Its stable enough for the opportunistic skirmishes Powerplay generates, although we will have to see how that translates in V2 given it might have more complex areas.
Open-Only in PP2.0?
- Thread starter August Lagrange
- Start date
There was a fun moment the other day where someone put out a call on discord to protect/avenge him from "gankers" who attacked him while he was "just farming NPCs"
And when asked where, it was in a powerplay expansion system.
For a power he was hostile towards.
Inside a conflict zone.
Where he had specifically picked the side opposing the powerplay faction.
And other players were present.
And those other players were pledged to, surprise surprise, the very powerplay faction he was opposing.
Some people's definitions of ganking literally extend as far as "I deliberately went out of my way to pick a fight and the other players didn't switch sides to join me". Absolute protagonist syndrome.
that's the status of the game. 
What kind of games do you know where you can choose unilaterally an handicap for your opponent and is still fun for both ? I mean any game can be fun even if you lose ( a football match, a COD match, a CZ in elite, whatever) but if the competion is unfair (ie the opponent is an hacker,) there is no fun, that's it.
Yeah, I've run into a few of these.
Good thing no one I know of is hacking, and Fdev gave us game mode choices so we can all have fun the way we want. There is no handicap, we all have the same choices, and we pick the mode we like best. Also in Elite, there is no winning, even in pp1
There is, you have the galactic standing which is fed from successful expansions. In V1 you have rewards for being in the top 3 and I expect something similar in V2.
So your choice (which allows easier traversal and efficiency) dictates mine (where there are more variables) because strategically its harder to gain in one mode? In V2 i'm fine with modes, but the rewards themselves need to be aware of the consequences of modes they are awarded in. For example why should PG be awarded the same as Open? PG could be the new exploit where alts are shot down to tank INF in total safety- if so, should player kills only 'count' in Open?
How can you handicap someone in Elite?
Because as far as I'm aware, you all have the same choices as I do.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not even this game is on that hypothetical list - as it is the choice of each player whether to handicap themself, or not. Players don't make choices for other players in this game, even if some players claim that they do.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Nothing is won that can't subsequently lost - there are no permanent "win" conditions.
... because players that might not be fun to play among are optional, whereas playing in a PG with friends is specifically facilitated by the game.
Which holds for Open as well - as system volumes are enormous and players dropped in to a normal space instance are invisible to those in SuperCruise - best to remove the likely exploit of players colluding to gain rewards for contest unconstested before it becomes a problem that is not limited to one game mode.
I am curious Bob. Aside from Elite Dangerous, what other multiplayer games that involved a lot of player engagement (ones where you cannot get by for example, by macro running) and individual skill have you played with systems that have grander scales in terms of PvP/TvT? And did you enjoy them?
TBC Not a 'GOTCHA', this is a genuine question.
Last edited:
You can go up and down, lose territory and bonuses. There is no 'permanent' win state in any ED features, its not that sort of game. Even Titans can respawn, and only via narrative is anything truly 'the end' of things.
But again, you deliberately pick ahead of time who you play with- not unless you are someone who sees another player and reaches for block before doing anything else?
Also, don't you see the logical problem in a competitive feature that should equalize the advantage but instead distorts it?
AFK was used for farming in PG the same (I assume if destruction = -ve INF, it might not) but its deliberate and unstoppable because any and all eyes are not hostile. In Open you'd be able to see traversal (since you don't exit rebuy in the middle of space). I'd point out this is how other issues like bots were found- people actually saw it.
If FD link player value (i.e. how far up the pecking order they are that week) to the inf gain or loss (if its a thing) you'd stop the potential exploit. But then thats just one apect between modes- reducing wing bonuses in PG would have done the same (and why I think its a good idea).
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Few multi-player games in general and none of them PvP - as I have zero interest in PvP from a being targeted perspective or from an initiating it perspective.
For example I've been aware of EVE Online for a long time - with precisely zero inclination to play such a game due to the player behaviours it encourages.
[edit]
Noting that this request for clarification was not a "gotcha", the same can't be said for previous such requests - as there are those who attempt to use the answer to discredit and disregard the opinion of a player who doesn't enjoy PvP when discussing entirely optional PvP in a game that does not require PvP.
[/edit]
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
While PvP remains an optional extra in this game, no.
Bots are a pox on any game - and steps should be taken to make them ineffective in any game mode.
If Wing bonuses are seen as a problem to be solved then they should be removed in all game modes - as they increase total reward while reducing individual risk in all game modes.
And yet there is no functional difference between PG and Open, even when both (for PP) are used completely differently? Optional or not, its still more than solo in bonuses as well as (for Open) drawbacks.
Yes they are, but it illustrates that those bots in Open (like any other player) can be countered directly. If they'd been in solo you'd not know and be able to do nothing.
They should be a thing, as they are an incentive to team up for the direct multiplayer part of ED. For Powerplay that should be at its highest to encourage more gameplay the devs themselves talk about and envisage.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Players who eschew PvP can play in PGs with friends - and may receive Wing bonuses for doing so. That some choose to potentially, maybe, handicap their progress in Open is their choice and their choice alone.
Indeed - noting that they have been used as a modes-other-than-Open boogeyman for a long time now.
They are not an incentive for "direct" multi-player, no matter how much some want them to be considered to be - as they are available in both multi-player game modes so are therefore an incentive for co-operative play.
And yet- that choice is the one FDs devs seem to be the most enthusiastic about in the livestreams.....and again, Powerplay is not the wider game. It has objectives and strategic gains made easier (or less complicated) in PG than in Open. For example AFK turretboats. Reductive nonsense is what killed V1, if every mode is representative then Open should have something as a reward the others do not.
As again, it shows that in Open you can at least have a chance to find others. In the above example you come across an AFK wing you can dispatch them easily.
And why is it co-operative play is seen as equal in a mode that excludes other groups by design, to another that makes having wings useful against other wings? Having a bonus then encourages wings and actually supporting the gameplay FD seem to want.
Moreover, people here are claiming to want player interactions and PvP. But then claim its a handicap? Excuse me?
By playing in solo I have a handicap, i can't wing up, but hey, i can live with that. My choice. I would love for FD to add NPC wingmen though.
Perhaps I'd be amenable to FD making PP open only if we could have NPC wingmen and the elite ones would be as tough as Rubbernuke wants PP NPCs to be!
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Frontier have been enthusing about playing in Open for a long time - noting that they haven't, in all of that time, chosen to penalise those who don't.
The AFK issue should have largely been dealt with in 2.0 due to changes in CZs in the rest of the game.
If not wanting to engage in PvP is what killed v1, what realistic expectation is there that it will be different in 2.0?
Noted, noting that it's still not a reason to make anything Open only / other mode penalised.
Those other groups, and the opposition that they may represent, are entirely optional in this game, even though Frontier know that not all players accept that.
On the topic of the validity of polls, they can be rough indicators of sentiment as long as the poll itself is produced so people can view it and account for self-selection bias and bias in the wording of the poll and make a judgement on that.