For me this should be in the form of 123 bonuses like before (as in the 1/2/3 powers gain some extra bonus) and that other powers have bounty bonuses for attacking the top 3 (maybe scaling down as you go down the ranking).
Though with the differences in scale it'd likely have the similar problem as PP1 - if you're 9th you're not going to get to be 3rd with any plausible effort, not least because you have a fraction of the players so even if you did get to be 3rd you'd never hold it - and even the gap between 4th and 3rd is very substantial in terms of number of systems needed.
 
Though with the differences in scale it'd likely have the similar problem as PP1 - if you're 9th you're not going to get to be 3rd with any plausible effort, not least because you have a fraction of the players so even if you did get to be 3rd you'd never hold it - and even the gap between 4th and 3rd is very substantial in terms of number of systems needed.
True, but at the same time its breaking power blocs up and at least establishing mercenary reasons to attack others (so at least random players have incentives guiding them).

And thats the problem with Powerplay 2, unlike with 1 where you really could (in theory) loose a ton of territory quickly you can't do that in PP2.

Saying that you could go the other way and simply do away with the galactic standing altogether, since it has no real value. Go this route and every battle becomes local and probably fits the brief better.
 
As a minimum set of fixes
- undermining would need to be at least as easy to do "while doing other things entirely" as reinforcement (so bounties, high-value trades, exploration data and ship scans at the very least need to start counting as undermining actions too, and rares if they ever re-enable them)
- System Strength Penalty should be stepped down a level (so "Moderate" is the one where undermining and reinforcement are even, while "Standard" lets undermining happen faster than reinforcement for the same action, so undermining becomes the meta-grind location for ranking up)
- probably introduce some sort of strategic bonus to make undermining a faster way to gain systems (undermine an exploited system, it instantly switches to you if it's in range; undermine a fortified system that's not supported by anything else and it also instantly switches to you and takes all its sole-supported exploited systems with it) so that it's not just passing traffic doing the work
Excluding the specifc powers' perks, which are ofc related to some variables, the main source of undermining should be (as it used to be) combat.

But, point is it was already a dumb nav beacon roaming in PP1 against braindead NPCs, in PP2 is even dumber.

Not only dumber is even worse due to the random punitive spawning [we don't even know if it is a bug to have often other-than-controlling powerplay ships spawning] and the super lobotomized PP2 NPCs (unless one wins the lottery and drops in a Powerplay Distress POI, where eight Elite overpowered 'Condas are there protecting a couple of wings of PP haulers).

PP2 POIs are not a bad idea, but are badly implemented because they are also random, require travelling time in SC and the spawn is not "guaranteed".

That still feels too large a set of fixes with a substantial amount of balance monitoring needed and inevitable complaints from whichever set of powers felt disadvantaged that month; it'd probably be simpler (and more popular?) to remove undermining as a player action entirely (this is a peaceful competition for peaceful turtles) and just drain all systems by N merits a week passively so that reinforcement still has a purpose.

A sort of decay for CPs... well, that would remove "hostility" and trust me reinforcements could be as well as unpopular :D :D :D
 
It would have been entirely sufficient, I think, if they'd not made undermining so deliberate and unrewarding on a personal level.

Consider the CG a few weeks back at an LYR system. Lots of people passing through the system and doing stuff, lots of them pledged, can probably assume 90%+ plus not pledged to LYR. Result: the system gets instantly reinforced all the way to Stronghold with barely any undermining points filed at all.

As a minimum set of fixes
- undermining would need to be at least as easy to do "while doing other things entirely" as reinforcement (so bounties, high-value trades, exploration data and ship scans at the very least need to start counting as undermining actions too, and rares if they ever re-enable them)
- System Strength Penalty should be stepped down a level (so "Moderate" is the one where undermining and reinforcement are even, while "Standard" lets undermining happen faster than reinforcement for the same action, so undermining becomes the meta-grind location for ranking up)
- probably introduce some sort of strategic bonus to make undermining a faster way to gain systems (undermine an exploited system, it instantly switches to you if it's in range; undermine a fortified system that's not supported by anything else and it also instantly switches to you and takes all its sole-supported exploited systems with it) so that it's not just passing traffic doing the work

That still feels too large a set of fixes with a substantial amount of balance monitoring needed and inevitable complaints from whichever set of powers felt disadvantaged that month; it'd probably be simpler (and more popular?) to remove undermining as a player action entirely (this is a peaceful competition for peaceful turtles) and just drain all systems by N merits a week passively so that reinforcement still has a purpose.
One of the core issues right now is that the balance is completely off. Certain powers have abilities that allow them to undermine extremely effectively due to their bonuses, while others are more focused on reinforcement or acquisition. On top of that, game-external alliances further distort the playing field. As a result, some powers—like Aisling—experience very little conflict, while others are under near-constant attack.

I've been tracking power activity and generating preliminary heatmaps since January. Aisling remains consistently cold. In contrast, Patreus and Torval face significantly more aggression relative to the amount of space they hold. This constant pressure makes it unlikely that they’ll grow meaningfully in the current system, especially since they often act as a buffer, absorbing attacks that might otherwise target Aisling or the Empress.
 
One of the core issues right now is that the balance is completely off. Certain powers have abilities that allow them to undermine extremely effectively due to their bonuses, while others are more focused on reinforcement or acquisition.
True, though even the ones who could undermine effectively generally aren't.

The total balance of reinforcement to undermining is 10:1 in favour of reinforcement; all powers are up on net systems over the last four months.

Doing a quick check of systems with >5000 points of net undermining detected so far in the current cycle:
Code:
+------------------+----------+
| A. Lavigny-Duval |        4 |
| Aisling Duval    |        2 |
| Archon Delaine   |        5 |
| Denton Patreus   |        7 |
| Edmund Mahon     |        2 |
| Felicia Winters  |        1 |
| Jerome Archer    |        2 |
| Li Yong-Rui      |        1 |
| Nakato Kaine     |        1 |
| Pranav Antal     |        2 |
| Yuri Grom        |        6 |
| Zemina Torval    |        4 |
+------------------+----------+
There's maybe a slight bit of ZYADA-bias (where the A stands for Archon rather than Aisling, of course) but even Patreus is hardly taking serious damage here.

This isn't particularly a sign of superb Federal defence, either - looking at systems with total >10000 points undermining (regardless of reinforcement)
Code:
+------------------+----------+
| A. Lavigny-Duval |        3 |
| Aisling Duval    |        2 |
| Archon Delaine   |        5 |
| Denton Patreus   |        5 |
| Edmund Mahon     |        2 |
| Felicia Winters  |        3 |
| Jerome Archer    |        3 |
| Li Yong-Rui      |        4 |
| Nakato Kaine     |        3 |
| Pranav Antal     |        5 |
| Yuri Grom        |        7 |
| Zemina Torval    |        2 |
+------------------+----------+
whereas systems with >10000 points reinforcement (regardless of undermining)
Code:
+------------------+----------+
| A. Lavigny-Duval |       92 |
| Aisling Duval    |       81 |
| Archon Delaine   |       14 |
| Denton Patreus   |       17 |
| Edmund Mahon     |       25 |
| Felicia Winters  |       24 |
| Jerome Archer    |       75 |
| Li Yong-Rui      |       52 |
| Nakato Kaine     |       25 |
| Pranav Antal     |       33 |
| Yuri Grom        |       36 |
| Zemina Torval    |       19 |
+------------------+----------+
(which is more or less just equivalent to ordering the powers by their numbers of supporters)

Patreus and Torval could be growing basically just as fast as the Emperor or LYR ... if they weren't running on maybe a tenth of the supporters. The minor extra opposition they face would be an irrelevance.
 
If we take opposition into account. The most interesting thing is Archer. Because they are actually under attack from more than one side. I think that's where currently the most efficient group is.
 
[...]
whereas systems with >10000 points reinforcement (regardless of undermining)
Code:
+------------------+----------+
| A. Lavigny-Duval |       92 |
| Aisling Duval    |       81 |
| Archon Delaine   |       14 |
| Denton Patreus   |       17 |
| Edmund Mahon     |       25 |
| Felicia Winters  |       24 |
| Jerome Archer    |       75 |
| Li Yong-Rui      |       52 |
| Nakato Kaine     |       25 |
| Pranav Antal     |       33 |
| Yuri Grom        |       36 |
| Zemina Torval    |       19 |
+------------------+----------+
(which is more or less just equivalent to ordering the powers by their numbers of supporters)

Why I am not surprised to see us at the bottom? :LOL: :unsure:😅
 
If we take opposition into account. The most interesting thing is Archer. Because they are actually under attack from more than one side. I think that's where currently the most efficient group is.
Under attack in theory, perhaps.

But in practice maybe all sides attacking them are expecting someone else to do the work?
- in terms of systems with >1000 undermining they're high but still only have as many as Grom or Mahon
- in terms of systems with >10000 undermining they have fewer than almost half the other powers
- in terms of their average undermining per system they're currently third-lowest

And this is entirely before their defence is considered, where they're pretty mid-table in their ability to outpace undermining with reinforcement
Code:
+------------------+---------+--------+---------+
| power            | totalR  | totalU | ratio   |
+------------------+---------+--------+---------+
| Denton Patreus   |  980699 | 678212 |  1.4460 |
| Yuri Grom        | 2449053 | 678588 |  3.6090 |
| Archon Delaine   |  856524 | 203645 |  4.2060 |
| Zemina Torval    | 1034394 | 166656 |  6.2068 |
| Edmund Mahon     | 1494198 | 188537 |  7.9252 |
| Felicia Winters  | 1590268 | 178908 |  8.8887 |
| Jerome Archer    | 3311471 | 259468 | 12.7625 |
| Pranav Antal     | 2940415 | 196674 | 14.9507 |
| Nakato Kaine     | 2220622 | 142611 | 15.5712 |
| A. Lavigny-Duval | 5104645 | 198418 | 25.7267 |
| Aisling Duval    | 4472080 | 131949 | 33.8925 |
| Li Yong-Rui      | 5374577 | 150840 | 35.6310 |
+------------------+---------+--------+---------+
Archer is facing more total undermining than anyone except Patreus and Grom (though the gap between 2nd and 3rd here is huge!), but has the numbers to simply counter/ignore it pretty freely.
 
Patreus and Torval could be growing basically just as fast as the Emperor or LYR ... if they weren't running on maybe a tenth of the supporters. The minor extra opposition they face would be an irrelevance.
Over the past 3 weeks, we have had the second-highest net gain in systems of all powers. Whilst we wouldn't mind more players, the larger powers are comprised of 70+% dead weight.
 
Over the past 3 weeks, we have had the second-highest net gain in systems of all powers. Whilst we wouldn't mind more players, the larger powers are comprised of 70+% dead weight.
Which is impressive. In comparison to Aisling there is a lot more fluctuation (up and down) in the control values of your systems (at least in my limited data since January). I still think that Patreus and Torval act essentially as shields for Aisling and the Empress (and suffer for it more than the other Zyada powers). Especially with Patreus being cannibalized by Grom currently (We attack him too, of course ;), but that's the normal order of things).
 
Back
Top Bottom