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

[Rinzler o7o7o7]

This change would be great. High risk = high reward, and hopefully a lot of meaningful PvP conflict over systems. Too much for your tastes? Go hide in safe mode and enjoy gimped rewards. It's how risk vs reward works.

It'd also be good if powerplay commodities and merits were tagged similarly to the GTX Titan commodity, which would only stay in your cargo hold as long as you were in open play. As soon as you logged into solo/private, it was removed from your cargo hold.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Too much for your tastes? Go hide in safe mode and enjoy gimped rewards. It's how risk vs reward works.

Mmm. Risk / Reward. Always a fun game.

Come find me in Open and you'll find out exactly what Risk / Reward is. Your Reward will be blowing me up in two seconds. Your Risk is, well, nobody knows exactly what Risk is - which is why it's Risk

 

[GluttonyFang]

Mmm. Risk / Reward. Always a fun game.

Come find me in Open and you'll find out exactly what Risk / Reward is. Your Reward will be blowing me up in two seconds. Your Risk is, well, nobody knows exactly what Risk is - which is why it's Risk

Haha, that reminds me of the day people intentionally lower the value of their shield and hull to make it seem like they got one-shot to fake report the aggressor for cheating. But it got identified pretty quickly by FD support.

Do you play CQC by any chance? I wana see what kind of skills are under those sleeves

 

[Asp Explorer]

Haha, that reminds me of the day people intentionally lower the value of their shield and hull to make it seem like they got one-shot to fake report the aggressor for cheating. But it got identified pretty quickly by FD support.

Do you play CQC by any chance? I wana see what kind of skills are under those sleeves

Well yes I do play CQC occasionally - although I have to admit I'm not keen on the whole powerup things. Far too much Q3TA in the 90's filled that spot for me.

As for deliberately gimping a ship and complaining to Support about getting oneshotted - that's just wrong.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Well yes I do play CQC occasionally - although I have to admit I'm not keen on the whole powerup things. Far too much Q3TA in the 90's filled that spot for me.

Yea me either, it really doesn't live up to the spirit of the main game combative PvP, oh well, worth a try

As for deliberately gimping a ship and complaining to Support about getting oneshotted - that's just wrong.

I know right, people must have to be so desperate and bored to do something like that. If I were that desperate for a laugh at other people's expense I'd probably kill myself first.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Yea me either, it really doesn't live up to the spirit of the main game combative PvP, oh well, worth a try

Oh I'll gladly take you on in CQC - just announce a mode, day and time Sometimes are better than others though (I have to work a lot) - but I am sure we can work something out.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Because there's a rational incentive to be in solo and private for PP, a competitive mechanic?

Thus we are bringing incentive to Open for PP to balance it out?

What isn't understood here?

What isn't understood by many, to which you are blindly transfixed upon, is your use of the word "competitive" when describing PP.

PP is a competitive add-on : it pits player against players (PvP) in a race to do things for your power. It's not a confrontational battle, but a race against time. You have 7 days to complete the objectives before the cycle progresses. As described many posts ago this does not mean you are required to blow people up in order to complete these tasks. That isn't the exclusive meaning of competition.

Your decision, for what ever reason, is to play in open .. Playing in open, whilst performing this race, incurs added risk of meeting another player from an opposing side. The thing to realise is that this was brought upon by yourself - you wanted that added risk; you want the drama and excitement of battle; you chose to play in open. Power play is by it's very design is a competition, or more accurately a race ... not a combative trial by laser fire add-on.

Based on the above a much fairer way to give a bonus (not that I think it's required) is that if you kill someone from an opposing power then you receive a bonus amount of merits, not a flat amount regardless*

Edit:
Interestingly if you kill another player right now in PP you receive nothing for your effort. That further emphasises the fact that PP is a PvE activity in a race against time and killing players is not part of the objective. Being in open is not a requirement to play PP.


*I play 90% time in open, self imposed IM and rarely meet commanders. Is this because everyone is so scared of open, or is it more likely that space is big .. time zones .. instancing problems .. bugs ? You get the point

 

[GluttonyFang]

Oh I'll gladly take you on in CQC - just announce a mode, day and time Sometimes are better than others though (I have to work a lot) - but I am sure we can work something out.

Welp, I'm on spring break so let me know when you're free this week, let's PM each other so we don't eat up the thread.

 

[GluttonyFang]

What isn't understood by many, to which you are blindly transfixed upon, is your use of the word "competitive" when describing PP.

PP is a competitive add-on : it pits player against players (PvP) in a race to do things for your power. It's not a confrontational battle, but a race against time. You have 7 days to complete the objectives before the cycle progresses. As described many posts ago this does not mean you are required to blow people up in order to complete these tasks. That isn't the exclusive meaning of competition.

Your decision, for what ever reason, is to play in open .. Playing in open, whilst performing this race, incurs added risk of meeting another player from an opposing side. The thing to realise is that this was brought upon by yourself - you wanted that added risk; you want the drama and excitement of battle; you chose to play in open. Power play is by it's very design is a competition, or more accurately a race ... not a combative trial by laser fire add-on.

Based on the above a much fairer way to give a bonus (not that I think it's required) is that if you kill someone from an opposing power then you receive a bonus amount of merits, not a flat amount regardless*

Edit:
Interestingly if you kill another player right now in PP you receive nothing for your effort. That further emphasises the fact that PP is a PvE activity in a race against time and killing players is not part of the objective. Being in open is not a requirement to play PP.


*I play 90% time in open, self imposed IM and rarely meet commanders. Is this because everyone is so scared of open, or is it more likely that space is big .. time zones .. instancing problems .. bugs ? You get the point

But the problem is that if all modes are really equal, then there shouldn't be any reason to avoid Open if one wishes to be competitive. When the rational way to gain an edge in the competitive mechanic known as PP is to avoid Open mode, something is clearly wrong with the premise of mode equality.

PP's specific mechanics are PvE grinds for the overall PvP scoreboard, which betrays the integral nature of combative PvP, thus making it viable and rational for those that seek it but hold themselves against their desires due to the meta of the competition is the rectifying of pre-existing inequality of PP and modes.

Being in Open is not an requirement to play PP, no, but it is not a rational choice to, either whereas solo and private are in the current setting of things. If we want to use that argument, being in private/solo are not requirements to play PP, either.

If we examine the three modes and truly respect what they are: playing with everyone, playing with selective crowd, playing by oneself. Can we really not see why everyone with rational sense will avoid Open like the plague for the competitive mechanic? And if so, is that the trend we should maintain? Or do we do something about it like providing incentive for Open?

I don't know if you have been in PP hot spots in Open, during the time I was the coordinator, we had some genuine fun time doing combative PvP until the 5c situation got so severe that people who value their faction reluctantly entered Solo and Private just to deal with the amount of of 5c and general amount of people avoiding Open due to everyone's gradual recognition of the rational choice.

If you think that transition is in line with the idea of "equality," then I really don't know what to say.

Edit:

Basically when the competition pushes people into private and solo, something might be wrong with the equality of the modes. The reason why people enter a mode of play should be because the person deems the mode to suit his playstyle the most and is the most fun, not because the competition forces them into a certain mode which they do not enjoy but have to deal with.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

But the problem is that if all modes are really equal, then there shouldn't be any reason to avoid Open if one wishes to be competitive.

Do not confuse all modes being equal in terms of content (solo doesn't have wings for example) or required style of play with all modes being considered equal by the devs.

As long as devs consider all modes equally valid ways of playing, they will never do anything to show favour to one mode over another. Should they do so, it means they no longer consider all modes to be equally valid - and that will send a signal to the playerbase, some of whom will rejoice, and some of whom will be unhappy.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Do not confuse all modes being equal in terms of content (solo doesn't have wings for example) or required style of play with all modes being considered equal by the devs.

As long as devs consider all modes equally valid ways of playing, they will never do anything to show favour to one mode over another. Should they do so, it means they no longer consider all modes to be equally valid - and that will send a signal to the playerbase, some of whom will rejoice, and some of whom will be unhappy.

All modes' playstyle should be valid, true, but when one of these playstyles is an irrational choice for a competitive mechanic, does the premise of equality still hold or do we adjust the mechanic to maintain the stance of equality?

 

[smiths121]

The thread would have been a lot shorter if this had been the OP with links!

My only addition to 88 pages is - if FD are going to reward some activities differently in different modes best do it quickly as it seems quite a contentious proposition.


Simon

Do not confuse all modes being equal in terms of content (solo doesn't have wings for example) or required style of play with all modes being considered equal by the devs.

As long as devs consider all modes equally valid ways of playing, they will never do anything to show favour to one mode over another. Should they do so, it means they no longer consider all modes to be equally valid - and that will send a signal to the playerbase, some of whom will rejoice, and some of whom will be unhappy.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

But the problem is that if all modes are really equal, then there shouldn't be any reason to avoid Open if one wishes to be competitive. When the rational way to gain an edge in the competitive mechanic known as PP is to avoid Open mode, something is clearly wrong with the premise of mode equality.

A throw away comment (as I am now at work) would be to say "well, if you can't handle open .."

Should they do so, it means they no longer consider all modes to be equally valid - and that will send a signal to the playerbase, some of whom will rejoice, and some of whom will be unhappy.

Which is quite the dilemma we have here - Sandro is advocating exactly that

 

[CTCParadox]

Sounds like a good idea to encourage more people into Open for versus activities like Powerplay.

CMDR CTCParadox

 

[GluttonyFang]

A throw away comment (as I am now at work) would be to say "well, if you can't handle open .."

Well, then I'll conjure up a counter example:

We have a new PP mechanic that focuses on a really hard NPC boss, you need a full wing to take it on adequately, or you are an ace pilot (really ace) and you can kill it yourself.

The catch is that you must race against the clock and be the first faction to score a set amount of kills of this really really hard NPC boss.

As we know, if we have more than one wing going at it, only one wing will receive the credit for it and only those who shot at it. (And this is decided at random which wing gets it if there is more than one wing that shot at it. So if some random wing just happens to drop in and land a shot at it at last health, it's possible that said individual's wing gets the credit).

This NPC boss is located in an instance that will spawn said boss by chance, the more player you have in the instance, the higher the spawn rate. (Otherwise it spawns random faction NPCs that you can kill to raise an insignificant amount of the boss NPC's spawn rate).

Now we make this mechanic essential to the success of a faction.

Now, how many Solo players are going to flip out and ask for substantial bonus for accomplishing the task in Solo?

How many people are going to ask for bonus in Open for facing player opposition?

How many people are going to giggle in private group with three friends?


I just want to point out how easily we can just imagine these scenarios and understand how frustrating it will be, and frankly the current implementation of PP does pretty much this, just in favor of private and solo. I can think of many scenarios where it will be equivalent of the current mechanic and implement it in such a way that it creates frustration for a certain mode or modes.

Sure, argue that ED is not a game like that. But think for a second, developers that cling so hard onto equality should just look away from a problem that is of the equivalence of this example? I think not.

 

[excalibus]

without reading the entire thread I do not know if this has been mentioned... Sandro, what is to stop me from docking at my powers home system in OPEN, gathering the necesarry PP materials for fortify or expand, then going into GROUP / SOLO, flying to the destination and docking at the station, logging back into OPEN to deliver the goodies and get the 2x effect for my power?

If this has been 'countered' already then I apologise for raising a moot arguement, if it has not been countered yet, then the argument remains valid...

 

[CTCParadox]

without reading the entire thread I do not know if this has been mentioned... Sandro, what is to stop me from docking at my powers home system in OPEN, gathering the necesarry PP materials for fortify or expand, then going into GROUP / SOLO, flying to the destination and docking at the station, logging back into OPEN to deliver the goodies and get the 2x effect for my power?

If this has been 'countered' already then I apologise for raising a moot arguement, if it has not been countered yet, then the argument remains valid...

Just set a timer, so once you entire solo/private you are counted as solo/private player for a day or so (increase duration if necessary).

CMDR CTCParadox

 

[Agony_Aunt]

All modes' playstyle should be valid, true, but when one of these playstyles is an irrational choice for a competitive mechanic, does the premise of equality still hold or do we adjust the mechanic to maintain the stance of equality?

My suggestion is find a way of changing the mechanics so that it doesn't require giving a bonus to open players.

As i understand, the main problem is 5Cers who can have a disproportionate effect on PP, so focus on fixing that, which i believe Sandro's other proposals can help with.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Which is quite the dilemma we have here - Sandro is advocating exactly that

Advocating is a strong word. Its something he is considering. Should it actually become a thing, then the signal will be sent.

Even if Sandro is fully in favour, he still needs to get approval from those above him in the food chain.

 

[GluttonyFang]

My suggestion is find a way of changing the mechanics so that it doesn't require giving a bonus to open players.

As i understand, the main problem is 5Cers who can have a disproportionate effect on PP, so focus on fixing that, which i believe Sandro's other proposals can help with.

I don't think that solves the issue of unequal rational incentives under a competitive scope. 5cers are top priority, yes.