Open-Only in PP2.0?

[Rebel Yell]

Oh, wasn't aware of that. Supports that FDev's thoughts about open only for pp2.0 actually had a 'scientific' background and was not just hot air...
Problem could be that they won't present a new gaming mode that would not attract the majority of players if open only...
On the other hand many more complaining about ganking could increase web traffic around E and FDev, which are important ingredients to economical success nowadays...

Newbies can farm their merits/progression in absolute safety modes, not affecting the Galaxy... with engineers' unlocks, and some experience, risks in open are much more manageable (if one wishes to affect the Galaxy) otherwise can continue to enjoy all aspects of the game without affecting it, without any limitation.

Seems pretty much straightforward to me.

 

[Brrokk]

Because PP/BGS is PvP, ...

Is not.

 

[Wily Rites]

I have to say that on reading much of what has come before, those PvP'ers who claim that there is no gameplay for them, are really kind of missing the point of the game entirely. You kit out your ship for 'helluva fight', for bounty hunting and going after particularly difficult targets, but for most in game activities. For those you kit out your ship differently, appropriately.

If they we're to get over this notion that the only thing in game is the 'unreal tournament' that they feel is there FDev given right, and engage in some of the actual gameplay in appropriately fitted ships, that some truly wonderful PvP gameplay would emerge from that. But the insistence upon continually ignoring close to the entirety of the possibilities in the game ruins any chance of fun PvP activities emerging for everyone else concerned; Demanding that gameplay be provided, when it is already there and you are ignoring it, is pretty crazy.

It is all PvE when it comes to the BGS, when this is in open other human players also constitute that environment; PvP is a subset of PvE.
I think that if folk learn to relax and enjoy PP2.0 a bit more, it could become a lot more fun for everyone, that means getting involved in all of its activities, and only fighting with others when the occasion arises and is appropriate, because your paths have crossed in your duty. Not because you were camping out looking for only humans to fight.

If this were the case, then there could be so much fun to be had in open, that folk would perhaps be more prone to coming in of their own accord, looking for it.

 

[Wily Rites]

I was once killed by a Type 9 in an engineered combat build.

I can comfortably nail 1,000,000cr and above bounties whilst hauling 750units in Betty. Its safer to add some module protection, if say there as a dangerous mission that instigates you getting chased by 4 or so of that kind of pirate, then this is the wiser option. You could also of course return home and get a 'murder boat' to deal with those pirates, then continue on hauling when they've been dealt with, but I find it more fun and a lot more sporting to deal with them with Betty, my trusty type-9!

It is a shame that you can't get involved in this kind of fun game play with human opponents though, I think perhaps that better ship board comms and nav equipment could solve this issue.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

Is not.

BGS nonsense is debatable (particularly as it was something adopted by the player base as a metric), but PP definitely is.

 

[angusmadmac1]

BGS nonsense is debatable (particularly as it was something adopted by the player base as a metric), but PP definitely is.

In your opinion ?? PP is BGS but a different system . Fill up your imaginary buckets of stuff quicker than your opponents.
I acknowledge that some groups have their own code and actually play PP like some groups play BGS , but the majority of folk don't really care .
Now you could get rid of modules and then let PP be played by those who actually do care and you would find those groups already have open only rules . So it's a win win . People play PP who care and others won't bother . And never shall the twain meet .
And lastly what are people complaining about all these high merits ?? You know the exploits in PP2 not once has PvP been mentioned it's all about the imaginary buckets being filled up really quickly .

 

[Rebel Yell]

In your opinion ?? PP is BGS but a different system . Fill up your imaginary buckets of stuff quicker than your opponents.
I acknowledge that some groups have their own code and actually play PP like some groups play BGS , but the majority of folk don't really care .
Now you could get rid of modules and then let PP be played by those who actually do care and you would find those groups already have open only rules . So it's a win win . People play PP who care and others won't bother . And never shall the twain meet .

Opinions are opinions matey.

People is people.

How do you know that "majority of folk" don't really care, or wouldn't really care?

I do speak for myself (+ some of my group who for sure are 100% agree with me) and it is where we are perfectly right, not pretending to be that.

 

[WhiteHaulerMan]

In your opinion ?? PP is BGS but a different system . Fill up your imaginary buckets of stuff quicker than your opponents.
I acknowledge that some groups have their own code and actually play PP like some groups play BGS , but the majority of folk don't really care .
Now you could get rid of modules and then let PP be played by those who actually do care and you would find those groups already have open only rules . So it's a win win . People play PP who care and others won't bother . And never shall the twain meet .

As it's a PvP/TvT bucket filling contest, it's not my 'opinion' that it is a PvP mechanic, albeit in its current form, one that isn't well implemented.

How players engage with it (much like how player groups use/used the BGS as a PvP metric when it initially wasn't designed as such) does not detract from this.

 

[angusmadmac1]

Opinions are opinions matey.

People is people.

How do you know that "majority of folk" don't really care, or wouldn't really care?

I do speak for myself (+ some of my group who for sure are 100% agree with me) and it is where we are perfectly right, not pretending to be that.

I totally agree it's just opinions.
We don't know it's right or wrong but to come out with absolutes is in my opinion wrong ?
I would rather people who enjoy that side of the game enjoy it without people like me trying to understand or module shopping and messing it up.
I do PP for the modules although I'm quite comfortable with ALD . I've even sullied my self with Feds just to get the modules ( yes I know I'm pretty disgusted too).
I try and not mess up other people's gameplay.
And I don't want to downplay people's enjoyment in aspects I have no interest.
It's a long winded apology if you took offense at my post it was not intended as so . I don't know how many people do PP , I don't know how many people do open and I don't know how many do PG and solo .
My posts have been anti open ( I play in open I've enough credits not to really worry about it ) but the gameplay is for all modes . That's the fair bit.

 

[Darrack]

casual player

Don't mistake many of us that don't do/want PvP as casuals, ive sunk a stupid amount of hours in this game.

O7

 

[Shadowsnog]

Don't mistake many of us that don't do/want PvP as casuals, ive sunk a stupid amount of hours in this game.

O7

[Sarcasm] just because you have been doing something wrong for a long time it doesnt make it right [/Sarcasm]

 

[Darrack]

[Sarcasm] just because you have been doing something wrong for a long time it doesnt make it right [/Sarcasm]

Only if someone can prove its wrong

O7

 

[ethelred]

People are lazy, I know I am.

It takes an inordinate amount of time to arrange PvP - I have to get my wing together of haulers, than see who is free to escort us.

Then we have to agree with an opposing power of where to meet, or which station they're trying to blockade.

Time time time.

I can't even hire NPCs as escorts.

I'd like to see the game co-ordinate this somewhat so more casual people can drop in and form wings and give it a go - as it stands you'd have to look outside game on various discords to do it.

Ideally I'd like the game to give these hotspots to draw sides in, and then a leaderboard so everyone can see what a l33t hauler pilot I am.

 

[Rebel Yell]

I totally agree it's just opinions.
We don't know it's right or wrong but to come out with absolutes is in my opinion wrong ?
I would rather people who enjoy that side of the game enjoy it without people like me trying to understand or module shopping and messing it up.
I do PP for the modules although I'm quite comfortable with ALD . I've even sullied my self with Feds just to get the modules ( yes I know I'm pretty disgusted too).
I try and not mess up other people's gameplay.
And I don't want to downplay people's enjoyment in aspects I have no interest.
It's a long winded apology if you took offense at my post it was not intended as so . I don't know how many people do PP , I don't know how many people do open and I don't know how many do PG and solo .
My posts have been anti open ( I play in open I've enough credits not to really worry about it ) but the gameplay is for all modes . That's the fair bit.

No worries there's no offense at all, I always read your replies and that's why you caught me off guard with that one so was more like "don't slide down there" as like you said above, no one knows what others' preferences are (not you, not me and perhaps not even FDEV as of today).

 

[Riley Angel]

I do not feel like reading through ~200 pages of crying form both who are for and against open-only PP, and I don't know if anyone else suggested what I'm about to, but here is the thing:

Those who play in solo and PGs can still be eligible for global rewards when ranking up (modules unlocking, mini-care packages, etc), but their efforts should not be counted towards actual system undermining/reinforcing progression. That way solo players can have fun gameplay AND have all the rewards, and open players can have a fair chance to fight back against undermining, since all the progress will be done through open. I feel like this way everyone will be happy. I get the impression that most solo/PG players are here just to have fun. So what's the difference if you're having fun while not ruining other's people hard BGS work?

This mechanic should also be a part of general BGS system, not just PP. It's so incredibly frustrating when some player faction basically declares war on you, and then you have to fix all the BGS mess that they've made while not being able to fight back because they're in solo or PG. It just becomes the tug of war game, which is not fun for neither attackers nor defenders.

 

[JME SMASH]

I do not feel like reading through ~200 pages of crying form both who are for and against open-only PP, and I don't know if anyone else suggested what I'm about to, but here is the thing:

Those who play in solo and PGs can still be eligible for global rewards when ranking up (modules unlocking, mini-care packages, etc), but their efforts should not be counted towards actual system undermining/reinforcing progression. That way solo players can have fun gameplay AND have all the rewards, and open players can have a fair chance to fight back against undermining, since all the progress will be done through open. I feel like this way everyone will be happy. I get the impression that most solo/PG players are here just to have fun. So what's the difference if you're having fun while not ruining other's people hard BGS work?

This mechanic should also be a part of general BGS system, not just PP. It's so incredibly frustrating when some player faction basically declares war on you, and then you have to fix all the BGS mess that they've made while not being able to fight back because they're in solo or PG. It just becomes the tug of war game, which is not fun for neither attackers nor defenders.

I agree with Riley. I play in Open almost exclusively, but I don't want to force anyone to play the game in a way they don't like. However, as it stands now, preferring to play in Open is a disadvantage - it gives your enemies the ability to directly counter you, a risk you don't need to take in Solo or PG. You're incentivized and rewarded for playing in Solo or PG instead of Open. So how the system is set up currently is actually driving players away from Open who normally would play Open - the kind of player that cares very much about efficiency in their grinding, for example.

 

[Lateralus]

The open-only naysayers assume that us open play, PvP players all want easy ganks - but this isn't the case. We want to fix this glaring problem with Powerplays' competitiveness...

What we (open play advocates) are looking for (fair, transparent and competitive):

What we currently have and what the status quo advocates want to keep (too easy, exploitable, uncompetitive):

I don't know about you but if football or other sports played like the latter it would be pretty dull and get tedious pretty quickly...

I look forward to reading why this isn't a correct analogy (even though it 100% is).

 

[Darrack]

I get the impression that most solo/PG players are here just to have fun.

We are but also take PP pretty seriously when we are engaged with it.

O7

 

[Darrack]

The open-only naysayers assume that us open play, PvP players all want easy ganks - but this isn't the case. We want to fix this glaring problem with Powerplays' competitiveness...

What we (open play advocates) are looking for (fair, transparent and competitive):

View attachment 409017

What we currently have and what the status quo advocates want to keep (too easy, exploitable, uncompetitive):

View attachment 409019

I don't know about you but if football or other sports played like the latter it would be pretty dull and get tedious pretty quickly...

I look forward to reading why this isn't a correct analogy (even though it 100% is).

You wont win games playing 4-4-2, thats so 1980s

O7

 

[anShpan]

What we (open play advocates) are looking for (fair, transparent and competitive):

View attachment 409017
I look forward to reading why this isn't a correct analogy (even though it 100% is).

What an excellent analogy! To me personally just not completely clear who is doing undermining here: those blue t-shorts or those red t-shorts? Or they are flooding markets with low-cost goods? No, wait, they are hauling rares, right?
Otherwise, perhaps, excellent illustrations for PPx.0, just with minor correction: it could be multiple balls (activities), multiple gates (station, strongholds, etc.). And not necessary 11 vs 11 players, could be 3 vs 11 or 33 vs 5, or whatever and from every league (combat ranks) mixed together as much as fairness, transparency and competitiveness in your example.

P.S. Possible, at some day some people will be able reach the idea that PowerPlay is not exclusively about Open-only combat at all. Or those people will continue to measure PowerPlay<whatever version> with their Combat-only ruler and football rules.