This is a Powerplay overhaul proposal that uses all of Sandros ideas plus a few more based on the 3.x BGS rework to enhance the feature, and employ strong anti 5C measures. Sandro Sammarcos proposal changes are included as they were originally.
Problem
Powerplay does not function well across the three modes, with antagonism between solo / PG and Open players being fed by a lack of boundaries and hard rules as to who is playing 'right'. Due to design flaws its also very easy to hurt powers from within 5C, or fifth column).
The following offers Powerplay to both groups in a way that both help the same power via separate, focused tasks.
Idea
Powerplay is split into two halves: one half is Solo /PG, the other Open only. The Solo/ PG part is mission based and contributes to accumulating fort materials for the Open only half to deliver. So, rather than make all modes try to do the same things you provide each mode with specific jobs that amplify that modes potential.
-----------------
General (shared across all modes)
1) Both sets of players share ranks and perks as they are now.
2) Merits are split as a concept. Players have the value Trust (see later), cargo in the game or combat merits (from killing PP NPCs).
3) Solo and PG players can vote in all stages (i.e. consolidate / vote on weeks preps) as normal, thus they have an equal say in a powers choices.
Sandros suggestions here would also be available for all players too:
Preparation Cycle Split
• The first half of the cycle is available for preparation
• The second half of the cycle locks the current preparation values and enables voting
Vote to veto preparation
• Each player can vote to veto or support each preparation
• If a preparation ends the cycle with more veto votes than support votes it is removed from preparation
• Voting requires minimum, rolling time spent pledged and active for a power, somewhere into rank 2
Reasoning: these two changes in tandem are meant to make it easier to prevent bad systems from being prepared with minimal effort. Rather than use consolidation, which must be chosen blind in terms of both the final preparation for systems and the final resting place for the consolidation marker, here Commanders are voting on a fixed list and can choose precisely which systems they want to attempt to veto.
Vote to withdraw from system
• Each cycle players can vote on the 5 least profitable systems, to withdraw or support
• At the end of a cycle if a system has more withdraw votes than support votes it is removed from the power’s control
• Voting requires minimum, rolling time spent pledged and active for a power, somewhere into rank 2
Reasoning: currently there is no way to lose a bad control system other than hoping or colluding with opposing powers that it will end up being forced into turmoil. We think this vote is a legible and relatively safe way of allowing powers to shed chaff, as only systems that at a base level would be unprofitable would be eligible for withdrawal.
4) The allocation increment between ranks is removed. It starts at a flat 10 and multiplied by your Trust value (see below). Important: allocations are not time dependent but instead dependent on delivery- i.e. you get a fixed amount to move at the time of collection and no more until its delivered.
5) Perks and modules are unlocked based on your trust value (see below).
Trust
Powerplay players have a new variable to manage- 'Trust'. It acts similar to rep with factions and replaces personal merits. The more positive outcomes you have doing tasks across all modes, the higher this value gets. It acts as a multiplier for rewards, as well as your allocation (see later sections for details).
The trust value ranges from 10 (maximum) to -9 (no trust) depending on activity. At full trust (10) all personal perks are unlocked in a similar way to rank 5 currently. But, if your trust gets too low through failing certain tasks repeatedly, you are automatically unpledged and treated as a defector- i.e. that power sends assassins after you.
Automatic unpledging occurs after 1 BGS 'tick' at -9. This is an anti 5C measure, so that positive actions reward, while being 5C gets you kicked out and punished (see later for examples of this in action).
New pledges have to undergo a mission to prove their loyalty, and once complete get a message from your glorious leader allowing them to be a pledge. You start with a low trust score, and must work to improve it. Missions might be to stock a control systems depot (see below) or kill x amount of rival PP players / NPCs.
Note, trust will decay slowly over time. However this is gradual (and not as harsh as it is now- it would be 5% each week, not 50%.) Please note also that regaining trust points is free and as easy as doing missions or delivering cargo (which is also free).
If your Trust value is high (say, 10) each Open cargo run could pay for one potential rebuy. So for each cargo unit which has a flat value (say 1 million) , with a trust of 10 on delivery you get 10 million in cash. Since credits can't buy cargo, you can't use the cash to 5C the power. Those with a negative trust value get no bonus, so only get a million on delivery.
If your trust value is negative (between -1 and -9), you are blocked from collecting preparation materials or hauling fortification materials. This is to prevent 5C from dumping cargo, completing a mission to raise trust, and deliver again (so doing just enough to stay in the Power). In this situation the player must raise trust doing missions or undermine, thus preventing any mass dumping of cargo / prep materials to unlock the ability to deliver in the Open portion of Powerplay. So, 5C are forced to act in your powers interests.
IMPORTANT:
All actions that either gain or lose trust have bold labeling that clearly indicate what that action costs in Trust (in the UI). This can act as a guide for new pledges who currently are left overwhelmed (and have no guidance since Powerplay is not in the pilots handbook).
Examples:
Hovering over the votes would have a popup that says +1 trust for 'good' votes for high CC systems
Outside in space, killing a fellow pledge would have a message, like the "treachery!" message, or if you eject your cargo for potential collusion piracy.
By knowing whats a good move v a bad one, players can in isolation see what to do like a gentle guide. Currently there is no indication as to what is wrong or right.
Pledging / Unpledging
You can unpledge at any time. You must wait 7 BGS ticks before you can repledge again to any power, and you start with a neutral trust value of 1. This gives new pledges plenty of scope to advance (and make mistakes) but not high enough to be abused by 5C agents.
You can also defect instantly- however your trust value with your new power is set very low at -8 since you are traitorous untrustworthy scum, and your old power will hunt you for 7 days with G5 assassins, as well as having your marker show up in Open as a traitor for the same amount of time. In short, defecting is dangerous. If you are auto unpledged for being at -9 trust 1 BGS tick, you are hunted for 14 BGS ticks and subject to the same caveats as defectors (visible in map etc).
Note, it would therefore be in a players own interests if they are not active in Powerplay to depledge rather than let it lapse Power leaders do not forgive and take time to forget transgressions.
In practice with 5C
Voting for negative CC systems, delivering preparation merits to 5C systems, shooting your own Powers ships, fortifying systems past 100% all affect your trust score to varying degrees. However it is possible that if a 5C agent keeps on making 5C moves they will be unpledged within one tick and expelled for 2 whole cycles, making direct 5C very hard to do for any length of time. This also stops multiple 'alt' accounts doing the same.
Examples:
Voting for negative CC systems: -1 trust (scaling to -5 if vote strength is 5 after 16 weeks)
Delivering preparation merits to 5C systems: -1 per 10 cargo
Shooting your own Powers ships: -1 trust per ship
Fortifying systems past 100%: -1 per 200 cargo past 100% total (unless system is 'mega' undermined as per Sandros proposed changes that uncap undermining).
So, a 5C agent would have 19 points of damage to 'spend':
-1 vote for a poor system
-18 for delivering 180 preparation merits to a poor CC system.
So from doing very little 5C work, the 5C agent would have to do positive things to prevent unpledging after one tick - in short they must improve the power to remain in it, disrupting exploitative loops. With Sandros weighted merits that would be a double effect ('bad' systems would be hugely expensive in merits and that every 110 cargo dropped you down to levels of trust where you are blocked from collecting more). This also allows Powerplay piracy again, because collusion piracy is heavily penalized.
Note: good actions (fortifying systems below 100%, preparing high (or non zero) CC systems, are worth the following:
Voting for positive CC systems: + 0.5 trust (scaling to 2.5 if vote strength = 5)
Delivering preparation merits to positive CC systems: +1 per 10 cargo
Fortifying systems that are below 100%: +0.5 per 200 cargo, this increases to +1 per 100 cargo if the system is 'mega' undermined since this is a dangerous area!
Good actions are worth 'less', so that is easier to drop trust than it is to gain it (ensuring that players are always guided to do good deeds via design- i.e. players know up front what is a 'good' action and what is detrimental to the power). But, since genuine players would be doing more good tasks the difference is not a problem.
Also note its impossible to 5C from the solo / PG part of Powerplay in this proposal.
Voting
Along with Sandros weighting a pledge can only vote if their trust value is 9 or 10. This makes 5C have to improve the power to be able to vote, which is hard if through exploitative play they get a low trust score as outlined. A regular player who is delivering, running missions that improve the power will always have a high trust value.
Your vote also counts towards trust. The lower the CC of the system you are voting for, the more your trust is knocked. So vote for a wildly negative one, and prepare to take the hit.
This is in addition to the weighting Sandro suggested.
Between Sandros voting changes:
Preparation Cycle Split
• The first half of the cycle is available for preparation
• The second half of the cycle locks the current preparation values and enables voting
Vote to veto preparation
• Each player can vote to veto or support each preparation
• If a preparation ends the cycle with more veto votes than support votes it is removed from preparation
• Voting requires minimum, rolling time spent pledged and active for a power, somewhere into rank 2
Reasoning: these two changes in tandem are meant to make it easier to prevent bad systems from being prepared with minimal effort. Rather than use consolidation, which must be chosen blind in terms of both the final preparation for systems and the final resting place for the consolidation marker, here Commanders are voting on a fixed list and can choose precisely which systems they want to attempt to veto.
...plus my suggestion 5C cannot flourish- the Trust value acts as a logical guide that rewards a player for voting for high value systems, and punishes 5C choices.
Solo/ PG tasks
This fleshes out Sandros 'missions / favours' proposal quoted below:
Missions give Powerplay successes
• Missions for factions in a system that share a power’s superpower award a number of Powerplay successes when completed
• The mission type determines how many successes are given
• Successes can be applied to expansion, opposition, fortification and undermining
Reasoning: one of the complaints of Powerplay is the limited actions available to support your power. We think that liking, in a very simple manner, missions for aligned factions and Powerplay successes allows Commanders increased variety in an efficient manner. The idea is not to replace the standard Powerplay activities, but to compliment them.
My expansion of this section:
A power who owns a 'bubble' (i.e. a control system and its surrounding exploited systems) will generate missions for that bubble. Each mission has three rewards (as now) but with an important difference- as well as money / mats you also have a Powerplay cargo reward based on difficulty (this replaces the INF reward). When complete, this adds that amount to a central depot in that bubbles control system automatically. Each + equals 10, so a reward of +++++ = 50 cargo added to the depots total.
PP themed missions would consist of the following, and would be biased in generation depending on power ethos (i.e. a power that is all hauling would have mainly hauling tasks, while a power that has violent ethos traits would have more combat missions). So covert = spy / steal missions, combat = combat, social = positive delivery missions, economic = hauling etc.
Some ideas:
Spy recovery: your power tasks you in recovering a captured VIP on a surface base or defended location. Use your SRV and break them out!
Kidnap: wipe out a visiting dignitary's escorts and steal his escape pod.
Protect: protect a Powers megaship from waves of scum sent by your enemies!
Courier: you must deliver important data that enemies want to prevent being seen.
Kill: a rival Powers ace pilot has been spotted- kill them for a propaganda coup.
Data thief: steal data from a rivals surface data point/ megaship / instillation without getting caught
Passenger (A): a VIP power dignitary wishes to tour your powers control systems. Make sure they come out alive
Passenger (B): Saboteur- smuggle these illegal passengers into rival control systems to lower their CG. If you are scanned you will be fired on.
Haul: some powers who move slaves / dissidents might have missions where you move these unfortunates, with mission wrinkles being other powers trying to convince you what you are doing is 'wrong'. You can lose Trust for siding with the enemy if you choose a certain outcome!
Wing missions could be harder versions of the above, or provide more of a challenge to solo players.
These missions could also have more of your Powers 'flavour' to them- for example Archon Delaine might have more organised crime themed missions, Zemina Torval more mining based, and so on- aspects that are currently glossed over and forgotten. They could also be good RP windows into your power, showing what its like rounding up Utopian crimethink dissidents, or corporate officespeak with Li Yong Rui.
Solo PG also has the task of BGS upkeep (as it is now).
As these are completed the amount of power supplies increases, and the available supplies are visible on the Power map.
Open tasks
Sandro:
Open only
• Powerplay contacts are only available to players in open
• Powerplay vouchers and commodities are destroyed if a player enters solo or private groups
Reasoning: We’ve saved the biggest change for last, as making Powerplay Open only goes way beyond the remit of a tweak. We’ve seen this topic discussed many times and we think it’s time we addressed it directly to get as much quality feedback as possible.
Powerplay is fundamentally about consensual player versus player conflict. We think that pretty much all of the systems and rules would benefit from being played out in Open only, as it would dramatically increase the chance of meeting other pledged players and being able to directly affect the outcomes of power struggles.
Profitability modifier applied to votes and preparation successes
• A system’s base profitability modifies preparation votes, withdraw votes and preparation successes
• Votes and successes for profitable systems are increased by a factor of 10
Reasoning: we think this modifier acts as another barrier against internal sabotage, forcing the saboteurs to work many more times harder to get the same effect as a Commander who has the power’s interests at heart.
My elaboration:
In this proposal, all tasks that are done today are done in Open only here. So fortifying, prepping, UM, expansions are done on a level playing field (or as near to one as you can get technology wise).
Expansions
Expansions by combat now use the 'new' CZ mechanics. Although this does mean more hopping between zones it does stop AFK (away from keyboard) players farming merits in tough turret based ships that use heal beams (as demonstrated in the Healies 4 Feelies videos). Each intensity (low,med high) also reward more merits based on difficulty chosen. Being killed does not reduce trust, but killing someone who holds merits or Powerplay cargo massively increases trust.
Fortifying
Fortifying is all inbound (as per Sandro) and can only take place if enough supplies are in the control systems depot. Allocations are based on your trust value. You must deliver successfully to keep your high allocation.
If you fail at delivery (i.e. the cargo is destroyed or ejected and left to expire) your trust value goes down. This in turn affects your allocation multiplier which can go from 10 to -9 depending on activity, but is weighted to go down faster (almost x2 as fast) while it takes twice as long to raise the trust value in positive actions. This in turn protects against the old collusion piracy problem, and could also allow power commodity piracy back as another lucrative gameplay mechanic.
All of Sandros suggestions in the link at the top of the thread would be used (weighting, prep votes etc) and would hopefully make 5C more manageable. Along with CZ changes it would limit exploitation. Being realistic it will not wipe out all problems but thats down to P2P in the end. All powers are inbound fortifiers, 'uncapped' undermining (which dovetails well into solo players increasing allocations to help), BGS footprints now in capitals / control systems only (so only these systems need to be aligned to lower fortification) and so on.
Taken together, solo / PG players act as the 'generators' of Powerplay materials, while Open players are the 'movers' who deliver them. Everyone has a well defined role, and no mode is excluded.
Blocking
Pledges cannot block other pledges, only censor messages. Its illogical to block a player for killing you in a feature thats about conflict. Also, if you are winged with a Powerplay pledge, you 'inherit' the Powerplay block rules- this prevents an exploit where non pledges can be used to get around the blocking rules.
Power Module
Players have two ways to get a module: tech brokers (no pledge required), or have a trust value above 8 for a reduced cost. Note: the module is free while you are at a high trust value and pledged, but expensive in time and materials via brokers.
This incentivizes being in a Power properly because you can gain the module via good actions only, is fast (i.e. no waiting for weeks) and that modules are much less expensive if they are of a high Trust value (only done via playing correctly).
This would ultimately have to go hand in hand with balancing the modules though, because some (like Prismatics) are massively expensive and come in all sizes, while other powers have modules in one size and / or are useless (the Retributor laser for example).
For those who want the module outside of Powerplay, you have to do the equivalent in work to unlock them- i.e by depositing materials like any human technology broker. Both apporaches are broadly equal, but favour being in a power still.
Additional
Sandros idea of control systems alone determining a bubbles favourable / neutral / unfavourable status also features in this proposal.
Powerplay tab
You can only see information that relates to your power, and rival powers information on fortifcation levels only updates if you are in that system. This is to encourage a new role, that of spies and information reconassaince.
Problem
Powerplay does not function well across the three modes, with antagonism between solo / PG and Open players being fed by a lack of boundaries and hard rules as to who is playing 'right'. Due to design flaws its also very easy to hurt powers from within 5C, or fifth column).
The following offers Powerplay to both groups in a way that both help the same power via separate, focused tasks.
Idea
Powerplay is split into two halves: one half is Solo /PG, the other Open only. The Solo/ PG part is mission based and contributes to accumulating fort materials for the Open only half to deliver. So, rather than make all modes try to do the same things you provide each mode with specific jobs that amplify that modes potential.
-----------------
General (shared across all modes)
1) Both sets of players share ranks and perks as they are now.
2) Merits are split as a concept. Players have the value Trust (see later), cargo in the game or combat merits (from killing PP NPCs).
3) Solo and PG players can vote in all stages (i.e. consolidate / vote on weeks preps) as normal, thus they have an equal say in a powers choices.
Sandros suggestions here would also be available for all players too:
Preparation Cycle Split
• The first half of the cycle is available for preparation
• The second half of the cycle locks the current preparation values and enables voting
Vote to veto preparation
• Each player can vote to veto or support each preparation
• If a preparation ends the cycle with more veto votes than support votes it is removed from preparation
• Voting requires minimum, rolling time spent pledged and active for a power, somewhere into rank 2
Reasoning: these two changes in tandem are meant to make it easier to prevent bad systems from being prepared with minimal effort. Rather than use consolidation, which must be chosen blind in terms of both the final preparation for systems and the final resting place for the consolidation marker, here Commanders are voting on a fixed list and can choose precisely which systems they want to attempt to veto.
Vote to withdraw from system
• Each cycle players can vote on the 5 least profitable systems, to withdraw or support
• At the end of a cycle if a system has more withdraw votes than support votes it is removed from the power’s control
• Voting requires minimum, rolling time spent pledged and active for a power, somewhere into rank 2
Reasoning: currently there is no way to lose a bad control system other than hoping or colluding with opposing powers that it will end up being forced into turmoil. We think this vote is a legible and relatively safe way of allowing powers to shed chaff, as only systems that at a base level would be unprofitable would be eligible for withdrawal.
4) The allocation increment between ranks is removed. It starts at a flat 10 and multiplied by your Trust value (see below). Important: allocations are not time dependent but instead dependent on delivery- i.e. you get a fixed amount to move at the time of collection and no more until its delivered.
5) Perks and modules are unlocked based on your trust value (see below).
Trust
Powerplay players have a new variable to manage- 'Trust'. It acts similar to rep with factions and replaces personal merits. The more positive outcomes you have doing tasks across all modes, the higher this value gets. It acts as a multiplier for rewards, as well as your allocation (see later sections for details).
The trust value ranges from 10 (maximum) to -9 (no trust) depending on activity. At full trust (10) all personal perks are unlocked in a similar way to rank 5 currently. But, if your trust gets too low through failing certain tasks repeatedly, you are automatically unpledged and treated as a defector- i.e. that power sends assassins after you.
Automatic unpledging occurs after 1 BGS 'tick' at -9. This is an anti 5C measure, so that positive actions reward, while being 5C gets you kicked out and punished (see later for examples of this in action).
New pledges have to undergo a mission to prove their loyalty, and once complete get a message from your glorious leader allowing them to be a pledge. You start with a low trust score, and must work to improve it. Missions might be to stock a control systems depot (see below) or kill x amount of rival PP players / NPCs.
Note, trust will decay slowly over time. However this is gradual (and not as harsh as it is now- it would be 5% each week, not 50%.) Please note also that regaining trust points is free and as easy as doing missions or delivering cargo (which is also free).
If your Trust value is high (say, 10) each Open cargo run could pay for one potential rebuy. So for each cargo unit which has a flat value (say 1 million) , with a trust of 10 on delivery you get 10 million in cash. Since credits can't buy cargo, you can't use the cash to 5C the power. Those with a negative trust value get no bonus, so only get a million on delivery.
If your trust value is negative (between -1 and -9), you are blocked from collecting preparation materials or hauling fortification materials. This is to prevent 5C from dumping cargo, completing a mission to raise trust, and deliver again (so doing just enough to stay in the Power). In this situation the player must raise trust doing missions or undermine, thus preventing any mass dumping of cargo / prep materials to unlock the ability to deliver in the Open portion of Powerplay. So, 5C are forced to act in your powers interests.
IMPORTANT:
All actions that either gain or lose trust have bold labeling that clearly indicate what that action costs in Trust (in the UI). This can act as a guide for new pledges who currently are left overwhelmed (and have no guidance since Powerplay is not in the pilots handbook).
Examples:
Hovering over the votes would have a popup that says +1 trust for 'good' votes for high CC systems
Outside in space, killing a fellow pledge would have a message, like the "treachery!" message, or if you eject your cargo for potential collusion piracy.
By knowing whats a good move v a bad one, players can in isolation see what to do like a gentle guide. Currently there is no indication as to what is wrong or right.
Pledging / Unpledging
You can unpledge at any time. You must wait 7 BGS ticks before you can repledge again to any power, and you start with a neutral trust value of 1. This gives new pledges plenty of scope to advance (and make mistakes) but not high enough to be abused by 5C agents.
You can also defect instantly- however your trust value with your new power is set very low at -8 since you are traitorous untrustworthy scum, and your old power will hunt you for 7 days with G5 assassins, as well as having your marker show up in Open as a traitor for the same amount of time. In short, defecting is dangerous. If you are auto unpledged for being at -9 trust 1 BGS tick, you are hunted for 14 BGS ticks and subject to the same caveats as defectors (visible in map etc).
Note, it would therefore be in a players own interests if they are not active in Powerplay to depledge rather than let it lapse Power leaders do not forgive and take time to forget transgressions.
In practice with 5C
Voting for negative CC systems, delivering preparation merits to 5C systems, shooting your own Powers ships, fortifying systems past 100% all affect your trust score to varying degrees. However it is possible that if a 5C agent keeps on making 5C moves they will be unpledged within one tick and expelled for 2 whole cycles, making direct 5C very hard to do for any length of time. This also stops multiple 'alt' accounts doing the same.
Examples:
Voting for negative CC systems: -1 trust (scaling to -5 if vote strength is 5 after 16 weeks)
Delivering preparation merits to 5C systems: -1 per 10 cargo
Shooting your own Powers ships: -1 trust per ship
Fortifying systems past 100%: -1 per 200 cargo past 100% total (unless system is 'mega' undermined as per Sandros proposed changes that uncap undermining).
So, a 5C agent would have 19 points of damage to 'spend':
-1 vote for a poor system
-18 for delivering 180 preparation merits to a poor CC system.
So from doing very little 5C work, the 5C agent would have to do positive things to prevent unpledging after one tick - in short they must improve the power to remain in it, disrupting exploitative loops. With Sandros weighted merits that would be a double effect ('bad' systems would be hugely expensive in merits and that every 110 cargo dropped you down to levels of trust where you are blocked from collecting more). This also allows Powerplay piracy again, because collusion piracy is heavily penalized.
Note: good actions (fortifying systems below 100%, preparing high (or non zero) CC systems, are worth the following:
Voting for positive CC systems: + 0.5 trust (scaling to 2.5 if vote strength = 5)
Delivering preparation merits to positive CC systems: +1 per 10 cargo
Fortifying systems that are below 100%: +0.5 per 200 cargo, this increases to +1 per 100 cargo if the system is 'mega' undermined since this is a dangerous area!
Good actions are worth 'less', so that is easier to drop trust than it is to gain it (ensuring that players are always guided to do good deeds via design- i.e. players know up front what is a 'good' action and what is detrimental to the power). But, since genuine players would be doing more good tasks the difference is not a problem.
Also note its impossible to 5C from the solo / PG part of Powerplay in this proposal.
Voting
Along with Sandros weighting a pledge can only vote if their trust value is 9 or 10. This makes 5C have to improve the power to be able to vote, which is hard if through exploitative play they get a low trust score as outlined. A regular player who is delivering, running missions that improve the power will always have a high trust value.
Your vote also counts towards trust. The lower the CC of the system you are voting for, the more your trust is knocked. So vote for a wildly negative one, and prepare to take the hit.
This is in addition to the weighting Sandro suggested.
Between Sandros voting changes:
Preparation Cycle Split
• The first half of the cycle is available for preparation
• The second half of the cycle locks the current preparation values and enables voting
Vote to veto preparation
• Each player can vote to veto or support each preparation
• If a preparation ends the cycle with more veto votes than support votes it is removed from preparation
• Voting requires minimum, rolling time spent pledged and active for a power, somewhere into rank 2
Reasoning: these two changes in tandem are meant to make it easier to prevent bad systems from being prepared with minimal effort. Rather than use consolidation, which must be chosen blind in terms of both the final preparation for systems and the final resting place for the consolidation marker, here Commanders are voting on a fixed list and can choose precisely which systems they want to attempt to veto.
...plus my suggestion 5C cannot flourish- the Trust value acts as a logical guide that rewards a player for voting for high value systems, and punishes 5C choices.
Solo/ PG tasks
This fleshes out Sandros 'missions / favours' proposal quoted below:
Missions give Powerplay successes
• Missions for factions in a system that share a power’s superpower award a number of Powerplay successes when completed
• The mission type determines how many successes are given
• Successes can be applied to expansion, opposition, fortification and undermining
Reasoning: one of the complaints of Powerplay is the limited actions available to support your power. We think that liking, in a very simple manner, missions for aligned factions and Powerplay successes allows Commanders increased variety in an efficient manner. The idea is not to replace the standard Powerplay activities, but to compliment them.
My expansion of this section:
A power who owns a 'bubble' (i.e. a control system and its surrounding exploited systems) will generate missions for that bubble. Each mission has three rewards (as now) but with an important difference- as well as money / mats you also have a Powerplay cargo reward based on difficulty (this replaces the INF reward). When complete, this adds that amount to a central depot in that bubbles control system automatically. Each + equals 10, so a reward of +++++ = 50 cargo added to the depots total.
PP themed missions would consist of the following, and would be biased in generation depending on power ethos (i.e. a power that is all hauling would have mainly hauling tasks, while a power that has violent ethos traits would have more combat missions). So covert = spy / steal missions, combat = combat, social = positive delivery missions, economic = hauling etc.
Some ideas:
Spy recovery: your power tasks you in recovering a captured VIP on a surface base or defended location. Use your SRV and break them out!
Kidnap: wipe out a visiting dignitary's escorts and steal his escape pod.
Protect: protect a Powers megaship from waves of scum sent by your enemies!
Courier: you must deliver important data that enemies want to prevent being seen.
Kill: a rival Powers ace pilot has been spotted- kill them for a propaganda coup.
Data thief: steal data from a rivals surface data point/ megaship / instillation without getting caught
Passenger (A): a VIP power dignitary wishes to tour your powers control systems. Make sure they come out alive
Passenger (B): Saboteur- smuggle these illegal passengers into rival control systems to lower their CG. If you are scanned you will be fired on.
Haul: some powers who move slaves / dissidents might have missions where you move these unfortunates, with mission wrinkles being other powers trying to convince you what you are doing is 'wrong'. You can lose Trust for siding with the enemy if you choose a certain outcome!
Wing missions could be harder versions of the above, or provide more of a challenge to solo players.
These missions could also have more of your Powers 'flavour' to them- for example Archon Delaine might have more organised crime themed missions, Zemina Torval more mining based, and so on- aspects that are currently glossed over and forgotten. They could also be good RP windows into your power, showing what its like rounding up Utopian crimethink dissidents, or corporate officespeak with Li Yong Rui.
Solo PG also has the task of BGS upkeep (as it is now).
As these are completed the amount of power supplies increases, and the available supplies are visible on the Power map.
Open tasks
Sandro:
Open only
• Powerplay contacts are only available to players in open
• Powerplay vouchers and commodities are destroyed if a player enters solo or private groups
Reasoning: We’ve saved the biggest change for last, as making Powerplay Open only goes way beyond the remit of a tweak. We’ve seen this topic discussed many times and we think it’s time we addressed it directly to get as much quality feedback as possible.
Powerplay is fundamentally about consensual player versus player conflict. We think that pretty much all of the systems and rules would benefit from being played out in Open only, as it would dramatically increase the chance of meeting other pledged players and being able to directly affect the outcomes of power struggles.
Profitability modifier applied to votes and preparation successes
• A system’s base profitability modifies preparation votes, withdraw votes and preparation successes
• Votes and successes for profitable systems are increased by a factor of 10
Reasoning: we think this modifier acts as another barrier against internal sabotage, forcing the saboteurs to work many more times harder to get the same effect as a Commander who has the power’s interests at heart.
My elaboration:
In this proposal, all tasks that are done today are done in Open only here. So fortifying, prepping, UM, expansions are done on a level playing field (or as near to one as you can get technology wise).
Expansions
Expansions by combat now use the 'new' CZ mechanics. Although this does mean more hopping between zones it does stop AFK (away from keyboard) players farming merits in tough turret based ships that use heal beams (as demonstrated in the Healies 4 Feelies videos). Each intensity (low,med high) also reward more merits based on difficulty chosen. Being killed does not reduce trust, but killing someone who holds merits or Powerplay cargo massively increases trust.
Fortifying
Fortifying is all inbound (as per Sandro) and can only take place if enough supplies are in the control systems depot. Allocations are based on your trust value. You must deliver successfully to keep your high allocation.
If you fail at delivery (i.e. the cargo is destroyed or ejected and left to expire) your trust value goes down. This in turn affects your allocation multiplier which can go from 10 to -9 depending on activity, but is weighted to go down faster (almost x2 as fast) while it takes twice as long to raise the trust value in positive actions. This in turn protects against the old collusion piracy problem, and could also allow power commodity piracy back as another lucrative gameplay mechanic.
All of Sandros suggestions in the link at the top of the thread would be used (weighting, prep votes etc) and would hopefully make 5C more manageable. Along with CZ changes it would limit exploitation. Being realistic it will not wipe out all problems but thats down to P2P in the end. All powers are inbound fortifiers, 'uncapped' undermining (which dovetails well into solo players increasing allocations to help), BGS footprints now in capitals / control systems only (so only these systems need to be aligned to lower fortification) and so on.
Taken together, solo / PG players act as the 'generators' of Powerplay materials, while Open players are the 'movers' who deliver them. Everyone has a well defined role, and no mode is excluded.
Blocking
Pledges cannot block other pledges, only censor messages. Its illogical to block a player for killing you in a feature thats about conflict. Also, if you are winged with a Powerplay pledge, you 'inherit' the Powerplay block rules- this prevents an exploit where non pledges can be used to get around the blocking rules.
Power Module
Players have two ways to get a module: tech brokers (no pledge required), or have a trust value above 8 for a reduced cost. Note: the module is free while you are at a high trust value and pledged, but expensive in time and materials via brokers.
This incentivizes being in a Power properly because you can gain the module via good actions only, is fast (i.e. no waiting for weeks) and that modules are much less expensive if they are of a high Trust value (only done via playing correctly).
This would ultimately have to go hand in hand with balancing the modules though, because some (like Prismatics) are massively expensive and come in all sizes, while other powers have modules in one size and / or are useless (the Retributor laser for example).
For those who want the module outside of Powerplay, you have to do the equivalent in work to unlock them- i.e by depositing materials like any human technology broker. Both apporaches are broadly equal, but favour being in a power still.
Additional
Sandros idea of control systems alone determining a bubbles favourable / neutral / unfavourable status also features in this proposal.
Powerplay tab
You can only see information that relates to your power, and rival powers information on fortifcation levels only updates if you are in that system. This is to encourage a new role, that of spies and information reconassaince.
Last edited: