow players to attack enemy surface installations or assassinate a top ranking military or political figure of the opposing power. Perhaps some espionage, a data mission to obtain military or industrial information.

What problem is Open Only, or a system that give open players greater gains for their PP action, supposed to solve? Looks to my like it changes little: a few people might move to Open the rest will either go "oh well, I guess that's no more PP for me" or rage quit. PP will still be the same except with fewer people all of witch are now in Open. How does that alone make it better?
 
It just dawned on me that maybe I don't understand what the problem with PP is. I mean I though it lacked interesting gameplay, one of my Idea's was to hook into the mission system and allow players to attack enemy surface installations or assassinate a top ranking military or political figure of the opposing power. Perhaps some espionage, a data mission to obtain military or industrial information.

What problem is Open Only, or a system that give open players greater gains for their PP action, supposed to solve? Looks to my like it changes little: a few people might move to Open the rest will either go "oh well, I guess that's no more PP for me" or rage quit. PP will still be the same except with fewer people all of witch are now in Open. How does that alone make it better?

In one of my proposals I suggest just that: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...es-on-sandros-last-ideas.526335/#post-8079411

So that rather than making one thing try and work everywhere you split the roles and focus on strengths of the underlying game.

Open on its own won't help matters- its a combination of uncapped UM, unified fort direction, open and reduced BGS footprint that condenses Powerplay into a much smaller space. Uncapped UM makes no system safe- until one side stops it will always be in play. Unified direction means all fort traffic goes to a central place. Open takes all of that and presents the opportunity to stop all this traffic, and slow efforts enough so that a power can't achieve its aims that cycle.

Since players can do things NPCs can't (i.e. be spontaneous) the day to day is much less tedious, since NPC patterns are so easy to predict.
 
In one of my proposals I suggest just that: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threa...es-on-sandros-last-ideas.526335/#post-8079411

So that rather than making one thing try and work everywhere you split the roles and focus on strengths of the underlying game.

Open on its own won't help matters- its a combination of uncapped UM, unified fort direction, open and reduced BGS footprint that condenses Powerplay into a much smaller space. Uncapped UM makes no system safe- until one side stops it will always be in play. Unified direction means all fort traffic goes to a central place. Open takes all of that and presents the opportunity to stop all this traffic, and slow efforts enough so that a power can't achieve its aims that cycle.

Since players can do things NPCs can't (i.e. be spontaneous) the day to day is much less tedious, since NPC patterns are so easy to predict.

I still don't see why Open Only or a weighted system is necessary, a blockade is never going to be effective and the more people you dedicate to trying to stop people the harder you are going to lose.

If it's PvP you want them maybe use special PPPvP combat zones.

Edit: if it's an even playing field you want, it is even and if it's pewpew you want see above suggestion. If on the other hands it's a matter of: "Some people have it easier that me." than that is entirely your problem.
 
Last edited:
There's been a lot of discussion about whether or not Powerplay should be Open Only.

There are some fair points here; namely, that right now, there's little way to directly counteract the actions of an opposing faction, and that things are biased against combat. Instead, you need to just counter-grind them, doing more work than them in the same time period. This can feel unfair to players who want to be able to go out and directly stop these players, instead, as well as biasing against the combat side of things.

The current balance of power is clearly tilted away from Combat, especially in Open. Combat is slower, and playing in Open has no real benefits with many downsides, such as being killed by enemy factions, or even killed by just random gankers. If your objective is playing efficiently, then being in Open is clearly a poor choice. Okay, fair enough, these are reasonable complaints.

But does that mean open-only is a reasonable solution to these problems?

I don't think so. There's a fundamental problem with this proposal, and it has to do with balance of power, and what players will do in response to that balance.

What is the goal?

Firstly, as we talk about trying to fix this bias in the balance of power, what is our desired goal? After all, while the current form isn't fair, we don't want to take things too far and make them just as unfair to the opposite side. Clearly, if having the balance of power shifted to one direction(cargo hauling) is unacceptable, then having it equally shifted the opposite direction(combat) is no better. It's not solving the problem, just moving it from one pole to another.

And that's the problem with moving Powerplay to Open-Only. It shifts the balance of power ENTIRELY to the combat, putting it 100% at the whims of the combat players.

Why? Because no matter what you do, a pvp-optimized build will ALWAYS beat a cargo-hauling build. The current state of combat balance ensures that even attempting pvp in such a case simply doesn't work, because the other player will have a massive advantage from using cargo space for combat modules. Yes, the cargo hauler can often escape, but that will often mean high-waking away, which simply resets the fight, getting them nowhere.

Yes, the cargo hauler can bring escorts, but again, that puts power 100% in the domain of the combat players, with the cargo hauler a subservient second class.

To make matters worse, while Cargo haulers must face these challenges, as they MUST go to several pre-determined locations that can be defended, enemy combat ships face no similar restrictions. If your only goal is to destroy a target faction, all you need to do is drop in on a ring repeatedly and blow up civilian ships that spawn, and then the cops that follow. There is no way to locate a player doing this and no way to stop them, open or solo.

Is this truly a solution, when the net result is moving the balance of power entirely into the combat players' court? And what would the actual end result be?

---

What would be the net result of changing Powerplay to Open-Only?

Many people hope that it would result in many more players playing in Open, giving them more and better opportunities for rp-based combat, but I suspect the exact opposite would be true. The players who don't currently play in Open do so because they don't enjoy pvp. Not enjoying pvp is different from not enjoying any aspect of pve content; pve can be balanced to allow any player to complete it, with time and effort. Pvp is different; by nature, it will always skew towards the top 20% of combat pilots, who will win 80% of the time(See the Pareto Distribution). This means that, for many pilots, succeeding in a pvp context is quite literally impossible. It's not something you can work your way over, it's simply out of reach forever.

Making Powerplay open-only offers these players a choice; forcibly experience something they don't like(and often literally cannot win at, due to the fact that pvp always biases towards to most skilled players)....or don't do powerplay at all.

I strongly suspect that the net result would be SOME players moving to Open to try to continue, but as pvp rapidly comes to dominate the powerplay experience, and players discover that becoming skilled enough at pvp to succeed requires a much larger investment of time and effort than they're willing or able to put forward, the end result would be a powerplay far less active than even the current diminished version.

---

What is a more realistic solution?

The fundamental problem with this approach is that it assumes you can force players to engage in an activity they don't enjoy. This may work with short-term activities, like unlocking an engineer or a few ships, but Powerplay is nowhere near short-term. It requires sequential investment over long periods of time, and if players have a game they don't enjoy, they'll respond by just not playing.

So what is the solution? It might seem obvious, but make the game fun to play.

The most fundamental problem with Open right now is that the default two encounters you'll have with other players are A: Ignoring them, or B: Being killed by them. This is because these are the things the game does best at facilitating! It makes these two things EASY, while making most other shared activities frustratingly difficult by default!

If you're doing a wing mission and you see another player and you want to work with them, you need to go through multiple menus and requests, just to join together in the same wing. And then, afterwards, you're left with a 'friend' you most likely will never see again, requiring yet more menu fiddling to get rid of them. Most often if you're traveling and you see another player, that player will be going in an entirely different direction from you(and you have no way of knowing), so there's no point in anything other than a quick waggle of your wings. There's no way ingame to communicate with other members of your faction, so trying to coordinate action with other members requires the assistance of out-of-game apps and forums. BGS manipulation is completely obscured, so it's impossible to tell if another player is helping you or hurting you. Opening your ship for multicrew as often results in them shooting a station as actually helping you. And so on, and so forth.

THESE are the ways that the game should be changed to make Open Play more desirable and used. Facilitate positive player interaction, and make the process easy and fun, not a chore.

But don't just assume you can force players to engage in a game they not only dislike, they have no chance of winning. They'll do exactly what anyone would do in that situation.

Leave.

And this have not even considered that there are currently 3 opens, so even if you are in open you can still be unable to see the opposition, as they are on a different platform.
Sure, we know that crossplay is possible, from a technical standpoint, but one of the drawbacks with this is the need to coordinate the releases on 3 different platforms at once. Today each platform can get their updates at different times, and everything still works as expected. but if we need to coordinate the update on 3 platforms, then we could encounter more issues and problably also a bigger workload for when the updates go live. Becuse if we allow different client versios to crossplay, you can imagine what if PC playgers got access to a new super weapon and some new defense items, a few days ahead of the console players, and sp PC players can use a new and radical new weapon on console players, and they do nto have access to either the weapon or the new counter defense for this new weapon!!! that would be really bad. Or simply get a new best in class combat ship... a few days earlier. How would that even look in platforms now having access yet?


I do still think that the game should spawn NPC ships doing what players do, so if players haul alot of PP cargo to a system, other players should see NPC ships do the same, and if they interdicts and destroys them, the haulers, will get the same treatment from NPC ships. and since PP is an opt-in activity, we can start to scale the NPC AI... based on an earlier response about how much cargo they haul... so want easy mode, carry less, or bring out your friends and have them escort you. Let these spawned NPC ships, use "copies" of player ships. so high end NPC attack ship, should fly some of the most common player setups used, with a beefed up AI, and if most of the hauling is done in shield less Type-9, then NPC will be flying mostly that. What players do, NPC copies.


This way, we do not need to worry about instancing, several different Open modes etc, etc, There would be no hidden Hauling going in the "dark", ie solo mode, that is un challenged, unless the opposition decides to ignore all these NPC ships...

So if something like this would be implemented, and even only half good, then for PP, we should now start to see what players are up to, and be able to act on this. Sure, players might not be able to take their meta FDL and go hunting players in Type-9's, but they can still target PP NPC's run Type 9's and knowing that doing this for a while, will send FDL's after those players...

Of course there are quite alot of more details omitted here. And if this works for PP, then a very similiar implementation of such mechanic could be used to visualize BGS stuff, but I see that we could skip the difficulty scaling part. This could open up you seeing several similiar ships leaving the statuion you are at, allow you to follow these using a wake scanner, and cargo scanner, and figure out what they are hauling and where. New trade route to try? new piracy targets? etc, etc. or just some good PP targets to take care of.
 
I still don't see why Open Only or a weighted system is necessary, a blockade in never going to be effective and the more people you dedicate to trying to stop people the harder you are going to lose.

Its not about 100% blockading, its about slowing and disrupting a power enough so they can't do what they want to do in the cycle or set time. This is what the NPCs should be doing, because otherwise what happens is its a faceless grind race where you can only do something faster rather than a combination of both.

Plus Powers all work differently- some powers one week attack while others defend, so no-one is really in lockstep.

If it's PvP you want them maybe use special PPPvP combat zones.

You could, the main complaint being that some want the simplicity of having you do your task which is opportunistically challenged by another player. One cheap idea I had which straddles the idea is a certain proportion of a total is open only- so for example 50% is solo but the rest can only be done in open, or that high value systems to a threshold can only be done in open. In the end its balancing abstractions with visible things happening.
 
Its not about 100% blockading, its about slowing and disrupting a power enough so they can't do what they want to do in the cycle or set time. This is what the NPCs should be doing, because otherwise what happens is its a faceless grind race where you can only do something faster rather than a combination of both.

Plus Powers all work differently- some powers one week attack while others defend, so no-one is really in lockstep.



You could, the main complaint being that some want the simplicity of having you do your task which is opportunistically challenged by another player. One cheap idea I had which straddles the idea is a certain proportion of a total is open only- so for example 50% is solo but the rest can only be done in open, or that high value systems to a threshold can only be done in open. In the end its balancing abstractions with visible things happening.
PPCZs and PP missions with or without what we have now should work without having to mess with the modes and we'd have something far more interesting than we have now.

And yeah, the complexity of different systems for different powers isn't exactly helping matters...
 
PPCZs and PP missions with or without what we have now should work without having to mess with the modes and we'd have something far more interesting than we have now.

And yeah, the complexity of different systems for different powers isn't exactly helping matters...

It depends on what you find interesting- some want missions, while others like the idea of a mission in which someone else is involved adversarially since Powerplay is either an open ended wing CZ or open ended hauling mission.
 
Top Bottom