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

[Boomer Kay]

One issue would be unfairly penalising a Commander disappearing due to connection issues, I suppose.

Hence just for the mode switching. If you go back to the mode you originally started in, you could do so immediately.

Greater point is .. as long as people can't stop themselves from cheesing game mechanics, any additional reward on top of what's the current status quo accomplishes exactly nothing.

 

[Jockey79]

I don't think threatening with "exploits" is a good idea, if this can't be won on merits (see what I did there) we don't deserve to win.

It's no threat, some folks don't have UPnP on by default (some network hardware manufacturers have it disabled on the default settings).
So they currently play open and never see anyone, due to having UPnP off.

The Netgear support page for UPnP clearly states it is a security risk to have it on, and suggest people keep it turned off and use manual port forwarding.
(I did link this information once, but it went missing - so you'll have to check this yourself, as there is no point me linking it again).

So unless FD want to move to a client/server model, this whole idea of giving one mode a bonus over another is just a waste of time.

 

[Asp Explorer]

This is great, encouraging people to game the networking system.

For some people, that is more entertaining and a better game than the game itself

 

[Marra Morgan]

I don't think threatening with "exploits" is a good idea, if this can't be won on merits (see what I did there) we don't deserve to win.

No threats made on my part, just stating that it would be exploited.

Personally, I like Open play as it is and I wouldn't tinker with my UPnP to exploit - it's not in the spirit of the game.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Great idea, then all Solo players can turn UPnP off and play in open for the bonus and still never ever see another person.
Private GRoup players can set up a white list of allowed P2P connections and play in open and only ever see their friends.

And PvP'ers are right back at square one.... but at least FD will have login data to show people playing in open mode

lets try it again: you may overestimate how many people immediately start cheating when something happens they dont like. Most people PvP and PvE alike, are more mature than that. This topic is, in case you forgot, about PowerPlay. PowerPlay is a player versus player war-mode, which players enter voluntarily. So this topic itself is not about PvP versus PvE, because everyone who does play PowerPlay is by definition chosing to enter PvP gameplay. Most people either dont care for powerplay, or they accept the PvP element. If your prophesized 'mass exodus' of would-be-cheating 'solo-powerplayers' would be caused by a increased effect of Open merits than that is even more reason to go ahead with it ASAP.

People want to play Open, Solo or Private? Fine. People want to PvP or PvE? Fine. People want to game the system to have riskfree PvP in Solo while threathening to cheat if anything happens they dont like? Please go away.

 

[Boomer Kay]

So unless FD want to move to a client/server model, this whole idea of giving one mode a bonus over another is just a waste of time.

Encouragement is always a waste of time. And forcing is usually counterproductive. .. stuff in a nutshell

If they feel they need to promote a certain mode, I do see little general issue with it, as long as it's done with a little bit of insight.
Biggest bonus for playing in private group? Well, I'm the vice president of the galaxy.

 

[Carmaki]

You know how the A-Team busted out of military prison and now roam the Earth, seeking wrongs to right? Sometime just for kicks! We're like that, with spaceships. We grief griefers. It's fun and challenging.

We could have helped you get revenge. Just for kicks! Instead you denied us that, and have the audacity to turn your nose up at Open.

You are not a bad person for being scared and afraid of Open. Hell, I am too. It's ok to be scared. But staying out of Open means you're choosing to remain a "Carebear". That is your real mistake, not daring to live life on the edge, but for turning away!

You could have helped make Open a better place! You still can! Embrace the light! It is tears of the brave that truly forged the stars of Open.

You see, this is where I believe we have a difference of outlook...

You view getting blown up in Open as a challenge; "How dare those people do that! I'm gonna get my posse and we're gonna blow them up right back!"

My personal view is: "I just wasted 35 million credits, that equates to 9+ hours worth of NPC bounty hunting! I just wasted 9 hours... Welp, back to Solo I go."

Why would I risk another 35 million (plus unclaimed claims) in Open? I don't find it fun. I just don't. I understand why people find it fun, but it just doesn't appeal to me. Though, I will say that is a pretty good speech, but I'm not just not interested in being someone else's content when that content is a big target with 'SHOOT ME' written on it.

 

[VR Murgle]

It's no threat, some folks don't have UPnP on by default (some network hardware manufacturers have it disabled on the default settings).
So they currently play open and never see anyone, due to having UPnP off.

The Netgear support page for UPnP clearly states it is a security risk to have it on, and suggest people keep it turned off and use manual port forwarding.
(I did link this information once, but it went missing - so you'll have to check this yourself, as there is no point me linking it again).

So unless FD want to move to a client/server model, this whole idea of giving one mode a bonus over another is just a waste of time.

So not a threat but you have been drawing attention to it by putting it out there several times allready and while I agree with you that bonuses for Open will increase the chances of people using it I don't see the point in stacking the odds as it were...

 

[Jockey79]

This is great, encouraging people to game the networking system.

Well, if people would stop being so concerned over how much fun everyone else is having (or not as the case may be) - and just get on with playing the game and suggesting fixes that actually fix the game, no one would care this is a peer to peer network or even need to know it.

 

[Kermit Laphroaig]

For some people, that is more entertaining and a better game than the game itself

You shush, or you're going to get undersized stock thrusters and a one-way trip to Achenar 3 [mad]

 

[telperion]

You know how the A-Team busted out of military prison and now roam the Earth, seeking wrongs to right? Sometime just for kicks! We're like that, with spaceships. We grief griefers. It's fun and challenging.

We could have helped you get revenge. Just for kicks! Instead you denied us that, and have the audacity to turn your nose up at Open.

You are not a bad person for being scared and afraid of Open. Hell, I am too. It's ok to be scared. But staying out of Open means you're choosing to remain a "Carebear". That is your real mistake, not daring to live life on the edge, but for turning away!

You could have helped make Open a better place! You still can! Embrace the light! It is tears of the brave that truly forged the stars of Open.

BINGO! I win.

Revenge
Afraid
Tears
Carebear
Griefers

... all in a line. Thanks Kermit. Now to find out what I've won...

 

[Mephane]

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.

As long is it is only about the effects on the PP simulation and no personal gains whatsoever, I guess it is okay. Completely unnecessary unless one sees PP as a vehicle for incentivising PvP, but okay.

 

[Asp Explorer]

You shush, or you're going to get undersized stock thrusters and a one-way trip to Achenar 3 [mad]

Aww - here, have a hug. It's a lovely place this time of year.

 

[EUS]

I would never run with UPnP enabled on the router. Especially while running windows. Been that way since 98, or XP days.
And I'm certainly not poking holes by port forwarding to my LAN. It ain't gonna happen.
DMZ is a different story, and even then I allow port forwarding only where I'm running public services, mail, web, ftp, etc., for my server(s), which are built and locked down appropriately.
Biggest security issue I see with this game is that FD expects us to run pseudo-servers, which, again, I'm not going to do.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

I don't think threatening with "exploits" is a good idea, if this can't be won on merits (see what I did there) we don't deserve to win.

If you think this is about winning you have already lost. Sandro made a suggestion about giving Open Mode players more "weight" in PP by making their actions more effective in PP. The OP asked if this could/should be added to other activities.
That's the discussion. It's about making the game better or if the suggestion would make the game better.

It's not about use vs. them. Or PvP vs. PvE (what ever PvP definition currently is fashionable.) If you turn it into something you want to win, you will be blind for solutions that could benefit everybody.

This is great, encouraging people to game the networking system.

The main problem of the suggestion - compensation/bonus/buff for activities in Open Mode - is that the networking system of the game in it's current state can be easily used to circumvent the suggested solution.
As long as the networking system of the game is the way it currently is any bonus for Open Mode is worthless and does more harm than good - because players will use their routers and internet connection to get empty instances.

Before any bonus/compensation is added to any mode, FD would have to fix the networking system to prevent such things and then they would have to fix the matchmaking and instancing.

Only after this we can start to discuss if a bonus/compensation for playing in Open is a good or bad idea.

Pointing out the obvious problems isn't threatening with "exploits", it's stating the obvious.

 

[Mohrgan]

The determining factor for the perceived imbalance between the modes is PvP. Without PvP the modes would be a non-issue. My proposal would be to offer PP rewards for PvP to make up for the possibility of having more risk in open. Pay for the actual risk, and not some risk that you might face more risk. In open, if you are pledged and get into a PvP scrap, you get 5 merits for loosing, not logging, and 10 for winning.

This solution, or something like it, actually considers the issue, instead of using it as a smokescreen to populate open. It won;t be considered because it just doesn't fix the real problem, and FD's real concern; The population in open.

 

[Mephane]

But this equality that people seem to champion for so much was completely non-existent under a competitive scope of examination. This change if anything attempts to bring balance to the mechanic.

Any still the old point from the very beginning stands: with a bit of technical expertise anyone can turn their open play into an effective solo mode, by blocking P2P access to all but FD's servers. And if the internet and gaming in particular has taught us one thing, it is the inventiveness and the distance lots of people will go in games, especially any form of real or perceived competitive situation, to gain whatever advantage possible. And the people who will do in this case, will enjoy the benefit of both the absense of PvP and the open play PP bonus.

At least, as long as it does not affect personal rewards, there will be not as many people inclined to go to such great lengths than would otherwise. Stick a personal, measurable reward (or, heck, just a level number, rank icon, progress bar!) behind something and people will do their best to game the system (as opposed to playing the actual game) for the greatest reward in the least amount of time.

 

[Kermit Laphroaig]

You see, this is where I believe we have a difference of outlook...

You view getting blown up in Open as a challenge; "How dare those people do that! I'm gonna get my posse and we're gonna blow them up right back!"

My personal view is: "I just wasted 35 million credits, that equates to 9+ hours worth of NPC bounty hunting! I just wasted 9 hours... Welp, back to Solo I go."

Why would I risk another 35 million (plus unclaimed claims) in Open? I don't find it fun. I just don't. I understand why people find it fun, but it just doesn't appeal to me. Though, I will say that is a pretty good speech, but I'm not just not interested in being someone else's content when that content is a big target with 'SHOOT ME' written on it.

Nothing wrong with that, I guess, but the problem is you ARE someone else's content while being in Solo - you have just as much, if not more say as anyone what happens to the shared universe. I don't find THAT fun.

If you want to play by yourself then cool, but as it stands you get a 'bonus' because you can play free of fear other than magical teleporting chain interdicting NPC who are intensely interesting in a packet of trade data you simply cannot get scanned because somehow the people getting that data can tell if it's been scanned. Lord knows the game has enough ways to waste your time.

Do you want a posse? I can rent you one cheap.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Well, if people would stop being so concerned over how much fun everyone else is having (or not as the case may be) - and just get on with playing the game and suggesting fixes that actually fix the game, no one would care this is a peer to peer network or even need to know it.

Do you even play PowerPlay? Or are you just using this discussion about PowerPlay as a cheap way to start another, very unrelated, discussion? Ther problem isn't that 'people are concerned others have too much fun', but that some people are messing up the gameplay of thousands of people by gaming the system of the only structured PvP gameplay there is. Sandro proposed a way to help with that. Your only response so far is "never, we'd rather cheat!" and "there is no problem, lalalalala!". Neither of these arguments is very strong.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Now I can't get that Anthrax song out of my head