Page 48 of 62 FirstFirst ... 43464748495053 ... LastLast
Results 706 to 720 of 922

Thread: Powerplay is probably going open only - finally an amazing change

  1. #706
    Originally Posted by askavir View Post (Source)
    While I do understand your reasoning, I for some reason just don't see the PvPers rushing to powerplay ready to fill their FdLs with pamphlets and do endless A<->B runs.

    See the major issue with powerplay is not really the modes, is the endless repetition of basic gameplay loops (pretty much like the rest of the game but I digress). And to add insult to injury, even with expansions, retreats, etc, nothing of note ever actually happens, you can't tell the difference between being in fed or empire, or Hudson or Patreus or Antal space, everything stays exactly the same bar some miniscule changes to bounty bonuses or black markets.

    It's basically a grinding war that has no victories nor defeats. And adding even further insult, not only there is barely any reason to pledge and be loyal to a power, but the game actually encourages people to betray all the powers (to collect all the special modules).

    I say this with some degree of sorrow, because when powerplay was announced, I thought it would be the injection of "color" and life that the galaxy was surely missing. It was the update (aside from 2.0) I was (at time of announcement) the most looking forward to. But ultimately it's just another game within a game, with no connection with the other things, and ultimately a game that can't even be won or lost (a bit like combat zones, but I digress again) and that whatever you do nothing actually noticeable ever changes.

    Anyway, the perceived "excitement about powerplay" you're actually witnessing has nothing to do with powerplay itself, it's just about open scoring a "victory" over solo.

    And people who actually believe powerplay will be about epic battles or mostly combat are in for an hilarious surprise. It will go like:

    PvPer1 - So... who carries the pamphlets?..
    PvPer2 - Not me, I have no cargo space on my FdL.
    PvPer3 - What do you mean carry? The FSD on my FAS can't jump to another system! I thought powerplay was about shooting people!
    PvPer1 - Well lets stand guard, waiting for our enemies to deliver their pamphlets here.
    PvPer2 - Good idea, we'll get them... We'll get them good!
    (hours later...)
    PvPer1 - No one is delivering pamphlets here!
    PvPer2 - Damn carebears!
    PvPer1 - Let's go to another system and look for them!
    PvPer3 - But my FSD can't jump! And what's this malarkey about merits and preparations and pamphlets anyway? I thought powerplay was about shooting other players!
    PvPer2 - You stay here, and we'll go to their headquarters! We'll get them! We'll get them good!
    PvPer1 - Are you out of your mind? Their base is 34 jumps away on my uber hull tank Corvette!
    (...)

    After 2 weeks tops, they will have forgotten all about powerplay.
    An excellent summation of the PP situation. Which is why I find the forced Open idea to be terribly misguided. Instead of fixing PP to make it more interesting, it seems like Frontier rather just strong-arm people into playing it in Open as a way of bypassing the bland mechanics, thus reducing the entire PP experience into something that is little more than an ersatz CQC.

  2. #707
    Originally Posted by Cygnus X-1 View Post (Source)
    I completely agree. I'd be cool with solo players being able to contribute to PP in some way. I just don't want them to be able to participate in the exact same gameplay mechanics as open players because it removes any sense of competitiveness.
    Years ago I proposed Powerplay outcomes should be split (eg: 50/50) by the results from Open and non-Open. In that fashion OPEN and SOLO would both have a bearing on the outcome, but a measured/fair outcome.

    Alternatively:-

    Originally Posted by NeilF View Post (Source)
    I do wonder if a compromise might be to make certain PP task types/specific locations OPEN only? This would have two benefits?
    1) Obviously solo/group could still pretty much continue to play as currently.
    2) If all of Powerplay was OPEN only, I do fear with so many locations/systems/tasks that this would mean PvP would be hard to come by? But if it was instead reduced do a set of obvious key hot spots between Powers then CMDRs would be funneled into those and PvP would be more likely.

    And I'd still suggest there's the elephant instancing issue in the room that I've mentioned before? If Powerplay Squadrons X and Y are competing in a specific system, FD have already said members of X will be more likely to be preferentially instanced with other members of X. And likewise with Y. This could result in:-
    1) Most of X never seeing a Y, and vice versa.
    2) X appearing in stances typically completely outnumbered by Y, and vice versa.


    I'd still suggest to the only way to ensure actual balanced (Powerplay) PvP would be for the game to actually orchestrate it (via specific Squadron/Fleet Carrier meet ups). Eg: So a Wing of four from Squadron X fights a wing of four from Squadron Y. And let's not even consider the notion of also bringing CQC fighters into the mix so its four fighters vs four fighters to decide towards an outcome - https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...olved-gameplay

  3. #708
    Originally Posted by Sichz View Post (Source)
    Thank you FD! This is the best change that you have ever made. This is the best thing you could have done time encourage player interaction.

    THANK YOU!!!!
    This is precisely why I loathe the final change - it taps into a far greater and more devisive discourse in Elite - people who think how they play should be the way everyone plays. It just encourages the Open Vs. Solo mantra and is really unnecessary. I appreciate that Open players have felt fustrated by Solo activity in PP, but if all modes are equal, which they should be to defend against the debates on HOW you should play ED, you can't pick and choose.

    And no, you make it one mode only, I don't see a flood of people changing game-styles to inter-act with players in Open. They'll just go do something else in private groups or Solo. I think the boundaries of game-style WAY trump Powerplay.


    Originally Posted by Cobra1984 View Post (Source)
    I think we should remove solo players from the forum.

    If they don't want to engage or interact with other players in the game, why should they interact with other players on the forum?
    Again, a perfect example of the same issue. This is the scary issue with gaming now. There is a lack of understanding that gamers *and games* that aren't multi-player can STILL have communities. Solo players still chat, discuss, consider, and love a game together (sometimes with Open players). Again, just because their enjoyment doesn't involve playing each other, doesn't make their position less valuable. You can watch a football game without being on the field - you both love football. You can enjoy your Star Trek in your room, or with other fans, or at conventions. None of these "modes" is the "right" mode.

    I just hate seeing changes within the game that really feed into this notion of gaming value.

    Originally Posted by Urbanski101 View Post (Source)
    FDev have achieved something quite spectacular with this suggestion, turned a much maligned and largely forgotten feature into a mass brawl that goes way beyond the feature itself...quite the own goal and a tremendous waste of everyones time.
    Indeed. Stunning call. For the minor issues Solo can give Powerplay Openers, the game modes have to be radically unbalanced. I've always thought that invisible PP is quite realistic. If people in Solo can create minor effect, that's like life - this is meant to be a damn galaxy of inhabited systems - why should you be able to have total control over interactions? Is it not more realistic some power is invisible? I'm not saying that everyone should agree with that, but it's why I never saw the issue of Powerplay and Solo really about being the general effect on gameplay, more the ideological frustration there's a player out there you can't hit and is probably laughing about it. Which is a VERY annoying image, but that's my point, how much is it about affecting the game, and how much is it about not liking particular game-mode methods?

    And even if FDev promises this is the only time this will happen, well, they said the game would always be equal, so we've seen one slide there. With a lot of the new changes again being multi-player focused, I can see why Solo players are skeptical.

    As a caveat, I'm not a Powerplay player, nor do I sit in any specific game-mode. But I guess current attitudes would suggest that if you're not purely in Open and Powerplaying, shouldn't be part of the discourse - which is the worrying mirror to the policy change.

  4. #709
    Originally Posted by AbslomRob View Post (Source)
    Here's the problem with the suggesting that making Powerplay "open only" is segregating the different modes. People who play Powerplay in Solo >AREN'T< doing so with the expectation of it being a "Solo" activity. They doing so knowing full well that what they're doing is impacting the "open" community. But they're doing it in a way that prevents the open community from doing anything back to them. There's something fundamentally selfish and entitled in the attitude that this makes sense.

    There are lots of other things that you can't do in Solo...wing missions and PvP for example. No one complains about that 'cause it's kinda obvious. It should be equally obvious when it comes to Powerplay (and FDev's biggest mistake was not recognizing that in the first place).
    Actually, for the record, plenty of us have previously argued for NPC wingmates precisely to provide access to that gameplay for solo players, regardless of the mode they play in for that matter. And still do when the opportunity arises.

    You might also like to consider that a large proportion of PP players who do so in solo or private aren't magically going to switch to open to do so precisely because they're not actually interested in combat-based PvP or playing with jerks.

  5. #710
    Originally Posted by RooksBailey View Post (Source)
    An excellent summation of the PP situation. Which is why I find the forced Open idea to be terribly misguided. Instead of fixing PP to make it more interesting, it seems like Frontier rather just strong-arm people into playing it in Open as a way of bypassing the bland mechanics, thus reducing the entire PP experience into something that is little more than an ersatz CQC.
    Indeed. All that will happen is that some time afterwards we'll get a round of people complaining that even in open they still can't stop people who are in other instances, using other platforms or playing in different timezones.....better keep the popcorn handy.

  6. #711
    Originally Posted by Vedmo View Post (Source)
    I never said 'several hours,' nor did I originally say I it even took me the 'few hours' to make it up. I asked if in another game it takes 'a few' hours to recoup the cost of a death, as I believe a few hours to be a reasonable estimation for people in varied degrees of progress in ED. Don't worry though, your sharp wit is still harming my psyche.
    You implied it. Don't get mad at me because I can read between the lines.

    "Does getting killed in it cost a few hours worth of dedicated credit grind?"

  7. #712
    Originally Posted by Zelos View Post (Source)
    Obviously, PvPing in D-Rated T9s is not a very satisfying experience.
    So when you want to do PvP, the high-end Cutter comes in.

    If you just want to do PP, then the T9 might be viable. Although I use my Cutter as well, it's significantly faster, more maneuverable and - until recently - had a bigger payload.

    Still does I think if you got a class 5 shield modded to fit into the Cutter.

  8. #713
    Originally Posted by bigity View Post (Source)
    You implied it. Don't get mad at me because I can read between the lines.

    "Does getting killed in it cost a few hours worth of dedicated credit grind?"
    Vedmo makes the point that getting killed is costly in ED compared to other games. This basic statement stands up regardless of the skill level of the player.

    You are arguing a point Vedmo did not make bigity. Clearly being good at not getting killed, or being good at quickly earning rebuys back by whatever means are better than not being good at those things, this is self-evident.

  9. #714
    Originally Posted by Zelos View Post (Source)
    Obviously, PvPing in D-Rated T9s is not a very satisfying experience.
    So when you want to do PvP, the high-end Cutter comes in.

    If you just want to do PP, then the T9 might be viable. Although I use my Cutter as well, it's significantly faster, more maneuverable and - until recently - had a bigger payload.
    So those D-rated T9s should be forbidden from using in PvP activity. Or they will stay as efficiency standart if they will be left immune to PvP.

  10. #715
    Originally Posted by askavir View Post (Source)
    While I do understand your reasoning, I for some reason just don't see the PvPers rushing to powerplay ready to fill their FdLs with pamphlets and do endless A<->B runs.

    See the major issue with powerplay is not really the modes, is the endless repetition of basic gameplay loops (pretty much like the rest of the game but I digress). And to add insult to injury, even with expansions, retreats, etc, nothing of note ever actually happens, you can't tell the difference between being in fed or empire, or Hudson or Patreus or Antal space, everything stays exactly the same bar some miniscule changes to bounty bonuses or black markets.

    It's basically a grinding war that has no victories nor defeats. And adding even further insult, not only there is barely any reason to pledge and be loyal to a power, but the game actually encourages people to betray all the powers (to collect all the special modules).

    I say this with some degree of sorrow, because when powerplay was announced, I thought it would be the injection of "color" and life that the galaxy was surely missing. It was the update (aside from 2.0) I was (at time of announcement) the most looking forward to. But ultimately it's just another game within a game, with no connection with the other things, and ultimately a game that can't even be won or lost (a bit like combat zones, but I digress again) and that whatever you do nothing actually noticeable ever changes.

    Anyway, the perceived "excitement about powerplay" you're actually witnessing has nothing to do with powerplay itself, it's just about open scoring a "victory" over solo.

    And people who actually believe powerplay will be about epic battles or mostly combat are in for an hilarious surprise. It will go like:

    PvPer1 - So... who carries the pamphlets?..
    PvPer2 - Not me, I have no cargo space on my FdL.
    PvPer3 - What do you mean carry? The FSD on my FAS can't jump to another system! I thought powerplay was about shooting people!
    PvPer1 - Well lets stand guard, waiting for our enemies to deliver their pamphlets here.
    PvPer2 - Good idea, we'll get them... We'll get them good!
    (hours later...)
    PvPer1 - No one is delivering pamphlets here!
    PvPer2 - Damn carebears!
    PvPer1 - Let's go to another system and look for them!
    PvPer3 - But my FSD can't jump! And what's this malarkey about merits and preparations and pamphlets anyway? I thought powerplay was about shooting other players!
    PvPer2 - You stay here, and we'll go to their headquarters! We'll get them! We'll get them good!
    PvPer1 - Are you out of your mind? Their base is 34 jumps away on my uber hull tank Corvette!
    (...)

    After 2 weeks tops, they will have forgotten all about powerplay.

    Anyway I have no personal stake in this, I already play in open and donęt do any powerplay for the reasons I mentioned, I'm just waiting for the inevitable popcorn.
    LMAO, exactly. This is actually a pretty terrible rework, because it's sounds like a complete marketing decision:
    "Hey, we don't have the resources to actually rework Powerplay, so let's give them something that takes us the minimum effort to implement that pleases the vocal part of the crowd."

    I really don't care for PP, never have, because to me the whole backstory is bland and boring, but these proposed changes will not make this feature more popular, as in, if you don't care about open, you won't go into open just for PP.
    It just removes a part of the PP players that took part in it in solo, which makes a underused feature actually less used in the end.

    I'm just gonna sit back and join with the popcorn.

  11. #716
    Originally Posted by NeilF View Post (Source)
    Years ago I proposed Powerplay outcomes should be split (eg: 50/50) by the results from Open and non-Open. In that fashion OPEN and SOLO would both have a bearing on the outcome, but a measured/fair outcome.

    Alternatively:-
    The concern there is that if doing those easier 50% of activity would be enough and as fast in terms of personal progression, whole powerplay will just become stagnant, with people actually doing stuff only when all bonuses are unlocked through PvE.

  12. #717
    Originally Posted by CMDR EDGEL0RD View Post (Source)
    The concern there is that if doing those easier 50% of activity would be enough and as fast in terms of personal progression, whole powerplay will just become stagnant, with people actually doing stuff only when all bonuses are unlocked through PvE.
    Fair call... But let's not forget that "easier activity" probably accounts for well well over 50% of the outcome at the moment? So it would be an improvement on that front.

    It also means, if most people chose non-Open gameplay, it means a minority of people in Open (PvP) each has far more of an affect on the outcome (compared to folks in non-Open).

  13. #718
    Originally Posted by NeilF View Post (Source)
    Fair call... But let's not forget that "easier activity" probably accounts for well well over 50% of the outcome at the moment? So it would be an improvement on that front.

    It also means, if most people chose non-Open gameplay, it means a minority of people in Open (PvP) each has far more of an affect on the outcome (compared to folks in non-Open).
    I meant that those halves should be non-interchangeable.

    In order for PvP mean anything at all with such split, PvP actions should either have desiding role, same as PvE ones, or yield overwhelmingly more result. I am talking figures of 800 merits per PvP kill with the latter (and every other action done in Open balanced with about same scale). And without such actions, PvP would stay irrelevant for actual moving of PP, because easier and safer PvE way would be more effective.

  14. #719
    Originally Posted by CMDR EDGEL0RD View Post (Source)
    I meant that those halves should be non-interchangeable.

    In order for PvP mean anything at all with such split, PvP actions should either have desiding role, same as PvE ones, or yield overwhelmingly more result. I am talking figures of 800 merits per PvP kill with the latter (and every other action done in Open balanced with about same scale). And without such actions, PvP would stay irrelevant for actual moving of PP, because easier and safer PvE way would be more effective.
    So - given my noddy understanding - would an alternative/better approach not be to make some appropriate tasks/locations PvP (OPEN) only between Powers? And the rest remain as currently?

    Wouldn't the risk of making it all OPEN only mean so many tasks/locations that PvP gets watered down and becomes unlikely? If it's at only 4-5 potential locations in a given week, then bingo bango!

  15. #720
    Originally Posted by NeilF View Post (Source)
    So - given my noddy understanding - would an alternative/better approach not be to make some appropriate tasks/locations PvP (OPEN) only between Powers? And the rest remain as currently?

    Wouldn't the risk of making it all OPEN only mean so many tasks/locations that PvP gets watered down and becomes unlikely? If it's at only 4-5 potential locations in a given week, then bingo bango!
    Well, systems have CC income values. So it would not be watered down.

    My point is, any attempt to actually balance PvP and PvE at status quo balance in ED, PvP would require either to yield overwhelmingly more returns, or be made necessary for PP advancement. And PvP should still have some unreacheable by PvE unlockables (new ones, sort of bonuses).

    And without any of those actions, PP would continue to be a Farmville competition.

    Or just made Open only. Without resorting to adding easily exploitable features.

Page 48 of 62 FirstFirst ... 43464748495053 ... LastLast