Don't know. I think they did.
Another (feature breaking) one (that happened twice) was expansion CZs spawned opposition that had no weapons- so 5C dutifully expanded powers and destroyed months (if not years) of work.
Open-Only in PP2.0
- Thread starter August Lagrange
- Start date
Another (feature breaking) one (that happened twice) was expansion CZs spawned opposition that had no weapons- so 5C dutifully expanded powers and destroyed months (if not years) of work.
You know what would be wicked? Make powerplay NPC-s dangerous--give them G5 dirty drag drives, phasing PA-s, drag munition packhounds, resonant cascade torpedoes, SCO drives. Make them actively pursuit players, haulers and fighter alike.
But in solo/PG only
That way you have a choice: face dangerous NPC-s with 100% certainty; or have an uncertain chance of meeting an even more dangerous player opforce.
Choose wisely, young padawan
...and thus biblical amounts of forum/Reddit salt shall be generated
Yea, but no thank you - that really looks like a punishment not an improvement - people will move to open with large block lists and/or local firewall block lists - this way making open a safe haven or not engage with pp anymore.
However, if you make those Boss PP NPC mode agnostic - aka also available in open - then there are chances something would happen*, but not for the good
*(the vast majority of player base will stop doing the things that will attract them bossy pp npc - and if you dont believe me, ask them criminals how do they like fighting ATR and iirc the ATR is not pursuing players in SC while being rather predictable in their appearance)
Absolutely. I find it funny that I can waltz into another power's territory and no npc bats an eye. At the very least make opposing superpower NPC-s actively hostile. If I pledge to eg Arissa and go into a RES in Hudson system the powerplay NPC-s there should go all "shoot first, ask questions later". And every other PP NPC should be actively hostile to an Archon's pledge
That was deliberate on Frontier’s part. Too many complaints by players that those particular PowerPlay NPCs were too dangerous.
Still, something like this could be used to level the playing field without forcing everyone into the same game mode. Meeting a high-level NPC can be likely in solo, very likely in PG if you're flying in a wing and somewhat likely in open. The high level NPC-s can be leveled to the player combat rank and ship; that is, if you're a Novice flying a Type 7 you won't get an Elite level FDL with five phasing PA-s that an Elite player flying a Cutter might face.
They can also be made location specific: if you try to sabotage a carrier group in solo or PG, you will face high level NPC-s seeking you out. The more players in the PG instance around an enemy carrier; the more acts of sabotage you do (eg the more turrets you disable or cargo holds you hatchbreak) the more you'll raise the alert level and the more NPC-s with progressively tougher ships spawn in until you're either killed (with lost progress) or forced to retreat. And you have a cooldown for instances--can't relog or otherwise reset the instance, you'll face a dozen very angry, very trigger happy FDL-s and Python MKII-s if you do this sooner than an hour or two from your last sabotage act. Whereas in Open you get maybe one or two NPC-s but the onus is on players to defend their PP carriers: find a neglected enemy carrier and sabotage to your heart's content! Or until someone from their ranks reacts to the message in their inbox that calls everyone to action to protect a carrier group under attack.
Make menu log timeout in hostile territory while under threat 60 seconds to disincentivize logging out and then using the recovery option to get out of a bind.
This way people who really don't want to deal with Open can play in Solo/PG, but still face enough challenge to make them wonder if Open would make more sense instead.
That aged wellThat was deliberate on Frontier’s part. Too many complaints by players that those particular PowerPlay NPCs were too dangerous.
That's all predicated on the idea that anyone should play the game only one way ... or there is only one reason to play solo.
There seems to be a lot of players who struggle with the idea of ... Forge your OWN path.
I don't play solo/PG because of gankers, hard pvp or because I somehow think Open is a challenge I am not upto. I play solo/PG for the solitude ... plain and simple. I relish the universe being mine to explore and simply don't want other people in it while I do it.
There is no "playing field" to level because we are playing different games .... Forge your own path.
This forum is a perfect microcosm of why I don't play in Open. The constant insistence by 50%(I'm rounding down) of the community that I am somehow doing something wrong by not playing their way. I don't want to deal with that while I casually traverse the black. It's my down time.
Last edited:
I get your sentiment of solitude and lack of other people in solo. At the same time I understand why veteran Powerplayers want to make it open only, since PP is inherently something that pits players against each other. Reconciling these two completely contradicting views is really, really hard, and since there are reasons other than direct or indirect PvP to pledge (roleplay, it seems, is a big motivation for quite some) I don't think that those who say that if you don't want human interactions, don't pledge for powerplay are in the right--but they do have a point.
The right thing IMO is to make PP across all game modes more challenging by beefing up NPC-s--it's not right that the 5C can bot away without a worry in the world in solo. Certain elements should be fairly easy and accessible for all no matter the game mode, like general trading or missions (but still more challenging than run-of-the-mill trading and missions). Others should be endgame, like messing with the carrier groups. As with AXCZ-s, make these advanced activities very difficult, but still possible if you have the skills, to do in solo (the baseline); disincentivize large PG-s by scaling opposing NPC difficulty and numbers with player numbers in a PG instance (the stick) and most importantly, incentivize doing these activities in open by making them actually easier in this mode if you know where to go and don't lurk around for too long (the carrot).
I'm sure it's not a perfect solution, I'm no gameplay designer, but constructive discussion about how to make things palatable for most players should be the point of this thread
I dont want to play in open because there is little to no reason to do so.
All the game's objectives are pve only and no game objective is asking me to do something directly with or directly against other players, not to mention that any pvp interference is counter productive to the game's goals for both parties.
And when i do play in open, i doit usually because i do like to play coop with other players against thargs, for example, or to fight in a CZ for a common cause but not because i want to fight directly against other players
That's the reality of the game.
The modes are in the game not to increase or to decrease difficulty of the game, to make it challenging or not, nor to punish nor to reward players.
The only reason the modes are in is to filter other players out, so one has the liberty to chose who they play with - and all the gameplay, until now at least, is designed to work with the modes - as in an asynchronous indirect way - Including PP10.
To be clear it's not like i'm against PVP in online games - this is the only online game where i dont feel like engaging in direct pvp - every other game - starting with Quake, Unreal, UT, CS then going mmo like DAoC and Age of Conan then later on Dota2 and more recently World of Warships - i played all of them for the pvp part
But in ED, pvp simply does not make any sense - except for all sorts of make-believe personal fantasies regarding space battles a la Star Wars.
PVP is connected to the game as much as CQC is - and that is precisely zero.
Well, no - that's what i keep saying. PP10 is built as a pure PVE activity
Make it so that all the PP activities are gained by direct PVP and you will be right and PP should be open only - but it's not.
Not even PP20 - it seem to be about supporting factions in game to convince them to join/support a power - factions you are not even related to simply because there is no direct connection between a cmdr and a faction, PMF included.
You may chose to support a faction or not, but you are not a member of that faction - you are still a member of Pilots Federation, like me and everyone else - and yet we are expected to kill eachother on sight - even tho we are members of the same organization and are paid by the same organization?
It's f-ing ridiculous
I don't think you can reconcile those two views, but to be honest, it kind of seems like the people that are vehemently opposed to OOPP aren't going to play anyway, because the mechanics are, and always will be, a boring grind to anyone not playing as part of a community. We can put in incentives to try to get people to play, and to overcome the anxiety of being subject to interdiction, but still, some will not be interested, and there's nothing we can do about that besides radical gameplay overhauls. We should accept that and focus on making the experience better for those who do want to be a part of the communal experience.
PP V1 has hardly any PvE in it- its essentially an endless A to B cargo CG or old model CZ. Outside of that, there is supposed to be roving NPCs to hassle you which were dialed back.
You are also wrong regards it not having PvP- on launch (for about 50 cycles) it had piracy with a heavy PvP incentive. The issue with that being the stolen cargo had personal and power benefits which powers used in collusion (for SCRAP) and 5C for UM. And like I said as well, Powerplay has real time features that support PvP not needed in other modes and totally unlike how the BGS operates.
So in effect the paper thin PvE (CG haul / CG shoot) is either wrapped in PvP (other players encountered) or even thinner PvE (roving NPCs). Its why other players are needed to make things interesting or varied, because its empty outside of the themed CZ (old style, not new) or the plain A to B cargo run. As much as you deny it, even FD at the time said this openly in the forums. In FU#4 FD said after U19s release they'll be reacting to feedback and assessing Open only.
In the end PP is an akward blend of features that never gels because it doesn't know what it truly is. PP V1 is at its most engaging with others who replace the almost invisible NPCs outside of PvE areas. If you listen to livestreams its apparent FD are intending PP V2 to be similar- stronghold FC attacks, system fights etc-even the new UI has a 'destroy other commanders' tag which assumes a PvP action (if its worded correctly).
Last edited:
True. But PP 2.0 promises to change that--the main spiel is "Go and do things!" and the goal to draw in people who don't participate in PP 1.0 precisely for the reason that it's a boring cargo grind with awful UI and UX as a bonus.
And from my own perspective, grinding as part of a community is still grinding
If PP 2.0 opens up options to roleplay as a specialist military contractor/agent instead of a glorified truck driver or murderhobo, I'll eagerly jump in. And I want NPC-s to offer actual, reasonable resistance to players (including me) no matter if it will be open-only or cross-mode. Even in open, opposing players can't be everywhere all the time and if I choose to go and mess with some unattended assets it should not be a walk in the park. And if solo is allowed, NPC-s should be more dangerous in that mode, acting basically as a proxy for players you won't face--even more so in PG-s to thwart "safety in numbers".![[VR] Bulbulunufus](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/261/261245.jpg?1671230473){kind=avatar}
Forget about open/solo for a minute. It stands to reason that the more you mess with a power's interests, or the more of a hero you are in your own power, the more resistance you should see. Thus NPCs should beef up their response the more effective you are at powerplay. Both in a given cycle, and in general (maybe on some decay scale). That naturally filters for pilots who are capable to take on that challenge due to skill and kit- because they'll be the ones that can get most done, and it simply makes sense and makes the game more immersive. Meanwhile, someone who's not operating at that level yet can still engage in just the same way- but they won't achieve as much and so won't receive the same level of opposition.
I can only act on the changes I've seen, none of which imply a significant revamp of the actual gameplay. It's worth keeping in mind the implications if they do something like that for those not in an organised community, but everything I've seen thus far has been about changing the galaxy-scale system, not individual gameplay.
From my perspective, when I first started PP, it was on my own, and I just delivered like one run of cargo. And then I had no feedback on what anyone else was doing, no indication it made a difference or that anyone cared. When I joined a community, it was completely different. I got a sense of how what I was doing fit with an overall strategy. Of course, that meant I was able to prioritise what I was doing to have the greatest impact, but also it meant a lot to understand why I was doing what I was doing. I went from being completely disengaged to being entirely on-board.And from my own perspective, grinding as part of a community is still grinding
So yeah, it doesn't feel like a grind when it doesn't feel meaningless.
Pretty much what I argue if FD ever went the NPC route. I at least hope NPCs in V2 are actually potent and not the 2015 era we have in V1.
From my perspective, PowerPlay has always been about having fun roleplaying my character first, the additional depth it gives to my day-to-day decisions second, and “effectiveness” and community a distant third. That’s the reason why I never earned merits once I discovered how much I loathe ABA hauling and combat farming, and went back to BGS manipulation, only with PowerPlay considerations being my primary factor, as opposed to fun and profit.
I can appreciate the effort required to plot out the most effective weekly strategy for each Power, but I play games to make interesting and in character decisions which I don’t face in real life, not blindly follow the instructions of another. If they kindly make it easy to obtain this information, I’ll take it under advisement. But I won’t jump through hoops to do so.
Question for you, was that in order to improve triggers, or was it just kind of advancing empire-aligned factions?
It was was a split of promoting ALD-favored factions and promoting anti-Hudson factions in Federation space… though admittedly more of the latter rather than the former. Since BGS 2.0 removed most of what I liked about BGS 1.0 while fixing its flaws, and switching over to the People’s Princess, my activities in that regard have been all over the place. Promoting non-Imperial factions to improve triggers is antithetical to my character’s pro-Empire beliefs, and pure anti-Hudson activities don’t get me any closer to that iCutter she wants.
Which is why I’m looking forward to BGS 2.0. The information we have so far indicates that Ethos isn’t based on faction type but activity type, and everything is at a system level with some strategic bottlenecks, so everyday gameplay should feel very similar to what I enjoyed about most about BGS 1.0, with the added benefit of actually credit for working for the Empire.
In my opinion, PP1.0 suffered from one major flaw ... it was just utterly baffling and convoluted. So I gave up on it and moved on to other things .... all the while in Solo. The community part has little to do with it. Dealing with other humans in that respect will drive me up the wall, regardless of the activity.
So I guess here is the rub ... well from my point of view anyway ... PP2.0 CAN'T be reliant on having a "community" around you to make it enjoyable. It SHOULD be enjoyable, and engaging on it's own merits, from a single player point of view. If FDev want more people playing it ... it needs to be playable in Solo ... it needs to be interesting in Solo. Because that's the ONLY place I'd ever play it.
The above is just my opinion ... and not a universal truth
I get the sense that FDev intend to make the feature enjoyable on its own merits, and more transparent. It's hard to argue with that from any point of view. They also seem to intend to make it less centralised and reliant on organised groups. Although those groups will still be advantaged in terms of the efficiency of teams (I keep coming back to the Thargoid war - anyone can move the needle but meaningful moves have been driven by organised teams who have "made the weather"). So in a sense both the solitary and group players are served, without arguably stepping on each others' toes.In my opinion, PP1.0 suffered from one major flaw ... it was just utterly baffling and convoluted. So I gave up on it and moved on to other things .... all the while in Solo. The community part has little to do with it. Dealing with other humans in that respect will drive me up the wall, regardless of the activity.
So I guess here is the rub ... well from my point of view anyway ... PP2.0 CAN'T be reliant on having a "community" around you to make it enjoyable. It SHOULD be enjoyable, and engaging on it's own merits, from a single player point of view. If FDev want more people playing it ... it needs to be playable in Solo ... it needs to be interesting in Solo. Because that's the ONLY place I'd ever play it.
The above is just my opinion ... and not a universal truth
It doesn't seem like people are arguing with the idea of solo/PG players being able to play the feature, just questioning what impact they then have on the galaxy. If someone wants others absent from their game then it could be imagined that they also have no interest in influencing the shared universe, because they do not wish to take part in multiplayer content, and the galaxy is just scenery to them. Some still do however, and the question is - should they have the same impact, since they are investing less (they provide less content because they are not interactable live, and they also undertake less risk because they're switching off the most effective form of opposition - players). And another question - if there's an advantage from using solo/PG (less risk, more predictability), then does that make the choice of modes less of a free choice, because it's incentivising one mode over another.
And there's two types of risk here. There's the transaction of saying "I'm willing to put my personal assets and in-game safety on the line for an outcome". And there's the risk of losing accrued progress towards that outcome - e.g. cargo that's lost mid-voyage so that the voyage or gathering process has to restart, with the potential cumulative end-of-week outcome that the enterprise (which is inherently multiplayer in a feature like this and not personal to a single Cmdr) fails.