You do know that poll is largely irrelevant due to being biased by the sample used for the poll itself
If you do the same poll on Moebius forums, you will get 100% against Open only or Open being favored in any way.
Open-Only in PP2.0?
- Thread starter August Lagrange
- Start date
You do know that poll is largely irrelevant due to being biased by the sample used for the poll itself
If you do the same poll on Moebius forums, you will get 100% against Open only or Open being favored in any way.
Ask a question, get an answer- its an order better than personal opinion and the results are similar to previous polls that came to the same conclusion.
I've been racking my brains trying to think of ways to allay the concerns of opponents of OOPP. It's clear that some compromise has to be reached, but that's a tricky proposition that requires analysing the roots of the disagreement.
Fundamentally, haulers that oppose it do so because of a profound "feel-bad" feeling they get when they're destroyed. For many, it seems to outweigh any reward they'd get for delivering their cargo. I don't think there's any reasonable way to mitigate the feel-bad feeling, since intercepting haulers is a legitimate part of PowerPlay, and I think that high stakes isn't really a bad thing, on the contrary, it gets you invested. Feelings aren't bad as long as they're balanced. So I'd like to propose some rewards that could be given, and I'd be curious to hear what people think.
1. Monetary rewards are the simplest. Cargo doesn't cost anything, and if the overall rewards were, say, doubled (from 50m to 100m for 5000 merits), that would help.
2. Extra rewards could be given if haulers are being killed en-route. This could potentially be a proportion of merits lost vs merits delivered, although only by players, and would be for a short period of time. The more merits are lost, the higher the rewards for running the gauntlet, maybe up to 5x depending on the proportion. This would fit with what was said in the last stream about rewards for delivering despite opposition, although it was vague on specifics.
3. Some kind of recognition for haulers delivering despite opposition. Maybe a trophy?
I'm open to ideas. If this isn't enough for you personally, tell me what would be. Instead of shutting down the conversation, propose a solution that works for both sides.
Fundamentally, haulers that oppose it do so because of a profound "feel-bad" feeling they get when they're destroyed. For many, it seems to outweigh any reward they'd get for delivering their cargo. I don't think there's any reasonable way to mitigate the feel-bad feeling, since intercepting haulers is a legitimate part of PowerPlay, and I think that high stakes isn't really a bad thing, on the contrary, it gets you invested. Feelings aren't bad as long as they're balanced. So I'd like to propose some rewards that could be given, and I'd be curious to hear what people think.
1. Monetary rewards are the simplest. Cargo doesn't cost anything, and if the overall rewards were, say, doubled (from 50m to 100m for 5000 merits), that would help.
2. Extra rewards could be given if haulers are being killed en-route. This could potentially be a proportion of merits lost vs merits delivered, although only by players, and would be for a short period of time. The more merits are lost, the higher the rewards for running the gauntlet, maybe up to 5x depending on the proportion. This would fit with what was said in the last stream about rewards for delivering despite opposition, although it was vague on specifics.
3. Some kind of recognition for haulers delivering despite opposition. Maybe a trophy?
I'm open to ideas. If this isn't enough for you personally, tell me what would be. Instead of shutting down the conversation, propose a solution that works for both sides.
Here or elsewhere I suggested a small bonus for cargo haulers per trip (merit wise) and a large merit bonus for attackers, given that you'll be doing more of the former and the latter is a burst activity. Then you can couple that with the top 10 but have top 10 fortifiers, top 10 hunters etc and maybe have a 'staying alive' / eliminated bonus for the aces of both.
If you have someone to call for help, that is. I don't like Discord, I quit Reddit after the APIcalypse and I don't really care about squadrons and all that stuff. I'm the lone agent taking my orders directly from my handler with the power I support—I hope this part gets more fleshed out, too, and includes more than just "Pick your trinkets to haul, or turn in your combat merits you have".
Considering that every action I do, every mission I finish, every ton of cargo I shift affects everyone else the galaxy, the only way to not affect others would be to not play at all... Or do you suppose I should seek out contact with every player group to get their permissions to bounty hunt, fight in CZ-s, trade or do missions in every system a PMF is present?
You can see what's going on in a system at any station's local news. And even in open chances that you are able to track down the lone underminer are slim—instancing, timezones and the general lack of knowledge about at which POI someone is. At the end of the day it might be more effective to try filling your buckets faster than to spend hours hanging out in SC for a slim chance of catching the troublemaker
Hey, I'd wager that if an FDL, Krait MKII or a Mamba shows up as a hollow triangle behind me I know pretty confidently about what their loadout and intentions are
Chiefs and FAS-s can be more ambiguous and hollow triangle AspX-s and DBX-s are safe. Hollow triangle Phantoms are the real unknown, though, never know what these madmen are up to (speaking as a Phantom madman myself)
I have developed muscle memory for pip management and can more-or-less consistently hit an Eagle with my PA-s. I still occasionally forget the landing gear when taking off or landing, or mix up FA off with the boost button
SCO is a blade that cuts both ways. You see a hollow triangle, do your boost, disable the turbo when approaching your destination and have now a 10 second cooldown. The catcher can see what state your SCO is in the target panel and time their boost to your cooldown. Due to how huge the relative velocity now is they can interdict you from a thousand lightseconds away, even if they start deep in the gravity well of the main star. I have done similar with NPC-s; SCO makes catching someone far away a real breeze even if I start from the gravity well of a star or gas giant. I guess you could in theory intentionally overshoot your destination, turn around and approach it from the opposite direction, but I haven't seen real tests done or viable SCO catching-escaping tactics published. Things might devolve into a game of SCO chicken and end up with both of you needing to call the Fuel Rats
Not necessarily, I think the poll questions are the cause of the flawed poll. Odd given Cmdr Buur's own statement regarding his interaction with PP in the video. Despite this the stated position isn't reflected in the options.
A merit bonus for surviving is a good idea. Having a merit bonus for attackers is good too, but I worry about the possibility for abuse. With the requirement to go from one specific place to another, there's less room for abuse than just one player killing another.
I suppose it depends- another thought I had was that Open rewards are personal and not counted to the power. That way you are there because it is lucrative, you have a CQC like competitive aspect (i.e. top 10, best pilot etc).
And you think this is not easily abusable?
And also heavily favoring the attacker? How it will work? The attacker just need to graze the hauler shields once to get the merits?
(Like how it happens in AX CZ where everyone get the same bond value no matter if they grazed the interceptor once or if they did 7 out of the 8 hearts?)
The more I think of it, the more I suspect that the real reason why haulers and mission-runners don't want to stick their nose into Open in busy systems simply boils down to the interdiction mechanics. As it is now there is near-zero possibility to win the interdiction by another player, it's so heavily biased towards the attacker. And we don't need or even want new gadgets that make interdiction impossible.
What is actually needed is rebalancing the interdiction minigame so that someone with skills flying a ship nimble in supercruise can win the interdiction reliably. This would make blockading a system and denying the area for other players much harder and while flying a T9, Cutter or Anaconda would still mean you will likely be interdicted, flying a Clipper or AspX or any other nimble ship means that "a blockade runner will always get through".
I know I personally would gladly fly a Clipper loaded with cargo or mission payload through the gauntlet if I can have a fair chance of leaving the interdictor spinning in realspace with a long FSD reboot instead of having to high wake out and hope that at attempt nr. 28 of running into the wall headfirst gets me to quantum-tunnel through it
What is actually needed is rebalancing the interdiction minigame so that someone with skills flying a ship nimble in supercruise can win the interdiction reliably. This would make blockading a system and denying the area for other players much harder and while flying a T9, Cutter or Anaconda would still mean you will likely be interdicted, flying a Clipper or AspX or any other nimble ship means that "a blockade runner will always get through".
I know I personally would gladly fly a Clipper loaded with cargo or mission payload through the gauntlet if I can have a fair chance of leaving the interdictor spinning in realspace with a long FSD reboot instead of having to high wake out and hope that at attempt nr. 28 of running into the wall headfirst gets me to quantum-tunnel through it
It's not Zero - but it's definitely close to zero if you fly a Cutter and the interdictor flies a ships that is more agile in SuperCruise.
(based on that video with the dude that won 24 interdictions in a row, winning it seem to depend on ship type - more agile in SC better chances, and on throttle position - 50% throttle before the interdiction commence, more SC agility, more chances to win it - and skill yes, the mini game skill matters too)
This is a very good point. For a hauler especially, flying a T9 or a Cutter, you are likely to be getting interdicted by a smaller ship, who are obviously going to out-manoeuvre you. It would be good if it were more skill-based, as you say. I don't think it would satisfy all of the concerns, but it would help.
On the other hand, I remember a report from someone who tested this and still lost the interdiction despite managing to keep his ship pointed to the escape vector at all times. Might have something to do with desync or network lag or other factors, too.
In any case, for whatever the core reason, the thing is so heavily unbalanced that no experienced player ever recommends trying to win the minigame, no matter what ship you're flying. Expecting that everyone should be top 1% pilot and fly an Eagle to be able to win an interdiction is just not sustainable. It makes as little sense as expecting everyone to fly a PvP fit FDL no matter what activity they are doing and have skills to beat another FDL pilot in a fight (often 2v1 or even 4v1!) if they want to go into a busy (PP) system in Open.
the dude in the movie was flying a Clipper.
The interdictors were FDL, Kraits and Cutter - all with worse SC maneuverability that the Clipper. The 50% throttle before the interdiction commence (iirc) was mentioned in the comments, but noticeable in the movie too.
Now, who's keeping the throttle in 50% when they're about to be interdicted - i dare to say nobody, but it's still doable if you fly a ship that's more agile in supercruise and you notice someone is trying to line up for an interdiction.
This would be on destruction. And as I've explained here and elsewhere there are ways to minimse any possible collusion using the metrics available.
When I say foavour the attacker, consider that most cargo runs won't end in being shot down, and because they are more frequent the reward is lower (but more frequent). An attacker has to invest time and not always come out with anything, hence why a kill is worth more in comparison.
it doesnt work like that when it comes about polls and statistics
Ah, ok, then an Shield Tank Cutter will only have to deal with the annoyance of the interdiction itself - no fear of getting destroyed
And it the interactions go as they go in the CG systems, where you get interdicted only several times till the gankers notice they cannot do anything and look for other targets
So you end up being left to your own devices till a new ganker pops in and tries you, then they give up too... and so on and so forth
Well its a more representative pool of opinion, with many comments from non forum people and the exact audience FD want to interest with U19. Its like with the old flash topics, FD wanted feedback and got it.
Strange too that I've been in wings where a group of pledges quite successfully blow up ships- which just demonstrates the need for a small bonus for cargo and larger one for attack. In fact you don't even need to blow them up- you could just as easily pirate them an send the power cargo into space (that is if power cargo and delivery is a thing).
Meaning it will immediately jump to another system ? But that might work if there's only 1 opponent.
The only way PP would work as open-only is if PP has no effect on solo and PG players. It's a two-way street.
Asking for PP to be open-only is effectively asking for another galaxy-wide split like the Live/Legacy split. That is the only truly "fair" way to do it. I personally do not want a static, never changing galaxy, just because a small group wants open-only PP.
Asking for PP to be open-only is effectively asking for another galaxy-wide split like the Live/Legacy split. That is the only truly "fair" way to do it. I personally do not want a static, never changing galaxy, just because a small group wants open-only PP.
I have a list from a few years ago of the leadership of various groups that signed on to a statement endorsing OOPP. It's likely incomplete, so there are probably more that would sign on if given the opportunity.
Commanders of Federal Liberal Command (Winters)
Commanders of Federal Republic Command (Hudson)
Commanders of the Kumo Crew (IF it’s true Open ONLY, ideally for all actions affecting others or the galaxy) (Delaine)
Commanders of SiriusGov (LYR)
Commanders of Utopia
Commanders of ElitePatreus (Denton Patreus) (Only if there are specific suggestions to Fdev included in the supplemental: Changes to voting, no merits eranable in solo/pg, etc)
Commanders of EliteTorval (Zemina Torval) (Only if we support make fortification direction be unified across the powers)
Commanders of the Starlight Brigade (Aisling)
This is your "small group".
And you're right, a split would be a bad idea, which is why it is not a suggestion anyone is seriously making.