Because inherently you are competing with other factions, and ultimately other players. Your argument is the same as saying, "Why can't both basketball teams have a guy with a ladder that is allow to walk the ball up to the rim and drop it in whenever there is a break in play? WHY NOT?"
The fundamental problem with making Powerplay Open-Only.
- Thread starter DemiserofD
- Start date
That doesn't have anything to do with oopp.
This is why the power boundaries have not meaningfully shifted for years. Nothing interesting or exciting can happen in powerplay because all that is currently possible, with the easy ability to fortify in solo, is minor squabbles over the fringe borders.
Edit: With OOPP you would not be so easily able to fortify 5C core systems. Opposing factions could make meaningful blitzes for core systems, PowerPlay would become much more dynamic - the board would be able to shift in ways it was NEVER able to do before.. So I disagree, Rubbernuke's comment has much to do with OOPP.
And as I said, and always say- for powerplay to work, NPCs have to be like players, or players be like NPCs.
Without a significant opposition to make fortification more difficult (to slow it, each run being harder) you lead to the feedback loop I described in #261. OOPP supplies opposition to areas intelligently, thats its job.
Or you could just uncap UMing.
How would that solve the issue of the feedback loop? How does uncapping UM solve the issue of Powerplay lacking any significant dynamic change in outcome and week to week? Uncapping UMing keeps all of the current issues, and just moves the goalposts from their current place to infinity.
You could, back about five pages I linked this https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/powerplay-mode-agnostic-version-ideas.556921/ which outlined as much of a compromise as I thought would work. But again, uncapping is only part of the story.
Uncapping 'unlocks' systems to attack. It means any system can be UMed at virtually any time during a cycle. The danger here is that solo allows a massive advantage, because there are ways to game the bounty boards and remain hidden. At the very least if PP remains multi mode solo and PG need weighting to prevent massive multi system snipes.
Open allows for near direct recon, confrontation with uncapping UM with ships capable of mounting an effective defence. Players can intelligently co-ordinate, while NPCs spawn to set rules, if at all.
So what?
No-one likes being sniped from thin air, from a place that can't be reached by any means to either stop the attack or blunt it.
They always have the ability to outcompete the enemy.
That's an exploit. You're now advocating for an exploit. In an inherently competitive game mode.
And that is ALL they can do. Why is it right to have no the ability to confront the opposition?
Which is doing it blindly, rather than stopping it at source- which is much more engaging than just grinding. Another aspect is identifying who is doing it- instancing aside, its always nice to know who is attacking you (something thats not always obvious).
So what?
Rubbernuke, he's exhausted any remaining intelligent rebuttal to concrete criticism of his ideas. The opportunity for meaningful discussion is gone now.
I'm simply allowing the opposition to express their views and facilitating that expression to the best of my ability. Please, continue.
Giving a power more options to reply to an attack- powers will be cautious regarding high CC systems. It would be mayhem to have to balance a couple and protect your capital at the same time. In tightly contested cycles lost ships could make all the difference in your capital with hit and fade tactics. But only PvP can make the latter part work in your capital, not unless NPCs get a drastic overhaul.
Why is this fundamentally better than simply uncapping UMing?
For the reason I just outlined from the last few pages.
No, that's what you thought would happen. Why are those things better?