Obsidian Ant's "Powerplay Rant"

[emacinnes]

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.

The idea is there, the strategic level is about right, but it all feels so inconsequential right now that it feels like it doesn't deliver on the video, even though, technically, at 10,000ft up, it, mostly, does.

It was not built on top of what was there, when really, I would have expected it to, to be integrated. Given the launch of Community Goals earlier and the announcement of PP, it was easy to see how these two could have sat together nicely, could have linked to the minor factions, and that's part of the frustration here.

The video talks about a famine. How do I see "famine" anywhere in the game, except buried deep somewhere in the galaxy map at the planetary level in an info page. There's no visible indication of that, anywhere. There's no visible sense of any of this, anywhere in the game. There's no big station entrance advert for "GlieseAid 3301", or power cuts on the station, or a "Death to the Gold Miners of HS 6456" graffiti in the station docking bay. Famine-related missions in the bulletin board aren't colored differently, listed as Urgent! and listed at the top, like paid ads in google. What about NPC's coming up to me directly in flight and asking for donations for food, which I can then donate to them. Powerplay boils all that good sounding stuff down to a bar graph race, doesn't reflect these issues in the NPCs or the stations, or the system. There isn't even something meta in the ship, like a sad bobblehead, or an angry bobblehead, or a change of ship internal lighting to reflect a local mood change. (If there is, apologies, but it ain't strong enough for me to tell, everything just stays looking orange, not that I'm saying the orange is bad, but if there's a lighting mood change, the orange is overwhelming it).

The cost of changing sides in PP is minimal/non existent so it's all inconsequential. Pledge, don't pledge, it's all instant, with zero practical consequences, I don't have to work for either of these. It takes some amount of time, effort and energy to Ally up to a minor faction, yet I can just pledge to a power and that's me, good to go. That's weird, and that's a disconnect. I have to be openly hostile to a minor faction to become an enemy, and it takes some amount of effort to undo my good reputation, yet I can just abandon a power ad hoc, and I don't care about any reputation with a power, I can go back any time and just start shoveling in vouchers again. Add to that, instead of simply fleshing out the CG mechanic, it strips it of the tiers, which worked well as a collective "fight", the top 10% scrambled to stay on top, while the rest were perfectly happy at 25% or 40%, but the better everyone did overall, the better the result, and that then gets reset to square 1 for the next one. Instead of that, it puts in a time-abusive rank system that gives everyone tunnel vision on doing the same undermining over and over, rather than wanting to try different things and engage with the strategy.

It would almost be better to slow it down a bit, and not always have expansions, always have undermining, always have fortifications on the go, remove the time pressure on the merits, abstract the bar graphs to be less precise, so that it seems like less of a numbers game, and let people take some time to think about what's next, instead of the mad rush for the 50,000,000 per week, and give people career specific tasks in each section, and not just "bounty hunters do undermining, which is only ever infinite-interdictions".

 

[cherbert]

All of this teeth gnashing and we haven't even completed once weekly cycle.

Yes we have and they couldn't even get that right.

- - - Updated - - -

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

This is why I lost faith in them. Powerplay is clearly a springboard to making money.

1000 Merit topup anybody?

 

[Cradle2Grave]

What's the point of PP? The purpose?

 

[Iskariot]

What's the point of PP? The purpose?

PP is great at introducing a cool expandable political system that gives an identity to otherwise faceless star systems and perhaps even more importantly it gives a framework for direct and indirect player interaction.
As Obsidian Ant said PP adds quite a bit of new dimensions to the game; it brings the Galaxy to life, it puts characters in context to the galaxy, it gives players, who want that, direction in what to do.

I also believe PP is not yet finished. FD will listen to our input and tweak stuff if it fits in with their development goals.
So far PP is a very positive experience for me and I expect more to be added.

From what I gathered from his video Obsidian Ant is not so much disappointed with what PP does, because it is good at what it seems to be designed for, but he would have liked to see much more interesting emergent and dynamic gameplay to be a part of it. I agree with him that in this respect ED is still lacking, but perhaps this subject should have been treated as separate from PP. PP was not intended to introduce more emergent gameplay. Emergent gameplay is a much more fundamental game mechanic.

 

[dannysquid]

What's the point of PP? The purpose?

Well... the politics of the galaxy are now shaped by the players.

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?

My view is that Powerplay shouldn't be visible to the player, it should all be under the hood, with the politics emerging in missions and conversations with NPCs. Although I admire the mechanics of it, it just feels WRONG for a game that's supposedly being experienced first-person by the player. I'm a fan and supporter of the game, but this is the first element they've introduced that I flat-out dislike.

 

[Tar Stone]

From what I gathered from his video Obsidian Ant is not so much disappointed with what PP does, because it is good at what it seems to be designed for, but he would have liked to see much more interesting emergent and dynamic gameplay to be a part of it. I agree with him that in this respect ED is still lacking, but perhaps this subject should have been seen as separate from PP.

I think the point OA made at the very end of that video is that PP means that we won't see the emergent stuff, as PP is taking the game fundamentally in a different direction.

I'm not sure I agree with that because PP is a layer over the top of all the minor faction/BB mission stuff, and this layered approach might be the way the emergent stuff that DB spoke about at length will finally appear.

- - - Updated - - -

My view is that Powerplay shouldn't be visible to the player, it should all be under the hood, with the politics emerging in missions and conversations with NPCs. Although I admire the mechanics of it, it just feels WRONG for a game that's supposedly being experienced first-person by the player. I'm a fan and supporter of the game, but this is the first element they've introduced that I flat-out dislike.

That's actually a really good point. I respect this reason for disliking PP.

 

[Winterwalker]

My view is that Powerplay shouldn't be visible to the player, it should all be under the hood, with the politics emerging in missions and conversations with NPCs. Although I admire the mechanics of it, it just feels WRONG for a game that's supposedly being experienced first-person by the player. I'm a fan and supporter of the game, but this is the first element they've introduced that I flat-out dislike.

I thought this when I first saw PP but am coming around to the idea that what FD have added is a second level interaction with political factions, whoever they might be for now, and however that interaction may be at present.

Only two direct activities exist at the moment but it is very early days.

At the moment all the power pages are basically similar to each other, but the architecture makes it possible to customise each power's page, to closer align with their style ..

In future I'm sure we'd all like to see more variation in the power related missions, a bleed from those into the regular bulletin boards, direct invitation to join a power, bribery to get you to leave yours and join theirs and etc etc. Although obv. not in version number one .. the architecture makes that kind of thing possible.

 

[Iskariot]

I think the point OA made at the very end of that video is that PP means that we won't see the emergent stuff, as PP is taking the game fundamentally in a different direction.

I'm not sure I agree with that because PP is a layer over the top of all the minor faction/BB mission stuff, and this layered approach might be the way the emergent stuff that DB spoke about at length will finally appear.

Your second point is spot on. PP itself has nothing to do with the emergent gameplay mechanism in the game. They are separate entities. PP can be a vehicle for emergent gameplay too, but the mechanisms need to be in the game first to be able to make use of it..

 

[emacinnes]

My view is that Powerplay shouldn't be visible to the player, it should all be under the hood, with the politics emerging in missions and conversations with NPCs. Although I admire the mechanics of it, it just feels WRONG for a game that's supposedly being experienced first-person by the player. I'm a fan and supporter of the game, but this is the first element they've introduced that I flat-out dislike.

I fully agree with this. The mechanics need to be abstracted to maintain the illusion of fictional character action, and not a pure stats race. Does Arissa send a note of thanks to any of her underminers if it's successful, does she scold people when it fails, or air her disappointment, or express her interest in a new system. Are we getting messages from her that something is failing and needs urgent attention, stuff that hints at progress, at success, without saying "well here's the bar chart, here's the list of systems, here's the total, voucher away".

 

[Ekar]

My view is that Powerplay shouldn't be visible to the player, it should all be under the hood, with the politics emerging in missions and conversations with NPCs. Although I admire the mechanics of it, it just feels WRONG for a game that's supposedly being experienced first-person by the player. I'm a fan and supporter of the game, but this is the first element they've introduced that I flat-out dislike.

Totally agree, but I also said the same thing about Community Goals. PP and CG are kinda the same in that everything is laid out in a rules based fashion, and that really undermines the first person feeling by showing a top down perspective over everything, just like you're hovering over a boardgame. That you can't even read the propaganda material you're hauling for various Powers highlights for me the problem of this approach- it's not about your experience of fighting for your Powers cause. Again this could simply be down to first iterations of the design and a desire to give players some transparency in the mechanics involved, and over time PP can be massaged into a richer experience of how it all works.

Hope the devs never lose focus of '1 man(woman), 1 ship' and emphasising the world over the game. 'Rich Experience' is still the keyword for me.

 

[Badd Mongo]

My main gripe with PP so far is the decision by FD to make firing on enemy faction members when outside of your own factions space results in you getting bountied.

What exactly is the point of a faction war where firing on the enemy (unless they are in your home factions space) is considered a criminal offense? Why must the law get involved?

Worse still if you go and enter an opposing factions space, not only can you not shoot at the opposing faction without becoming a criminal, but they can try and kill you at any time they choose without penalty. And even if they open fire on you first you cannot defend yourself from attack without becoming bountied if you fire back. Quite ridiculous when you have different factions which belong to the same side, ie the 4 in Empire alone whose zones of control are intertwined with each other, which means attempting to travel anywhere within Empire will most likely result in getting bountied repeatedly by your own faction from being forced to defend yourself from opposing power Cmdrs and interdicting NPCs. I also think this game mechanic is going to start getting abused to death by griefers to force large bounties on opposing players before too long.

 

[Kayweg]

Sorry, i couldn't finish watching that.
I may even agree with him on many things, but that was just too long winded, in parts repetitive and downright dull.
His analytic mind may be alright, his presentation skills however are lacking severely.
Too little content spread over too much space.....sound familiar ?
Give me Jim Sterling, Total Biscuit or Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw any day.

 

[steevaavoo]

I've hit that wall, finally. I've not really played this week and I've started playing dota with friends. It's the perfect game for casual players as each game lasts up to an hour or so. And it's excellent pvp.

I'll keep an eye on this game and I'll probably play it again. But only once there's something truly new to do.

1.3 was an excellent update and the game has improved a lot. But it hasn't yet expanded on the core activities nearly enough. So this is a good time to put it down.

I will probably log into Ydiss once in a while (he's still exploring) to get my fix.

Hopefully, we'll get more interesting activities soon.

Sorry to to see you going Ydiss. I hope you stick around on the forums - I enjoy your posts and perspective.

I also sincerely hope they do something to bring you back and refresh your enthusiasm. And mine frankly...

Respect.

 

[pdizzle]

Is there a TL;DR for that video? I'm not watching 38 mins of ranting.

 

[Bazorlag]

Is there a TL;DR for that video? I'm not watching 38 mins of ranting.

Powerplay is more slanted towards achievement/meter gaming than emergent gameplay.
Powerplay has build-in timesinks that do not appeal to him (merit decay and such).

 

[pdizzle]

Powerplay is more slanted towards achievement/meter gaming than emergent gameplay.
Powerplay has build-in timesinks that do not appeal to him (merit decay and such).

He should be in politics if he can make that into 38 mins...

 

[Glenn Ross]

My view is that Powerplay shouldn't be visible to the player, it should all be under the hood, with the politics emerging in missions and conversations with NPCs. Although I admire the mechanics of it, it just feels WRONG for a game that's supposedly being experienced first-person by the player. I'm a fan and supporter of the game, but this is the first element they've introduced that I flat-out dislike.

Quoted for Truth.

Emergent gameplay should have come out BEFORE PP. That way, actual missions like the CG search for the president's ship [Yes, I know that was pre-PP, bear with me] could have triggered a mission for anyone who found it, The more people found it and compleyed the mission they got from it, the greater the gain for that faction.

All of which should have been hidden from the general gamer. After all, who wouldn't have liked to have seen "President rescued" on Galnet and be able to think "I did that!" rather than "So we did actually manage to get the 250K repetitions that were required."? It should also be possible for combat rating - and bounty gained for an illegal kill - to be based on the DIFFERENCE between combat ranks. I.E. you take down a pirate 3 ranks above yours, you get X reward. Take down a pirate 4 ranks above yours, you get 2X. 5 ranks above, 4X. If you make an illegal kill on someone your own combat rank, you get Y bounty. 1 rank below, 2Y. 2 ranks, 4Y. 3 ranks, 8Y. That way, better combat pilots can get a boost up the ranks without affecting those of lesser abilities whilst at the same time curbing the tendancies of 'bully-boys' [and girls] to pick on new players.

And unfortunately, as primarily an explorer with some trading to improve my ship or buy a better one, I personally have zero interest in the politics anyway. The only difference I have seen first hand due to PP is the much better DC, and for that one improvemnt FD have bought my interest for a while longer. I hope they can continue to improve the experience for us all.

 

[Rankaze]

Yeah, like all rants, when I say everyone, I don't actually mean everyone, just you, and you, and you there down the back.
Nor do I mean things don't need adjusting to be viable, but surely the first aim of viability is fun and not "min/max Cr/Hr so I get the most or failing that, we all get the same, so no one gets more than me"

Once again, can't rep you yet... but you've touched on something that drives me crazy.

Bounty hunting is VASTLY more fun in 1.3 with the new missions and other changes, and all I hear is people complaining that they can't farm RES anymore.

Likewise, the constant complaining that picking up a bounty in one system has locked someone out of the game for 7 days.

There are 400 billion stars, and I don't know how many inhabited systems but it's a lot. Go somewhere else and do something!

I wince every time I see a thread title with " cr/hour " in it.

Screw making the fastest profit. Go have an adventure! The game is only a grind if you make it one.

 

[Sapient6]

So you can still blaze your own trail. What is the point of all these Powerplay threads really?

S

Powerplay is "the biggest update to Elite Dangerous!!!!!!"

That right there cements its eligibility for all of the critical review any particular player wants to send its way. Defending it with "you can skip it entirely" isn't really less critical than "the best part is I can skip it entirely". I mean, if that's your defense for Power Play then maybe the people who should have skipped it entirely are FDev.

 

[Tar Stone]

Polite request to stick to the points Obsidian Ant raised in the video, particularly whether you think Powerplay rules out the emergent gameplay that Obsidian Ant directly quotes from David Braben at last year's EGX.