Open-Only in PP2.0?

[Darrack]

is going to fail again in its current form

In your opinion, mine is that PP2 is 100% better than PP1, my main role in the old system was hauling for Fortification, boring but the rewards were good, the new system means i have way more stuff i can do, the balance to that is it takes longer for me to effect my chosen system.

O7

 

[Darrack]

It's sad, there's an entire group of people in the game who've been completely discouraged from flying in open purely based on utterly overblown accounts by an incredible few loud voices including in this forum.

A basic bit of engineering, and some basic flying skills renders "ganking," utterly toothless.

Wait your saying Open isnt Dangerous or a disadvantage?

O7

 

[Murky Dregs]

Wait your saying Open isnt Dangerous or a disadvantage?

O7

Essentially. Playing open since 2016. Don't die much, at all.

 

[Darrack]

We want our playstyle to have RELEVANCE

What this really means is 'I have no targets', i wonder why.

O7

 

[Murky Dregs]

I still don't get why some people cant get a grasp of the fact that empires can tumble without a shot being fired, history has taught us that.

O7

Which ones? And how many were created without violence?

 

[Darrack]

Essentially.

Then why do folks want a bonus to Open play?

O7

 

[Murky Dregs]

Then why do folks want a bonus to Open play?

O7

Because the Powerplay gameplay activities say something along the lines of, "Shoot enemy Commanders."

It's great fun. You should try it!

 

[Darrack]

Because the Powerplay gameplay activities say something along the lines of, "Shoot enemy Commanders."

It's great fun. You should try it!

Nope that is one line from many different activities, the whole basis of PP2 shouldn't be changed because of one type of play which i imagine is very minimal otherwise folks wouldn't be here complaining at the of a lack of victims.

O7

 

[Vermin]

In which case it's not a reward that is being sought but PvP-gating of essentially the whole game. In a game where PvP is, by design, an optional extra and every single player bought or backed it on that basis. That's one way to encourage players who accept the game design for what it is to reconsider whether they will continue to play.

Given that Frontier have, over the years, advised us that they are "well aware" that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP, that the "majority" of players play in Open, and much more recently that while "a lot" of players engage in combat (unspecified whether PvP or PvE), "a lot" of players don't get involved in combat "at all", I doubt that they will make changes that would force players to play in Open to affect game features.

It's becoming clearer that the thrust of the argument is to make PvP dominant in the game by forcing players to play among those who want to shoot at them, with no regard to how that would affect the playerbase.

.... and when players adversely affected by proposals are disregarded by those making proposals that would suit their gameplay, those proposals can be equally disregarded (and opposed, of course) by those who would be adversely affected.

Again being deliberately disingenuous to suit your own argument.

The system is an inherently competative one, hence why it should be kept in the mode that provides that.

We want content, a means for our playstyle to be relevant. Its not about it being the "dominant" mechanic, its about it being a meaningful part of the mechanics that already exist.

Quite frankly Robert, i don't think I'll be interacting with you any further regarding this topic as you seem very set on strawman arguments, which i do not have time for.

 

[Murky Dregs]

Nope that is one line from many different activities, the whole basis of PP2 shouldn't be changed because of one type of play which i imagine is very minimal otherwise folks wouldn't be here complaining at the of a lack of victims.

O7

Victims? What victims?

You can shoot back too; pretty funny how that works. There's these things called "hardpoints, shield generators, hull reinforcements, etc.."

 

[Darrack]

Victims? What victims?

You can shoot back too; pretty funny how that works. There's these things called "hardpoints, shield generators, hull reinforcements, etc.."

Your seriously not trying to tell me your T7/T9/T8 is going to take out my Vette?

O7

 

[Murky Dregs]

Your seriously not trying to tell me your T7/T9/T8 is going to take out my Vette?

O7

Now, a 'Vette is a victim. It's a giant billboard saying "please shoot me." A favorite bullseye for medium pilots everywhere.



They don't fare well without support, easily outran, and easily torpedoed.

A T7/8 will easily outmaneuver one to make an easy escape.

Somebody handy with mines will absolutely ruin your day in a 'vette.

Even a T9 if you build it right. Besides, what makes you think a well armed transport should take out a warship? Do you think that's all you find in Open?

Perhaps you need more experience in this arena?

 

[Darkfyre99]

Risk is a probability by definition

Right, and that probability varies wildly, depending upon a number of factors, most of which are beyond Frontier’s control, because they ceded the most important factor, who hosts a particular instance, to players. I’ve been playing in Open since the beginning, and it’s not for nothing that I evaluate my overall risk of death under the guns of another player at less than 0.1% on average. And that includes running CGs in Open.

Part of that is that I've never cared about the "grand strategy" of the Power I support. I just wanted to do my thing, and that thing isn't heavily combat oriented. There was no reason for me to participate in a combat expansion, which is where the greatest risk of actually being attacked via PvP lie. By my rough estimate, somebody playing in Europe at 20:00 UTC is nearly ten times as likely to encounter other players than I am, even though we're both playing concurrently. I could go into a highly contested system, where there's twenty players in Open duking it out, and at best I'll see two... assuming that we're even in the same instance (Supercruise, or one of dozens on normal space) and instancing works perfectly each time.

Do you really think I deserve the same bonus, simply because I'm playing in Open?

 

[Darrack]

Perhaps you need more experience in this arena?

Ive had plenty, but thanks

O7

 

[AEBRAM]

I will chime in the PP v2.0 and Open Play. Personally, PP v2.0 would be a viable option for PVP framework: Players vs. Enemy Faction Players. A simple Boolean or validation check on the FS Interdiction module activation against player-controlled ships would eliminate non-PP v2.0 players from being viable PVP targets. This suggestion leans into Players actively engaging other players, on their faction's behalf, for intergalactic dominance. Plus, with PP v2.0 on how PP modules are available from any one faction, then there is reduced need to faction hop unless you're a PVP player then to find targets; Hence, it will inevitably create a balanced ecosphere of faction players to battle over time, as all the "apples in one basket" leaves no targets to engage.

 

[Darrack]

This suggestion leans into Players actively engaging other players

Its a good suggestion however many players do not want PvP in Power Play.
Things as they are at the moment are perfect, those who do want PvP play in open, the rest of us can use Solo or PVE PG.

O7

 

[Murky Dregs]

Ive had plenty, but thanks

O7

Well, not enough to realize just how unmaneuverable the Corvette is against two out of the three ships you've mentioned.

Ironically, I've been in open, for hours, at the busiest rares site in the bubble.

Not a "ganker," in sight.

 

[AEBRAM]

Its a good suggestion however many players do not want PvP in Power Play.
Things as they are at the moment are perfect, those who do want PvP play in open, the rest of us can use Solo or PVE PG.

O7

That's the beauty. Group and Solo servers when you're just wanting your own "me" time without interference doing your v2.0 PP activities. Otherwise, it's a viable option to develop a player driven, PVP framework centered around PP.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

It's somewhat ironic when players who can't force others to play their way then go on to call them selfish.

If the proposal were to affect those disinterested in it then I'd agree, but it doesn't (or if it does it's negligible in terms of rerouting around a permit locked volume, which already exist in-game), so I don't. Maybe I need to get to work on a suggestions forum proposal prior to the launch of Colonisation....

This is a somewhat odd twisting of my point, to be clearer:

1. In this specific circumstance, as always, you've assumed the other party is a 'ganker', which to be clear, is nonsensical in a powerplay interaction context (which actively encourages attacking players pledged to rival powers), and shows the weird biases you've built up over the past decade plus.

2. Adopting a 'central protagonist' (where everything is about you as an individual) rather than a teamplay/compeititive mantra in a game loop which is PvP/TvT is selfish, as it gives little regard to the others playing, or maintaining a healthy gameloop, and leads to a toxic environment with the collapse of said loop.

3. To quote your own stock answer "its excluding a feature/option from the rest of the community behind a wall of forcing choice on the player." Any time in the last decade such a mechanic was proposed or floated by FDEV, its been shouted down by the Forum Consensus clutching at their rosary beads about how 'this isnt the game they kickstartered' (usually while ignoring the lack of offline mode, Iron man mode and other undelivered promises) and the such

 

[Rebel Yell]

Nope that is one line from many different activities, the whole basis of PP2 shouldn't be changed because of one type of play which i imagine is very minimal otherwise folks wouldn't be here complaining at the of a lack of victims.

First: the cringy concept of "victimisation" in powerplay sounds like ones climbing on mirrors -> there are ALLIES and ENEMIES.

We're not complaining, we're asking for a fair game where you can stop us doing things and we can do the same to you.

One can always run/try to escape etc. again fair game.

Unfortunately, solo/PG is not fair game anymore, saying the contrary is hypocrisy.