The Powerplay discussion thread.

[Schmack]

Why does it matter that people play in open if their actions still affect the system in the same way? I'll admit I haven't read every post in this thread, probably should, the answer might be in there somewhere, but I don't get why anyone cares whether or not you have CMDR T9s in open. Sounds like asking the fish to swim near your trap. Nothing in it for the fish, just for your trap.

Does it give better immersion? Does it create a busier environment? Does it create a community environment at stations to see real players instead of NPCs? How does it benefit anyone who doesn't want to be there?

 

[Draxxen]

This



Also this.

..definately this.. o.0

- - - Updated - - -

While I wouldn't say that Power Play killed Elite: Dangerous for me, I will say that I like the game a lot less than I did v1.2 (which I really loved). If it went back to that, keeping the new ships of course, I would be very happy!

..but but..
..if you just ignore the power play part, that is excactly what you have.. right..?

 

[Schmack]

The two types of players that need to be encouraged to join open are traders and explorers.

1. Traders and explorers are not primarily interested in interaction with other players.
2. Traders have almost nothing to gain in open:
- most interaction will be negative
- there is much higher chance to lose progress
- combat is totally one sided and not fun for trader
- even if they "win" (run with cargo), they lose time
- even if they "win", they can be interdicted again and lose more time
- meaningful security or law is non existent (from trader PoV)
- even if they destroy pirate, progress loss for pirate is minimal - comparing to possible trader losses insignificant
3. Pirates want interaction with traders.
4. Griefers want interaction with traders.
5. Bounty hunters want interaction with pirates and griefers.

Penalizing Solo players by making traders&explorers grind more to unlock faction benefits will not make them seek player interaction.


What could be done:

1. Lower the "fee" for traders:
- different ship&cargo insurance basing on system security level
- different ship&cargo insurance for unarmed traders
- different ship&cargo insurance for clean players
- trading ship on PowerPlay missions could have insurance fully covered by the PP faction (some resource system that could add another layer to PP?)
- "non-lethal" weapons for pirates to disable the trader instead of having to cause damage
- killing clean/unafilliated players should be penalized - so less players will destroy traders&explorers
- hired AI for protection, security forces response
- make interdiction encounter longer but single event only

2. Lower the risk for explorers returning to civilized space:
- no scanned data loss on death?
- data delivery drones?

3. Improve PvP Bounty Hunting:
- add PvP mission system that influences matchmaking
- allow BH "wing beacon-like jump" to a trader attacked in the same system - and share part of the bounty with trader (!)
- advertise pirate location if spotted in high-security system
- collected bounty should be less than 100% of the insurance paid by the pirate (to protect against printing money) - pirate death could lower the bounty just by this amount

4. Improve the crime system:
- the space is big enough to ban pirates from stations where a bounty is set by a minor faction
- make the fines and bounties survive a ship destruction, just as trader's money loss "survives" ship destruction - lower the bounty by paid insurance only
- make the insurance more costly for pirates (e.g. 10%)
- make piracy more profitable if "done right"

5. Add separate layers without changing the Open/Solo balance:
- add new combat ranking like "Valor" you proposed, but make it an Open-only ELO-like rating
- automated "protect convoy" missions with matchmaking, allowing PvP players to play escort scenarios - with "destroy convoy" mission autogenerated for other side
- add additional PvP possibilities (CQC)

I like most of those ideas. I don't agree with sharing bounty money with traders. You're bailing out traders if you jump to their location to rescue them. Why would you pay them for that? If anything they should pay you. Same is true for NPC ships. If you protect an NPC ship being attacked by other NPC pirates, the NPC miner should reward you somehow, at least an acknowledgement that you helped them. It could just be as simple as a "thanks" and some rep increase for that faction.

Most of this game relies on dishonesty. Most people I know want to play honestly. By those to terms I don't mean player dishonesty, but the game requires you to kill otherwise innocent people, and to kill authority, and to steal and pilfer and slave trade and sell guns illegally. You can make money legally but you're moving Palladium/performance enhancers and basically nothing else. Why even have all the other stuff we just ignore or use for specific "needs" missions? Maybe you should be able to carry more meat than Palladium, so that you can still make a tidy profit hauling food as well as anything else, it should be balanced. If food is in great need but Palladium is so "oooh aaahh Palladium" rare, why do I find it everywhere? Who would ever haul meat when they could haul gold or other high profit materials? I don't get how the system ever stays in business.

Has nothing to do with open vs solo. The reason I don't play open is not even because of this game. It's because of my many years experience with online idiots who live to grief, hack, whatever... No thanks. I had my fill years ago.

 

[Hellhawk666]

You make a fair case, OP, and I can see how PP has been a negative from your perspective, however just as a dissenting voice I have to say that PP has greatly revived my previously flagging interest in the game.

 

[jpaulwilson1982]

I agree with incentivizing greater risk with greater reward, whether we're talking Powerplay or the Solo vs Open vs Groups stuff. The only problem is that any effort to reward higher risk is going to be seen by many as punishing those who do not interact with other players. I disagree with that notion (that reward for risk is punishment) but some folks simply aren't going to let you move beyond that. I applaud your excellently worded and organized post, and your ideas. But lots of folks simply aren't open to that risk vs reward concept. They will always call it out as punishment, unfortunately.

I'm giving this a +1
Not because I agree with anything, but because atak2 you are the first person out of the dreaded mega thread to actually try and come up with a well thought out and structured idea to try and improve the game in a way you think it needs improving.
So many just wander into the mega thread (as you've seen), spout a load of complaints, argue for a while and leave it. You at least are trying and I wish you all the best with this idea and the effort you are putting in.

Jockey.

I've actually seen some people try to offer ideas and compromises in that thread (myself included), thus atak2 is certainly not the first "to actually try and come up with a well thought out and structured idea to try and improve the game in a way [he] think it needs improving." Even the reasonable people leave that thread due to the unreasonable people who refuse to compromise. The unwillingness to even compromise is why I gave up on that thread.

I get the idea, and I applaud your efforts, but the idea still smacks of bribery. It still boils down to, "Here is a preferred mode and a bribe to play it. You can still play the other modes, but you won't be getting your daily bribe." Open should be populated by like-minded players: Players who get and share the appeal of playing in open. I know that you mean well, but trying to bribe the players who aren't already predisposed to playing in open just doesn't sit well with me.

Without getting into a vs thing, I think everyone should accept that there should be organic reasons to play in any mode. I play solo because I like single player games, and that's about as organic as it gets. I've seen scores of posts from MMO players, who are naturally drawn to the exact opposite experience than I would want.

IMHO, offering any reason outside of individual taste and playstyle would be the wrong way to go. In the long run, open players will be better served by being instanced with other players who also prefer open, than with the guy (or girl) who isn't really into the whole MMO scene, but just couldn't pass up the bribe.

And this post perfectly sums up why many folks in this forum will never budge on the idea of greater risk being rewarded. Thankfully Frontier is the one who will make the decision, because if it was based on the folks in the forum reaching a compromise, it simply would never happen or even be seriously considered.

 

[Jypson]

I wouldn't go as far as saying PP ruined the game; I've found it extremely optional. I agree that it changed the flavor of ED quite a bit, but if PP doesn't interest you it's pretty easy to avoid for the most part. What I do like about PP, is that it gives some players something to do if it interests them, and for those who don't, it at least gives the backdrop a little bit of color. I appreciate that certain regions have different priorities and ambitions and gives you another element to think about while traveling through different regions. As an RES fisherman, it kinda sucked to have to close up shop and move to another region; but then again, I'm actually traveling more and seeing more...so that's actually a plus in my book

 

[Senex VII]

Personally, I'm ignoring it. Or more accurately, I'm not participating. I'd like to ignore it, but it shouts too loud for that. :-/

I sometimes wonder whether it will still be here in 6 months time and, if so, what the participation rate will be.

And I do hope FD have automated the admin side of it; I'd hate to think they were spending good development dollars on its maintenance.

 

[DuQuesne]

Without wishing to go all psychoanalytical, may I suggest to the OP that this is just a good time to take a break?

1.2 didn't (for me personally) add a lot to my game experience. Even though nothing was actually worse for me as a result, my desire to play dropped significantly and I found that I didn't play much at all for a few weeks. 1.3, on the other hand has brought me back into it, even if it's not quite what I wanted/expected.

Take some time away from it, get some perspective, and hopefully the next update will remind you why you loved it in the first place.

 

[[HJ]-RedRaven]

I'll have to check out the Reddit Hudson group as well; I pledged to Hudson since I liked the power-statesman vibe in his profile pic and the Combat/Combat/Combat focus in his prep, expand and control methods.

However, I find myself popping in every 30mins to grab prep intel or garrison supplies while cooking dinner and putting the kids to bed. The 'effort' for landing this ~100t is waaaay less than racking up 100 kills in a Military Strike zone.

Lets get organised and show the Imps some Hudson-style pacification (via the Pacifier if its any good lol)! They can bask in 'his fluids' all they like, SOL WILL NEVER FALL!

@Fergal - yes, if pledged to a power, you should have access to a [insert your power here]-only forum. Raving about targets out in the open is silly at best and strategic suicide at worst.

 

[FuzzySpider]

---Snip---

Some good stuff, but no mention of SCBs. I was in Open yesterday, in an Anaconda (decently armed and very well shielded but with mostly cargo racks). I was interdicted by an Asp. Not a pirate, just a mindless pew pew pew artist. I boosted, hit reverse, spun around, and unleashed all my weapons. His shields bounced back immediately. I kept on, they kept on coming back. Eventually my shields gave out and I started taking damage.

For what?

So I jump to another system, log out, log into solo, and played on that for the rest of the day (earlier I had also faced a mindless pew pew pew artist who attacked my diamondback in an Anaconda 3 times and I was fed up).

While someone can just deploy as many instant medikits as they like, and while there is no consequence for pointless pew pew pew, and while such people aren't shunted off into their very own "duuurr call of dooty" server, Solo/Mobius will remain popular. I prefer Open but "gamey" activity forces me out, I think you'll find that common.

 

[Robert Maynard]

A gentle reminder to anyone considering posting in this thread: comments on the game modes in general or the ability to switch between them are off topic and will be moved here.

 

[Mohrgan]

My question always becomes; why? What is this need to prop up a mode? I feel that each mode is interchangeable, and use open when it suits me. It doesn't seem right to attempt to bribe players into being victims. The only way, for some players, to make open more attractive is to stop the possibility of being attacked by PC's without cause.

 

[Lunchmoney]

..... you dont even get paid back what you put in.

Just like donating time and money to real world policital parties. Which is why only the rich donate.

 

[Witcherman]

The two types of players that need to be encouraged to join open are traders and explorers.

1. Traders and explorers are not primarily interested in interaction with other players.
2. Traders have almost nothing to gain in open:

Yeah, this is really the crux of the issue right here.

There are no tools in the game right now that will allow most people to interact with other players in a fun and meaningful way (other than blowing eachother up).

If you want to draw these people in, then FD need to put their thinking caps on and start creating tools that allow the players to interact with each other in ways that make playing open WAY more fun that in solo or private group.

That's the bottom line. And that's a huge bottom line because the closest they've come to that is "wings" (which I love) but you can play wings in private group mode and I still can't do something as simple as pass some money to my friend who needs a little help getting into that new shiny Vulture.

Given all that, I don't hold out much hope for getting people to play in open who aren't already there, well maybe in a couple of years, once FD have figured out how to transfer credits between friends and have more than a few people in an instance..."open" should really mean "everyone" or what's the point?

 

[Araviel]

My question always becomes; why? What is this need to prop up a mode? I feel that each mode is interchangeable, and use open when it suits me. It doesn't seem right to attempt to bribe players into being victims. The only way, for some players, to make open more attractive is to stop the possibility of being attacked by PC's without cause.

have we not gone through this already mohrgan?
there are plenty of pvp players like me that won't shot you without cause and just wants to fight each other, but are not getting any reason to do it.
its not victims we want, its opponents.

 

[Mohrgan]

have we not gone through this already mohrgan?
there are plenty of pvp players like me that won't shot you without cause and just wants to fight each other, but are not getting any reason to do it.

Ok, then why would you need those players that are just there for the bribe? Unless the bribe exceeds the potential loss some players will just pass it up. If you only want to fight with others of the same mind, setting up a bribery system defeats that notion.

 

[Araviel]

Ok, then why would you need those players that are just there for the bribe? Unless the bribe exceeds the potential loss some players will just pass it up. If you only want to fight with others of the same mind, setting up a bribery system defeats that notion.

we are just brainstorming here, bribing i agree it might not be the best thing.
you have been following this debate in several threads now, maybe you have you got some ideas by now on how our player group can get some more reasons to shoot each rather than just shooting each other for the sake of it?

 

[Cid]

Combat- 50% merit bonus at the point they are earned.
Trade- Trade agreements transferred into cargo are worth 50% more if transported in an open game, but converted to standard ones if logged into a solo instance.

Use 50% as the tuning peg as needed.

 

[Witcherman]

It's as simple as this: FD need to create highly desirable/rewarding activities that cannot be completed in solo/private group mode.

This is how every other MMO designs their games to encourage group play.

 

[Mohrgan]

we are just brainstorming here, bribing i agree it might not be the best thing.
you have been following this debate in several threads now, maybe you have you got some ideas by now on how our player group can get some more reasons to shoot each rather than just shooting each other for the sake of it?

I believe the system, as it stands, is the fairest over all. I can see no reason to encourage PvP at all. PvP is available to any and all who seek it.
It's hard not to be convinced that all of this is just to get more victims in open. The bottom line is, no one wants to be a victim. Unless the bribe exceeds the potential loss, it would all be for nothing. If it did become financially beneficial players would just hide in the shadows, bringing no more game play in the end.