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

[Arubeto]

It seems like you are, in general not interested in any competitive PvP mechanic, which PP is one.

The fact that PP is available in solo suggests otherwise.

 

[GilliganTX]

You can still control who you interact with in Group.

Indeed. What if I want to get two opposing factions into a group to have a little war?


"Group" and "PvP" are not mutually exclusive in anyway.

 

[Lustan]

I don't quite understand Sandros reasoning. He says its a "you maybe run into PvP" Bonus, yet he also says it will be only for Open. But that you maybe run into PvP is true for Groups as well, not all Groups are PvE and even when they are you maybe still will run into PvP as we have learned.

Simply private groups can have different rulesets governing it's play that are out of Frontier's control. Open Play is 100% managed by Frontier.

If a bonus was allowed in Private Groups everyone who plays in solo would create their own private group and continue their solo play experience in the private group.

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

The fact that PP is available in solo suggests otherwise.

It appears you missed this part:

Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

 

[Bomba Luigi]

You can still control who you interact with in Group.

And they still can shoot me, so I maybe get into PvP

Simply private groups can have different rulesets governing it's play that are out of Frontier's control. Open Play is 100% managed by Frontier.

If a bonus was allowed in Private Groups everyone who plays in solo would create their own private group and continue their solo play experience in the private group.

Whatever rules you make up for a private group, you can't prevent anybody from shooting another group Member. So PvP can happen, I'm sure the SDC can tell you a lot about that should need more Info

Then only give the bonus to Groups as soon as there are at least 2 players active in it at the same time.




Again, I'm just confused by the reasoning that is supposed to be "You maybe run into PvP" Bonus, when its really not.

 

[Arubeto]

It appears you missed this part:

Thanks for pointing this out, but no, I didn't miss it. I meant "PvP" in the classic sense of players directly fighting against each other, not players against players on the meta level by supporting different factions.

The simple fact that Powerplay's mechanics would technically still work for me even if not a single person would choose to pledge allegiance to the Power my own Power is up against shows that PP can't be pure PvP, not even on the meta level.

 

[Kaocraft]

Great idea, provided I have understood the proposal correctly.

As I understand it, this change would have no effect on the amount of merits any individual player would gain, nor would it have any effect on the number of kills/deliveries that they would have to make in order to earn merits and "rank". The only change would be that the kills and deliveries would have a greater impact on the "background simulation" aspect of PowerPlay - meaning that, all other things being equal, one fortification delivery in Open would "move the needle" further than one fortification delivery in Solo.

I find this change very appealing because it wouldn't personally penalize me for playing in Solo, but would still allow for multiple CMDRs to run coordinated actions in Open and have it actually make a difference.

At the moment, ironically, if you want to be a "team player" in PowerPlay and have the maximum positive impact possible on behalf of your chosen Power, you have to play in Solo, which is dumb.

 

[jabokai]

As to the size of the bonus, well, that’s up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but I’m not too worried about the details of that at the moment, I’m more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.

I actually don't care about doing this for Powerplay because I have no interest in it, but please don't let this idea pervade the game in general when human/human encounters based around piracy, crime/punishment are so poorly implemented.

 

[GilliganTX]

Great idea, provided I have understood the proposal correctly.

As I understand it, this change would have no effect on the amount of merits any individual player would gain, nor would it have any effect on the number of kills/deliveries that they would have to make in order to earn merits and "rank". The only change would be that the kills and deliveries would have a greater impact on the "background simulation" aspect of PowerPlay - meaning that, all other things being equal, one fortification delivery in Open would "move the needle" further than one fortification delivery in Solo.

I find this change very appealing because it wouldn't personally penalize me for playing in Solo, but would still allow for multiple CMDRs to run coordinated actions in Open and have it actually make a difference.

At the moment, ironically, if you want to be a "team player" in PowerPlay and have the maximum positive impact possible on behalf of your chosen Power, you have to play in Solo, which is dumb.

That does seem to be the case.

Unfortunately, IMO, FD have effectively tied their hands behind their backs by promising "Three equal modes," which this change would break.

 

[Ziljan]

Hello Commanders!

Lots of lively debate here, for sure, but let's keep things civil, please. I understand that this is an emotive subject, but remember, that's never an excuse for being rude.

So, just to let you folk know a little more of the reasoning behind the concept of an Open Play bonus, I thought I'd pop this out.

Elite Dangerous is a game where you can just as easily play solo, in groups or as part of a nation, as it were.

In general, there aren't mechanical befits within the game to push you towards one style of play over another.

However, there are a few aspects of the game that are specifically aimed at utilising the fact that the game has multiplayer facets, one of these is Powerplay.

Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

In addition, Powerplay has rules to handle direct Commander-Commander confrontation. Indeed, this is the core conceit: the system encourages justifiable piracy and homicide for a higher purpose. It’s my belief that Powerplay will always be at its best when opposing Commanders interact directly, whether in an expansion conflict zone or through interdiction.

So it feels natural (to me) to look at ways to encourage Commanders to use Open Play. However, It’s also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.

Now we have to consider probabilities. Yes, it’s perfectly reasonable to say that you might never run into a human opponent in a control system, even playing in open. The fact remains however, that you *might* instead run into several. And this is on top of the standard NPC threat, which is identical in all play modes.

What’s more, the more pledged Commanders that play in Open, the greater the likelihood there is of human interaction and conflict.

There are thousands of Commanders that engage to some degree or another in Powerplay. Some play in Open, some don’t. If we are successful in getting more Commanders into Open, then the potential for them bumping into each other could increase rather significantly.

And there’s another point to make here, that’s quite simple but also fairly undeniable, is that playing in Open you don’t just meet other Commanders pledged to Powers. You meet *all* other Commanders. That includes all sorts of scum and villainy (character persona only, of course).

So what would an Open Play Success bonus actually achieve? The idea is that it’s a reward for taking the additional risk, whether the risk actually manifests or not.

If you care about Powerplay, and care that you power does well in it, then playing in Open is a “force multiplier” for your Power’s strength.

If you generally play in a Private Group or in Solo, it’s also a gamble, because in addition to all the NPC challenges you have the possibility of opposing Commanders engaging you.

If you already play in Open then you could treat this bonus as a reward for working with the game to make it the best it can be for all involved.

As to the size of the bonus, well, that’s up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but I’m not too worried about the details of that at the moment, I’m more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.

Of course, it’s equally important to remember that this is, at the moment, just being raised as an idea, nothing more. Everyone’s opinion is equally valid, even in disagreement, and all feedback is useful.

This change would actually get me to start playing PP again just for the increased chance of human interaction. Whether cooperative or opposing, it doesn't matter, but being opposed is always more exciting.

I am not the kind of player that goes looking for trouble, but I do enjoy it when It finds me.


Another needed improvement to PP was mentioned by a PVE solo player above: the need for more mission variety when supporting your power (stealth/spy/raiding/sabotage/smuggling/etc). The whole gambit of BB missions transposed onto PP would be the ideal level of diversity. And also the need for more mechanical manifestations of the effects of PP changes. Reducing the local security level /economy/ minor faction influence via undermining would be a good start. And of course, increasing it via fortifications.

This way, Solo players could create islands of security inside Open by fortifying Control Systems, and could expect to be reasonably well protected by a robust local security force. Assuming that this will be part of the Crime and Punishment updates in 2.1?

 

[Lustan]

Again, I'm just confused by the reasoning that is supposed to be "You maybe run into PvP" Bonus, when its really not.

The key here is the "maybe". It' expected that you will get attacked where as in private groups if managed properly you expect to never get attacked.

It can't be done with private groups regardless of it's size because no matter what you set the population threshold to people will would find a way to reach that threshold and still be able to avoid PVP. It has to be limited to Open.

 

[Kristov]

PvP is possible in all forms in group.

If PP is PvP, then PvP is possible in solo.

Indeed, if anyone could get into Solo mode with you, they could shoot you, there is no PvP flag in this game, there are only modes which limit exactly what other players will be in the game with you. Solo, no one will be with you, therefore direct PvP is impossible, this is a fact.

Group mode, you select exactly who's in the Group with you, so if you've set it up for doing PP and PvP at the same time...gaming the system would be my first guess on that, not something people really should be doing is it? Sounds like 5th column to me. Doesn't matter however, you still don't have the same risk as Open since you've limited exactly who you will encounter in the game, unlike Open which has no such limitations on it.

And Sandro covered that, Open, you don't JUST encounter other people doing PP, you encounter anyone and everyone, there's no telling who you'll see or what their intent is, unlike Group where you know exactly who'll you see and what their intent is.

The fact that PP is available in solo suggests otherwise.

Even though Sandro clearly stated otherwise, you want to try that line of illogical argument? Think real hard on your answer to that...

 

[Lheim]

I don't think Open should have an innate bonus to effectiveness because people 'might' run into PvP.

I'm sorry, it's just extremely rare. It's entirely avoidable if you're away from certain hot spot systems. The effect of it on the the contributions of open players to PP is exaggerated by a certain clique. If you do an analysis of how many player ships in open are blown up carrying PP goods, vs how many successful trips there are.. you might end up justifying a 1 - 5% bonus to effectiveness. But a 'significant' bonus? No way. That's just social engineering; bribery to try and save an unpopular mode.

 

[Jypson]

That does seem to be the case.

Unfortunately, IMO, FD have effectively tied their hands behind their backs by promising "Three equal modes," which this change would break.

I suppose "Three equal modes" is up for debate then. How we understand the phrase and how the devs meant the phrase could be two very different things.

 

[Lustan]

Thanks for pointing this out, but no, I didn't miss it. I meant "PvP" in the classic sense of players directly fighting against each other, not players against players on the meta level by supporting different factions.

The simple fact that Powerplay's mechanics would technically still work for me even if not a single person would choose to pledge allegiance to the Power my own Power is up against shows that PP can't be pure PvP, not even on the meta level.

That was not Frontier's intent with PowerPlay as Sandro has said.

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

I'm sorry, it's just extremely rare. It's entirely avoidable if you're away from certain hot spot systems.

The people that all play in Mobius and Solo think it's not avoidable. May be this will teach them how to play in a PVP environment.

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

I suppose "Three equal modes" is up for debate then. How we understand the phrase and how the devs meant the phrase could be two very different things.

That and it's not uncommon practice for companies to say "never" only a couple years later say "we were wrong, it's coming."

 

[GluttonyFang]

And they still can shoot me, so I maybe get into PvP

Not if you choose trust worthy friends and not to mention you have the ability to remove them as a group owner.

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

Indeed. What if I want to get two opposing factions into a group to have a little war?


"Group" and "PvP" are not mutually exclusive in anyway.

They are not, but it is controlled.

You can get two opposing factions to have a war in Open, but you can't ensure that no third party's going to show up and ruin the day.

 

[Theodrid]

I actually don't care about doing this for Powerplay because I have no interest in it, but please don't let this idea pervade the game in general when human/human encounters based around piracy, crime/punishment are so poorly implemented.

You aren't the only one Jabokai, lets be honest here, the powerplay sub forum on these boards is a graveyard, there is a lot of 'pretend' interest in powerplay here and quite frankly I'm not buying it. Many of you guys applauding this have no interest in powerplay or the respective powers, you are just interested in being able to get the next 'must have' shield or weapon A.S.A.P, as soon as you have it, screw the power.

Now, what are Frontier trying to 'fix' here, powerplay or open via the back door?, because frankly offering bonuses for PVP/Pk'ers to get their shields and weapons faster is a bizarre move. So Frontier if you are trying to incentivise powerplay, good luck, there is a general lack of interest in it and the powers behind it, just the goodies sadly, if you are trying to get people into open via a back door, poor form Frontier and you are showing an obvious lack of understanding of the why's and wherefores of opens problems.

To those of you that are genuinely interested in powerplay and your powers even after you have what you can from then, kudos to you but sadly, I would think, you guys are probably a minority, whatever the numbers, you guys are the only, and I mean ONLY ones that deserve a better powerplay, and this isn't going to be it.

 

[GilliganTX]

I suppose "Three equal modes" is up for debate then. How we understand the phrase and how the devs meant the phrase could be two very different things.

That's basically been the core of my argument the whole time.

ATM, the modes are treated equally. Them being treated equally creates inequity in the "merit output" of the groups.

Sandro wants to remedy the inequity by treating one group differently, or unequally, from the others.


Again, being very clear that this is neither intrinsically good or intrinsically bad. It is just an observation.


My opinion based on that observation, is that treating one mode differently or unequally breaks their long standing "three equal modes" promise, and that is disingenuous to a lot of players, and FD should consider how they're going to implement this very, very carefully.

 

[edgar]

Hello Commanders!

Lots of lively debate here, for sure, but let's keep things civil, please. I understand that this is an emotive subject, but remember, that's never an excuse for being rude.

Spoiler

So, just to let you folk know a little more of the reasoning behind the concept of an Open Play bonus, I thought I'd pop this out.

Elite Dangerous is a game where you can just as easily play solo, in groups or as part of a nation, as it were.

In general, there aren't mechanical befits within the game to push you towards one style of play over another.

However, there are a few aspects of the game that are specifically aimed at utilising the fact that the game has multiplayer facets, one of these is Powerplay.

Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

In addition, Powerplay has rules to handle direct Commander-Commander confrontation. Indeed, this is the core conceit: the system encourages justifiable piracy and homicide for a higher purpose. It’s my belief that Powerplay will always be at its best when opposing Commanders interact directly, whether in an expansion conflict zone or through interdiction.

So it feels natural (to me) to look at ways to encourage Commanders to use Open Play. However, It’s also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.

Now we have to consider probabilities. Yes, it’s perfectly reasonable to say that you might never run into a human opponent in a control system, even playing in open. The fact remains however, that you *might* instead run into several. And this is on top of the standard NPC threat, which is identical in all play modes.

What’s more, the more pledged Commanders that play in Open, the greater the likelihood there is of human interaction and conflict.

There are thousands of Commanders that engage to some degree or another in Powerplay. Some play in Open, some don’t. If we are successful in getting more Commanders into Open, then the potential for them bumping into each other could increase rather significantly.

And there’s another point to make here, that’s quite simple but also fairly undeniable, is that playing in Open you don’t just meet other Commanders pledged to Powers. You meet *all* other Commanders. That includes all sorts of scum and villainy (character persona only, of course).

So what would an Open Play Success bonus actually achieve? The idea is that it’s a reward for taking the additional risk, whether the risk actually manifests or not.

If you care about Powerplay, and care that you power does well in it, then playing in Open is a “force multiplier” for your Power’s strength.

If you generally play in a Private Group or in Solo, it’s also a gamble, because in addition to all the NPC challenges you have the possibility of opposing Commanders engaging you.

If you already play in Open then you could treat this bonus as a reward for working with the game to make it the best it can be for all involved.

As to the size of the bonus, well, that’s up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but I’m not too worried about the details of that at the moment, I’m more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.

Of course, it’s equally important to remember that this is, at the moment, just being raised as an idea, nothing more. Everyone’s opinion is equally valid, even in disagreement, and all feedback is useful.

I have so much love for all of this <3 Thank you Sandro!

Next - please apply the same principle to Community Goals.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Next - please apply the same principle to Community Goals.

Please not.

 

[Sandro Sammarco]

Hello Commanders!

A couple of clarifications:

* This change, which remember is nothing more than a suggestion at this point, would have no effect on personal gain. It would affect success values for expansion, fortification and undermining only, not the merits you earned.

* It does not, and is not, meant to be a panacea to make the actual activities of Powerplay better. It's best to think of it as activity agnostic. That's not to say that we don't want to improve the activities (we do!), just that this is not aimed at that.

* The reason this benefit would only apply to Open as opposed to in Private Groups is fairly clear I think: we have no way to control distribution in Private Groups. Folk could start a Private Group where everyone was pledged to a single power. This would effectively then be Solo in terms of dealing with the potential threat of other Commanders.

* I would not want to introduce this into any aspect of the game except Powerplay because Powerplay is the only aspect of the game that explicitly uses the concept of adversarial multiplayer, as opposed to the more vague ways that minor factions operate.

Hope this info helps.