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

[GluttonyFang]

Question for the PP analysts.

Let us assume for the moment that Sandro's (2x?) proposed bonus was implemented on the next cycle.

1) What do you think the effect will be on your power's preparation, fortification, expansion, and undermining attempts assuming that nobody switches mode due to bonus?

As in nobody switches out of Open? We'll probably see some interesting fluctuation in the sense that at first, some prominent players and player groups will dominate and drive less-organized groups into regional activity. Then alliances will get real as in providing escorts and combining strike force.

2) What do you think the effect will be on your power's preparation, fortification, expansion, and undermining attempts assuming that at least 50% of current solo/group PPers change to playing in Open?

We'll see a slight increase in efficiency, since there's no way for one to intercept all the players in Open.

3) Do you believe, from your analysis of powerplay player behaviour (those who simply take part in PP for the bonus, those who play it strategically, those who 5C) do you think that it will cause an increase in PvP interactions? Will you as players focus more on stopping opposition directly, or you will still focus on getting those deliveries and undermining done? What will you do if you see an enemy player in a warzone? Will you stay for the PvP, or will you switch warzone until you find one where there are no players? Will anyone camp warzones or systems to try and stop players (do you already?) or its still better to simply ignore the opposition and focus on your own merit grind?

The focus will still be on PvE activities, but they will see delays due to player opposition. Some groups/players will see direct combative PvP as their contribution to PP. The logical approach to dealing with enemy Cmdr in CZs is usually to avoid them by switching out of the mode, but with the bonus in Open, Cmdrs will try to find a CZ that doesn't have a Cmdr, if he does, he does, if he doesn't, he either fight it or do something else. Though, systems will see a lot more blockades and conflict by players and player groups.

Therefore merit grinding is still the top priority, but opposition cannot be "ignored."

If we don't deal with the potential p2p network cheating/implement the change in such a way that avoid p2p network shut off then we're looking at a guide on how to disable p2p network in Open within a week of the change, or even within days.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

As in nobody switches out of Open? We'll probably see some interesting fluctuation in the sense that at first, some prominent players and player groups will dominate and drive less-organized groups into regional activity. Then alliances will get real as in providing escorts and combining strike force.



We'll see a slight increase in efficiency, since there's no way for one to intercept all the players in Open.



The focus will still be on PvE activities, but they will see delays due to player opposition. Some groups/players will see direct combative PvP as their contribution to PP. The logical approach to dealing with enemy Cmdr in CZs is usually to avoid them by switching out of the mode, but with the bonus in Open, Cmdrs will try to find a CZ that doesn't have a Cmdr, if he does, he does, if he doesn't, he either fight it or do something else. Though, systems will see a lot more blockades and conflict by players and player groups.

Therefore merit grinding is still the top priority, but opposition cannot be "ignored."

If we don't deal with the potential p2p network cheating/implement the change in such a way that avoid p2p network shut off then we're looking at a guide on how to disable p2p network in Open within a week of the change, or even within days.

Thanks, but i think you missed the bit where i said "for your power". If you are still involved with Delaine, what do you think will happen with regards to Delaine's fortification, preparation, etc.

I mean, wouldn't a 2x bonus to all activities in Open make fortifying and undermining and expanding twice as easy?

Look at your power's numbers and then run some best guess stats through them. Last time i was in a powers area in open, there were lots of power players around, so there definitely would be an effect.

 

[Ziljan]

Question for the PP analysts.

Let us assume for the moment that Sandro's (2x?) proposed bonus was implemented on the next cycle.

1) What do you think the effect will be on your power's preparation, fortification, expansion, and undermining attempts assuming that nobody switches mode due to bonus?

2) What do you think the effect will be on your power's preparation, fortification, expansion, and undermining attempts assuming that at least 50% of current solo/group PPers change to playing in Open?

I understand you don't have firm number for your speculations, but since you analysts run the numbers, you probably have a good idea of what double bonuses will cause in the first instance, and you probably can hazard a guess on the second.

and finally

3) Do you believe, from your analysis of powerplay player behaviour (those who simply take part in PP for the bonus, those who play it strategically, those who 5C) do you think that it will cause an increase in PvP interactions? Will you as players focus more on stopping opposition directly, or you will still focus on getting those deliveries and undermining done? What will you do if you see an enemy player in a warzone? Will you stay for the PvP, or will you switch warzone until you find one where there are no players? Will anyone camp warzones or systems to try and stop players (do you already?) or its still better to simply ignore the opposition and focus on your own merit grind?

(Sorry if number 3 is quite speculative, skip it if you don't have an answer, i'm probably showing my lack of understanding of how PP players organize themselves).

1) only Undermining will see a general increase. The crime sweeps etc will see a slight drop of progress in Open due to mildly increased resistance.

2) depends heavily on the Fortifucation/Preparation/Expansion bonuses in Open. It will likely generally increase, but the increase in Undermining will be the balancing factor, since Undermining can directly oppose the other three by distrupting them. Undermining will see an increased activity above situation #1 due to having more potentially interesting targets.

3) Yes there will be a slight increase in PVP interactions. But it may be short lived unless the base mechanics of PP become more compelling, interesting, and FUN. I am guessing this will roughly double the amount if PP participation if this is the only change, and this increase will heavily taper off after about 1 month.

 

[Dave1235]

Please not.

Sandro said they wont so I guess we have to believe him....... about as much as I believe dbobe's statements about all modes being equal in fd's eyes and there being no right way to play the game. comments "You should play it the way you enjoy it comments".since sandros contradictions. What is that phrase they use in parliament"it would appear the honourable gentleman is a stranger to the truth"
I am starting to think ks was just a ruse to separate 84's from their cash so they could make eve with cockpits ymmv

 

[GilliganTX]

AA: Fortification is going to get done a lot faster, IMO.

The only real thing hindering fortification, or at least the only [statistically] significant threat they face at the moment, is enemy aligned players hanging out in Power HQ systems, and popping CMDR ships as the come to pick up their PP commodities.


Arrive in solo. Log to open to pick up the commodities and deliver in open. There are enough delivery points that it would be incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to block-aid all a powers fortification systems. Commodities are bought in open. Deliveries are made in open. Bonus collected. It's all bueno.


That could be an issue.

 

[Mohrgan]

As in nobody switches out of Open? We'll probably see some interesting fluctuation in the sense that at first, some prominent players and player groups will dominate and drive less-organized groups into regional activity. Then alliances will get real as in providing escorts and combining strike force.



We'll see a slight increase in efficiency, since there's no way for one to intercept all the players in Open.



The focus will still be on PvE activities, but they will see delays due to player opposition. Some groups/players will see direct combative PvP as their contribution to PP. The logical approach to dealing with enemy Cmdr in CZs is usually to avoid them by switching out of the mode, but with the bonus in Open, Cmdrs will try to find a CZ that doesn't have a Cmdr, if he does, he does, if he doesn't, he either fight it or do something else. Though, systems will see a lot more blockades and conflict by players and player groups.

Therefore merit grinding is still the top priority, but opposition cannot be "ignored."

If we don't deal with the potential p2p network cheating/implement the change in such a way that avoid p2p network shut off then we're looking at a guide on how to disable p2p network in Open within a week of the change, or even within days.

Even you point out, that your whole assertions are predicated on the fact that players don't play PP in another mode. Do you really believe a bonus to influence is going to bring most PP'ers into open exclusively? What percentage of players that are not using open to PP will be brought into open only play? Do you see it as a significant draw, or just a stepping stone for more incentives for open? Once we find that the bonus, if enacted, doesn't serve it's purpose, to increase the population in open, the calls for more incentives will start.

The calls will be louder and better supported by the incentive that failed (if it does). They will be called out on why just PP, the BGS works in the same way. If I'm battling another PG for dominance of another system, isn't that PvP too? Isn't that competitively scoped? No, the proposed bonus is not suggested to bring parity to the modes, giving players a reward for PP aligned PvP would do that, it is just a test of how would incentivizing open go.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

So, you want to participate in a PvP activity without doing any PvP. Sounds to me like you want to have the ball all to yourself.

PP is PvP. Even when we are not blowing each other up. Keep that in mind.

From reading his post I think he meant PvP-Combat. The problem here is that PvP is an encompassing term and some only use it to mean combat.

 

[GluttonyFang]

Thanks, but i think you missed the bit where i said "for your power". If you are still involved with Delaine, what do you think will happen with regards to Delaine's fortification, preparation, etc.

I mean, wouldn't a 2x bonus to all activities in Open make fortifying and undermining and expanding twice as easy?

I only glance at the numbers every week.

The bonus won't just flat out make things easy, since everyone will be after the bonus. In fact, the more players each power can send into Open the more likely the power will dominate in Open. Though to dominate Open, there needs a large amount of players doing interception work, which cuts down on the people actually just grinding for merit. Therefore the larger number the faction's supporters have, the more of an advantage it'll have once every power become organized in Open. The more PvPer a power has, the more likely it will dominate Open (more escort/attack force), but the amount of PvPers need to be substantial, not just a two or three groups, we're talking a hundred in the least (Considering the amount of systems, and the different activities between delivery interception and system defense against underminers).

If there are a substantial differential between the available PvPers in each faction, then they might simply avoid Open regardless of the Bonus due to the amount oppression there might be.

But hey, if Archon's able to deal with every Empire faction on its rear for cycles after cycle and then some, I'm sure this sort of player domination won't be an issue.

At least that is my primitive speculation.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

1) only Undermining will see a general increase. The crime sweeps etc will see a slight drop of progress in Open due to mildly increased resistance.

2) depends heavily on the Fortifucation/Preparation/Expansion bonuses in Open. It will likely generally increase, but the increase in Undermining will be the balancing factor, since Undermining can directly oppose the other three by distrupting them. Undermining will see an increased activity above situation #1 due to having more potentially interesting targets.

3) Yes there will be a slight increase in PVP interactions. But it may be short lived unless the base mechanics of PP become more compelling, interesting, and FUN. I am guessing this will roughly double the amount if PP participation if this is the only change, and this increase will heavily taper off after about 1 month.

You are talking about your power? Are you saying then (from what i infer) that most of you power's supporter currently play in group/solo and even after the application of a 2x bonus most will remain there? Or... that you expect other powers will directly try and stop you, rather than getting on with their own merit grinding? Is this perhaps a consequence of double merits then? Less time needed to fully fortifiy/prepare/etc, so more time to oppose directly... but then... all sides would do the same? Fully fortify/etc then.... who would they be opposing if everyone has got all the merits they need for their ranks and fortification/etc?

Can you clarify?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I only glance at the numbers every week.

The bonus won't just flat out make things easy, since everyone will be after the bonus. In fact, the more players each power can send into Open the more likely the power will dominate in Open. Though to dominate Open, there needs a large amount of players doing interception work, which cuts down on the people actually just grinding for merit. Therefore the larger number the faction's supporters have, the more of an advantage it'll have once every power become organized in Open. The more PvPer a power has, the more likely it will dominate Open (more escort/attack force), but the amount of PvPers need to be substantial, not just a two or three groups, we're talking a hundred in the least (Considering the amount of systems, and the different activities between delivery interception and system defense against underminers).

If there are a substantial differential between the available PvPers in each faction, then they might simply avoid Open regardless of the Bonus due to the amount oppression there might be.

But hey, if Archon's able to deal with every Empire faction on its rear for cycles after cycle and then some, I'm sure this sort of player domination won't be an issue.

At least that is my primitive speculation.

Ah ha! But if people are intercepting, they aren't grinding for their merits. Will supporters give up their time and their merits to work directly against people? Can the power supporter, even with the bonus, spare the time? Every hour spent trying to stop others is an hour lost to grinding merits and fulfilling the demands of the power....

What do you think? Anything to this?

 

[GluttonyFang]

Even you point out, that your whole assertions are predicated on the fact that players don't play PP in another mode. Do you really believe a bonus to influence is going to bring most PP'ers into open exclusively?

Please go strawman somewhere else, it seems to be a running theme with you.

I'm answering another user's questions, where did I state I want PPers to play Open exclusively with this bonus?

Edit:

Go read, go: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=238428

What percentage of players that are not using open to PP will be brought into open only play? Do you see it as a significant draw, or just a stepping stone for more incentives for open? Once we find that the bonus, if enacted, doesn't serve it's purpose, to increase the population in open, the calls for more incentives will start.

FD has the numbers, once the participants between Open and Solo are roughly close to one another or are appropriate to the threshold FD is comfortable with, that will be it. Plus, it's PP only.

The calls will be louder and better supported by the incentive that failed (if it does). They will be called out on why just PP, the BGS works in the same way. If I'm battling another PG for dominance of another system, isn't that PvP too? Isn't that competitively scoped? No, the proposed bonus is not suggested to bring parity to the modes, giving players a reward for PP aligned PvP would do that, it is just a test of how would incentivizing open go.

Hah... how many times do I have to bring up that I'm distinguishing player owned faction (player group leader chooses whether his faction gets the PP treatment we are discussing or not) and NPC owned faction (operates as normal) since if they get large enough, they'll end up in PP anyway. Also, Sandro stated himself he's not implementing this anywhere else other than PP.

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

Ah ha! But if people are intercepting, they aren't grinding for their merits. Will supporters give up their time and their merits to work directly against people?

Think of it like this, we have group A that does grinding and completely ignore trying to interfere with another faction. But the rationality is that this group wants all the advantage it can have, so it does it in Open.

Then another group (Group B) doesn't like grinding, but still want to contribute, so they go direct combative PvP against people grinding for merits in Open.

Faction A has group A and B type

Faction B has group A and B type

Faction A group A gets interfered by faction B group B

Faction B group A gets interfered by faction A group B

Then leads to faction A group B directly conflicting with faction B group B that theoretically cancel each other out.

I see nothing but additional gameplay and making PP relevant for more people.

Can the power supporter, even with the bonus, spare the time? Every hour spent trying to stop others is an hour lost to grinding merits and fulfilling the demands of the power....

What do you think? Anything to this?

You are working under the assumption that we are dividing the work force we currently have in the current state of PP, which doesn't have to happen, since new players are attracted to PP for alternative reasons as I've explained. Not to mention new players in general, regardless of interest will also be accounted for.

I see nothing but positive here.

 

[Kristov]

Ah ha! But if people are intercepting, they aren't grinding for their merits. Will supporters give up their time and their merits to work directly against people? Can the power supporter, even with the bonus, spare the time? Every hour spent trying to stop others is an hour lost to grinding merits and fulfilling the demands of the power....

What do you think? Anything to this?

For the groups actually doing PP, it's not an issue, devoting time and energy to countering the enemy will be done and devoting time and energy to getting the merits will also be done, one will probably take place in Open, while the other will probably remain in Solo/Group, exactly as they are done now, because it's safer. 2x the Power benefit really doesn't matter all that much if you can stop the enemy from getting that in the first place by physically stopping them in Open or by driving them to Solo so they can grind their merits.

This proposal of Sandro's simply addresses the imbalance between Solo/Group and Open when it comes to PP, that's all, it doesn't really give much incentive to switch TO Open as some imply, since Open is where you actually would face opposition. As Gluttony pointed out, without lots of active and good PvPers in the group, there won't be any point in being in Open in the first place, 2x bonus means nothing if you can't collect it after all.

We might see SOME more PP action in Open, there are some decent PvP groups engaged in PP after all, but that will be a limited response, and when other Power groups don't materialize in Open, well...

 

[Mohrgan]

Please go strawman somewhere else, it seems to be a running theme with you.

I'm answering another user's questions, where did I state I want PPers to play Open exclusively with this bonus?



FD has the numbers, once the participants between Open and Solo are roughly close to one another or are appropriate to the threshold FD is comfortable with, that will be it. Plus, it's PP only.



Hah... how many times do I have to bring up that I'm distinguishing player owned faction (player group leader chooses whether his faction gets the PP treatment we are discussing or not) and NPC owned faction (operates as normal) since if they get large enough, they'll end up in PP anyway. Also, Sandro stated himself he's not implementing this anywhere else other than PP.

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



Think of it like this, we have group A that does grinding and completely ignore trying to interfere with another faction. But the rationality is that this group wants all the advantage it can have, so it does it in Open.

Then another group (Group B) doesn't like grinding, but still want to contribute, so they go direct combative PvP against people grinding for merits in Open.

Faction A has group A and B type

Faction B has group A and B type

Faction A group A gets interfered by faction B group B

Faction B group A gets interfered by faction A group B

Then leads to faction A group B directly conflicting with faction B group B that theoretically cancel each other out.

I see nothing but additional gameplay and making PP relevant for more people.



You are working under the assumption that we are dividing the work force we currently have in the current state of PP, which doesn't have to happen, since new players are attracted to PP for alternative reasons as I've explained. Not to mention new players in general, regardless of interest will also be accounted for.

I see nothing but positive here.

Go look up what a straw man argument really is.

You have just agreed with the fact that the suggested bonus isn't to bring parity to the modes, but is purely an effort to increase open's population. Which undermines the entire suggestion. No more smokescreen. The question then becomes why should open be protected by special considerations?

You, and Sandro have also said this suggestion is to bring parity between the modes. We can clearly see that is not the case. Why should anyone believe your distinction, when your justification was shown, by you, to be false?

 

[GluttonyFang]

Go look up what a straw man argument really is.

Yes you should, once you stop intentionally misinterpreting people's argument and argue against said misinterpretation.

You have just agreed with the fact that the suggested bonus isn't to bring parity to the modes, but is purely an effort to increase open's population. Which undermines the entire suggestion. No more smokescreen. The question then becomes why should open be protected by special considerations?

I agreed to no such thing, I said people trying to min-max their influence will come to Open at the cost of risk by direct player opposition. The Open population's increase is a natural development for those no longer coerced into private and solo with the change.

You, and Sandro have also said this suggestion is to bring parity between the modes. We can clearly see that is not the case. Why should anyone believe your distinction, when your justification was shown, by you, to be false?

What justification is false? It's to let those who are willing to be competitive be rewarded regardless of what mode they are in. If they are in Open, they get opposed by players, so they get a little extra, which is the perk. Those that don't want to be opposed by players directly can stay in private and solo, the perk is no direct player opposition.

What partiality is there to speak of?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Thanks guys for answering my questions. I have my suspicions things won't be exactly like some think.... i think it will have unintended effects. But that's just speculation on my part.

Perhaps the best thing to do is for Sandro to implement it and see what happens. If it doesn't have the desired effect then it could be reversed (of course, there would be those who wouldn't be happy with a reversal - but as long as it was stated up front it was a test with specific goals to see what the effect would be there would be a valid path back, especially if the changes made things worse than before).

 

[GluttonyFang]

Thanks guys for answering my questions. I have my suspicions things won't be exactly like some think.... i think it will have unintended effects. But that's just speculation on my part.

Perhaps the best thing to do is for Sandro to implement it and see what happens. If it doesn't have the desired effect then it could be reversed (of course, there would be those who wouldn't be happy with a reversal - but as long as it was stated up front it was a test with specific goals to see what the effect would be there would be a valid path back, especially if the changes made things worse than before).

Yea I say experiment, though there should be some method to it.

 

[Mohrgan]

Yes you should, once you stop intentionally misinterpreting people's argument and argue against said misinterpretation.



I agreed to no such thing, I said people trying to min-max their influence will come to Open at the cost of risk by direct player opposition. The Open population's increase is a natural development for those no longer coerced into private and solo with the change.



What justification is false? It's to let those who are willing to be competitive be rewarded regardless of what mode they are in. If they are in Open, they get opposed by players, so they get a little extra, which is the perk. Those that don't want to be opposed by players directly can stay in private and solo, the perk is no direct player opposition.

What partiality is there to speak of?

You said ....'FD has the numbers, once the participants between Open and Solo are roughly close to one another or are appropriate to the threshold FD is comfortable with, that will be it. Plus, it's PP only.' in your post. That says the decision is based on numbers in open, not some parity between the modes.

 

[GluttonyFang]

You said ....'FD has the numbers, once the participants between Open and Solo are roughly close to one another or are appropriate to the threshold FD is comfortable with, that will be it. Plus, it's PP only.' in your post. That says the decision is based on numbers in open, not some parity between the modes.

Parity is what FD has in mind for the modes, and in this case, PP the mechanic and its interaction with modes, the numbers will reflect whether the parity is proper or not. It's simple cause and effect. Parity causes the desirable distribution of players.

 

[Mohrgan]

Parity is what FD has in mind for the modes, the numbers will reflect whether the parity is proper or not. It's simple cause and effect.

So, you slipped in your messaging, talking about 'participants' rather than influence or the bonus. Don't worry, the suggestion is obviously set to bolster open's population, no secrets were exposed.

 

[GluttonyFang]

So, you slipped in your messaging, talking about 'participants' rather than influence or the bonus. Don't worry, the suggestion is obviously set to bolster open's population, no secrets were exposed.

You know what, read this and tell me what I care about:

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=238428