Fixing 5C Attacks

[DemiserofD]

One of the most fundamental flaws of Powerplay is the ease with which outsiders can infiltrate and corrupt a power. Literally anyone can join a power, and immediately begin hauling power commodities to determine where the power will expand.

Besides being harmful to the system as a whole, this doesn't make very much sense. Why would a Power let a new recruit determine where their expansion efforts will be directed?

So I'd like to propose a change to make this at least somewhat more difficult.

Hauling commodities should no longer have any impact on the target of expansion. Instead, the target should be determined by two things; longstanding high-ranking members, and the Power itself. The Power would simply always choose the most profitable choice within a certain radius of its HQ, and if no profitable option exists, choose to Fortify instead.

Hauling commodities would still exist, but it would instead be to open an Embassy for the power in the target system. The embassy would consume a certain number of commodities per week after being founded, and would provide Power services in that station only.

The way Players would help expand would no longer be via commodity hauling, but by missions given by their Power relating to the type of expansion. They could be combat, or trade, or even mining.

The way the players who have the highest rank would be determined is via who is the most active in supporting the Power via these missions. This means that potential 5C players would need to actively support that power constantly to maintain their ability to force the Power to act against its interests. And even then, because it would be based on voting, they would most likely not have enough votes to achieve their goal unless the entire Power has been subverted, at which point its not really relevant anymore, the Power's screwed anyway.

And finally, change the way Power Modules are acquired. Rather than giving them after 4 weeks, give them after a certain reputation has been earned with the power, as a mission reward for helping them to expand. That way players have to actually help the power to get their modules, rather than just join and sit for four weeks.

Does anyone see any problems with these ideas? Let me know.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

I think the main problem with 5C in Powerplay is that, essentially, most obvious moves are bad ones, and by this stage most moves of any sort are actively harmful.

Basically I think the entire concept of a "loss-making system" needs to go. Once it's at the stage where a random enthusiastic player signing up, fortifying and expanding some stuff that the interface says needs it, is at worst being really ineffectual and at best doing something helpful ... then 5C basically disappears.

(What replaces that concept to continue having a strategically interesting game, I don't know)

 

[Rubbernuke]

I think the main problem with 5C in Powerplay is that, essentially, most obvious moves are bad ones, and by this stage most moves of any sort are actively harmful.

Basically I think the entire concept of a "loss-making system" needs to go. Once it's at the stage where a random enthusiastic player signing up, fortifying and expanding some stuff that the interface says needs it, is at worst being really ineffectual and at best doing something helpful ... then 5C basically disappears.

(What replaces that concept to continue having a strategically interesting game, I don't know)

It is possible- Sandro proposed weighting a system based on profitability which would make 5C much harder.

In my own attempt to sort things out I created a new 'trust' mechanism that rewards positive actions and punishes negative ones and coupled it with this weighting and on paper at least it works:

Powerplay Proposal (strong anti 5C, mode specific, plus other tweaks)

This is a Powerplay overhaul proposal that uses all of Sandros ideas plus a few more based on the 3.x BGS rework to enhance the feature, and employ strong anti 5C measures. Sandro Sammarcos proposal changes are included as they were originally. Problem Powerplay does not function well across...

forums.frontier.co.uk

 

[DemiserofD]

I think the main problem with 5C in Powerplay is that, essentially, most obvious moves are bad ones, and by this stage most moves of any sort are actively harmful.

Basically I think the entire concept of a "loss-making system" needs to go. Once it's at the stage where a random enthusiastic player signing up, fortifying and expanding some stuff that the interface says needs it, is at worst being really ineffectual and at best doing something helpful ... then 5C basically disappears.

(What replaces that concept to continue having a strategically interesting game, I don't know)

See, that's why I prefer the idea of taking those decisions away from the average player and giving them to those who are the most invested. If a beginner player wants to help a power, all they should have to do is show up and take a mission. If you want to get power specific modules, all you should have to do is show up and do several missions, until eventually your reputation gets high enough to earn you some modules.

And if you want to feel like you are impacting the game, the ability to open an embassy in a system gives you that possibility, without negatively impacting the power.

In The meantime, for the players who are truly invested, who want to facilitate the expansion of their power , they have the option to eventually become high-ranking members, members with the ability and knowledge to choose the best places to expand. But if all you want to do is harm the power, the effort required would be far too much for most people. It would be easier to fight against them more directly.

 

[DemiserofD]

Whoops, wrong thread, pls delete

 

[EUS]

This topic is a perfect example of where more game depth is needed.
5C for a political game (PP) should be encouraged, however there should be ways for these CMDRs to get caught, and face consequences for their actions. Catch a spy, they get kicked out of the PP group and not allowed to return.
When successfully caught, their negative contributions are wiped out, they lose access to any weapons/other goodies they were able to purchase from the power.
Game depth is missing.

 

[Rubbernuke]

This topic is a perfect example of where more game depth is needed.
5C for a political game (PP) should be encouraged, however there should be ways for these CMDRs to get caught, and face consequences for their actions. Catch a spy, they get kicked out of the PP group and not allowed to return.
When successfully caught, their negative contributions are wiped out, they lose access to any weapons/other goodies they were able to purchase from the power.
Game depth is missing.

First:

Powerplay is not political, not unless you think banana republics are democratic.

You kill your opposition to undermine them.

Powers either transport marked slaves for execution, dissidents for re-education, food for support, contracts, garrison supplies etc.

The terminology is not political either- you have control systems, and exploited systems.

To expand you first bribe people with drugs, spy on them, dump propaganda on them. You then either ship contracts or violently take over with combat expansions.

Spying should be something certainly, but nothing like the 5C we have today which is you supporting one power but pledging to another and wrecking it from the inside.

A more benign idea would be that unless you spy on other powers you can't see their Powerplay information, and that ordinarily you can only see your own powers status. It might be that you have to smuggle yourself into rival powers stations to do this, risking destruction if caught.