Elite Dangerous | Powerplay 2.0 exploration and trade balance changes

How do I find out which system is responsible?
It is possible that there's more than one which works. Any Fortified system within 20 LY or Stronghold system within 30 LY can support the acquisition.
There are 2 fortified/stronghold systems within 30LY of the target system, and neither have any mining resources.
... and in that case if this is the way it works that particular target system can't be acquired by mining.
 
It is possible that there's more than one which works. Any Fortified system within 20 LY or Stronghold system within 30 LY can support the acquisition.

... and in that case if this is the way it works that particular target system can't be acquired by mining.
In the first example both systems were fortified, but only one was within 20LY.
I have now checked another acquisition system, but the mining system is 28LY away, and only fortified.
I did not get any merits for selling the resources, which doesn't surprise me.
The nearest fortified system is 14LY away, but does not have any mining resources.

If this is true for other acquisition systems, then this could be a problem. Given that for each example only 4 methods were available -

Deliver powerplay materials - at a few every 30 minutes, progress is going to be glacial
Holoscreen hacking - I haven't tried this, but with only 2 or 3 stations (mainly outposts) in each system, how many screens can you hack?
Sell mining resources - appears not to work
Complete aid/humanitarian missions - I haven't seen any of these, how do you get them?

Then the acquisition process is going to be very slow. I'm certainly not going to be able to do it by myself!
 
Given that for each example only 4 methods were available -

Deliver powerplay materials - at a few every 30 minutes, progress is going to be glacial
Holoscreen hacking - I haven't tried this, but with only 2 or 3 stations (mainly outposts) in each system, how many screens can you hack?
Not many and it trashes your reputation in the process!
Sell mining resources - appears not to work
Complete aid/humanitarian missions - I haven't seen any of these, how do you get them?
Not sure: in Reinforcing or Undermining, any mission in the "Support" category works, but they don't seem to in Acquisition.
Then the acquisition process is going to be very slow. I'm certainly not going to be able to do it by myself!
Those are only the "preferred" methods for your power - the other methods listed under Acquisition in the Pilots' Handbook should also work, just without your power's score bonus.
- bounty hunting
- high-profit trading
- rares trading
- killing other Power ships
might all work
 
Not many and it trashes your reputation in the process!

Not sure: in Reinforcing or Undermining, any mission in the "Support" category works, but they don't seem to in Acquisition.

Those are only the "preferred" methods for your power - the other methods listed under Acquisition in the Pilots' Handbook should also work, just without your power's score bonus.
- bounty hunting
- high-profit trading
- rares trading
- killing other Power ships
might all work
I might well try some of the other options, but there is no rush.
I'm not interested in the fastest way to get merits, and I neither need, or want more powerplay modules.
For me it's a case of working out how my usual game play activities (pre pledge) can benefit my power, at least for a while.

How does bounty hunting affect powerplay? I have dropped into the odd RES in the last couple of days, and I haven't seen any enemy ships present so far.
I get merits for scanning ships, but haven't tried blowing up any wanted ships yet.
 
How does bounty hunting affect powerplay? I have dropped into the odd RES in the last couple of days, and I haven't seen any enemy ships present so far.
I get merits for scanning ships, but haven't tried blowing up any wanted ships yet.
Enemy ships don't seem to generally be present there.

Normal wanted ships get merits in Reinforcement systems for killing them (higher bounty = more merits, but generally less than an actual enemy)
It also says they do in Acquisition but I haven't personally tested that.

Should be pretty decent if the system has a good bounty-hunting spot or two.
 
Enemy ships don't seem to generally be present there.

Normal wanted ships get merits in Reinforcement systems for killing them (higher bounty = more merits, but generally less than an actual enemy)
It also says they do in Acquisition but I haven't personally tested that.

Should be pretty decent if the system has a good bounty-hunting spot or two.
I have just tried a high RES in this acquisition system, and I can confirm that you do get merits for the kills. Numbers seem to be in the 15 - 55 merit range, depending on bounty value.
 
Bounty hunting is so badly paid in terms of credits, apart from enemy stronghold carriers. The slfs are 72 merits (elites) and say, a python is just 40!?
It's just all so screwed up!
Did anyone play test? And if they did and reported how all screwed up it is, was it actioned? Doesn't look like it.
And you get a raft of bountys against you for killing enemy ships which is just daft!
The whole merits system is broken. Only rares pays. 100s of carriers In the rares "golden region" attest to it.
Why don't they allow gamers to beta test this mess before releasing it.?
 
Bounty hunting is so badly paid in terms of credits, apart from enemy stronghold carriers. The slfs are 72 merits (elites) and say, a python is just 40!?
It's just all so screwed up!
Did anyone play test? And if they did and reported how all screwed up it is, was it actioned? Doesn't look like it.
And you get a raft of bountys against you for killing enemy ships which is just daft!
The whole merits system is broken. Only rares pays. 100s of carriers In the rares "golden region" attest to it.
Why don't they allow gamers to beta test this mess before releasing it.?
I suspect the only folk who 'playtested' this were the same ones who complained and got the AI aggressiveness turned down because it meant they weren't able to not give 90%+ of their attention to streaming and talking to an audience that may or may not have been there, rather than playing the game.
 
Last edited:
Bounty hunting in PP 2.0 is very weak. In Acquisition systems, I get some 55 merits for a 1.2M Anaconda. I also get ~10 merits for killing ships from other powers but also fines and bounties for that. Very annoying.

To reiterate, the first few days of PP2.0 had me rolling in merits by bounty hunting in acquisition systems. Getting 300-400 merits per large ship kill was not rare. I wish they revisited bounty hunting and upped the merits payout from what it is now. As it stands, my bounty hunter role has been forced into a rares hauler - hate that.

And don't get me started about the 400 credits for killing enemies in Stronghold systems. A Harmless Sidewinder in a Low RES gets more than an order of magnitude than that.
 
It means that LYR is making progress on making that system a LYR fortified system, and that without anyone trying to oppose it.

Though I don't think we know yet if there is a diminishing return on effort.

No sign of any so far, and Frontier did say in a comment somewhere that it was going to be purely linear.

The only cap is that you can't move a system by more than one band (e.g. Exploited to Stronghold or vice versa) in a single cycle. Merits after that add to the hill for the other side to stop it moving, but don't affect the position next week if they don't.

Once the control bar fills for aquire, the extra points are lost. Like hundreds of thousands of points didnt count for next bar. It started on 0 reinforcing.

I’d like to extend my gratitude to CMDRs Jack Winter, Ian Doncaster, and tomalus for their responses to my previous post.

After checking again, I noticed that the blue marker had advanced further since my last observation. I’ve been recording the progress every 24 hours, but I’m beginning to suspect that it may take some more time for the control points earned to fully reflect on the progress ba—or perhaps there’s another condition involved.

If that’s the case, figuring out the best timing to stop might be a bit challenging...

Thanks again for your support !
 

Attachments

  • PP21.jpg
    PP21.jpg
    124.2 KB · Views: 47
The data seems to be updated every hour, but it can take a little longer than that for your personal map to pick up the change.

There's no harm in going over a little bit - you wouldn't want to be exactly on the line, then have someone come in early on Thursday morning, shoot down a few ships, and push it back over the other way.
 
Unless I missed it the data port farming exploit being fixed, the fleet carrier SLF farming issue mixed in with overall poor balance, and lots of minor bugs may really kill pp2 before it gets going. Fdev fix the issues, rollback the cheaters gains for using the data port exploit...

If you do not believe me go check the issues tracker looking for the above
 
Yeah, it wont take too much longer of this and people are going to let loose the reigns and faf-off. Strongholds are disasters for the power that has them. Solo and PG merit farms that force the entire other group to do nothing but haul rares to counteract. Now the data exploit means you either participate in it or fail. This needed a beta-test phase with people other than "I'm Commander Burr". People that would actually push at the design and find this kind of stuff.

Im so sick of hauling rares at this point I'm about there myself.
 
This needed a beta-test phase with people other than "I'm Commander Burr". People that would actually push at the design and find this kind of stuff.
Personally, I've come to realise that that was not a closed beta test. (I used that phrase for it before.) It was a marketing campaign. Why? Because the only people who had access to it were there to advertise the upcoming update, and flying around in an overpowered new ship and showing off Powerplay stuff does make for much more entertaining viewing than plain old testing stuff would.
So yes, this would have needed a beta test, and there wasn't really one.
 
Yeah, it wont take too much longer of this and people are going to let loose the reigns and faf-off. Strongholds are disasters for the power that has them. Solo and PG merit farms that force the entire other group to do nothing but haul rares to counteract. Now the data exploit means you either participate in it or fail. This needed a beta-test phase with people other than "I'm Commander Burr". People that would actually push at the design and find this kind of stuff.

Im so sick of hauling rares at this point I'm about there myself.
There is of course always the choice of just playing the game to have fun and leave the grinders and exploiters to that dumb nonsense. But of course gamers are gamers, and while you don't have to care about others artificially boosting their ranks, the damage they do to the systems balance of PP might be severe.

But gamers be gamers, if there's something to grind or exploit, they will do it.
 
So yes, this would have needed a beta test, and there wasn't really one.
Having a bunch of "looking to break it"-minded players involved before release would probably have been sensible.

That said, I wouldn't have expected that to find everything, and it might also have come back with false positives (in the same way that the streamer advertising may have resulted in "Hostile" being toned down a little too much [1]).

- Stronghold Carriers being too vulnerable: yes, it would probably have found that; that said, I remain unconvinced it's actually a major problem [2] as opposed to something which needs a little adjustment to balance - not every Stronghold system gets a carrier, so a Power creating many Strongholds can have most of them be carrier-free; it stops being effective after the Stronghold is reduced to Fortified so you can't use it to destroy a position entirely, and the defending Power can easily push it back up to Stronghold (without the carrier) the next week.

- Exploration data over-effectiveness: was shown on stream anyway because someone used it to try out the Concord Cannon.

- Rares being too good: probably would have been picked up, but it'll take a bit more effort on refining approaches before we can tell how high some of the more complicated/combined ways of getting merits cap out

- Data Port exploit: might have been spotted, might not have, depends on the size of the testing group as to whether someone accidentally does it and notices. Took about a week of live play for someone to notice so the odds of a smaller group finding it are low even if they're deliberately looking for loopholes.

- 1t trade exploit: was anyone in the test group old enough to remember it working in the pre-3.3 BGS? It's taken almost two weeks to notice in live.

- mixed activity rates: very easy to pick up on just by doing each activity in isolation that A is faster than B, but a lot of the interest in PP2 is whether you can effectively combine multiple activities to get A+B merit rates ... and then also "passive" merit activities (scans, normal trade, mining, bounty hunting) can afford to be less efficient as merit sources because players are already getting other things from those activities too, and they're likely to be done by pledged-but-not-actively-Powerplaying commanders. That was always going to need a lot of live balancing anyway.
(Like: on paper and in isolation the various Odyssey activities all look pretty poor; even without the data exploit doing all of them at once is actually pretty competitive for non-SC undermining)

- the various documentation issues: yeah, they'd have come up straight away but aren't a balancing problem as such

- anything big-picture: no chance that a small group of testers can actually duplicate whatever structural mess Powerplay gets itself into through collective actions in about 3-6 months time



[1] How much of the effectiveness of rares is because non-Mahon Powerplayers can just rock up to the Old Worlds cluster, pick up their rare goods, and go again, without having to worry about the Mahon forces in the system? Or grab some Harma Rum right out from under Archon Delaine's nose? If you had to fight your way in a bit, and then possibly fight your way through the systems in-between the rare source and your target, that might slow it down a bit!

[2] It's exactly the sort of offence-over-defence balance point which a lot of players absolutely hate because loss-aversion is the name of the game ("Dangerous" refers to how angry players get if they might lose something, right?). But that doesn't mean it's wrong - Stronghold Carriers are really useful, there probably should be some sort of requirement to maintain them or lose them, it's self-limiting because of how SCs are generated, your HQ carrier is immune, etc.

Similarly the data port exploit absolutely needs shutting down hard and fast ... but I feel a lot of the anger over it is specifically because it's a fast undermining technique and Frontier removing a fast fortifying technique (like Orrerian Vicious Brew) instead mostly gets "why has Frontier nerfed this :(" reactions.
 
Controll points have already drop off a cliff,compared to last week. I think it will drop even more this week.
I think teaming up in a wing and clearing combat zones will be the best way to earn merits fast and counter enemy.
 
Similarly the data port exploit absolutely needs shutting down hard and fast ... but I feel a lot of the anger over it is specifically because it's a fast undermining technique and Frontier removing a fast fortifying technique (like Orrerian Vicious Brew) instead mostly gets "why has Frontier nerfed this :(" reactions.
It would really be a bit over the top to get angry with frontier for removing what is clearly an exploit, especially after seeing the damage it does to pp gameplay.. :(
 
- Rares being too good: probably would have been picked up, but it'll take a bit more effort on refining approaches before we can tell how high some of the more complicated/combined ways of getting merits cap out

- 1t trade exploit: was anyone in the test group old enough to remember it working in the pre-3.3 BGS? It's taken almost two weeks to notice in live.
These should've been caught in the design phase. These things can be reasoned about and even some quick back of the envelope math will show how broken these could be.

Rare trade being lucrative might actually be fine if its something players don't otherwise engage with much nowdays outside of CGs and the soontill relic stuff week 1 was kind of a coincidence with the other rares being a bit worse (or better balanced).

The 1t selling just makes no sense - why would a bonus to selling low amounts ever be desirable. There's obviously some algorithm behind that that takes amount/credits/profit and whatever variables as inputs and outputs merits rewarded, but they didn't look at how the variables can affect it.

If you look at either activity compared to transporting power cargo (which imo could be a good baseline to balance against) neither of these decisions makes sense.

Starting to think that FDev is hiding the numbers for how profitable stuff is because they don't have them or understand what they mean enough to present them accurately.
 
It would really be a bit over the top to get angry with frontier for removing what is clearly an exploit, especially after seeing the damage it does to pp gameplay.. :(
That's not what I mean. Few are going to publicly admit to being sad when that particular exploit gets closed, of course.

But people are much more likely to raise a fuss about imbalances (whether exploits or just balancing points) which lead to fast undermining than they are about ones which lead to fast fortifying.

For the exploits that's okay - Frontier should be fixing those quickly and rolling back any unjust gains whether they're for super-undermining or super-fortifications. This thread started with their announcement on some super-fortification methods, I hope they'll get to the data point one before the end of the week comes and it gets a lot trickier.

For the balance points there's a strong likelihood that people shout way louder about undermining being too easy than they do about fortification being too easy ... and therefore if Frontier just listens to the complaints without an actual sense of the big picture effects, we end up with everything being fortified to an unassailable degree, which was already the likelihood from fortification and undermining being equally efficient solely because of player psychology going defence-first in aggregate.
 
Back
Top Bottom