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

[Arry]

Excuse me, i'm fairly noob at this game, just playing it "seriously" (aka: with friends and more than 5-10mins a day) from 3 days or so....

buuut...Hey, this is a Galaxy Simulator right? And an Ambitious one. The PP part, I really didn't get all the mechanics to it, but in my eyes it brings a LOT for the player community to create game on it. Mercenaries, spyes, Pirates, Police forces, it's just on us players to take a role on that. I find that people who's doing 5C in this kind of game are pitiable...want to do some "inside work"? Well, you could undermine the system, using the gameplay the game give to you. Want to spy? Go socialize with the CMDRS and try to learn when they will be moving and where.

But if PP works in Solo, imho the possibility of gameplay for the entire community is greatly reduced. In Open, I can organize with others commanders, fighting for and in a system, share some fun and having my pixel ship go into pixel space dust as i get outplayed from people who own better equipment, experience, tactis or each. it's part of the game. In Solo, is just *******hit that my action, where nobody can actively do something for stopping it, influence the Online galaxy.

I'm reskilled outside of the station, and lose all my precious CR? Yeah, that's sucks, but in that case i could organize myself, maybe asking from help from some Squadrons who will get the "griefer" out of my system for me, in exchange for 1000T of something valuable. That way i'm creating content and game, without being a supermassive player who can solo an entire wing in an eagle with just 2 lasers, or being a game dev.


To me, this game is full of possibilities, but the community itself can't see it.

Stop ranting about being killed, and out-think the killer, like in any other MMO. Form Alliances, be social, or get good at it, maybe asking the killer how to improve.

But please, don't continue to this futile "war a"bout being able to play an, as I see it, end-game content like PP, who affect EVERYONE, in a safe environment.

PP is a war, and war isn't safe.

It is a nice cosy feeling; to think, that if everything that involved PP was played exclusively in open; that then you could face the enemy and through player cooperation, be able to deal with them. However: As pointed out a number of times. This is not the case; based on the facts. The fact that instancing, is the first issue, because you cannot guarantee, to ever meet your opponents. The second fact: There are a number of different types of hardware to play this game. P.C., Xbox, PS, Mac and these systems do not interact with each other; but will still affect, the outcomes of the PP environment.

Agreed: The way forward, is coordinated player actions. Get as many players to agree the the task and work togeather to achieve a collective goal. That would work, no matter what the general rabble, is doing; out of reach.

 

[Arry]

@Jockey79
I think you took the discussion to a wrong direction totally. So here nobody tells you which mode you have to play but rather about in which mode PP/BGS should have been available.

Yes, you are right, all modes have the same influence on PP/BGS BUT it does not have the same conditions / environment to win. Powerplay and BGS are all about competitions. If you want, it is like Olympic Games where all competitors are supposed to have the same conditions to win (just only skills do matter). But in our case, some sportsmen do use doping (PG/Solo) while others not. Yes, you can say, that this is their choice not to use doping (playing in Open) but I’m for the honest competition (I’m open only 100% in the game).

At the end, why do you haul merits? I believe you want your POWER to win the competition? Then we all should be at the same honest conditions. Do you think it is PG/Solo mode?

fly dangerous, fly open.

Everything you are against. Everything you put up as a reason 'to stop players in the shadow modes' playing or affecting PP and the BGS. Can be done 'for your own cause'. Take a random number of players, fighting against your cause in solo, PG etc and you have that same 'random' amount; doing the same, in the same 'out of reach modes'; working for your own cause.

 

[Rubbernuke]

It is a nice cosy feeling; to think, that if everything that involved PP was played exclusively in open; that then you could face the enemy and through player cooperation, be able to deal with them. However: As pointed out a number of times. This is not the case; based on the facts. The fact that instancing, is the first issue, because you cannot guarantee, to ever meet your opponents. The second fact: There are a number of different types of hardware to play this game. P.C., Xbox, PS, Mac and these systems do not interact with each other; but will still affect, the outcomes of the PP environment.

Agreed: The way forward, is coordinated player actions. Get as many players to agree the the task and work togeather to achieve a collective goal. That would work, no matter what the general rabble, is doing; out of reach.

This is not the case; based on the facts

Um, sorry? There are no 'facts' because it has not been tried yet.

The fact that instancing, is the first issue, because you cannot guarantee, to ever meet your opponents.

Until it goes Open (along with the proposed changes) we will never know.

The second fact: There are a number of different types of hardware to play this game. P.C., Xbox, PS, Mac and these systems do not interact with each other; but will still affect, the outcomes of the PP environment.

Unless I'm mistaken, each platform has its own players. Mac has died (and was in the PC instance anyway). If Open became a thing then you'd have 3 platform instances and not 9.

Agreed: The way forward, is coordinated player actions. Get as many players to agree the the task and work togeather to achieve a collective goal. That would work, no matter what the general rabble, is doing; out of reach.

This is what happens currently, and has led to stagnation because there is little joy to be had coordinating dull tasks that have little chance of failure.

 

[Arry]

This is not the case; based on the facts

Um, sorry? There are no 'facts' because it has not been tried yet.

The fact that instancing, is the first issue, because you cannot guarantee, to ever meet your opponents.

Until it goes Open (along with the proposed changes) we will never know.

The second fact: There are a number of different types of hardware to play this game. P.C., Xbox, PS, Mac and these systems do not interact with each other; but will still affect, the outcomes of the PP environment.

Unless I'm mistaken, each platform has its own players. Mac has died (and was in the PC instance anyway). If Open became a thing then you'd have 3 platform instances and not 9.

Agreed: The way forward, is coordinated player actions. Get as many players to agree the the task and work togeather to achieve a collective goal. That would work, no matter what the general rabble, is doing; out of reach.

This is what happens currently, and has led to stagnation because there is little joy to be had coordinating dull tasks that have little chance of failure.

Woof Woof

 

[bigity]

BGS is an integral part of PP. Much more than BGS and solo are connected.

If people don't want to do a theoretical OOPP, they don't have to, and can still do anything else.

 

[bigity]

Woof Woof

There's an argument, well done.

He would be ed about your negative waves anyway.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Woof Woof

?

Some more detail:

This is not the case; based on the facts

Until Open PP is tried for at least a few cycles, you will never know what habits, tactics etc occur. We can guess and theorycraft but in the end you have to try it to really find out.

The fact that instancing, is the first issue, because you cannot guarantee, to ever meet your opponents.

The mindset that this is some Red Baron 1:1 dogfight mode is wrong. It does not matter so much that you can't get an explicit instance, its the overall chance of one happening and you disrupting the overall plan of your enemies. If a whole power simply cheated and blocked it would become pretty obvious.

I've already posted videos of massive wing fights, if Sandros proposal with condensed areas comes in that will become more common, not less.

 

[Arry]

BGS is an integral part of PP. Much more than BGS and solo are connected.

If people don't want to do a theoretical OOPP, they don't have to, and can still do anything else.

I still say that FD should have made it just open play in the first place. Yes there would have been opposition, but if they had explained why. (many good reasons have been offered during this debate) Then stuck to it, the moaners would still be moaning.

My issue, is that the proposal to remove access to it, from many players, is just an afterthought; due to the player killers, whining about, not getting their full compliment, of their own game content.

 

[Arry]

?

Some more detail:

This is not the case; based on the facts

Until Open PP is tried for at least a few cycles, you will never know what habits, tactics etc occur. We can guess and theorycraft but in the end you have to try it to really find out.

The fact that instancing, is the first issue, because you cannot guarantee, to ever meet your opponents.

The mindset that this is some Red Baron 1:1 dogfight mode is wrong. It does not matter so much that you can't get an explicit instance, its the overall chance of one happening and you disrupting the overall plan of your enemies. If a whole power simply cheated and blocked it would become pretty obvious.

I've already posted videos of massive wing fights, if Sandros proposal with condensed areas comes in that will become more common, not less.

So you are just looking for, more content. More real players to attack; even though you fully understand (but just dismiss) that you cannot fully control, any outcome, you are supossed to be fighting for.

 

[Rubbernuke]

So you are just looking for, more content. More real players to attack; even though you fully understand (but just dismiss) that you cannot fully control, any outcome, you are supossed to be fighting for.

Open Powerplay would essentially add a mode that sits next to the BGS, in that you indeed have players out to kill or run away from each other. Thats the point, its paramilitary warfare. Indeed you can't control everything just as you can't now, but by having alone imposed it changes how people build ships, how they approach interaction and how they fly.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Open Powerplay would essentially add a mode that sits next to the BGS, in that you indeed have players out to kill or run away from each other. Thats the point, its paramilitary warfare. Indeed you can't control everything just as you can't now, but by having alone imposed it changes how people build ships, how they approach interaction and how they fly.

True.

But that pretty much ignores the fact that Powerplay is a political simulator, not a paramilitary warfare simulator. And while it is true that Powerplay does have its paramilitary aspects, there are many Powerplayers who are attracted to it for the former, not the latter. I see no point in removing gameplay from those players, for the sake of other players, whose preferred gameplay is likely as good as it is going to get.

What is wrong with Powerplay is not the modes, but the rules, especially the “once and done” fortification and the voting rules that favor 5C. Once the rules are changed to being a direct competition, the mode “advantages” will cancel each other out, leaving the actions in Open as the deciding factor.

I’ll admit it, I’m greedy, I want it all. I want a Powerplay that is enjoyed by a large segment of the playerbase, so that Frontier will be willing to devote more resources to it in the future. I want an Open where adversarial play is possible, without the inevitable GIFT-like behavior that PvE/PP hybrids seems to bring. And I want the deeper gameplay that Powerplay being fully integrated into the game, and not sequestered as its own mode like CQC, brings to the table.

Time and time again, I’ve seen MMO developers cave to the inevitable, and sequester PvP behind switches or servers, to be played by a tiny minority. Frontiers tri-modes system has accomplished what I consider to be impossible, an Open mode that is enjoyed by the majority of players. I’m now convinced that Frontier pulled a Homer to accomplish this feat, but as far as I’m concerned, it works.

 

[Rubbernuke]

But that pretty much ignores the fact that Powerplay is a political simulator, not a paramilitary warfare simulator. And while it is true that Powerplay does have its paramilitary aspects, there are many Powerplayers who are attracted to it for the former, not the latter. I see no point in removing gameplay from those players, for the sake of other players, whose preferred gameplay is likely as good as it is going to get.

Powerplay does not simulate politics, or at least many powers do not. If it was, it would run like elections do and only peaceful actions count. The nearest action that could be an analog would be the prep phase, which for some powers is flooding systems with propaganda. From memory only a few powers (Winters Mahon and Aisling) approach anything political lore wise, the rest use force or coercion to get what they want. Even then only two (Winters and Mahon) have democratic outlooks. I mean, is Archon a politician? Grom? Antal?

What is wrong with Powerplay is not the modes, but the rules, especially the “once and done” fortification and the voting rules that favor 5C. Once the rules are changed to being a direct competition, the mode “advantages” will cancel each other out, leaving the actions in Open as the deciding factor.

But should all fortification run be 'safe'? In a mixed mode situation what will happen is that all forts will be done in solo or PG as it is now, only that it will have no ceiling and go on until one side stops. That to be is bad, as it amplifies the grind people hate with Powerplay. It would make it even harder to 'sell' Powerplay to newcomers.

I’ll admit it, I’m greedy, I want it all. I want a Powerplay that is enjoyed by a large segment of the playerbase, so that Frontier will be willing to devote more resources to it in the future. I want an Open where adversarial play is possible, without the inevitable GIFT-like behavior that PvE/PP hybrids seems to bring. And I want the deeper gameplay that Powerplay being fully integrated into the game, and not sequestered as its own mode like CQC, brings to the table.

I want that as well, but FD have demonstated to us the scope of the changes we can hope for in the proposals content- and within that scope Open Powerplay is the only significant change that lifts general Powerplay activities above those in the currently superior BGS. I don't know, FD might surprise us and overhaul PP totally....but I think FD are in damage limitation with the minimum effort needed.

Time and time again, I’ve seen MMO developers cave to the inevitable, and sequester PvP behind switches or servers, to be played by a tiny minority. Frontiers tri-modes system has accomplished what I consider to be impossible, an Open mode that is enjoyed by the majority of players. I’m now convinced that Frontier pulled a Homer to accomplish this feat, but as far as I’m concerned, it works.

But thats the thing, most of the game will remain unchanged, only one part of it would cater to players who currently do not have a feature to use.[/QUOTE]

 

[Eridanin]

Open PP is enjoyed??? It almost doesn't exist. It is not possible to combine these modes. They are too much opposite, mutually exclusive.
PP right now is just like chess. Go to CZ in PG, watch movies when your ship farms merits, enjoy you increasing place, write in discord we are the best. Finish. Thanks to feds, sometimes there was some gameplay.

I had a chance to play REAL open BGS (it could be similar with PP in Open) when EGU had a conflict with Paladin Consortium. Both factions played in Open. It was very interesting gameplay. Even small things like the way you form your wings matters. Tactics, strategy.

So now I left BGS/PP for private/Solo guys. For those in open there is nothing to do there. Now for me Elite is just like survival simulator, I enjoy mining and other things in Open. And I hope there will be enough griefers to make Elite really Dangerous.

 

[Interstellar Overdrive]

Politicians can be non-democratic as well, even criminal

 

[Rubbernuke]

Politicians can be non-democratic as well, even criminal

But cut peoples heads off and sell the families into slavery? Thats not politics. Thats something else entirely.

 

[Interstellar Overdrive]

But cut peoples heads off and sell the families into slavery? Thats not politics. Thats something else entirely.

You might consider it barbaric but it is still well within the realm of politics.

 

[Rubbernuke]

You might consider it barbaric but it is still well within the realm of politics.

But is Powerplay political? You could argue that everything in ED is political- from doing a mission for influence to killing security.

In Powerplay you don't convince anyone, you race to deliver more drugs or food aid- there is no choice made by the population, Powerplay has no concept of happiness, fear etc. If you had a Civ like mechanic of culture where systems can defect to other civs I'd agree, its politcal because you have to care what your people think of you and the threat of other Powers being more popular. As it stands no power really cares about the leaderboard- in cycle 1 Powers really did care because we thought we would be erased in the 10th spot.

Politics does go on off the field in Discords though. That very much does happen, often to the detriment of gameplay.

 

[cmdr Ramius007]

What is wrong with Powerplay is not the modes, but the rules, especially the “once and done” fortification and the voting rules that favor 5C. Once the rules are changed to being a direct competition, the mode “advantages” will cancel each other out, leaving the actions in Open as the deciding factor.

This "direct competition" right now involves game play that can be made by Bots or AFK turret-boats, so what competition you are talking about? Because definitely it's not player vs player competition and by definition its not competition at all, call it whatever you like but not use "competition" word for it. Even if we fix voting mechanics and vary PP more in gameplay, issues i mentioned remain, whole game is pve, so what's the problem with leaving 1 activity that doesn't offer anything new in terms of pve gameplay to PvP crowd? People leave Elite because of this!

 

[Interstellar Overdrive]

But is Powerplay political? You could argue that everything in ED is political- from doing a mission for influence to killing security.

In Powerplay you don't convince anyone, you race to deliver more drugs or food aid- there is no choice made by the population, Powerplay has no concept of happiness, fear etc. If you had a Civ like mechanic of culture where systems can defect to other civs I'd agree, its politcal because you have to care what your people think of you and the threat of other Powers being more popular. As it stands no power really cares about the leaderboard- in cycle 1 Powers really did care because we thought we would be erased in the 10th spot.

Politics does go on off the field in Discords though. That very much does happen, often to the detriment of gameplay.

It has always been my understanding that Powerplay is politics. The various interactions with BGS make it all very much political. Sort of like a diffuse layer that sits between superpower and minor factions.

 

[Rubbernuke]

It has always been my understanding that Powerplay is politics. The various interactions with BGS make it all very much political. Sort of like a diffuse layer that sits between superpower and minor factions.

That part I'd say was political, because it is subject to the normal game. Powerplay itself though is superficial, its do the one thing your power does in different flavours.

In one of my ideas I had a while ago makes Powerplay really political:

Another idea based on what Ramius said- what if you got rid of expansions / prep altogether? Imagine each system has every power contact available simultaneously:

Instead, you haul your powers fortification material from any system like cargo and the highest amount hauled 'wins' that system? You could freely pirate others or blow them up then like normal traffic. You could also PP flavour other missions to support too.

It would be 5C proof, and it would organically produce hotspots of commander activity.

You would win by being in control of the most systems.

In fact, you could do away with pledging altogether, and simply support the power you like for that system. So you could have the bonuses you like where you like, and synergistically boost the BGS by working in parallel with it. It also reflects a more political aspect, as it then becomes a genuine popularity contest, depending on what the characters are like and what they say in Galnet.

In this it turns politics around in that you can support who you like when you like- you could support several powers at once, or the ones you agree with. Your alliegance might change based on the unfolding lore- the main thing is though its you voting with your daily actions.