Open-Only in PP2.0?

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
No, its expected because otherwise, why would an NPC interdict and make its feeble attempt to destroy you? Just like the rest of ED NPCs do their best to blow you up.

Are you suggesting that Powerplay, a feature about explicit eleven way competition has no opposition in solo and PG and that its safer than the regular game which has no explicitly defined enemy?
Not at all - however Powerplay as it currently exists does not offer much in the way of NPC challenge, as previously discussed (several times now).
Then lets hope the NPCs actually do the job this time round.
No disagreement there.
 
Not at all - however Powerplay as it currently exists does not offer much in the way of NPC challenge, as previously discussed (several times now).
Which has led to the problems we have. NPCs in V2 have to pop in and hassle people, otherwise Open will always be seen as the mode that at least tries to make powers felt.

No disagreement there.
The Thargoids have proved that its possible to link capable NPCs in various types to events, it would be incredibly disappointing after all the development in the BGS and general game to not see it used.
 
Sorry, I disagree, unless you’re defining “enemy” as NPCs. There’s nothing in PowerPlay’s current design that requires PvP combat, and there’s quite a bit of PowerPlay’s current design that encourages avoiding PvP at all costs. You’re adding a completely optional extra to the mix to spice things up, which is why I play in Open as well.
Where I did say it's "required" by the design... the whole game design doesn't require anything, it's all optional and about players' choices.

Dont't get me wrong... powerplay NPCs are brain dead, and it's even worse since a few time as their wings don't even return fire (and that's another big flaw of current powerplay design IMHO). If one doesn't accept of being destroyed by an enemy (player), as well as being ready to destroy an enemy (player), [excluding modules and perks] why engaging powerplay then?

For the love of hauling or for shooting herds of brainless NPCs? It sounds to me a bit hypocrital... 🤷‍♂️

Once one's accepting the above, then it comes the "ethos" which is the main element to drive the decision to pledge with this or that.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
If one doesn't accept of being destroyed by an enemy (player), as well as being ready to destroy an enemy (player), [excluding modules and perks] why engaging powerplay then?
.... because it's a game feature that all players can engage in without any requirement to engage in PvP while engaged in it.

That some accept that out-of-game rule as the basis of their "ethos" is clear - just as it is clear that no-one else needs to.
 
Where I did say it's "required" by the design... the whole game design doesn't require anything, it's all optional and about players' choices.

Then what did you mean by “fundamental premise?” 🤔

For the love of hauling or for shooting herds of brainless NPCs? It sounds to me a bit hypocrital... 🤷‍♂️

Which is why I don’t bother to to earn merits under PowerPlay 1.0 and concentrated on the BGS side. Why would I bother engagjng with such uninteresting and basic gameplay when I have the rich panoply of gameplay that the BGS offers me?

If PP 2.0 doesn’t have at least a rough parity with the rich variety of PvE activities the rest of the game offers, I won’t be bothered to earn merits either, and it will have failed again at what I consider to be PowerPlay’s fundamental premise: a PvE simulation of politics at the Super Power level.

No PvP required.
 
Then what did you mean by “fundamental premise?” 🤔
A behavioural component, part of the players' mindset not necessarly fenced by the gameplay.

More or less the same applies to PvP FPS (besides with a different angle as that also implies the concept of human "avatars").

Which is why I don’t bother to to earn merits under PowerPlay 1.0 and concentrated on the BGS side. Why would I bother engagjng with such uninteresting and basic gameplay when I have the rich panoply of gameplay that the BGS offers me?
That's quite a different scale... BGS is... BGS, hopefully we'd get rid of this flawed linkage too (I'm lightning another couple of candles for the prayers in the meantime).


If PP 2.0 doesn’t have at least a rough parity with the rich variety of PvE activities the rest of the game offers, I won’t be bothered to earn merits either, and it will have failed again at what I consider to be PowerPlay’s fundamental premise: a PvE simulation of politics at the Super Power level.

No PvP required.
Powerplay is PvP, even in 1.0 as anyone competes vs. other players... the decision to avoid to shoot players or being shot by other players doesn't change that baseline.
 
Aren't the modes just filters on if you can see live players or not? In solo, we can still talk to everyone in a system on the coms.
What about just making some key systems to the gameplay mechanics always open with a warning prompt before you jump? I don't know if that's possible, but it seems like it should be.
 
Aren't the modes just filters on if you can see live players or not? In solo, we can still talk to everyone in a system on the coms.
What about just making some key systems to the gameplay mechanics always open with a warning prompt before you jump? I don't know if that's possible, but it seems like it should be.
It has been proposed too... we're ready to submit today all Archon Delaine controlled/exploited systems for open-only game mode.
 
Aren't the modes just filters on if you can see live players or not? In solo, we can still talk to everyone in a system on the coms.
What about just making some key systems to the gameplay mechanics always open with a warning prompt before you jump? I don't know if that's possible, but it seems like it should be.
Area's should never be restricted by mode.
It wouldn't work anyway as PVE PGs are basically Open with no PvP rules.

O7
 
Area's should never be restricted by mode.
It wouldn't work anyway as PVE PGs are basically Open with no PvP rules.

O7
No restriction, anyone can always go anywhere (permits accounted for) regardless of mode. But if you are flying solo or in a group there would still be systems that are always going to be open. You can go there, you just get an unfiltered galaxy in those. Basically the choice is on a player at a system level to dip their toe in or not.
 
No restriction, anyone can always go anywhere (permits accounted for) regardless of mode. But if you are flying solo or in a group there would still be systems that are always going to be open. You can go there, you just get an unfiltered galaxy in those. Basically the choice is on a player at a system level to dip their toe in or not.
Cool can we have no fire zones in Open as well then to balance it? or is this just more PvP pushing?

O7
 
Is ShinDez the start of a full power reset, at the hands of the goids??? I hope so! Burn out all the powers main systems and kill all the current leaders, a fresh start for everything as pp2.0 goes live. I am hearing reports of ganking in ShinDez in the AX CZ's in Open, yet another example of the Open shenanigans in Elite
 
Is ShinDez the start of a full power reset, at the hands of the goids??? I hope so! Burn out all the powers main systems and kill all the current leaders, a fresh start for everything as pp2.0 goes live. I am hearing reports of ganking in ShinDez in the AX CZ's in Open, yet another example of the Open shenanigans in Elite
Shin Dez is an always-on gank zone. There's no way adding Thargoids, or any development that attracts players, to the mix would reduce that:).
 
Cool can we have no fire zones in Open as well then to balance it? or is this just more PvP pushing?

O7
I think no fire zones sounds great. Im not a PvP player. Everyone is always in open. Solo and PG just hides the player controled ships. You can still talk on coms and interact socially.
 
Why not have PVP zones in well travelled or contested areas the rest as no fire zones ?? And see who visits the PVP zones ?? This would give Fdev an idea of numbers of the commanders who are or aren't against PVP ?? Then act accordingly? It may be a surprise either side ??
 
Why not have PVP zones in well travelled or contested areas the rest as no fire zones ?? And see who visits the PVP zones ?? This would give Fdev an idea of numbers of the commanders who are or aren't against PVP ?? Then act accordingly? It may be a surprise either side ??
Why not... more over I'm against a lot of things and activities in the game as well!
 
Back
Top Bottom