PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

Open only should of been there from the start which would of been a bigger balancing problem after engineers since pp is a base game feature or just introducing pp in the horizons dlc would of been the smart way to include it. Its been almost 4 years so people are use to it being the way it is now.
 
Last edited:
Stacks of 1kg ingots of gold would not convince me. I’d support removing power play entirely first. Here’s why:

To ask for this is pure selfish hypocrisy.

You want to take a feature away from 2/3 of the game, where you will continue to exert influence over the game, but do not want to be influenced by 2/3 of the game. If you can’t see the hypocrisy for yourselves, you’re blind.

That leaves only two viable options:

1. Power Play stays available to all modes*.

2. Power Play is removed from all modes.

* I have posted previously and at great lengths how power play could be overhauled to remain fair, balanced, vastly improved, and available to players in all modes. If someone more adept that I at forum searching would care to dig one of these threads up and repost it, I would appreciate it.
 
Stacks of 1kg ingots of gold would not convince me. I’d support removing power play entirely first. Here’s why:

To ask for this is pure selfish hypocrisy.

You want to take a feature away from 2/3 of the game, where you will continue to exert influence over the game, but do not want to be influenced by 2/3 of the game. If you can’t see the hypocrisy for yourselves, you’re blind.

That leaves only two viable options:

1. Power Play stays available to all modes*.

2. Power Play is removed from all modes.

* I have posted previously and at great lengths how power play could be overhauled to remain fair, balanced, vastly improved, and available to players in all modes. If someone more adept that I at forum searching would care to dig one of these threads up and repost it, I would appreciate it.

All I can say is:

If Powerplay does not change (or FD have no long term plan) then it needs to be removed.

Open Powerplay has the most potential to differentiate PP from the rest of the game (which has had far more dev time)

If not that, then either a weighting based on the ideas here or an equal separation (i.e. solo has tasks, open has tasks) so that everyone has a role.

There has been many, many ideas that would provide mode equality, but judging on the size of past PP proposals FD are not willing (or not visibly willing) to do anything of that size.

You want to take a feature away from 2/3 of the game, where you will continue to exert influence over the game, but do not want to be influenced by 2/3 of the game. If you can’t see the hypocrisy for yourselves, you’re blind.

To be honest, I don't think that many people care about PP's influence, otherwise they'd be playing by now, surely? I can't really think of threads screaming about Pranav closing black markets, or Grom depressing gold prices by 5%.
 
Stacks of 1kg ingots of gold would not convince me. I’d support removing power play entirely first. Here’s why:

To ask for this is pure selfish hypocrisy.

You want to take a feature away from 2/3 of the game, where you will continue to exert influence over the game, but do not want to be influenced by 2/3 of the game. If you can’t see the hypocrisy for yourselves, you’re blind.
I agree about the sentiment of your message but the precise numbers are irrelevant.

That leaves only two viable options:

1. Power Play stays available to all modes*.

2. Power Play is removed from all modes.

* I have posted previously and at great lengths how power play could be overhauled to remain fair, balanced, vastly improved, and available to players in all modes. If someone more adept that I at forum searching would care to dig one of these threads up and repost it, I would appreciate it.
Not quite - there is a 3rd option and one that has been put forward by myself and others but largely dismissed: Add new mechanics for those looking for OOPP type gameplay.

That would not preclude the current PvE PP implementation being improved either.
 
Not quite - there is a 3rd option and one that has been put forward by myself and others but largely dismissed: Add new mechanics for those looking for OOPP type gameplay.

It would be easier to simply add things to do for Solo than the other way round because it augments what already exists. You would then have BGS play and missions done by solo mode players to help open players load up faster (i.e. solo has proper logistics helping prep and fort allocations) and open players haul and fight.
 
Not quite - there is a 3rd option and one that has been put forward by myself and others but largely dismissed: Add new mechanics for those looking for OOPP type gameplay.

That would not preclude the current PvE PP implementation being improved either.

The last thing we need is another convoluted, bug-riddled “feature”. If you would excavate my post regarding overhauling power play, I believe you would find that it does have advantages specific to Open play (a higher value for PvP combat victories) as well as addresses mid-Combat disconnection (full victory value assigned to engaged players, negative values applied to those disconnecting), while maintaining familiar mechanics and processes.

You just can’t throw new paint over peeling, rotten structures and expect any good to come of it.
 
The last thing we need is another convoluted, bug-riddled “feature”.
I am sorry but making existing PP OO/OB would solve absolutely nothing except massage the egos of some PvP kiddies that think PvP should NOT be optional or that because they choose to engage in PvP they have more skillz - give me a break. Besides - the new mechanics need not be convoluted or bug ridden, especially if they are designed around the wants and desires of those that want OO type gameplay (with the proviso that it does not affect the gameplay of those that do not choose to participate).
 
I am sorry but making existing PP OO/OB would solve absolutely nothing except massage the egos of some PvP kiddies that think PvP should NOT be optional or that because they choose to engage in PvP they have more skillz

A little bit derogatory and irrational?
 
I am sorry but making existing PP OO/OB would solve absolutely nothing except massage the egos of some PvP kiddies that think PvP should NOT be optional or that because they choose to engage in PvP they have more skillz - give me a break. Besides - the new mechanics need not be convoluted or bug ridden, especially if they are designed around the wants and desires of those that want OO type gameplay (with the proviso that it does not affect the gameplay of those that do not choose to participate).
The last thing we need is another convoluted, bug-riddled “feature”. If you would excavate my post regarding overhauling power play, I believe you would find that it does have advantages specific to Open play (a higher value for PvP combat victories) as well as addresses mid-Combat disconnection (full victory value assigned to engaged players, negative values applied to those disconnecting), while maintaining familiar mechanics and processes.

You just can’t throw new paint over peeling, rotten structures and expect any good to come of it.

Its ok, relax, we dont need your help. We've already found the gameplay we want to explore, its in Open doing Powerplay. Fix a few mechanics theyve already propsed fixing, fix a few bugs theyve already said theyre fixing, and we're good. A few little formula tweaks that will help everyone (even solo players trying to dock at fully-occupied outposts) Thats all we need to be getting on with. At present this Open Powerplay gameplay is crippled by being an irrelevence, simply because there is a legitimised 'quit to menu, load into solo' infallible opt-out. Solo/pG has the efficiency advantage in all areas of the game, which is fine for those who simply only care about themselves and their own CMDR's journey. For those more interested in how they can influence factions and the BGS, theres nothing for players that appreciate that direct player interaction adds layers of complexity and tactics onto the underlying gameplay. There's nothing except distraction and being more innefficient than players who choose to turn off the human element. Its about making that diversity provided by human interaction part of the gameplay, not a distraction from doing it as best you can.
If you really want to win, if you want to be as effective as you can be, within the rules of the game (that goes for most people doing anything they care about enough to want to do well) the obvious thing in ED is to not be doing it in Open.

This doesnt mean provide PvP merits/ benefits. Thats so dumb. So exploitable. I also dont want a disconnected playpit with no relevance to the rest of the BGS. A reduction in that BGS relevance by 9/10ths or more (going from favourable minor faction control of Power controlled + exploited systems determining how much fortifying is required to defend a system each week, going to just control systems determining it) thats a great change to reduce antagonism & conflict grind between PP and the BGS. Id also ask if solo/pg commanders would really be so thrilled if they lost the blanket 15% discount off all modues & ships at all LYR systems, or the bountyhunting bonusses within Utopia borders and other powers. These are effects that benefit, they dont intrude, any more than areas of the game I dont care about intrude on my gameplay. I dont gnash my teeth while im scrolling through all the mining-only minerals which im 'mining-gated' from ever selling. How many hours have I wasted scrolling past all those? The Injustice of mining commodities intruding on my game Must End.

Give your righteous indignation a break,
Solo/PG has everything its own way when it comes to influencing the galaxy we all share. Throw Open a bone so it has some relevance (its a diseased bone with barely scraps left on it anyway, how much are 'you' losing?!) It will be good for the vitality of the game, and might just give your precious solo experience more legs by keeping the servers up for longer.
 
Last edited:
It will be good for the vitality of the game, and might just give your precious solo experience more legs by keeping the servers up for longer.

Right, because the game is so dependent on the smallest percentage of it's player base... I keep forgetting about the vital importance of the smallest minority.
 
Right, because the game is so dependent on the smallest percentage of it's player base... I keep forgetting about the vital importance of the smallest minority.
That's weird, because so many of the arguments against changes to Powerplay that include OpenOnly, hinge on the vital importance of the smallest minority of the smallest minority, who might be negatively impacted by changes.

Taking an unpopular feature, and using minimum development time to turn it into something that provides a true teamgame dynamic that better fits the original intention of that feature. That's what we're calling for here. Make the feature unique & attractive to more players and the numbers & signficance of that feature will increase. The players wont flood back in the hope the devs fix what they dont like.
 
That's weird, because so many of the arguments against changes to Powerplay that include OpenOnly, hinge on the vital importance of the smallest minority of the smallest minority, who might be negatively impacted by changes.

There's a big difference between players who come along and demand changes to a game mechanic to suit themselves and players who paid money with the understanding they had access to a a particular game mechanic, they actually have money invested in it, whereas the other group don't have money invested in a non-existent feature.

The arguments don't all actually hinge on that minority though as is clear from the discussion, however be that as it may the essence of good society is that one group doesn't unfairly get to impose its will to the detriment of another group. The first group the OOPP group suffer no detriment, they just don't get a benefit they desire, they don't suffer a loss, the second group however does suffer a detriment by being pushed out of using a feature that some of them enjoy, they suffer a loss, the two position are not equal no matter how hard you try to portray them as being the same.
 
There's a big difference between players who come along and demand changes to a game mechanic to suit themselves and players who paid money with the understanding they had access to a a particular game mechanic, they actually have money invested in it, whereas the other group don't have money invested in a non-existent feature.

The arguments don't all actually hinge on that minority though as is clear from the discussion, however be that as it may the essence of good society is that one group doesn't unfairly get to impose its will to the detriment of another group. The first group the OOPP group suffer no detriment, they just don't get a benefit they desire, they don't suffer a loss, the second group however does suffer a detriment by being pushed out of using a feature that some of them enjoy, they suffer a loss, the two position are not equal no matter how hard you try to portray them as being the same.

But they wouldn't though, not if FD are paying attention. Missions and Powerplay BGS work suits Solo and PG, while the hauling / shooting of Powerplay like we have now would benefit from being Open only. This division of labour is the best fit for the least work.

I do wish Sandro had fleshed out the favours / missions side of things, as it would have given us a fair idea of what stuff solo and PG players would have gained in the process.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
At present this Open Powerplay gameplay is crippled by being an irrelevence, simply because there is a legitimised 'quit to menu, load into solo' infallible opt-out. Solo/pG has the efficiency advantage in all areas of the game, which is fine for those who simply only care about themselves and their own CMDR's journey. For those more interested in how they can influence factions and the BGS, theres nothing for players that appreciate that direct player interaction adds layers of complexity and tactics onto the underlying gameplay. There's nothing except distraction and being more innefficient than players who choose to turn off the human element. Its about making that diversity provided by human interaction part of the gameplay, not a distraction from doing it as best you can.
If you really want to win, if you want to be as effective as you can be, within the rules of the game (that goes for most people doing anything they care about enough to want to do well) the obvious thing in ED is to not be doing it in Open.
What is described here is an inevitable consequence of every player buying a game where hostile PvP has been designed to be entirely optional with regard to any in-game feature.
 
What is described here is an inevitable consequence of every player buying a game where hostile PvP has been designed to be entirely optional with regard to any in-game feature.
Every player bought a game that is in continual development, which means features change. Having an entirely opt-in feature where PvP is not entirely optional would be a new string to the bow for a game that caters to a lot of different play-styles and which, afterall involves shooting things much of the time and has 'dangerous' in the title.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Every player bought a game that is in continual development, which means features change.
Indeed - some changes are less likely than others though - no matter how much a subset of the player-base desires them.
Having an entirely opt-in feature where PvP is not entirely optional would be a new string to the bow for a game that caters to a lot of different play-styles and which, afterall involves shooting things much of the time and has 'dangerous' in the title.
If it was a new feature then I'd have no problem with Powerplay requiring hostile PvP. The fact that Powerplay is an existing feature that forms part of the base game that every player owns becomes a problem when changes are proposed that would mean that it would require hostile PvP, in a game sold to all as not requiring hostile PvP to engage in any game feature.
 
So I get the impression that a some people here don't agree with the evaluation that Powerplay was supposed to be 'Endgame Content' where consensual PvP and Power vs Power conflict is supposed to happen. The question I have to ask is what do you think Powerplay is supposed to be?

And to the people who play powerplay, why do you play?
What is it that makes you come back to it?
Is it the Power's Player community?
The Rewards?
The fact you like Dyed Blue Hair?
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
So I get the impression that a some people here don't agree with the evaluation that Powerplay was supposed to be 'Endgame Content' where consensual PvP and Power vs Power conflict is supposed to happen.
If Powerplay was "Endgame Content", why does it become available immediately the CMDR has gained a single rank in any of the three paths to Elite?

Powerplay does offer opportunities for consensual PvP - it does not, however, force any player who engages in the feature to engage in PvP. Power vs. Power conflict need not be driven by PvP....
 
If Powerplay was "Endgame Content", why does it become available immediately the CMDR has gained a single rank in any of the three paths to Elite?

because of DB's comment on it on a Lave Radio interview. Just after 1.4 was released, he said that PowerPlay had been released but he wouldn't recommend it for starter players, it's for players who have been playing the game for a while.

Powerplay does offer opportunities for consensual PvP - it does not, however, force any player who engages in the feature to engage in PvP. Power vs. Power conflict need not be driven by PvP....

Hasn't answered my question. what do you think Powerplay is supposed to be?
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
because of DB's comment on it on a Lave Radio interview. Just after 1.4 was released, he said that PowerPlay had been released but he wouldn't recommend it for starter players, it's for players who have been playing the game for a while.
Not for starter players does not necessarily equate to "endgame" content - there's quite some time between starting and reaching "endgame" (whatever that is defined as).
Hasn't answered my question. what do you think Powerplay is supposed to be?
A political feature for all players that is bigger in scope than Factions but less than Superpowers.

On the one hand we have Sandro and DBOBE talking of Powerplay as a feature, not for beginners, that offers consensual PvP.

On the other hand we have the implementation, available in all game modes after gaining a single rank.

Both can be perfectly accurate - when one accepts that the timing of a player engaging in Powerplay is up to the player and that engaging in PvP within Powerplay is up to the player.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom