PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

I will leave if I can't do power play my way. I like how it is. I can play solo or open mode it my choice. I don't want to deal with ganker or PvPers I should not have to.
 
Unfortunately FD chose to make it a bland PvE grindfest, and making it open only, while presenting more opportunties for PvP it will still be a bland PvE grindfest.
It is interesting that you word it this way.
Basically attacking those that do enjoy the current system, and that it has no PvP mechanics. As if they are wrong? maybe just maybe open up to the fact that everything cannot be as you want it? this is the way FDev wants it to be currently. And considering that ever since Powerplay came into existence there has been an outcry to make it open only because some people seem to think that it will give them more targets to attack in open.
But there is nothing that supports that statement, especially given the nature of people's online times and locations. Elite isn't a game based around PvP and expecting that seems to just be setting yourself up for failure.
There are a huge amount of players that do not actively participate in the forum, they simply sit down and play the game the way they want to play it, and then go about their lives afterwards. If the game stops being fun to them, they quit.
How many of these people will quit if a minority of players, by frontier's previous statement about PvP, get their will to turn the focus of the game more towards PvP? that is something these topics never really address, and if they do they simply brush that group of players aside because they are playing the game 'wrong'
 
People are confusing what Open mode can be with what it is now. I'm talking from a perspective of Open Only and what it might be like.
'can' be?
However should it be that? would that really make it better for everyone? as stated in last post, what about those people that aren't active on forum but simply playing and enjoy the game as it is currently, what about them? if they quit because the game changes to something they do not enjoy? That is simply too bad? remember, as frontier has previously stated, the group of people wanting PvP is a minority.
 
Oh, I understand what you're talking about, and what you describe is PvP IMO. So is player-killing/ganking, for that matter, but I would never call a player-killer/ganker a PvPer.

In my experience, though, what you're describing simply doesn't work. Like many other aspects of PvP, the "cunning" doesn't actually happen in the game, but in the meta-game. The use of alts to scout potential targets before a raid, for example, infiltrating the opposing sides forums or chat, and so on. After a while, the whole thing devolves into a game of blind-man's bluff, where the only PvP that happens is when both sides accidentally show up at the same time and place.

When you combine that with the tendency of PvPers to seek out PvP, rather than sitting around doing nothing on guard duty, and you get a situation where non-PvPers really can't rely on anyone but themselves for their own protection. And that was in games that used a client/server architecture, as opposed to what we have in this game.
What would most likely happen (P2P issues aside)

Forting:

Ships would get smaller and faster. Haulers would haul less per trip, with players funneled into the capital with waiting interception. Opposition would use ships like the Courier to intercept these intruders as cargo comes into the system.

Expansion:

You would see merit grinders but also more swing role ships fending off opposition in CZs. AFK would become a gamble. Since its a fixed place (i.e. its rare currently for more than one expansion) you are condensing players leading to more ferocious fights.

Preparation:

Preparation destinations are similarly small in number, so it acts like fortification but in reverse. So if you want to stop a rival prepping you have the option of either outpacing them or killing these shipments.

show up at the same time and place


But that will happen. If a ball of players pops up in a system the opposition have to respond, especially as time goes on in a cycle. You then have a DIY CZ, especially with combat expansions or prep targets.

In any case, a switched on enemy will record a rivals forting patterns and plan accordingly. Scouting will be important both spatially and temporally. The former already happens now.

'can' be?
However should it be that? would that really make it better for everyone? as stated in last post, what about those people that aren't active on forum but simply playing and enjoy the game as it is currently, what about them? if they quit because the game changes to something they do not enjoy? That is simply too bad? remember, as frontier has previously stated, the group of people wanting PvP is a minority.
Powerplay is a dying husk of a feature. FD won't give it a lot of love, and what they do has to punch above its weight.

What you describe could equally be applied to the exploration scanner changes which are not universally popular, or any big change. In the end its FDs call.
 
Pledges are spread quite evenly across platforms. But FD only know for certain. My own Power has a good spread across XB, PS and PC.
So you claim evenly spread...
and how many doing powerplay things are only in it for the weapons/modules... another thing FDev probably knows....


This does not really affect Powerplay, mainly as the closer you get to Thursday morning the more synchronized players get if they are doing large co-ordinated attacks. I remember when I was up at 4AM with a guy from Finland, the UK, Africa and Australia hours before the cycle ended to prep snipe.
Impressive, you and 4 other players team up todo something... And putting up this as proof that timezones does not effect instancing is ludicrous. And nothing in your statement tells us that you did any of this in open in the same instance. You where clearly NOT in the same wing...



This will always be the weakness in the plan, but, until you try you don't know how much of a problem it would be or pose.
until you you try...what else should just try for the sake of it? you have not addressed the no crossplay part etc, etc. so we shoudl just take youy word for it that is worth persuing? ignoring all the signs that this is based on flawed logic...
 
So you claim evenly spread...
and how many doing powerplay things are only in it for the weapons/modules... another thing FDev probably knows....
Thats true. But if the modules are moved as per the proposal this would be nullified. And ironically Aisling might have less admirers (along with LYR).

Impressive, you and 4 other players team up todo something... And putting up this as proof that timezones does not effect instancing is ludicrous. And nothing in your statement tells us that you did any of this in open in the same instance. You where clearly NOT in the same wing...
It was an anecdote from my experiences of what you were describing. Take it how you like.

Powerplay cycles are finite, activities such as UM, prep sniping, forting etc can be done tactically or out of desperation and get more pressing as it progresses. Anything like a prep race / fortifying / blanket UM will go down to the wire where you have to attend for it to work. In that example I gave we were trying to outprep a rival, which could have ended in disaster if that power or a third party or anyone else decided to get nasty. It was tense and exciting and one of my favorite memories.

until you you try...what else should just try for the sake of it? you have not addressed the no crossplay part etc, etc. so we shoudl just take youy word for it that is worth persuing? ignoring all the signs that this is based on flawed logic...
Well, I'd rather have 3 Open only focussed dynamic conflicts than 9 flatline grind races. But then its my opinion and I try to articulate that as best I can. Will it be perfect? No. But on paper it has more of a future than what Powerplay is now. Should we try it? Yes. Because then we will know one way or the other that it works and give a feature that has no real life of its own a second wind. If that test itself is finite, what is the harm?
 
Powerplay is a dying husk of a feature. FD won't give it a lot of love, and what they do has to punch above its weight.

What you describe could equally be applied to the exploration scanner changes which are not universally popular, or any big change. In the end its FDs call.
Powerplay is a dying husk of a feature? ok what facts back up that claim? I hardly think making it 'open only' is going to change anything in that regard, PvP'ers are not big enough to carry the entire mechanism, especially if other players fall away because of it. So if anything it should be refreshed mechanic wise, not just 'make it open'

It could equally be applied to exploration scanner changes? to changes that only affect one individual player, the one doing the scanning, compared to changing and potentially forcing people to interact with others, or forcing people to play in open when they do not want to?
Exploration change hits everyone equally.
This change would in no way shape or form do that, it would be a gain for some, a detriment to others.

Yes, it is FDev's choice, but here it is you that seem to not want to accept what powerplay is, but rather want to change the foundation of what it is? which simply cannot be compared with making exploration more engaging, I'm an explorer and I enjoy the new changes, yeah it might end up being a bit slower then the old simple honk, but it being more engaging is a win for me, explorers generally aren't in a hurry to begin with.
 
Powerplay is a dying husk of a feature? ok what facts back up that claim? I hardly think making it 'open only' is going to change anything in that regard, PvP'ers are not big enough to carry the entire mechanism, especially if other players fall away because of it. So if anything it should be refreshed mechanic wise, not just 'make it open'
Go ask Powerplay vetrans and they'll tell you the same, don't take my word for it. Many simply now want FD to remove Powerplay- fancy that, the people that supported, nurtured and created whole communities around it want it dead. Why is that? Is it because its a raging success?

As I've exhaustively said before, FD have not supported Powerplay like they have for other features. How many times has it been upgraded since its been introduced? Its had: fort merit totals upped by a factor of 10, overhead curve tweaked, consolidation added. FD used to give us Powerplay data until that stopped for no reason. Loads of bugs have remained or been added, we had server wobbles (Cycle 52), bugged combat expansions that could not be lost (ruining powers), and so on. Once players and groups realised the grind they simply left, and ever since its bumped along. Since its introduction no new gameplay has been added.

Its had a few proposals (four at last count) that have been small in scope because FD see an unpopular feature and they don't want to be stung twice with it, hence every tweak and change doing double duty. If FD won't do any Mining or Exploration / Codex level of refreshing, you are left with fewer and fewer options to justify Powerplays continual inclusion in ED, making it stand out enough to be considered something to engage in. Open only is a radical choice, but it would differentiate Powerplay from the BGS which is fantastic in comparison.

It could equally be applied to exploration scanner changes? to changes that only affect one individual player, the one doing the scanning, compared to changing and potentially forcing people to interact with others, or forcing people to play in open when they do not want to?
Exploration change hits everyone equally.
This change would in no way shape or form do that, it would be a gain for some, a detriment to others.
Tell that to the threadnought. Outside Open Powerplay its the other massive talking point thats split the forum and affects far more people than Powerplay ever will.

Yes, it is FDev's choice, but here it is you that seem to not want to accept what powerplay is, but rather want to change the foundation of what it is? which simply cannot be compared with making exploration more engaging, I'm an explorer and I enjoy the new changes, yeah it might end up being a bit slower then the old simple honk, but it being more engaging is a win for me, explorers generally aren't in a hurry to begin with.
Powerplay started life as an exciting, do or die fight for survival, or it did until FD admitted there was no collapse. From that point on the whole underpinning reason for Powerplay vanished. It became a broken half baked feature, not one thing or the other. Its gone on directionless until now where the whole galaxy is full, and subject to brutal 5C that saps morale. It never had a foundation, and ever since then its been crying out for one. Open does that- maybe its simply rearranging the wreckage, but at least its a direction that might lead somewhere. The alternative is the status quo: little change, powers giving up and being sock puppeted by others. Its a sad fate that I want to avoid and I'll argue to EDs end to stop it.
 
I've laid out the gameplay of both. Both are territorial. BGS is better at it.
False - PP is explicitly territorial and focused around influence expansion. The BGS is just the background simulation that is affected by our general activities. You may think the BGS+Squadrons offers better gameplay (which is highly subjective) BUT it is not even close to being the same gameplay as Power Play.
 
Go ask Powerplay vetrans and they'll tell you the same, don't take my word for it. Many simply now want FD to remove Powerplay- fancy that, the people that supported, nurtured and created whole communities around it want it dead. Why is that? Is it because its a raging success?
I have, those i've asked are asking for mechanical changes that have absolutely nothing to do with PvP and do not see how that will really change or improve anything it is the mechanics that need overhaul, not the concept of open vs not open.
Tell that to the threadnought. Outside Open Powerplay its the other massive talking point thats split the forum and affects far more people than Powerplay ever will.
"Split the forum" is not really the times that I've scanned threads for number of unique players commenting the amount of people for trying to push a more pvp orientated thing are often the same limited number.

Powerplay started life as an exciting, do or die fight for survival, or it did until FD admitted there was no collapse.
I would not agree with that perspective, and last I checked like the rest of the game, it was never presented as PvP? correct me if I am wrong.
 
Is there a suggestion that the game does not have any emergent content?

Alternatively, which subset of emergent gameplay doesn't emerge because of the game modes?
Emergent is self contextualizing. Frontier have little to do with it directly though, or at least I'd hazard a guess. Play the intended way (Engineers withstanding, etc.) seems more than a bit... un-emergent to me. Of course it's my own fault for how I approach the game, though I'd argue I'm all the better for it, despite themselves. ;)

Some of my thus far most enjoyable emergent gameplay...


 
Last edited:
Thats true. But if the modules are moved as per the proposal this would be nullified. And ironically Aisling might have less admirers (along with LYR).
Well it would certainly remove alot of "pledged" players... I do not follow how this make this any less relevant, or as you put it nullified...



It was an anecdote from my experiences of what you were describing. Take it how you like.

Powerplay cycles are finite, activities such as UM, prep sniping, forting etc can be done tactically or out of desperation and get more pressing as it progresses. Anything like a prep race / fortifying / blanket UM will go down to the wire where you have to attend for it to work. In that example I gave we were trying to outprep a rival, which could have ended in disaster if that power or a third party or anyone else decided to get nasty. It was tense and exciting and one of my favorite memories.
So explain how this would change in any meaningful by having it all done in open?
You gather your PP supporters, and do your thing. All of you can by all purposes be working towards the same goal, despite being on different platforms, or you could all be on the same.

So how would any potential response be from the "other" side look like? if they are now on a different platform than you, then there would be NO difference from how it is today. And even if one of your team is on the same platform as where the response is done on, and the rest of you are on other platforms, how would you help your friend in that case?

So your supporting evidence is your own anectdotal experieceny of 5 players doing something... it still does not address core issue you made that response too.... far from most players do not enjoy the freedom to do alot of things just before the tick... because of in what timezone they are located in.


Well, I'd rather have 3 Open only focussed dynamic conflicts than 9 flatline grind races. But then its my opinion and I try to articulate that as best I can. Will it be perfect? No. But on paper it has more of a future than what Powerplay is now. Should we try it? Yes. Because then we will know one way or the other that it works and give a feature that has no real life of its own a second wind. If that test itself is finite, what is the harm?
What 3 dynamic conflicts are you talking about? You seems to be confused....I do get where you get the number 3 from... but presenting PC, XBox and PS4 as 3 separate conflicts is just just wrong...



TLDR of the below there are probably to few players engaged in PP and to many conflicts = small chance to meet other opposing players doing PP activities on average...



So lets see how many conflicts there are likely to be...
11 powers

and we have 3 main activities

  • Expand
  • Fortify
  • Prepare
and we can do multiple of each each cycle, so we can safely assume that on average, that all powers have on average atleast one of each activities each cycle, that gives us 11 powers and 3 activities = 33 different locations...

What if the the average is 2 of each activity? then we have 66 locations... and so it goes on...

And there is a top 10 list, so that means that the number of potential conflicts each power can have is ALOT more than 1-2 on average... So if we go with that they could be 10 of each, that brings this to be a potetial of 3x10x11 powers = 330 conflicts....


Couple this with players do not play 24/7, they have limited time to spend on this, as school,. work, family, etc, also requires their attention. So what is the average play time? 2 hours? 3 hours 4 hours? lets go with 4 hours on average each day, this further limit how many players you are likely to encounter in those 4 hours.

So if I do my 4 hours at 13-17 UTC time, and you play your 4 hours at 18-22 UTC time, we are very unlikely to ever meet ingame. But we still play every day...

So how many players at any given timeslot is active in PP activities? Lets say we have 10 000 players engaged in this, on all 3 platforms.
For ease of calculations we assume all platforms are split evenly (even you suggested that you have even split of players on each platform)
So on average we have 10000/3 players = 3333 players per platform.
If we assume an evenly spread of play time, that means that we have roughly 24/4 = 6 rolling time slots during any day.
So in each timeslot we then have 3333/6 = 555 PP players online.

These players are now (assuming evenly support between all powers, I know they are not), that gives us 555 players over 33 locations, which give us ~17 players per conflict.
Now if there would be 333 conflicts, then we are looking at ~1.7 player per conflict....

Add to this that that these tasks mostly is about hauling stuff, so you are moving back and forth further limited the time spent in the system the conflict is over.... further limiting the time to see other PP players. We also assume that there would be no instancing issues at all.


So the likelihood of all that "action" you suggest would happen, is unlikely. So with some very rough estimates, it becomes evident, that your "vision" for dynamic conflicts is unlikely to happen.... as there are probably to few players in doing PP activities at the same time, spread over to many locations. And if other stats are anything to go by, PC platform is probably bigger, so in this regard, PC players are more likely to encounter other players in these conflicts, compared to two other platforms, which in turn then makes it even less likely for them to encounter other PP players...



So quite alot of assumptions, to get some numbers, but I welcome any better sources putting more real numbers in here. But as you have already acknowledged the only ones having those figures are FDev, and they will most likely not disclose those...
 
I am not trying to be snarky or rude but... is PowerPlay still a thing beyond "do what you have to do to get X module"?

I have not played PP for ... well, 2+ years. Has it changed much? Fly around and move papers from place to place or fly into another Power's space and do some attacking?

I honestly did it just for the mods then never went back. And Prismatic wasn't what I thought it was gonna be.
 
Greetings,

After several hundred posts about Open Only PowerPlay over the years and Frontier's response or lack of it one might figure out that this is not going to happen. Maybe in the future Frontier will come up with another way to spend 4 weeks to acquire enhanced weapons and shields but I don't think so as as it is so part of the PowerPlay game they developed from the start.

Forget PowerPlay as it is not going to happen. Might I suggest providing other Open Only game scenarios which Frontier might take a look at. All you experienced MMO players from Eve and other games certainly can come up with simplistic suggestions to make your Open Play game more exciting. Get something simple Frontier will look at then with upgrades it gets more complex. It is just a game. But remember that Frontier is all about balance across three modes. Too many suggestions come across as Open Only. You are wasting your time.

This is nowhere close to a MMO game which frustrates many. So think out of the box forgetting past MMO games you have played and look in another direction Frontier wants to go with. See what they are trying to achieve and decide yes or no to go with it. Tell me any other game company who cared about your inputs. Make the best of them not just for you but everyone else playing this game.Too many only post on the Forum per their desires. They are totally missing the point what Frontier is trying to do in the gaming industry.

Regards
 
Last edited:
Greetings,

After several hundred posts about Open Only PowerPlay over the years and Frontier's response or lack of it one might figure out that this is not going to happen. Maybe in the future Frontier will come up with another way to spend 4 weeks to acquire enhanced weapons and shields but I don't think so as as it is so part of the PowerPlay game they developed from the start.

Forget PowerPlay as it is not going to happen. Might I suggest providing other Open Only game scenarios which Frontier might take a look at. All you experienced MMO players from Eve and other games certainly can come up with simplistic suggestions to make your Open Play game more exciting. Get something simple Frontier will look at then with upgrades it gets more complex. It is just a game. But remember that Frontier is all about balance across three modes. Too many suggestions come across as Open Only. You are wasting tour time.

This is nowhere close to a MMO game which frustrates many. So think out of the box forgetting past MMO games you have played and look in another direction Frontier wants to go with. See what they are trying to achieve and decide yes or no to go with it. Tell me any other game company who cared about your inputs. Make the best of them not just for you but everyone else playing this game.Too many only post on the Forum per their desires. They are totally missing the point what Frontier is trying to do in the gaming industry.

Regards
Yea, we may all do good to consider this. The resistance to changing PP to OO is unreal.

After all, these type of threads should be promoting discussion that could lead to some positive change. Unfortunately, they often turn to platforms where we are just trying to win an argument. I don't think it's possible for anyone to really win this OOPP argument. People are different, they have different points of view, and they enjoy gaming in different ways.

I wonder if FDEV would actually take another game mode into consideration; an Open Only with its own unique rules and identity? It seems like this is the only hope anyone has if they desire to fly their spaceships in the same galaxy as everyone else.
 
Top Bottom