Powerplay: Ideas from the devs - Feedback wanted! #3

My comments on a couple of the areas.

Powerplay Flag - This sounds like a great idea to encourage more CMDRs to participate and to allow those who participate free to undertake other game activities.

Up/Down Vote - I am not sure this is the primary issue. Much of the wastage and misaligned activity within a power isn't due to confusion on what would be best for the power. Instead is it due to individuals doing what is best for themselves - which often happens to be in opposition to their power. The term "merit grinders" is used to refer to the majority of these individuals and it is a misnomer to consider them just poorly informed or casual. Many of them are rank 5 players grinding out merits in the most time efficient way possible. If we want to fix this issue then we need to make it so they are discouraged from just running the shortest routes or those with the best return trade profits. If we made it so that merits could not be earned under many of these undesirable scenarios it would go a long way to aligning the power overall. Examples of these limits include not allowing merits to be earned for fortification past the trigger or not earning merits past the expansion trigger if opposition is insignificant.
 
Kickstarter backer here, I stopped playing about 5 weeks ago because I don't feel as if there is any need for me to progress, either in PP or in the main game.
The game looks and plays amazingly well, it's testament to how good Frontier are at making games but it's not what made me want to log in and pledge when I first read about an Elite reboot.
This feedback is not PP specific but it is a product of PP.

The original Elite was open ended, so much so that it was immersive, for all that you had to imagine in terms of graphics you had to imagine the same in the end goal which was to reach the Elite rank.
The immersion, the chasing of that goal was the game, the frustration in between was the game but every now and then you got a little distracted by worry for your life and your career.

ED for me has hardly any of the immersion that drove the original, for sure gaming has moved on, lots of things have and so to recreate the utopia of Elite would actually be a staggering achievement and it's at this point that I feel ED falls short.
The core game is, okay to be honest but it lacks some basic detail, revision to the mechanics as we saw in Beta. The Galaxy map for example is pretty bad, it's a hopeless UI, it needs revision, i.e. Navigation towards the core, the jumping that happens when mousing over a system, the zoom flagging a system just in front of the system you are trying to choose.
Selling exploration data, you can't tell me this does not need revised, do I need to list why?
I could go on here but won't, I'm not even sure that this will be read or understood to be honest.
So PP feedback, well, it's okay (but broken if you like that sort of thing), so we have a feedback thread posted by persuasion that PP might not actually be the community facing drive that was needed in the game?
For me, this is where all of the ED problems lay, we have an abundant set of input, dedication on both sides (FD and Cmdrs) but to find a common ground takes repeated flagging and then understanding and then acknowledgement with intention to fix.

So, PP feedback? Put the choices back out for discussion before implementation, just as we did in Beta, just as we did for Kickstarter, get the community involved at the discussion level before a line of code is added or removed.
I say this because the game that was delivered in Dec 2014 was immense, since the doors have been closed I feel it's lurched from one piecemeal update addressing things in a scattergun method which seems be creating division and as a result there is no collective drive.
 
Or I suppose you could factor the amount of up/down votes into the 'value' of merits gained for that system. Probably overcomplicated but you could possibly have a system with merit value towards rank being based on the up/down factor of the system you are working on. If up/down=1 then merit value is same otherwise the value of your merits is based on faction approval of that system such that if you grind merits in a system that has 100 up votes and 1000 down votes they are only worth 10% of normal.

I guess this would probably be difficult to implement but if it could then at least you would have a way of reducing grinding that has little impact on your power and if the grinders managed to outvote the rest of the power then at least you know how you stand with the rest of the player base.
 
I like the concept of favor, and the up-down vote thing, as long as votes are registered and conveyed to clients reasonably quickly (currently Fortification numbers seem to lag, which causes wastage when you get close to 100% fortification).

The PowerPlay flag seems strange and unnecessary. Why not simply add Commander save slots in a similar way that other games have multiple character slots? Aside from Fifth Columning concerns, I don't see a drawback. I'd quite like to have a "low-level" Commander save that I could role-play differently from time to time. (For people caring about 5th-Columning type junk, people can currently already do that by buying multiple accounts, it just costs them $50 a slot).
 
Up / Down Votes
I approve of an up/down-voting system. I would opt for a system where each Commander has a number of votes per Control System to use, with the number of votes available to cast in each system being based on their Power Rating.

I wouldn't want a system where we have a fixed number of global votes to cast across Control Systems, with self-imposed rationing, as that would be no better than the not-very-useful Preparation Nominations we have at the moment. A "global votes" system would also fail where we see much bigger Powers so the votes would not scale up with the size of the Power. So I would strongly favour having a number of votes to cast in every single Control System on the map.

Power Ethos V Government
I think this is a very worthwhile idea, certainly NOT a waste of time! :) I think the more granular way of having each aligned system impact on the Control System is more interesting, especially if the Ethos/Government effects were more pronounced, and maybe gave more varied effects on top of the changes to trigger points.

Flipping systems and supporting Minor Factions also makes for Combat Zones and PVP hotspots, and I think it might pull Commanders away from the "primary" Powerplay tasks of directly Undermining or Fortifying (in a good way, for variety & richer roleplay). But the caveat to this would be a potential slowdown in those "direct PP" actions. Which makes me think maybe Cycles should be longer than 1 week, if there's to be a more integrated experience to be had interacting with so many different aspects of the game.
 
Last edited:
There have been a few reasons why i left powerplay.

  • Not being able to contribute much to my chosen power as a combat oriented player (other then undermining another power, which isn't really helping my own power much). Hauling papers isn't interesting to me and fighting for merits alone while not being able to fortify/prepare made me stop working for merits all together.
  • All the merits i did gain were gone so that was no reason to stay any longer
  • Keep getting interdicted by enemy ships without there being a benefit in killing them.
Favour and Powerplay Flag would mean I probably at least pledge again.
I still wish I was able to actually contribute through combat instead of the hauling of papers.

Up/Down Vote is a good idea. Can't really go wrong there I think.

Freedom Fighters
Being able to actively fight against a power while not pledged to one is a nice idea.
I think the suggested 'dangers' are more harsh then they need be. Just being an enemy in the system you are a freedom fighter too would seem to be more then enough. Also, I don't think it is much of a problem if someone is a freedom fighter for more then 1 system.

More Powerful Ethos versus Government Effect
I would rather see more of a focus on the major factions the control systems belong to then their government type.
Maybe for independent powers it makes sense, but not so much for the ones belonging to a major faction.
As an Alliance player it has bugged me that our power is not government type neutral.
And to have even more emphasis on which government his control systems belong to only adds to this problem.
Also it's pretty strange how a power can belong to a different major faction then the controlling minor faction in a system without a negative effect.
 
well theoretically you could save up favors and get li-yong's exploration bonus right? although it's still rank 5... or did you mean how does it affect explorers gaining favour and doing powerplay.

Just the point that PP does not really support explorers. Yes there is a financial benefit by supporting the grand total of 1 PP, not much choice in the figurehead department or the missions.
 
I see some mechanical changes to how it works, but nothing on why to participate. All the powers are identical to each other except for the picture and minor mechanical effects. They lack backstory and don't have any interaction with the game world. I don't see why a player should care about any of them, or what impact they can have at all.

In addition, the entire system sits on top of the existing game rather than being integrated. Every mission, bounty, ton of cargo or exploration data I turn in should contribute to my advancement in the power. There should be power specific missions. And the power itself should determine the expansion targets, not the mercenaries that have been hired.

Generally, I don't let my employees make decisions regarding how my business is run, especially if they're not even full time.
 


Sounds like a great idea, and would really help sate those who would fall under that category, as well as give those who push themselves for straight merits a bit of a stockpile in case their rig fails, or they have to take a break for a vacation!

Powerplay Flag

Tricky. The idea in itself is great, one I'd thought of too, but as you noted, has potential for abuse. One thing I'd like to add is maybe tack on a few days after joining a Power where you cannot make use of this. Maybe each Power keeps track of its defectors, and for a day or two even after it stops hunting you, you will still be 'marked' as a consequence. Especially while their agents hunt you, to allow players to mete out stellar justice to traitors!

Also, perhaps the higher your rank within the faction, the longer the time until the toggle actually takes effect? It'd be harder to "hide" if you're a high-profile Federal commander, and the top spies in the Empire are watching you closely! (Not a huge additional cooldown, maybe an extra day or two at Rank 5. Yes, you worked hard to reach Rank 5, but now all eyes are on you, commander, and you've got to be craft while you slowly lose all your tails, and there are quite a few now that you're so famous!)

Up/Down Vote


Absolutely would be appreciated by everyone, I think! However, just to avoid a case of a massive exodus of double agent defections, please, if this is enabled, have a 1-3 day lockout so groups can't simply defect temporarily and unleash a massive misinformation campaign to derail a faction. I know it'd be difficult to do, but it shouldn't be hard to install and a commander freshly joining a faction should be following the existing membership to 'learn the ropes' of how the faction operates, rather than trying to command them!


Freedom Fighters


Awesome idea! Maybe make two 'degrees' of Freedom Fighter? The first degree is as stated- you're not going to be hunted whilst deep within Federation territory for rebelling n the middle of it... because you're a quiet supporter. You run weapons, food, supplies, maybe help out with a mission or two for prep work. Hunt the odd SDF/Faction ship but for all they know you're just some crazy who shoots authorities. Maybe even at this level, if you partake in too many SDF/Faction kills, they might elevate you and say, the systems directly connected to the one are in, killing so many, learn about you at the end of the day. After another day, every system connected to every system where your chosen minor faction exists knows about you. Beyond that, maybe one more jump, but probably only systems within 5-10Ly to keep it from blowing too far out of proportion. And that's only if you keep it up. If you only trigger the threshold once, it will only escalate to the second stage. Or maybe just the first, as they suspect you may be working for X minor faction, but they can't know for sure. A second trigger will have them almost positive, so they deliver a PSA to all nearby systems associated with that faction. Maybe even keep track of the number of FF's, and if enough trigger this second one, security is increased in those systems in addition. Crossing the line for a third time will trigger the additional, range-based warning, leaving you surrounded by up to 3 jumps in all directions in hostile territory.

Adding onto that, if the random NPC interdictions are adjusted to be far, far less, at this third level you will be chased at set times and will almost assuredly be interdicted by whatever ship/wing the game spawns (relative to your threat level) if you aren't paying attention. This spawn and interdict would persist for an additional jump or two out of the Hostile range around your minor faction systems, but beyond that, it will spawn the hunter ship but it will have a vastly reduced chance to know who you are, and will otherwise behave as a normal NPC. If you happen to cross its path (difficult for you to tell since you have no idea which one it is, unless it's marked with some obvious minor faction such as "Federal Dissident Hunter" or something) it has a 50-50 chance of identifying you and moving to intercept. Outside of the owning major faction's space, you are free from this, unless being chased already (they would chase you at max, four jumps, say) or if you are well and truly away from your system of operation, at the edge of your faction space. (Dying from random interdictions without being scanned will not remove the trigger alert for the hunter, only your 'unrelated' bounty. Dying outside of owning major faction's space even with a scan will not remove the trigger alert, as other factions want you to continue to be dissentful in their rival's spheres of influence. The only way to remove the hunter trigger is to fall to the hunter, or get scanned with a KWS in your owning major faction's space and destroyed. Or, perform the suggested 'redemption' mission!)

The second level of Freedom Fighter would be akin to an outright declaration of rebellion. Lore-wise, a commander delivers a high-profile and scathing diatribe against the local system, and pledges to support X minor faction in throwing off the yoke of control. All relevant forces within a 3-jump range will be instantly marked as Hostile to you, but if attacked you have a chance for support from partisans. While within your minor faction's space (not just the zone around a planet or station they own, but the whole system where they exist, even if they only control one station) your "Report Crimes Against Me" beacon will act slightly differently. It might draw in hostile SDF, or it might draw in allied SDF from your minor faction. It will also have a small chance to draw in allied partisans. Disabling it will remove the ability for the SDF to locate you (both Hostile and Allied), and drastically reduce allied partisan chance of finding you, but not entirely (they might be roving around and saw you get interdicted, and moved to join) but the new chance will be 5-15%, and there will be a longer delay before they arrive. (or maybe to balance it out, since you're not broadcasting and they had to have been 'close' enough to see you get nabbed, if you roll a success for partisan reinforcement, they come in almost immediately after you drop out!)

With two forms of Freedom Fighters, you can cater to those who want to be rebels, but still take part in activities outside their dastardly rebellion- though if they've been too naughty, they'll have some work to do to get out of their Hostile zone, and if they linger in the major faction's area, they'll get hunted here and there. You can be a low-key rebel but if you're acting too high-profile, there will be consequences. But you're not forced to do that, and you can quietly take out an SDF ship here and there if you pace yourself. (Maybe have the kill counter needed to trigger decay like merits, but weighted? Like, if you kill two SDF every day, sure you're doing it quietly but maybe after a week they'll start to wisen up to you, and it'll decay less. Or, for something probably simpler to code, after a week as a low-key Freedom Fighter, the decay rate decays less regardless of your actions, as they start to wisen up to you anyway. It can get tense as a low-key rebel, but it will never be quite as difficult and restrictive as a high-profile rebel. This way more casual players have a range of options even within their low-key rebellion, so they can forge their own narrative. Maybe they just want to quietly run supplies for the underdog, but after a while, have a change of heart and start sniping SDF, and get really into it. They don't have time to be a full-time rebel, nor do they want to be so restricted, but they can certainly start killing left and right and have a bit of fun with the new Hostile zones.)

Oh, and I think I forgot to mention but for the second level of Freedom Fighter, after the instant 3-jump Hostile range, after a week of remaining as a high-profile rebel, it should keep track of where you like to get a lot of kills on SDF/major faction ships and mark everything within one jump of those new areas as Hostile. You could forge a narrative whereby you declare your hatred of the Empire, pledge to some two-bit corporate guy in a system, and then go on a killing rampage across Imperial space, with a huge swath of it now marked as Hostile. The heat's getting too much for you, so you depart Imperial space and go chill with Archon Delaine. Perhaps there can be a tie-in with the poor ol' Archon whereby any spawned Hunters interdicting you will behave as if you were in your own stomping grounds- Kumo Crew or other assorted pirates have a small chance of assisting a 'rabble-rouser' so they can keep living and keep killing. (Of course, you can't kill them for credits, you're one of them now! Instead, you get a token bounty from SDF/major faction ships. There's no way to increase it like you can while bounty hunting, but on the flip side, you don't need to mount a Kill Warrant Scanner. And it's far less work finding SDF than finding a good bounty- they're all worth the same amount! (or about the same, maybe a minor change depending on spawned skill level. Players aligned with your hated major faction will instead always be marked as a valid bounty target (so you still don't need a KWS) and will grant all their bounty upon kill. But only if you are within your supported minor faction's zone of influence (systems) otherwise you will only get the local bounty, plus a token sum for killing a hated major faction supporter.)

More Powerful Ethos versus Government Effect

No opinion here as I'm still working on figuring out how this all works, but sounds like a good idea nonetheless!

Zac Antonaci;2588182[/B said:
]Missions, Variety and Rewards


No! Never! Variety is bad! This'll be the end of Elite: Dangerous!

jk jk, more variety is always a good thing, more to do, more to see :D
 
Just my quick opinions.
Favor:
No. It just adds another layer over the merit decay. Instead i would suggest do extend the merit decay to 2 cycles and increase the thresholds for rankings a bit. This way people would be more flexible. For example the cycle is coming to its end and you are facing the decision to either increase your merits, or help out your buddys to protect a system.
Also add more opportunities to earn merits. Controlled systems could generate BB missions with a mix of credits and merits as a reward.

Flag:
No. People will find ways or timings to exploit this mechanic, or at least take as much advantage out of it as possible. Maybe even more ways to 5th column tactics. We already have the three game modes (which can be used to bypass things), please no flag. Instead of flags, people pledged to a power should be able to switch modes only at certain locations and have a cool down in between switching again. Maybe switching between modes should also "delete" your current pending merits. For example if you have pamphlets in your cargo bay you can not switch modes without loosing those. The same goes for confirmed kills as long as they haven't been brought to a control system.
Also pledging to a power should mean a thing and it should bring risks. I don't like the idea to be able to turn all of this stuff of depending on your mood. Pledging is a decision that should not be made halfheartedly.
The only flag i would agree to is to show your "tolerance" to other factions then the one you are pledged to.

Up/Downvote:
I have mixed feelings about this. I am not sure if i have suggested this earlier somewhere else, or if i have scrapped the idea. Though it would add a simple way to "communicate" it has a big risk of being used for 5th column tactics, or will be just pretty chaotic like the preparation of systems is now. So even with a voting menu you still would need outsourced tools like reddit to communicate which systems to up/downvote.

Freedom Fighters:
I honestly see no reason for it. Why should i decide to help my previous chosen power undermining another system while putting myself to the risk of being attack by former friendlies because i have no alignment at the moment. Give Pledging a true meaning and leave it with that.

Additional:
If it would take too much effort/ cash to implement a proper faction wide communication system, could there be somewhere the hint to use forums/reddit for those who don't know those platforms but want to communicate?

On the other hand there is this "Do you powerplay" poll thread. Without showing my opinion here i really suggest to think about PP related changes after taking an honest look at what we have, what the people think about what we have and why people think what they think.
 
Zac, there's a recurring theme that seems to be in the minds of my members, how can Power Play really breathe life into the game visually and game play wise. A few of the suggestions you have are a great turning point, but I believe that there's an extra step that would go further into immersing players of all sorts. Frontier Development's Art Team is something that almost never disappoints when it comes to breathing life to a concept, as such, I think its time that they also help illustrate the wars, peace, famine, discoveries, and culture of this grand space of work. While the GalNet does bring some life here and there, it isn't entirely sufficient to the scale and canvas that this game, specifically the Background Simulator and Power Play have to offer. The one bit that troubled me about Lugh and Kappa Fornacis was the fact we weren't able to really see the damage caused by the Conflicts and the Culture of these systems.

The decisions we make as a Power, should have consequences and currently, we only see the numeral aspect to it. There is so much room to really breathe life into the story behind Elite: Dangerous. Likewise, there should be more consequences to our missions and decision makings while under a Power. With the same 'reputation' bar as the Background Simulator, what we did in a certain system should either give us praise or really governments as we were essentially doing it under the arm of the Power.
 
Last edited:
With such a system, I believe we could also consider reverting the way merits rewards are calculated back to the more competitive allocation method we started with, where rating requirements are based on success versus one’s peers as opposed to an arbitrary threshold. I know that this proved less than popular in the first instance, but I’d be interested if folk might reconsider its value if coupled with a favour system for the less competitive power supporters. Don’t worry if you strongly disagree, just say so!

No. No no no no no.

Powerplay should be about your faction competing with other factions, not about you competing within your own faction. It's a terrible idea, and from a gameplay perspective, it would not be fun. It's bad enough to engage in powerplay at the moment and feel you're having to grind out a reward, imagine doing all that, and then at the end of the cycle, oops, someone else ground more than you and you didn't advance at all. I know that if that happened to me even once, I'd never touch powerplay again, no matter what changes you guys made to it, until that mechanic was removed.

I like most of the other suggestions, I am iffy on the Flag mechanic, I feel like it should not be changeable on the fly, and you should also be able to reveal someone's status (warrant scanner?) in some way.

I personally feel like merits should not decay at all and you should just be able to spend X amount of merits to unlock the various reward tiers for a week at a time. There doesn't need to be a second currency.

Freedom fighters sound fun but again, I feel they are unnecessary - there should simply be more incentive to participate in powerplay/participate with a power. The rewards for doing it should be clear and enticing, and the benefit of not doing it would be that you are not marked hostile/lawless anywhere. Freedom Fighters seem like trying to incentivize avoiding powerplay, and I disagree with the idea of powerplay as an optional side game. Go all in with it, or take it out, but don't half-bake it.
 
Last edited:
I think Favour is unnecessary. Just add a flat ranking system, like those for combat/exploration/trading, so that players can achieve the higher ranks and rewards over time, without decay.

But I do like the idea of up/down voting, though i don't think it can be called a replacement for player comms at all, it does add some "crowd sourced intelligence" to activities a power will undertake in a given cycle. I also agree that the number of votes per cycle should be merit based, and in fact I think that's the only thing that should be merit based. But it's potentially the most powerful perk. I would hope also that up/down voting can in some we be applied to systems TO BE prepared. We need some way to select the next cycle's prep targets to avoid random bad choices/5th columning. let us use the up/down vote mechanic to vote on the systems to be prepared in the next cycle, and have the system pick the top 10. Then, only allow prep on those systems - no more random preps.
 

Sandro Sammarco

Lead Designer
Frontier
Hello Commanders!

A couple more bits and bobs.

Using decals as a method of toggling a Powerplay flag: I actually think this is a really neat idea! I'll need to check all the angles for potential issues, but as a concept, top banana.

On Powerplay flag benefits versus dilution: I'm not convinced that dilution would be noticeable versus the possible uptake of pledges. Also, I see this flag as a way of empowering Commanders to play the game how they want to. With the various restrictions for toggling the flag, I don't see how it weakens the pledge too much - and when the flag is set to Powerplay, all of the risks are active. It's just that the Commander in question has made the choice. I guess I think that pledging to a power should not necessarily cause risk and complications *all* the time. Just my current opinion.

Powers lacking character: I think perhaps this is a little unfair. They all have clear ethos and I believe that there has been a fair bit of information via Galnet. We do have biographies to add to Powerplay as well. That being said, I'm open to concrete and reasonable suggestions!

Polls: nothing wrong with them, I've used a fair few myself, they can be useful. However, I just want to point out that the sample sizes are, in general, *very, very small* compared to the player base, as well as being vulnerable to artificial skewing for various reasons. So whilst I, for example, do take the Powerplay poll seriously (hey, we're having these cool discussions, right?) don't think I can use it as a definitive "voice of the people".

Systems that have special meaning for Powerplay: I really like this idea as well, the notion that control of particular systems gives added benefit and context. One of the reasons is that it could add more space geography, another is that it could act as a nice choke point, drawing Commanders into conflict. Of course, we'd need solid rules to determine why and when such systems would become focal points, but yes, this I like.

"You don't listen to us and ignore suggestion X!": well we certainly try to listen! The cold truth is that we aren't able to cover everything that gets posted in the forum, and we certainly don't have the time or leeway to answer all posts. The good news is, threads like these do get extra attention from us, so as long as it's on topic, now's the chance!
 
Thanks Sandro.

With the exception of one Power, can you please explain how explorers can participate in a meaningful way please?
 
Hello Commanders!

Polls: nothing wrong with them, I've used a fair few myself, they can be useful. However, I just want to point out that the sample sizes are, in general, *very, very small* compared to the player base, as well as being vulnerable to artificial skewing for various reasons. So whilst I, for example, do take the Powerplay poll seriously (hey, we're having these cool discussions, right?) don't think I can use it as a definitive "voice of the people".


I definitely agree with what you said here.

OK - So you must have access to the data from the server side.

What are the numbers?

Or aren't we supposed to know?
 

Sandro Sammarco

Lead Designer
Frontier
Hello Commander GJ51!

I don't think we publish numbers. But hey, like I said, we want to make Poweplay better, we want to address issues being raised and we do try to listen, and when I see polls with clear results, it certainly means something. Although I've said before, and still stand by, the statement that Powerplay isn't necessarily for everyone, clearly I'd like to see more Commanders enjoying it - I make no bones about that! That's why we love feedback and find it genuinely useful.

Hello Commander Cula-Ta!

It doesn't really, at the moment. The Powers fight over inhabited space. I'm open to suggestions though :)
 
Sandro, I really do appreciate your passion and commitment to the game. The forum gave you a rough time today and I can't apologise as I feel PowerPlay just doesn't fit into the game I wanted. As a solo player our voice is not being heard and the game is just catering to the PvP crowd. Losing Sarah's new AI really hurts... Solo players desperately need Tier 2 NPC's to interact with, please put a face to mission and power contacts. Let us get to meet higher level NPCs within the Power as we move up rank, you know maybe receive a message from the Power leader if you get to rank 5. Something like that...
 
Last edited:
Hello Commander GJ51!

I don't think we publish numbers. But hey, like I said, we want to make Poweplay better, we want to address issues being raised and we do try to listen, and when I see polls with clear results, it certainly means something. Although I've said before, and still stand by, the statement that Powerplay isn't necessarily for everyone, clearly I'd like to see more Commanders enjoying it - I make no bones about that! That's why we love feedback and find it genuinely useful.

Hello Commander Cula-Ta!

It doesn't really, at the moment. The Powers fight over inhabited space. I'm open to suggestions though :)


Thanks again Sandro,

How about a task to gather information on specific (or unspecific) sectors. PP could specify interest in particular resources such as Helium Gas Giants, or Water Giants.
That's all I've got for you off the top of my head, I'll give that some thought and come back to you. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom