Powerplay Don't throw the whole thing out! Tying BGS to powerplay without a complete redesign

Don't throw the whole thing out! Tying BGS to powerplay without a complete redesign


I've been part of the leadership team for Patreus for over a year, and have been active in powerplay since cycle 14. I have seen a lot of proposals that are meant to offer suggestions on improving powerplay, but would often require a fundamental rework of powerplay itself, if not wholesale replacement.


My suggestion is written with powerplay as it is now in mind. I may be in the minority, but I don't believe that powerplay is deeply mechanically flawed in its present state. I believe the main issues keeping CMDRs away from powerplay are related to the ways in which we interact with it mechanically.


Here are the complaints and concerns this proposal is meant to address:


1. Powerplay is inaccessible for new pilots.
2. Powerplay is too abstract.
3. Powerplay is a grind.
4. Powerplay is a credit sink.
5. Powerplay is not tied to the BGS.


My proposal starts at the bottom, tying powerplay into the BGS in a way that allows CMDRs to have an impact regardless of the depth of their pockets or the size of the ship, while building this bridge in a way that will guide players into having a positive impact.


Powerplay and the BGS Now


Powerplay is tied to the BGS, but in a very abstract, limited way. Local factions impact control systems in the expansion stage, again modifying the expansion triggers. Local factions can also impact system authority, which in turn impacts the resistance CMDRs face while undermining.


More importantly, BGS actions impact powers by reducing or raising fortification triggers. Roughly, if the governments of a control system and its exploited sphere are 50% favorable, the base fortification trigger is reduced by 50%. If they are unfavorable, the base trigger is increased by 50%.


This is a strong impetus for organized communities, as fortification is a constant need for every power while probably being the least-beloved activity in the game. But local factions are not tied in a visible way to powerplay while you work on them. There is no acknowledgement of control or exploitation. A community might install hundreds of governments in the name of their power. You'd think those governments would show their gratitude by supporting the power.


So Let's Make Them.


Local governments that are favorable to their exploiting or controlling powers should declare their support. Hostile governments should covertly oppose, and they should do this by tying the missions they give to pledged CMDRs into the fortification and undermining levels of their local control system.


Apam Napat Empire Assembly Office, Tsim Binba, Control System of Senator Denton Patreus. I see that the system is being undermined, so I load my Cutter with garrison supplies and head out. When I dock, I go into the power contact menu to deliver my supplies and am greeted by an Apam Napat Empire Assembly representative.


"A welcome return, Commander Misaniovent. Thank you for your continued support of Senator Patreus. Our partnership with him has made our economic output the best it's ever been, but we've detected suspicious activity in a nearby system."


EGM 823 is exploited by Tsim Binba, but is controlled by an independent dictatorship. It's a safe bet that the Freedom Party of EGM 823 is not happy with Senator Patreus' exploitation of their system, and we believe they've reached out to Archon Delaine for support. Fly to Fozard Barracks and make contact with Umaspi Emperor's Grace. They'll tell you more."


Fozard Barracks isn't a landable base, so I'll need to bring my SRV. When I arrive, I'm told about a Kumo Crew listening post in system. I'm tasked with scanning the data point and then destroying the listening post's generator. I'm told it will be well-defended, so I contact a friend who joins my crew.


We head to the listening post and destroy the local patrols. I land my Cutter outside the exclusion zone and drop my crewmate off in a SRV, and keep station while I wait for him to complete the task.


He scans the data point and destroys the power. I pick him up and we return to Tsim Binba, mission complete.


What's the Effect?


First, we've helped protect the system. Completion of this mission nets us a small credit reward, reputation with the local faction, and since we are pledged to Senator Denton Patreus, a small boost in our naval rank.


It also:


1. Helps fortify the system. By completing this mission, I've boosted Tsim Binba's fortification progress by 350 merits, which go toward my rank as well. My crewmate, who is also pledged, boosted it by 125. If I'd had a third crew member, they each would have earned 63 merits for the system and themselves.
2. It supports a favorable local government.
3. It hurts a local unfavorable government.
4. It introduces me to a local favorable government that could overthrow the independent dictatorship in EGM 823.


Most importantly:


1. I've increased the system's fortification level without spending money.
2. I've done it in a suboptimal way. I could have run 700 tons in the same amount of time, but I accepted less efficiency in exchange for less cost.
3. I've participated in the BGS while directly supporting my power this week.
4. I've engaged in Horizons content while supporting my power.


Numbers, Ranks, Bonuses, and Balance


1. This is not meant to replace powerplay as it is now. It's additive. This means that fast-tracked fortification would remain the fastest way to fortify a system, while giving CMDRs another way to play defense. I could run missions like this all day, or, if my power is truly threatened, I can fast track and move forts the old-fashioned way.
2. Your power rank should impact the missions available to you and the impact they have. We don't want a CMDR to jump from Rank One to Rank Three in two missions, but you _do_ want to give CMDRs in Cobras a way to participate in powerplay without feeling like they are not having an impact unless they spend what little money they have.
3. Existing BGS influence bonuses could tie into how effective these missions are. Or they could be affected by a new bonus.
4. Powerplay is not balanced. This would be outstanding for Patreus. It would do absolutely nothing for Hudson, whose ethos is broken and has left him unable to benefit from BGS work.
 
This isn't a bad chunk of suggestions at all.

That's been Elite's problem with engaging a CMDR with the background sim since Day One. It's entirely impersonal. The NPC portraits and PG lines of dialogue are a great step towards personalizing them, but if they offer Power-enabling missions specifically to you based on your Rating and based on what Power they're supporting (or working against)? That'd be fantastic.

It's especially helpful for Rating 1 pilots and those new to Elite: Dangerous to help the Power and learn the system. Not to mention by having supportive governments emphasize why they support or oppose the Powers exploiting them, it will be easier for players to understand some of the more in depth power play mechanics.

4. Powerplay is not balanced. This would be outstanding for Patreus. It would do absolutely nothing for Hudson, whose ethos is broken and has left him unable to benefit from BGS work.

I still think there is a fantastically simple solution to the ethos problem at least a couple of Powers see. A social control ethos ranges from a media blitz campaign to brutally oppressive regimes that brand dissidents and ship them to HQ as marked slaves. It's all about manipulation, controlling the narrative, and leveraging your power and influence to bend the system to your will, right?

Why isn't that strong against a patronage type of government?

I understand why it'd be weak against a feudal lord, and why a dictatorship wouldn't care, but it fits in both an idyllic form of mutually beneficial patronage and investment, but also the concept of corrupt crony capitalism full of nepotism and abuses of patronage networks.

Okay, so that settles both Archon Delaine and Aisling Duval as strong for patronage, which is a good thing, as currently Aisling Duval's ethos suffers from any Imperial government under her Dominion. That doesn't make a lot of sense for an Imperial Power and alleged heir to the throne.

And who else has a similar issue? President Zachary Hudson holds to a combat ethos across all tasks, and he cannot benefit from a Federation government. This is the former VP of Core Dyanmics turned Congressman who manipulated the Federal Navy to Core Dynamics' plans, contrived to oust the populist Halsey, and succeeded in taking over from an unelected president who appeared weak in the face of adversity. Oh, and he's spent the past two years padding his pocket and his supporters' pockets by distributing military-budget work programmes throughout Federation space and by pimping out CQC: Arena to all Federation systems in an effort to encourage the unemployed and coming of age to develop combat skills and look to the Federal Navy for employment and a sense of purpose.

How is Zachary Hudson's method of control not a Social ethos?

So, Power Play is not balanced. It is not supposed to be balanced. But by making it detrimental to the President of the Federation to support Federation governments and Princess Aisling Duval susceptible to a common form of Imperial government (with no benefit from other Imperial governments), the lore principles that should be driving Power Play feel like a ridiculously tacked on measure that doesn't jive with how ethos should be working.

The simple solution is to add Patronage to Social Ethos and shift Hudson's control ethos to Social, not combat.

That alone will go a long way towards shaking up the current power play environment.
 
Last edited:
So, Power Play is not balanced. It is not supposed to be balanced.

Indeed, and for many reasons. But to add something like this, there would need to be a balance pass, especially for Hudson and Aisling's ethoses. We would not want to see anyone's prior BGS work disrupted — we just need the possibility to be added for those two powers.

Power bonuses need to be revisited, too.
 
Some good suggestions there.

Players should see and notice more of the different system stages.
 
Last edited:
I don't see a reason to tie the BGS to PP. The root of the issue with all the BGS and PP itself is not that it doesn't influence anything but hwat it influences is meaningless. Why would I care for a god damn forsaken system in this bubble to be of a certain type of government? It's not like there are a thousand other systems with the same government out there and I really just need a hand full of jumps to get there. There are all offering the same goods, modules, ships and assuming you or a faction would take the challenge to flip systems to a certain government type what would it use? I, as a Hudson supporter being almost pledged 100 weeks now, have not earned a single merit for the last 70 weeks not because I don't feel I can't influence something, no, but due to the lack of player influence.

And here is issue that has to be addressed. A system being controlled by the federation and being federal alligned via the BGS is simply no difference to an imperial, alliance or whatever type of system. They all have the same stations, the same services, the same missions and the same NPCs. I can go there with a 1m cr bounty for slaughtering their population, undermine a whole system by myself and still they send the exact same NPCs wit hthe exact same pathetic level of danger and their stupid strategy of interdicting with just a single wing.

System blockades, agents, traps ... all of that could be such an interesting way to make the life of a CMDR extremely hard and experiencing the revenge of a major faction ... and not just a bunch of braindead NPCs.



There is no point in bundling two incredibly stupid and meaningless systems together to an even bigger pile of biowaste.
 
Powerplay is connected to the background simulation.

Lets take Zac Hudson if he is in a Fed controlled system then the security level goes up.
If he is in an alliance controlled system the security goes down.
Hence background sim increases pirate interdictions in the Alliance system which should result in it being easier for pirate factions to gain traction.

Other Powers do things like close black markets. This directly affects the background sim as selling to a blackmarket reduces controlling power influence.

Li Yong Rui reduces the effect that your actions have on the background Sim for Fed and Imp run systems as he creates increased stability. That means more effort is required to flip his systems.

All this info is visible in the powerplay stats panel.
 
I don't see a reason to tie the BGS to PP. The root of the issue with all the BGS and PP itself is not that it doesn't influence anything but hwat it influences is meaningless. Why would I care for a god damn forsaken system in this bubble to be of a certain type of government? It's not like there are a thousand other systems with the same government out there and I really just need a hand full of jumps to get there. There are all offering the same goods, modules, ships and assuming you or a faction would take the challenge to flip systems to a certain government type what would it use? I, as a Hudson supporter being almost pledged 100 weeks now, have not earned a single merit for the last 70 weeks not because I don't feel I can't influence something, no, but due to the lack of player influence.

And here is issue that has to be addressed. A system being controlled by the federation and being federal alligned via the BGS is simply no difference to an imperial, alliance or whatever type of system. They all have the same stations, the same services, the same missions and the same NPCs. I can go there with a 1m cr bounty for slaughtering their population, undermine a whole system by myself and still they send the exact same NPCs wit hthe exact same pathetic level of danger and their stupid strategy of interdicting with just a single wing.

System blockades, agents, traps ... all of that could be such an interesting way to make the life of a CMDR extremely hard and experiencing the revenge of a major faction ... and not just a bunch of braindead NPCs.



There is no point in bundling two incredibly stupid and meaningless systems together to an even bigger pile of biowaste.

I agree that PP and the BGS are not as engaging as they should be. Ultimately the best reason I could give you to do these things would be to support a community. You've been pledged to Hudson for 70 weeks. Have you ever participated in their community?

To be honest, I think your attitude is a shame, because I doubt Frontier could ever do anything to engage you.

Powerplay is connected to the background simulation.

Lets take Zac Hudson if he is in a Fed controlled system then the security level goes up.
If he is in an alliance controlled system the security goes down.
Hence background sim increases pirate interdictions in the Alliance system which should result in it being easier for pirate factions to gain traction.

Other Powers do things like close black markets. This directly affects the background sim as selling to a blackmarket reduces controlling power influence.

Li Yong Rui reduces the effect that your actions have on the background Sim for Fed and Imp run systems as he creates increased stability. That means more effort is required to flip his systems.

All this info is visible in the powerplay stats panel.

Yeah, I mentioned a few of these effects. The security level one is particularly important. These are still superficial connections, but as I said in my post, powerplay and the BGS are connected. It's just a misconception that they aren't.
 
Last edited:
These are some good suggestions in here.

I my opinion powerplay is a great idea, but with a lackluster implementation. Like so many other things in this game, it ends up throwing away its most of its potential because they made it "a game within a game" with its own separate layer of grind.

Powerplay factions should have a closer connection with the BGS and minor factions within each system. But most importantly, the powerplay activities should merge with all the other regular gameplay activities, instead of being standalone. Also, powerplay faction affiliation should reflect itself when dealing with minor factions, so reputation with your powerplay faction should reflect (positively or nagatively) with minor faction and superpower reputation.

Currently, you "play powerplay" or do other stuff. But it would be much, much better if everything was interconnected.

This guy from the video below had some great ideas for powerplay, which revolve around what I mean: connecting powerplay with the rest of the game.

[video=youtube;xo-1M9fZirA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xo-1M9fZirA[/video]
 
Great suggestions here.

With DB confirming in today's Reddit AMA that Powerplay's development is still being internally debated by FD, I really do hope they are looking at sensible suggestions such as the OP to inform the direction.
 
Vectron has the best solution to altering PP, which is both a good change and extremely easy (minutes to change the game code) but hes been a bit shy at sharing his idea.

Hopefully he can make a thread here about it.
 
I've gone from Powerplay, what's the point of working above rank 2/3 with everything else to do; to, it's pretty good actually but the merit decay sucks too much, to now; actually, the merit decay isn't really a problem now I've got my head around the maths.

Faction missions I like the sound of, I suggested someplace else something similar that a CMDR could receive merits for it instead of cash plus the desired effect on the system. I also think the rewards need revisiting; Torval's mining laser is nice but very niche. Perhaps each Power also has a deal with an Engineer (a free favour, or a CMDR can cash in merits for a material on that Engineers' blueprint?). I'll also plug the idea for awards & medals again.

With regard again to the BGS I do think/hope that eventually Powerplay will have a bigger influence - somehow. For instance, to me also, it makes no sense for a Federation faction to be happy under the thumb of an Imperial Power, nor for the said Imperial Power to be content with the enemy within. Without having thought about any consequences of this or its implementation :) … how about a special type of 'minor' Community Goal that is issued by each Power's HQ system from time to time (ie so Frontier can turn it off if there is an issue with balance) that will allow all the Powers followers to participate in a mission? Eg Smuggle 20,000 tons of Battle Weapons to station X in y system to support a coup. If successfully there is an X percent chance of the 'enemy' controlling faction collapsing & switching allegiance to the issuing Power. A mission to counter this such as 'Shoot down Weapons Smugglers' could be issued in the system X & advertised on Galnet. You could make the goal only accessible to CMDRs of the issuing Power's Rating 3, for instance, with the reward being cash, Merits, a medal, or some other benefit of supporting a Power (that may be added :) ).

Anyway, I think Powerplay has huge potential, as also indicated by previous posts by others above; it just needs to be explained a whole lot better & there needs to be a direct connection between Powerplay & the BGS (even if at first it's largely just one of perception from a CMDR's point of view.).

Neowave
 
Last edited:
A really good proposal that would fix the problem of Powerplay being woefully detached from most of the gameplay in Elite. It is a shame how barebones it is, considering how easily existing game elements could be tied into it for variety and diverse gameplay, as laid out in the post.

I highly doubt anything will happen to Powerplay for the next 1-2 years though. Braben said in the recent AMA that while they discussed a lot of changes to powerplay, they have not yet found a satisfying solution...considering how wonky and annoying the missions system (logging in and out to find missions you want, factions not giving missions at all, basically no variety, etc.) is at the moment anyways, I'd rather have them fix and improve it before they tie it closer to Powerplay itself.
 
A really good proposal that would fix the problem of Powerplay being woefully detached from most of the gameplay in Elite. It is a shame how barebones it is, considering how easily existing game elements could be tied into it for variety and diverse gameplay, as laid out in the post.

I highly doubt anything will happen to Powerplay for the next 1-2 years though. Braben said in the recent AMA that while they discussed a lot of changes to powerplay, they have not yet found a satisfying solution...considering how wonky and annoying the missions system (logging in and out to find missions you want, factions not giving missions at all, basically no variety, etc.) is at the moment anyways, I'd rather have them fix and improve it before they tie it closer to Powerplay itself.

Thanks Jonas.

Have they changed the location of the garrison supplies from Nanomam Gresley dock, please help if you can

There was a bug this morning. You should be able to collect supplies normally.
 
I agree that powerplay has a lot to offer and that with some changes the powers could be tied in with the rest of the gameplay without chucking the baby out with the bathwater. Good call! [up]
 
# **INTEGRATED INFLUENCE**

There should be benefits and drawbacks to aligning with minor factions, powers, and superpower.

**POTENTIAL BENEFITS & DRAWBACKS**

- **When interdicted in a system with an aligned group present, additional faction ships provide support.** Ships would be in the style of the group (feds send federal ships, empire sends imperial ships, alliance needs more ships). Alignment with multiple groups within a system provides greater numbers. Higher standing with groups provides better ships. For example,if you were aligned to alliance, Mahon, in good standing with the system controlling faction, and minor factions, when you are indicted a whole mess of ships could show up to help. Things would get interesting when two groups are in conflict, I think declaring support for one side should make the other side hostile to you. *DRAWBACK* - if you are unfriendly or hostile to groups, they don't provide as many or as good of ships.

- **Reduced insurance costs** when your ship is rebuilt at a friendly station.
*DRAWBACK* - increased insurance costs in unfriendly systems.

- **discounts for station services** (repair, refuel, restock). *DRAWBACK* - increased costs at unfriendly stations.

- **Better station payouts** - increased rewards for exploration data, combat bonds, bounties. *DRAWBACK* Reduced payouts.

- **Priority docking**. You get moved ahead of others that have already been given landing clearance. *DRAWBACK* - delayed landing clearance or denial of landing.

- **Access to better paying missions**. Missions and power play should be integrated so that those that don't want to haul merits or fight, have other means to support or undermine groups. *DRAWBACK* - fewer, riskier, lower payout, or further missions. **NOTE** my personal preference would be that this system does NOT fortify, prepare, or expand systems for the power. My reason for this is based on the perception that a good portion, though maybe not a majority, of players involved in powerplay are in it solely for the power-specific modules. Allowing players to gain rank without tinkering with fort/prep/expand might simplify the efforts of long term power players by reducing the amount of merit grinders. Under this system, ranks gained would not provide voting privileges, again, to provide more effective power play by dedicated CMDRs.

Integrated together, the above systems would encourage players to invest in the areas they frequent. Additionally, this would effectively increase the security for players, in essence creating their own HI-SEC areas. Completely independent pilots would receive neither the benefits nor drawbacks, but would be able to move about the bubble more freely than those aligned to groups.

The above provide a more coherent and expansive system that operates at all levels and includes elements of the background simulation, powerplay, and crime & punishment.
It also provides benefits and drawbacks for all styles of play.

Cool, all well and good, but what are the downsides?

**Easier said than done**
- currently there isn't much overlap between the various reputation systems in game (powerplay, BGS, crime & punishment, minor faction reputation). A bubble wide integrated reputation system would be complex, timely, and therefore expensive. Are the benefits worth the cost?

**Isolation**
- the longer and more a player is in a system, the more incentive there is to stay there. A few systems could become highly favorable due to elements of the system (REZ, compromised nav beacon, variety of stellar bodies and stations). Travel throughout the bubble might be impeded due to higher risk in unfriendly areas.

**Change**
- existing systems would be removed or drastically changed. For new players after the change, this would not be much of an issue. However, for more established and long term players, the large changes could have unforeseen consequences. Systems, factions and stations could become outright hostile. The benefits of such a large and wide change would need to outweigh the time and risks associated with learning the new system.

**Segregation**
- the other side of the “isolation” coin. As people form deeper alignment with factions, the benefits of staying there increase, but so does the setback of moving into other areas, powers, factions, etc. I personally would prefer a more cooperative and mutually beneficial human bubble, but I think that the differences between (super)powers is mostly flavor..

Communication is the key to everything.
 
Back
Top Bottom