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

[kilvenny]

The question being asked in this game has the potential to fundamentally change the way this game will evolve going forward.

Liqua made a great point about pp essentially being a race for merits (regardless of mode). Now that you have player factions potentially being in a race against each other for merits, it does seem a little odd to me that a race between two player factions could be conducted without the two ever meeting.

My personal view is that powerplay should have some extra elements added that support open play between player factions. You can still get the merits as now, but where two or more player factions are competing for a system I would open up limited combat instances where victory generated merits in a manner where it was advantageous to contest the instance. A further encouragement might be that you had to fight in faction provided ships, so there was no insurance loss.

This way those who do not want pvp can still avoid it, but there would be an encouragement to indulge in it in at least a limited fashion.

 

[Robert Maynard]

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

The fact that PvP is not specifically rewarded in Powerplay (and would not seem to be about to be - Sandro's posts don't seem to mention any PvP specific rewards) is interesting in this context - the Open Bonus would seem to be a scattergun approach to mitigating reduced merit delivery efficiency (fewer merits delivered against those set out to be delivered) in Open due to PvP - in effect a PvP subsidy - in a game feature that does not specifically reward PvP (but may, soon, reward the remotest possibility of PvP regardless of whether it is encountered - or not).

What Sandro's proposal does not do is mitigate the financial losses that each player in Open will still endure due to PvP inside Powerplay.....

 

[Flea King]

..however, getting things done while facing the possibility of being directly opposed by human players does present more oppertunities for challenge than attempting to get the same things done while being opposed by bots. And PP is all about getting things done.

So the smart choice? Get things done while reducing the chance of direct human contact. Avoid Open mode while supporting our factions in PP.

Some change to reward those play PP and stay in Open makes sense and I feel it is fair. Attempting to get PP things done, in Open, can be more challenging. I see the proposal as less of a carrot to encourage folks into Open, more of a Gold Star – and reward to the faction, not the player – for enduring the tougher, more challenging option of PP play.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

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

Quick question: have you ever been blown up delivering pamphlets for the Pirate King in Open?

 

[Saool]

They need to work on the countless other problems with power play before worrying about modes. Personally it would make no difference to me if there where bonuses to doing it in open, as I lost all interest in it due to it being horribly broken and bias.

 

[Jockey79]

They need to work on the countless other problems with power play before worrying about modes. ....

yup.

/8char

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

...

I didn't even read your post as my comment was meant tongue in cheek - it's what many people say when they complain about open being full of PvP combat players.

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.

I stand corrected - you are indeed right - "advocating" was too strong a word.

Apologies to Sandro / FD.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

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.
…

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. …


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.…

Bad example.

In your example the reason for the imbalance isn't the mode used, the imbalance is between lone player and player in wings. The imbalance is part of the design of that specific gameplay element you came up with.
It doesn't matter if the player in in solo or open mode as long as the player is alone that player will have an disadvantage based on the game design of that specific feature.

In PP the disadvantage is a result of something else that is not directly related to the PP game design. It doesn't matter if a player in Solo or Open participates in PP as the game is designed in a way that the direct PP related actions are equal.
The disadvantage is a result of Open Mode and the possibility of PvP combat.

If PP should get a boost/compensation of the ineffectiveness that results form the risk of PvP combat in Open mode, then that bonus would have to be applied to your example too as players in Open Mode would face the opposition of other players. Your example game design punishes lone players in all modes, while at the same time putting the players in Open Mode into the disadvantage of facing opposition form other players.

The current implementation of PP doesn't do what your example shows.
The game design of PP is not in favor of private or solo.
The problem is that Open Mode PvP combat affects the PP gameplay in a negative way.
The problem is that an unrelated aspect of Open Mode affects PP and Sandro's suggestion tries to fix it by applying a bonus to something that isn't causing the imbalance.

 

[Boomer Kay]

And PP is all about getting things done.

That was 4 days into the cycle in a high income system near you and pretty much between different powers:

If that's supposed to be "getting things done", "a race" and/or "highly competitive player vs. player action", this here is the Boston Marathon:

It could have been won by just showing up there, but of course it's that much more in the spirit of competitiveness to go on rambling about Nike shoes requiring a 10 second headstart for fairness' sake.

 

[Jockey79]

I didn't even read your post as my comment was meant tongue in cheek - it's what many people say when they complain about open being full of PvP combat players.

Oh the number of times I've seen PvP'ers say "if you cannot handle the challenge of open" or "go hide in Mobius if you're not good enough"...

Seems it is a bitter pill to swallow when it works the other way.

 

[excalibus]

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

how would that work if I go into solo say doing non powerplay stuff on monday morning, maybe I am running missions or mining etc for example, then monday evening I log into open to do my powerplay stuff, all in open of course... would I not be 'entitled' to earn the extra points because I was doing the powerplay stuff in open? A devils advocate would suggest marking 'cargo' as such that if I am transporting that powerplay cargo outside of open, then the cargo gets flagged as being in my hold outside of open and then perhaps it is worth only 1x the effect.

But then what if I sit at my home world in solo buying up the powerplay items, then once I have a hold full, I log out to open and then fly to the place to deliver them in open and make the delivery in open? wouldn't I be worthy of the extra PP affects reward because I delivered them in open play?

Soo many problems with how this could be implemented that I can see personally and I do not even bother with PP these days...

 

[JosiahD]

Actually, it's true, Solo and Group hold less risk

Just going to pick up on this point as many continually attempt to portray solo and private groups as less risk. I recommend adopting an OH&S risk assessment approach. It is important to distinguish risk from hazard.
.
The presence of other players in open is a hazard, NOT a risk, if adopting that approach.
.
All other hazards, be they environmental, NPC-related or one's own actions, exist across all modes equally.
.
if one considers each mode overall, the overall risk in open is actually not higher than the other modes. All other hazards and their contribution to the risk score overwhelm the impact of the single additional hazard in open of other players. For example, if based on all the other hazards the overall risk in open was assessed as medium, the single additional hazard of other players doesn't noticeably raise that risk score because the actual probability of encountering another player, considering the mode as a whole, is actually very low (no higher than possible) when taking into consideration the volume of play area and the impacts of P2P, instancing and matchmaking.
.
Granted, carrying out a proper OH&S style risk assessment tends to be subjective and dependent upon individual consideration of likelihood and consequence. But try it and you will quickly realise that when looking at the modes in their entirety, the risk score is actually no different between the modes. I would certainly recommend Frontier adopt that approach if they really want to properly assess the differences in risk across the play modes and in-game activities.
.
That said, if one wanted to focus on specific localised events such as CGs, then of course that would adjust the risk, and open would probably result in a higher risk score but ONLY in the vicinity of that localised CG activity. PP might well have a slightly elevated risk in open, but I think it unlikely as PP actually occurs over a much wider area than CGs and therefore the additional hazard of other players has a lesser impact. For example, for a CG the probability of encountering another player in open might well be probable and the risk score might well be elevated as a result, but with PP I would suggest it would still only be assessed as possible given the larger area involved and so there would likely be little difference between PP in open and the other modes as a whole in terms of risk score. However, that's not how the risk difference is usually described when people simply claim that solo and private group are less risk as it doesn't suit their argument. In reality, if discussing the modes overall, it is important to acknowedge that the overall risk is really no different if considering each mode as a whole. But if discussing the risk in localised areas, that's when it would be reasonable to think that there might be a difference in risk. It's important not to confuse risk with hazards though, if one really wants to assess risk associated with different activities. Other players are just an additional hazard though, nothing more, not to be confused with risk......and a hazard that is not always present even in open mode.

 

[JosiahD]

Oh the number of times I've seen PvP'ers say "if you cannot handle the challenge of open" or "go hide in Mobius if you're not good enough"...

Seems it is a bitter pill to swallow when it works the other way.

Indeed. It's interesting to on the one hand to be told to go play in solo or private group if we're not interested in PvP or 'can't handle it' only to then be told once people have done that (in droves if what some say about PP is to be believed), open needs incentives to be bring people back because those in open feel somehow disadvantaged as a result (conveniently ignoring it seems that the way to oppose PvE-based PP activities is to actually execute those same PvE-based PP activities but in opposition - and mode choice makes no difference there - except to PvPers). Amusing even......

 

[Flea King]

Again -- PP inOpen is potentially harder than PP in Group or Solo.

Those that stick with PP and attempt to play it in Open? Sure, give their faction a Gold Star bonus.

 

[Voiddancer]

The question being asked in this game has the potential to fundamentally change the way this game will evolve going forward.

Liqua made a great point about pp essentially being a race for merits (regardless of mode). Now that you have player factions potentially being in a race against each other for merits, it does seem a little odd to me that a race between two player factions could be conducted without the two ever meeting.

My personal view is that powerplay should have some extra elements added that support open play between player factions. You can still get the merits as now, but where two or more player factions are competing for a system I would open up limited combat instances where victory generated merits in a manner where it was advantageous to contest the instance. A further encouragement might be that you had to fight in faction provided ships, so there was no insurance loss.

This way those who do not want pvp can still avoid it, but there would be an encouragement to indulge in it in at least a limited fashion.

This is a suggestion that does keep cropping up and is a promising one. These arena-like combat instances could also be placed in control systems as a pvp alternative of undermining and fortifying. I would suggest that you can bring your own ships to these instances, but within them your insurance costs are covered by the power and being destroyed within them does not cost you your merits so far.

 

[Tuub t Tute]

And still nobody has come back with even anecdotal evidence that it was harder for them to deliver pamphlets. Only that they cruise around their own territory in combat ships and find no enemies to "educate".

Players supporting Sandro's hypothesis are not doing it because they want an incentive to try delivering pamphlets in Open; they are doing it because they want more fish in their barrel.

And let's go off on a flight of fancy and extrapolate this: Sandro puts up some form of multiplier for a fixed period as a test. A few PPers decide they will try Open, refitting their ships to offer more shields and better thrusters or whatever. They get interdicted delivering their pamphlets and when they refuse to go away, they get blown up.

Do we think at that point they will be all Incey Wincey Spider and try, try again for that phat Open bonus, or do we think they will go back to the mode they were comfortable in, do their PvE grind for their Power and not go back to Open?

We reach a dichotomy where until it is tested, either everyone in Open will get a big bonus for delivering pamphlets unscathed. Or they will get blown up in Open and go back to other modes and do what they were going to do in the first place.

 

[Lily from anim.o.v.e]

Just going to pick up on this point as many continually attempt to portray solo and private groups as less risk. I recommend adopting an OH&S risk assessment approach. It is important to distinguish risk from hazard.
.
The presence of other players in open is a hazard, NOT a risk, if adopting that approach.
.
All other hazards, be they environmental, NPC-related or one's own actions, exist across all modes equally.
.
if one considers each mode overall, the overall risk in open is actually not higher than the other modes. All other hazards and their contribution to the risk score overwhelm the impact of the single additional hazard in open of other players. For example, if based on all the other hazards the overall risk in open was assessed as medium, the single additional hazard of other players doesn't noticeably raise that risk score because the actual probability of encountering another player, considering the mode as a whole, is actually very low (no higher than possible) when taking into consideration the volume of play area and the impacts of P2P, instancing and matchmaking.
.
Granted, carrying out a proper OH&S style risk assessment tends to be subjective and dependent upon individual consideration of likelihood and consequence. But try it and you will quickly realise that when looking at the modes in their entirety, the risk score is actually no different between the modes. I would certainly recommend Frontier adopt that approach if they really want to properly assess the differences in risk across the play modes and in-game activities.
.
That said, if one wanted to focus on specific localised events such as CGs, then of course that would adjust the risk, and open would probably result in a higher risk score but ONLY in the vicinity of that localised CG activity. PP might well have a slightly elevated risk in open, but I think it unlikely as PP actually occurs over a much wider area than CGs and therefore the additional hazard of other players has a lesser impact. For example, for a CG the probability of encountering another player in open might well be probable and the risk score might well be elevated as a result, but with PP I would suggest it would still only be assessed as possible given the larger area involved and so there would likely be little difference between PP in open and the other modes as a whole in terms of risk score. However, that's not how the risk difference is usually described when people simply claim that solo and private group are less risk as it doesn't suit their argument. In reality, if discussing the modes overall, it is important to acknowedge that the overall risk is really no different if considering each mode as a whole. But if discussing the risk in localised areas, that's when it would be reasonable to think that there might be a difference in risk. It's important not to confuse risk with hazards though, if one really wants to assess risk associated with different activities. Other players are just an additional hazard though, nothing more, not to be confused with risk......and a hazard that is not always present even in open mode.

Every harzard is a risk otherwise it wuld not be a hazard. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hazard http://www.thefreedictionary.com/risk

 

[Robert Maynard]

Every harzard is a risk otherwise it wuld not be a hazard. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/hazard http://www.thefreedictionary.com/risk

Hazard becomes risk when probability of occurrence is taken into consideration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_(risk)#Hazard_vs_risk

In the multi-player game modes there is an additional hazard of being attacked / destroyed by a player. For that to be considered to be an increased risk, the probability of occurrence needs to be determined.

 

[Jockey79]

.....

We reach a dichotomy where until it is tested, either everyone in Open will get a big bonus for delivering pamphlets unscathed. Or they will get blown up in Open and go back to other modes and do what they were going to do in the first place.

See, this is a good idea. Why not set a testing time for it and see what happens.
If it flops, revert the game back and if it works look at keeping it.

The summer holidays are coming up, I'd be more than happy to live stream every day for, say 4 weeks(?).
People can watch me going in to open, gaining a bonus to my faction influence while never, ever, ever seeing another commander, while I earn merits to get a Prismatic Shield for my Cutter.

Heck, I'm tempted to prove this point one Saturday afternoon, but I feel 1 afternoon session may not get the point over.

 

[Derath]

And still nobody has come back with even anecdotal evidence that it was harder for them to deliver pamphlets.

I've got anecdotal evidence! I've been interdicted by a player at least once everytime I've done a powerplay activity, admittedly I refuse to deliver pamphlets so I tend to do the other ones but still. Did it slow me down? Yeah, did it have a great impact? No, but thats because i'm about as familiar with PvP as you can get so trash or leave im back to what i was doing in a couple of minutes.

It is slower, and open needs looking at in the context of CGs and PP, but a flat bonus is just dumb.

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

See, this is a good idea. Why not set a testing time for it and see what happens.
If it flops, revert the game back and if it works look at keeping it.

The summer holidays are coming up, I'd be more than happy to live stream every day for, say 4 weeks(?).
People can watch me going in to open, gaining a bonus to my faction influence while never, ever, ever seeing another commander, while I earn merits to get a Prismatic Shield for my Cutter.

Heck, I'm tempted to prove this point one Saturday afternoon, but I feel 1 afternoon session may not get the point over.

Don't do it in a cutter or your skewing your potential findings by basically saying you need a wing of decent ships to have any impact, I suspect a majority of players still can't afford a cutter or anything of the like, I could buy one but I certainly couldn't get close to A rating it.