Obsidian Ant's "Powerplay Rant"

Ahem. Few days ago I re-started my ancient (alpha test) WoT account which I haven't touched ever since ED has been released - it's a blast :)

I will keep an eye on ED and these forums, though, because I also expect that the game will grow in the future. If it doesn't... oh, well. Past six months were interesting. Sometimes. Kind of.

Funnily enough, I've just restarted my SWTOR sub. Not played in about a year, but I never finished my main characters storyline quest and ED has made me appreciate that whilst games like SWTOR aren't perfect, they feel a whole lot more alive than ED does at time.
 
Funnily enough, I've just restarted my SWTOR sub. Not played in about a year, but I never finished my main characters storyline quest and ED has made me appreciate that whilst games like SWTOR aren't perfect, they feel a whole lot more alive than ED does at time.

I've been meaning to try Star Trek Online...
 
Unfortunately for the us players you can only slightly bend the direction of the game within the influence of the forums. If FD have a direction they are taking ED and we don't like it do you think they are seriously going to making such drastic changes. I can't see this happening. The game will get it's updates and time will progress but it will remain a grind. To start again with a whole new game dynamic would only come through a sequel which I doubt would happen. Not at least for another 30 years.
 
Once he gets to the vision of what ED was intended to be (and after extensive minutes long explanations of terminology and what he means by them) , it all be comes clear just how short of that vision PowerPlay falls, and in fact is headed in the opposite direction. Very interesting, a lot of thought put into that - I'm a beta backer, so not as invested, but it does highlight how much of my time (generally restricted to about two hours a night max) IS spent on time-sinks. Grinding I'm OK with, to a certain extent ... but the game should be moving away from Cr/hr discussions. For all that, I'm still playing - did the minimum to go up a rank in a chosen power, but I'm not enthused about it, and have gone back to doing whatever I feel like (an hour of trading, and hour of killing, generally).
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uKD1ap5hsI
EDIT: Erimus just posted the same video above...

The point I am making, is that the game - Powerplay as it currently stands - is not the game Frontier and David Braben spoke about as recently as EGX last year. That is a factual statement, and not a matter of opinion. However the game still has time to change and head in the direction that was promised.

As King5ton posted above, the game described in this video, is the game I backed...but it isn't the game I got. I merely made my video to address that fact. :)

It is a factual statement but your interpretation is significantly wrong in a few aspects I am afraid. The video actually addresses quite a lot of what we have today in Powerplay.

Watch that video atentively from min 3:05 again. Or from 4:55. That is precisely how Powerplay works. Powerplay is admittedly even much more complicated than those simple statements. DB was already outlining the "aggregated population on both sides deciding outcomes" principles of the Powerplay system early on. I d say he has delivered precisely that, and more, on that front with Powerplay.

With regards to the El Presidente mission though, fully agree, looking forward to those kind of missions and context.

I also look forward to further integration between PP and the actual background simulation. I.e. Command Capital being a direct yield from locla systems economy, population, security level etc all, aspects that can be already directly influenced and played by commanders.
 
Last edited:
OP, totally with you. Thank you for taking the time to put together this video, and elaborate your points. I think it is for the best, and tips for a better direction.
 
I have found the answer to everything I don't like about PP.

Don't align with a power (then you don't have the majority% of the players attacking you).
Ignore it like it wasn't there and just carry on as before.

Sorted!
 
Unfortunately for the us players you can only slightly bend the direction of the game within the influence of the forums. If FD have a direction they are taking ED and we don't like it do you think they are seriously going to making such drastic changes. I can't see this happening. The game will get it's updates and time will progress but it will remain a grind. To start again with a whole new game dynamic would only come through a sequel which I doubt would happen. Not at least for another 30 years.


The thing is, if the game has diverged so much from the original plan, why did it happen? One thing I liked about ED development was that they were going to do things very logically in manageable stages, as opposed to throwing everything out there in a rush to fill out the game with content. We were told 'there is a plan', and the devs seemed very confident in it. There's a chance that what we see now and what is actually planned might just be two very different experiences... that's atleast the optimistic view. Each of these systems ingame now could be early passes at what is to come (with combat being the most developed module in the game so far, imo). This view might also just be really naive. From a customer position, there's no way of telling until and unless Frontier decides to give out more information on the long term development, which is totally upto them. So, we wait and see.

I'll be disappointed if the game doesn't live up to what was described pre release. I didn't help kickstart ED but I shelled out for the beta and the expansions- it's probably the most expensive game I've ever bought. Not sure how many hours I've put in but it's not a crazy amount. For me it's not about that- it's about wanting to see ED realise it's potential, and wanting to play something really cool and interesting. I've definitely shelved ED for now. This PP talk of farming merits is a huge turn off. These aren't stories, it's not 'blazing your own trail', it's just monotonous, mediocre game design. At the moment.
 
Last edited:
I'm all for emergent play, but the key to that system is balance with auto-correction. Making sure there is no ENRON style manipulation in the markets has to be central to any design or we'll be asked to pay 3,000,000,000 credits a ton for fuel.

Players should be able to affect the game world, but within limits. When those parameters are violated there should be a correcting response.

I said this on Obsidian's YouTube comments. NPC's can be that balance. In a dynamic world:

Scenario 1: A player group or aligned faction blockades a station to starve it. Food prices skyrocket and then the same blockading players ship in food to take advantage of the artificially high demand to make $$$.
NPC's traders could smuggle in food to depress the prices to a reasonable level. The blockade players will make money, but not billions.

Scenario 2: A mining player Wing of four T-9's full of Osmium is taken to a market and sold. Osmium prices in that system and surrounding stars will need to drop dramatically as the NPC market has just been saturated.

Scenario 3: As a bounty grows, interest in that player should increase. NPC bounty hunters (and eventually Wings of them) should be interdicting like wasps around a bear.

Without checks and balances a few will manipulate the system and potentially ruin it for the rest. That is not to say that there won't be disappointment at the best of times as a dynamic world will go places that are completely unforeseen, but that's all part and parcel.

Be warned though. If you are complaining about a 50 Cr/ton loss on a trade route now, you'd best gird yourself for much larger price swings. Multiple runs on one route carrying the same cargo will decrease the price over time.
 
The thing is, if the game has diverged so much from the original plan, why did it happen? One thing I liked about ED development was that they were going to do things very logically in manageable stages, as opposed to throwing everything out there in a rush to fill out the game with content. We were told 'there is a plan', and the devs seemed very confident in it. There's a chance that what we see now and what is actually planned might just be two very different experiences... that's atleast the optimistic view. Each of these systems ingame now could be early passes at what is to come (with combat being the most developed module in the game so far, imo). This view might also just be really naive. From a customer position, there's no way of telling until and unless Frontier decides to give out more information on the long term development, which is totally upto them. So, we wait and see.

I'll be disappointed if the game doesn't live up to what was described pre release. I didn't help kickstart ED but I shelled out for the beta and the expansions- it's probably the most expensive game I've ever bought. Not sure how many hours I've put in but it's not a crazy amount. For me it's not about that- it's about wanting to see ED realise it's potential, and wanting to play something really cool and interesting. I've definitely shelved ED for now. This PP talk of farming merits is a huge turn off. These aren't stories, it's not 'blazing your own trail', it's just monotonous, mediocre game design. At the moment.


I'm not white knighting here. FDev is creating a game of their own design and definition. I see no difference in what was advertised prior to release and currently. What I do see, is people that let their expectations color their opinions as to what should be expected. There is no divergence. We are getting the game that was advertised.

I have shown that almost everything that was promised in at least one video, has already been added to the game. Yes, it's a very basic implementation, but it is still implemented...and could be claimed so by marketing. I am hoping for the same that everyone else is...more depth, better missions, etc. However, I also realize this might be all we are getting. Gloss and polish over the game we already have, with minor variations and manipulations of the current game play. There really are only two responses if this is the case. Play or not play. As in any other game. I make my choice every day I hit the play button...or do not hit the play button. Everyone has the same choices to make.
 
Last edited:
<Snip>
People say they want a large open world, but no one wants to travel more than 200 Ls to a station, some dont want SC at all, just jump from station to station, the SC drop in was moved from 20 km to 9.5 and even that was described by someone on this forum as literally "the worst torture ever" because it takes 40 seconds.

<Snip>

Bounty Hunters want one zone they can sit in endlessly shooting ships (endless because this dynamics living universe would not react to hundreds of pirates being slaughtered for hours on end in one place, nope, always more Elite Anacondas with fat bounties just sitting on the bench waiting for their number to be called), no one wants to get back to base to reload or turn in vouchers, or hunt in different zones or SC or Signal sources or take missions, nope not good for you Cr/HR and if the traders are about CR/HR so are we,.

<Snip>

Worse for Combat pilots, they face the greater danger, generally due to one eye being on the target, whilst the other eye is looking at the traders, counting their CR and thee Traders CRs and say "but I want what he has, it is so unfair" because you know millions of credits an hour now is not enough. No mention of fun other that that brass ring of keeping up with the Trader Cr/Hr, cos equity, or is it equality, balancing or fairness or everyone is the same yay!

<Snip>

I'm an advocate of the mini-hyperjump from star to planet to cut down on wasted time Supercruising just to get from A to B. However, I only want that as an extra option, but that doesn't mean I want the ability to Supercruise instead, like we do now, to go away. Think of it like this:

In other openworld games, I can walk from A to B, or I might be able to drive, sail, fly, ride a horse or even swim... etc., if I choose to depending on the environment. Each one differs in the rate and way you can experience the journey, but you still arrive at the same point.

Supercruise has its place, and I wpuldn't want to be without its ability to explore, or visit small points of interest that cannot be locked onto by the FSD; or, indeed, if you really like the process, to visit any and all objects, large or small, as we do now. However, having the extra option to also jump from a star to planet, or from planet to planet, won't kill the game for those that don't want to do it. But it will make the game better for those that do need it to economise gameplay time.

No SC is NEVER going to happen. Anyone pushing for 'mini-jumps' or anything else that replaces or runs alongside SC is going to be dissappointed, I'm afraid. It doesn't take much to realise why either. There is currently a mechanic which allows players and NPCs to pull others out of SC in order to pirate them. Do it decently and the player who has been interdicted will drop some of their cargo and be on their merry way. How is that going to be possible when you drop into a system and [Blip] you're at the station you wanted to get to. FD have always stated that piracy is a valid playstyle choice, so don't expect them to do anything that makes it virtually impossible - or that gives them major work to do to impliment it in a galaxy of instantaneous intra-system travel. Don't see it happening. Who would willingly use SC and risk getting pirated if they could use another method, such as a 'mini-hyperjump, and avoid the issue? Even if you are playing solo, there is a risk that you'll be interdicted by an NPC.
.
And when I am trading, of course I want the maximum Cr/Hr that I can get. I don't know about anyone else on this forum, but I trade as a means to improve my craft for when I am doing what I really want to do - Exploration. I don't give a [Expletive Deleted] that someone else is earning more than me, just so long as I am happy with what I am earning. After all, anyone who doesn't think trading is a grind just hasn't done enough of it. (And I actually kinda like trading) [Fill cargo hold with commodity 'A' at station 1, fly to station 2 and sell it, fill cargo hold with commodity 'B', return to station 1 and sell it, rinse and repeat Ad Nausium] is one of the most grindy things in the game. FD ought to give us "Eddie Stobart" paintjobs when we get to Elite ranking in trading as that's all we're doing.
.
As a Non-Combat Pilot, trading is the best way I have of getting that better Fuel Scoop I want, the more efficient power generator, the better thrusters, etc. so when the choice is "A. Keep exploring in a vessel I am not happy with until my exploration pay-out will allow me to upgrade, B. Transfer over to a trading vessel and have those upgrades much faster, or C. Try combat and (probably) lose money when I keep getting my clock cleaned", well, I'm going to chose 'B' then, am I not. But it is still time away from what I want to be doing in the game, and therefore I will want to minimise it.
.
How would you feel if suddenly FD announced that you would no longer get bounty vouchers for combat and that to upgrade your ship, you would be forced into trading to make some profit. Wouldn't YOU want to make that money as fast as possible so YOU could get back to what YOU wanted to do in the game?
 
I'm not white knighting here. FDev is creating a game of their own design and definition. I see no difference in what was advertised prior to release and currently. What I do see, is people that let their expectations color their opinions as to what should be expected. There is no divergence. We are getting the game that was advertised.

I have shown that almost everything that was promised in at least one video, has already been added to the game. Yes, it's a very basic implementation, but it is still implemented...and could be claimed so by marketing. I am hoping for the same that everyone else is...more depth, better missions, etc. However, I also realize this might be all we are getting. Gloss and polish over the game we already have, with minor variations and manipulations of the current game play. There really are only two responses if this is the case. Play or not play. As in any other game. I make my choice every day I hit the play button...or do not hit the play button. Everyone has the same choices to make.

Hi Roybe- not sure which post you're referring to (didn't see any other posts by you in this thread atleast). I started a topic the other day reviewing pre-release comments by DB in a PC Gamer article about how ED was going to work. I've tried to fit those comments within the current state of the game and to me there's a pretty big mismatch.

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=155022&p=2371910#post2371910

Of course I understand that not everything works out the way you want, but DB's descriptions and what we're playing now almost feel like two different games to me. Your milieage may vary of course and I encourage you to make your case in that thread if you feel like it.

And yeah, I've made my choice for the moment- I'm also a patient guy, and I'm also a busy guy, which helps! I shouldn't be playing games at the moment anyway. (I shouldn't even be on this forum :D )
 
Last edited:
I'm not white knighting here. FDev is creating a game of their own design and definition. I see no difference in what was advertised prior to release and currently. What I do see, is people that let their expectations color their opinions as to what should be expected. There is no divergence. We are getting the game that was advertised.

I have shown that almost everything that was promised in at least one video, has already been added to the game. Yes, it's a very basic implementation, but it is still implemented...and could be claimed so by marketing. I am hoping for the same that everyone else is...more depth, better missions, etc. However, I also realize this might be all we are getting. Gloss and polish over the game we already have, with minor variations and manipulations of the current game play. There really are only two responses if this is the case. Play or not play. As in any other game. I make my choice every day I hit the play button...or do not hit the play button. Everyone has the same choices to make.

I understand what you are saying. But I don't see any of the things I spoke about in my video in Elite currently. I can't sell discovery data to competing factions and get a bounty on my head. Outposts don't get constructed based on player and NPC activity. There are no in-world missions being generated, by this I mean I can't discover a ship wreck that triggers a mission. There are no missions that pit players directly against each other. These things are not false expectations, they were explicitly talked about by David Braben and Frontier on multiple occasions. But I do still feel those things may come with time.

We also have the choice to speak our minds about the matter. :p
 
Last edited:
It is a factual statement but your interpretation is significantly wrong in a few aspects I am afraid. The video actually addresses quite a lot of what we have today in Powerplay.

Watch that video atentively from min 3:05 again. Or from 4:55. That is precisely how Powerplay works. Powerplay is admittedly even much more complicated than those simple statements. DB was already outlining the "aggregated population on both sides deciding outcomes" principles of the Powerplay system early on. I d say he has delivered precisely that, and more, on that front with Powerplay.

With regards to the El Presidente mission though, fully agree, looking forward to those kind of missions and context.

I also look forward to further integration between PP and the actual background simulation. I.e. Command Capital being a direct yield from locla systems economy, population, security level etc all, aspects that can be already directly influenced and played by commanders.

My comment about a factual statement are refering to the things David Braben spoke about at EGX last year. Which was selling exploration data to competing factions, along with the consequences of that. It is a fact that is not in the game.

The Kick starter video I quote is talked about in a separate paragraph, and I did not mean to imply my "factual" comment also applied to that.
 
Last edited:
OH my god, what an amazingly painful video.

Don't get me wrong, I love his Rift vids, but this is mindlessly dull. The first 10 mins is just him explaining what he thinks a grind is.
 
@ Bobbydylan

I agree. We are talkig about a game. there is no need to write a book about what "grind" is. Even though he has good arguments it is painfull to watch becuase he is not getting to the point.
 
Although I like PP for what it is I do agree with Obsidian Ant that it would be wonderful if much more emergent gameplay was introduced. There are already signs of that outside of PP. I have had more diverse and surprising encounters with enemies than I had before 1.3 for example, Obsidian Ant's suggestions sound very good to me. I hope we will eventually get that kind of dynamic gameplay.

I believe PP was fundamentally designed to introduce a cool expandable political system that gives an identity to otherwise faceless star systems and perhaps even more importantly to give a new framework for direct and indirect player interaction. At this PP does a good job, but it needs some tweaking and refinement.
 
Last edited:
OH my god, what an amazingly painful video.

Don't get me wrong, I love his Rift vids, but this is mindlessly dull. The first 10 mins is just him explaining what he thinks a grind is.

I've found that no matter how clearly one tries to explain a point of view, a pedantic will come out from underneath their rock and cherry pick something as irrelevant, or just plain wrong, based on their own point of view, and they'll then go on to derail or dismiss the rest of the message without even understanding the real crux of the matter. So yeah, those first 10 minutes were pretty basic to those who already know what a grind is, like you, but nevertheless still important. So I understand why he went at some length to explain where he's coming from.

What did you think of the rest of the video?
 

Tar Stone

Banned
I watched Obsidian Ant's video last night, then listened to the latest Lave Radio podcast, in bed, naked, in which Grant gives a brilliant run down of Powerplay and all the great things about it.

Both Obsidian Ant and GrantfromLaveRadio are right, I agree with both of them. I'm enjoying Powerplay a lot - it's right up my street - and as OA and Grant both point out, it does add life to the galaxy.

The question remains - what happened to all the stuff David Braben was talking about? Is Powerplay instead of, or a stepping stone to? I'm not sure I agree that Powerplay means all that emergent stuff CANNOT happen, but it doesn't look obviously like a stepping stone either?

I'm happy with Powerplay, I'm enjoying it and will play until I'm not enjoying it.

But I am convinced that once 1.0 dropped Frontier gave themselves a clean slate and no longer feel obligated to backers.
 
Back
Top Bottom