PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

[lenna]

The good reason is to make something of Powerplays corpse.

If PP is so bad, why play it

Unless there is a way to do what you want as cheaply, I'm all ears.

All approaches will cost time and money to implement, assuming OO/OB PP would have a positive effect for anyone other than PvPers in general is just self-confirmation-bias.

Utlimately, they have the beginnings of something that could be evolved to facilitate at least semi-meaningful PvP in Squadrons - the tags are there, league tables are implemented, adding per-squadron opt-in mechanics for some Open specific activity would probably require less messing around and be far less contentious.

 

[Chalkie]

I've only read the last couple of pages, so its probably been discussed ad nauseum, but why exactly do a large number of the people who are very active in PP propose open only?
Is it really because they just want to gank lesser ships?
Didn't the discussion all start as a workable counter to bots?
"Bots?" we don't care about bots! If people want to cheat & gain billions of credits using a bot, then why not just let them?
Well, because these particular bots are not being used to gain billions of credits, they're being used to horribly skew the mechanisms built in to PP. If you're not suffering from these bots like the players in PP are, then I'm not convinced that your arguments are valid.
Maybe "open only for PP actions" is not the fabulous solution that might theoretically be possible, but it would appear to be something which would be an achievable change. I don't know, I've not seen the Elite codebase, but it looks from the outside as if it ought to be possible.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Most do not care about Powerplay in the slightest, never will but hate the idea PvP style players might get something.

I have no problem with Frontier developing something for PvP players. I have a problem with existing base game content being appropriated for PvP and taken away from those disinterested in PvP.

 

[lenna]

...

Botting in general is in contravention of the EULA/ToS as is any form of hacking/cheating. FD have apparently been made aware of some of the alleged cheat facilities out there and are apparently looking into it (at least according to an item in my google feed in the past few weeks).

It may be that the alleged cheats may not be actual cheats but what could be considered exploit builds instead - I know a friend of mine configured a particular ship a particular way then got accused of cheating when the other person lost. I have also previously encountered a certain type of build in a Beta that made the ship in question seem immortal.

Ultimately, the concerns in play can be addressed by other means - be it addressing balancing concerns, or introducing measures to address the alleged cheating.

 

[Rubbernuke]

If PP is so bad, why play it

Because there are people who have invested a lot of time, effort and love into the feature and are proud of the Power they support. They then get very angry when FD ignore it for years, and continue to do nothing.

All approaches will cost time and money to implement, assuming OO/OB PP would have a positive effect for anyone other than PvPers in general is just self-confirmation-bias.

The common factor in all proposals (and implemented changes) is that they have the bare minimum input to get the maximum gain. Consolidation was like this, and so is the Flash Topics. FD can't make NPC opposition work like a player, which would be great. Players can make the humdrum exhilarating though, Open can do that and let players be the agitators.

Utlimately, they have the beginnings of something that could be evolved to facilitate at least semi-meaningful PvP in Squadrons - the tags are there, league tables are implemented, adding per-squadron opt-in mechanics for some Open specific activity would probably require less messing around and be far less contentious.

Its not a case of having squadron v squadron though- what people like the idea of is Powerplay activities in open- so rather than having a CQC Max you have an actual conflict where you can apply your skills. You can't do that in the BGS as you can't prove intention (i.e. you can't reveal what missions another player is doing) , however you can in PP because a) they are pledged differently b) you have PP bounties and that Powerplay cargo (prep and fort) are fixed.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I've only read the last couple of pages, so its probably been discussed ad nauseum, but why exactly do a large number of the people who are very active in PP propose open only?
Is it really because they just want to gank lesser ships?
Didn't the discussion all start as a workable counter to bots?
"Bots?" we don't care about bots! If people want to cheat & gain billions of credits using a bot, then why not just let them?
Well, because these particular bots are not being used to gain billions of credits, they're being used to horribly skew the mechanisms built in to PP. If you're not suffering from these bots like the players in PP are, then I'm not convinced that your arguments are valid.
Maybe "open only for PP actions" is not the fabulous solution that might theoretically be possible, but it would appear to be something which would be an achievable change. I don't know, I've not seen the Elite codebase, but it looks from the outside as if it ought to be possible.

Page 47-48 is where you get in depth explanations.

And no, its not about ganking, or killing lesser ships. Since Powerplay is about screwing your opponents in an opt in basis, you sign up for action- i.e. you accept you will be opposed at some point for no reason other than your pledge.

Powerplay has what is called 5C (5th column) that either through ignorance, exploiting loopholes or cheat try to ruin the game. Botting is an issue because it allows someone to do an activity for an inhuman amount of time, outstripping anyone who plays 'normal' hours. AFK turretboating is similar but uses a combination of existing flaws and features to sit in a Powerplay CZ and farm all day to a point where its hard to counter. Both of these force you to either accept defeat, quit or do the same.

Open only itself is a very basic filter for bots- it would only help to catch 5C in your instance. However it does work- once in Utopia someone was prepping a very damaging system to Utopia- I flew out and found a new pledge and explained what we was doing and he then joined the Utopia reddit and helped in a beneficial way. This was a benign example, genuine 5C would be shown no mercy.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Because there are people who have invested a lot of time, effort and love into the feature and are proud of the Power they support. They then get very angry when FD ignore it for years, and continue to do nothing.

Pitchforks are in aisle 5.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Pitchforks are in aisle 5.

Well what else can they do? The latest snub is the Pilots Manual and tooltips: Powerplay is on neither while features like squadrons are promoted heavily. PP has a poor design thats not popular, but FD are not exactly helping matters by ignoring it again.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And no, its not about ganking, or killing lesser ships. Since Powerplay is about screwing your opponents in an opt in basis, you sign up for action- i.e. you accept you will be opposed at some point for no reason other than your pledge..

None of which requires PvP, as implemented. Unless it is about killing lesser ships - which would be facilitated by placing the feature behind a PvP-Gate.

 

[lenna]

Because there are people who have invested a lot of time, effort and love into the feature and are proud of the Power they support. They then get very angry when FD ignore it for years, and continue to do nothing.

Ever think it might be because of the behaviours of at least some of those people that PP may be (allegedly) dying in the first place?

The problem with PP territory allocation stagnating is unlikely to be solvable via the means you are campaigning for.

The common factor in all proposals (and implemented changes) is that they have the bare minimum input to get the maximum gain. Consolidation was like this, and so is the Flash Topics. FD can't make NPC opposition work like a player, which would be great because players can make the humdrum exhilarating- however Open can do that and let players be the agitators.

Again - PP in itself has never been a PvP centric activity and should not be mutated to be that at the cost of PvE players. You may find PvP interesting but many do not - PvP is ok as a scheduled diversion in some environments but PP is both a PvE and mode-agnostic mechanic and should remain that way.

Its not a case of having squadron v squadron though- what people like the idea of is Powerplay activities in open- so rather than having a CQC Max you have an actual conflict where you can apply your skills. You can't do that in the BGS as you can't prove intention (i.e. you can't reveal what missions another player is doing) , however you can in PP because a) they are pledged differently b) you have PP bounties and that Powerplay cargo (prep and fort) are fixed.

So allow for squadron alliances based on Squadron PP affiliation perhaps, the foundations are there with the Squadron mechanics. It could be done as an entirely separate but linked mechanic with the end effect having no impact on either the BGS or the shared universe state.

It might however be better to implement squadron alliances completely independently and have the new gameplay separate from PP and the BGS.

 

[Rubbernuke]

None of which requires PvP, as implemented. Unless it is about killing lesser ships - which would be facilitated by placing the feature behind a PvP-Gate.

But if you have inept NPCs that offer no resistance and only players can do that, you need to make it open only. If FD made NPCs like players, then I'd have no argument, but as they are they are simply fodder to feed the grind machine.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But if you have inept NPCs that offer no resistance and only players can do that, you need to make it open only. If FD made NPCs like players, then I'd have no argument, but as they are they are simply fodder to feed the grind machine.

It depends what difficulty level Frontier want to attach to the feature - players don't set that in anything but Open.

.... and, in a game where PvP is optional and two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot, I don't expect that Frontier will make NPCs as capable as players.

 

[lenna]

None of which requires PvP, as implemented. Unless it is about killing lesser ships - which would be facilitated by placing the feature behind a PvP-Gate.

Forget Iran-Gate, Watergate... ED has PvP-Gate

On a more serious note, Open-Only/Open-Bias for PP solves nothing except perhaps ensure that PP is ONLY engaged by those that are interested in direct PvP. If there is any sure fire way to kill PP as a mechanic once and for all then that is likely to be it.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Well what else can they do? The latest snub is the Pilots Manual and tooltips: Powerplay is on neither while features like squadrons are promoted heavily. PP has a poor design thats not popular, but FD are not exactly helping matters by ignoring it again.

Not sure what else they can do. People have been campaigning for years. Either improvements will be made or not, when FD are ready, if they are ever ready to do it. PP is never going to be popular without some significant changes, with or without open only. It needs a lot more than that.

Until then, your choice, either continue to use the feature or don't.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Can someone reset Rubberbot and Maynardbot? They seem to be stuck in a loop.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Ever think it might be because of the behaviours of at least some of those people that PP may be (allegedly) dying in the first place?

Ever think that even the most dedicated people have limits? You now have people that wrote the rulebook on PP maths call for PP to be culled entirely- and thats after being in Powerplay since day 1 figuring out how the map works (and finding out its bugged, and not fixed for years). Or that FD fail to fix a bug that ruins powers CC (years of careful work and management)? Or cycle 52, where the goalposts moved back an hour?

The problem with PP territory allocation stagnating is unlikely to be solvable via the means you are campaigning for.

It would, simply as it makes fortifying more difficult. Right now its 100% safe and predictable, and can be done top to toe in a few days- you also have consolidation and station reports plus lots of disposable income to buy everything. With players intruding in capitals sniping inbound fort hauls, or hot spot mega UM systems, you then have an extra dimension that currently can only be countered by hard grinding- and even then sometimes thats not enough.

Again - PP in itself has never been a PvP centric activity and should not be mutated to be that at the cost of PvE players. You may find PvP interesting but many do not - PvP is ok as a scheduled diversion in some environments but PP is both a PvE and mode-agnostic mechanic and should remain that way.

What was Powerplay supposed to be when it launched? The answer is ultimately not known since it was half built. Its mutated all of its own accord, and has drifted for far too long.

So allow for squadron alliances based on Squadron PP affiliation perhaps, the foundations are there with the Squadron mechanics. It could be done as an entirely separate but linked mechanic with the end effect having no impact on either the BGS or the shared universe state.

But if you have squadrons that can affect PP via merits earnt, thats still the same position as before.

 

[lenna]

Well what else can they do? The latest snub is the Pilots Manual and tooltips: Powerplay is on neither while features like squadrons are promoted heavily. PP has a poor design thats not popular, but FD are not exactly helping matters by ignoring it again.

PP does have a prominent front end in the UI and fingers all over the place. Ultimately, once you understand the basics of ED gameplay (what the Pilots Manual is notionally for) understanding of it should fall out in the wash.

PP may get added to the manual at some point when the dust has settled over PP revisions which have yet to be declared. FD have spent a year (or more) investing in the base game, now they probably need to concentrating on a new Premium Expansion to both address their own business case and start to fulfil the bargain they effectively made with LEP owners that bought into the LEP during Horizons.

 

[Rubbernuke]

It depends what difficulty level Frontier want to attach to the feature - players don't set that in anything but Open.

Its supposed to be end game content, something you spend your cash on. Plus there is no difficulty curve at all if you face what is essentially starter ships.

.... and, in a game where PvP is optional and two of the three paths to Elite don't require the player to fire a shot, I don't expect that Frontier will make NPCs as capable as players.

But if players are the only effective opposition in a mode thats totally player driven, what do you do? Cut them out by 2/3?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Not sure what else they can do. People have been campaigning for years. Either improvements will be made or not, when FD are ready, if they are ever ready to do it. PP is never going to be popular without some significant changes, with or without open only. It needs a lot more than that.

Until then, your choice, either continue to use the feature or don't.

And thats why people like me are holding signs saying

BLOODY WELL HURRY UP

Because the people that keep Powerplay going each week (the people who each cycle plan attacks, calculate, write blogs, update Reddits etc) do not have infinite patience. Its them that keep the feature going and FD have squandered them.

 

[Rubbernuke]

PP does have a prominent front end in the UI and fingers all over the place. Ultimately, once you understand the basics of ED gameplay (what the Pilots Manual is notionally for) understanding of it should fall out in the wash.

So why is it, the most complicated feature in ED has no instructions at all? Why is it you have a tooltip cheerfully say "want to team up? Find a squadron!". How about tooltips for each Power? "Hey you! Join Hudson and make the galaxy great again!". This is not hard stuff to do but is glaringly absent.

PP may get added to the manual at some point when the dust has settled over PP revisions which have yet to be declared.

I get that FD might be considering something- but right now PP has not appreciably changed for ages- compared to the BGS PP development is glacial in pace.

FD have spent a year (or more) investing in the base game, now they probably need to concentrating on a new Premium Expansion to both address their own business case and start to fulfil the bargain they effectively made with LEP owners that bought into the LEP during Horizons.

I live in hope PP will be improved. But while we wait FD are burning through a finite amount of goodwill.