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

[Marra Morgan]

It has also been stated that some ISP / Router providers turn uPnP off on their hardware by default. It isn't an exploit if that is the way your hardware is set up by the provider.

But it would be being used to gain an unfair advantage, which could be considered an exploit.
On the other hand, Frontier don't really have any say over how you configure your router, so it's a really tricky thing to deal with :/

I think, as some others have suggested, that directly rewarding PvP against opposing powers is the best way forward.

 

[Lestenio]

.... which rather begs the question: given that it is unlikely that both "sides" in the debate will be satisfied with the outcome and that it will probably be a least worst compromise at best, which portion of the community can Frontier afford to lose?

Indeed. I did read somewhere that when players give up a game because they feel something unjust happened, they divorce themselves from it completely and never go back. Solo/group players appear to be reasonably content, how much is it in FD's interest to upset them.

I'd love to see the in-game analytics that could be used, with simple rules applied, to roughly categorise players as PvE; PvE&P or PvP - and the relative populations of each. Similarly which game mode players predominantly play in....

I'd like to see some insights to the stats too, but I guess that's never going to happen. Given that they appear to be trying to promote more multiplayer gameplay, they would seem to be more worried about open numbers than they are group/solo. *Guessing* but if people are not playing open as much as they'd like, then that hurts some of the features coming down the line. eg. multi-crew, ship boarding etc. If that's the case then they have misunderstood what players really want from the game.

My 2 cents of course.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

But it would be being used to gain an unfair advantage, which could be considered an exploit.
On the other hand, Frontier don't really have any say over how you configure your router, so it's a really tricky thing to deal with :/

I think, as some others have suggested, that directly rewarding PvP against opposing powers is the best way forward.

"We demand you change your router configuration in order to play our game"

"Please address your technical requests to my ISP for approval, until then, jog on"

Yup, tellingly, not one Open PP proponent has even mentioned their personal efficiency rate. How many times they have been blown up, lost their merits, had to go back and start again.
My rather cyncial view is that none of these fellows are part of their Powers' Logistics Division... they are all part of the Enforcer crew and wouldn't sully their rails with something as demeaning as hauling cargo.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Powerplay is accomplished through PvE actions, but you want to counter them through PvP and you can't because to few people want to play with you but that doesn't mean there's no counter. Just because you don't want to PvE doesn't mean I have to PVP. As has been stated before: it's a very simple situation, people don't want to play with you. Deal. With. It!

*sigh*. You dont have to randomly assume stuff about others if you dont have arguments, you know. PvP means more than 'shooting at people', I am not looking for powerplay opponents to shoot, I am not lacking in people to play with and 99% of my gameplay is PvE. The simple point people make is that if they join a player faction and declare war on another player faction, that kinda implies you do want to play with these other people. And undermining another group of humans is PvP, regardless of the method itself. But I guess these points are lost in the ocean of personal sniping that this topic has become, as most topics here become.

This sort of 'bonus' would set a dangerous president that I don't like. I quit PP a while ago because it didn't appeal to me, nor does any sort of PvP action, and I'm not inclined to back decisions that push me back into Open play when my own personal experiences have been negative 66% of the time.

Huh? If you dont like powerplay, and dont play powerplay, how does this even matter to you at all? How would this push you back to Open? Cant you just ignore this, as this in the most literal sense of the word doesnt involve you in any way whatsoever?

This topic makes so little sense I think I'll politely back out of it, so those who dont care about powerplay can discuss cheats with those who want to game the system in a PvP environment. I have no idea what Sandro is supposed to do with this, but fine.

 

[Dave1235]

This is going to be a very interesting morning

Oh to be a fly on the wall of dbobes office this morning. Going back many years to my army days it was refered to as an "interview without coffee".
Glad it wasn't me publicly stating I was looking at moving the game in a direction my boss has previously said is not going to happen. if I disagree with my boss we sit down behind closed doors and discuss it. Doubt it would be a good career move to contradict him in public let alone in front of customers. To use a pp phrase he might think I was trying to undermine him.

 

[VR Murgle]

"We demand you change your router configuration in order to play our game"

"Please address your technical requests to my ISP for approval, until then, jog on"

Yup, tellingly, not one Open PP proponent has even mentioned their personal efficiency rate. How many times they have been blown up, lost their merits, had to go back and start again.
My rather cyncial view is that none of these fellows are part of their Powers' Logistics Division... they are all part of the Enforcer crew and wouldn't sully their rails with something as demeaning as hauling cargo.

You wouldn't be alone in thinking that, I'm actually fairly certain this is true for quite a lot of them

 

[GilliganTX]

IMO, in spirit, this is a good move. In application, it does open up a "slippery-slope" argument, in regard to the promises that were made during the kick-starter and other starting phases. Realistically, if "Open-bonuses" became standard fair, that's a huge slap in the face to many early backers and original players.

Whether or not they should have made those promises to begin with is a different conversation.


If this stays relegated to Power Play it's probably a good move. If it starts spilling out into the rest of the game, then it is a very, very bad move.

 

[Mohrgan]

Why should the decision of some players, be enforced on another set of players? Those that choose to play exclusively in open do so by choice. They have perfect access to the 'golden' mode, so use it, if what you think you can gain is in another mode? Why should choosing to play in open be rewarded? It's the exact same effort as logging into a PG. Each and every player makes the choice to enter in one mode or another, they should have to live with the repercussions.

Parity between the modes is ensured by equal access. If there is an advantage in one mode, everyone has access to that advantage, establishing a perfect balance. Choosing to play in open doesn't remove that ability to chose where to play, Saying that playing in open, just for playing in ope deserves a reward, is saying that customers that play otherwise are less valuable than those that choose open.

One question I have consistently asked, and rarely if ever get answered is: Why should one set of personal gamer ethics be given the power to dictate another set?

What is going on here is certainly not an attempt at equity, it's an attempt to see what incentives will get players into open, and just how deep the reaction is to the idea. We don't need to argue with other players, we don;t need to convince ourselves, we need to express to FD how a change like this would impact our experience in Elite.

P.S. The idea that an overarching goal pitting players against player, but not requiring PvP is best described as Meta-PvP. That way it's not confused with the general use of the phrase PvP. Meta-PvP is now being used as a justification and foundation for the nonsense that PP is somehow gimped in open.

 

[pindleton]

You wouldn't be alone in thinking that, I'm actually fairly certain this is true for quite a lot of them

They could make logistical power play cargo worth 30 merits a ton, and make player kills worth only 10 merits to balance it out. Sounds fair considering the burden of risk taken by the couriers.

 

[Dave1235]

Right, proof enough for me, everyone report Sandro's post, lets get him a one week ban from the forums!

Lol you beat me to it.

 

[Jypson]

Indeed. I did read somewhere that when players give up a game because they feel something unjust happened, they divorce themselves from it completely and never go back. Solo/group players appear to be reasonably content, how much is it in FD's interest to upset them.



I'd like to see some insights to the stats too, but I guess that's never going to happen. Given that they appear to be trying to promote more multiplayer gameplay, they would seem to be more worried about open numbers than they are group/solo. *Guessing* but if people are not playing open as much as they'd like, then that hurts some of the features coming down the line. eg. multi-crew, ship boarding etc. If that's the case then they have misunderstood what players really want from the game.

My 2 cents of course.

> For me, I'm relatively happy in Solo. I'm very much against ship/equipment 'balancing' though, drives me nuts. It would either take a lot of that happening, or not releasing updates that I can use in Solo, or getting rid of Solo all together to get rid of me.

I'm mostly here in the forums just to remind people that Solo people still exist and can voice opinions too

 

[GilliganTX]

Why should the decision of some players, be enforced on another set of players? Those that choose to play exclusively in open do so by choice. They have perfect access to the 'golden' mode, so use it, if what you think you can gain is in another mode? Why should choosing to play in open be rewarded? It's the exact same effort as logging into a PG. Each and every player makes the choice to enter in one mode or another, they should have to live with the repercussions.

Parity between the modes is ensured by equal access. If there is an advantage in one mode, everyone has access to that advantage, establishing a perfect balance. Choosing to play in open doesn't remove that ability to chose where to play, Saying that playing in open, just for playing in ope deserves a reward, is saying that customers that play otherwise are less valuable than those that choose open.

One question I have consistently asked, and rarely if ever get answered is: Why should one set of personal gamer ethics be given the power to dictate another set?

What is going on here is certainly not an attempt at equity, it's an attempt to see what incentives will get players into open, and just how deep is the reaction is to the idea. We don't need to argue with other players, we don;t need to convince ourselves, we need to express to FD how a change like this would impact our experience in Elite.

On the whole, I agree with you. Their choosing to play in Open is just that, their choice. They're choosing to play with that handicap. There is no real reason to pander to those who chose to handicap themselves, and then complain about it.

Now, to that point, in Forza 6, you can choose to play with a handicap. When you do, the game rewards you more than if you were not playing with that handicap.


In regard to Elite, "Power Play" is a competitive aspect of the game, more so than any others, IMO. And I've observed that in general, those seeking PvP in game tend to play Power-Play, and as such, I am OK with compromising in regard to Power-Play, but I'm going to draw the line there.

 

[Dave1235]

Well, in my opinion he is. He knows we can just turn UPnP off and be in pseudo Solo while collecting bonuses in open.
Plus if people read his comment;



"Since I'm in the mood for pulling hand grenades" .... Really? Pulling hand grenades!

Has anyone looked at other announcements, dev info or patch notes since the "bonus to open" comment was made..... nope.
He is either trolling or distracting everyone from something else the team want to slip past us. And it is working, everyone is so focused on that section they have not even talked about the rest of his PP suggestions.

You got me thinking. Its a bit like the government waiting for a big news story to break before releasing a bad news story in the hope everyone will be distracted. I wonder what they are really upto.

 

[VR Murgle]

*sigh*. You dont have to randomly assume stuff about others if you dont have arguments, you know. PvP means more than 'shooting at people', I am not looking for powerplay opponents to shoot, I am not lacking in people to play with and 99% of my gameplay is PvE. The simple point people make is that if they join a player faction and declare war on another player faction, that kinda implies you do want to play with these other people. And undermining another group of humans is PvP, regardless of the method itself. But I guess these points are lost in the ocean of personal sniping that this topic has become, as most topics here become.



Huh? If you dont like powerplay, and dont play powerplay, how does this even matter to you at all? How would this push you back to Open? Cant you just ignore this, as this in the most literal sense of the word doesnt involve you in any way whatsoever?

This topic makes so little sense I think I'll politely back out of it, so those who dont care about powerplay can discuss cheats with those who want to game the system in a PvP environment. I have no idea what Sandro is supposed to do with this, but fine.

First off lets not try and redifine PvP, yes PvP does mean fighting other players it's been like that since the first MMo's. Really no need to change that. Secondly I'm not declaring war on a player faction I'm supporting an NPC faction, rather poorly I might add, but that's between me and the princess...There's a difference, subtile maybe but it's a difference.

 

[Hajile]

I play in Mobius and solo almost exclusively, I don't play very often (3-4 hours a week at most, RL keeps me busy). I think that when you have a system that promises rewards it is human nature to seek those rewards in the safest way possible. It is inherent in our desire to mitigate risk in every way; it is a games job to force us to confront risk (whether perceived or actual) and thus LIVE... Fear makes the heart pump, and we are not afraid if we risk nothing.

The current system in place for power play is unbalanced, it allows for players to behave in a way in solo that they would never in OPEN... IE in open one would NEVER fly without guns and a shield, but in SOLO why wouldn't you. Therefor the commanders in solo (myself included) have an advantage over the commanders in OPEN that is NOT equal opportunity, even though it is Equality, therefore it is not fair.

 

[Faded Glory]

[snip]
Yup, tellingly, not one Open PP proponent has even mentioned their personal efficiency rate. How many times they have been blown up, lost their merits, had to go back and start again.

I don't know, a number have posted (as recently as yesterday) that they never or very rarely have any issues being interdicted by other players.

It struck me as rather confusing at the time...

 

[VR Murgle]

Why should the decision of some players, be enforced on another set of players? Those that choose to play exclusively in open do so by choice. They have perfect access to the 'golden' mode, so use it, if what you think you can gain is in another mode? Why should choosing to play in open be rewarded? It's the exact same effort as logging into a PG. Each and every player makes the choice to enter in one mode or another, they should have to live with the repercussions.

Parity between the modes is ensured by equal access. If there is an advantage in one mode, everyone has access to that advantage, establishing a perfect balance. Choosing to play in open doesn't remove that ability to chose where to play, Saying that playing in open, just for playing in ope deserves a reward, is saying that customers that play otherwise are less valuable than those that choose open.

One question I have consistently asked, and rarely if ever get answered is: Why should one set of personal gamer ethics be given the power to dictate another set?

What is going on here is certainly not an attempt at equity, it's an attempt to see what incentives will get players into open, and just how deep the reaction is to the idea. We don't need to argue with other players, we don;t need to convince ourselves, we need to express to FD how a change like this would impact our experience in Elite.

P.S. The idea that an overarching goal pitting players against player, but not requiring PvP is best described as Meta-PvP. That way it's not confused with the general use of the phrase PvP. Meta-PvP is now being used as a justification and foundation for the nonsense that PP is somehow gimped in open.

Good sir, I tip my hat at you. I wish I could have put it so clearly an succinctly.

 

[Ian Skippy]

First off lets not try and redifine PvP, yes PvP does mean fighting other players it's been like that since the first MMo's. Really no need to change that. Secondly I'm not declaring war on a player faction I'm supporting an NPC faction, rather poorly I might add, but that's between me and the princess...There's a difference, subtile maybe but it's a difference.

PvP means 'Player versus players', I redefine nothing. In many games the only way to do anything against another player is by hitting it with a gun, club or spell. In other games, like ED, you can work against other players in more ways. FD explicitly stated powerplay is competitive gameplay between players. You want to see it as a solo/NPC/roleplaying thing? Fine. But then why insist that your actions should fully and negatively influence other players? You cant say both "I insist that may actions work negatively towards the goals of hundreds or thousands of other players" and follow that up with "Oh, its just PvE for me, its all about NPC factions.".

 

[VR Murgle]

On the whole, I agree with you. Their choosing to play in Open is just that, their choice. They're choosing to play with that handicap. There is no real reason to pander to those who chose to handicap themselves, and then complain about it.

Now, to that point, in Forza 6, you can choose to play with a handicap. When you do, the game rewards you more than if you were not playing with that handicap.


In regard to Elite, "Power Play" is a competitive aspect of the game, more so than any others, IMO. And I've observed that in general, those seeking PvP in game tend to play Power-Play, and as such, I am OK with compromising in regard to Power-Play, but I'm going to draw the line there.

Isn't the PvP just a part of the reward?

 

[Mohrgan]

I play in Mobius and solo almost exclusively, I don't play very often (3-4 hours a week at most, RL keeps me busy). I think that when you have a system that promises rewards it is human nature to seek those rewards in the safest way possible. It is inherent in our desire to mitigate risk in every way; it is a games job to force us to confront risk (whether perceived or actual) and thus LIVE... Fear makes the heart pump, and we are not afraid if we risk nothing.

The current system in place for power play is unbalanced, it allows for players to behave in a way in solo that they would never in OPEN... IE in open one would NEVER fly without guns and a shield, but in SOLO why wouldn't you. Therefor the commanders in solo (myself included) have an advantage over the commanders in OPEN that is NOT equal opportunity, even though it is Equality, therefore it is not fair.

What do you say to the player that plays simply for the entertainment, and is not looking to LIVE through a video game? Why should I take on content I don;t find fun? Those that play in open have every opportunity to avail themselves of what Solo or PG has to offer. Why should the fault for not taking that up some how rest on the shoulders of those that do?

The energy behind this claim is entitlement. Players feel that because they log into open they are somehow making a sacrifice, and in making that grand sacrifice they are entitles to a bonus. Because, as we all know, open is the proper way to enjoy E: D. Now that sacrifice to playing Elite correctly has to be rewarded. Because their choice to play in open is worth more than my choice to play in a PG. It is a ridiculous assumption.