Powerplay: Ideas from the devs - Feedback wanted! #3
- Thread starter Zac Antonaci
- Start date
Hello Commander Dodgey!
Don't worry, I have a fairly thick skin. Besides, the whole point of asking for feedback is to gather opinions and suggestions, if folk didn't speak up, what would be the point?
We will still be getting AI updates, just not right now.
Now onto Powerplay, and I have a question for *you*
: you say that Powerplay doesn't cater to you as a solo player. How so? Technically, you have access to all the same functionality in solo vs NPCs as in open play. I'm not attacking your opinion, I was just wondering if it's actually that you don't find Powerplay engaging rather than it being aimed at multiplayer?
And if this was the case, do you think any of the suggestions I've raised help at all?
Hello Commander Cula-Ta!
They do say that knowledge is power
I think this idea could work well as Powerplay missions. It would be a littler harder to fold it into the standard activities though.
Don't worry, I have a fairly thick skin. Besides, the whole point of asking for feedback is to gather opinions and suggestions, if folk didn't speak up, what would be the point?
We will still be getting AI updates, just not right now.
Now onto Powerplay, and I have a question for *you*
: you say that Powerplay doesn't cater to you as a solo player. How so? Technically, you have access to all the same functionality in solo vs NPCs as in open play. I'm not attacking your opinion, I was just wondering if it's actually that you don't find Powerplay engaging rather than it being aimed at multiplayer?And if this was the case, do you think any of the suggestions I've raised help at all?
Hello Commander Cula-Ta!
They do say that knowledge is power
I think this idea could work well as Powerplay missions. It would be a littler harder to fold it into the standard activities though.
Sandro, with the greatest respect, what if the whole concept is flawed? It is certainly very complicated. It just doesn't feel like the correct direction. There are already major powers, and ranks in two of them. But nothing has been made of those ranks. And there are the minor factions. Is it not just a layer too much - where content is lacking elsewhere? I know this is putting you on the spot - but at some point maybe the flogging of the horse should - cease? Thanks.
- - - Updated - - -
I have always been consistent with my criticism. If the patient is dead, the discussion concerning his future well-being is over..
- - - Updated - - -
Ahh...internet "discussions"...aren't they glorious!
I have always been consistent with my criticism. If the patient is dead, the discussion concerning his future well-being is over..
These all sound quite positive, especially the Favours and unFlaging as a Power member to regain freedom of movement
Removes some of the reasons PP Cmdrs have been ignoring CGs, the constant need for merits to keep placing and the Hostility when you are one a mission of mercy.
As an Unpledged Cmdr, the Freedom Fighters ideas sounds interesting; and does remind me to raise the question:
Why can we do nothing with any 'liberated' Power Play tokens?
I took some "unmarked Military supplies" from the Kumo Crew, and even the in game description said they were worthless
Seems kinda odd that they have absolutely no value what so ever and cannot be sold on the black market.
I wasn't expecting to effect Power Play by liberating the goods, but was a little surprised that these resources the Powers ship enmass to their controlled systems have no value in any market to anyone. You cannot even sell them back to the Power you liberated them from, let alone selling to them enemies.
Having the greater Type of Government effects on Powers sounds like a key idea, as it will encourage PP Cmdrs to work on the minor factions in their Sphere of influence, thus you can have sections that support a Power but need not participate in PP directly, but can assist with lowering CC costs by putting the right minor factions in charge of the key system , or 5th columnist support incomparable minor factions in Enemy Territory. Tying in PP with the BGS more
More Missions and Variety, who could say no
Removes some of the reasons PP Cmdrs have been ignoring CGs, the constant need for merits to keep placing and the Hostility when you are one a mission of mercy.
As an Unpledged Cmdr, the Freedom Fighters ideas sounds interesting; and does remind me to raise the question:
Why can we do nothing with any 'liberated' Power Play tokens?
I took some "unmarked Military supplies" from the Kumo Crew, and even the in game description said they were worthless
Seems kinda odd that they have absolutely no value what so ever and cannot be sold on the black market.
I wasn't expecting to effect Power Play by liberating the goods, but was a little surprised that these resources the Powers ship enmass to their controlled systems have no value in any market to anyone. You cannot even sell them back to the Power you liberated them from, let alone selling to them enemies.
Having the greater Type of Government effects on Powers sounds like a key idea, as it will encourage PP Cmdrs to work on the minor factions in their Sphere of influence, thus you can have sections that support a Power but need not participate in PP directly, but can assist with lowering CC costs by putting the right minor factions in charge of the key system , or 5th columnist support incomparable minor factions in Enemy Territory. Tying in PP with the BGS more
More Missions and Variety, who could say no
Last edited:
Hello Commander Space Fan!
Not to belittle your opinion, but I just happen to not agree with it. Possibly the situation is hampered by the view that we are spending too much time on Powerplay. In reality, there's a lot of work going on in parallel; Powerplay is certainly not stopping anything else from progressing right now. And Powerplay is active, so it's reasonable for us to talk about it, whereas in other areas we're not quite ready to talk. And of course, I think Powerplay generates dynamic changes to human space that affect all Commanders.
So that being said, unless you utterly hate Powerplay, now just happens to be a point where we can discuss its future, and mull over ways to improve it - is that really such a bad thing?
But if you absolutely know that Powerplay is not for you, that's OK too.
Not to belittle your opinion, but I just happen to not agree with it. Possibly the situation is hampered by the view that we are spending too much time on Powerplay. In reality, there's a lot of work going on in parallel; Powerplay is certainly not stopping anything else from progressing right now. And Powerplay is active, so it's reasonable for us to talk about it, whereas in other areas we're not quite ready to talk. And of course, I think Powerplay generates dynamic changes to human space that affect all Commanders.
So that being said, unless you utterly hate Powerplay, now just happens to be a point where we can discuss its future, and mull over ways to improve it - is that really such a bad thing?
But if you absolutely know that Powerplay is not for you, that's OK too.
Last edited:
Understood. And respected. Thank you.
Thanks for replying Sandro, your ideas are great, they really are. But I'm not one for the technical side of things but as a solo player I need to feel to connected to PowerPlay on a personal and emotional level... make me care about the Power. If I pledge, I would love to have an initial contact with a low-level Power NPC, some shady looking character if its Archon or military type for the Federation, etc. Once I move up rank, maybe a more senior NPC member introduces himself/herself, missions would become progressive and difficult. Surprise me, maybe while I'm out mining, I receive an urgent message from the Power to help out in one particular system. This also applies to the minor factions and the current mission system. Something like the mission interaction in FFE would go a long way.
Extensive feedback on your suggestions
Favour
This should be implemented ASAP and is by far the wisest idea you guys had.
And how about using huge amounts of Favour to unlock another faction weapon for a week? This would make the new modules widely available to everyone at the cost of using this new currency, and would make this currency more valuable to the players that already commit themselves 24/7 to their power.
Powerplay Flag
This is interesting but should come to the player at a cost other than making them unable to perform PP actions or a simple cool down to avoid spam. What about costing half of your merits to turn the PowerPlay Flag off? This would put a bigger weight for players that are already fully committed to their power and would also scale itself to more casual players or new ones.
Up/Down Vote
I don't know what to say about this idea. Aside from giving players a suggestion, it wouldn't do much at all.
Freedom Fighters
This presents a few problems:
More Powerful Ethos versus Government Effect
YES! Government types should have more effect on the Galaxy other than changing which cargo is illicit, security levels and starport skins. I want for this feature to matter more, specially in powerplay where it's all about politics.
Missions, Variety and Rewards
Thank you for listening to the community!Missions, better rewards, merit balance and bigger variety on PP activities is sorely needed to make this part of the game more enjoyable and to make this feel less like work and more like a style of play.
Favour
This should be implemented ASAP and is by far the wisest idea you guys had.
And how about using huge amounts of Favour to unlock another faction weapon for a week? This would make the new modules widely available to everyone at the cost of using this new currency, and would make this currency more valuable to the players that already commit themselves 24/7 to their power.
Powerplay Flag
This is interesting but should come to the player at a cost other than making them unable to perform PP actions or a simple cool down to avoid spam. What about costing half of your merits to turn the PowerPlay Flag off? This would put a bigger weight for players that are already fully committed to their power and would also scale itself to more casual players or new ones.
Up/Down Vote
I don't know what to say about this idea. Aside from giving players a suggestion, it wouldn't do much at all.
Freedom Fighters
This presents a few problems:
- Firstly, this feature should be implemented into pledging to a minor faction, such that a player can affect on all the systems the minor is situated.
- Secondly, undermining barely does anything to the controlled and exploited system directly aside from denying any profit so I dunno how it would help allowing them to perform such action.
- Lastly, the counter preparation goal should be balanced to make it possible for a small player group (say less than 20 people) to have a chance of opposing the powers.
More Powerful Ethos versus Government Effect
YES! Government types should have more effect on the Galaxy other than changing which cargo is illicit, security levels and starport skins. I want for this feature to matter more, specially in powerplay where it's all about politics.
Missions, Variety and Rewards
Thank you for listening to the community!Missions, better rewards, merit balance and bigger variety on PP activities is sorely needed to make this part of the game more enjoyable and to make this feel less like work and more like a style of play.
Last edited:
I like these ideas.
Favors would fix the useless grind of powerplay for merit and rank rewards
The up/down vote system is needed badly to better coordinate cmdr's in a power
And the flag system is genius. I would love to turn my powerplay stays to off now and again just so I could avoid the b.s. of npcs and cmdr's who are out for blood when I just wanna trade or fly around.
------
As for points yet to be addressed or partially addressed
1) We need more powerplay missions as alternatives to expanding like doing stuff to increase the value of a system. This could allow for powers to take a small focused empire approach or a large sprawling empire approach. It could also open up the expansion of human space to new systems. Or missions that allow us to do non powerplay tasks like trading & mining to get resources for a project like getting a new ship type available at a certain station.
2) I still have issues with how systems are expanded into. For example independent systems should be the easiest for takeover if your power is strong against their government type. But if say a federal power moves in on an Imperial system there should be conquences. Like capitol ships showing up to defend it, more imperial npcs showing up to try and stop the federal take over. These systems should be much harder to capture for opposing superpowers and independent empires. Also when they are captured they should be worth less CC for at least one cycle. Think back to civilization 5 how capturing an enemy city messes with your happiness in a negative way for a few turns. Also once say the federation captures an Imperial system that system should then be taken into the federation and no longer show as imperial but under federal control. It should just show as federal. If enough imperial systems are captured by the federation it should start a war between the two superpowers in border systems where it's possible for an Imperial power to capture them back. The lack of this is kinda immersion breaking. But it would make galactic powers have to be more careful about where they expand into just like real life countries trying to expand their borders gotta be careful.
3) still nothing addressed about how in a powerplay combat zone such as a resistance pocket that an eagle and an Anaconda are worth the same amount of merits. It's fine if you wanna keep the number that have to be killed to succede in expansion the same but at least give us ore merits for higher tier ship kills.
4) Ferrying powerplay cargo needs to be based upon ship size with the timer to buy another full load instead of a set amount. The timer before another allotment of powerplay cargo could also be based upon how much you carried last time, so smaller ships like a Hauler could get their next load sooner but a type 9 would have to wait longer. That way it's fair to smaller ship pilots.
5) Powerplay credit rewards, I'm sorry but if we're gonna be grinding merits we should also get paid better for it. As powerplay stands right now it's a money sink with little to no reward. For example In my Anaconda I can smuggle slaves for approximately 2 million credit profit per run. This run takes like 10 minutes so that's around 10 to 12 million per hour depending upon how fast I am. So yeah I could make 50 million in one afternoon of dedicated trading. I understand that powerplay likely won't pay as well as standard professions because it has other benifits on top of the weekly bonus but seeing the fact we get what 100 credits (or was it 200cr) per merit it's kinda a joke. We should be getting way more credits so that powerplay is actually profitable. Now the Favour system would help fix this but it's more of a bandaid than a cure for the credit gap between non-PP activities and PP activities.
6) Galaxy Map and functions tab still can't remember my settings from previous login please fix
-----
Finally I have a question - what happens to power specific modules if a power falls? I know cmdr's with them get to keep them but what about their sale? Will they vanish from the game, be given to a new power, or occasionally pop up at various outfitters in limited quantity for anyone.
Favors would fix the useless grind of powerplay for merit and rank rewards
The up/down vote system is needed badly to better coordinate cmdr's in a power
And the flag system is genius. I would love to turn my powerplay stays to off now and again just so I could avoid the b.s. of npcs and cmdr's who are out for blood when I just wanna trade or fly around.
------
As for points yet to be addressed or partially addressed
1) We need more powerplay missions as alternatives to expanding like doing stuff to increase the value of a system. This could allow for powers to take a small focused empire approach or a large sprawling empire approach. It could also open up the expansion of human space to new systems. Or missions that allow us to do non powerplay tasks like trading & mining to get resources for a project like getting a new ship type available at a certain station.
2) I still have issues with how systems are expanded into. For example independent systems should be the easiest for takeover if your power is strong against their government type. But if say a federal power moves in on an Imperial system there should be conquences. Like capitol ships showing up to defend it, more imperial npcs showing up to try and stop the federal take over. These systems should be much harder to capture for opposing superpowers and independent empires. Also when they are captured they should be worth less CC for at least one cycle. Think back to civilization 5 how capturing an enemy city messes with your happiness in a negative way for a few turns. Also once say the federation captures an Imperial system that system should then be taken into the federation and no longer show as imperial but under federal control. It should just show as federal. If enough imperial systems are captured by the federation it should start a war between the two superpowers in border systems where it's possible for an Imperial power to capture them back. The lack of this is kinda immersion breaking. But it would make galactic powers have to be more careful about where they expand into just like real life countries trying to expand their borders gotta be careful.
3) still nothing addressed about how in a powerplay combat zone such as a resistance pocket that an eagle and an Anaconda are worth the same amount of merits. It's fine if you wanna keep the number that have to be killed to succede in expansion the same but at least give us ore merits for higher tier ship kills.
4) Ferrying powerplay cargo needs to be based upon ship size with the timer to buy another full load instead of a set amount. The timer before another allotment of powerplay cargo could also be based upon how much you carried last time, so smaller ships like a Hauler could get their next load sooner but a type 9 would have to wait longer. That way it's fair to smaller ship pilots.
5) Powerplay credit rewards, I'm sorry but if we're gonna be grinding merits we should also get paid better for it. As powerplay stands right now it's a money sink with little to no reward. For example In my Anaconda I can smuggle slaves for approximately 2 million credit profit per run. This run takes like 10 minutes so that's around 10 to 12 million per hour depending upon how fast I am. So yeah I could make 50 million in one afternoon of dedicated trading. I understand that powerplay likely won't pay as well as standard professions because it has other benifits on top of the weekly bonus but seeing the fact we get what 100 credits (or was it 200cr) per merit it's kinda a joke. We should be getting way more credits so that powerplay is actually profitable. Now the Favour system would help fix this but it's more of a bandaid than a cure for the credit gap between non-PP activities and PP activities.
6) Galaxy Map and functions tab still can't remember my settings from previous login please fix
-----
Finally I have a question - what happens to power specific modules if a power falls? I know cmdr's with them get to keep them but what about their sale? Will they vanish from the game, be given to a new power, or occasionally pop up at various outfitters in limited quantity for anyone.
Last edited:
Favour
Well, it could work, but it honestly feels like an over-complicated fix. Why not just remove merit decay and simplify the whole process? If the only objection is that you just like merit to decay over time because it seems like a good idea please consider that maybe this is simply the wrong approach.
Powerplay Flag
Oh, hells no. You take the pledge, you wear the uniform. End of story.
You're assuming that the reason more people don't participate is because of timidity, which I don't think is justified. The real reason is simple disinterest.
Up/Down Vote
It's certainly never a bad idea to introduce anything that helps communication, but I don't know that this would achieve much. Just seeing raw data of "up down votes" without any planning or rationale behind it is pretty empty.
Could you? Would that be sufficient to justify your activity in game, or would you prefer to actually know why the large number of down votes had been cast so you could see the larger picture?
I'm not totally opposed to this as it seems at worst to be benign, but my feeling is that anyone sufficiently invested in Powerplay will be following forum threads, alliance directives, Reddit postings and other sources to make up their minds about how best to support the Power, while others who are not so interested either won't be Powerplaying at all or will just go and do undermining combat because that's the easiest and most satisfying thing to do. Both will probably not pay much attention to the up/down votes.
Freedom Fighters
No! Enough of the cotton-wool padding - this is Elite: Dangerous
More Powerful Ethos versus Government Effect
LOL, you left the best for last - it's not a small change, it's a subtle change, and a great idea. Please go with this one!
Missions, Variety and Rewards
Conclusion
Thanks for engaging with us on this Sandro, it's appreciated
For what it's worth my feeling is that the upcoming player minor factions will be the thing that actually saves Powerplay, and the critical thing will be looking at activities at this low level and how they can directly influence a Power. I bet there will be things that arise after the minor factions get going that will change the entire shape of how Powerplay is structured.
Just consider what it will mean when instead of many players working directly in support of a Power, we have many minor factions within each Power's area of influence, all intent on supporting or opposing that Power. The shift in dynamics will be huge.
Well, it could work, but it honestly feels like an over-complicated fix. Why not just remove merit decay and simplify the whole process? If the only objection is that you just like merit to decay over time because it seems like a good idea please consider that maybe this is simply the wrong approach.
Powerplay Flag
Oh, hells no. You take the pledge, you wear the uniform. End of story.
You're assuming that the reason more people don't participate is because of timidity, which I don't think is justified. The real reason is simple disinterest.
Up/Down Vote
It's certainly never a bad idea to introduce anything that helps communication, but I don't know that this would achieve much. Just seeing raw data of "up down votes" without any planning or rationale behind it is pretty empty.
Could you? Would that be sufficient to justify your activity in game, or would you prefer to actually know why the large number of down votes had been cast so you could see the larger picture?
I'm not totally opposed to this as it seems at worst to be benign, but my feeling is that anyone sufficiently invested in Powerplay will be following forum threads, alliance directives, Reddit postings and other sources to make up their minds about how best to support the Power, while others who are not so interested either won't be Powerplaying at all or will just go and do undermining combat because that's the easiest and most satisfying thing to do. Both will probably not pay much attention to the up/down votes.
Freedom Fighters
Best news so far - hooray! Freedom fighters does sound interesting, but more so because it is something outside the current structure of Powerplay and has general relevance to both individual pilots and minor factions.
No! Enough of the cotton-wool padding - this is Elite: Dangerous
More Powerful Ethos versus Government Effect
LOL, you left the best for last - it's not a small change, it's a subtle change, and a great idea. Please go with this one!
Missions, Variety and Rewards
Good to know. Lack of variety is one of the big issues. I guess somewhere in the planning stage someone thought that Powerplay would have to have a very rigid structure with balance imposed by only having one kind of mission for each activity carried out for a Power. It makes for good accounting, but a dull game.
Conclusion
Thanks for engaging with us on this Sandro, it's appreciated
For what it's worth my feeling is that the upcoming player minor factions will be the thing that actually saves Powerplay, and the critical thing will be looking at activities at this low level and how they can directly influence a Power. I bet there will be things that arise after the minor factions get going that will change the entire shape of how Powerplay is structured.
Just consider what it will mean when instead of many players working directly in support of a Power, we have many minor factions within each Power's area of influence, all intent on supporting or opposing that Power. The shift in dynamics will be huge.
I approve. There's an additional angle to consider: If you are gunning for any sort of benefrit, you can't actually take "time out" right now and just do something else - mostly exploring, but even focussing on a CG is completely out of the question. You can see the result in the many, many failed CGs in recent days.
I'm on the fence about this one. If the cooldown is too large, it will prevent players from enjoying the game in both ways as they desire anyway, if it's too short it can be abused. Couldn't you make it participation-based?
Carrying power commodities works similar to carrying illegal goods - if an enemy supporter scans you when you carry them, you get flagged as an enemy for a while.
If you attack a supporter of an enemy faction, you get flagged as an enemy for those guys for a time and become fair game to shoot down.
Undermining a system controlled by a faction flags you as an enemy of that faction.
The time period would be ~1 week, but explicetly not wear off at the end of the cycle.
This way you can make an ad-hoc decision to participate or not, you might see more varied player interaction - interdict other players, scan cargo hold, let them go if they are clean - and you even add an element of strategy - trying to stay undetected when working for your power.
Maybe add a voluntary flag "yes I am an active supporter and enjoy pvp, attack me if you dare" for pvp players and RP faction militias.
Yes this would be tons more development effort, but it might make for a much, much better experience.
Works for Reddit, and should be a big improvement over what we have now. I approve.
I approve. You should be able to support a new system easily - perhaps switching once per cycle or so - with the hostility flag from the powers you opposed lingering for a while. If you want to off the entire galaxy, why should anybody stop you?
Make freedom fighter coupled with support of [System Name] Independent Party or [System Name] Freedom Fighters minor factions. That way, once such a system has been freed, and that faction thus put in control, people could then support that faction and it might expand, becoming a power in its own right which then in turn suffers freedom fighters!
Also, I don't think you need to be worried about freedom fighter affecting players as much as pledging to a major power, since it's a more... specialized? niche? choice, and presumably you can pick & choose much better who you will annoy by your activities (based on what system you choose to support).
Undecided on this one. If you make it more worth-while to attack individual systems, the communications/coordination problems might just increase. Keep this option for a second round, see how the rest plays out first.
Good, I feel you can do a lot of good here with relatively cost-effective effort.
Thanks for posting the suggestions.
Some nice ideas there, although the suggestion about favour doesn't work for me because i don't like how merits are earned in the first place.
I'm not a trader, i find trading boring, and supporting (fortification) is basically too similar to trading. Go to A collect, go to B deliver. Yes, i can undermine, but then that's not supporting my faction, and i see the need to ensure a power is fortified first.
So for me to get involved in Powerplay i need a way to earn support (fortification) merits by doing other activities, such as combat or mining, or delivering exploration data.... basically anything that isn't just run from A to B.
I'm not a trader, i find trading boring, and supporting (fortification) is basically too similar to trading. Go to A collect, go to B deliver. Yes, i can undermine, but then that's not supporting my faction, and i see the need to ensure a power is fortified first.
So for me to get involved in Powerplay i need a way to earn support (fortification) merits by doing other activities, such as combat or mining, or delivering exploration data.... basically anything that isn't just run from A to B.
I would like to see a better way to flip our systems to the government that lowers the CC cost, but I can't figure out how you guys choose which governments are represented in the Control system. For example: In Damoorai it has 12 exploited systems. It is now Corporate in the Control system due to Influence. 6 Exploited planets are Corporate, 6 are Patron. But when I go to Damoorai to do quests to raise our Patron influence there are absolutely no choice for Patronage Factions. Even though Patronage owns 6 of the exploited systems of Damoorai, or half. How can this be? how are the 5 factions in the control system selected?
Also, I think Merits should never expire. It would stop systems being fortified 5000%
Last edited:
No, just no.
Wow, my prediction was correct: after the Powerplay we'll have the Powerless play for CMDRs not pledged to any power.
I don't see any sense in it, if one doesn't enjoy Powerplay, they would better just ignore it, that take part in it anyway, only in a form of "freedom fighters".
Why would an independent commander care if their home system is free of Powers or not? Do the Powers make them pay taxes for operating within their territory? Or maybe Power-aligned ships interdict independent pilots in their territory? Or what?
Now, wait a moment. The Powerplay manual says the opposite: you have to flip the control system first before you can also flip the 50% of surrounding systems and have additional effect. So which is true? Though why do I even bother asking, it's not like you can actually know how your game works.
Anyway, effect on per-system basis would be really nice. Even nicer if it's proportional not to just the number of systems under certain government's rule, but to the population (maybe divided by the total population in the cluster).
A way to create more dynamic and interesting scenarios
As I have earlier posted on reddit here https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/3eiuew/with_all_this_talk_on_group_created_minor/
I'll just copy paste what I have written:
The new idea of a Freedom Fighter is quite impossible with the way Fortification and Undermining works. A Power losing profit CC by undermining isnt enough, you need to be able to affect the controlled system you are targeting more directly, or else there is no way to carve your own space and fight for it.
My idea is changing how it works and implementing a new state for a controlled system that is successfully undermined. The name of this state is:
Imminent Revolt
How it is triggered:
When a system is successfully undermined in a week (without being fully fortified). This system will enter a state of Imminent Revolt on the next week and will appear as a priority for fortification.
The outcomes:
• Revolt. If the system is 100% undermined and has more percentage in undermining than fortification, the system will be no longer in control of any power and a gap would appear. This system will enter on a 1 week cool down in which the same power isn't allowed to prepare it for expansion, but others are welcome to try.
• Oppression. If the system is 100% fortified and has more percentage in fortification than undermining, it will then be counted fortified and get out of the state of imminent revolt. Without a cooldown period, it can be undermined again and go back into the state of imminent revolt if successfully undermined.
• Stalemate. If both the undermining and fortification goals don't reach 100%, the system will continue on its state of imminent revolt for the following week. The CC profit will count as if there was no fortification or undermining, just as if a system fails to meet the threshold or is cancelled.
This new mechanic would not only give a better fighting chance of player created factions to arise, but would also give PP more strategy, dynamics and more focused conflicts. This would also be better than the proposed state of collapse as it doesn't directly reward over fortification/undermining caused by merit grinders.
Thanks for reading.
As I have earlier posted on reddit here https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDangerous/comments/3eiuew/with_all_this_talk_on_group_created_minor/
I'll just copy paste what I have written:
The new idea of a Freedom Fighter is quite impossible with the way Fortification and Undermining works. A Power losing profit CC by undermining isnt enough, you need to be able to affect the controlled system you are targeting more directly, or else there is no way to carve your own space and fight for it.
My idea is changing how it works and implementing a new state for a controlled system that is successfully undermined. The name of this state is:
Imminent Revolt
How it is triggered:
When a system is successfully undermined in a week (without being fully fortified). This system will enter a state of Imminent Revolt on the next week and will appear as a priority for fortification.
The outcomes:
• Revolt. If the system is 100% undermined and has more percentage in undermining than fortification, the system will be no longer in control of any power and a gap would appear. This system will enter on a 1 week cool down in which the same power isn't allowed to prepare it for expansion, but others are welcome to try.
• Oppression. If the system is 100% fortified and has more percentage in fortification than undermining, it will then be counted fortified and get out of the state of imminent revolt. Without a cooldown period, it can be undermined again and go back into the state of imminent revolt if successfully undermined.
• Stalemate. If both the undermining and fortification goals don't reach 100%, the system will continue on its state of imminent revolt for the following week. The CC profit will count as if there was no fortification or undermining, just as if a system fails to meet the threshold or is cancelled.
This new mechanic would not only give a better fighting chance of player created factions to arise, but would also give PP more strategy, dynamics and more focused conflicts. This would also be better than the proposed state of collapse as it doesn't directly reward over fortification/undermining caused by merit grinders.
Thanks for reading.
Last edited:
typos
To use a well-known phrase... Okay, I'll bite!
Here are my suggestions...
Integrate "Power" Stuff With Minor Faction Allegiances
Like this...
That alone opens up a LOAD of "integration-friendly" possibilities...
BBS Missions
Once some Minor Factions are given Power-based allegiance (as an extension of Major Faction allegiance), the impact of some Bulletin Board missions will be implicitly Power-related. Powers will benefit/suffer from mission activity if the "sponsoring" and/or "target" Minor Factions are allied to a Power figure.
We already have missions that are unavailable because "this faction does not trust you enough". Extend that to include the Minor Faction's Allegiance, compared against the pilot's pledged status...
So, for high-level pledged pilots in relevant locations (ie. where their Power is active), all available mission types become "Power" missions. This means greater variety. And going forward, every single mission "variety" enhancement will be leveraged straight into PowerPlay.
For pilots, Minor Faction Reputation gains/losses could be aligned with Power Stuff in interesting ways. Currently, the Major Faction reputation rises and falls in line with Minor Faction reputation. Consider the possibilities of extending this to something like the "Favour" concept (or even just calling in "Power Reputation", and keeping all those ducks in a row).
It also has the neat benefit for selling exploration data. When sold to UC at stations owned by "Power-allied" Minor Factions, Power-related benefits could flow.
Given all the above, pilots could then play as they wish, while still being engaged with Power Stuff. 100% of existing in-game mechanics would have Power carry-over.
Impact of Minor Faction Rework on Global Power Mechanics
The above Minor Faction integration invites a re-imagining of the weirder Power concepts like Exploitation, Command Capital, etc.
If a system's Controlling Minor Faction is allied with the nearby Power (ie. controlling system close by), some concept other than "exploited" can be used. Perhaps such systems are more like "coalitions", or "bloc systems", or "aligned". If the Controlling Minor faction is not allied with the nearby Power, stick with "exploited".
Command Capital value could change based on the Controlling Minor Faction's level of influence (and its alliance). Systems could then gain and lose profitability based on their Minor Faction situation - famine, war, boom, flipping, etc.
Pilots would collectively have a vested interest in "building up" individual system health and well-being, to keep the Command Capital flowing. Keeping the population on-side with the favoured Controlling Minor Faction would be key to a stable power structure and support base.
Review Power Pledge Costs, Benefits and FUN FACTOR
The benefits of being pledged to a Power are pretty dodgy. The quirky bonus equipment is AT BEST "not better" than regular stuff, and more often worse.
The negative impacts of being pledged are many, and can be a real turn-off. Loss of freedom to roam without a target painted on your head. Distorted play, like being made to wait 30 minutes for another "parcel of stuff" to be handed out (people logging in via laptop at work, camping stations, collecting goods to ship in the evening). No progressive credit earning. No time to enjoy Power-conferred bonuses like bounty/exploration multipliers, due to the "either/or" approach to Power vs. non-Power actions. The way the merit decay makes pilots feel inside. The limited mission styles and unbalanced merit earnings. The list goes on.
This needs a fundamental reappraisal!
You need to ask some serious questions for PowerPlay to answer.
Example...
Being interdicted by "rival power" hit squads in your own Power HQ.
Sounds like fun - a bit of risk, a bit of pew-pew. But...
The same analysis should be run through for:
etc.
Leverage Existing Game Mechanics for Additional Power Benefits
Look to use what you already have, to give PowerPlay some actual sparkle, and some point. For example,
Rapid Response Squadrons
The higher your "level" as a pledged pilot, the more likely it is that a Power Rapid Response Wing will be deployed to assist you if you are attacked. Just use the same sort of spawn mechanic as the "system authority" response, but with Power-aligned NPC ships. Have them turn up faster if you are close to your HQ or Control systems. That way, if you are attacked by those silly "rival Power hit squads" in your own HQ, a squadron of angry Eagles appears to shoot them up.
Suddenly, there is a real-world benefit to being a pledged Pilot - your own wing of defenders, appearing on demand.
Redeem Bounty Vouchers and Combat Bonds Anywhere in Power Space
In the same way that you can currently land on any station to cash in a Bounty Voucher or Combat Bond for an in-system Minor Faction, make it possible to cash them in for any Minor Faction in Power-controlled space, if you dock at a station in that Power region.
Another instant benefit to being a pledged pilot - no need to travel to every darn system controlled by your Power. Convenient cashing in of a broad range of vouchers, facilitated by your friendly neighbourhood Power.
Make Sure Stuff Actually Works Properly and Consistently
Please shore up the Background Sim. Run extra internal simulations, add some extra back-end debugging, publish what is supposed to happen and when (so the players can actually differentiate "correct" and "incorrect" behaviour), etc. Us players have been tearing their hair out right from 1.0, through to 1.2, and then still more crazy stuff hit the BGS when 1.3 arrived. This demoralises, frustrates and discourages the very groups you need to engage.
Please improve stuff like relevance of ship spawning, NPC AI, etc. It doesn't make sense for roaming hit squads to be blithering idiots who cannot shoot straight. It doesn't make sense that they fly around unopposed in enemy power regions (Hint: We all know NPCs don't actually interdict other NPCs, but at least spawn ships in such a way as to pretend they do).
Please address the CRAZY EDGE CONDITION mess that PowerPlay introduces. It really shows its rough edges right now, and makes it look exactly like a layer slapped on top of an existing game world. For example,
Indeed, please consider ensuring Rule Of Law is restored across Elite space. If there is jurisdictional authority, there is NO justification for allowing a ship to attack a CLEAN ship without itself becoming WANTED. It shouldn't matter who is "pulling the strings"; An unlawful attack is an unlawful attack. If a manipulative Power wants to press buttons and have someone killed, get them to issue a bounty on a pilot that has done them wrong. Work WITH the legal system... don't compromise/discard it for the sake of Power Pew-Pew.
- - - - - - - -
Summary - Final Words
If PowerPlay worked like this, above, I'd actually be interested in playing it. It would be integrated with the "proper" Elite Dangerous, would be as fun and involving as the "proper" Elite Dangerous, and would be inclusive of existing gameplay activities... which could occur under the "PowerPlay" umbrella.
Unfortunately, as it stands today, PowerPlay gets an emphatic "hell, no" from me. It comes across as a minimally integrated add-on layer that could have been slapped on top of practically any multiplayer game with a map. World of Tanks, Elder Scrolls, Star Wars, heck - it could be plonked on Minecraft. But it would transform none of them, benefit none of them, and be a disappointing add-on... because it's not Right.
I'm sorry to be so blunt here, but PowerPlay strikes me as being a "separate" layer so as not to break anything else already in and running. These are the kinds of compromises that happen when live-running products are enhanced and extended... without significant resources being available to do the kind of job that would have been done if tackled prior to release. With the approach, "For God's sake, don't change the existing stuff!", you're left with a system that is, as Michael Brookes described it, "deliberately kept separate". Yes, it's pretty clear that it's been kept separate, let me tell you!
But it wasn't kept separate, I fear, in order to enhance the gameplay experience. The gameplay experience, in all honesty, is not good. It was kept separate because that limited the risks behind the PowerPlay code changes.
That design and delivery approach was reasonably successful at not breaking everything else, I guess. To me, though, it was NOT successful at delivering a compelling new way of enjoying Elite Dangerous.
It's all well and good to say, "You don't have to like it, and don't have to play it", but you should really WANT players to like it, and WANT them to be keen to play it! Months of effort went into this stuff, instead of being put into other things on the to-do list. True, PowerPlay didn't destroy the integrity of the existing game code, but in my book, it didn't deliver compelling, rich and fun gameplay experiences - which is surely the key objective here...?
To fix PowerPlay, I really think you need to take a good, hard look at the decision making behind the allowed scope of changes. Because just tinkering with add-on bits (Favour) and magic numbers (expansion formulae) won't resurrect PowerPlay.
I reckon you need to commit to a full and proper rework and BGS integration of PowerPlay... with all that it entails in terms of software risk, extra testing, community involvement and rollout complexity.
Don't go all Secret Squirrel on us again, please. Don't just "tinker" with PowerPlay around the edges. Discuss the issues with your playerbase, then dive in with confidence and build it properly. Throw away all the not-fun/frustrating/boring stuff (most of it, in my opinion), and integrate it. Not as a "separate" slap-on layer, but as a core set of mechanics alongside everything else.
- - - - - - - -
That's my list of stuff... thanks for asking for feedback.
Good luck!
To use a well-known phrase... Okay, I'll bite!
Here are my suggestions...
Integrate "Power" Stuff With Minor Faction Allegiances
Like this...
That alone opens up a LOAD of "integration-friendly" possibilities...
BBS Missions
Once some Minor Factions are given Power-based allegiance (as an extension of Major Faction allegiance), the impact of some Bulletin Board missions will be implicitly Power-related. Powers will benefit/suffer from mission activity if the "sponsoring" and/or "target" Minor Factions are allied to a Power figure.
We already have missions that are unavailable because "this faction does not trust you enough". Extend that to include the Minor Faction's Allegiance, compared against the pilot's pledged status...
- Use the interplay between Minor Faction Reputation and pilots' Power "Pledged" Allegiance to determine which missions are available.
- Power "sensitive" missions (ie. ones that could impact system control on the Power landscape) would only be available to appropriately pledged pilots.
- Use pledged pilot Levels in their Power progress to unlock the more interesting missions.
So, for high-level pledged pilots in relevant locations (ie. where their Power is active), all available mission types become "Power" missions. This means greater variety. And going forward, every single mission "variety" enhancement will be leveraged straight into PowerPlay.
For pilots, Minor Faction Reputation gains/losses could be aligned with Power Stuff in interesting ways. Currently, the Major Faction reputation rises and falls in line with Minor Faction reputation. Consider the possibilities of extending this to something like the "Favour" concept (or even just calling in "Power Reputation", and keeping all those ducks in a row).
It also has the neat benefit for selling exploration data. When sold to UC at stations owned by "Power-allied" Minor Factions, Power-related benefits could flow.
Given all the above, pilots could then play as they wish, while still being engaged with Power Stuff. 100% of existing in-game mechanics would have Power carry-over.
Impact of Minor Faction Rework on Global Power Mechanics
The above Minor Faction integration invites a re-imagining of the weirder Power concepts like Exploitation, Command Capital, etc.
If a system's Controlling Minor Faction is allied with the nearby Power (ie. controlling system close by), some concept other than "exploited" can be used. Perhaps such systems are more like "coalitions", or "bloc systems", or "aligned". If the Controlling Minor faction is not allied with the nearby Power, stick with "exploited".
Command Capital value could change based on the Controlling Minor Faction's level of influence (and its alliance). Systems could then gain and lose profitability based on their Minor Faction situation - famine, war, boom, flipping, etc.
Pilots would collectively have a vested interest in "building up" individual system health and well-being, to keep the Command Capital flowing. Keeping the population on-side with the favoured Controlling Minor Faction would be key to a stable power structure and support base.
Review Power Pledge Costs, Benefits and FUN FACTOR
The benefits of being pledged to a Power are pretty dodgy. The quirky bonus equipment is AT BEST "not better" than regular stuff, and more often worse.
The negative impacts of being pledged are many, and can be a real turn-off. Loss of freedom to roam without a target painted on your head. Distorted play, like being made to wait 30 minutes for another "parcel of stuff" to be handed out (people logging in via laptop at work, camping stations, collecting goods to ship in the evening). No progressive credit earning. No time to enjoy Power-conferred bonuses like bounty/exploration multipliers, due to the "either/or" approach to Power vs. non-Power actions. The way the merit decay makes pilots feel inside. The limited mission styles and unbalanced merit earnings. The list goes on.
This needs a fundamental reappraisal!
You need to ask some serious questions for PowerPlay to answer.
- What is FUN about PowerPlay? If it's not really good fun, why do it?
- What is CHALLENGING about PowerPlay? If it's not an intellectual, organisational and/or skill-based challenge, why do it?
- What is BORING about PowerPlay? If it is boring, get rid of it!
- What is ANNOYING about PowerPlay? If something is annoying, was it supposed to be "fun" or "challenging", but is being let down by the mechanics involved? If so, fix the mechanics making it annoying.
- What DRAWS YOU IN to the "living galaxy" when involved in PowerPlay?
- What BREAKS IMMERSION and smashes the concept of a "living galaxy" when involved in PowerPlay?
- What feels like ADVANCEMENT when flying around doing things in PowerPlay?
- What feels POINTLESS when flying around doing things in PowerPlay?
Example...
Being interdicted by "rival power" hit squads in your own Power HQ.
Sounds like fun - a bit of risk, a bit of pew-pew. But...
- If the attacking ships are idiot-level NPCs, it's no challenge - so BORING.
- If it happens too frequently, it becomes ANNOYING. It is also IMMERSION-BREAKING, as there is no sense in rival power hit squads roaming free in your HQ system.
- If you are given a reward for successfully eliminating a rival power hit squad, great - you can at least gain some ADVANCEMENT. But to gain no benefit whatsoever makes the exercise POINTLESS.
The same analysis should be run through for:
- Each available mission type.
- Each way of earning "merits".
- Reason for expanding your Power.
- Each Power-specific magic weapon/module.
- Each facet of "non-Power" style Elite play, from the perspective of a pledged pilot. Is Trading still FUN? Does Exploration benefit Powers, or is it pointless? Does being pledged to an exploration-focused Power actually help ADVANCE your exploration gameplay, or render it POINTLESS?
etc.
Leverage Existing Game Mechanics for Additional Power Benefits
Look to use what you already have, to give PowerPlay some actual sparkle, and some point. For example,
Rapid Response Squadrons
The higher your "level" as a pledged pilot, the more likely it is that a Power Rapid Response Wing will be deployed to assist you if you are attacked. Just use the same sort of spawn mechanic as the "system authority" response, but with Power-aligned NPC ships. Have them turn up faster if you are close to your HQ or Control systems. That way, if you are attacked by those silly "rival Power hit squads" in your own HQ, a squadron of angry Eagles appears to shoot them up.
Suddenly, there is a real-world benefit to being a pledged Pilot - your own wing of defenders, appearing on demand.
Redeem Bounty Vouchers and Combat Bonds Anywhere in Power Space
In the same way that you can currently land on any station to cash in a Bounty Voucher or Combat Bond for an in-system Minor Faction, make it possible to cash them in for any Minor Faction in Power-controlled space, if you dock at a station in that Power region.
Another instant benefit to being a pledged pilot - no need to travel to every darn system controlled by your Power. Convenient cashing in of a broad range of vouchers, facilitated by your friendly neighbourhood Power.
Make Sure Stuff Actually Works Properly and Consistently
Please shore up the Background Sim. Run extra internal simulations, add some extra back-end debugging, publish what is supposed to happen and when (so the players can actually differentiate "correct" and "incorrect" behaviour), etc. Us players have been tearing their hair out right from 1.0, through to 1.2, and then still more crazy stuff hit the BGS when 1.3 arrived. This demoralises, frustrates and discourages the very groups you need to engage.
Please improve stuff like relevance of ship spawning, NPC AI, etc. It doesn't make sense for roaming hit squads to be blithering idiots who cannot shoot straight. It doesn't make sense that they fly around unopposed in enemy power regions (Hint: We all know NPCs don't actually interdict other NPCs, but at least spawn ships in such a way as to pretend they do).
Please address the CRAZY EDGE CONDITION mess that PowerPlay introduces. It really shows its rough edges right now, and makes it look exactly like a layer slapped on top of an existing game world. For example,
- Empire Internal Security not stepping in to help a a CLEAN Imperial Earl being attacked by CLEAN ships in a system that has a "Controlling Minor Faction" allied to the Empire. Supposedly because a Federation-aligned Power figure is somehow "in charge".
- Said Imperial Earl becoming WANTED for defending himself.
Indeed, please consider ensuring Rule Of Law is restored across Elite space. If there is jurisdictional authority, there is NO justification for allowing a ship to attack a CLEAN ship without itself becoming WANTED. It shouldn't matter who is "pulling the strings"; An unlawful attack is an unlawful attack. If a manipulative Power wants to press buttons and have someone killed, get them to issue a bounty on a pilot that has done them wrong. Work WITH the legal system... don't compromise/discard it for the sake of Power Pew-Pew.
- - - - - - - -
Summary - Final Words
If PowerPlay worked like this, above, I'd actually be interested in playing it. It would be integrated with the "proper" Elite Dangerous, would be as fun and involving as the "proper" Elite Dangerous, and would be inclusive of existing gameplay activities... which could occur under the "PowerPlay" umbrella.
Unfortunately, as it stands today, PowerPlay gets an emphatic "hell, no" from me. It comes across as a minimally integrated add-on layer that could have been slapped on top of practically any multiplayer game with a map. World of Tanks, Elder Scrolls, Star Wars, heck - it could be plonked on Minecraft. But it would transform none of them, benefit none of them, and be a disappointing add-on... because it's not Right.
I'm sorry to be so blunt here, but PowerPlay strikes me as being a "separate" layer so as not to break anything else already in and running. These are the kinds of compromises that happen when live-running products are enhanced and extended... without significant resources being available to do the kind of job that would have been done if tackled prior to release. With the approach, "For God's sake, don't change the existing stuff!", you're left with a system that is, as Michael Brookes described it, "deliberately kept separate". Yes, it's pretty clear that it's been kept separate, let me tell you!
But it wasn't kept separate, I fear, in order to enhance the gameplay experience. The gameplay experience, in all honesty, is not good. It was kept separate because that limited the risks behind the PowerPlay code changes.
That design and delivery approach was reasonably successful at not breaking everything else, I guess. To me, though, it was NOT successful at delivering a compelling new way of enjoying Elite Dangerous.
It's all well and good to say, "You don't have to like it, and don't have to play it", but you should really WANT players to like it, and WANT them to be keen to play it! Months of effort went into this stuff, instead of being put into other things on the to-do list. True, PowerPlay didn't destroy the integrity of the existing game code, but in my book, it didn't deliver compelling, rich and fun gameplay experiences - which is surely the key objective here...?
To fix PowerPlay, I really think you need to take a good, hard look at the decision making behind the allowed scope of changes. Because just tinkering with add-on bits (Favour) and magic numbers (expansion formulae) won't resurrect PowerPlay.
I reckon you need to commit to a full and proper rework and BGS integration of PowerPlay... with all that it entails in terms of software risk, extra testing, community involvement and rollout complexity.
Don't go all Secret Squirrel on us again, please. Don't just "tinker" with PowerPlay around the edges. Discuss the issues with your playerbase, then dive in with confidence and build it properly. Throw away all the not-fun/frustrating/boring stuff (most of it, in my opinion), and integrate it. Not as a "separate" slap-on layer, but as a core set of mechanics alongside everything else.
- - - - - - - -
That's my list of stuff... thanks for asking for feedback.
Good luck!
Last edited:
Anything that combats the decay of merits for players that cannot play hours a day in order to maintain ranks would be great. Give casuals a chance to participate in content, and able to eventually be rewarded.
I like the idea of the flag idea too, which beats defection that's for sure when you wish to explore outside your power's space.
My suggestion is that PowerPlay needs mission variety to stay viable, doing the same thing back and forth back and forth sets a new benchmark for grind.
Perhaps random generated PowerPlay specific community goals which are paid out in merits instead? This would provide variety as well as good commander social interaction or flash-points of action. Thoughts?
I like the idea of the flag idea too, which beats defection that's for sure when you wish to explore outside your power's space.
My suggestion is that PowerPlay needs mission variety to stay viable, doing the same thing back and forth back and forth sets a new benchmark for grind.
Perhaps random generated PowerPlay specific community goals which are paid out in merits instead? This would provide variety as well as good commander social interaction or flash-points of action. Thoughts?
Last edited:
Ahh...internet "discussions"...aren't they glorious!
So is ignore features of this forum, although I can predict what Space Fan and it's ilk will write, so I don't even have to see posts