Modes The Solo vs Open vs Groups Thread - Part the Second [Now With Added Platforms].

[jgm]

If players on other platforms were going to be able to be encountered in-game then I would expect that the announcement would have made more of that rather than just stating that we will all affect the same overarching narrative and galaxy state.

.... in which case there will be also players in Open that you will never (for networking reasons, geography, time-zone, etc.) that you will never be able to counter.

But *someone* could. Again, possible Vs. impossible.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But *someone* could. Again, possible Vs. impossible.

You seem to be suggesting that the only way to counter opposition is to destroy it.

 

[ianw]

I can't source it but I have a recollection of DB saying he would like everyone (from the different platforms) to be able play in the same instances - but that it wasn't possible. They could only share the background sim.

Don't know whether its a technical limitation or something else but that's how I recall it.

ETA - there is actually something from Ed in the Xbox thread saying they are "assessing the viability" - can't see anything from DB confirming what I said above..

 

[SteveLaw]

To reiterate: I couldn't care less about CGs or any other aspect of play except Powerplay because Powerplay has been built with directly competitive play in mind. FD could "fix" powerplay or "fix" solo, but they should think about doing something because the current situation is the worst of all worlds.

I've never seen a quote from FD that states that they've definitely built Power Play with directly competitive play in mind. Could you point it out to me?

 

[Robert Maynard]

I've never seen a quote from FD that states that they've definitely built Power Play with directly competitive play in mind. Could you point it out to me?

If Powerplay had been intended to be purely competitive then I would expect that it would not allow players in Solo or Private Groups to engage in it.

 

[jgm]

I've never seen a quote from FD that states that they've definitely built Power Play with directly competitive play in mind. Could you point it out to me?

It's baked in to the rules. Fortification Vs. Undermining.

 

[SteveLaw]

If Powerplay had been intended to be purely competitive then I would expect that it would not allow players in Solo or Private Groups to engage in it.

Competitive is one thing (although they took out the competitive ladder aspect following Beta feedback). Directly competitive is a different thing entirely. I don't see any part of PP that looks to be designed for direct PvP competition. Indirect, sure, we all share the same universe, but not direct competition. Its possible, but it's not part of the design.

- - - Updated - - -

It's baked in to the rules. Fortification Vs. Undermining.

Quote please.

Edit: All I can find is "A system that is both fortified and undermined at the end of a cycle is counted as neither – each state cancels out the other." If you fortify a system it can't be undermined. From any mode.

 

[jgm]

You seem to be suggesting that the only way to counter opposition is to destroy it.

I'm not going to bother quoting myself, but further up the thread I explained the Powerplay rules for fortification and undermining. The only way to stop an opposing power from undermining your fortified control system is to halt their activities. Scare them off, convince them that they're better off defecting to your side, blowing them in to small irregular-shaped pieces, whatever. But yes there is no possible counter to someone attempting to undermine a fortified control system other than direct interaction with said players.

 

[Robert Maynard]

It's baked in to the rules. Fortification Vs. Undermining.

So the actions of players in Solo and Private Groups can be opposed, regardless of game mode - by doing the opposite of what they are doing....

 

[SteveLaw]

The only way to stop an opposing power from undermining your fortified control system is to halt their activities.

Not true. Or at least not designed that way. If a fortified system can still be undermined then you should submit a bug report.

A system that is both fortified and undermined at the end of a cycle is counted as neither – each state cancels out the other.

 

[jgm]

Not true. Or at least not designed that way. If a fortified system can still be undermined then you should submit a bug report.

Please read the Powerplay manual before continuing to talk about it in this thread. It is designed that way, it isn't a bug.

 

[SteveLaw]

Please read the Powerplay manual before continuing to talk about it in this thread. It is designed that way, it isn't a bug.

I quoted the manual above. Twice.

 

[jgm]

I quoted the manual above. Twice.

Then you are confusing current state with end-of-cycle state.

Cycle starts Thursday. Our power fortifies a control system on Friday. The system is now fortified. For this we get nothing, as the cycle has yet to complete.

Thursday rolls around. Our end-of-cycle state for the power is 'Fortified' so we don't spend any upkeep CC. Yay.

Next cycle starts. Our power does their Friday fortification. The system is now fortified. Again, we get nothing at this point.

Another power wakes up on Monday and decides to undermine the fortified control system.

Come the next end-of-cycle our fortification has been neutralised and we have to pay upkeep CC. Boo.

The point is very simply that in the second week there is *nothing* that we can do to stop the undermining process if it happens in solo. We lose the CC that we could have used for expansion.

 

[SteveLaw]

Then you are confusing current state with end-of-cycle state.

Cycle starts Thursday. Our power fortifies a control system on Friday. The system is now fortified. For this we get nothing, as the cycle has yet to complete.

Thursday rolls around. Our end-of-cycle state for the power is 'Fortified' so we don't spend any upkeep CC. Yay.

Next cycle starts. Our power does their Friday fortification. The system is now fortified. Again, we get nothing at this point.

Another power wakes up on Monday and decides to undermine the fortified control system.

Come the next end-of-cycle our fortification has been neutralised and we have to pay upkeep CC. Boo.

The point is very simply that in the second week there is *nothing* that we can do to stop the undermining process if it happens in open. We lose the CC that we could have used for expansion.

"This effect only lasts for a single cycle change; once the next cycle begins all fortification is removed and must be re-applied to retain the benefit." You must fortify each cycle or you leave the system open to undermining.

A successful Fortify can't be "neutralised". It cancels out a successful Undermine. Which is it's purpose - Or part of it's purpose at least.

 

[jgm]

"This effect only lasts for a single cycle change; once the next cycle begins all fortification is removed and must be re-applied to retain the benefit." You must fortify each cycle or you leave the system open to undermining.

A successful Fortify can't be "neutralised". It cancels out a successful Undermine. Which is it's purpose - Or part of it's purpose at least.

It's not calculated until the end of the cycle. Note "lasts for a single cycle change".

A control system can be fortified on Friday and undermined on Saturday, in which case at the end of the cycle it is neutral.

 

[Roybe]

Then you are confusing current state with end-of-cycle state.

Cycle starts Thursday. Our power fortifies a control system on Friday. The system is now fortified. For this we get nothing, as the cycle has yet to complete.

Thursday rolls around. Our end-of-cycle state for the power is 'Fortified' so we don't spend any upkeep CC. Yay.

Next cycle starts. Our power does their Friday fortification. The system is now fortified. Again, we get nothing at this point.

Another power wakes up on Monday and decides to undermine the fortified control system.

Come the next end-of-cycle our fortification has been neutralised and we have to pay upkeep CC. Boo.

The point is very simply that in the second week there is *nothing* that we can do to stop the undermining process if it happens in solo. We lose the CC that we could have used for expansion.

How would this change if everything would be done in Open?

 

[Robert Maynard]

How would this change if everything would be done in Open?

I expect that the 24/7 all-instance blockade would attempt to dissuade the Underminers....

 

[jgm]

How would this change if everything would be done in Open?

You would be able to stop ships from another power being able to deliver their supplies (or whatever their particular undermining tactic was).

- - - Updated - - -

I expect that the 24/7 all-instance blockade would attempt to dissuade the Underminers....

Well done for coming back with the sarcastic response rather than responding to the post where I tried to explain what the problem is and why it's a problem.

 

[SteveLaw]

It's not calculated until the end of the cycle. Note "lasts for a single cycle change".

A control system can be fortified on Friday and undermined on Saturday, in which case at the end of the cycle it is neutral.

Yes, it's neutral. The Fortify cancelled out the Undermine. Without the Fortify you'd be paying more upkeep. So it was partly successful.

So you are worrying about players from other powers undermining in Solo? What about players from your Power Fortifying in Solo? Or players from your Power undermining another in Solo. It all balances out.

You want to stop everyone else from Undermining your system completely? Tough. The game wasn't designed like that. It was NOT designed for players to oppose other players via combat. They do it through indirect actions. You seem to have misunderstood the focus of the game. Actions have counter actions. You oppose actions with their counter action, not by blocking the action in the first place.

The modes do not open a loophole or a flaw, they expose the game as something other than you are hoping for. That's all. (It works better if you think of it as designed for Solo rather than designed for Open, then it makes sense. Sorry about that.)

 

[jgm]

Yes, it's neutral. The Fortify cancelled out the Undermine. Without the Fortify you'd be paying more upkeep.

So you are worrying about players from other powers undermining in Solo? What about although players from your Power Fortifying in Solo?

Yes, other powers could attempt to stop us from fortifying our control systems.

You want to stop everyone else from Undermining your system completely?

I want there to be a way to stop it, yes.

Tough. The game wasn't designed like that.

It wasn't designed with Powerplay in mind, either.

Actions have counter actions. You oppose actions with their counter action, not by blocking the action in the first place.

Which leaves you totally at the whim of the other powers as to if you gain the CC bonus at the end of the cycle or not, with no ability whatsoever for your own power to influence it.

For you it appears that this last bit is fine. For me, who has spent the last week looking at Powerplay and considering how it will play out beyond the first few turns, I think it will result in Powerplay being abandoned by players in their droves once the initial gold rush period is over and the only way to get ahead will be to grind harder than the next guy, in a concerted fashion, week in week out.

I've said my piece and tried to explain where I believe the issue lies. I'm done here.