Powerplay Whatever happened to the Powerplay Open only Proposal (POOP) ?

[Agony_Aunt]

Ok so: let's make a practical example.

Let's say that Rubbernuke and I are surgeons, and we're talking about a new kidney surgery technique that would help improve the hospitalization time of a patient.

Then you come in and you claim that the patient should have no kidneys at all, but you didn't study anatomy but you want to tell your opinion anyway. Because you know you've got kidneys. And that's enough for you to say your thing.

As I told you many times before we're talking about technical things in here. You want talk about the Open/Pvt/Solo feud? Good, open your thread about that.
You want to talk about Open Play in Powerplay? Good enough, you told your opinion many times before, you've been criticized using very technical arguments.

But please do not try and talk about the very same technical reasons because your opinion has been refute to try and defend your opinion. At least try to understand the maths first. Or you are just speaking non-sense.

LOL, sorry, i'm not telling you how PP works. All i'm doing is suggesting that you all give it a try of 5Cing and see what the reaction is from FD.

This is not about surgery or rocket science, its about a computer game.

Can we keep things a little grounded here?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

It’s basically an agreement between Powers to undermine each other’s extremely unprofitable systems, to maximize their chances of going into turmoil and then revolt when a Power has a CC deficit. Successful undermining increases CC maintenance costs, so having a friendly Power undermine your bad systems protects you from losing any undermined good systems, especially since 5C players will be fortifying those same extremely unprofitable systems, to lower their maintenance costs, in the hopes that it will leave more profitable systems vulnerable.

Seems to me since this is a competitive thing, the logical thing to do is say screw the agreement and get doing it!

 

[Bard Voronwe]

LOL, sorry, i'm not telling you how PP works. All i'm doing is suggesting that you all give it a try of 5Cing and see what the reaction is from FD.

This is not about surgery or rocket science, its about a computer game.

Can we keep things a little grounded here?

Still you need to know things to actually be able to talk about them technically.

That was just an analogy, dont' be a square.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

SCRAP was conceptualised as an in game way for powers to help other powers oppose 5C expansions.



Its true no power can be wiped out, but its not that easy. There is a CC overhead curve that dictates what each system costs in keeping it. From memory it used to be linear, but early on FD changed it so after a set number of systems you pay the same. In essence large powers have it easier than mid sized ones (which describes most 'small' powers now since everywhere is full).



And this is not in dispute, as many early adopters went for the underdogs thinking skill would make up for size.



So wrecking the game, not using skill etc is acceptable? In your twisted reality even if everyone 5C'ed each other the larger powers would still be better at it because with modes numbers alone matter.



Correct



Well, consolidation and Sandros proposals do that, so FD are trying to stop it.



Sandros proposal goes as far as this design can mitigate the damage. Several design proposals have been posted by players that would eliminate 5C totally. A BGS style PP certainly would.



Open is one part of the proposals defences against 5C. The Open aspect is mainly there to make PP more dynamic and differentiate it from the rest of the game since features like the BGS have evolved.



Then we will have to agree to disagree on that one.

Thanks for the point about linear vs scaled expansions. I wasn't aware of that. Probably changed after my time.

As for wrecking the game, well, i though the whole point was at this time PP is in a terrible state and FD aren't doing anything about it or 5Cing, so it might be a way to provoke a reaction. Nothing would be permentantly damaged. You could all recover later, it might even shake things up for a while. What have you got to lose really?

As for cheating, it might be unwanted by players and FD, but until i see a statement from FD saying its cheating, its not cheating.

Cheers.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Still you need to know things to actually be able to talk about them technically.

That was just an analogy, dont' be a square.

If i was trying to tell you how PP works, then i'd agree. I'm not. I'm just making a suggestion everyone go crazy 5Cing each other and see what FD do about it (if anthing).

All you had to do was say you didn't like the idea of doing that and it would have been fine. Instead you try telling me i have no rights making suggestions like that.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

 

[Rubbernuke]

All I see is just one paragraph mentioning SCRAP in

This is self-referencing at best but certainly no explanation of the term SCRAP. So if you're so sure, why don't you just highlight that part that you think would explain it? And then explain to me why something that only few have enough insider knowledge about to be able to properly explain it, would be justification for a sane game design - or what else was it that you've tried to communicate?

Or just let us keep it simple: what exactly is a SCRAP service. Meanwhile I think I know and understand what it is but I want to hear it from your mouth, in words that everyone would be able to understand and not just an elitist group of nerds.

If you look at the other listings you'd see what SCRAP is. When 5C successfully prep a system for a power, that power would post on other powers Reddits that its up for opposition for free UM merits, and that its not a wanted expansion. It prevents having to pledge to another power to protect your own.

From memory not much politicking was involved because it was simply a listing, that was seen more in controlled turmoils and collusion piracy- quite often for that you'd de-pledge though for maximum safety.

in words that everyone would be able to understand and not just an elitist group of nerds.

How nice.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Ok then, but initially it required some sort of agreement between powers to cooperate

LYR 'invented' it, and it caught on as 5C became more of a problem. Thats not to say agreements were made between powers because that happened too, just not in this case.

Anyway, I stay to my words that if such things are needed/possible/required then such a design is inherently broken and need to be re-done from scratch - instead of keeping it artificially alive by some sophisticated rules or formulas. I'm pretty sure most players just want to play a game and not doing some math instead...

I'd love this to happen, and so would a lot of others too. Sadly from whats been gleaned and previous history the proposal is the limit of whats available. If FD cleared up bugs and did some rebalancing it would do wonders, hence why people ask for it.[/QUOTE]

 

[Roybe]

That statement literally had nothing to do with what I wrote, did it Roybe?

My point was, in response to yours...there are other reasons for 5c gameplay....not just opening a backdoor for an opposing team...

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

My point was, in response to yours...there are other reasons for 5c gameplay....not just opening a backdoor for an opposing team...

There is no reason for 5c to exist besides being malicious period. Its an unacceptable form of gameplay.

 

[Bashy81]

There is no reason for 5c to exist besides being malicious period. Its an unacceptable form of gameplay.

Imo the 5c problem is a matter of balance. It's way out of kilter to the point of perversity, as has been known for years. This would be rectified from various angles by the measures already proposed by Sandro.

Imo Fdev wont come out and condemn it outright, as 5c in its proper place can provide scope for emergent gameplay. Its not my cup of tea in any form, but thats not to say id deny everybody's right to engage in it, if implemented in a way that wasnt a universal META.

5C in history is a highly risky form of espionage and deception, that preys on complacency. The Trojan Horse was a simple Classical 5c (long before the term was coined.) If the Trojans had had a peek inside, they could have burnt the greeks alive, and it would have posed zero threat. Once aware of it, 5c loses all it's advantage and becomes a liability. In powerplay, all powers are on high-alert to 5c, but are hopelessly disadvantaged to deal with it through counter-mechanics, and cannot confront the 5Cers directly due to modes.

If modes were not considered a valid 'out', other attempts to imitate it via network manipulation could be dealt with by bundling dummy instancing requests along with system state updates from the fdev servers to the client. If these were routinely rejected by the client then 'advice on connectivity settings' could be issued, followed by requirement to contact Support if it persists. As always, case-by-case circumstances would be considered.

Fundamentally though, once the principle was established that requirement for participating in a multiplayer feature, was being capable of participating in multiplayer.. (seems like common sense to me) myriad solutions to preventing evading it would present themselves.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

I agree with that. Guildwars 2 had this issue and they were protected by friendly fire. People would join our side, Run in our groups let people know about map positioning. Turn cannons around before an attack. All sorts of things. Some of it cant be stopped. Espionage is acceptable if you are able to combat it, or have the chance to.

Botting is a major issue, and the new player additions with supercruise and advanced docking gives botters the upper hand. I do know Fdev is working on kicking the bots out though so thats nice.

In Elite, what hurts it the most is Voting and out right working against your own faction just to make things work sometimes.

Thank goodness friendly fire IS a thing in Elite though. If all that other stuff worked like we see it, things could be better. The only other issue to me is to tackle the voting system.
I really like how they handled the new BGS and hope that one day powerplay will get the same uplift the BGS did. Cause it really is neat. The big turn off to me as everyone knows is not seeing your combatants. And this is the only game I have ever been a part of where it was taboo to even talk about wanting to kill your opponents. Outright laughable reading some of the comments over the years about it.

 

[Roybe]

There is no reason for 5c to exist besides being malicious period. Its an unacceptable form of gameplay.

Pfft....whatever.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

There is no reason for 5c to exist besides being malicious period. Its an unacceptable form of gameplay.

Thanks for the laugh. I mean, considering your position on ganking, this is really funny. 5Cing is in a way just like group ganking.

Surprised you are not delcaring to it be emergent gameplay.

 

[WorldsGreatestForumDad]

Thanks for the laugh. I mean, considering your position on ganking, this is really funny. 5Cing is in a way just like group ganking.

Surprised you are not delcaring to it be emergent gameplay.

What? Ganking is supposed to happen. Good lord.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Thanks for the laugh. I mean, considering your position on ganking, this is really funny. 5Cing is in a way just like group ganking.

Surprised you are not delcaring to it be emergent gameplay.

Ok so... As much we can solve (even if it wouldn't be "the" solution) 5C by making people play in Open Only you could say that ganking could be solved by making people who don't wanna be ganked play in private or solo.

Hey wait: this is what already happen! So modes are not equal!

 

[Jockey79]

Thanks for the laugh. I mean, considering your position on ganking, this is really funny. 5Cing is in a way just like group ganking.

Surprised you are not delcaring to it be emergent gameplay.

The thread for the past few days has been a laugh once you realise why they are posting.

It's all about "the math" remember.... aka, now they are on the receiving end of their own tactics they don't like it.
We used to see it on the old forums, those demanding "Open Only" in the PP section were the ones on the receiving end of 5C.
Weird how those names were not so bothered when it was them doing it. Swings and Roundabouts I guess

Again, look at the date on the "SCRAP" post. It's taken how long before it is being used as an excuse to remove content from people?
This is why Frontier are dragging their heels on PP. Those complaining now, we not so bothered when they were winning using those tactics back then.

90s is right though, 5C shouldn't be a thing. Some of us told FDev that back at the start and said it would be Power Plays undoing.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

The thread for the past few days has been a laugh once you realise why they are posting.

At least we're talking about Powerplay, you and AgonyAunt have clearly not a clue of what you're talking about.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The thread for the past few days has been a laugh once you realise why they are posting.

It's all about "the math" remember.... aka, now they are on the receiving end of their own tactics they don't like it.
We used to see it on the old forums, those demanding "Open Only" in the PP section were the ones on the receiving end of 5C.
Weird how those names were not so bothered when it was them doing it. Swings and Roundabouts I guess

Again, look at the date on the "SCRAP" post. It's taken how long before it is being used as an excuse to remove content from people?
This is why Frontier are dragging their heels on PP. Those complaining now, we not so bothered when they were winning using those tactics back then.

90s is right though, 5C shouldn't be a thing. Some of us told FDev that back at the start and said it would be Power Plays undoing.

Well, its trying to explain features, events and terms to people who don't know what they are, or simply to belligerent to acknowledge. People wanted to know what SCRAP was, and I told them- up until now it was enough to contain 5C because during that time 5C was minor. Today its a major problem. If you played Powerplay you'd might understand, but you don't so how could you?

The people on this thread are the people who actually play Powerplay to its fullest and see the damage 5C does to it. To say we do it too is insulting frankly- maybe thats the point, in that you don't have the knowledge of the feature to make a coherent retort you go for the person instead, mainly out of spite? You can't even direct your rage at anyone, so you simply talk round them as well?

Its quite amusing since your premise is 'Open PP takes away content', and yet you don't use the feature... so in reality its you just being a slippery slope NIMBY.

As many of us have tried to say, the open aspect of Sandros proposal is part of fighting 5C, and not the sole reason. If you read Sandros proposal it has several other changes that together act in unison. The main benefit of Open PP is making Powerplay actually unique in ED. Otherwise, what is it for? A different flavour of expensive hauling? On its own uncapped fortification with mode agnosticism is simply going to magnify the grind, nullifying the only part that makes large powers vulnerable. With open it makes a perceptable gameplay change.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

The thread for the past few days has been a laugh once you realise why they are posting.

It's all about "the math" remember.... aka, now they are on the receiving end of their own tactics they don't like it.
We used to see it on the old forums, those demanding "Open Only" in the PP section were the ones on the receiving end of 5C.
Weird how those names were not so bothered when it was them doing it. Swings and Roundabouts I guess

Again, look at the date on the "SCRAP" post. It's taken how long before it is being used as an excuse to remove content from people?
This is why Frontier are dragging their heels on PP. Those complaining now, we not so bothered when they were winning using those tactics back then.

90s is right though, 5C shouldn't be a thing. Some of us told FDev that back at the start and said it would be Power Plays undoing.

You know what's the funniest part of this? You guys are so clueless that you didn't even understand that "SCRAP" it's just the verb "to scrap", this is something that's been done until today, the problem is that 5C doesn't let you do that so easily because you need to not fortify the systems that you want to actually scrap (which is something that 5C usually does to prevent scraping or "SCRAP" as you like to call that). We managed to do that some months ago taking advantage of our 5C being focused to some other Power at the time (and after playing possum for a couple of months), so it's not that old as you think it is.
You are so ignorant about what you're talking about that you can't even recognize a verb. In what is probably your native language.
Now that put a smile on my face.

Oh and mathematically speaking (sory if I stick into things you can't understand but that's how things work in Powerplay: maths) you can't even scrap the worst systems as you want: you can't simply do that, it is impossible even if you were all alone with no external disruption. That's the reason why 5C assaults are so dangerous in the long term. So: we want to say that Open Only wouldn't be a solution for 5C. That's correct, nobody told that differently, it's always been told that would have been helpful, not resolutive. So if you want to keep sabotaging another thread just because you want to defend something else which is totally different then please keep on, but for the last time this is not what this thread is about.

You are so paranoid about and belligerant that you are trying to talk about technical stuff without having any clues at all.

Damn it's the exact same thing it happens to me when I try to deal with anti-vaxers. Do you want to be like an anti-vaxer? Go on! Do that! Put yourself in that position for a videogame if it is so important to you!

Or: you could ask the people in here that clearly know better than you to explain with mathematical examples why 5C was not something done by design at all, it was just a consequence of very poor design. Or if you like better, we could tell you that the leadership of the different Powers had to explain to the developers themselves why 5C was so disruptive, because they didn't expect that kind of result.

We are here to explain to you everything you want to know, just ask. But if you keep talking about 5C as if you know what you're talking about well... you're making a joke of yourself.