PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

[Rubbernuke]

It's Frontier's job to offer what they consider to be "fair" to their whole player-base.

No, I wouldn't. What "fighting" is there regarding surface bases?

My point was that surface bases are Horizons only- if player A has Horizons and is fighting a war and can use that base, while player B is fighting the same war in oppositon but can't use it, is that fair?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Ya RubberNuke seems to Ignore that part.

And from what I understand FD looked at the numbers, felt it was too expensive to find a solution for the graphics API and canned the lot.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Because Powerplay as it is needs to stand apart from the BGS, which is Powerplay 2.0 in all but name. The grindy mechanics become much more fun when you are evading others. I'm enthusiastic about that based on the brief glimpses of that happening in my time, and having that as normal rather than fleeting is something that would energise the feature.

I'm all for it standing apart. Now, for you maybe it becomes more fun when evading others, but it still doesn't change it being a grindy mechanic (and i thought the consensus around here was that grind is bad? And PP is as grindy as it gets!), but its not fun for everyone being jumped on by a wing of meta ships. And the thing is, you can already get that! If you are flying in open, then those who are playing the role of hunters are already in open! But how often are you actually having to evade others? In thoery, there is an imbanace at the moment between haulers and hunters right? Because all the hunters are in open but the haulers are split between modes. So you are at peak hunter right now. Thats it, that is max excitement you are getting. And when fortifying, exactly how much are you getting hunted, because when i was fortifying earlier in the week, i didn't see a single other player. Not even allies, let alone enemies. Where were all these mythical hunters? I presume in their own systems, because they weren't in ours.

Again, its fine that you want this, but you also want it to be more popular, so there has to be something change that will bring in a lot more players. Its questionable how many more people open only PP would draw in vs how many it would lose. But making changes just to please only those who already do it, without looking to bring in fresh blood, would seem short sighted to me.

 

[Lestat]

And from what I understand FD looked at the numbers, felt it was too expensive to find a solution for the graphics API and canned the lot.

OpenGL was Windows. Apple/MAC. Would not get off their rere end and support software from windows. It not Frontier Fault. It was Apple/MAC fault. It had nothing to do with Frontier.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You can't, not without balancing engineering, heal beams, PG, PP CZs all in one go. Its the combination that is the killer, not the individual parts.

Possibly, possibly not - however it'd be worth making the attempt to deal with a usage that can be prone to AFK play - and see how it affects merits gained in Solo / Private Groups before going ahead with any PvP-gating.

But you can't collude with weighted merits- its simply impossible as you are collecting merits from NPCs and can't trade or steal them. The only thing another player can do in this case is destroy someone hoarding them.

True - while no merits are gained from any player/player interaction (although they can be lost, as you say). I doubt that there'd be agreement on the weighting factor as, while some want 20:1 in favour of Open, others don't consider that a weighting is required in a game where PvP is entirely optional.

But its all we have- and its all FD has regarding quality feedback outside of what numbers FD sit on in some giant spreadsheet.

.... and the feedback they have received may not be sufficiently compelling - especially given that Frontier would have to be prepared to, in addition to PvP-gating content in a game where PvP has been sold as being entirely optional from the outset, remove existing content completely from those players on consoles without premium platform access.

Like quite a lot of the game then.

... and none of the game is restricted to a single game mode.

 

[Robert Maynard]

My point was that surface bases are Horizons only- if player A has Horizons and is fighting a war and can use that base, while player B is fighting the same war in oppositon but can't use it, is that fair?

Are there any systems with no stations / outposts and only surface installations?

 

[Rubbernuke]

I'm all for it standing apart. Now, for you maybe it becomes more fun when evading others, but it still doesn't change it being a grindy mechanic (and i thought the consensus around here was that grind is bad? And PP is as grindy as it gets!)

Without Open the 100%+ fort / UM clause would be what you fear- with it, each run becomes a test of skill because your opponents know where you are, and so do your allies.

, but its not fun for everyone being jumped on by a wing of meta ships. And the thing is, you can already get that! If you are flying in open, then those who are playing the role of hunters are already in open!

They are, but people have the use of the other modes, so they bypass those who are looking for them. Its not until the whole system changes will you get what I describe.

But how often are you actually having to evade others? In thoery, there is an imbanace at the moment between haulers and hunters right? Because all the hunters are in open but the haulers are split between modes. So you are at peak hunter right now. Thats it, that is max excitement you are getting. And when fortifying, exactly how much are you getting hunted, because when i was fortifying earlier in the week, i didn't see a single other player. Not even allies, let alone enemies. Where were all these mythical hunters? I presume in their own systems, because they weren't in ours.

I explained all this a while ago. Plus see the answer above. The proposal focuses players into limited areas, making hunting much simpler and would make fortifying much slower and trickier.

Again, its fine that you want this, but you also want it to be more popular, so there has to be something change that will bring in a lot more players. Its questionable how many more people open only PP would draw in vs how many it would lose. But making changes just to please only those who already do it, without looking to bring in fresh blood, would seem short sighted to me.

Well, only by doing it will you see if it works. If you do nothing, the last people who really take pride in their Power will vanish and the feature will simply lose direction like its beginning to now. You have the BGS balanced across modes, being a more varied version of Powerplay so why duplicate that again? You have lots of PvP wings, squadrons etc wanting stuff to do- what better than this?

 

[Rubbernuke]

OpenGL was Windows. Apple/MAC. Would not get off their rere end and support software from windows. It not Frontier Fault. It was Apple/MAC fault. It had nothing to do with Frontier.

Porting takes time. Time is money, and the numbers were not good. We don't know what options they could have taken if money was not an issue.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Are there any systems with no stations / outposts and only surface installations?

Yes there are.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Possibly, possibly not - however it'd be worth making the attempt to deal with a usage that can be prone to AFK play - and see how it affects merits gained in Solo / Private Groups before going ahead with any PvP-gating.

But FD haven't. Just like the millions of other bugs and exploits in Powerplay nothing has been done. So here we are, with the killer PG / heal beam T-10 wing merit fruit machine.

True - while no merits are gained from any player/player interaction (although they can be lost, as you say). I doubt that there'd be agreement on the weighting factor as, while some want 20:1 in favour of Open, others don't consider that a weighting is required in a game where PvP is entirely optional.

But that 'optional' part is the most dangerous situation you can currently face in Powerplay. Just as you can have no PP NPC interdictions on runs the same can be true for Open PP- but, one is far more dangerous and needing skill to survive.

.... and the feedback they have received may not be sufficiently compelling - especially given that Frontier would have to be prepared to, in addition to PvP-gating content in a game where PvP has been sold as being entirely optional from the outset, remove existing content completely from those players on consoles without premium platform access.

We don't know what the numbers are re consoles, and it might be that FD favour weighting since that gets around that issue. And having nearly 65- 70% of responses very positive about a proposal would be compelling, especially in a feature that weeks before was a running joke by everyone, with the same people voicing support not interested in it at that point.

... and none of the game is restricted to a single game mode.

Except CQC, but that does not count, does it?

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Are there any systems with no stations / outposts and only surface installations?

I think there are actually.... i'm fairly sure i've seen one. I could be imagining things.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes there are.

Thanks.

But FD haven't. Just like the millions of other bugs and exploits in Powerplay nothing has been done. So here we are, with the killer PG / heal beam T-10 wing merit fruit machine.

Maybe they don't consider it to be a problem that needs to be priorisited.

But that 'optional' part is the most dangerous situation you can currently face in Powerplay. Just as you can have no PP NPC interdictions on runs the same can be true for Open PP- but, one is far more dangerous and needing skill to survive.

The optional part can be considered to be the most dangerous situation one can currently face in the game as a whole - it makes it no less optional given Frontier's design for the game.

We don't know what the numbers are re consoles, and it might be that FD favour weighting since that gets around that issue. And having nearly 65- 70% of responses very positive about a proposal would be compelling, especially in a feature that weeks before was a running joke by everyone, with the same people voicing support not interested in it at that point.

We'll see what, if anything, from the list of proposals in Sandro's first Flash Topic Frontier decide to implement, in time. Sandro weas at pains to reiterate that it was an investigation and not a fait accompli, after all. I'll be surprised if any of the QoL updates pre the 2020 release specifically removes Powerplay from players who don't or can't play in Open though.

Except CQC, but that does not count, does it?

Not in my opinion - unless one is looking for a PvP-gated out-of-game feature with negligible effect on the game (some credits and a single system permit, I believe).

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think there are actually.... i'm fairly sure i've seen one. I could be imagining things.

If the eddb.io database is anything to go by, of 20578 inhabited systems, 26 have no stations; 19189 have orbital stations and 13929 have planetary bases. That suggests that 1363 systems (approximately 6.6%) have planetary bases and no orbital stations.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Thanks.

There are a few- I know of at least two (one controlled by Archon and one by Utopia).

Maybe they don't consider it to be a problem that needs to be priorisited.

Its one of many exploits that FD either don't have time for, or can't fix. Either way it breaks Powerplay, and makes trying to fight against it not fun at all.

The optional part can be considered to be the most dangerous situation one can currently face in the game as a whole - it makes it no less optional given Frontier's design for the game.

But given FD most recent stance about Powerplay and what they think, they see a home for it in Powerplay either via weighted or Open only. My bet would be weighted.

We'll see what, if anything, from the list of proposals in Sandro's first Flash Topic Frontier decide to implement, in time. Sandro weas at pains to reiterate that it was an investigation and not a fait accompli, after all. I'll be surprised if any of the QoL updates pre the 2020 release specifically removes Powerplay from players who don't or can't play in Open though.

Well they can't put it off much longer- or can they?

Not in my opinion - unless one is looking for a PvP-gated out-of-game feature with negligible effect on the game (some credits and a single system permit, I believe).

But still has connections and denies players access to that system then.

 

[Robert Maynard]

There are a few- I know of at least two (one controlled by Archon and one by Utopia).

About 6.6% of inhabited systems have planetary bases and no orbital stations. I used eddb.io.

Its one of many exploits that FD either don't have time for, or can't fix. Either way it breaks Powerplay, and makes trying to fight against it not fun at all.

I can understand that - and would like to see AFK turretboating stamped out in all its incarnations.

But given FD most recent stance about Powerplay and what they think, they see a home for it in Powerplay either via weighted or Open only. My bet would be weighted.

We'll see, in time.

Well they can't put it off much longer- or can they?

Only Frontier have the answer to that.

But still has connections and denies players access to that system then.

One of over 20,000 inhabited systems, yes. Not that CQC has any consequences - I expect that any player could gain the required level, in time.

 

[lenna]

subsequently cancelled before launch.

Ultimately the same thing, splitting hairs a bit - overall, the reasoning for it being cancelled (as I understand it) was because of the shared universe state.

FD have repeatedly expressed their commitment to the single shared universe state since release and people in general need to learn to accept that regardless of the mode they choose. The shared universe state includes PP thus should not be made Open only unless FD are going to depart from their commitment - which then opens a whole bag of worms regarding other things including but not limited to off-line mode.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Ultimately the same thing, splitting hairs a bit - overall, the reasoning for it being cancelled (as I understand it) was because of the shared universe state.

FD have repeatedly expressed their commitment to the single shared universe state since release and people in general need to learn to accept that regardless of the mode they choose. The shared universe state includes PP thus should not be made Open only unless FD are going to depart from their commitment - which then opens a whole bag of worms regarding other things including but not limited to off-line mode.

FD have repeatedly expressed their commitment to the single shared universe by inquiring about Open Only Powerplay / weightedf merits four times- I see the logic.

 

[lenna]

So it became too expensive with too few players and it was cut

Not quite - as I understand it, supporting the Mac version was holding them back on some things because of the technical limitations and FD had to make the hard choice to stop supporting it.

 

[lenna]

FD have repeatedly expressed their commitment to the single shared universe by inquiring about Open Only Powerplay / weightedf merits four times- I see the logic.

Inquiring about something and doing something are two different things - I believe they realised after the fact how untenable the situation would be because of PP's effect on the shared universe state and removing that effect was probably not a compromise they were willing to do.

During subsequent discussions around "potential" PP revisions, FD have repeated their commitment to the shared universe state.

 

[Robert Maynard]

FD have repeatedly expressed their commitment to the single shared universe by inquiring about Open Only Powerplay / weightedf merits four times- I see the logic.

For everything but Powerplay - and even that is just an investigation.

Regarding the BGS:

Source: https://youtu.be/VCy1ZYjLvdQ?t=853