Powerplay Powerplay Solo/Private Exploit Problem

[Para Handy]

Why then, if you care not for Power Play or PvP in general, are you coming here to argue with something that will not affect you at all?

1. The thread was in the suggestions sub-forum when I made my initial response, I see the updates after that, even though it was moved to the PvP sub-forum, my further responses were in reply to remarks made to quotes of me.

2. Any change in access to game features is of concern to all players - I might choose to pledge to a powerpants thingie in future so of course I don't want to see people manipulate the argument in order to provide fodder for PvP content-hungry people.

 

[Arkadi]

oh boy, can't some mod move this thread to the "modes of elite" bin...please.

 

[withnail]

From which mode / continent / platform / timezone / ISP?

If you're reading this for the first time you need to understand that Maynard doesn't play Powerplay and is an evangelical PG/solo advocate.

 

[Robert Maynard]

If you're reading this for the first time you need to understand that Maynard doesn't play Powerplay and is an evangelical PG/solo advocate.

Indeed (although I haven't ruled out going module shopping at some point) - I am, however, somewhat concerned when attempts are made to hijack existing content, released for all players to engage in from all game modes / platforms, to suit the play-style choice of a minority of players - a play-style that is entirely optional in this game, as has been obvious from the outset.

 

[Arkadi]

Indeed (although I haven't ruled out going module shopping at some point) - I am, however, somewhat concerned when attempts are made to hijack existing content, released for all players to engage in from all game modes / platforms, to suit the play-style choice of a minority of players - a play-style that is entirely optional in this game, as has been obvious from the outset.

https://www.elitedangerous.com/en/gameplay/wings

Wings

Fly alone, or with friends as part of a Wing

Experience unpredictable encounters with players from around the world in Elite Dangerous' vast massively multiplayer space. Fly alone or with friends in a connected galaxy where every pilot you face could become a trusted ally or your deadliest enemy.

Whether you experience the open multi-player galaxy on your own or in a Wing where you can stay connected to a group of your buddies as you share in jointly-earned spoils, the connected galaxy delivers a constant source of new opportunities and people to play with and against.

In Solo play you can choose never meet another human player, yet the results of your actions still contribute to economy, politics and conflicts of the connected galaxy, and you experience the echoes of their activity.

You are not to wrong. This is how the game is advertised.

Still we can argue if this approach is crippeling some of the games features, and if it would not be appropirate to help those features make more sense by changing some parameters.

There are some possibilties. Adding reconnaissance missions that make it possible to see which players are performing activitys in a system, and where in the galaxy they presently are, to be able to call who is undermining your faction/power, regardless of modes. Adding ingame communication-boards would help to communicate with players regardless of instance and mode. Boosting open-play by making theire impact count more, would help players in a game-feature that is built around conflict and territorial control, to acutally play a game-feature about conflict and territorial control.


I have not yet read anywhere that all modes have to impact the BGS/Powerplay to the same amount. They all have effect, but how much can be matter of discussion.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You are not to wrong. This is how the game is advertised.

Indeed.

Still we can argue if this approach is crippeling some of the games features, and if it would not be appropirate to help those features make more sense by changing some parameters.

Of course - however in arguing that point it is natural that opposition to the proposed change(s) will be encountered.

There are some possibilties. Adding reconnaissance missions that make it possible to see which players are performing activitys in a system, and where in the galaxy they presently are, to be able to call who is undermining your faction/power, regardless of modes. Adding ingame communication-boards would help to communicate with players regardless of instance and mode. Boosting open-play by making theire impact count more, would help players in a game-feature that is built around conflict and territorial control, to acutally play a game-feature about conflict and territorial control.

.... which would help with the "between platforms" case as well as the "between modes" case.

I have not yet read anywhere that all modes have to impact the BGS/Powerplay to the same amount. They all have effect, but how much can be matter of discussion.

Here's a selection of relevant Developer quotes:

Will at any time solo and private group play be separated into a different universe/database from open play? It's kind of cheap that you can be safe from many things in solo, like player blockades and so on, and still affect the same universe.

No.

Michael

Hi Micheal

I know you said that solo/group and open will always use the same universe, can you also say that there will be no specific perks in playing in one mode over another? i.e bigger profit from trading in open or bigger bounties?

None are planned at the moment.

Michael

For fun

That said, it could be worth thinking about reducing the impact that solo & group players have on the political simulation.

Unlike community goals, Powerplay is a swinging balance - ie solo players are also balancing solo players.

According to some members of the community, Solo players should have a limited or no effect on Powerplay - or, alternatively, playing in Open should offer Powerplay bonuses. Is this something you are considering?
No. For us Solo, Groups and Open are all valid and equal ways to play the game.

Is there planned to be any defense against the possibility that player created minor factions could be destroyed with no possible recourse through Private Groups or Solo play?

From the initial inception of the game we have considered all play modes are equally valid choices. While we are aware that some players disagree, this hasn't changed for us.

Michael

Even when Sandro mused about an Open Play Bonus for PowerPlay, it was for the Power only (i.e. not affecting player rewards):

And since I'm in the mood for pulling hand grenades , here's another thing to chew on: I'm currently rather taken by the concept of a success multiplier for Commanders in Open Play. this modifier would not improve personal gains from power play activities, but it would magnify the effectiveness of a power's actions (expand, oppose, fortify, undermine). And the effect would probably be significant.

My thinking for this? At the moment, any way I slice it, I can't come to any conclusion other than Commanders in Open Play have a tougher time than those in Private Groups or Solo. So the playing field is basically uneven as it stands and in this case, maybe change could make things better.

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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uetVzNINdKU;t=26m40s

The first one's from Robert Maynard and he's saying "Has the pin been pulled on the hand grenade I posted in a Collusion Piracy thread?". Just for context this was, I was musing out loud about potentially Open Play Powerplay having some benefit to success over and above Private Groups and Solo - I just want to reiterate that was just me musing, we're not going to do that at the moment, there are no plans to do it, but it is still an interesting thought, nothing's ever completely off the table but nothing to announce at the moment.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Powerplay in open should carry more reward, as the risks are much more. It would be great if personal rewards stayed between modes but anything that affected the power as a whole should only count in open, otherwise you get this: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...owerplay-rules?highlight=powerplay+fought+ww2

 

[withnail]

Indeed (although I haven't ruled out going module shopping at some point) - I am, however, somewhat concerned when attempts are made to hijack existing content, released for all players to engage in from all game modes / platforms, to suit the play-style choice of a minority of players - a play-style that is entirely optional in this game, as has been obvious from the outset.

You keep justifying that to yourself.

Last time we discussed this we found out that you don't like aggression and prefer to play as a pacifist. You need to make people understand where your viewpoint is rather than deal out the usual multi quote stuff and coming over all passive aggressive.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You keep justifying that to yourself.

Last time we discussed this we found out that you don't like aggression and prefer to play as a pacifist. You need to make people understand where your viewpoint is rather than deal out the usual multi quote stuff and coming over all passive aggressive.

My viewpoint stems from the simple facts:

All players affect the economic and political aspects of the shared galaxy state, by design, regardless of game mode or platform.

Some players who prefer a completely optional play style seem to want to force all players that engage with one or more elements of the single shared galaxy state to do so in Open, contrary to Frontier's design and implementation of these features.

It is true that I have no interest whatsoever in direct PvP, I find it to be rather tedious and predictable as an uninterested participant on occasion. Which is why the design of this game appeals to me as it was clear from the outset that the game was designed to be unable to be dominated through direct PvP, just as it continues to be.

 

[Para Handy]

I posted this in another thread but since this one has been moved again, I'll pop it in here - it is a genuine question:

Here is a very naive question - if there were no players acting on behalf of a powerpants power wouldn't that power still have activities going on, like fortification etc?

Assuming that is the case then what it the point of PvP peeps complaining about some players doing powerpants in PG or Solo because they are not going to see all the background activities are they?

As I said, honest question so try not to flame please.

 

[Rubbernuke]

powerpants


As I said, honest question so try not to flame please.

If you actually said 'Powerplay' I might take you seriously there.

Powerplay is 100% player driven. So no players equals no forts, undermines, preps, anything.

Powerplay is gangland warfare. Its 'our turf' so to speak- but how do you defend against someone who is in solo? What gameplay outcome seems better:

1: Players stick to solo.....means its a numbers game alone, whoever delivers the most wins. No fighting at all as PP NPCs are no threat. This simply makes for grinding.

2: Open.....here deliveries have the possibility of being intercepted, necessitating protection and patrols. In combat expansions do you go for the snipe (risking 10k merits to surprise your enemy?) or do you cash in? Some powers have choke points, do you blockade them? Who is prepping system x? In open you have a chance to actually know.

 

[Para Handy]

..............

Powerplay is 100% player driven. So no players equals no forts, undermines, preps, anything.

..........

Are you sure about that? How about all these Sirius Transport and Sirius Security NPCs I see about the place in my current sphere of operations? Similar with the Alliance enforcers, etc, etc

I find it hard to believe that F D leave the Powerplay (that better? ) Powers with no background activity. However, of course, I have taken no involvement in it since one pledge time as a favour to help another player so I naturally defer to others in this.

 

[Ethaidan]

Powerplay is 100% player driven. So no players equals no forts, undermines, preps, anything.

Are you certain? I was wondering about NPC contributions, so I did some rudimentary testing - possibly counter to a certain PP groups efforts (sorry!) and I suspect there may be some NPC triggering. Granted I can never control all the variables, but here is what I did & observed.

1. Tracked the prep/fort/undermining late during cycle, focused watching #/% of systems receiving no Fort support.
2. Checked PP group postings to check the least supported systems against their 'do not deliver to' list.
3. Did deliveries to the lowest supported systems.
4. Without fail, following my deliveries, these systems received far more absolute #s of merits and % increases than my 150 merits to each one.
5. Other low supported systems that I did not deliver to, I noticed no change to.

It's entirely possible that my minimal efforts coincided with larger player actions, but... I've done this a few times now and noticed the same pattern. So, either some fantastic coincidences, complete with perfect timing, or maybe player actions trigger some NPC support?

 

[Rubbernuke]

PP NPCs in nav points are cannon fodder for underminers and do nothing. Allied PP NPCs in control systems do nothing and are cannon fodder for underminers.

All other NPCs are window dressing essentially. If players do nothing, powers go no-where.

Powerplay is 100% player driven. If numbers go up, its players doing it.

 

[LeptonFields]

+1000 rep

PowerPlay is pointless without people. Anything that separates the people diminishes PowerPlay. That this concept is in dispute is mind-boggling.

PowerPlay is one of the few aspects of the game that created communities of the game - more by accident than by design (design would have included squadrons from the start). Because people can remain separated in Solo, the game degenerates into flat dimensions of grinding - not much room for strategy, not much emergent game-play, and weakly-bound communities. Think of the missing roles of Solo-only PowerPlay: scout, escort, blockader, interceptor, attack-wings. There can be no 'Battle of the Atlantic' (in space) if the conoys can dodge the 'U-boats' by flying in Solo.

FDev better wake up to supporting its' communities, because that is what keeps people playing and buying expansions when the competition comes along with the newest, shiniest products. I speak from experience of playing Everquest for 13 yrs, long after World of Warcraft should have drawn me away with better graphics - it was the guild, the community I was a part of that kept me coming back year after year. To paraphrase, 'It's the people, stupid!'

 

[withnail]

My viewpoint stems from the simple facts:

All players affect the economic and political aspects of the shared galaxy state, by design, regardless of game mode or platform.

Some players who prefer a completely optional play style seem to want to force all players that engage with one or more elements of the single shared galaxy state to do so in Open, contrary to Frontier's design and implementation of these features.

It is true that I have no interest whatsoever in direct PvP, I find it to be rather tedious and predictable as an uninterested participant on occasion. Which is why the design of this game appeals to me as it was clear from the outset that the game was designed to be unable to be dominated through direct PvP, just as it continues to be.

My problem here is the spamming of threads with frontier quotes every single time this is raised and effectively shutting down discussion between people that have heard what you have to say.

We would have a better discussion if it was allowed to flow. People know that frontier have three modes, it isn't always about settng Pg/solo apart and, in some cases, frontier are not necessarily right.

There is at least one player above that is extremely well known and experienced in Powerplay. He prefers PG over open but admits that open has the disadvantage.

This is the discussion we should be allowed to have. Spamming quotes kills it.

 

[Robert Maynard]

To paraphrase, 'It's the people, stupid!'

.... and not all of "the people" like PvP.

Frontier saw that one coming and designed the game to accommodate them too.

 

[Robert Maynard]

My problem here is the spamming of threads with frontier quotes every single time this is raised and effectively shutting down discussion between people that have heard what you have to say.

We would have a better discussion if it was allowed to flow. People know that frontier have three modes, it isn't always about settng Pg/solo apart and, in some cases, frontier are not necessarily right.

There is at least one player above that is extremely well known and experienced in Powerplay. He prefers PG over open but admits that open has the disadvantage.

This is the discussion we should be allowed to have. Spamming quotes kills it.

Part of the problem is that new participants seem to get the impression that this is a new topic - hence the history briefing.

The discussion does flow - it doesn't flow without any opposition though, as the feature in question has been implemented for all players and only a subset of those players seek to change it to suit their play-style.

While Frontier may or may not be right (how does one determine what is "right" in relation to a video game feature?) however they are definitely in control of their game and are aware of what they have sold to each and every player (whether those players appreciate it, or not, as the case may be). The would also seem to be well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP.

 

[LeptonFields]

Give it up withnail, the non-moderating moderator is defending the company line.

I noticed his intentional dodge about 'It's the people, stupid!' - I cannot believe he cannot separate PowerPlay from the rest of those who would play the game. PowerPlay is team-vs-team sport, but the other team is never on the field for direct confrontation... what's the point.

 

[Manticore]

... what's the point.

Fair comment.