Open-Only in PP2.0?

[Rubbernuke]

I'd agree with this and thus why I support passing the modules to Tech Brokers, particularly if they are going down the open only route.
Some players like 'Epic PvP battles ' or getting through blockades, but that isn't everyone's perspective.
I like wandering amongst the fringe systems of the Bubble but a glance at my contacts list tells me it's not everyone's cup of tea.
If you want to have an inclusive system you'll need to present as being inclusive and not Keep Out signs.

Although I agree with the broad sentiment, at some point you have to define what the feature actually is and that by definition can't appeal to everyone otherwise it loses focus.

Its finding where the line is drawn - for example Buur ran a poll in his latest video where the clear majority wanted change of some sort- it was (1.3K) votes:

Yes 28%

No, but Open Play has a greater effect than singleplayer or PG 45%

No, leave it as it is right now 20%

What's Powerplay? 7%

Leaving out the 7% of Kumo Burger meat, 73% want the status quo changed. How that translates into being as broad as possible is the big question- it might be that certain tasks done in solo simply don't count INF wise* (like attacking FCs in solo) but at the same time (shutting one flaw) but at the same time Open enthusiasts will have to accept the limitations remaining. Its not ideal, but it still allows free flowing play.

* but most importantly it will always count towards your personal achievements and rewards progress

 

[Morbad]

I fly in open exclusively, but have never knowingly witnessed cheating. Being caught cheating has consequences. Doing it in open makes you more likely to be caught and incentivises using it for PvE in closed modes.

I've seen cheating. Far and away the most common cheat I've encountered is severing connection to bypass the log-off timer and avoid some unpleasant outcome. Second most common is abuse of legitimate mechanisms in ways that violate the game's terms to gain some sort of advantage or disadvantage opponents (e.g. logging in and out during a CZ to ambush CMDRs or force them to waste time fighting your rather than contribute to the CZ). I've only knowingly witnessed hacking once or twice in 9k hours of Open.

I assume most cheating happens outside of Open, or at least when no other CMDRs are around, because witnesses are a risk.

But i get it, it's easier to say "i lost, they must be cheating" then admit either skill issues or the fact that the opposition coordinated better or put more effort in

I don't assume cheats when I fail to achieve an objective. However, I'd be foolish to assume that no cheating is ever going on. I also don't need to be aware of cheating for it to negatively impact my game.

This goes both ways too. If my CMDR achieves his objectives because the player of an allied CMDR was cheating, I am harmed every bit as much as if it were an opponent cheating. Either way, my own legitimate contributions to the game are diluted by others who do not feel compelled to play by the rules.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

PP V1 has super thin PvE, thats why its dull- what FD did was transpose current day (for 2015) mechanics and spread them out over a bubble wide CZ. Since NPC persistence and consistency fall apart at those scales it was the Open part which filled that gap and for many that provided the fun team v team Open experience.

Well, as someone who is interested in the PvE mechanics, the PvP side doesn't matter to me, but all the PvP side did was give a reason for PvP to happen, but if people want PvP they can have it any time they want with like minded folk. They don't need PP or any other mechanic to test their skills against other players.

That's why I do enjoy PvP Arena games. No messing around, just get it and fight against other players on a level playing field. ED can't and never will, provide a quick and level playing field for PvP (well, except for CQC cough)

Anyway, will see how PP2 goes. At the end of the day, it is really good, and it does become open only, i suppose i can always fill up my block list

 

[August Lagrange]

Just a few hours of investigating it only to realize the mechanics were absoloutely rubbish, boring, and a never ending grind of running to stay in the same place.

It will always be a grind of running to stay in the same place. That's what happens when you're up against other people. There is no win scenario, and that's reflective of real politics, in which there is also no realistic win scenario. It's just a tug of war, and all you can do is hold on and hope the other side's grip slips. You don't understand the appeal, and that's fine, but please recognise that there are a lot of people who like being part of a community and working together for a shared goal, and their enjoyment gets ruined frequently by those who decide to be anti-social.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

I've seen cheating. Far and away the most common cheat I've encountered is severing connection to bypass the log-off timer and avoid some unpleasant outcome. Second most common is abuse of legitimate mechanisms in ways that violate the game's terms to gain some sort of advantage or disadvantage opponents (e.g. logging in and out during a CZ to ambush CMDRs or force them to waste time fighting your rather than contribute to the CZ). I've only knowingly witnessed hacking once or twice in 9k hours of Open.

I assume most cheating happens outside of Open, or at least when no other CMDRs are around, because witnesses are a risk.



I don't assume cheats when I fail to achieve an objective. However, I'd be foolish to assume that no cheating is ever going on. I also don't need to be aware of cheating for it to negatively impact my game.

This goes both ways too. If my CMDR achieves his objectives because the player of an allied CMDR was cheating, I am harmed every bit as much as if it were an opponent cheating. Either way, my own legitimate contributions to the game are diluted by others who do not feel compelled to play by the rules.

I specifically meant hacking, which seemed implied.

 

[Morbad]

They don't need PP or any other mechanic to test their skills against other players.

PP and/or other activities can give direct PvP context.

Most of the good PvP I have had in this game was when I wasn't looking for trouble, often when I was least prepared for it.

That's why I do enjoy PvP Arena games. No messing around, just get it and fight against other players on a level playing field. ED can't and never will, provide a quick and level playing field for PvP (well, except for CQC cough)

I don't really like arena type games, at least not in large doses. I've played my fair share of them, but I much prefer there to be some goal beyond testing a narrow scope of combat focused skills just because. Settings and gameplay that test a larger breadth of skills and more varied attributes appeal to me.

IMO, the best PvP games are just simulators where the PvP aspects are simply side-effects of allowing whatever players are controlling to interact without arbitrary limits. Since these sorts of experiences are so rare, I find myself playing a lot of tactical shooters and war games; the scope of what they simulate is relatively narrow, but there are more options and a wider variety of experiences than I can find in a purpose-made arena type games.

Some people want their contests to always come down to who is the better shot or the more technically adept pilot. I'm appreciate those tests, but I also like tests of patience, endurance, stealth, deception, planning and foresight. I'm ok to losing to someone because their a better shot, I'm excited to lose to someone who comes at me from an entirely unexpected angle. The arena type stuff is what I do in preparation for the 'real' stuff and the playing field is always level (if the rules are consistently enforced) because it encompases the entire setting.

I specifically meant hacking, which seemed implied.

Yes, I gathered as much.

I'm pointing out that most cheating has nothing to do with hacking.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

It will always be a grind of running to stay in the same place. That's what happens when you're up against other people. There is no win scenario, and that's reflective of real politics, in which there is also no realistic win scenario. It's just a tug of war, and all you can do is hold on and hope the other side's grip slips. You don't understand the appeal, and that's fine, but please recognise that there are a lot of people who like being part of a community and working together for a shared goal, and their enjoyment gets ruined frequently by those who decide to be anti-social.

I disagree, they could make fail states for powers and have new powers rise.

But it was more than just that. You basically just became required to keep up the pressure doing the same few tasks over and over again.

Anyway, I'm hoping with PP2, there is a much wider variety of activities to do in order to help my powers, so i can just play the game how i want while helping my power at the same time, just like i can more or less do with the BGS (except when specific states prevail, and even then, there is some choice).

In this way, it will feel less of a grind and be more enjoyable for me.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

PP and/or other activities can give direct PvP context.

Most of the good PvP I have had in this game was when I wasn't looking for trouble, often when I was least prepared for it.



I don't really like arena type games, at least not in large doses. I've played my fair share of them, but I much prefer there to be some goal beyond testing a narrow scope of combat focused skills just because. Settings and gameplay that test a larger breadth of skills and more varied attributes appeal to me.

IMO, the best PvP games are just simulators where the PvP aspects are simply side-effects of allowing whatever players are controlling to interact without arbitrary limits. Since these sorts of experiences are so rare, I find myself playing a lot of tactical shooters and war games; the scope of what they simulate is relatively narrow, but there are more options and a wider variety of experiences than I can find in a purpose-made arena type games.

Some people want their contests to always come down to who is the better shot or the more technically adept pilot. I'm appreciate those tests, but I also like tests of patience, endurance, stealth, deception, planning and foresight. I'm ok to losing to someone because their a better shot, I'm excited to lose to someone who comes at me from an entirely unexpected angle. The arena type stuff is what I do in preparation for the 'real' stuff and the playing field is always level (if the rules are consistently enforced) because it encompases the entire setting.



Yes, I gathered as much.

I'm pointing out that most cheating has nothing to do with hacking.

We clearly have very different tastes then, and that's fine.

Being attacked while i'm bimbling around in a non-PvP ship for me doesn't lead to good PvP... it won't even lead to PvP. I'd just take my hands off the controls and go have a smoke while they get their jollies on.

And even if in a PvP capable ship (not that i have one), i'm still not going to be a match for any PvPer with skill. So again, if caught, might as well just go for a smoke.

Arena games though, you're up against a range of different skilled people and battles are quick and exciting. I've watched too many PvP fights in ED on YouTube to understand even if i cared to increase my skill to the point where i could complete, its just mind numbingly boring. Fights that go on for 15 minutes or more against a single opponent. Gods, i hate in enough in CZs when i'm facing a hull tank Python kitted with a ton of SCBs. Those can take a few mins to take down, and its a snooze fest.

ED just doesn't do it for me in terms of PvP.

Organized PvP, like i had in San-Tu, now that was fun. trying out my turretted Beluga against someone in their PvP Cobra was fun!

 

[SergMx]

ED just doesn't do it for me in terms of PvP.

Organized PvP, like i had in San-Tu, now that was fun. trying out my turretted Beluga against someone in their PvP Cobra was fun!

I'm reminded of the novel "The Nine Princes of Amber" when Corwin stabs someone in the back and says:
This isn't the Olympics!

 

[Rubbernuke]

Well, as someone who is interested in the PvE mechanics, the PvP side doesn't matter to me, but all the PvP side did was give a reason for PvP to happen, but if people want PvP they can have it any time they want with like minded folk. They don't need PP or any other mechanic to test their skills against other players.

That's why I do enjoy PvP Arena games. No messing around, just get it and fight against other players on a level playing field. ED can't and never will, provide a quick and level playing field for PvP (well, except for CQC cough)

Anyway, will see how PP2 goes. At the end of the day, it is really good, and it does become open only, i suppose i can always fill up my block list

The whole draw of PvP in Open for PP (and for many outside of it) is that its pitting your skills against other randoms. Thus this

ED can't and never will, provide a quick and level playing field for PvP

will never happen because its not meant to be level- not unless you have artificial contests . It can't because you don't know who you'll face, when or where. You can help mitigate those things via ship choice, build, where you fly and how you fly. Its just you and who you find on a random day. Its this random possibility people like, as NPCs are very predictable and have very apparent limits.

I also like PvE (its why I want BGS PP missions and other mechanics like POIs) drawn into PP V2. I happen to think that for a lot of people having a more structured challenge (and not the incredibly tenuous one PP NPCs provide now) would lessen the absolute need for an Open Only feature.

i suppose i can always fill up my block list

If FD have gone as far as openly ( ) talk about Open exclusive bits (and not for the first time- every PP rework proposal from FD has included that want), started selling ships and thinking radically its not fantasy to think they'd change those rules too........

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I'm reminded of the novel "The Nine Princes of Amber" when Corwin stabs someone in the back and says:
This isn't the Olympics!

LOL. Brilliant series, at least the first books are. Second books are ok, but kind of are a bit all over the place.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

will never happen because its not meant to be level

And for me. unlevel PvP is unfair PvP. Its like having a game of chess where one or more of your peices are missing or your opponent has 2 queens. Fair enough if its agreed to, to balance different skill levels, but not in a regular game. PvP should be about relative skill levels, not about random chance.

If FD have gone as far as openly ( ) talk about Open exclusive bits (and not for the first time- every PP rework proposal from FD has included that want), started selling ships and thinking radically its not fantasy to think they'd change those rules too........

You're suggesting they would change how blocking works? Or remove it?

 

[Rubbernuke]

And for me. unlevel PvP is unfair PvP. Its like having a game of chess where one or more of your peices are missing or your opponent has 2 queens. Fair enough if its agreed to, to balance different skill levels, but not in a regular game. PvP should be about relative skill levels, not about random chance.

Its more like that you can buy more chess pieces, learn how to play better or move your pieces to another board.

You're suggesting they would change how blocking works? Or remove it?

I'm suggesting nothing is off the table. PP is about conflict with others, and in a game where killing is not wrong and a certain level is expected its a contradiction to allow a block because you were shot at in a double gated feature. Bad language blocks and blocking chat should absolutely stay in though, and perhaps rebuy players instances are temporarily shuffled.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Its more like that you can buy more chess pieces, learn how to play better or move your pieces to another board.

Oh, pay to win! Got it! I like the suggestion to move my pieces to another chessboard though, PG and solo works well for that!

I'm suggesting nothing is off the table.

Sweet! FD could make it PvE only! As for not allowing blocking of players, i think you'd want blocking of cheaters to remain possible wouldn't you? Unless you like unfair PvP? Still, at least you can switch to PG/solo if there are cheaters in your open instances.

PP is about conflict with others

Can be indirect PvP then, doesn't have to be direct. Like two people playing Tetris side by side to see who can get the biggest score!

Oh, ps:

learn how to play better

Ah, the old gid gud. Didn't expect that from you to be honest.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

Oh, pay to win! Got it! I like the suggestion to move my pieces to another chessboard though, PG and solo works well for that!


Sweet! FD could make it PvE only! As for not allowing blocking of players, i think you'd want blocking of cheaters to remain possible wouldn't you? Unless you like unfair PvP? Still, at least you can switch to PG/solo if there are cheaters in your open instances.


Can be indirect PvP then, doesn't have to be direct. Like two people playing Tetris side by side to see who can get the biggest score!

Oh, ps:


Ah, the old gid gud. Didn't expect that from you to be honest.

TBH I think there is possibility for constructive discussion. Though avoiding the usual hoffle nosh would likely mean avoiding strawman arguments.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

TBH I think there is possibility for constructive discussion. Though avoiding the usual hoffle nosh would likely mean avoiding strawman arguments.

Of course there is, but i do enjoy yanking Rubbernuke's chain

 

[Rubbernuke]

Oh, ps:

Yes, this is called skill growth- you go from ultra beginner who forgets to raise the undercarriage to vet who has HW muscle memory. Between the two is the player learning how to play better. Everyone goes through the process, so why is it somehow a 'gotcha' pointing that out? You fail > learn from mistake > grow.

Sweet! FD could make it PvE only! As for not allowing blocking of players, i think you'd want blocking of cheaters to remain possible wouldn't you? Unless you like unfair PvP? Still, at least you can switch to PG/solo if there are cheaters in your open instances.

Unlikely, given FD have on camera and elsewhere mentioned that PvP is a) in PP V2 (as well as a new ship with that in mind) and that they at some point after U19 goes live look at Open and giving it more of a focus.

Not everyone is a cheater either. While I don't deny it exists at the same time the vast majority just play the game- and that you can report people. And you can indeed switch to solo or PG (and log back into Open)- the question will be what actions are cancelled out in those modes.

Can be indirect PvP then, doesn't have to be direct. Like two people playing Tetris side by side to see who can get the biggest score!

Sort of. Open when you don't meet is indirect, it just might happen as you can't predict it. The soul sapping part is having a CG bar chart race x control systems against people you know you will 100% never see (not unless we have the mode bug that mixed people together).

Oh, pay to win! Got it! I like the suggestion to move my pieces to another chessboard though, PG and solo works well for that!

'Buy new pieces' as in- buy a different ship. If your Bishop is too diagonally inclined buy a Knight. This is within the players control as well as the abilities of those pieces with the modules you equip.

And 'moving chessboard'- in ED you have the choice to go anywhere. If its too dangerous you can retreat elsewhere for a while. Its hubris and folly for players to think you can go everywhere anytime in anything- if you could it nullifies the BGS, PP, skill, and ship choice.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Yes, this is called skill growth- you go from ultra beginner who forgets to raise the undercarriage to vet who has HW muscle memory. Between the two is the player learning how to play better. Everyone goes through the process, so why is it somehow a 'gotcha' pointing that out? You fail > learn from mistake > grow.



Unlikely, given FD have on camera and elsewhere mentioned that PvP is a) in PP V2 (as well as a new ship with that in mind) and that they at some point after U19 goes live look at Open and giving it more of a focus.

Not everyone is a cheater either. While I don't deny it exists at the same time the vast majority just play the game- and that you can report people. And you can indeed switch to solo or PG (and log back into Open)- the question will be what actions are cancelled out in those modes.



Sort of. Open when you don't meet is indirect, it just might happen as you can't predict it. The soul sapping part is having a CG bar chart race x control systems against people you know you will 100% never see (not unless we have the mode bug that mixed people together).


'Buy new pieces' as in- buy a different ship. If your Bishop is too diagonally inclined buy a Knight. This is within the players control as well as the abilities of those pieces with the modules you equip.

And 'moving chessboard'- in ED you have the choice to go anywhere. If its too dangerous you can retreat elsewhere for a while. Its hubris and folly for players to think you can go everywhere anytime in anything- if you could it nullifies the BGS, PP, skill, and ship choice.

Heh, i could have guessed your responses, we've done this dance too many times

 

[Ytterium]

You mean im spoiling the fun for gankers?

A bit late to the show, but in any activity that affects the goals of another player (eg. BGS or PowerPlay, particularly Powerplay given how the Enemy status changes crime and punishment), it is pretty clear that the game does not view it as "ganking" and more inherent to the gameplay loops. I figure this bit is a bit relevant to the rest of the stuff I'm replying to, so I kept it in.

Well, as someone who is interested in the PvE mechanics, the PvP side doesn't matter to me, but all the PvP side did was give a reason for PvP to happen, but if people want PvP they can have it any time they want with like minded folk. They don't need PP or any other mechanic to test their skills against other players.

When doing PvE against other people, in order to make it less of a "who can spreadsheet harder" or "who can repeat xyz more" contest, making PvP a core part of Powerplay both streamlines the gameplay loops such that you can actively interfere against your enemy, and adds challenge to the game (assuming instancing behaves which is a whole other can of worms.

Besides, death is effectively consensual in this game given how crazy defensive engineering is such that even a cargo fitted cutter can get like 3000 shields stacked up on it and still carry 700t+ of cargo.

That's why I do enjoy PvP Arena games. No messing around, just get it and fight against other players on a level playing field. ED can't and never will, provide a quick and level playing field for PvP (well, except for CQC cough)

Quick maybe not, but it definitely provides level playing fields for PvP. While I won't elaborate fully here, if you want more clarification, I'm happy to go into it.

Anyway, will see how PP2 goes. At the end of the day, it is really good, and it does become open only, i suppose i can always fill up my block list

I do hope they change it such that blocking no longer changes instancing as in its current state, it can screw it up for everyone other than you too.

And for me. unlevel PvP is unfair PvP.

I mean from what I've seen of PP2.0 stuff, it seems less like it is unfair, and more that it is asymmetric which are fundamentally two different things. Unfair would be you filling your "bucket"/objective faster, whereas in PP2.0, it seems like there are multiple "buckets" to fill, similar to BGS. Fundamental to your assertion is that it is equally "unfair PvP" for powerplay to be influenced more by a cargo cutter hauling 720t+ than a Type 6 hauling a measly 160t or so as the two sides are "unlevel". It makes much less sense when the understanding of PvP activities is applied beyond merely combat, even though it is "unfair" in the exact same way.

Its like having a game of chess where one or more of your peices are missing or your opponent has 2 queens. Fair enough if its agreed to, to balance different skill levels, but not in a regular game. PvP should be about relative skill levels, not about random chance.

Its not. It's like if I'm playing chess, and you're playing another game on the same board. Each side has totally different objectives, and reducing it to an issue of being "unfair" fails to do justice to the fundamental differences in the gameplay loops each side is working on. Your job is to escape and deliver cargo, and mine is to make sure the cargo never arrives--Not to bring more than you, just as your objective is not killing me.

Can be indirect PvP then, doesn't have to be direct. Like two people playing Tetris side by side to see who can get the biggest score!

You can't do that without forcing everyone into solo. As long as there is player interaction, competition can, and should at least in part be direct.

Ah, the old gid gud. Didn't expect that from you to be honest.

It certainly helps to build for survival if expecting opposition in a contested area. Skill in this area effectively boils down to:

Stack 2,000 or so shields
Submit when interdicted
If mass locked, high wake
Else, Low wake and continue onwards to your destination.

This is all streamlined by SCO making interdiction evasion easier by hitting the gas whenever someone in a scary looking ship lines up behind you.

 

[August Lagrange]

A bit late to the show, but in any activity that affects the goals of another player (eg. BGS or PowerPlay, particularly Powerplay given how the Enemy status changes crime and punishment), it is pretty clear that the game does not view it as "ganking" and more inherent to the gameplay loops.

Ganking in most of the game is an activity for which there is no incentive. You don't gain from killing players trying to do engineering. However in PowerPlay, this is an explicit, measured activity- undermining. When you kill a pledged player in an expansion system, you get merits. That's an absurdly inefficient way of getting merits, but it is incentivised and understood to be part of that feature.

So for those commenting like the question is whether the whole game should be open-only, you're misunderstanding how it understands hauling in PowerPlay differently to everything else.