PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

[Arry]

Well, it certainly is a new account. And that account has done little except be involved in this thread. And they do seem rather knowledgable.

However, it doesn't prove that its an alt account, and if it is FD should be on the case to kill it, unless they are being clever and going through a VPN.

I would like to believe none of our OOPP brethern would be so scummy and underhanded as to create an alt account just to push their agenda. Especially when anyone is free to create a new thread whenever they like as long as there isn't an active thread on the topic.

Unless... unless.... it was to try and make it appear as though there is greater support for this than there actually is. No... surely not.

We have to assume OP is genuine in their intentions, even if we disagree, unless the mods can determine it is an alt account.

I would agree; that the genuine P/P players that feel let down by F.D. for not doing this: Have no need to hide behind a new profile. They stand proud and their motives are honourable. However: There have been many posters in these threads, that have been called out and shown; just to want more choice of human targets. Those guys, now hold no weight here and so may feel the need, to hide behind an Alt.

Whatever: Let them continue, within the rules; of course. They are still wasting their time.

 

[Arry]

I'll just leave this here.

 

[CMDR Cknarf]

The only thing I’ve ever used powerplay for is special parts, really.

That, or to attack someone running crimes at a CG without ramifications lol. That’s more of a chance thing, but still. Super convenient when it happens.

I can’t say I’ve ever felt the need to seriously participate otherwise, but open only might make me reconsider. Maybe. It’ll probably be dull still, but who knows? It’s worth a try at least, you know?

I’d totally be down for robbing people of PP cargo, blockading, or even getting in fights with enemy escorts etc.

That sounds far more exciting than hauling cargo- that I have to pay for- without any chance of being contested.

Of course, there’s no way to stop players on other platforms from completing their deliveries, but that’s easily taken care of by allies on the other end.

If there’s one thing powerplay groups have, its numbers. Often dedicated, organized numbers. If you’ve ever seen a powerplay discord server, you’ll know what I’m talking about.

The potential for some big action is there, and I’d love to see Fdev at least give it a trial run.

 

[lenna]

But what exact gameplay is missing from the BGS that is in Powerplay?

BGS is currently different from but linked to PP - if you can't tell the difference in the way they work then you obviously do not know enough about either.

The fundamental point is PP is different gameplay from the BGS and restricting it to just Open will remove current options from players who do not play in Open for whatever reason. It is not rocket science.

 

[Cogenerate]

This is such a great game. Engineering ships to fight and fly according to your playstyle is great. Graphics are good. The POWERPLAY system can potentially be a great system. It gives the player base direct control over the power structure and can actively affect what the boundaries are in this galaxy. Unfortunately all the immersion potential is completely wasted because we are living in two galaxies, parrallel dimensions or something not understandable. The powers and their borders can be affected by people's actions in another reality that somehow translates to the current 'open' reality.

You get my drift. You lose the awesomeness of there being one galaxy that we all live in when people can just live in their own pretend version of the galaxy and still influence the 'politics' of the real galaxy called OPEN.

I know this has been brought up plenty in the past, I'm just casting my vote for making POWERPLAY activities only available in OPEN.

PLEEEAASSE.

Seriously though, I think you would see a lot more of your player base return if you made this change.

Honestly, I thought they were planning on making this change a long time ago. I totally agree, it's something that should only be available in open.

How do you justify having a mechanic in the game that pits players against one another in a power struggle and then allow players to do it in a way they can't be stopped by the very players they are pitted against? It's like making the goalie stand on the sideline during a penalty kick. Nobody wants to see that.

I mean, can you really call it a game when there's nobody else on the field with you?

 

[Vardaugas]

I mean, can you really call it a game when there's nobody else on the field with you?

That's an issue with the way powerplay game mechanics are designed and not so much with game modes.

 

[Cogenerate]

That's an issue with the way powerplay game mechanics are designed and not so much with game modes.

I feel like you missed the entire point.

If I'm trying to prevent Aisling Duval from Fortifying one of her Control Systems... I can fly around that system and interdict Commanders who arrive in cargo ships carrying fortification cargo. If they are in Solo... I can't interdict them. They can carry as much fortification material to the station as they please without risk of anyone stopping them. Ever.

They are on the field alone.

The game mechanic is sound. Doing it in Solo is the problem.


And, of course, if I were interdicting commanders, they would spread the word to the combat commanders in their power and pretty soon they would come to hunt me.
Which sounds surprisingly like a game. One that may actually attract players back to Elite. Because people want to play a game, not a space trucking simulator.

And if it happened enough... cargo ships might have to get escorts to be able to fly missions.... wait I think I've seen that somewhere... oh yeah, the Trailer made by Frontier for the Wings update.

At which point Frontier might have to add some sort of matchmaking aspect to the game where cargo haulers could enter a station and post a request for commander to conduct fighter escort for a share of the profit.

But that's just crazy because then you'd have a game where the players actually interact with on another. Maybe we should just go back 1984 when Elite was just a single player game. We can just make Solo the only game mode and be done with it.

 

[CMDR KOBAL]

Building spaceships - sure.

Weapons? Two of the paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot at another ship....

Ok. But those two paths don't have anything to do with POWERPLAY either, right? Point being that if POWERPLAY is OO, that wouldn't affect anybody any different that's wants to follow the path of an explorer or trader.

And come on, there is a lot of weapons to build in this game. It's not even possible to have a ship that can't fit weapons.

 

[Cogenerate]

.

 

[CMDR KOBAL]

Ah, but people can find competitive combat if they want. There is even a group of PvPers in San Tu who especially go for competitive combat.

But look at the illustrious names of the vocal people who are crying out for OOPP. Now, there are some there who really care about PP, and even if i disagree with them, i can fully understand their desire for OOPP, because they truly believe it stands a chance of making PP better.

On the other hand, there are the.... well, gankers. They see OOPP as a way to enforce people to play in open, to be their targets. They seem to think if PP goes open only there will be lots of easy targets to for them to shoot at.

I think this is flawed thinking.

Who will continue to PP in an open only environment? I think it will be a) people who enjoy PvP, usually not pushovers, b) people who haul but know how to deal with attacks from PvPers, they don't fly shieldless type 9s, they fly fast and defended ships, c) other gankers.

I think (and i could be wrong), a lot of people who do PP just to chill and haul will say "forget this for a game of soldiers" and just quit.

But hey, just speculation on my part.



I ALSO HAVE CAPS LOCK!!!!

Anyway, that pretty much depends on the person. I've spent over a month driving around a planet. A lot of my activities don't even involve weapons. YMMV.



Nothing wrong with them asking, just as there is nothing wrong with people saying they don't like it. They have made their case time and time and time again. So far FD haven't done anything to appease them. Maybe they will one day, maybe they won't. All we can do in the meantine is discuss.

FD could instead introduce another feature that promotes the use of these ships and weapons against each other with a strategic pupose behind it. Perhaps the new interstellar initiatives could have been it. Thing is, even if PP goes open only, it doesn't do what you are suggesting. PP works 90% off moving tokens around via PvE. I think if people really want some sort of PvP oriented feature with strategic purpose, then there needs to be a mechanic that works off PvP, not PvE. The only thing like that at the moment is CQC. Maybe they could add some sort of in game tourney similar to CQC but affects certain things territorially.

Problem is, FD would need to think about the mechanics very carefully. Any sort of competitive game attracts cheats or otherwise unsavoury actions, like in PP with 5Cers as things stand. Imagine implementing something that works via PvP... it doesn't take much imagination to consider that people will cooperate to blow each other up to produce desired results, or use alt accounts to do so.

FD did a very interesting thing with the modes and cross mode play. I think its the first time i've seen something like this in a game rather than total separatation. It has pluses and minuses for sure, just like any system. It seems to me though, that a vast majority of players are fine with it and enjoy the freedom of choice it brings. However, there are two groups who are clearly not happy. Those who play PP (and a few who do BGS) and think that those who play in PG/solo are bad for the feature. Those who like to kill other players and are upset that some players can avoid them.

The latter i think are safe to ignore. The former, its understandable they think this way. 5Cers hauling away in PG/solo are a cause for concern, but there again, they can haul away in open, just with the risk of getting attacked by their opponents... who really shouldn't be attacking them since they would be doing stuff against their own power, and of course, their own power players who probably shouldn't be attacking members of their own power. Its a messy situation.

Regardless, PP is 99% about PvE, and if you are losing, you're losing not because you can't shoot your opponents, you are losing because you are not playing as well as your opponents. If 5C isn't meant to be a thing, then FD should stop it.. somehow. How, i've no idea! How do you stop someone from "helping" in a detrimental way? FD made some proposals that could help. Then FD could fix it and make 5Cing less attractive. Other issues could be dealt with without making it open only. Except for the issue of not seeing everyone who is partaking, friends and enemies alike. But Open only won't solve that either, because of instancing, time zones, platforms, and general networking.

I remain pretty convinced that if PP went open only, it wouldn't be quite what people are expecting.

I don't agree verbatim with everything that you said but I think you make some sound and logical assessments.

 

[varonica]

Ok. But those two paths don't have anything to do with POWERPLAY either, right? Point being that if POWERPLAY is OO, that wouldn't affect anybody any different that's wants to follow the path of an explorer or trader.

And come on, there is a lot of weapons to build in this game. It's not even possible to have a ship that can't fit weapons.

But it is a choice whether or not you fit weapons to that ship. You can fit an AA gun into the back of a toyota utility but it doens't mean you have to take part in a war somewhere if you own one.

The other thing is, if neither of these paths affect PP as you claim, then making PP OO is redundant, your logic is flawed. Your entire argument seems predicated on the assumption that ED is a person to person space combat game and everyone should be either made to take part or penalised by not being able to get the PP perks. If arguments about this keep going then you are going to end up being self-defeating because FDEV will no longer introduce these sorts of features, just like we no longer get new restricted modules.

Continual toxic arguments for and against will just lead to certain paths of development being dropped to detriment of all. I suspect that's why OOPP was dropped like a hot potatoe, they just aren't going to go there and it's because of the toxicity on the forums, it's never going to happen.

 

[CMDR KOBAL]

But it is a choice whether or not you fit weapons to that ship. You can fit an AA gun into the back of a toyota utility but it doens't mean you have to take part in a war somewhere if you own one.

The other thing is, if neither of these paths affect PP as you claim, then making PP OO is redundant, your logic is flawed. Your entire argument seems predicated on the assumption that ED is a person to person space combat game and everyone should be either made to take part or penalised by not being able to get the PP perks. If arguments about this keep going then you are going to end up being self-defeating because FDEV will no longer introduce these sorts of features, just like we no longer get new restricted modules.

Continual toxic arguments for and against will just lead to certain paths of development being dropped to detriment of all. I suspect that's why OOPP was dropped like a hot potatoe, they just aren't going to go there and it's because of the toxicity on the forums, it's never going to happen.

Do you take my tone as being toxic in this forum? I'm trying to respect people and understand their point of view.

Let me ask you this, when you say PP perks, you are simply referring to modules right? If the modules were made available in a different way than they are now... like you don't have to do PP to get them, would you still feel you are being penalized by having to play PP in open?

 

[CMDR KOBAL]

OK, just for the record, I am not from some previous group and just created this account as an alt. I've owned this game since it came out, I just have never posted anything on the forum until now. Truth be told. I'm not even a good pvper. I do enjoy it and would like to get better at it. I just think it's a shame to have a game like this that doesn't have a way for pvpers to interact with each other in a way like OOPP would exactly provide.

I have tried to talk about things in a civil, logical, and peaceable manner. Some of you have responded in the same way. Thank you for that. What I don't get is the people who just respond with such anger. Why does this discussion make you so angry?

 

[Rubbernuke]

BGS is currently different from but linked to PP - if you can't tell the difference in the way they work then you obviously do not know enough about either.

The fundamental point is PP is different gameplay from the BGS and restricting it to just Open will remove current options from players who do not play in Open for whatever reason. It is not rocket science.

Having run a Powerplay group and been involved with Powerplay from Cycle 1 I have a fair idea how things shake down. I know full well the relationship between the BGS and PP, and aside from having the right gov types in the right places they don't interact any more than that. As you say, 'its not rocket science'.

You don't understand what I asked: what is (from a basic gameplay perspective) missing from the BGS that is in Powerplay to warrant such inflexible views? Now, is Powerplay this vital to you, or are you using it for the 'slippery slope' agenda?

Powerplay is at its most fundamental take this / shoot this. You do that over and over, with no variety. Putting Powerplay activities in BGS terms you have Preparation and Fortification being cargo runs, Combat Expansions being pre 3.x CZs ( i.e. unending uniform combat) and UM being basic wetwork. 1:1 Powerplay piracy was drastically nerfed so thats out. Do you count Prep / Consolidating 'gameplay'?

There is no extra stuff in Powerplay to entertain you except for other players in or out of the game who oppose you. There is a reason why people stopped playing it, and its not because of people shooting at you- its because these base gameplay elements are so sparse that do not make up for the onerous grind and merit decay imposed on pledges. When Cycle 4 arrived many player groups simply left the feature because of that.

In this context this is why a lot of people are excited for an Open Only Powerplay, because having this go on against other players transforms the mundane. The proposal limits areas where Powerplay happens, and makes activities potentially much more dynamic and unpredictable because of other pledges.

The BGS in comparison is infinitely more complex. You have nested missions, megaships, in fact the whole game revolves around it. Powerplay is tiny in comparison, and if you think that by 'taking it away' you are denying a huge chunk of the game then you are just plain wrong. Put simply, Powerplay has no place in the game any longer, it needs to change and evolve into something that costs little developer time to do. I'm sure some players would stop playing it if these changes went ahead, but I'm equally sure others would take their place...and, since an Open Powerplay would have a clear mandate within the game people would know what it was for- objective based tactical fighting in large groups.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I don't agree verbatim with everything that you said but I think you make some sound and logical assessments.

What is this? How dare you be so nice and polite while expressing disagreement? MODS!

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Having run a Powerplay group and been involved with Powerplay from Cycle 1 I have a fair idea how things shake down. I know full well the relationship between the BGS and PP, and aside from having the right gov types in the right places they don't interact any more than that. As you say, 'its not rocket science'.

You don't understand what I asked: what is (from a basic gameplay perspective) missing from the BGS that is in Powerplay to warrant such inflexible views? Now, is Powerplay this vital to you, or are you using it for the 'slippery slope' agenda?

Powerplay is at its most fundamental take this / shoot this. You do that over and over, with no variety. Putting Powerplay activities in BGS terms you have Preparation and Fortification being cargo runs, Combat Expansions being pre 3.x CZs ( i.e. unending uniform combat) and UM being basic wetwork. 1:1 Powerplay piracy was drastically nerfed so thats out. Do you count Prep / Consolidating 'gameplay'?

There is no extra stuff in Powerplay to entertain you except for other players in or out of the game who oppose you. There is a reason why people stopped playing it, and its not because of people shooting at you- its because these base gameplay elements are so sparse that do not make up for the onerous grind and merit decay imposed on pledges. When Cycle 4 arrived many player groups simply left the feature because of that.

In this context this is why a lot of people are excited for an Open Only Powerplay, because having this go on against other players transforms the mundane. The proposal limits areas where Powerplay happens, and makes activities potentially much more dynamic and unpredictable because of other pledges.

The BGS in comparison is infinitely more complex. You have nested missions, megaships, in fact the whole game revolves around it. Powerplay is tiny in comparison, and if you think that by 'taking it away' you are denying a huge chunk of the game then you are just plain wrong. Put simply, Powerplay has no place in the game any longer, it needs to change and evolve into something that costs little developer time to do. I'm sure some players would stop playing it if these changes went ahead, but I'm equally sure others would take their place...and, since an Open Powerplay would have a clear mandate within the game people would know what it was for- objective based tactical fighting in large groups.

I don't agree verbatim with everything that you said but I think you make some sound and logical assessments.

Totally stolen from Kobal

As i said in my choice for what should happen if PP goes open only, remove the connection between PP and BGS, perhaps add some other mechanic to compensate, and i could live with it.

 

[lenna]

You don't understand what I asked: what is (from a basic gameplay perspective) missing from the BGS that is in Powerplay to warrant such inflexible views?

If you focus too much on the basic gameplay aspects (e.g. day to day activities) like you seem to be trying to then you miss the entire point.

PP supports CMDR participation in shaping how an in-game faction expands, provides a form of definitive PvE faction affiliation, and goes above and beyond what the BGS provides in terms of faction modelling.

Despite the moaning of the PP PvPers even making it OO will not guarantee that you will be able to spawn with people opposing your interests. If PP were to go Open Only then it should also go platform specific too in that case (i.e. PS/4, Xbox, PC OO PvP-centric PP should be independent of each other). If this were done, then PP should be also mirrored for PG/Solo players (would not necessitate platform-specific split) - cross-feeding (Open merits/non-Open merit) would by necessity need to also be disabled in that case.

What I am getting at is that PP should not be removed as an option for non-Open players and the only reasonable way to actually properly address the desire of PvPers would be to fragment PP in such a way that flies in the face of FD's commitment to a single shared universe state (both cross-mode and cross-platform).

 

[Rubbernuke]

If you focus too much on the basic gameplay aspects (e.g. day to day activities) like you are trying to then you miss the entire point.

But unless you focus on the nitty gritty you don't get to the fundamental issues of Open Only Powerplay. Like it or not day to day activities are what make people want to engage with the feature- if they offer nothing new or substantially different from what exists why waste your time? Many people have come to this conclusion and stopped using the feature, hence this situation.

PP supports CMDR participation in shaping how an in-game faction expands, provides a form of definitive PvE faction affiliation, and goes above and beyond what the BGS provides in terms of faction modelling.

While BGS + Squadrons does not? Again, this potent combination offers everything Powerplay could do and more. No 5C, flexible, varied, profitable, communal....its no contest is it?

Despite the moaning of the PP PvPers even making it OO will not guarantee that you will be able to spawn with people opposing your interests.

This is true, but then it still modifies how you approach the feature. A simple cargo run in busy space goes from routine in PG / Solo to potentially lethal, with you having to adjust how you play and modify your ship. It also draws in the need for team play, and tactics. Also remember Open Powerplay is opportunistic, its not a curated arena but the bubble itself.

If PP were to go Open Only then it should also go platform specific too in that case (i.e. PS/4, Xbox, PC OO PvP-centric PP should be independent of each other). If this were done, then PP should be also mirrored for PG/Solo players - cross-feeding would by necessity need to be disabled in that case.

From my understanding all powers have pledges spread across platforms, so there would be no need for this (IMO) needless complexity because you would have a desirable middle ground.

What I am getting at is that PP should not be removed as an option for non-Open players and the only reasonable way to actually properly address the desire of PvPers would be to fragment PP in such a way that flies in the face of FD's commitment to a single shared universe state.

My argument is that what you fear in material terms is negligible from a gameplay perspective. You lose no gameplay because Powerplay poorly duplicates Squadrons and BGS actions now. Powerplay is the poor relation and offers nothing extra.

flies in the face of FD's commitment to a single shared universe state

In the context of what I've just posted in my last few replies- who cares? As I've argued FD have built a direct analogue of Powerplay with Squadrons + BGS. While Sqadrons / BGS thrives in multi mode, Powerplay does not. You do not lose anything by letting Powerplay go open. Its a practical, low cost solution that would in theory differentiate the feature and justify its continued inclusion (since the other option is removal). A lot of resistance stems from an emotional (and IMO irrational) fear that Open Powerplay would infect the rest of the game and that in doing so is some gigantic betrayal of some long held oath etched into stone.

After all, CQC is Open only, did that break the sacred tenets?

 

[lenna]

While BGS + Squadrons does not?

Nope - not as far as PvE is concerned really, not even close to being comparable to PP.

After all, CQC is Open only, did that break the sacred tenets?

False - CQC is not open only, it is a separate environment period and was like that from day one.

PP does not duplicate Squadrons and BGS - that is a fallacy.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Ok. But those two paths don't have anything to do with POWERPLAY either, right? Point being that if POWERPLAY is OO, that wouldn't affect anybody any different that's wants to follow the path of an explorer or trader.

And come on, there is a lot of weapons to build in this game. It's not even possible to have a ship that can't fit weapons.

The point being responded to was the contention that the game is mainly about combat - merely pointing out that that contention is not strictly accurate.

While all ships have hardpoints, no ship requires them to be fitted with weapons.

Thank you for that. What I don't get is the people who just respond with such anger. Why does this discussion make you so angry?

Probably because some players who prefer PvP have been trying to get content PvP-gated to Open (or Solo / Private Groups removed, etc.) for well over six years now - it's rather repetitive - and Frontier has not chosen to accede to their demands in all that time.