Page 93 of 138 FirstFirst ... 88919293949598 ... LastLast
Results 1,381 to 1,395 of 2065

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: (info) First bonus for playing in OPEN under consideration for PP

  1. #1381
    Originally Posted by Boomer Kay View Post (Source)
    Well, I was wrong - the 0% shows up because the system is in turmoil and is supposed to represent "no data". The fortification is already completed according to 3rd party sites.
    Maybe a "no data" on the galaxy map would be a bit clearer.
    Turmoil is bugged but if you're logged in a while it should (sometimes) should the right data...

    Oh and the top turmoil system in the list for Aisling Duval was sitting at 0 when I was last there..

  2. #1382
    Originally Posted by Robert Maynard View Post (Source)
    Hazard becomes risk when probability of occurrence is taken into consideration: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hazard_(risk)#Hazard_vs_risk

    In the multi-player game modes there is an additional hazard of being attacked / destroyed by a player. For that to be considered to be an increased risk, the probability of occurrence needs to be determined.
    This distinction is only done for risk assessment, and guess what if you know and understand the Elite mechanics and if you know what a dedicated PK and griefe ris you know exactly that riks= hazard. because you know which ships are able to take you down and which not. There is no "exposure" in the terms of the given equation the Wiki page gives. Because Exposurer here is 100% if you ae close to this kind of opponent and the hazard just equals the risk. if ushc a player is able to get you he will, if he isn't he won't. It is actually that simple unless someone makes a total derp style maneuver.

  3. #1383
    Originally Posted by Murgle View Post (Source)
    Turmoil is bugged but if you're logged in a while it should (sometimes) should the right data...
    Ok, add that to the list of
    - bandwidth monitoring
    - network "optimization"
    - jumprange "optimization"
    - shield and weapon "optimization"
    - teleporting out of a station "optimization"

    and probably half a dozen more mechanics used by players to "optimize" their risk vs. reward, that make open such an inviting, gentlemanly environment to share with fellow players.
    (sad but true, that's the junk you stumble upon while looking for useful information on reddit)

  4. Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #1384
    Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous Frontier Employee
    Hello Commanders!

    Lots of lively debate here, for sure, but let's keep things civil, please. I understand that this is an emotive subject, but remember, that's never an excuse for being rude.

    So, just to let you folk know a little more of the reasoning behind the concept of an Open Play bonus, I thought I'd pop this out.

    Elite Dangerous is a game where you can just as easily play solo, in groups or as part of a nation, as it were.

    In general, there aren't mechanical befits within the game to push you towards one style of play over another.

    However, there are a few aspects of the game that are specifically aimed at utilising the fact that the game has multiplayer facets, one of these is Powerplay.

    Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

    In addition, Powerplay has rules to handle direct Commander-Commander confrontation. Indeed, this is the core conceit: the system encourages justifiable piracy and homicide for a higher purpose. Itís my belief that Powerplay will always be at its best when opposing Commanders interact directly, whether in an expansion conflict zone or through interdiction.

    So it feels natural (to me) to look at ways to encourage Commanders to use Open Play. However, Itís also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.

    Now we have to consider probabilities. Yes, itís perfectly reasonable to say that you might never run into a human opponent in a control system, even playing in open. The fact remains however, that you *might* instead run into several. And this is on top of the standard NPC threat, which is identical in all play modes.

    Whatís more, the more pledged Commanders that play in Open, the greater the likelihood there is of human interaction and conflict.

    There are thousands of Commanders that engage to some degree or another in Powerplay. Some play in Open, some donít. If we are successful in getting more Commanders into Open, then the potential for them bumping into each other could increase rather significantly.

    And thereís another point to make here, thatís quite simple but also fairly undeniable, is that playing in Open you donít just meet other Commanders pledged to Powers. You meet *all* other Commanders. That includes all sorts of scum and villainy (character persona only, of course).

    So what would an Open Play Success bonus actually achieve? The idea is that itís a reward for taking the additional risk, whether the risk actually manifests or not.

    If you care about Powerplay, and care that you power does well in it, then playing in Open is a ďforce multiplierĒ for your Powerís strength.

    If you generally play in a Private Group or in Solo, itís also a gamble, because in addition to all the NPC challenges you have the possibility of opposing Commanders engaging you.

    If you already play in Open then you could treat this bonus as a reward for working with the game to make it the best it can be for all involved.

    As to the size of the bonus, well, thatís up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but Iím not too worried about the details of that at the moment, Iím more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.

    Of course, itís equally important to remember that this is, at the moment, just being raised as an idea, nothing more. Everyoneís opinion is equally valid, even in disagreement, and all feedback is useful.

  5. #1385
    Has there ever been any thought about allowing changes between the various modes to be made only when docked and empty of cargo?
    .
    maybe to go along with the thoughts above?
    .

  6. #1386
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    Lots of lively debate here, for sure, but let's keep things civil, please. I understand that this is an emotive subject, but remember, that's never an excuse for being rude.

    So, just to let you folk know a little more of the reasoning behind the concept of an Open Play bonus, I thought I'd pop this out.

    Elite Dangerous is a game where you can just as easily play solo, in groups or as part of a nation, as it were.

    In general, there aren't mechanical befits within the game to push you towards one style of play over another.

    However, there are a few aspects of the game that are specifically aimed at utilising the fact that the game has multiplayer facets, one of these is Powerplay.

    Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

    In addition, Powerplay has rules to handle direct Commander-Commander confrontation. Indeed, this is the core conceit: the system encourages justifiable piracy and homicide for a higher purpose. It’s my belief that Powerplay will always be at its best when opposing Commanders interact directly, whether in an expansion conflict zone or through interdiction.

    So it feels natural (to me) to look at ways to encourage Commanders to use Open Play. However, It’s also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.

    Now we have to consider probabilities. Yes, it’s perfectly reasonable to say that you might never run into a human opponent in a control system, even playing in open. The fact remains however, that you *might* instead run into several. And this is on top of the standard NPC threat, which is identical in all play modes.

    What’s more, the more pledged Commanders that play in Open, the greater the likelihood there is of human interaction and conflict.

    There are thousands of Commanders that engage to some degree or another in Powerplay. Some play in Open, some don’t. If we are successful in getting more Commanders into Open, then the potential for them bumping into each other could increase rather significantly.

    And there’s another point to make here, that’s quite simple but also fairly undeniable, is that playing in Open you don’t just meet other Commanders pledged to Powers. You meet *all* other Commanders. That includes all sorts of scum and villainy (character persona only, of course).

    So what would an Open Play Success bonus actually achieve? The idea is that it’s a reward for taking the additional risk, whether the risk actually manifests or not.

    If you care about Powerplay, and care that you power does well in it, then playing in Open is a “force multiplier” for your Power’s strength.

    If you generally play in a Private Group or in Solo, it’s also a gamble, because in addition to all the NPC challenges you have the possibility of opposing Commanders engaging you.

    If you already play in Open then you could treat this bonus as a reward for working with the game to make it the best it can be for all involved.

    As to the size of the bonus, well, that’s up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but I’m not too worried about the details of that at the moment, I’m more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.

    Of course, it’s equally important to remember that this is, at the moment, just being raised as an idea, nothing more. Everyone’s opinion is equally valid, even in disagreement, and all feedback is useful.

    Thanks for your comments Sandro. It's always great to see some elaboration and clarification from the Dev team.

    I recently made a lengthy reply to your initial thread in the power-play section now that I have formed an opinion and slept on it.


    While I agree with pretty much all of the above:

    "PP is better in open."
    "PP is meant to encourage PvP action"
    and so on.

    I agree with the direction you're going here, but I do feel that it is important to keep the groups "equal" in doing so. IMO, buffing the effect that one mode has on the BGS over others is making them unequal, and that is something I would handle very carefully here, considering FD's promise of "Three equal modes."

    I think what ever change is made to the PP mechanics needs to respect that promise. I'm not sure this proposed change does that.

  7. #1387
    I completely agree with the "Equality through different Treatment" concept.

    The matter of fact is that the 3 modes are not equal between them, no matter how much the masses bark. The developers have the final consideration about where, when and how to adjust the inequalities.

  8. #1388
    Originally Posted by Jesse Blue View Post (Source)
    I completely agree with the "Equality through different Treatment" concept.

    The matter of fact is that the 3 modes are not equal between them, no matter how much the masses bark. The developers have the final consideration about where, when and how to adjust the inequalities.
    That is not equality. Equality requires everything to be treated equally regardless of output/effect/mitigating factors. Everyone gets one box. The results that come from that equal treatment are inequitable.

    Treating the modes differently to create equitable output between them is treating them unequally.

  9. #1389
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    Lots of lively debate here, for sure, but let's keep things civil, please. I understand that this is an emotive subject, but remember, that's never an excuse for being rude.

    So, just to let you folk know a little more of the reasoning behind the concept of an Open Play bonus, I thought I'd pop this out.

    Elite Dangerous is a game where you can just as easily play solo, in groups or as part of a nation, as it were.

    In general, there aren't mechanical befits within the game to push you towards one style of play over another.

    However, there are a few aspects of the game that are specifically aimed at utilising the fact that the game has multiplayer facets, one of these is Powerplay.

    Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

    In addition, Powerplay has rules to handle direct Commander-Commander confrontation. Indeed, this is the core conceit: the system encourages justifiable piracy and homicide for a higher purpose. Itís my belief that Powerplay will always be at its best when opposing Commanders interact directly, whether in an expansion conflict zone or through interdiction.

    So it feels natural (to me) to look at ways to encourage Commanders to use Open Play. However, Itís also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.

    Now we have to consider probabilities. Yes, itís perfectly reasonable to say that you might never run into a human opponent in a control system, even playing in open. The fact remains however, that you *might* instead run into several. And this is on top of the standard NPC threat, which is identical in all play modes.

    Whatís more, the more pledged Commanders that play in Open, the greater the likelihood there is of human interaction and conflict.

    There are thousands of Commanders that engage to some degree or another in Powerplay. Some play in Open, some donít. If we are successful in getting more Commanders into Open, then the potential for them bumping into each other could increase rather significantly.

    And thereís another point to make here, thatís quite simple but also fairly undeniable, is that playing in Open you donít just meet other Commanders pledged to Powers. You meet *all* other Commanders. That includes all sorts of scum and villainy (character persona only, of course).

    So what would an Open Play Success bonus actually achieve? The idea is that itís a reward for taking the additional risk, whether the risk actually manifests or not.

    If you care about Powerplay, and care that you power does well in it, then playing in Open is a ďforce multiplierĒ for your Powerís strength.

    If you generally play in a Private Group or in Solo, itís also a gamble, because in addition to all the NPC challenges you have the possibility of opposing Commanders engaging you.

    If you already play in Open then you could treat this bonus as a reward for working with the game to make it the best it can be for all involved.

    As to the size of the bonus, well, thatís up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but Iím not too worried about the details of that at the moment, Iím more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.


    Of course, itís equally important to remember that this is, at the moment, just being raised as an idea, nothing more. Everyoneís opinion is equally valid, even in disagreement, and all feedback is useful.
    Alrighty, so Open gets the love they wanted, can Solo, and by extension everyone else, be next on the list Sandro?

    Specifically, NPC wingmates for hire, and NPC crew in 2.3?

  10. #1390
    Originally Posted by GilliganTX View Post (Source)
    That is not equality. Equality requires everything to be treated equally regardless of output/effect/mitigating factors. Everyone gets one box. The results that come from that equal treatment are inequitable.

    Treating the modes differently to create equitable output between them is treating them unequally.
    So according to you, everyone have to pay the same taxes?

    1000$ of taxes! What, you are without job and with three babies? That's not my problem! Everyone is the same, everyone pays the same! Look at that billionarie! See? he pays his 1000$ without complaining! Equality man!

    Sorry but, "Equality through different treatment" exists precisely because outputs/effects/mitigating factors DO matter. That's why lots of people don't pay taxes at all.

  11. #1391
    Originally Posted by Boomer Kay View Post (Source)
    The analysis of the data I have access to (and have shared with y'all, so you can doublecheck and correct me)
    If it's the HIP 95... example that you posted a little back, I have bad news for you, systems in turmoil don't show the amount of fortification/undermining (it's a bug).

  12. #1392
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    However, It’s also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.
    This is what a lot of people forget/ignore when entering a Open vs Solo discussion.

  13. #1393
    Originally Posted by Jesse Blue View Post (Source)
    So according to you, everyone have to pay the same taxes?

    1000$ of taxes! What, you are without job and with three babies? That's not my problem! Everyone is the same, everyone pays the same! Look at that billionarie! See? he pays his 1000$ without complaining! Equality man!

    Sorry but, "Equality through different treatment" exists precisely because outputs/effects/mitigating factors DO matter. That's why lots of people don't pay taxes at all.
    What are you talking about? What does this have to do with taxation IRL?

    This is about the Dev team treating one game mode differently than the other two. It is about the Dev team treating one game mode unequally. That breaks a long standing promise they have made to many players.

    Read my past comments in the thread. Equality is not intrinsically good or bad. The fact that all game modes are equal creates inequitable results, and that's bad.


    Equality through different treatment is not equality, it is equity. Treating two things differently means treating them unequally. Definitively.

  14. #1394
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    Hello Commanders!

    Lots of lively debate here, for sure, but let's keep things civil, please. I understand that this is an emotive subject, but remember, that's never an excuse for being rude.

    So, just to let you folk know a little more of the reasoning behind the concept of an Open Play bonus, I thought I'd pop this out.

    Elite Dangerous is a game where you can just as easily play solo, in groups or as part of a nation, as it were.

    In general, there aren't mechanical befits within the game to push you towards one style of play over another.

    However, there are a few aspects of the game that are specifically aimed at utilising the fact that the game has multiplayer facets, one of these is Powerplay.

    Powerplay is unique in that it explicitly *enforces* adversarial multiplayer by making Commanders choose sides. You are no longer fighting against the vagaries of the galaxy; you are competing directly with Commanders pledged to opposing powers.

    In addition, Powerplay has rules to handle direct Commander-Commander confrontation. Indeed, this is the core conceit: the system encourages justifiable piracy and homicide for a higher purpose. It’s my belief that Powerplay will always be at its best when opposing Commanders interact directly, whether in an expansion conflict zone or through interdiction.

    So it feels natural (to me) to look at ways to encourage Commanders to use Open Play. However, It’s also fairly clear that human opposition is potentially, and generally speaking, much more of a significant threat than NPCs.

    Now we have to consider probabilities. Yes, it’s perfectly reasonable to say that you might never run into a human opponent in a control system, even playing in open. The fact remains however, that you *might* instead run into several. And this is on top of the standard NPC threat, which is identical in all play modes.

    What’s more, the more pledged Commanders that play in Open, the greater the likelihood there is of human interaction and conflict.

    There are thousands of Commanders that engage to some degree or another in Powerplay. Some play in Open, some don’t. If we are successful in getting more Commanders into Open, then the potential for them bumping into each other could increase rather significantly.

    And there’s another point to make here, that’s quite simple but also fairly undeniable, is that playing in Open you don’t just meet other Commanders pledged to Powers. You meet *all* other Commanders. That includes all sorts of scum and villainy (character persona only, of course).

    So what would an Open Play Success bonus actually achieve? The idea is that it’s a reward for taking the additional risk, whether the risk actually manifests or not.

    If you care about Powerplay, and care that you power does well in it, then playing in Open is a “force multiplier” for your Power’s strength.

    If you generally play in a Private Group or in Solo, it’s also a gamble, because in addition to all the NPC challenges you have the possibility of opposing Commanders engaging you.

    If you already play in Open then you could treat this bonus as a reward for working with the game to make it the best it can be for all involved.

    As to the size of the bonus, well, that’s up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but I’m not too worried about the details of that at the moment, I’m more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.

    Of course, it’s equally important to remember that this is, at the moment, just being raised as an idea, nothing more. Everyone’s opinion is equally valid, even in disagreement, and all feedback is useful.
    I love this idea. Thank you for the added clarification, Sandro!

  15. #1395
    Originally Posted by Sandro Sammarco View Post (Source)
    As to the size of the bonus, well, that’s up for grabs. Clearly it would have to be reasonably large to have the potential to cause significant change, but I’m not too worried about the details of that at the moment, I’m more interested in what folk make of the concept in general.
    V E R Y slippery slope you're plunging headlong towards here.

Page 93 of 138 FirstFirst ... 88919293949598 ... LastLast