Powerplay How I would like for Powerplay to be.

[Bard Voronwe]

First things first: contratulations @Bashy81 , you actually came up with something more complicated than current Powerplay!

I don't like at all some of the things you proposed, for example the existence of any kind of overhead, which I believe is the real cause of the existence of 5C in Powerplay, I first will move a "design criticism" to your idea, then I will list all the things I liked (and I think they should be in in every kind of Powerplay proposal).

I think that speaking of "continuous territories" is pretty pointless in Powerplay (with one exception ), and that's two simple reasons: jump range and how witchspace functions in the Elite lore.
To make a practical example, when you used to control Gliese 828.4, for people not knowing a Antal control systems just in the middel of Archon territories, I literallyused to jump through the entire bubble when fortifying Jormor without actually landing in any of its exploited systems.

In Elite lore, only Thargoids can actually interdict through witchspace so I believe that, even if aesthetically appealing, this kind of approach makes more sense in a "ground control like" kind of mechanic, not the 5 dimensions space (witchspace is basically a dimension of its own) of Elite Dangerous.

But there's an interesting concept in that: isolated bubbles should be somehow damaged by just being far away from the closest allied control system, maybe with a malus to upkeep, fortification trigger or even expansion trigger itself. The concept of "vicinity" more than connection is very interesting and would mitigate some nonsensical trolling maneuvers like trying to prepare systems very close to the closest enemy HQs just to contest closest bubbles. On the other hand a bonus to fortification should be applied for systems with overlapping CCs, because having the strong connection you talked about before they'd be easier to manage. This is very interesting and should be something pretty useful when combined with weaponised for example.

The nature, and progress of a Power and a conflict between Powers would all be visible on Galmap. A glance would tell you a lot. That easy-access to strategy, even if involving complicated mechanics, is more important IMO than the specific mechanics ive outlined, themselves.

I totally agree with that: in fact part of my proposal considered giving players a personal bonus if they contribute where it's most needed, to avoid people grinding without any sense in the same system.
Another "good point" I agree with: Powerplay needs a far better graphical representation to show people what's happening in the galmap: right now icons are quite ugly and confusing. I have few to propose about that, I really have no idea how you could make it better.

Other than providing a natural slowing of pace (to moderate the more dynamic attacking possibilities) & providing chokepoints for invasions, it serves to both decentralise strategy as is the OP intention, (by making strategy far more visible and accessible in-game) as well as providing easy-access to what is going on for outsiders. Id love for streamers to be able to do simple & yet meaningful Powerplay reports having Galmap as a primary tool. It would be extra-awesome if it didn't end up looking like geeks pointing at 3D space willies.

Honestly I am surprised we don't already have shaped powerplay bubbles. And... "slowing of pace"? Isn't Powerplay slow enough already? This model more than a decentralized one seems to me a more "graphical way" to give indications to casuals. Problem is that with overhead some decisions will not be able to be taken by leaderships (and remember: we are self-appointed leaders, people just pledging couldn't care less about what we say or decide, and they'd have technically every right to think so). Being truly decentralized means that any maneuver would at least not harm your Power tactically speaking, I think this should be a milestone in everypossible future Powerplay iteration.

And now a little step back.

This represents what happens to all factions & civilizations that surround themselves with like-thinking people. They start to believe their own propaganda that they are wonderful & Right, stop challenging their own ideas and become inefficient, decadent and begin a descent into decay & collapse. I.. dont need to colour-in a comparison with the Forums here.

This is so Utopian of you, but very interesting. Makes me wonder: can we make of Powerplay something more than just missions, pew-pew and opposing triggers?

Or... should we?

I would actually have TONS of ideas to make Powerplay even more meaningful in the Galaxy: changing local security with Powerplay ships for good-alligned factions, decals, everything to make it more "vivid" and "appealing" to the new and older players, but the sad truth is that Powerplay should be almost "invisible" to grant us even the tiniest possibility to have it as we like it (you-know-what-I-am-talking-about-don't-let-me-write-that).
I will not even begin to list how cool it would be, how interesting it would make the Galaxy, but gameplay wise we need to push for a totally optional and almost imperceptible Powerplay, the reason is because people, and I think you perfectly know what I am talking about.

Anyway it was an interesting reading of course, we do not agree on many things, I would love to read some other ideas too.

 

[Bashy81]

I think that speaking of "continuous territories" is pretty pointless in Powerplay, and that's two simple reasons: jump range and how witchspace functions in the Elite lore.
To make a practical example, when you used to control Gliese 828.4, for people not knowing a Antal control systems just in the middel of Archon territories, I literallyused to jump through the entire bubble when fortifying Jormor without actually landing in any of its exploited systems.

huh, the quote function seems to have clipped something out of your quote there. Very Weird I Will Contact My Local ISP
I was meaning an imagineered benefit to the supposed but necessary hidden background to Powerplay activites. We CMDRs have our fancy engineered ships, but the Joe Schloe NPCs doing the donkey-work for Powers in their E-rated borrowed rot-boxes; ferrying Contacts out to their jobs, running supplies to our Brave Loyal dissident-hunters, all that infrastructure that must exist for Powers to function. All that pretend-stuff would be very likely more efficient to run with a continuous 'friendly' space back to HQ.
Ultimately though, im no Roleplayer except for the lols. It was a plausible Lore explanation for a mechanic I felt could bring a heightened dimension to Powerplay. It's (nearly?) always mechanics-first when I make suggestions

"slowing of pace"? Isn't Powerplay slow enough already?

Absolutely is, lol, but my idea was meant as a possible amendment/addition to your proposal, which itself would speed up system flips considerably. I felt this was a way to stop Control systems exchanging hands continuously, and doing so in a visible & predictable way, because only Powers who's territory was approaching it, could have a chance to take it.
Afterall, how schizophrenic do we want to make the citizens of the galaxy?! In just one month it could be.. "Im a loyal Utopian! No I love the Pres, no wait, its all about the sultry Empress!, except now im a pirate."

But there's an interesting concept in that: isolated bubbles should be somehow damaged by just being far away from the closest allied control system, maybe with a malus to upkeep, fortification trigger or even expansion trigger itself. The concept of "vicinity" more than connection is very interesting and would mitigate some nonsensical trolling maneuvers like trying to prepare systems very close to the closest enemy HQs just to contest closest bubbles. On the other hand a bonus to fortification should be applied for systems with overlapping CCs, because having the strong connection you talked about before they'd be easier to manage. This is very interesting and should be something pretty useful when combined with weaponised for example.

I like that very much. Vicinity to other Control Systems being a distance factor, instead of just distance to capital. That makes so much more sense, and gives a strategic option for a campaign to make unexpandable systems: attainable.

This is so Utopian of you, but very interesting. Makes me wonder: can we make of Powerplay something more than just missions, pew-pew and opposing triggers?

Or... should we?

Ive no idea! Each of the Powers & their ingame Leaders make them entirely possible to love, or hate, by choice, depending on the allegiance you happen to have. They all have admirable & abhorrent aspects. It all depends on what you choose to highlight and what you prefer to 'take with a pinch of salt'. I cant really imagine a way to make more of that right now, without it turning into a dev-led morality mission that would make me CG-nauseous..

I would actually have TONS of ideas to make Powerplay even more meaningful in the Galaxy: changing local security with Powerplay ships for good-alligned factions, decals, everything to make it more "vivid" and "appealing" to the new and older players, but the sad truth is that Powerplay should be almost "invisible" to grant us even the tiniest possibility to have it as we like it (you-know-what-I-am-talking-about-don't-let-me-write-that).
I will not even begin to list how cool it would be, how interesting it would make the Galaxy, but gameplay wise we need to push for a totally optional and almost imperceptible Powerplay, the reason is because people, and I think you perfectly know what I am talking about.

I do agree there. It has to be either Control-systems only, or remove the BGS impact altogether (just make all Power effects on the BGS modest buffs like with the LYR discount) & with powerplay missions, as you said, that would be fine by me.

I mentioned to 'nuke the other day about using Economy types instead of Government types to help determine CC income, so that the BGS aspects that feed into Powerplay were unalterable & therefore not interfered with by Powerplayers.

Each faction could have a Lore-relevant preferred balance of Economies within their exploited systems, to both create a sense of a coherent local economy, and divorce Powerplay from the BGS (as that was under discussion at the time).

I will not even begin to list how cool it would be, how interesting it would make the Galaxy, but gameplay wise we need to push for a totally optional and almost imperceptible Powerplay, the reason is because people, and I think you perfectly know what I am talking about.

Anyway it was an interesting reading of course, we do not agree on many things, I would love to read some other ideas too

One thing that would help with that, is to remove random PP ship spawns, as that is a source of irritation ive seen mentioned quite a bit by, well, a few regular non-PP contributors here.

My idea for that is to primarily serve as a way to remove off-beaconing altogether. It looks, smells, feels, like an exploit, but it is tolerated by the devs, basically because undermining is just, absurdly underpowered without it. This really isnt a bias thing, it's just a change for the good of the game : Off-beaconing is probably the thing i'm best at in-game. (yeah sure I know it's easy, but doing it well and racking up big numbers is another thing)

So what id suggest there is buff merits for undermining massively, 100 merits or more per ship. And restrict all PP ships to Supercruise, so we have the far more interesting interdiction mechanic to use instead of exploiting reinstancing. This also ofc brings players directly into Supercruise contact with opposition wings seeking to stop them, so gaining 'air'-superiority in a system would blockade undermining in the same way as it blockades fortification, with no cheeky instance-blocking possible, and more fluid contests than just hunting-down nav beacon bunny-hoppers, because youre all aiming to regain the optimal positions for interdicting.

For non-Powerplayers, this would mean bountyhunting wouldnt have those irritating Powerplay ship spawns that are completely pointless. They only insult us all anyway, no matter our Powerplay rank. If theyre serving as some sense of 'who's in charge' ; Just hang a bigger Powerplay banner on the main station, stick a few powerplay logos on the jackets of random NPCs in the Odyssey lounges, that will do just fine.


I think that would be an all-around big improvement, and take (surely?) minimal dev-time to implement.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

huh, the quote function seems to have clipped something out of your quote there. Very Weird I Will Contact My Local ISP
I was meaning an imagineered benefit to the supposed but necessary hidden background to Powerplay activites. We CMDRs have our fancy engineered ships, but the Joe Schloe NPCs doing the donkey-work for Powers in their E-rated borrowed rot-boxes; ferrying Contacts out to their jobs, running supplies to our Brave Loyal dissident-hunters, all that infrastructure that must exist for Powers to function. All that pretend-stuff would be very likely more efficient to run with a continuous 'friendly' space back to HQ.
Ultimately though, im no Roleplayer except for the lols. It was a plausible Lore explanation for a mechanic I felt could bring a heightened dimension to Powerplay. It's (nearly?) always mechanics-first when I make suggestions


Absolutely is, lol, but my idea was meant as a possible amendment/addition to your proposal, which itself would speed up system flips considerably. I felt this was a way to stop Control systems exchanging hands continuously, and doing so in a visible & predictable way, because only Powers who's territory was approaching it, could have a chance to take it.
Afterall, how schizophrenic do we want to make the citizens of the galaxy?! In just one month it could be.. "Im a loyal Utopian! No I love the Pres, no wait, its all about the sultry Empress!, except now im a pirate."

I like that very much. Vicinity to other Control Systems being a distance factor, instead of just distance to capital. That makes so much more sense, and gives a strategic option for a campaign to make unexpandable systems: attainable.

Ive no idea! Each of the Powers & their ingame Leaders make them entirely possible to love, or hate, by choice, depending on the allegiance you happen to have. They all have admirable & abhorrent aspects. It all depends on what you choose to highlight and what you prefer to 'take with a pinch of salt'. I cant really imagine a way to make more of that right now, without it turning into a dev-led morality mission that would make me CG-nauseous..

I do agree there. It has to be either Control-systems only, or remove the BGS impact altogether (just make all Power effects on the BGS modest buffs like with the LYR discount) & with powerplay missions, as you said, that would be fine by me.

I mentioned to 'nuke the other day about using Economy types instead of Government types to help determine CC income, so that the BGS aspects that feed into Powerplay were unalterable & therefore not interfered with by Powerplayers.

Each faction could have a Lore-relevant preferred balance of Economies within their exploited systems, to both create a sense of a coherent local economy, and divorce Powerplay from the BGS (as that was under discussion at the time).




One thing that would help with that, is to remove random PP ship spawns, as that is a source of irritation ive seen mentioned quite a bit by, well, a few regular non-PP contributors here.

My idea for that is to primarily serve as a way to remove off-beaconing altogether. It looks, smells, feels, like an exploit, but it is tolerated by the devs, basically because undermining is just, absurdly underpowered without it. This really isnt a bias thing, it's just a change for the good of the game : Off-beaconing is probably the thing i'm best at in-game. (yeah sure I know it's easy, but doing it well and racking up big numbers is another thing)

So what id suggest there is buff merits for undermining massively, 100 merits or more per ship. And restrict all PP ships to Supercruise, so we have the far more interesting interdiction mechanic to use instead of exploiting reinstancing. This also ofc brings players directly into Supercruise contact with opposition wings seeking to stop them, so gaining 'air'-superiority in a system would blockade undermining in the same way as it blockades fortification, with no cheeky instance-blocking possible, and more fluid contests than just hunting-down nav beacon bunny-hoppers, because youre all aiming to regain the optimal positions for interdicting.

For non-Powerplayers, this would mean bountyhunting wouldnt have those irritating Powerplay ship spawns that are completely pointless. They only insult us all anyway, no matter our Powerplay rank. If theyre serving as some sense of 'who's in charge' ; Just hang a bigger Powerplay banner on the main station, stick a few powerplay logos on the jackets of random NPCs in the Odyssey lounges, that will do just fine.


I think that would be an all-around big improvement, and take (surely?) minimal dev-time to implement.

Ok massive quote but it was just to ping you.

Maybe we should start from scratch. What should Powerplay be not for us (the leaderships and the dedicated communities) but for Elite Dangerous as a game?

First things first: the role of Leadership. Usually leaderships are something that naturally come out in a game: cooperative games always need somebody that know the game better and help the new guys understanding it, but in Powerplay leaderships are vital to make a Power survive. This is one big flaw in my opinion of current Powerplay.

About the gameplay itself: right now, concerning just the player, Powerplay is just:

• hauling commodities (at loss)
• killing dumb NPCs both in supercruise (or by nav hopping) and in dedicated conflict zones.

Ok, BGS matters a lot, but it's not directly part of Powerplay.

No wonders even people potentially interested in Powerplay (PvPers, roleplayers etc) usually avoid it.

So... what should be the foundations of Powerplay? What should it offer to the community?

When I came with my current proposal (which is my very own proposal and of course I am quite in love with that, it's just natural) I tried to consider these factors, and as you can see it came out an extremly decentralized thing, where people who don't usually engage in Powerplay could choose to pledge (coming out in Open) to fight for their chunck of space, with a possibility to be able to do their thing. All the other technical stuff are consequential (like how much difficult it should be for a group to do so, considering then interesting things like a system being far away from the HQ of the desired Power, or if it is isolated to have even a bigger difficulty to do so).

Another thing I find to be crucial is for the game to offer different ways to enjoy it, but with the costant of involving as many game mechanics the game it has to offer: that's the reason why I am not a big fan (right now) of "Open Only BGS", I understand perfectly well that's there's plenty of people that do not like being involved directly with their enemies and are more for a "grind vs grind" approach, I don't like for myself that but, being a functional adult which is quite rare nowadays, I don't have any issues with that and they need to have something to play the game that way (with all the pros and cons that come out of it)... but right now there's a lot of people looking for a Pve/PvP mixed game and I think they need something for themselves too. It's just that easy.

Considering the different things above, Powerplay designers should consider as milestones (in my opinion of course):

• missions to cover the different gameplay mechanics and avoid as much as possible any grindy game mechanic
• no PvP only approach to avoid exploits (sacrificial lamb sidewinders)
• a set of rules to avoid 5C by design (and as long expanding aimlessly will be a danger to some tactical crucial systems we will have 5C)
• game mechanics that point out clearly where a system is being attacked or defended and where a player should be able to find (or avoid) PvP interaction
• good rewards for the players involved, proportional to personal engagement and the health of the Power itself

Can't find any more, might forget something anyway.

 

[Vetinari]

making them Open Only

No for so many reasons.

if you want to contribute consider this: you must know what you are talking about

Why? Rather arrogant that people who might be interested in PP but arent due to the current design arent allowed to speak?

even if totally optional for casual players that are not interested in the MMO Competitive side of the game.

Like some BGS players who just want their own home system and nothing else?

(no more BGS influence over triggers or consolidation bonus):

Separate the two seems like a good idea.

making clear to the players where their contribution is more needed for their Power.

Would be very helpful yes.

As I mentioned before Powerplay triggers should not be affected by BGS anymore in this way, but being Powerplay basically the macropolitics layer in the galactic bubble, it's obvious that it should have a major effect over BGS,

Ah so its one way not separated, PP should affect the one system casual BGS players but not the other way round? No. Either separate completely or both affect each other. Cant have it all one way.

Let's get this straigh, Powerplay should be an end-game MMO competitive game mechanic, Open Only is mandatory at this point,

Why? Why shouldn't a first day player be able to decide they want to RP as a Fed Hudson supporter and build their game around it?

pledged players should be forced to Open unless they decide to unpledge,

No for so many reasons. Plus it wont work but more on that later.

Open Only Powerplay is not about I want necessarily to attack an enemy, it's about that enemy being in the conditions to be attacked by somebody else

And here we are finally. OK I PP module shopped, all Combat all in Open, saw no enemy at all in their systems and 1 at an Engineers. PP areas are far too big to run into someone else doing PP, only way to achieve that is to vastly shrink PP AOI down to much smaller bubbles....but somehow I think you want to rule the bubble or the galaxy and not actually have small zones where PP can happen.

Finally: a pledged CMDR should be not able to block any other pledged CMDR, aside for comms.

No, for so many reasons. Just arrogant to think that someone should be forced to play your way. Get over it.

This Powerplay would have the big advantage to nullify 5C,

5C is PVP, you dont like it but it is PVP. Saboteurs and spies are part of war.

it would make it free from its bonds with BGS

No it would control BGS but not the other way round, either free it and separate it or not, not one way only.

to offer at least one organic way to play the game competitively, with basically no effect over the rest of the game.

Apart from that single system BGS squadron mentioned earlier. As well as all the 'benefits' to certain gamestyles in certain PP areas. Shrink it and this would actually be true.

let's not make this become the usual "flood-white-noise" thread by people only interested in defending the "all modes are equal" crusade, we do not gank casuals, we just want to have something organic to play with, competing with real, instanced people, not spreadsheets.

All modes are equal, get off your high horse and get over it. You would be ganking casuals and traders, thats what you want, the ability to gank casuals and traders doing PP for RP or any other reason. Instancing with real people would need the PP area shrunk drastically, I have no problem with that.

. If you don't want to engage in PP, you have no reason to pledge at all, and can play whatever mode you want.

And if you want to pledge to PP because you want to and you want to play in Solo or PG because you want to?

. As I said before: only Powerplay nerds allowed

Again. No. Its not your diary where only you can read and write in it and you may run your PP like a dictatorship but it doesnt work here.

Extra missions etc yes anybody would want that but with such a vast area of PP AOI theres little chance of meeting anyone else anyway. If I want PVP only I can arrange a fight or do CQC where its guaranteed to meet somebody.

Perhaps if youd started with ideas to 'improve' PP and not slated or attacked anyone disagreeing with you youd have had a more fruitful conversation. But you basically come across as wanting it all your own way which is your opinion. I would personally try and make PP as attractive as possible to as many peopel as possible, not chase them off by belittling them and trying to control the conversation, especially as you yourself mentioned 'Open Only' at least three times in your OP and made it clear that is the primary intention. I did PP in Open for 9 months and saw nobody, address that issue or ridiculous size and no room for new Powers and we might get somewhere.

On another thread recently I suggested Mahon might lose the election and a new PP character would take over as leader of the Alliance, it got shot down as unworkable and frankly not wanted. Seems PP people dont want change that might affect them, just other people. How can it be dynamic if nobody loses and nobody else can get a foothold?

PP maybe should only attract systems that are in their ideology, no special artificial bubbles of influence but more like train stations linked by ideology with constant attacks by opposing ideologies. Maybe it should be separated from BGS completely so both people can play their own game without affecting the other. Yes there could be more varying missions including subterfuge and sabotage. yes there should be PVP specific or intended zones within that. Yes get rid of the modules as just encourages shopping for people who dont even want to do PP. But make it more attractive not more punishing or penalised.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

See @Bashy81 ? How can we even talk about things when we have comments like the one above? For some people it's just a battle of principle anyway. I wonder what would happen if really Powerplay would not affect BGS anymore... Imagine a galaxy without the 15% discount in LYR systems, the salt!

 

[Vetinari]

See @Bashy81 ? How can we even talk about things when we have comments like the one above?

Seems I can say exactly the same thing

 

[Bard Voronwe]

I think that competence is always required when somebody is talking about anything, and you obviously has none Powerplay-wise.

I am not interested in pigeon chess attempts (have too many in my field of work already), especially the explicit ones: you sold yourself trying to trigger people with the "5C = PvP" thing.

You can fly back to your flock and claim victory for what that matters.

Said so, the only way to counter 5C is by tweaking the game design accordingly, as we are talking about in here. Have a nice day.

 

[Bashy81]

Maybe we should start from scratch. What should Powerplay be not for us (the leaderships and the dedicated communities) but for Elite Dangerous as a game?

what should be the foundations of Powerplay? What should it offer to the community?

Imo, Powerplay should be the competitve PvE/PvP teamplay feature of ED. The BGS is many things to many people, but Powerplay should have a focus & be the 'tip of the spear' when it comes to competitive PvE. It already is that in many ways, but with muddled implementation (it tries to be something for anyone but ends up being below-par for everyone.) And ofc, it has mechanics flaws, which were played-out to their logical conclusion several years ago, & now it just eats itself, when it isn't stagnating.

Powerplay needs to be clearly distinct from the BGS, so it has its own defined appeal. It needs to be seen at large as a valid career path in it's own right, whilst accepted that it is an end-game feature, since if you really get into it, it will be the driver for almost all your in-game activity. It should not be designed around the lowest common-denominator, because.. "endgame competitive feature".

ED allows you to try whatever you want at whatever stage on your personal progression. It's the Blaze Your Own Trail thing. & an endgame feature can still be compatible with that .. "The Game of Powers is not for the weak-hearted. You will encounter other CMDRs with the best ships money & engineering can provide ; Some will be your allies, others may be out to destroy you. Can you make it in this ocean, little fish, or do you need time to build your skills & resources?. It is for you to decide, but you have been warned.."

It's hammed-up iffy marketing, lol, but it's a placeholder to show how Powerplay could be positioned so players know what it really is, without creating a situation where existing Powerplayers might shun new players "who shouldn't be here". Powerplay groups are very helpful & informative for all their pledges, and that shouldn't be lost.

Another thing I find to be crucial is for the game to offer different ways to enjoy it, but with the costant of involving as many game mechanics the game it has to offer: that's the reason why I am not a big fan (right now) of "Open Only BGS", I understand perfectly well that's there's plenty of people that do not like being involved directly with their enemies and are more for a "grind vs grind" approach, I don't like for myself that but, being a functional adult which is quite rare nowadays, I don't have any issues with that and they need to have something to play the game that way (with all the pros and cons that come out of it)... but right now there's a lot of people looking for a Pve/PvP mixed game and I think they need something for themselves too. It's just that easy.

I completely 100% agree with this. ED is a broad-church game and we can all co-exist. But for that to happen you need a place for each significant cohort where their gamestyles are not marginalised, and currently, Open-PvE (PvE/PvP mixed game) does not have such a place. You can see just from all the repetitive threads over the years in this Forum how that desire for a PvE/PvP mixed-game does have a significant following. And it is even stronger among the Powerplay groups.

Considering the different things above, Powerplay designers should consider as milestones (in my opinion of course):

• missions to cover the different gameplay mechanics and avoid as much as possible any grindy game mechanic
• no PvP only approach to avoid exploits (sacrificial lamb sidewinders)
• a set of rules to avoid 5C by design (and as long expanding aimlessly will be a danger to some tactical crucial systems we will have 5C)
• game mechanics that point out clearly where a system is being attacked or defended and where a player should be able to find (or avoid) PvP interaction
• good rewards for the players involved, proportional to personal engagement and the health of the Power itself

They all seem good to me.

Id want game mechanics that are capable of surviving maturity of the feature, since we clearly need faster progress than we've had up to now, but it cant be stalemating in 6 months after implementation. But I dont know how to bullet-point such a vagueness. Same goes for preservation of the 'Blockade - Blockade running - Blockade breaking' gameplay that is the highlight of the current Powerplay implementation. It curbs the grind by bringing one side's progress close to a halt for a significant period, and that needs to maintain or increase in importance. I cant bullet-point those, but I could certainly TL;DR them, as you know by now

 

[Bard Voronwe]

What buggers me the most... the game itself already has some end-game features and mechanics.

Thargoids for example. You simply can't go against them with your freshly new Sidewinder.
Or Community Goals: if you want to compete in those and go to the upper tiers, you need to know what you are doing, you need expertise.

But when it comes to Powerplay... apparently everybody should be able to compete with far more experienced CMDRs, no knowledge required, no competence, nada, niet, nulla, nichts, nothing at all.

One could think that those people are the usual alt-collecting users constantly trying to sabotage Powerplay votes every single cycle...

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

What buggers me the most... the game itself already has some end-game features and mechanics.

Thargoids for example. You simply can't go against them with your freshly new Sidewinder.
Or Community Goals: if you want to compete in those and go to the upper tiers, you need to know what you are doing, you need expertise.

But when it comes to Powerplay... apparently everybody should be able to compete with far more experienced CMDRs, no knowledge required, no competence, nada, niet, nulla, nichts, nothing at all.

Well I disagree in as far as the fact that open PP in the current system has no bar for entry in my view. I understand the "end game" aspect - it really can provide that and maintain interest or draw in advanced players to play much longer/more than they otherwise would. But there is a huge amount that an early game player can do to support their power. Preps (and some expansions) are almost always empty of player enemies and can be done in a shieldless paper ship, BGS plays a huge part and can be done effectively in a sidewinder. Where player opposition is sparse, UMing in wing can safely earn lots of merits by tagging targets in a cobra or vulture (unengineered vulture was my staple for a good while).

I joined early game and lots of our recruits are the same. It leads to really quite a wholesome and supportive community with a full cross-section of the game's players. Endgame players are directly incentivised by the feature itself to protect and nurture early game players, and the latter can really help the power, from day 1. It also makes the prospect of flying in open, and indeed taking interdictions and rebuys from enemy players etc. much more palatable and digestible to early players. Some early gamers happily take a leg up to accelerate their progress, others value the experience of making their own way ship by ship up the ladder and learning. In a team/community what you want is people to stay and feel they can follow their own path in their own time. And if they stay, they continue to contribute.

One thing I really like about PP is that as my CMDR has progressed, different activities have been steadily unlocked for me and it has never gotten stale. It would be a shame if this accessibility to players of all levels were lost. Basically you can join at whatever level, flying always in open and say "I can do this, this and this, but those things over there are way too hard/dangerous! Maybe some day..." and still have plenty to do. And wait long enough, and along that day comes for all the things you might like to do.

Re: BGS, the accessibility (to early game players especially) and diversity of activity available there (even exploration!), as well as the fact that PP is what brought the BGS alive and gave it meaning for me, and it making sense in the political landscape, mean that I'd prefer to keep the link there. By all means redesign the link (preferably if nothing else then to make sense, where currently it often doesn't) of course.

 

[Bashy81]

See @Bashy81 ? How can we even talk about things when we have comments like the one above? For some people it's just a battle of principle anyway. I wonder what would happen if really Powerplay would not affect BGS anymore... Imagine a galaxy without the 15% discount in LYR systems, the salt!

Yeah. Pity really, there were some decent questions, and at least some constructive ideas buried in all the salt. But you can spend ages (as i do in other threads at the mo) explaining why certain things don't apply in practice, or why the proposed suggestions would introduce more problems than they solve. & get nowhere regardless.
Its totally understandable, I didn't have a clue such things could exist in ED until I experienced them myself for the first time.
A module shopper doing bare minimum merits simply isn't engaging in a way that is likely to encounter the gameplay we're talking about. And that gameplay doesnt happen often enough, or have the player organisational infrastructure to properly evolve it, because Modes and all of the follow-on consequences of that.

Trying to broaden the appeal, has made Powerplay what it is today. What it actually needs to become more popular, is more focus to adequately appeal to it's ideal demographic. But that is a counter-intuitive argument, so obviously not comprehensible to people who are sceptical to begin with.

 

[Dragsham]

Powerplay to a casual ppplayer like me, even after a year or so, is an enigma.
The write ups ingame do nothing to shed light on its permutations. Getting your faction aligned with whomever depends entirely on your location within the bubble.
Lorewise makes perfect sense.
And yet I see small single bubbles miles from HQ on their own being undermined or fortified etc.
Just leads to confusion....?
Rant over....
Obviously leadership is needed to decrypt the complex machinations and tomfoolery required to manipulate the requisite you desire.
As a noob pp cmdr hellbent on affiliation with a power, I'm just overwhelmed by its complexity and 3rd party info aside, lack of info.
So I've made mistakes repledged (modules/weps aside) and repledged again. Finally I can raise hell. Ha!@

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Well I disagree in as far as the fact that open PP in the current system has no bar for entry in my view. I understand the "end game" aspect - it really can provide that and maintain interest or draw in advanced players to play much longer/more than they otherwise would.

I will make again the example with Thargoids: killing them is actually end-game but nobody make a fuss about that. And new players can actually try and assist experienced players, they've just got to grind some things first. The same could happen with Powerplay: new players could be involved anyway, especially within big communities, the only difference is that Powerplay should offer something different from the rest of the game, make the other players basically the Thargoid of politics. XD The Powerplay I have in mind would offer many "familiar" mechanics with missions, and with real time merits (and no more snipes) people would be able to see what the current hot spots in theGalaxy and even avoid them if they don't feel confident enough: Powerplay dominions are quite big anyway. Yeah, there would always be a possibility to find enemy CMDRs, but that's what should make Powerplay different and challenging in my opinion. Most experienced CMDRs would be most likely involved in such hotspots, it would be a natural process.

One thing I really like about PP is that as my CMDR has progressed, different activities have been steadily unlocked for me and it has never gotten stale. It would be a shame if this accessibility to players of all levels were lost. Basically you can join at whatever level, flying always in open and say "I can do this, this and this, but those things over there are way too hard/dangerous! Maybe some day..." and still have plenty to do. And wait long enough, and along that day comes for all the things you might like to do.

I think I answered to this point too above, but I will repeat myself to be clear: I never ever said I want to reduce accessibility, I just want to make the level of difficulty "higher" by forcing these players to Open. And about engineers well... most engineers are in some Powerplay bubble. Nurturing new players could become something like pointing out for them the fastest way to grind their ships. Basically what we already do.
And about the variability of activities... Powerplay missions should grant them, offering the same range of different activities BGS does.

Trying to broaden the appeal, has made Powerplay what it is today. What it actually needs to become more popular, is more focus to adequately appeal to it's ideal demographic. But that is a counter-intuitive argument, so obviously not comprehensible to people who are sceptical to begin with.

That's true, and what most people ignore is that many of the best players we saw in the game stopped playing because of the lack of "real opposition": they simply got burned by the spreadsheet war. We all know how happy we usually are when we start shooting each other, most of the players that still play Elite Dangerous might not understand, but I believe that most of the ones dropped the game might understand this.

Powerplay to a casual ppplayer like me, even after a year or so, is an enigma.
The write ups ingame do nothing to shed light on its permutations. Getting your faction aligned with whomever depends entirely on your location within the bubble.
Lorewise makes perfect sense.
And yet I see small single bubbles miles from HQ on their own being undermined or fortified etc.
Just leads to confusion....?
Rant over....
Obviously leadership is needed to decrypt the complex machinations and tomfoolery required to manipulate the requisite you desire.
As a noob pp cmdr hellbent on affiliation with a power, I'm just overwhelmed by its complexity and 3rd party info aside, lack of info.
So I've made mistakes repledged (modules/weps aside) and repledged again. Finally I can raise hell. Ha!@

One of the reasons why I always fly open is to intercept casual players and tell them where they should go to have indications. My advice is to partecipate in your Power's discord and ask as many things you do not understand and "build up" the different pieces of the puzzle with a lot of patience. I've been a recruit too, and I've always asked (I still do) @QBit4D why we were doing something or why we couldn't do something else. Learning curve in Powerplay is pretty harsh, you need time.

 

[Dragsham]

I'm doing just that, in discord. Some good advice thx.
And I'd like to commend the posts thus far, agreeing that yes, there's alot to learn. But I'll learn.
Let's hope l can be of help to my chosen power.
Brainstorming here is fab. Fdevs read these posts. They see the big picture and know stuff we don't. So us tabling ideas concepts etc is a good thing.
And those who disagree need speak too. Insight is a wonderful thing.
Keep it positive. And defo not personal.

o7

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

I will make again the example with Thargoids: killing them is actually end-game but nobody make a fuss about that. And new players can actually try and assist experienced players, they've just got to grind some things first.

Yep. Indeed there is also more room for harder PvE in powerplay. Given the opt-in nature of PP, PP NPCs could be a lot harder, at least in some circumstances. Often PP is a little disappointing because of the lack of player opposition (and I'm speaking as a hauler/UMer). Hard NPCs can fill that gap and make co-op with teammates more interesting even when player oppo is light.

The same could happen with Powerplay: new players could be involved anyway, especially within big communities, the only difference is that Powerplay should offer something different from the rest of the game, make the other players basically the Thargoid of politics. XD

I guess I'm saying that's already how it is for players doing PP in open. It can be quite predictable where (and to some extent when) player opposition will turn up and you can tune your desited risk level by picking different activities. But to be competitive in open, some players do need to engage with that enemy player risk, and that is where the more "mature game"/endgame players come in. The earlier-game players free up the "hardcore" to do the tough jobs by doing the jobs that demand less equipment/skill/experience. Everyone works to their own level and gets the level of stimulation/risk to keep them interested. And everyone gets the sense of something to progress towards, beyond their current level. And this is by no means to say that endgame players don't also do all the lower risk/danger stuff. These are not just menial, uninteresting tasks left to "lowly newbs".

The Powerplay I have in mind would offer many "familiar" mechanics with missions,

This has a chance of being great.

and with real time merits (and no more snipes) people would be able to see what the current hot spots in theGalaxy

One thing here - what snipes do offer is some guesswork element to in-week strategy (yes, as well as often a lot of wasted merits and stretching of credibility) and some serious stakes to flying in open. These are good things to me, and are one place where PvP has an opportunity to almost make or break a cycle, potentially through even a single CMDR kill. If you could have live merits (in terms of cause and effect) and still have a sense in which a plan has points of failure (something at stake in-game that can be lost by incautious CMDRs taking risks, or due to wiley hunters making key attacks), that'd be great.

and even avoid them if they don't feel confident enough: Powerplay dominions are quite big anyway. Yeah, there would always be a possibility to find enemy CMDRs, but that's what should make Powerplay different and challenging in my opinion. Most experienced CMDRs would be most likely involved in such hotspots, it would be a natural process.

Like I say, it's like this now (in open), and probably a good thing. I suppose part of what you're saying is that you want players to be able to spot these hotspots etc. without being part of a group that collectively knows what the good/weaponised PP moves are, and so what will be opposed.

I never ever said I want to reduce accessibility, I just want to make the level of difficulty "higher" by forcing these players to Open. And about engineers well... most engineers are in some Powerplay bubble.

Okay sounds like we agree (and actually, being in open doesn't add fhe unmanageable levels of danger/inconvenience that some people make out)

Nurturing new players could become something like pointing out for them the fastest way to grind their ships. Basically what we already do.

I mean, even beyond this, when you have early game guys pulling 100 merits in a T6 in a hot expansion being proudly protected by a wing of top tier PvPers in FDLs - and then later those guys turn around and start hauling merits themselves. It doesn't fit the "griefer" narrative trotted out time and again in this game.

And about the variability of activities... Powerplay missions should grant them, offering the same range of different activities BGS does.

As I say, PP missions might be really good. Nevertheless, involving minor faction BGS in PP leverages and enhances the significance of the somewhat rich content already available in minor faction BGS. Hard for me to let that go completely...
Plus, it still leaves the credible political system aspect - why wouldn't there be an interaction between MFs and powers?

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

I'm doing just that, in discord. Some good advice thx.
And I'd like to commend the posts thus far, agreeing that yes, there's alot to learn. But I'll learn.
Let's hope l can be of help to my chosen power.
Brainstorming here is fab. Fdevs read these posts. They see the big picture and know stuff we don't. So us tabling ideas concepts etc is a good thing.
And those who disagree need speak too. Insight is a wonderful thing.
Keep it positive. And defo not personal.

o7

I was going to say "afraid the only way is to join a discord" - looks like you already came to that realisation .

 

[Bard Voronwe]

@Bulbulunufus without quoting every part of your reply.

With new rules I believe it would come different kinds of complexity: I mentioned, for example, the new role of weaponised for example, but that's just something I came up by myself, who knows how many ways people will try to make their enemies work hard somewhere while they really are going to attack somewhere else, for example.

In current Powerplay "complexity" is mostly given by workarounds for very bad game design, snipes are a consequence of the "finire trigger" system, which makes Powerplay extremly stagnant (especially when forts and UM are done in PGs).

I think that Powerplay should help people find each other, both for cooperation and conflict. And that should be done at any level, especially if it will involve many new players. (And: it could be useful to integrade Odyssey game mechanics too )

 

[Bashy81]

I really do like the idea of removing merits from preps, do you have a price-point in mind for them? same question goes for forts as well I spose.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

I really do like the idea of removing merits from preps, do you have a price-point in mind for them? same question goes for forts as well I spose.

These things are part of the technicalities I'd gladly leave the developers to. Preparations in particula are seen as the fastest way to gain merits: this should change considering how dangerous they could be.

 

[Bashy81]

These things are part of the technicalities I'd gladly leave the developers to. Preparations in particula are seen as the fastest way to gain merits: this should change considering how dangerous they could be.

Ah k. Some things, sure: they're balancing details. When they affect the 5C landscape tho and have a more general significance.. these are things that I think its good to consider at the conceptual stage. Otherwise, in the event of some miraculous day when your plan is largely coopted & implemented, they come up with some crazy low or high values that make the whole thing nearly worthless. Not knowing what kindve Powerplay income or other earning potential might be in the mechanic, putting a CR figure is pretty pointless. Im thinking tho, as a ball-park, if Forts cost 100 Lira, id go with 500 Lira for the same quantity of preps. New players always want to put a mark down on the map & be involved in an expansion straight away. go them. if you want this goddam expansion, you have to appreciate there is a cost involved ok. 1000 ..Euros.. for preps.