Would you prefer toffee or salted? Judging by some of the posts, salted is trending.
Latest stream has more dislikes than likes... FD are you listening?
- Thread starter VR Cmdr Paine
- Start date
Have you let Barry out mate?
Umm, err, I must have been misheard - what I meant to say was - would you like a good old game of cricket you young scallywag? God save the king or queen!
Lol, I see fdev responding (as people demanded) had totally cooled things down
Yeah, that certainly happened! People seem ready to have a sensible and open discussion, whilst respecting others' opinions and views...!
Would you prefer toffee or salted? Judging by some of the posts, salted is trending.
It certainly does now! I tried hard last night to not have the thread derailed but it has all gone Pete Tong since I was here this morning!
Ergo, I would normally have toffee, but it seems salt is the rage here as you say!
Right?
I mean…
“At the moment we're focusing on some of the big hitter feedback regarding PowerPlay that have been circulating for a while, for example, the idea of 'Open-only' PowerPlay.”
That one sentence probably has more information than what was given in the entire dev update post.
Open Only will not fix the problems of Powerplay because the mechanics would remain unchanged.
The main argument for Open Only is to counter 5th Columnists (5C). 5C are commanders who pledge to a Power with the intent of bankrupting it by forcing the Power to do actions that make it incur a financial loss. In regards to 5C the argument goes like this:- I am Power A. I am being 5C'd but with Open Only I can have a group of my commanders pledge to an Enemy Power then interdict and kill all suspicious commanders pledged to my Power who are not in my Powerplay Group whilst they are in Supercruise in my Headquarters' system. The main problem with this is that not all Preparation Power Commodities are transported to/from the headquarters thus some Powers would have a large advantage against 5C, provided they guard their Headquarters 24/7, whilst others would have virtually none.
Open Only as a game mode for Powerplay could work. But first, in my view, you'd need to address the economic model of Powerplay so that commanders cannot pledge to a Power then harm it through their actions. Secondly, as Powerplay would be a de facto PvP mode I would also add an additional rebuy option for Powerplay enabling a 'free rebuy' with a time penalty in the hours before your replacement ship is delivered (it would allow commanders, especially new ones, to participate in an Open Only Powerplay without being financially wiped out due to rebuys). 'Free rebuys' though wouldn't stop any Open Only Powerplay discussion thread being deliberately targeted by PvE BGS groups posting negative comments because they fear that if Open Only Powerplay became a success it would be extended to the BGS.
Personally I'd look at fixing the mechanics and rewards of Powerplay first before moving on to Open Only once everything else is bedded in and working. If Powerplay as a strategy game is functioning properly frankly what mode people play in shouldn't be an issue. Open Only should be judged purely on its gameplay potential.
CMDR Justinian Octavius
Hmmm?Have you let Barry out mate?
Umm, err, I must have been misheard - what I meant to say was - would you like a good old game of cricket you young scallywag? God save the king or queen!
Your passable understanding of the enemies language makes you a person of interest to SOE.
However, should you decide to sell out friends and family, there are fabulous prizes to be won old bean, what what
I think it has been a great thread so far lots of good banter and great CM interaction, the entitled comment did come across as trying to shut down IMO justified criticism but I get the context in which it was said reading back through the posts,
Mr. Hat, are you a double double Agent?
its been a pleasure to see you articulate so eloquently and yes the unintended derailering has been fun Is it? Sandros proposed changes suggest otherwise with weighted expansions and vote to drop mechanics, these are far more obvious anti 5C. Open at best is a very mild anti 5C measure.
If you're not doing cheddar caramel mix, you're doing it wrong.Would you prefer toffee or salted? Judging by some of the posts, salted is trending.
Maybe, just maybe, it just comes down to people not enjoying the content of the stream. The thumbs up/ thumbs down is there for a reason. Otherwise just have a thumbs up button.
And I applaud them for doing so, I hope to see more interaction going fowardLol, I see fdev responding (as people demanded) had totally cooled things down
Hehe, yea. We complained loudly. So they promised to do better in the future. Then we got one really good supercruise news. A week later, already a much shorter one, but still acceptable. (I never expected them to be able to keep up like 50 minutes of actual information. There's just not enough info to go around in a week of development. )
The next one did not happen at all. Instead we got it in text form. Which i generally would even prefer. But the text form had limited good news, plenty of bad news and clearly spent more time in the PR departement than in the hands of those who actually gave out the info. So much sugar-coating, i gained plenty of weight by merely reading it...
Now the last one with this reaction. Very surprising, isn't it?
I guess "doing better in the future" was two or three weeks. Now the future is over...
One of the top comments:
"I would like to see a livestream where you attempt to prove Yamiks wrong about it taking 27 hours fully upgrade a space suite. Perhaps then you will understand the issues."
So a Yamiks drone strike.
Actually, there is...
in Elite Week, someone had the exact same issue. For over 10 days, he argued with Frontier. Fdev said: No way Jose! We cannot remove the product from your account.
So he called the Credit card company and reported it as a fraudulent transaction. Lo and Behold, the CC company refunded him the money. Not 24 hours later, Odyssey was removed from his account.
He had it all documented of course. Reason for the refund was lack of VR, especially since to begin with, Fdev said, there would be VR, so the guy bought Odyssey. But then went back on their word, they refused the refund, hence the call to the Credit card company.
Ian Phillips
Volunteer Moderator
Then maybe, just maybe they should just not watch the stream? That would seem to be a mature decision to make.
Correct expression would be: Bitte gib mir dein Geraffel.
However that is the colloquial expression, talking to someone you are familiar with.
The polite question is: Kann ich bitte Ihr Geraffel haben?
Translates to: Can I have your junk/stuff please?
They literally said "no VR at launch", but other than that, sure, with CC that is an option.
I really envy your patience to quote part by part...So you then have a race to the bottom, and that everyone to compete 100% has to use solo to fortify (facing laugable NPCs) to support large powers?
Sandros proposed changes make Powerplay smaller, and more arena based. Uncapped UM funnels defenders and attackers into the same systems because defenders have to fight then- there is no escape behind a wall of maths and the turmoil order.
It depends on how you look at it. Powerplay in Open is a team game where its group v group. In the past I've had people support fortifiers to occupy intruders while they punch through- how does that sound compared to solo, where you take off in total safety, jump in safety, SC have the risk, and drop right own into the stations no fire zone where no NPC can attack you?
The only way to break this PvE wise is to enlarge drop zones and remove end points at stations as I suggest here:
Powerplay in Solo
That's in the case of the current incarnation of the feature. If OP's measure was enacted, which is the substance of this thread, the roles would be reversed, or partly so. And whether or not to reverse the roles comes down to which players you want to detriment, again. In which case it's a...forums.frontier.co.uk
In the link above, I solve all these issues by removing stations as end points and using hidden trader POI.
Uncapped UM (as Sandro suggested) makes any system vulnerable to continual attack. This means an attacker can go straight for all profitables right off the bat. In practice this in Open would mean you have to keep on running the gauntlet until you force the enemy to stop attacking.
As far as instancing is concerned, you simply have to put up with it and see how it pans out, because in the end its being in a potentially hostile and complex situation that counts where you have to think about more than min max.
Its the potential and opportunism that is important- you can't know who you will face pledge or otherwise. I always say either Powerplay NPCS act like players, or players act like NPCs because its the PvE aspect that lets Powerplay down. NPCs don't scale to Powerplay levels. Check out that link above for what I think is the only real way to emulate players.
Its not about 1:1 CQC Red Baron stuff- its overcoming who you find. Sandros suggestions reduce Powerplays footprint significantly, and with uncapped UM makes areas much more vital and potential hot spots of action.
So you are admitting then that the modes are not equal? Powerplay is opt in, Open is opt in. I advocate a Powerplay for all modes, just not all at the same time.
Large powers have over 50 systems. If you're undermining the system, you won't be looking at haulers anyway... that is the trigger-centric nature.
In an instance-based game, just having people with you already ensures that the instance won't be supporting one of the enemy in it. Have enough people of your side in it, and the instance is yours. Matchmaking does prefer who is on your friends list, and the P2P limitations won't ever create more than skirmishes (and may even fail to create them), no matter how much you funnel objectives into a single system and hope the instancing will sort itself out.
Min-maxing will still matter. A wing of folks hunting, praying that instancing works has a lot more to lose for every idle second than the wing of folks with very combat capable ships at a beacon or the 10k shield cutters that won't die to single interdictions, and may even support each other with healing beams, they just need to survive until going into SC again.
Enlarged drop zones or POIs to move the combat outside of station no-fire zones do make sense, but that's really not making use of the majority of time we spend in-game - supercruising staring at the screen. Supposedly we are getting a ship balance pass this year, and maybe shield stacking won't be as absurd anymore so that even NPCs might go back into doing something more than tickle.
Uncapped UM to target profitables is just going to turn the PP map into a barren wasteland. Profitables further than a certain distance would get relentlessly attacked with extreme trigger efficiency, and powers are going to be further locked into their rotten cores of 5C bad systems that won't get undermined no matter what - good luck having 30k+ triggers versus 3-5k fort triggers for randoms/5C.
My kind of point is that PP should happen more actively, and it doesn't happen because the tendency is that powers freeze - expand until there is not enough CC and you can't do anything about lossmakers/overheads, and no real pressure to keep powers active. Every solution to this won't need the open-only component that would be so riddled with technical issues and breaks the panmodal essence. It will still boil down to a change in how the CC math works so that there is constant change.