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

[GJ51]

O, why should nature build so foul a den, Unless the gods delight in tragedies?



Read: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=235327

Hey, keep making yourself believe what you want yourself to believe, it might come true one day.



Clearly you don't read what I write. When people are given incentive to play in a certain mode/modes under a competitive scope, there was no equality to begin with, the change is suppose to mediate that.



The fact that you don't read other people's arguments and refuse to address them is the cause to your complete misinterpretation or even potential strawman.

Anyone can claim anyone else's argument to be subjective/suffer from confirmation bias, it's ludicrous as an argument. Especially there are evidence stating the complete contrary to your assertion:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=235327


Read why there was never equality under competitive scope of examination then come back to me, before then, you're just covering your eyes and typing blindly away.



No, you are refusing to comprehend others' arguments that clearly take in the present situation and analyze them appropriately. You are either pleading ignorance to all arguments but your own or have an agenda hidden from plain view.

See how this speculation game gets really really fun?

On the contrary, I do not believe that our positions are not as dissimilar as you may think. Our difference is in our approach to remedy. You rightly point out that by design the implementation of modes is unfair and gives an advantage to Solo and Group play.

I am merely pointing out that trying to compensate for a structural failure without addressing the source of the underlying problem will inevitably lead to kludge remedies that will continually exacerbate the problem, be viewed as unfair by many, and continue to alienate the users and divide them.

You on the other hand seem to advocate that you have an answer that "solves" this problem. I see that as a mere kludge, more likely to have even more unforseen consequences that are likely to compound the problem even further. When you never address a root problem, fixes only lead to more problems that weren't anticipated.

But, by all means, fix away and let us all participate in YOUR vision of "fair".

 

[kilvenny]

I agree that mechanisms need to be found to encourage players into open. The problem is its too easy to switch from solo to open and back again to grab the bonus and then head back to solo, so I am not convinced Sandro's idea adds a lot.

My personal view is that if you align with a power you should be playing in open with no opportunity to switch until you leave the power. I actually think the same should be true for player factions, being a member of one means you play in open. This would put all the regime change into open play which I think is where it should be. However what is also needed is sweeteners to draw solo and PvE players into that environment. I see three obvious ways.

1) Provide activities that force players to use the cheaper ships
2) Power or faction pays the ship insurance or a proportion of it
3) Power or faction provided ships

 

[GluttonyFang]

Yes there is - but what we can do in those groups, to the BGS and to each other, along with what benefits we gain from doing it are exactly the same as in open. That's the essence of my contention that it has to be what you do, not what mode you're in.

But the limitation of membership is what separates the modes. Hence in making the decision to play in a certain mode, the player already "did" something, and it's a choice to be distinguished under a competitive setting.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

On the contrary, I do not believe that our positions are as dissimilar as you may think. Our difference is in our approach to remedy. You rightly point out that by design the implementation of modes is unfair and gives an advantage to Solo and Group play.

Only under a competitive mechanic.

I am merely pointing out that trying to compensate for a structural failure without addressing the source of the underlying problem will inevitably lead to kludge remedies that will continually exacerbate the problem, be viewed as unfair by many, and continue to alienate the users and divide them.

If FD wanted to do this, they would have done it a long time ago considering the amount of threads about it on the forum. Hence why I propose alternatives.

You on the other hand seem to advocate that you have an answer that "solves" this problem. I see that as a mere kludge, more likely to have even more unforseen consequences that are likely to compound the problem even further. When you never address a root problem, fixes only lead to more problems that weren't anticipated.

I write mere proposals, not solutions.

But, by all means, fix away and let us all participate in YOUR vision of "fair".

If it backfires or the sky falls down on top of our heads, we can always revert the change.

 

[Carmaki]

I will say in this thread what I said in the other one...

If Frontier decides to make certain aspects pay out more in Open than in Solo and Private, I will have no problem taking my business elsewhere. I would also try to get a refund for my purchases, but since that's a little out of the question, I will just chalk it up as a learning expense and I will take my money elsewhere.

 

[Arkadi]

If pvp is just optional and not game decisive, then 5th columning is not a problem and doesn't need a counter. If solo underminers were actually making things unbalanced rather than just causing butthurt then they'd need a counter.

See?
it all makes sense now:
to apply force is no solution.

5th columning and solo undermining are different. Solo underminig has the (rather little) risk of NPC fighting back. 5th columning is just really abuse. To pledge a power and ruin their gameplay from within - out of solo mode really is ... bottom drawer and maybe was not intended gameplay from the start. It could be counterd just be veto voting...

 

[GluttonyFang]

I will say in this thread what I said in the other one...

If Frontier decides to make certain aspects pay out more in Open than in Solo and Private, I will have no problem taking my business elsewhere. I would also try to get a refund for my purchases, but since that's a little out of the question, I will just chalk it up as a learning expense and I will take my money elsewhere.

Sandro already said it's PP only, and it has good reasons, relax.

 

[kofeyh]

I will say in this thread what I said in the other one...

If Frontier decides to make certain aspects pay out more in Open than in Solo and Private, I will have no problem taking my business elsewhere. I would also try to get a refund for my purchases, but since that's a little out of the question, I will just chalk it up as a learning expense and I will take my money elsewhere.

And this is why frontier can't win. People using solo because this is literally impossible to stop, threatening the developer. Way to go. Way to gain support. Just threaten everyone.

And people say Open has issues.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

If pvp is just optional and not game decisive, then 5th columning is not a problem and doesn't need a counter. If solo underminers were actually making things unbalanced rather than just causing butthurt then they'd need a counter.

This has nothing to do with PVP. This is because PP literally encourages solo use. You can undermine, fifth-column and everything else with complete impunity. There is absolutely zero risk of any action being undone. Because it's physically impossible.

The war to get PVE added to this game is pretty much destroying any actual value in debate of other topics. Its seeking to use this as a solution to every problem. Frankly it's really boring hearing the same "reasons" recycled to support any argument, all day 'ery day.

It's hard to support such thinking when it goes to such extreme. Both sides of this are getting so religiously out of control it's just crushing all other debate. Come on frontier. Sort this out. Make a decision already so we can all move on.

 

[VR Murgle]

So lemme see if I got this right, there aren't enough easy targets in open so bonuses need to be applied to give people playing in solo and PG incentive to play in Open so they can "entertain" the PvPers? Sound about right? So does that mean there are less PvPers than they would like us to believe or is it that they don't like playing with themselves?

 

[GluttonyFang]

So lemme see if I got this right, there aren't enough easy targets in open so bonuses need to be applied to give people playing in solo and PG incentive to play in Open so they can "entertain" the PvPers? Sound about right? So does that mean there are less PvPers than they would like us to believe or is it that they don't like playing with themselves?

Hah... please don't flame the thread and spend some time reading through the arguments...

 

[veelckoo]

And this is why frontier can't win. People using solo because this is literally impossible to stop, threatening the developer. Way to go. Way to gain support. Just threaten everyone.

And people say Open has issues.

As if FD gives a toss about 'threats'.
They do what they want and it does not seem that they listen to anyone - and that is something that I actually respect even if I would like them to change few things.

I fail to see how fifth columning is impossible to counter. Go into solo with your group and the same. Problem solved. WITHOUT any PVP.
The hole reasoning that PP is purely PVP is baseless. It has the same impact on galaxy as trading - trading solo actively influences prices in stations and players in OPEN can't do a thing to prevent it. Should players in OPEN be more influencial in trading to?

As pointed earlier if you think that throwing peanuts at people will make them play open by all means try - but don't hold your breath.
With all the opinions on PP that are thrown on forums the incentive would have to be really good to change anything.

 

[VR Murgle]

Hah... please don't flame the thread and spend some time reading through the arguments...

Nope not flaming I'm actually a bit puzzled why people need to be strong armed into playing in open if they want to get involved in PP? Where's the harm in them (me) just staying where we are most comfortable? The only reason I can think of is that PvPers would like to take post shots at us and that must mean there aren't enough targets which in turn would mean there aren't enough PvPers or not enough that want to get involved in PP...

 

[Alexander the Grape]

Nope not flaming I'm actually a bit puzzled why people need to be strong armed into playing in open if they want to get involved in PP? Where's the harm in them (me) just staying where we are most comfortable? The only reason I can think of is that PvPers would like to take post shots at us and that must mean there aren't enough targets which in turn would mean there aren't enough PvPers or not enough that want to get involved in PP...

There's no harm, and no strong arming. The suggested change is simply an increase in impact of Open Powerplay to compensate for the added risk.

 

[Kristov]

> For the sake of this argument, let's assume I play Solo and choose Power 1 and you play Open and choose Power 2. Solo vs Open, not fair, right? But is there not Solo or Group players also choosing Power 2 and conversely Open players choosing Power 1? Or is there some deeper meta I'm not aware of?

> I guess it's not in everyone's best interest for me to be King

Deeper meta, as if all things worked as they should, you could have 50 people in Open split 25/25 and 50 in Solo split 25/25 and they would balance each other out. Problem is, the people in Solo face no competition, so they gain an advantage over the people in Open who aren't as skilled in combat, so the people in Open switch to Solo to avoid all confrontation. Next thing you know, everyone's in Solo because it's safe, and no one can counter anyone because it's all Solo. Add in the 5th column players, and you get a system that's not equal across all modes. Sandro's concept addresses this, it's the best possible solution if you keep PP in all 3 modes.

Their occur every week, with fixed schedules to start, they are the most popular activity, so they are quite normal game mechanics by now.
Except having the best RES sites all for yourself in solo, vs having to share targets with a multitude of other players in BH CG's. And having trade CG destination systems completely ganker free in solo, vs facing constant snake pits in open.
You don't see an obvious disadvantage here, regarding competing for the top rewards, in BH and trading CGs?
If we set a precedent in powerplay, you can bet your nards that CG's will follow. And then who knows.
And how will FD calculate the right amount of bonus to give open in order to make modes equal, without giving excessive benefit to one of the modes? Giving the past history of FD's balance passes, I'm pretty sure it wil take a very long time to get even close to right. And getting it wrong for too long with be another nail in PP's coffin.
Also, pampering one group of players over the others will ultimately blow up in their face, like it always does.

Again, CGs have already failed, some didn't reach their final tier(Obsidian Orbital anyone?), so there is no need to balance anything with them. You're now running around with a hammer looking for a screw to paint...

So lemme see if I got this right, there aren't enough easy targets in open so bonuses need to be applied to give people playing in solo and PG incentive to play in Open so they can "entertain" the PvPers? Sound about right? So does that mean there are less PvPers than they would like us to believe or is it that they don't like playing with themselves?

Yes, THAT'S IT! That is EXACTLY why Sandro came up with this! David Braben and the rest of the folks at FD are actually the REAL people running The Code and Smiling Dog Crew and ALL of the gankers and griefers in the game, and since EVERYONE is running to Solo, they need to do this to get people to grief! Man, no one can get anything by you can they?

Some people's kids.....

 

[Carmaki]

Sandro already said it's PP only, and it has good reasons, relax.

No. I will not. I will not be pressured into playing a mode that I do not enjoy, I will not be made into a moving target for someone else's enjoyment, and I will not sit idly by while such things are discussed. I do not trust that if this goes through, it'll just affect PP. Sure, it'll start there, but then you'll get a bigger bounty payout for bounty hunting in open, then trading, then a bonus to participation for community goals.

You may think it will, but I'm not willing to take that chance. If Frontier decides thats what they want to do, then fine. I'll accept it. But they ain't getting a single dollar/pound/euro/rubble/yen more out of me. I am simply stating my stance on the issue.

 

[kofeyh]

So lemme see if I got this right, there aren't enough easy targets in open so bonuses need to be applied to give people playing in solo and PG incentive to play in Open so they can "entertain" the PvPers? Sound about right? So does that mean there are less PvPers than they would like us to believe or is it that they don't like playing with themselves?

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Apart from absolutely reinforcing my point that this has become so religious that people aren't even reading the topic or first post and are weighing in with dogma

PP is currently heavily skewed in favour of solo, not because of PVP, but because it's literally impossible to prevent swings. PP is designed as a group mechanic (PVE, PVP either way but as a GROUP mechanic) however it's trivial to game the entire mechanic via solo.

I am sure the developer did not have this in mind; this it is considering how to improve the multiplayer aspect of what is, ostensibly, an actual multiplayer mechanic. Which is pretty healthy, ie to review mechanics periodically and ensure they are actually working as intended.

 

[VR Murgle]

There's no harm, and no strong arming. The suggested change is simply an increase in impact of Open Powerplay to compensate for the added risk.

And an other way of looking at it is that people playing in solo or PG are being punished for not wanting to play in open...

 

[kofeyh]

No. I will not. I will not be pressured into playing a mode that I do not enjoy, I will not be made into a moving target for someone else's enjoyment, and I will not sit idly by while such things are discussed. I do not trust that if this goes through, it'll just affect PP. Sure, it'll start there, but then you'll get a bigger bounty payout for bounty hunting in open, then trading, then a bonus to participation for community goals.

You may think it will, but I'm not willing to take that chance. If Frontier decides thats what they want to do, then fine. I'll accept it. But they ain't getting a single dollar/pound/euro/rubble/yen more out of me. I am simply stating my stance on the issue.

Simple. Stay in solo. Nothing changes. Literally nothing changes. If you are in open, where risks are greater, the developer is considering increasing the value proposition. More risk, more reward. Don't want the risk? Continue as is.

I find it remarkable people are jumping to the "I am being forced back to PVP; I quit!" bandwagon rather than actually reading what the developer is considering.

 

[Privata]

More pros? That's an interesting assertion. We should make a chart and compare notes! [praise]



Isn't that what the modes are for though, choice? There are pros and cons to each mode, we should evaluate those pros and cons and choose wisely, no?

Yes they are options all of them good. but powerplay is something that changes the galaxy for every one. so I feel that it would be fair to give a bonus to those who play powerplay in open.
the amount of times I have been in powerplay and I just see CMDRS pop out of the world because they spoted me as an enemie...
I dont want open to have bonus in everything only in powerplay and maybe conflict zones however what I think the ''fix'' would be is in areas were players are ment to fight they are worth more points.
so NPC in powerplay : 30 points CMDR : 200
NPC in conflict zone 1,000 CMDR 100,000
and if FD want to continue down the participation medal nonsens they could give a bit of cash to someone if they died against a player , anything to make the BGS and PP more ballanced

 

[kofeyh]

And an other way of looking at it is that people playing in solo or PG are being punished for not wanting to play in open...

Punishment denotes that you are being impacted to a state less than before. Which is incorrect. Solo remains as is, risks are greater in open, the developer is considering making that slightly more rewarding. This is actually a pretty good way to go. Stay in solo and all is as it was. In open? The job just got a tiny bit more worth while.

It won't mean powerplay actions can be stopped any more than it was before. Which is the huge advantage to solo. Merely that open is a little more rewarding in that the power benefits more.

CMDRs see no advantage. The power does. There is no direct commander punishment. Or reward. Rather the power gains more from open actions. Which makes sense simply because risks are greater in open.

It's hilarious. The developer is actually trying to improve the open experience to make it less one sided and people are complaining. Bravo.

 

[VR Murgle]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say. Apart from absolutely reinforcing my point that this has become so religious that people aren't even reading the topic or first post and are weighing in with dogma

PP is currently heavily skewed in favour of solo, not because of PVP, but because it's literally impossible to prevent swings. PP is designed as a group mechanic (PVE, PVP either way but as a GROUP mechanic) however it's trivial to game the entire mechanic via solo.

I am sure the developer did not have this in mind; this it is considering how to improve the multiplayer aspect of what is, ostensibly, an actual multiplayer mechanic. Which is pretty healthy, ie to review mechanics periodically and ensure they are actually working as intended.

If the only way to prevent a system swing is to shoot other players than maybe that's the problem, and if the people in solo and PG have such a huge impact on PP that those playing in open can't counter it then that leads to some interesting question now doesn't it?