(info) First bonus for playing in OPEN under consideration for PP
- Thread starter Abil Midena
- Start date
- Status
That equality is flawed under a competitive scope of examination, what Sandro is doing is precisely to uphold the actual equality:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=237773&p=3669496&viewfull=1#post3669496
Last edited:
My thinking for this? At the moment, any way I slice it, I can't come to any conclusion other than Commanders in Open Play have a tougher time than those in Private Groups or Solo. So the playing field is basically uneven as it stands and in this case, maybe change could make things better. -- Sandro
The modes are equal in the sense we all can do the same activities in each mode. However like Sandro said it is unequal for Open players currently.
I can't see any reason to incentivize any mode or activity. Everyone bought a game with 3 modes of play, and an interactive BGS. This kind of thing just exposes the fact that the PvP community cannot sustain themselves and needs bribes to attract targets. Once again, a part of the game could be held hostage to PvP, just as player interaction is. Open doesn't deserve special care.
The slippery slope is already pulling people down. When most players simply use PP for it's earning potential, wouldn't they just do what they do, for less impact, same reward, while they continue to deliver the packages as ever? This idea is just pandering.
The slippery slope is already pulling people down. When most players simply use PP for it's earning potential, wouldn't they just do what they do, for less impact, same reward, while they continue to deliver the packages as ever? This idea is just pandering.
Preferably, just use the default font color, please. It can be somewhat difficult reading posts otherwise. I use the Elite: Dangerous forum theme, which has a dark background and light text color.
...
On topic:
In general, I think this makes sense within the context of Powerplay, as that has certain PVP elements to it. That being said, within the larger game, I think this is a bad move and sets a bad precedent. Solo should be just as valid a game play option as any other. The fault, if any, was in how Powerplay was implemented into the game in the first place. Players could just as easily group up in a private group if they wanted to play together on their terms and do as they like. Playing in Open has some risks, yes, but those are risks that those playing in open are wanting to take, because it is enjoyable to them. They aren't being punished for playing in open because it can be more difficult, they're being rewarded with the possibility of it being more difficult.
Different outlooks, I suppose, and people seem to prefer complaining instead of enjoying what they've got. [General forum trend I've noticed.]
Cheers.
Last edited:
There are players who play in Open with a will to dominate and compete and WIN.
And they are mostly misrepresented as "Open Players" because they also play in Solo when they're grinding max-profit, and they also play in Group when they're working on their strategies and tactics and techniques.
They use every aspect of the game that they can - every mechanism to its full advantage.
And they are mostly misrepresented as "Open Players" because they also play in Solo when they're grinding max-profit, and they also play in Group when they're working on their strategies and tactics and techniques.
They use every aspect of the game that they can - every mechanism to its full advantage.
This is of course a conteoversial topic and it's extremely hard to speculate on due to the number of variables involved but I'll try to throw in my two cents.
I believe, while they are said to be, the three modes are in fact NOT equal. They are only equal in the numbers which affect BGS and PP per player action, and in commodity prices. Other than these pretty demonstrable numbers, equality simply doesn't exist.
Of course, the inequality comes in the form of risk vs reward. It is different in a lot of cases so as I said, large number of variables here. As an example, trading is most efficient in solo, with undisputable minimum risk, and HazRes farming is most efficient in PG in groups of 2 to 3, based on my experiments with friends. Mining is, again, most efficient in Solo.
Open simply doesn't have anything to show for in these areas. It only increases risk and does nothing to reward.
I see these issues being adressed as nothing other than trying to balance the modes, pushing them towards equality, not away from it.
Think about it this way: Since we have a history of balancing game mechanics in multiplayer games, between mechanics seemingly having no relation, why notnuse a similar approach here? If there was a character in an MMO, which is invisible by nature and can't be attacked directly because of that, you'd expect that character to be extremely ineffective in everything it does. It would have very weak attacks, long cooldowns and even constant debuffs so it would receive much higher damage from area attacs for example. Solo mode is essentially this.
I believe, while they are said to be, the three modes are in fact NOT equal. They are only equal in the numbers which affect BGS and PP per player action, and in commodity prices. Other than these pretty demonstrable numbers, equality simply doesn't exist.
Of course, the inequality comes in the form of risk vs reward. It is different in a lot of cases so as I said, large number of variables here. As an example, trading is most efficient in solo, with undisputable minimum risk, and HazRes farming is most efficient in PG in groups of 2 to 3, based on my experiments with friends. Mining is, again, most efficient in Solo.
Open simply doesn't have anything to show for in these areas. It only increases risk and does nothing to reward.
I see these issues being adressed as nothing other than trying to balance the modes, pushing them towards equality, not away from it.
Think about it this way: Since we have a history of balancing game mechanics in multiplayer games, between mechanics seemingly having no relation, why notnuse a similar approach here? If there was a character in an MMO, which is invisible by nature and can't be attacked directly because of that, you'd expect that character to be extremely ineffective in everything it does. It would have very weak attacks, long cooldowns and even constant debuffs so it would receive much higher damage from area attacs for example. Solo mode is essentially this.
I have no idea why it changed my font color. Must of been a bug from posting in both forums.
I understand your points, but what I want is for everyone to want to play in Open, and I think this type of proactive thinking by the Devs will do just that. Just my opinion mind you.
And this is a great representation of the many variables which need to be balanced in regards to play modes. Since everyone is free to choose whatever mode they want anytime, there is imho no harm in trying to balance risk vs reward in them.
This should be good news for those still doing Powerplay. We in Contrail quit PP precisely because in the end it was just all a futile grind where you're fighting ghosts who can undermine and do all the other stuff in perfect safety in Solo or Private Group. Giving a bonus to those doing PP stuff in open will add some reward to the extra risk and it'll provide a more lively Galaxy as not quite as many will squirrel away in their safe little Solo/Group mode.
I hope the devs expand upon it and reward other activities done in open as well. Influencing the BGS come to mind - especially now that a lot of player-groups have their own minor factions. Same thing as PP really, only on a smaller scale. Player groups like to nurture their own minor faction, and it is frustrating when ones efforts get undermined by people you can not see, much less 'dissuade' from continuing to undermine.
As for those more occupied by making coin than getting muddy with PP or the BGS - doing end to end trading in open should give a risk-bonus. Say 10% profit-bonus. Like a wingman-divident, only for shipping goods about in open. Would make the pirates happy again, wouldn't it Gluttony?
Though of-course, some better player-bounty and tracking of 'most wanted' players mechanic should then also be in place. And more civilized systems should have a much higher law-enforcement presence. Currently it is a bit of a joke...
I hope the devs expand upon it and reward other activities done in open as well. Influencing the BGS come to mind - especially now that a lot of player-groups have their own minor factions. Same thing as PP really, only on a smaller scale. Player groups like to nurture their own minor faction, and it is frustrating when ones efforts get undermined by people you can not see, much less 'dissuade' from continuing to undermine.
As for those more occupied by making coin than getting muddy with PP or the BGS - doing end to end trading in open should give a risk-bonus. Say 10% profit-bonus. Like a wingman-divident, only for shipping goods about in open. Would make the pirates happy again, wouldn't it Gluttony?
Though of-course, some better player-bounty and tracking of 'most wanted' players mechanic should then also be in place. And more civilized systems should have a much higher law-enforcement presence. Currently it is a bit of a joke...
The balance between the modes comes directly from their availability. No one is blocked from using the most effective means to reach their goals. This contention is based on the notion that everyone should be playing against open's backdrop. That open has to be held as special, and in need of propping up. That isn't justified. What it amounts to is bribing players into an environment they wouldn't normally be in, to increase the number of targets available to the PvP crowd. Pandering by any standards.
P.S. Giving more incentives for doing PvE grindy stuff in open isn't going to miraculously turn PP into PvP fun time. Those in open waiting for the masses will still have to do PvE grindy stuff to succeed.
P.S. Giving more incentives for doing PvE grindy stuff in open isn't going to miraculously turn PP into PvP fun time. Those in open waiting for the masses will still have to do PvE grindy stuff to succeed.
Last edited:
The risk is the reward. If not, you've been playing in the wrong mode all along. Just saying.
All I'm gonna say is Sandro's said a lot that never happened. Still waiting for my player id beacons.
Open is only more risky if you chose for it to be more risky. It's been said many of times that it is completely possible to fly in open with minimal risk. Look around for all of the advice offered in the dozens of threads on the matter. Why should a player be rewarded for the possibility of risk? How did open become the measure of how the game is played? It's only portrayed that way by players that want the game to revolve around their personal gamer ethics. I don;t feel the need to reward people for playing the way they want to play, while others doing the same thing are penalized.
Which is a reasonable thought process.
Of course it's speculation, but given that:
- First FD cited that all views were equal.
- Now they're promoting open-PP that enhances your work on the PP-BGS
It's not unreasonable to expect sometime down the line that other activities also have a magnified effect on the BGS. After all, I do remember reading a dev post years ago saying (and I paraphrase here as I CBA looking for it) "if it was up to me we would all be playing open ironman"
Last edited:
As pointed out by others, making Open more rewarding only rewards outbound fortification powers, as those who do inbound will have a choke point in their home system.
So a large power could blot out a smaller one through sheer numbers by camping the home system.
So a large power could blot out a smaller one through sheer numbers by camping the home system.
1: they are not doing the same thing - there is no risk in Solo or Group.
2: no-one is getting penalized. It is merely rewarding the extra risk, not taking anything away from anyone.
I have been playing in open since day one - only times I've been in solo is to land on a crowded outpost or 'mode cycle' to refresh the missions bulletin board. Generally speaking, I do not have a problem with other players - mainly because I go no-where without big guns and a shield to match. Which actually punishes me when doing the trade-thing in an Anaconda. Where Solo and Group players can forego the proper shields and cram in 500+ tonnes of cargo, my trading Conda can only do 400 tonnes.
This holds true for other ships as well, though perhaps maybe not to the same degree. So some reward for the precautions we who play open need take would only be right. Nothing much, but enough to make more want to expose themselves to actual interaction with other players. Most of whom are perfectly nice and helpful - some few of which may look at you as a cargo-piñata.
Last edited:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that kind of the intent?
Last edited:
All of this is at your choice. Now you want your personal choice to mean more than any other player's. All you are saying is that you deserve more rewards because you see open as the hallowed ground. Your choice not to step out of that hallowed ground should benefit you financially. I don;t see it.
- Status