Open-Only in PP2.0?

[Arioch]

I’ve never considered the modes to be equal (if I remember correctly, what Michael Brookes said was “we consider all modes to be equally valid choices” which I think is a subtly different thing) and I almost exclusively play in Solo* and have never engaged in PP1.0 - but I hope PP2.0 is either going to give me NPCs that will essentially give me inescapable combat (as in, I don’t have to go looking for it) or a good reason to go into Open.

I play the other three games in the Elite series and ED is the only one where combat is completely optional. I’ve got fingers crossed that Rubbernuke will be pleased in a few weeks

*…I just can’t stand coloured exhaust trails

 

[Robert Maynard]

How is it punishing? A minute ago you said it was exploited and at least other players can potentially stop you.

To remove the wing bonus from only Private Groups would be unreasonable as it is not a risk based reward, it's a co-operative reward - one that arguably rewards reducing risk by being in a wing.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Unless, of course, they simply don't find PvP to be fun in a game where PvP is optional (due to other players being optional) so are exercising their freedom to choose not to play among those who would engage them in PvP while engaging in game features that were quite deliberately designed to be affected by players in all game modes, i.e. game features which don't require PvP.

But by playing powerplay, the premise of which is player team vs. player team competition, they are engaging in PvP with other players, at a team-play level.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But by playing powerplay, the premise of which is player team vs. player team competition, they are engaging in PvP with other players, at a team-play level.

Team vs. Team engaging in asynchronous indirect competition, with optional synchronous direct competition - like the rest of the game.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Yeah it's really funny, people complaining about efficient use of time and resources refusing to use the most efficient method to achieve their aims, it's as if they are only focused on one single thing, oh yes that's right they are, PvP. They don't like hauling so the idea is to "encourage" all haulers into their target space, where the haulers can take part in gameplay they don't like!

You're over simplifying the point and attributing your own motives to the posts (seen as I happen to be one of these 'mystical' haulers you are talking about).

If the most efficient way to play PP2.0 is as previous (AFK turretboating and shieldless hauling in Solo), it defeats its core purpose of delivering team-based competitive gameplay, and the feature will sadly be effectively DOA, because as has been mentioned by many who were invested in powerplay (like myself), there is no way you'll find the large numbers of players willing to partake in it (as we saw in the decline of the first six months of PP1 as such tactics became the norm), because as much as I love engaging in healthy competition in a computer game, I'm not (for example, being colourful) leaving my computer on whilst I go out for the day logged in parked in a CZ, thats not gaming.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Team vs. Team engaging in asynchronous indirect competition, with optional synchronous direct competition - like the rest of the game.

Which at its core is PvP. Adding extra words doesn't change that.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Which at its core is PvP. Adding extra words doesn't change that.

Which, given that players will engage in this mode shared game feature that does not require any player to present themself for other players to shoot at them while experiencing and affecting the feature, must be the sort of PvP that does not require any player to engage in in-the-same-instance PvP.

Hence references to indirect (not necessarily in the same instance) asynchronous (as it is running 24/7 so will be affected by other players when one is not playing) competition (as while at its core it is player driven it does not require any player to engage in in-the-same-instance PvP while engaging with the feature).

 

[Nowski]

Which at its core is PvP. Adding extra words doesn't change that.

Equivocation - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Which, given that players will engage in this mode shared game feature that does not require any player to present themself for other players to shoot at them while experiencing and affecting the feature, must be the sort of PvP that does not require any player to engage in in-the-same-instance PvP.

Hence references to indirect (not necessarily in the same instance) asynchronous (as it is running 24/7 so will be affected by other players when one is not playing) competition (as while at its core it is player driven it does not require any player to engage in in-the-same-instance PvP while engaging with the feature).

Your original post stated "they simply don't find PvP to be fun in a game where PvP is optional", which is clearly not the case seen as they're opting into PvP by partaking in Powerplay, a Player Team vs. Player Team system within the game which is optional.

 

[varonica]

Your original post stated "they simply don't find PvP to be fun in a game where PvP is optional", which is clearly not the case seen as they're opting into PvP by partaking in Powerplay, a Player Team vs. Player Team system within the game which is optional.

Playing with word now, you know very well PvP in that case means players directly fighting each other and not in that other way of all affecting the same universe, equivocating is what it's called.

 

[Doctor Dread]

Your original post stated "they simply don't find PvP to be fun in a game where PvP is optional", which is clearly not the case seen as they're opting into PvP by partaking in Powerplay, a Player Team vs. Player Team system within the game which is optional.

Then how about all else in Open is PvE?

Only upon pledging you enter the PvP Open.

(To be clear, you are not able to shoot other Commanders unless they are pledged. Nor you are able to play PP if not in Open. Does this sound OK with you?)

 

[Robert Maynard]

Your original post stated "they simply don't find PvP to be fun in a game where PvP is optional", which is clearly not the case seen as they're opting into PvP by partaking in Powerplay, a Player Team vs. Player Team system within the game which is optional.

Players in Solo and Private Groups don't need to consider that some consider any potentially competitive mode shared feature of the game to be "PvP" - as it is simply "playing the game". Noting the apparent insistence to classify "playing the game" (where all players experience and affect the mode shared galaxy and no player requires to play among other players to do so) as "PvP".

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Playing with word now, you know very well PvP in that case means players directly fighting each other and not in that other way of all affecting the same universe, equivocating is what it's called.

In Poweplay Players are, in cooperation with others on their team, fighting (I prefer the term 'competing' though to be clear) with one rival ones pledged to other powers by use of various game mechanics, and in that context, engaged in PvP.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Then how about all else in Open is PvE?

Only upon pledging you enter the PvP Open.

(To be clear, you are not able to shoot other Commanders unless they are pledged. Nor you are able to play PP if not in Open. Does this sound OK with you?)

Personally, I could see that working for Powerplay specifically, which is why I think in the original flashtopic, they wanted to do that in the quick and easiest manner (as is FDEVs way) by proposing to push PP2.0 into the Open-Only realm and calling it job done.

The issue though is how that impacts on other players gameplay e.g. Piracy (such as it is now) would probably suffer, as would more dynamic pvp (such as BGS war again, such as they are now, or competitive CGs, if they ever return) due to the more rigid framework it would impose (as I imagine the only workaround under such a system would be to drag all those willing into a PG, unless we then began providing a whole smorgashboard of 'opt in/out' options, which would probably clash with FDEVs general approach to game mechanics).

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Players in Solo and Private Groups don't need to consider that some consider any potentially competitive mode shared feature of the game to be "PvP" - as it is simply "playing the game". Noting the apparent insistence to classify "playing the game" (where all players experience and affect the mode shared galaxy and no player requires to play among other players to do so) as "PvP".

Regardless of whether they consider it or not, whilst pledged to Powerplay, it is though.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Regardless of whether they consider it or not, whilst pledged to Powerplay, it is though.

Some certainly consider it to be, yes.

Others likely won't consider a game feature that does not require players to play together in a PvP-enabled game mode to be a PvP feature, even if it is competitive through PvE actions affecting the mode shared galaxy.

 

[CMDR Daiyus]

In Poweplay Players are, in cooperation with others on their team, fighting (I prefer the term 'competing' though to be clear) with one rival ones pledged to other powers by use of various game mechanics, and in that context, engaged in PvP.

I'd argue that community goals fall into this remit though. It's not teams, but we're still competing for the top spots for rewards, or even for different outcomes sometimes. We're able to do that from any mode we like.

I understand the arguments that PowerPlay could be more directly confrontational as an activity, by which I mean players ending up in the same instance and interacting (typically aggressively). I can see why that would be fun for a lot of people, but to me that's just not how Elite is built. The ability to directly confront another player is an opt-in for those that like that kind of interaction. For most, they prefer a first past the post system.

Looking at how PP2.0 is set up, the activities we can perform to spread influence will be more varied, but it's still, to my mind, a continuously running, repeating, conflicting set of community goals. It's more complex, but fundamentally not different in philosophy. Players are free to choose whether they want some spicy, direct PvP incorporated into their session, or not.

Elite is, and always has been, a game where players may choose how to engage with other people, and it should 100% stay that way in my opinion as it's one of its biggest selling points. Having one particular activity that doesn't respect that column, either by reducing rewards in certain modes, or restricting activity to one mode, just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Some certainly consider it to be, yes.

Others likely won't consider a game feature that does not require players to play together in a PvP-enabled game mode to be a PvP feature, even if it is competitive through PvE actions affecting the mode shared galaxy.

Regardless of whether they consider it to be or not, it is, because those interactions are impacting on the aforementioned PvP/TvT of Powerplay, and specifially in the case of Powerplay, they have opted into that. This is not like inadvertently 'messing' with a PMFs gameplay by dumping a load of exploration data on a station because:

(i) The player has pledged to the faction.
(ii) The player is carrying out work that improves the standing of that faction vs. other factions.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Regardless of whether they consider it to be or not, it is, because those interactions are impacting on the aforementioned PvP/TvT of Powerplay, and specifially in the case of Powerplay, they have opted into that. This is not like inadvertently 'messing' with a PMFs gameplay by dumping a load of exploration data on a station because:

(i) The player has pledged to the faction.
(ii) The player is carrying out work that improves the standing of that faction vs. other factions.

Still not seeing any requirement to engage in in-the-same-instance PvP in this so-called PvP feature.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Still not seeing any requirement to engage in in-the-same-instance PvP in this so-called PvP feature.

Because specifically right now in our wee flurry of back and forths we have been discussing the concept of what defines PvP, a players interest/involvement in it and how that relates to Powerplay within the framework of Elite Dangerous.