Powerplay 2.0 “Open” Rewards

[Rubbernuke]

Lots of people seem convinced that Open only is the way to go. But I'm not so certain that it would make them happy in practice.

I'd argue design wise its more about making all modes equally hard.

By that I mean if PP NPCs were generally harder, and that harder missions gave you more Power merits, it would make being in solo not ideal and make co-operation more ideal (which is logical- Helldivers is hard solo but possible in a team). Solo players can then risk harder missions alone or stick to safer ones that reward your power less.

 

[Afterglow [SecB]]

PP2.0 only in open play? No way. Then it's better not to have pp at all. That's how I see it for myself.

 

[something]

PP2.0 only in open play? No way. Then it's better not to have pp at all. That's how I see it for myself.

I absolutely disagree. Powerplay should be solo only!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Northpin]

Answers like these make me lose my faith in humanity.

If so, You havent seen the level of cheating that can be attained in ED

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

I'd argue design wise its more about making all modes equally hard.

By that I mean if PP NPCs were generally harder, and that harder missions gave you more Power merits, it would make being in solo not ideal and make co-operation more ideal (which is logical- Helldivers is hard solo but possible in a team). Solo players can then risk harder missions alone or stick to safer ones that reward your power less.

PG becomes the blip then. Presence of instanceable enemy players would have to diminish the NPC threat (i.e. players swap in for NPCs and vice versa).

 

[Phoenix_Dfire]

I absolutely disagree. Powerplay should be solo only!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

you know, your the first person I've seen argue for that!

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

I'd argue design wise its more about making all modes equally hard.

By that I mean if PP NPCs were generally harder, and that harder missions gave you more Power merits, it would make being in solo not ideal and make co-operation more ideal (which is logical- Helldivers is hard solo but possible in a team). Solo players can then risk harder missions alone or stick to safer ones that reward your power less.

Somebody - I don't remember if it was here or on the subeddit - suggested something that I thought was pretty clever, assuming it can be made to work in the game. Basically, if I'm remembering the concept correctly, PP players conducting actions in Solo/PGs generate NPC "proxies" in Open instances who mirror their activities, NPCs who can be fought by players in Open. If Open players successfully interfere with these NPC proxies, then that reduces or cancels out the actions of players in Solo/PG. Thus PP players would be encouraged to act in Open mode for maximum effectiveness since CMDRs can be much harder to counter than NPCs.

Not sure if anything like will actually be implemented in PP2.0, but I thought that kind of solution would address a big part of the "invisible enemy" problem without preventing Solo/PG players from doing PP actions.

As this is a discussion over PP, I'd have thought that PP players having their own, dedicated, mode would make then ecstatic, the only other players they meet will be involved in PP, and no PP activity can happen outside of this mode.

It is a win for everyone, surely?

I'm sure experienced PP players will be more than happy to chime in, but for myself I would less inclined to give it a go if PP were confined to its own mode.

 

[aRJay]

I support open only for the following reasons

• Allows us to counter scripted bot accounts
• Effective Tactics (blockades, smuggling)
• Emergent Gameplay
• Player Progression
• Brings “life” to the game
• Encourages multiplayer

There may be valid arguments against open only, so i’d like to mention some ideas towards a compromise (in the hope it inspires better ones)



Open only rewards

• Arx

A straight bribe.

• Leaderboard eligibility

Leader boards indicating mode perhaps.

• Increased influence per action

No!

• Some form of vanity award / recognition

Yes.

Probably the cleanest way to get feedback would be a vote, like with ship transfer times.

That is only available to FDev.

If you’re looking for loyalty reward ideas, I think engineered modules or bare bones (powerplay) ships would be cool, maybe leading towards a pre build or previous CG reward modules we never got a chance to revisit

I think loyalty rewards should only operate while you are loyal to that power, if you break your pledge and sign up for another you should lose the ones you had for your disloyalty. So no hardware but discounts or other perks would be the way to go.

Some unrealistic ideas include a reverse engineered thargoid ship developed through extended control of an important research system, or progress our ability to enlist NPCs help outside of the fighter bay…

Since recent troubles I’m really enjoying the comeback vibes with Frontier Unlocked and new content.

So many of us love the game and want to see you succeed, we just disagree how it should be done. Great effort so far, Fdev o7

 

[Northpin]

fully up for it! It will actually revive so many game loops for all main ingame aspects:

• wanna deliver tops of cargo? Request a convoy support, ask friends, hire mercs
• wanna attack something: gather allies, create alliances
• wanna do sneaky disruption stuff? Feel the actual danger from those who are protecting their assets

Aren't we are playing it for interactions with other players which are also trying to put impact on the whole game world?
And since new pp2 gameplay bind to a rewards - it would be kinda not that fair if some groups just do it from "secured modes" like solo/private when other players had to achieve the same competing with each other.

The least desired but could be "acceptable" from my pov that solo/pg mode would have huge debuff on impact onto pp2 activities. Same goes for rewards: it should be lower than achieving them from open.

Hope we face it open only and add more various interactions in the game we adore all

Cheers,
Alswulf
o7

Are we playing the same game?

iF your ship is weak enough so it cannot make it to destination, no Escort can save you from the Alpha damage a G5 murderboat can deliver to waste your ship.
If your ship is solid enough, you dont need any escort

Aren't we are playing it for interactions with other players which are also trying to put impact on the whole game world?

Nope, but who does can do it without forcing their gamestyle on anyone else.
If you think otherwise, you didnt read the fine print before purchasing the game.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Somebody - I don't remember if it was here or on the subeddit - suggested something that I thought was pretty clever, assuming it can be made to work in the game. Basically, if I'm remembering the concept correctly, PP players conducting actions in Solo/PGs generate NPC "proxies" in Open instances who mirror their activities, NPCs who can be fought by players in Open. If Open players successfully interfere with these NPC proxies, then that reduces or cancels out the actions of players in Solo/PG. Thus PP players would be encouraged to act in Open mode for maximum effectiveness since CMDRs can be much harder to counter than NPCs.

Not sure if anything like will actually be implemented in PP2.0, but I thought that kind of solution would address a big part of the "invisible enemy" problem without preventing Solo/PG players from doing PP actions.



I'm sure experienced PP players will be more than happy to chime in, but for myself I would less inclined to give it a go if PP were confined to its own mode.

It really comes down to quantifying risk. To me, the ready made solution is missions which price in an adversary. This way you could have a wing cargo depot reservoir of merits to move, dial in a destination, fill it will graded enemies. In solo thats a big ask, while in PG or Open you could have a wing focused on moving / protecting.

 

[Rubbernuke]

PG becomes the blip then. Presence of instanceable enemy players would have to diminish the NPC threat (i.e. players swap in for NPCs and vice versa).

Thats true, but in the end its trying to find a better middle ground. But saying that you could have a bounty bonus for killing ace players you find though, or something along those lines.

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

It really comes down to quantifying risk. To me, the ready made solution is missions which price in an adversary. This way you could have a wing cargo depot reservoir of merits to move, dial in a destination, fill it will graded enemies. In solo thats a big ask, while in PG or Open you could have a wing focused on moving / protecting.

Yes, that sounds like something that could be implemented using stuff that already exists in the game. I'm hopeful that the on-stream mention of Open only and that they will be watching the response to PP2.0 following its release, means that they've given some thought to the issue and will be relying on how things pan out in practice in order to make amendments or adjustments.

 

[molgrips]

What about open-only but you get instanced with people of a similar rank to you flying similar ships? A bit like how NPCs spawn.

 

[Crank Larson]

I don't think it needs to be pure Open-only, but there should be more opportunities and rewards available for activities completed in Open.

 

[Northpin]

What about open-only but you get instanced with people of a similar rank to you flying similar ships? A bit like how NPCs spawn.

Depending on to what level to do the match up, that would be like playing in Solo
Or it would be completely useless if it will pit Unshielded T9 versus, Armed T10 for example.

 

[Disemboweled Ego]

If you want open only it can't use the same mechanics as something designed for a asynchronous who can grind singleplayer activities the hardest gameplay.

To elaborate on this:

You'd need something with matchmaking like CQC that affects the galaxy or something like dark souls where you have a bonus to your PP contribution until your first death of the week and others can come and invade your game to mercilessly gank you.

The mechanics of elite, even in open, let you be sneaky too much and due to the large play area and instancing it's still pretty frustrating as it is now. These mechanics can/do work in some other games with smaller play areas and when escaping an ambush isn't trivial.

 

[Rat Catcher]

but for myself I would less inclined to give it a go if PP were confined to its own mode.

Why? (serious question)
If you are doing PP actions, doing them in a mode dedicated to PP makes most sense - unless, naturally, you would normally operate in Solo or PG, which is, apparently, something PP players want to be rid of.
(Of course, as the game is P2P and instancing isn't that brilliant, there would be no guarantee that, even in a dedicated mode, that other players might be encountered)

 

[Rubbernuke]

I don't think it needs to be pure Open-only, but there should be more opportunities and rewards available for activities completed in Open.

Indeed. A long time ago I had the idea of breaking up PP into roles per mode- solo and PG create and manage what open moves. That way, all modes contribute but don't overlap.

 

[Jmanis]

To elaborate on this:

You'd need something with matchmaking like CQC that affects the galaxy or something like dark souls where you have a bonus to your PP contribution until your first death of the week and others can come and invade your game to mercilessly gank you.

The mechanics of elite, even in open, let you be sneaky too much and due to the large play area and instancing it's still pretty frustrating as it is now. These mechanics can/do work in some other games with smaller play areas and when escaping an ambush isn't trivial.

Rewarding playing in Open is a DOA pursuit.

Rewarding PvP has a lot of merit to it, but the challenges of Open (and the game's more broadly) implementation are what kinda railroad this activity.

As an example; I went and hit up one of the Titan's in Open as an experiment. This was Leigong during a peak of activity. I instanced with exactly 0 commanders on multiple occasions. So... under the OP consideration, I should get heaps more rewards than if I did exactly the same thing in solo right?

Yeah... nah. That's why incentivising Open is DOA.

But that instancing is a barrier to successfully incentivising PvP. one that will never get resolved. So the only really viable option is to go with a mechanism that enables structured PvP to occur... as a naive view, imagine if doing CQC in a specific system for PP was the "incentivised" PvP. You've got:

• A structured activity with some reasonable bounds for balancing the rewards against other PvE activities which are equally measurable.
• A hard-barrier transition where you could perhaps force instancing with others.
• A focal point for PvP to seek PvP, instead of fishing for people doing PvE in open who you might not even instance with anyway.

Frontline Solutions would be the perfect vector for engaging these activities

The other challenge is, if you make PvP all-or-nothing in terms of reward (either you win and get stuff, or you lose and get nothing) you'll never incentivise it. Games like CoD and such work because, even in failure, you are rewarded. So too would need to occur with any structured PvP activity in order to incentivise it... if I suck at CQC, why would I ever do it when I know I could just earn merits via PvE faster. But I would engage PvP if it meant I would get some reward for losing even if it was less than a straight PvE activity, because then the activity wouldn't be entirely worthless, and the incentive of maybe just slightly better rewards by being successful at PvP.

But make it a flat bonus for being in open? I won't do PvP. I'll do PvE in an environment where I'm highly unlikely to instance anyway, if at all.

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

Why? (serious question)
If you are doing PP actions, doing them in a mode dedicated to PP makes most sense - unless, naturally, you would normally operate in Solo or PG, which is, apparently, something PP players want to be rid of.
(Of course, as the game is P2P and instancing isn't that brilliant, there would be no guarantee that, even in a dedicated mode, that other players might be encountered)

I'd like to have the chance for organic encounters with the widest possible group of players, not just those engaged in PowerPlay. It's why I even bother playing in Open in the first place. Playing in Open is where I meet interesting madmen who interdict me in order to ask whether I like pineapple on pizza, it's where I met my current squadmates. That kind of thing really makes up for the chance that some ganker in his G5 murderboat will send me to the rebuy screen.