Combat Pilots Unite! FDEV Listen Please!

[Sworecc]

I'd like to comment about the recent updates speaking on behalf of the old school combat/pvp crowd. As a combat focused pilot I have placed this game on the shelf for the better part of 2 years now. More specifically, as an Open Play PVP pilot...I feel in the current minority...although this wasn't always true. I was one of the last of my online friends to let go of the game. I used to sit in Xbox parties of 20+ people (Prismatic Knights 4-ever!), fighting other clans using the BGS systems, protecting our control systems, or attacking theirs. I met lifelong friends, who have transformed into IRL relationships through this game. ED was my first true gaming love due to the online community...but subsequently, it has become my largest gaming disappointment. These players are all moved on, no posts on the forums, no public opining...just gone! Moved on to other games. BGS and Powerplay have largely been unrewarding for their players. I love the systems, they are complex, yet fun... but they just don't hold long term attention or incentivize the MMO aspects of the game. This game sits on the precipice of becoming a truly great interactive space sim/MMO. This game could be a "Ready Player 1 - Oasis" level. I'm super excited and hopeful seeing FDev make some of these recent changes. I've re-downloaded the game... and have spent roughly 100 hours since their announcement trying to renew my Player Minor Faction in game!

Here is my Plea!

FDev, please re-engage your MMO community! PP-2.0, if implemented correctly, could set this game apart, and bring back droves of players, ready to duke it out galaxy wide, in the name and honor of their "Clan". You need to reward your players time. We either need higher wages for PP-2.0 or we need reduced input time. Currently Rating 5 takes 40+ hours per week, using the traditional....boring as insert chosen explicative transport....and I get 50 mil... that's an affront to my IRL time, that's a legit full time job. I can make more than that in an hour of mining. Let me fight other players/npc's for merits, however that system manifests, and let me feel like I've accomplished something. I know there are combat options available right now... but they are broken... If you want me to fight my way to Rating 5 in the current system, you can probably expect 80+ hours of searching, chasing, interdicting, running from system authorities, travelling, repairing...blah blah blah… sorry to say, but its not good. And good luck finding an expansion system, for the special CZ's, that's conducive. I'm sure there's ways to streamline this, and I'm sure someone out there is going to retort "Me and my crew can do it in 5 hours" or something... but these are outliers (or the Elite's lol). Kudo's to you. But the masses (which are needed to financially support games) just won't or can't accomplish this in a reasonable time.

As for the promised "New Feature"... I'm really hoping this has something to do with base building...whatever it is though, in the effort of community engagement, we need a trickle revenue stream. We put all this time and effort into our PMF's, or Carrier Ships, or possibly future bases. Reward that time by allowing it to make us resources of some kind. The amount needs to be tied to our activity, higher rates for more time in game, the revenue degrades if its inactive. And it needs to be interactive. By that, I mean we need it to be able to be affected (even if only partially) by rival or allied factions. Tie it to the systems BGS, allow it to be attacked or fortified. Give us something to fight for, a potential empire to build, let us build a starport.

This game is so much more than beating up Thargoids, or mindlessly jumping systems for exploration purposes... I think these game loops are important, and they should be well rewarded. They aren't my "cup of tea", but I'm not saying remove them, in fact they should be more rewarding than they are currently. I want so bad for this game to turn a corner. I don't think I'm alone in saying, we need more community engagement, yes this means combat and conflict, but this is a good thing for the games longevity. It will also encourage the other aspects of the game.

I will pay a subscription for a great game, I will buy DLC, I won't pay for cosmetics, but I will work to earn them in game. I'm not a CFO, and I'm not giving FDev monetary advice...just letting them know what this player will do for them. I will not mindlessly give them my time or money for no reward, and in that I don't think I'm alone.

If you are like me and want to see more Community based play, PLEASE bump this, share this, reply to this. Lets light a fire and bring ED to life!

 

[HappyMoonMonkey]

I basically agree with you that powerplay 1.0 is terrible and needs reform and that's what we're getting with powerplay 2.0. I have my fingers crossed and hope it truly brings you and your friends back to the game.

But I'm also an Elite and spreadsheet nerd and it will take you 5.13 hours to get 10,000 merits from scratch and 2.13 hours to maintain rank 5 each week from there assuming gaining merits from hauling.

 

[GroG79]

Fly Shieldless!

 

[AEBRAM]

I would like to apologize in advance for a walk down MMO history. Ultima Online was released in 1997 that allowed player vs. player killing. Repeated offenses would flag you, as “Red,” and the only penalty for being “Red” then was the exclusion to cities e.g. guarded areas and players could type “guards” and auto-kill the “Red” player when he trespassed into guarded areas. The player vs. player killing sprees in three years of the game’s release caused outrage by the non-player vs. player players. On May 4, 2000, the Ultima Online developers released the Renaissance expansion that segregated the non-PVP and PVP populations when Felucca and Trammel was created: Basically, mirrors of the same land mass, where Felucca allowed player vs. player killing and Trammel was only consensual. Electronic Arts developers did not have a comprehensive plan to address the player vs. player killing sprees than creating two mirror shards of the same Ultima Online world.

Fast forward in time to Elite Dangerous and the exact identical player vs. player killing sprees and non-player vs. player grievances except the non-player vs. player players do have the default choice to NOT participating in non-consensual combat in the Open server. The Private Group and Solo servers are the equivalence to Felucca and Trammel. When Frontier developers accepted the multi-server solution over unifying the Elite players into one server than Elite was “doomed to fail.” The speculation on whether the game would receive any developer’s attention was concerning for the Elite fans.

Update 18, 19 and the changes to Power Play could be the constructive framework for player vs. player killing within the scope of the galactic power struggles for faction control.

For example,

- Declaring “Loyalty” to one Power Play faction leader open the door to consensual player vs. player.

- The PP controlled borders to other PP faction leaders defines PP rivals.

- Players who have declared “Loyalty” to the PP rival are consensual targets for player vs. players activities.

- Players who engage in Controlling and Expansion activities are consensual targets for player vs. player activities. These activities are equally important under the suggested PP framework that expands the PP controlled systems, and by association, shifting the PP faction borders and potential PP rivals: the whole push and pull dynamics for control of the Bubble.

- Squadrons by default are “unaligned” to any PP faction. However, any squadron that declares “Loyalty” to one of the PP leaders than flags the entire squadron for consensual PP player vs. player activities.

- Player vs. player system restrictions could be bound where player vs. player activities can only be engaged in their own PP controlled systems or the bordering PP faction systems.

The purpose of the system restriction rule is to encourage players to participate in the Controlling and Expansion activities of the Power Play. The Elite AI system that calculates squadron control of systems compliments PP where players can open up "pocket" systems for PP rivals to challenge over control and influence PP faction-controlled systems, in addition, to the PP controlling and expansion push and pull mini-game.

On a high overview, the Power Play could be the consensual framework needed that defines and distinguishes the difference between consensual and non-consensual player vs. player activities without player segregation. Players that do not declare “Loyalty” to any PP faction or squadrons who remain “unaligned” are "by default" not participants or targets to any player vs. player interdictions, attacks, or gank killing sprees. The conceptual framework here would allow player to decide to be consensual or opt out anytime except with the "Hunted" penalty similar to switching PP "Loyalty."

 

[Rebel Yell]

- Declaring “Loyalty” to one Power Play faction leader open the door to consensual player vs. player.

That's already in the game, there's no need for "consent"... it's the game itself that marks other players as ENEMY.

- The PP controlled borders to other PP faction leaders defines PP rivals.

All powers should be in rivalry, this "feature" has been dramatically dampened by some power-players' groups at the expense of other powers (who became puppets).

- Players who have declared “Loyalty” to the PP rival are consensual targets for player vs. players activities.

See above.

- Players who engage in Controlling and Expansion activities are consensual targets for player vs. player activities. These activities are equally important under the suggested PP framework that expands the PP controlled systems, and by association, shifting the PP faction borders and potential PP rivals: the whole push and pull dynamics for control of the Bubble.

Enemies are enemies, even if they're takin a pee at the station > 24/7 legit target.

- Squadrons by default are “unaligned” to any PP faction. However, any squadron that declares “Loyalty” to one of the PP leaders than flags the entire squadron for consensual PP player vs. player activities.

Game doesn't mark a pledged squadron as ENEMY, as this is player-based (on game UI) but ofc sq. tags can be checked in game and all players belonging to that squadron may be tagged as ENEMY even if the game-UI doesn't say it. I mean, we're already doing that...

- Player vs. player system restrictions could be bound where player vs. player activities can only be engaged in their own PP controlled systems or the bordering PP faction systems.

Nope, that would be a strong constrain (not considering powerplay happens quite substantially outside controlled systems).

The purpose of the system restriction rule is to encourage players to participate in the Controlling and Expansion activities of the Power Play. The Elite AI system that calculates squadron control of systems compliments PP where players can open up "pocket" systems for PP rivals to challenge over control and influence PP faction-controlled systems, in addition, to the PP controlling and expansion push and pull mini-game.

On a high overview, the Power Play could be the consensual framework needed that defines and distinguishes the difference between consensual and non-consensual player vs. player activities without player segregation. Players that do not declare “Loyalty” to any PP faction or squadrons who remain “unaligned” are "by default" not participants or targets to any player vs. player interdictions, attacks, or gank killing sprees. The conceptual framework here would allow player to decide to be consensual or opt out anytime except with the "Hunted" penalty similar to switching PP "Loyalty."

The current environment doesn't allow for such bucketing: an unaligned player may damage a power with BGS, as even other aligned players can do (5C). These are just a couple of examples where PvP activity within powerplay is tied to a high level of subjectivity... personally I hope that the new framework will be more dynamic and way less centralized, that will pave way to rivalry between mutliple player groups and possibly bring back to the scene the broken/puppet powers.

 

[Northpin]

Currently Rating 5 takes 40+ hours per week, using the traditional.

I basically stopped reading after this.

Simply because it takes 14 Cutter (shielded) runs to get to 10000 merits, which makes it for like 3-4 hours tops, and half of that to maintain the rank
That should be doable in a single game session.