(info) First bonus for playing in OPEN under consideration for PP

[Perseus]

(sigh) Where's the rest of the quote? If you read the whole thing, it was meant to make a point, not a matter of fact.

(sigh) But you making a point is to allude to a matter of fact (or at least your opinion on this matter).
See how easy it is to be condescending?

 

[Zylark]

That those "Open Players" will switch to solo/group when they were shot down too often.

Well that is fine. And safe for them. The cost being, whatever they do in solo or group, won't affect PP or the BGS.

The other side of that coin is, we were all noobs once, but through actually participating in PvP, we got good. Well, in my case, almost decent. Anyhow, if ED would be more geared towards open, we'd have a much more lively galaxy to roam about in. More immersive. It'd create a sustainable environment of interaction, rather than the current model of many if not most squirreling off into their own safe little hobbithole just to grind.

 

[GJ51]

Oh dear another "my immersion broke."

.-.

Not at all. I don't really care about any of it other than to point out that the situation with Power play is just another example of how FD's poor decisions about their game design have continued to create problems for them. We now see kludge after kludge trying to compensate for the consequences of their design decisions. If each mode was fully separated and not impacting your progress in the other modes or the BGS then none of this would be at issue. As stated repeatedly, many warned of the consequences of all this before the game was released, but FD chose the current model.

Now we all get to "enjoy" the consequences of that decision...

My point is - you are all arguing about how best to kludge a remedy for a problem that should never have existed. As a result, no outcome will satisfy everyone at this point.

Personally, I really don't care. I have never, nor do I intend to ever participate in Power Play or Arena. I'm merely pointing out the root cause of the problem. At this point any "remedy" is just a kludge.

 

[Jypson]

(sigh) But you making a point is to allude to a matter of fact (or at least your opinion on this matter).
See how easy it is to be condescending?

You either accidentally or intentionally misquoted me. I guessed the latter as you cut out the rest of the post; hence my haughtiness. If I am incorrect, I apologize.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Agree completely.
I bought a game that the head honcho stated multiple times that all modes are equal.

Under a competitive scope modes are not equal with Solo/Private being incentivized more than open.

Thus, if you truly champion for equality, you should be supporting this change in the context of PP.

 

[DanaM]

Agree completely.
I bought a game that the head honcho stated multiple times that all modes are equal.

So either Frontier is going to disregard it's previous statements or changes to PP being talked about here aren't going to happen.

 

[GluttonyFang]

So either Frontier is going to disregard it's previous statements or changes to PP being talked about here aren't going to happen.

Nope, the possible changes proposed here to PP if anything strengthens and amends the former statement.

 

[Asp Explorer]

The other side of that coin is, we were all noobs once, but through actually participating in PvP, we got good. Well, in my case, almost decent. Anyhow, if ED would be more geared towards open, we'd have a much more lively galaxy to roam about in. More immersive. It'd create a sustainable environment of interaction, rather than the current model of many if not most squirreling off into their own safe little hobbithole just to grind.

I'm not good at PvP - it doesn't really interest me. However I have found that most of my "interactions" in Open have been with PvP players - and many of them simply want to blow me up for the lulz. I don't mind - I can usually escape - but that doesn't really point to an immersive, sustainable environment full of interaction. Rather - it demonstrates the shallowness of the average mindless pew-pew, which doesn't help my game at all.

 

[Ziljan]

All I can say to this is.... Woo Hooooooo!!!!


Faith in the future of Elite Dangerous is restored. I am also very glad to see that Sandro is taking an interest in reinvigorating PP. Hopefully this is combined with a revamp of PP missions to make them as interesting as Smuggling missions (not necessarily the pay, but maybe similarly interesting mechanics )

for example:

Instead of only delivering generic PP cargo, we can deliver sentive top-secret data that can be scanned and "stolen" by opposing factions. Must deliver the data, intact, and undetected within a certain time frame. The global accumulation data itself could grant a strategic bonus to the system.

 

[Faybs]

Having an open play bonus would probably draw more people into open but isn't it rather like FD admitting open play isn't any fun for most and they simply don't know how to fix it? Shouldn't people play in open because they actually want to and not because they feel they have to?

Exactly. I get the impression that FD's main designer (Sandro?) only knows one way to incentivize players, and that is to give them more money. How do we get more people into open? pay them more than in the other modes. Now I fully admit that he's the one making a living out of this and I am not, but I'm pretty sure there have to be more subtle ways of nudging players in one direction or another. Otherwise Machiavelli's "The Prince" would just consist of bribery techniques.

 

[GJ51]

Nope, the possible changes proposed here to PP if anything strengthens and amends the former statement.

Despite the ambiguity of your statement, you are still merely arguing in favor of a subjectively favored kludge.

 

[JosiahD]

As long as there is competition and direct opposition, it's PvP. There are plenty of games where they have modes where opposing teams fight in PvE fashion that creates obstacle of the opposing team. Tera for one has exactly this sort of mechanic where the more PvE mobs one team defeats, the more difficult the opposing team has it in PvE. There is no Pk happening, but it's a PvP mechanic regardless because the final results and what matters for the said mechanic is PvP, not PvE. If we are all fighting in one faction against say thargoid, then it's PvE. But it's clearly not the case.

I actually don't disagree with you here - playing the PvE PP mechanics to oppose other players doing the same thing is a form of PvP. However, it is not an overt form of PvP, it is hidden from view in many ways, apart from monitoring the stats and positions of each power from one cyce to the next. It doesn't even compare, in my opinion, to even playing chess or any board game as a form of PvP, let alone Elite. You can participate in PP and NEVER ever see another player, irrespective of the mode one players. When I dabbled in PP, I played it for weeks - principally in open - and never saw more than a handful of players the whole time - and then only when they were in stations. Simply due to the matchmaking I would expect. Not exactly significantly different to playing PP in solo or a private group, apart from when I was docked. So why incentivise playing it in open when playing it in open, for many (most?), will outwardly be no different to playing it in solo or a private group anyway?
.
Furthermore, by far and away the majority of time people discuss PvP, here or in any other game, they are discussing overt, player-on-player, direct combat, NOT something indirect like PP. While PP has PvP undertones as you describe, for all intents and purposes all most people see are the PvE mechanics overlying that. So as far as most people will be concerned it's PvE, especially as combative PvP - the very thing MOST people envisage when someone talks about PvP - has actually very little to do with PP in the majority of circumstances.

 

[GJ51]

Agree completely.
I bought a game that the head honcho stated multiple times that all modes are equal.

+1

Absolutely correct.

They painted themselves into their own corner, and now they are seeing the results.

This situation is no different than the practice of using mode switching to refresh mission boards. All of these "not in the spirit of the game" consequences can be traced back to the decision to mode switch and allow the progress in each mode to affect the other modes of play.

We can smuggle, kill, pirate, trade slaves, and so on - but OMG - work the game "in a spirit of the game nor intended" and the morality police will frown on you.

LOL - just can't make this stuff up.

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Good, because I've stated here that if they try this with non-competitive mechanics, I'll be in the front line shouting "no," too.

How about CGs would they not be the next step on the potential open buff request? ( not arguing with you it's just a complaint which comes up time to time)

 

[X-Terminator]

If anything else to brong us together then it's about time we converged PC/MAC with XBOX players. Simple solutions to simple problems.

 

[Jukelo]

There is no connection to the PP mechanic and a marketing theory that uses the phrase 'competitive scope'. It's just another attempt at obfuscating the reality of PP. The competition within PP is done by satisfying PvE activities that combine to return a result. No PvP is required. Just good old grinding.

If somebody does something and you try to prevent them from doing it, that's PVP. PVP doesn't require shooting other players, it simply requires adversarial gameplay. It's what it says on the tin: player versus player.
This can take the form of direct combat, but it can also take the form of out-grinding the opponents via PVE as you see in Powerplay and the recent Mobius attacks on the Wolfberg system, or the form of economic wars and espionage like you see in EVE, and even propaganda via various media platforms to out-recruit an opposing group of players as happens in most multiplayer games.
You're applying an exceedingly narrow defintion of pvp to this problem.

 

[Faybs]

+1

Absolutely correct.

They painted themselves into their own corner, and now they are seeing the results.

And they should have realized this the moment people started discussing PvP vs PvE loadouts many months ago. If all modes were really roughly equal, such a discussion would be irrelevant.

 

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commanders!

Gosh, this thread built up steam fast.

I'd just like to make very clear a couple of points.

The concept of an Open Play benefit for Powerplay is purely for Powerplay, not any other aspect of play.

In addition, the benefit is *not* a personal benefit - personal rewards, such as merits, obtained through Powerplay activities would remain identical between Open Play, Private Groups and Solo Play.

Finally, this concept is nothing more than a discussion point right now. There are no guarantees that we will move forward with it, or when we would implement it if we do decide it's a good idea.

 

[GJ51]

And they should have realized this the moment people started discussing PvP vs PvE loadouts many months ago. If all modes were really roughly equal, such a discussion would be irrelevant.

All this was pointed out long before the game was released. I argued unsuccessfully that progress in one mode should not be carried into other modes and that each mode should essentially be totally separate.

Wasn't listened to then, don't expect to be now.

 

[Jypson]

If somebody does something and you try to prevent them from doing it, that's PVP. PVP doesn't require shooting other players, it simply requires adversarial gameplay. It's what it says on the tin: player versus player.
This can take the form of direct combat, but it can also take the form of out-grinding the opponents via PVE as you see in Powerplay and the recent Mobius attacks on the Wolfberg system, or the form of economic wars and espionage like you see in EVE, and even propaganda via various media platforms to out-recruit an opposing group of players as happens in most multiplayer games.
You're applying an exceedingly narrow defintion of pvp to this problem.

True, what was the analogy FDev used? I think it was filling and emptying buckets. It does indeed take two people to try and fill / empty the bucket, but that doesn't meant the ladles have to spar

As far as what PvP means in the context of the forums, I guess that could be debated too