Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
No proof then. No matter.
Tired of the Open vs. Private Debacle
- Thread starter Hans_Oktane
- Start date
PP is set for Open as you describe, ironically.
Its 100% player generated objectives played in real time- i.e. PvE tasks that you can stop, slow or protect using PvP methods.
1:1 PvP is CQC.
What I mean is the player can generate personal merits. The whole point of the open part is that the opposition have a chance to stop Power merits being moved about and accrued. But you need Solo to generate the cargo to move in Open in the first place.
Are you pretending that sourcing something said by the developer is naming and shaming, and that's preventing you from proving your claim? Please, come on now.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I understand that that's what is meant - however it still constitutes a restriction on how players in Solo and Private Groups would affect Powerplay under that proposal - which seems to be the whole point.
.... and players who choose to play in Open can choose to play in either of the two game modes to generate the cargo - so they are in no way restricted from participating in that aspect.
On a side note, I'd be interesting a list of even 20 space sandboxes. I can name 10 off the top of my head if I stretch the definition, and it's my favorite genre.
If we're using the cake analogy it would be adding layers to the cake.
All my suggestions are my own opinion, and designed purely for the purpose of increasing choice, via the sandbox. I've seen you speaking for the player base already, so glass house and all that.
I've continuously advised you of what my suggestion is. Your mental or density or willingness to understand it is your own issue and has 0 impact on my suggestion. You don't have to accept it. You don't have to like it. You don't have to think it has a chance in hell. Doesn't change what my suggestion is. Everyone here seems to think I need to mold what I'm saying to you. I do not.
Everything about Powerplay is PvP in the sense that it's the efforts of some players against the efforts of others, regardless of the mode they are in; Players vs Players. Two Solo players can compete without ever seeing one another with opposing efforts.
Strictly speaking of PvP as combat between players, that's still interfering with PvE objectives using PvP. The core of it isn't PvP, your solution to the activities of others is. Objectives stated by PP factions are not specifically PvP directives.
No response so I'll ask again.
What's the goal of incentivising people who don't like open to play there? To bring people to open whose day can be ruined by getting ganked as opposed to folks that want that risk and seek it out?
I agree we could build an incentive system that would draw some players to open, I just don't agree we should want them there.
If you are the kind of player who hates getting into human vs human conflict I want you away from me, not in my sites.
That way anyone I shoot in Open is, or at least should be, as happy to be there as anyone I blast in a FPS.
Now, a combat event or battleground could aid the get more pvp play time in, but that is what the Arena is.
So again, these threads seem to be for people who want to gank other people, and to them I say gank the hauler with a full box. No one will be upset and you shouldn't care, by your logic, what kind of box the target has, unless your fun only comes from making someone else upset.
If that is your bag, you are toxic and should be isolated. Such players poison every community they are in.
What's the goal of incentivising people who don't like open to play there? To bring people to open whose day can be ruined by getting ganked as opposed to folks that want that risk and seek it out?
I agree we could build an incentive system that would draw some players to open, I just don't agree we should want them there.
If you are the kind of player who hates getting into human vs human conflict I want you away from me, not in my sites.
That way anyone I shoot in Open is, or at least should be, as happy to be there as anyone I blast in a FPS.
Now, a combat event or battleground could aid the get more pvp play time in, but that is what the Arena is.
So again, these threads seem to be for people who want to gank other people, and to them I say gank the hauler with a full box. No one will be upset and you shouldn't care, by your logic, what kind of box the target has, unless your fun only comes from making someone else upset.
If that is your bag, you are toxic and should be isolated. Such players poison every community they are in.
I guess you didn't quite make it to the part where I spoke specifically about how "adding layers to the cake" just shows exactly what a bad idea it is?
You just want the cake to be a different flavor, everyone else who likes it be damned, huh?
Sure is the analogy that keeps on giving.
All that Open allows you to do is play British Bulldogs with spaceships- i.e. risk moving cargo and merits in Open. The gameplay us exactly the same as missions in Solo PG (ie massacre this / move that). The separation is needed if FD keep Powerplay as it is and make something of its features (pledges, simple objectives, zones of control).
No you don't. Unless, of course, you would like your idea(s) to find support. I can only offer my support of course, but your proposal hasn't a glimmer of hope for that. And, from the commentarey in this thread, it's not looking good for your finding much anywhere else. I can take it from here that you will just have to accept resistance to your ideas posted here. That can be accomplished. See you in text.
And what about those that enjoy participating in the community, helping with long-term strategizing and generally also encouraging the player generation of objectives, but also dislike direct PvP pew-pew?
Even then, what's to stop rival PPers interfering with player generated objectives? Players partaking in opposing missions could still engage in combat just like they currently do; in fact, even more so as the mission generation algorithm could try to guide PPers to where their opponents and allies are going, so even a pilot who is independent and just follows the missions will naturally be guided towards player activity unless they deliberately choose to take unusual missions.
The mission generator could even state the amount of Pilot's Federation activity in the mission area (possibly including predicted activity, based on missions that players have already taken) before you take it, so more social pilots could opt to take high player-activity missions while the more reclusive pilots would instead deliberately choose missions with a low PF activity estimate. This would help the countering and forming of strategies in an organic way as the masses ebb and flow, rather than players being cut out of the loop because they aren't part of the right discord channels, as players could see in-game movements and trends more efficiently.
And I am a very vocal proponent on NPCs behaving more like players. Not in the illogical trolling sense, but in terms of general reach, effectiveness and intelligence. Dumb NPCs is a big issue in the game as it currently stands, they are more akin to something like World of Warcraft mobs at the moment rather than the sane and intelligent individuals they are meant to be.
"It's my opinion" is the fallback when justifying your argument has failed.
So if your suggestion is bad, and objectively adds nothing, and would create problems, you're not interested in changing your suggestion? Sounds like you're more interested in your opinion than actually "suggesting" anything, because of, you know... the definition of suggestion:
sug·ges·tion
noun
an idea or plan put forward for consideration.
Bit strange that you're so put out by people considering your idea and pointing out the many issues with it. You want to apply criticism, but don't want criticism applied to you.
The problem is Powerplay uses a solo mechanic that is really, really dull and compounds the dullness with heavily instanced NPCs that don't offer resistance in Solo or PG. If NPCs pushed back then the clamour for Open would not be as much.
Its one dimensional grind racing with multi mode Powerplay- the same mechanic used in CGs / IIs FD stopped because they felt it was overused. Well powerplay uses it between 50 and 100 times each week. You can't use any other tactic other than grind more than someone else- unlike in Open where you can directly (P2P withstanding) slow those in that instance.
Powerplay is in two halves: the gathering, and the delivery. You can mess up both with PvP, but only PvP means in Open can provide a structured opposition in the latter delivery phase. NPCs and the game fail at this: no permanence, no threat. You can avoid them because you take off in safety, SC in safety, and drop right into a stations protected zone.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Merits that are only meaningful to Powerplay when moved in Open.
Then I'd ask them what are they doing in a feature about wrecking other groups. You can't be peaceful in Powerplay- or that was its intention- its dog eat dog to be #1.
The suggestion I posted is based on what FD themselves suggested- i.e. I tried to keep to what I thought they saw as realistic. By all means submit your ideas too!
Unless New Era radically changes the station drop zones, NAV areas, SC and NPC capability, NPCs will never match a player sadly. NPCs are meant to be either farmed or be low level resistance.
I have no issue with criticism. But we're beyond that and just beating the horse now.
A bit strange you keep saying it adds no value or objectively adds nothing when objective additions to the game is the key point. You want criticize but not actually consider what I'm saying is your problem.
Not really:
Solo PG generate cargo that has to be moved via open by Powerplay themed missions.
Open players take this and move it.
Both are meaningful- you need to 'make' the cargo before you can move it. If Open players screw up then you have to do more missions to keep the supply going.
In game terms its a CG for each system for solo players to top up, and 'normal' delivery for Open players.