PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

[Robert Maynard]

I think I've lost the train of this; what collusion are you talking about?

If players were to be specifically rewarded for PvP interaction - mentioned by another user.

 

[Rubbernuke]

True - however I don't think that they go out of their way to do so - as would be the case in this instance.

They do know that every single player bought a game that does not require PvP to engage in any normal in-game feature - they can only guess at how many players might want Powerplay to be PvP-gated and what effect that might have on players that don't consider it to be a welcome change.

I think terminating the Mac client also falls into that bracket.

 

[Rubbernuke]

If players were to be specifically rewarded for PvP interaction - mentioned by another user.

Merit weighting is that but in reverse. Open would have 100% value, with other modes having much less.

Its much harder to game, even with AFK CZs. You can't collude with it, because its the normal activities. Collusion piracy was removed long ago.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think terminating the Mac client also falls into that bracket.

I disagree - with the deprecated nature of OpenGL on Mac, introduction of Metal and the apparent lack of particular shaders, development of Horizons on Mac was canned and subsequently support for the base game on Mac was dropped about three years later.

Now, Apple seem to be moving away from x86 CPUs in the near future - which would mean another level of complexity has been avoided.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Merit weighting is that but in reverse. Open would have 100% value, with other modes having much less.

Its much harder to game, even with AFK CZs. You can't collude with it, because its the normal activities. Collusion piracy was removed long ago.

The discussion related to specifically rewarding player/player interaction, not weighting merits earned in Solo / Private Groups somewhere between worth less and worthless.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I disagree - with the deprecated nature of OpenGL on Mac, introduction of Metal and the apparent lack of particular shaders, development of Horizons on Mac was canned and subsequently support for the base game on Mac was dropped about three years later.

Now, Apple seem to be moving away from x86 CPUs in the near future - which would mean another level of complexity has been avoided.

But a promised feature that was canned due to changing circumstances.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The discussion related to specifically rewarding player/player interaction, not weighting merits earned in Solo / Private Groups somewhere between worth less and worthless.

Weighting incentivizes being in Open, which indirectly rewards interaction with other players. Its a smart way of rewarding without adding extra exploitable mechanisms.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But a promised feature that was canned due to changing circumstances.

Indeed, due to changing circumstances outwith Frontier's control - unlike an arbitrary PvP-gating of existing pan-modal content.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Indeed, due to changing circumstances outwith Frontier's control - unlike an arbitrary PvP-gating of existing pan-modal content.

So FD are not strangers to making bold decisions then about the game like this one.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Weighting incentivizes being in Open, which indirectly rewards interaction with other players. Its a smart way of rewarding without adding extra exploitable mechanisms.

A simple participation weighting for Open would be ill applied - as every player engaging in Powerplay in Open would receive it regardless of whether they actually encountered any opposing players. It would also be exploitable - that the P2P nature of the game pretty much guarantees.

 

[Robert Maynard]

So FD are not strangers to making bold decisions then about the game like this one.

Indeed, e.g. the bold decision to design the game to offer players complete freedom to choose who they play among and not to PvP-gate any content to a single game mode.

 

[Rubbernuke]

A simple participation weighting for Open would be ill applied - as every player engaging in Powerplay in Open would receive it regardless of whether they actually encountered any opposing players.

But you are taking the risk, which under the new system would be much greater.

It would also be exploitable - that the P2P nature of the game pretty much guarantees.

How could you exploit it?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Indeed, e.g. the bold decision to design the game to offer players complete freedom to choose who they play among and not to PvP-gate any content to a single game mode.

But here they are, suggesting changes almost four times and framing the mode in what they see as consensual PvP.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But you are taking the risk, which under the new system would be much greater.

Depends on a lot of factors, time of day, geography and internet connection to name but a few.

How could you exploit it?

I'm not going to go into detail here - and there are those much more conversant with normal domestic internet security than I.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Depends on a lot of factors, time of day, geography and internet connection to name but a few.

But you are still taking the risk though, aren't you?

I'm not going to go into detail here - and there are those much more conversant with normal domestic internet security than I.

Which comes down to plain cheating then, which affects the whole game and not just PP. I assume you mean being in open and saturating your internet connection. Well its going to look very odd to FD servers if you are in Open and never see anyone, maybe if thats the case they apply the solo tax?

 

[Robert Maynard]

But here they are, suggesting changes almost four times and framing the mode in what they see as consensual PvP.

Four times? From memory it was March'16 and May'18.

Powerplay already offers consensual PvP - those who wish to have the possibility of a PvP encounter in Powerplay can play in Open and those who don't don't need to play in Open to engage in Powerplay. What it does not do is force players to play among those who wish to PvP.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But you are still taking the risk though, aren't you?

I suppose so, as tiny as it may be. Not really worthy of a 20:1 weighting of merits in Open compared to Solo / Private Groups, IMO.

Which comes down to plain cheating then, which affects the whole game and not just PP. I assume you mean being in open and saturating your internet connection. Well its going to look very odd to FD servers if you are in Open and never see anyone, maybe if thats the case they apply the solo tax?

Some players using default security settings have been unable to see other players - that's hardly cheating.

My point is that the P2P nature of the game is a weak point in any attempt to force players to play together - and I suspect that Frontier has known this for quite some time.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Four times? From memory it was March'16 and May'18.

Two open only proposals (one to the PP discord group and flash topic 1) and two weighted merits (flash topic 2 and before).

Powerplay already offers consensual PvP - those who wish to have the possibility of a PvP encounter in Powerplay can play in Open and those who don't don't need to play in Open to engage in Powerplay. What it does not do is force players to play among those who wish to PvP.

And in doing so creates an imbalance that these proposals try to correct.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Two open only proposals (one to the PP discord group and flash topic 1) and two weighted merits (flash topic 2 and before).

Wasn't aware of the PP discord proposal - surprised that he didn't take it to the forums to see how the wider player-base felt about it.
Flash Topic 1 and 2 were effectively the same proposal - with a minor tweak reintroducing the March'16 "hand grenade" proposal that came to nothing at that time.

And in doing so creates an imbalance that these proposals try to correct.

PvP-gating a feature is not a correction in balance - it's removal of an existing feature from players who bought a game with no requirement to PvP.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I suppose so, as tiny as it may be. Not really worthy of a 20:1 weighting of merits in Open compared to Solo / Private Groups, IMO.

In open you are potentially exposed to everything, all experimentals, G5 engineers, every design of ship. You might indeed not see anyone, but the same applies for NPCs in solo who are not 100% on the job- like in forting for example. And these PP NPCs have no engineering, no module specials and are weak.

Some players using default security settings have been unable to see other players - that's hardly cheating.

Very true.

My point is that the P2P nature of the game is a weak point in any attempt to force players to play together - and I suspect that Frontier has known this for quite some time.

True again, but at some point you will have to say its 'good enough' and try it. IMO its at that stage.