PFB, Ship Rebuy Penalty and Powerplay

[CMDR Relick]

1. Each Power should Stand Alone, regardless of what Superpower they support*, as they are not the same power, or they wouldn't exist.

Heavily disagree, but I think someone else already said it better than I:

As for common sense? Let's take the Federation.
Hudson is President. Winters is Shadow President. Winters may be representing the Opposition to Hudson on a political level, but that wouldn't mean she would actively undermine the interests of the Federation as a whole by sabotaging and attacking Hudson in favour of their common enemy - the Empire.

[Arkadi]

Ok, this is a bit complicated. I hope I got it all straight and I make my thoughts clear. Sorry for any faulty english.

First I doubt this rules will change the behaviour of most commanders who have enough credits to do how they please. Some iteration of these rules might hurt powerplayers with a credit shortage.

Out of the three options I think option 2 is the best (least bad?). Option one is too restrictive. Actually I don't understand it at all. Is it my lack of english literacy or do I get it wrong? Basically I understand option one means that the powerplayer will get a penalty for every ship destruction in powerplay pvp he manages to do, except of his own faction. I mean sorry why should he attack his own faction and if he does he should get lots of penaltys, fees and boutys. LOL .Maybe I got it wrong.

Also I wonder becouse of the wording "I will suffer a PF Bounty and risk rebuy penalty if I attack any pledged vessel" ??? I hope this means "...if I DESTROY any pledged vessel? Becouse I thought all this new rules is to deter player KILLERS and not pvp players who fight until 20% hull or such - but that's about powerplay, so maybe another story - still it would only make sense upon ship-destruction for me.

[...]
OK, so first, a recap so we're all on the same page:
[...]

Beta crime rules:
* I will suffer a Pilot's Federation Bounty and risk a ship rebuy penalty if I attack any pledged vessel that does not belong to my power.

As folk have pointed out, this is potentially very restrictive, reducing the ability to help out powers from the same superpower.
[...]
Feedback will be appreciated!

Option one is a big no,no for me becouse it puts a credit-wall for new players to engage in pvp powerplay - if I understood it correctly at all.

I prefer option two OVER option three. Reason is:

Option three gives too much freedom to the big superpower blocks of Federation and Empire - giving them a charter to defend all of theire territorry. Especially the Empire would profit from this. For exampel Patreus could help "defend" all other three empire powers (except of Grom - joke) without any hurdles of any kind. Also Zach and Winters would be sticking together even closer.
I like it that the superpowers of Empire and Federation can have some internal disunity too.

So for me its Option Two. With option two Hudson commanders would still get standard bountys for attacking and destroying ships in Winters domain but no increased penaltys like PF-bounty or rebuy-penalty, same ofc for the Imperial powers.

edit: formatting, littel additions. Also I would like to see Sandros old "handgranade" proposal getting real!

[puzz]

My vote is for option 3.

And please! Only those PP activities which are made in open should be taken into account when calculating CC.

[Space2504]

Jay Cee from LYR here - even though it suits the superpower factions I'd vote for 3. It makes the most sense.

* As a side note I'd like to point out that I'm with an independent power and play exclusively in open, in fact I'd love to see a higher reward for the power, not the players merits, for doing power play in open.

[CMDR Relick]

Option three gives too much freedom to the big superpower blocks of Federation and Empire - giving them a charter to defend all of theire territorry. Especially the Empire would profit from this. For exampel Patreus could help "defend" all other three empire powers (except of Grom - joke) without any hurdles of any kind. Also Zach and Winters would be sticking together even closer.
I like it that the superpowers of Empire and Federation can have some internal disunity too.

As the founder and leader of a pan-Imperial PvP defense force, I've got to say that I really disagree with that. It just doesn't make sense. Let's say Turkey gets attacked by someone, and then France comes to their aid (NATO). Would it be fair for the UN to slap a fine on France for defending their ally against aggression?

[Arkadi]

@cmdr relick: I am not sure if war acts of different nations under the same pact will go smoothly all the time. I doubt it. There will always be recriminations for civilian casualities, economical interests, what so ever.

Also I don't want to get into real world politics. It's just a matter of game balance for me and not about 100% realsistical geo-political simulation. Powerplay is far from that.

edit: especially with the Feds it should not be to cosy: I mean it's a republican and a liberal... I'd wonder if those two would be gently in love all the time...

[nrage]

Hi Sandro,
Thank you so much for taking the time to gather our opinion on the topic.
It has been a hot topic of discussion since the patch note release occurred.

I do have a basic question before stating my preference.
Do the changes proposed here, will affect Player vs Player interactions or both PvP and PvE interactions?
Please, could you clarify?

Pilot Federation bounties and Ship Rebuy Penalty only apply to PvP situations. That is to say, you only trigger them upon the murder of another player, not an NPC.

This thread is therefore just about exclusions to the above, for power play purposes.

[PlzDontShoot]

Pilot Federation bounties and Ship Rebuy Penalty only apply to PvP situations. That is to say, you only trigger them upon the murder of another player, not an NPC.

This thread is therefore just about exclusions to the above, for power play purposes.

Thank you nrage

[CMDR Relick]

@cmdr relick: I am not sure if war acts of different nations under the same pact will go smoothly all the time. I doubt it. There will always be recriminations for civilian casualities, economical interests, what so ever.

Also I don't want to get into real world politics. It's just a matter of game balance for me and not about 100% realsistical geo-political simulation. Powerplay is far from that.

It was just an example. Regardless, no matter which power in a superpower you're pledged to, you're still part of that superpower.

[nrage]

...Option one is too restrictive. Actually I don't understand it at all. Is it my lack of english literacy or do I get it wrong? Basically I understand option one means that the powerplayer will get a penalty for every ship destruction in powerplay pvp he manages to do. Maybe I got it wrong.

You got it wrong. Option 1 is..

* I will suffer a Pilot's Federation Bounty and risk a ship rebuy penalty if I attack any pledged vessel that does not belong to my power.

But, attack is the wrong word here, you have to murder them - that is destroy their ship in an act which is considered a crime. That's when you trigger the pilots federation bounty and ship rebuy penalty.

Also, this is missing a load of context, read the OP in these two threads:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...nty-Discussion
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...ost-Discussion

Also note that..

* This does not affect undermining or opposing

[Blight Born]

My vote is for option 3.

And please! Only those PP activities which are made in open should be taken into account when calculating CC.

1000x yes.

[JesusRocks1988]

@cmdr relick: I am not sure if war acts of different nations under the same pact will go smoothly all the time. I doubt it. There will always be recriminations for civilian casualities, economical interests, what so ever.

Also I don't want to get into real world politics. It's just a matter of game balance for me and not about 100% realsistical geo-political simulation. Powerplay is far from that.

Power play may be far from a real world political simulation, but I think option 3 would give players more options, more tactics, and allow for better player driven storytelling.

It might also bring more people into power play because it makes the Superpowers meaningful in it. At the moment, with regards to power play, the Superpowers themselves might as well not exist.

[Crimson Kaim]

IMO I should not get a penalty or a bounty at all when killing hostile PP players in any situation/system. My power should cover the bounty costs in case I get caught as I am acting in their interests. So if I kill an imperial CMDR that is clean in any space and get a PFD bounty for it, the power should cover the insurance costs (as of, no PFB and just basic 5% rebuy). Killing unpledged clean CMDRs is not included and will come with a PFB in any system.

[Jason Lightning]

All three options are bad game design IMO, Powerplay is optional to even sign up for, getting the expensive and restrictive PF bounty, which makes you wanted in your own home power systems btw, means that PvP while say undermining or countering haulers is wasteful.

Really the problem is that the pilots Federation bounties are too broad, they should have been superpower faction bounties, but no where is this more blatantly restrictive than Powerplay. Under any of the three options, if I shoot down an enemy faction player while undermining I will become wanted and have a potentially heavy rebuy even in my home territory. Becoming wanted in enemy space makes sense, but not in home territory.

The bounty system should reflect the nature of different superpowers having their own legal systems and independence, but since that isn't in place a good placeholder should be to make pilot Federation bounties for PvP exempt when a battle is between two players of different non-allied Powerplay factions anywhere, only local or regional bounties then apply.

I cannot stress enough that Powerplay is already an opt-in system of player conflict, penalizing the PvP side of that conflict with heavy handed non-lore friendly bounties is heavy handed.

[Arkadi]

All three options are bad game design IMO, Powerplay is optional to even sign up for, getting the expensive and restrictive PF bounty, which makes you wanted in your own home power systems btw, means that PvP while say undermining or countering haulers is wasteful.

Really the problem is that the pilots Federation bounties are too broad, they should have been superpower faction bounties, but no where is this more blatantly restrictive than Powerplay. Under any of the three options, if I shoot down an enemy faction player while undermining I will become wanted and have a potentially heavy rebuy even in my home territory. Becoming wanted in enemy space makes sense, but not in home territory.

The bounty system should reflect the nature of different superpowers having their own legal systems and independence, but since that isn't in place a good placeholder should be to make pilot Federation bounties for PvP exempt when a battle is between two players of different non-allied Powerplay factions anywhere, only local or regional bounties then apply.

I cannot stress enough that Powerplay is already an opt-in system of player conflict, penalizing the PvP side of that conflict with heavy handed non-lore friendly bounties is heavy handed.

Bravo, to the point! +Rep