PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

[Arkadi]

Many ture words are written above. I just want to drop some opinion on BGS and Powerplay.

I think the idea how powerplay interacts with BGS was a good one. Powerplay needs those ties to the BGS or it will become an even more useless and flat construct. I know it doesn't work perfectly and there are some inbalances and incongruencys regarding governmetal bonuses and super-power alignments.

I think if powerplay get's an overhaul someday maybe Frontier can deepen those element of powerplay where BGS interaction is important. I would be rather disappointed if powerplays ties to the BGS would be severed totally to make it nothing but an optional PvP playground having nothing to do with the rest of the game.

We already have enough optional and detached elements in the game (Thargoids, PvP, CQC...). I would welcome if the game would grow more organic and the seperate "optional" element would grow together. Everything would maybe get a bit more organic and meaningful-

These days in Elite it seems it's a theme-park of optional littel games we can play. For me this approach makes the game seem smaller then it is.

Today I am rather indifferent if powerplay is open-only or not. I would welcome a design-choice to connecting game-elements so Tharogoid Invasion and Powerplay and Minor Factions all impact the gameworld alike.

exampletime:
Aisling HQ Mission Board:

• PP/Arena:
  Arena fighters making rogue tournaments in Atrimih. Join the CQC Arene near Polansky Holdings and make points for Aisling. We need to show the galaxy who has the top CQC fighter pilots.
  Winning matches whilst pledged will give powerplay-merits and give influence to any favoreable factions present (communitst, cooperative, confederacy possibliy empire).
• PP/Repair Stations
  Haulers helping our damaged starport in Orang have reported heavy pirate attacks and lost critical cargo. Deliver 500 tons of thermo underwear to Orang to help our people. If you can shoot some pirates on the way the better. Bonus goal: collect bounties of pirates in Orang.
  Delivering cargo will boost preperation for the Control System Maityan, which is the rulinc Control System for Orang. Whils pledged you will also get merits + extra merits for killing off pirates.
• PP/Thargoid Incursion
  We have spottet Thargoid Scouts in Theta Octanis. Deploy immediatily to drive the Thargoids out of our control system.
  Killing scouts whilst pledged will give merits. Eliminating the Thargoids in the system will stabilize BGS of control system.
• PP/Fortification:
  Federal undermining spotted. Go to designated system, deliver fortification cargo and shoot wanted Federal ships where you can.
  Effect: fortification goes up, unfavorable federal factions lose influence, favorable empire factions gain influence. If pledged: Merits are gained.
  Also unpledged commanders may ship fortifications. They can buy them at the market.

enough examples? There could be lot's more including mining, relieve famine or outbreak in friendly control system, target enemy control system, sabotage enemy economy (smuggling)...

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I think the idea how powerplay interacts with BGS was a good one.

I'm not so certain. PPers already have to grind like crazy for CC/merits. The link with the BGS means they also have to keep an eye on the BGS as well and a PMF operating in their region can cause them to get into BGS wars if the PMF is of a government type that is bad for the power. The last thing they need is BGS wars on top of PP wars.

 

[Arkadi]

I'm not so certain. PPers already have to grind like crazy for CC/merits. The link with the BGS means they also have to keep an eye on the BGS as well and a PMF operating in their region can cause them to get into BGS wars if the PMF is of a government type that is bad for the power. The last thing they need is BGS wars on top of PP wars.

Isn't that what makes powerplay interesting? If not for that why play powerplay at all??? Also this is why powerplay was designed for big player groups I think. With many people this is manageable. With only a dozen it will be hard.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Isn't that what makes powerplay interesting? If not for that why play powerplay at all??? Also this is why powerplay was designed for big player groups I think. With many people this is manageable. With only a dozen it will be hard.

Well, i'd say it should be for the conflict between the powers. Sure, getting into conflicts with PMFs or just handling random swings of factions due to random player actions might add more interest, but its more work on top of an already massive workload.

The less other things going on, the more they can focus on having PP conflicts, fighting over border systems, and not worrying about some PMF settting up shop right under their noses.

 

[Arkadi]

Well, i'd say it should be for the conflict between the powers. Sure, getting into conflicts with PMFs or just handling random swings of factions due to random player actions might add more interest, but its more work on top of an already massive workload.

The less other things going on, the more they can focus on having PP conflicts, fighting over border systems, and not worrying about some PMF settting up shop right under their noses.

Right, but as I wanted to say in my first post, it would further increase the fractation of the game if you seperate Powerplay from the BGS.

Whilst having a complex system where powers, factions, thargoids, Arena fights all gear together - it could make for a more living, dynamic and exciting galaxy.

Ohterwise we will be someday at the point of Elite: Optional. Wher nothing really matters. You can chose your favorite minigame in the sandbox and it dosn't touch any of the other mini-games.

Pick your direction: a big shared galaxy where everything gears together or a empty sandbox with scattered isolated toys.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Well, it can, and it has for 4 years. Won't get me playing it though unless things signficantly change.

And this is why its between a rock and a hard place- out of what FD have offered, only making it Open would significantly change the dynamics of the feature beyond what we have now. And the only way to know is to actually do it.

 

[Rubbernuke]

but its more work on top of an already massive workload

This is normal though for Powerplay PP guys do it all throughout the week. BGS, UM, fortify, vote, missions etc.

 

[Darkfyre99]

As a genuine question, what is this roleplay? Is it a combination of the pledge, the bonuses or the unique module?

Roleplay means different things to different people. For me, Roleplay means making decisions that make sense to the character, but do not necessarily make sense to the player, especially at a meta-gaming level. This requires functional differences, which in turn lead to meaningful decisions.

Let's contrast the difference between the BGS's roleplaying opportunities vs Powerplay's.

In the BGS, there is little functional difference between minor factions, beyond the legal status of certain commodities. Anarchy's will sell unregulated slaves and other traditional black market commodities, dictatorships will sell slightly fewer traditional black market commodities, theocracies have more illegal commodities than normal, but that's about it. In particular, there's almost no functional difference between similar government types among the Superpowers. Aside from a Corporate state in the Empire trading in Imperial Slaves, there's no real difference. Unless you trade in illegal goods, there's really no in-game reason to prefer any one minor faction over the other.

Players may invent a difference, and we often do, especially if we can build off the lore of the game, but functionally? They're a distinction without a difference. My character dislikes Corporate states in general, but loathes Federal Corporate states, having seen first hand that Federal Corporate States treat their "employees" like unregulated slaves. I lose nothing by subverting the rule the cruel Galactic Federation's Corporate states... especially given the fact that my BGS strategy will leave me friendly or allied with the very minor faction I'm actively working against!

Contrast this with Powerplay. The various Powers are quite different functionally, in the unique equipment they provide (which encourages "module shopping" ), the benefits they provide, how certain Powerplay actions are performed, and the effects they have on the systems they control. Equally important is what the Powers represent. My character is what I would describe as an "old school" Imperial: traditional, honorable, and while very much anti-Fed, prefers diplomacy over direct warfare to spread the light of honor, prosperity, and civilization throughout the Galaxy. After her father's recklessness destroyed her family's fortunes, she sold herself into slavery for the opportunity to join the Pilots' Federation and rebuild what her father had destroyed.

Of the four Imperial Powers, Aisling Duval is a radical who seeks to destroy one of the core virtues of Imperial society; Zemina Torval, while a traditional Imperial, is also known to treat slaves under her control badly; and Denton Patraeus is a war-monger. Arissa Lagivy-Duval, on the other hand, is a traditional and honorable Imperial, the one who's political positions align with my character's leanings. But from both a game mechanic's perspective, and especially at a meta-gaming level, she's a very poor fit to me, the player. Aisling Duval is a much better fit for my playstyle, and at a Meta-Gaming level, I should switch sides to Li Yong-Rui whenever I go out exploring, and then grind to rating five before turning in my exploration data. This makes my decision to support ALD much more meaningful to me, because it means I'm sacrificing several opportunities supporting her.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

This is normal though for Powerplay PP guys do it all throughout the week. BGS, UM, fortify, vote, missions etc.

It might be normal, i think its too much. Less grind, more conflict!

 

[Arkadi]

It might be normal, i think its too much. Less grind, more conflict!

I don't think BGS ties of powerplay are a grind. The grind is in the core powerplay features. These need to be adressed.

In my opinion conflict (like player vs player combat) will only be happening in a satisfying way if it's in a meaningful setting. We already have random pvp. I think we need this kind of conflict the BGS / Powerplay intersection is offering.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Roleplay means different things to different people. For me, Roleplay means making decisions that make sense to the character, but do not necessarily make sense to the player, especially at a meta-gaming level. This requires functional differences, which in turn lead to meaningful decisions.

Let's contrast the difference between the BGS's roleplaying opportunities vs Powerplay's.

In the BGS, there is little functional difference between minor factions, beyond the legal status of certain commodities. Anarchy's will sell unregulated slaves and other traditional black market commodities, dictatorships will sell slightly fewer traditional black market commodities, theocracies have more illegal commodities than normal, but that's about it. In particular, there's almost no functional difference between similar government types among the Superpowers. Aside from a Corporate state in the Empire trading in Imperial Slaves, there's no real difference. Unless you trade in illegal goods, there's really no in-game reason to prefer any one minor faction over the other.

Players may invent a difference, and we often do, especially if we can build off the lore of the game, but functionally? They're a distinction without a difference. My character dislikes Corporate states in general, but loathes Federal Corporate states, having seen first hand that Federal Corporate States treat their "employees" like unregulated slaves. I lose nothing by subverting the rule the cruel Galactic Federation's Corporate states... especially given the fact that my BGS strategy will leave me friendly or allied with the very minor faction I'm actively working against!

Contrast this with Powerplay. The various Powers are quite different functionally, in the unique equipment they provide (which encourages "module shopping" ), the benefits they provide, how certain Powerplay actions are performed, and the effects they have on the systems they control. Equally important is what the Powers represent. My character is what I would describe as an "old school" Imperial: traditional, honorable, and while very much anti-Fed, prefers diplomacy over direct warfare to spread the light of honor, prosperity, and civilization throughout the Galaxy. After her father's recklessness destroyed her family's fortunes, she sold herself into slavery for the opportunity to join the Pilots' Federation and rebuild what her father had destroyed.

Of the four Imperial Powers, Aisling Duval is a radical who seeks to destroy one of the core virtues of Imperial society; Zemina Torval, while a traditional Imperial, is also known to treat slaves under her control badly; and Denton Patraeus is a war-monger. Arissa Lagivy-Duval, on the other hand, is a traditional and honorable Imperial, the one who's political positions align with my character's leanings. But from both a game mechanic's perspective, and especially at a meta-gaming level, she's a very poor fit to me, the player. Aisling Duval is a much better fit for my playstyle, and at a Meta-Gaming level, I should switch sides to Li Yong-Rui whenever I go out exploring, and then grind to rating five before turning in my exploration data. This makes my decision to support ALD much more meaningful to me, because it means I'm sacrificing several opportunities supporting her.

Thanks for a proper answer!

The various Powers are quite different functionally

Aside from certain bonuses that may / may not be applied (for example the position 123 bonuses) the powers all act in the same way, or have very broad groupings with only flavour text to really tell them apart. The main differences are outbound / inbound fortifying and what they move. The other is expansions- some expand using rebadged combat zones (resistance pocket, violent protest etc). Everyone preps in the same way, again using relabeled cargo. Opposition NPCs say the same and do the same things as well, so the interactive parts of each power are identical.

In the end after doing it over and over each week the differences are so small it all blurs together.

A roleplaying group could quite easily pick an arbitrary set of things they will not do- a theocracy that only deals in forbidden tech might only go after Guardian, Thargoid or AI relics for example.

I would argue though that since Powerplay characters are paper thin it still takes a great deal of effort to make them mean anything for roleplaying beyond the bonuses they provide. From memory you have Powers expressed in the BGS- Alliance, Fed and Imperial, Archon, Antal, Torval, LYR (via Sirius) so the only difference there is the powers bonus and if its active. Plus faction types themselves have differences that are pronounced https://elite-dangerous.fandom.com/wiki/Illegal_Goods so at a certain level at least you can craft a PMF that has some differences to another.

I'd also argue that Galnet offers more of a stage for these Tier 1 NPCs to breathe and aligned BGS factions. If Powerplay went Open only these characters would not suddenly dissapear, the only change would be that to maintain active Powerplay bonuses (i.e. bounty bonuses at certain tiers) you would have to be in Open. Things like LYRs passive discount would be felt regardless. You could then support your character via the BGS and CGs (like Segnen for a recent example).

The other issue with roleplaying though is are you an active participant? If you don't actively help your power prep, expand and defend then you are surely roleplaying passively (which means that it would be no different if PP was in another mode)? If you deal in a Powers BGS, this already is not roleplaying as a Powerplay character though- you may affiliate with one, but you are living with the consequences of what others have done (in this case prepped and expanded a system you help to maintain BGS wise).

 

[Darkfyre99]

Aside from certain bonuses that may...

I would argue though that since Powerplay characters are paper thin...

I believe this illustrates the main difference between roleplayers like me and other types of players. I don’t consider most Powerplay characters to be paper thin. For example, Zemina Torval’s “benevolent” act of taking unregistered slaves and “promoting” them to Imperial Slaves betrays the central tenant of Imperial Slavery: it is completely voluntary. She was still treating them like chattel, instead of newly liberated citizens of the Empire. That is behavior more appropriate to a bandit king or the CEO of a Federation Corporate State, not a Senator of the Empire.

It was also completely in character for her.

The other issue with roleplaying though is are you an active participant? If you don't actively help your power prep, expand and defend then you are surely roleplaying passively (which means that it would be no different if PP was in another mode)? If you deal in a Powers BGS, this already is not roleplaying as a Powerplay character though- you may affiliate with one, but you are living with the consequences of what others have done (in this case prepped and expanded a system you help to maintain BGS wise).

This question again illustrates the difference between roleplayers like me, and other players, as well as how badly Powerplay was designed. As far as I’m concerned, there is no BGS, no Powerpowerplay. Those are metagaming concepts, and as a roleplayer, I loathe the metagame.

There is only the Elite Universe, and Inga Stevenson’s reactions to what happens around her. I may contextualize certain more games aspects of this game, frame them in terms of the universe as opposed pure numbers, but I’ve the end my actions are based on the question “What would a Inga do?” as opposed to what’s the “Best way to undermine this system.”

If Powerplay had been better designed, your question would be academic, because there would be no distinction between Powerplay actions, BGS actions, and actions in general. This is the case in general with the BGS and actions in general, because it is well designed. I can undermine Federation rule by ingratiating myself with corrupt Federation officials, feeding their illegal desires, while aiding the brave freedom fighters resisting the cruel rule of the Galactic Federation. Because I’ve earned the favor of those less than scrupulous Federation officials, it puts me in the perfect position to betray them, such as diverting Federation VPs from their destination into the hands of those afore mentioned freedom fighters.

And it worked! At least it did pre 3.3. Can’t speak to how effective it is after the BGS revamp, given that I’ve be3n exploring non-stop since the 3.3 Beta, but not once did I ever have to break character and and start meta-gaming.

Powerplay’s greatest failure in my eyes is that I can’t do something similar while playing it. If I want to earn Merits by fortifying or undermining, I have to break character by either doing ABA cargo hauling, or via the pew pew. She’s an Imperial agent, dang it, not a stevedore or a common thug. I’ll grant you that that part of her personality is a reflection of my tastes, but I’m not that much of a gaming masochist to create a character who likes the kind of things I don’t.

That is why I fortify and undermine indirectly, via the BGS, rather than directly via earning Merits. It lowers Fortification costs in the case of the former, and raises fortification costs in the case of the latter. But if Powerplay had been better designed, there would be no Powerplay specific actions.

 

[Arkadi]

[...]
This question again illustrates the difference between roleplayers like me, and other players, as well as how badly Powerplay was designed. As far as I’m concerned, there is no BGS, no Powerpowerplay. Those are metagaming concepts, and as a roleplayer, I loathe the metagame.

There is only the Elite Universe, and Inga Stevenson’s reactions to what happens around her. I may contextualize certain more games aspects of this game, frame them in terms of the universe as opposed pure numbers, but I’ve the end my actions are based on the question “What would a Inga do?” as opposed to what’s the “Best way to undermine this system.”

[...]

Powerplay’s greatest failure in my eyes is that I can’t do something similar while playing it. If I want to earn Merits by fortifying or undermining, I have to break character by either doing ABA cargo hauling, or via the pew pew. She’s an Imperial agent, dang it, not a stevedore or a common thug. I’ll grant you that that part of her personality is a reflection of my tastes, but I’m not that much of a gaming masochist to create a character who likes the kind of things I don’t.

That is why I fortify and undermine indirectly, via the BGS, rather than directly via earning Merits. It lowers Fortification costs in the case of the former, and raises fortification costs in the case of the latter. But if Powerplay had been better designed, there would be no Powerplay specific actions.

I can really agree with this, even though Arkadi is different kind of pilot, who fled from Thorvals cruel slavery into the arms of the recruiters of the Federal navy. It did take some time until he realized that the Federals where just as corrupt as the Imperials. With this desillusion Arkadi went rogue and joined Archon first, then becoming a true freelancer flying only for independent powers and factions until he joined the Anti Xeno Initiative to fight the Thargoid Incursion. The only recent exception was the interstellar Initiative where Arkadi supported the Imperial Segnen Corporation for the better AX weapon...

 

[Rubbernuke]

I believe this illustrates the main difference between roleplayers like me and other types of players. I don’t consider most Powerplay characters to be paper thin. For example, Zemina Torval’s “benevolent” act of taking unregistered slaves and “promoting” them to Imperial Slaves betrays the central tenant of Imperial Slavery: it is completely voluntary. She was still treating them like chattel, instead of newly liberated citizens of the Empire. That is behavior more appropriate to a bandit king or the CEO of a Federation Corporate State, not a Senator of the Empire.

It was also completely in character for her.

This question again illustrates the difference between roleplayers like me, and other players, as well as how badly Powerplay was designed. As far as I’m concerned, there is no BGS, no Powerpowerplay. Those are metagaming concepts, and as a roleplayer, I loathe the metagame.

There is only the Elite Universe, and Inga Stevenson’s reactions to what happens around her. I may contextualize certain more games aspects of this game, frame them in terms of the universe as opposed pure numbers, but I’ve the end my actions are based on the question “What would a Inga do?” as opposed to what’s the “Best way to undermine this system.”

If Powerplay had been better designed, your question would be academic, because there would be no distinction between Powerplay actions, BGS actions, and actions in general. This is the case in general with the BGS and actions in general, because it is well designed. I can undermine Federation rule by ingratiating myself with corrupt Federation officials, feeding their illegal desires, while aiding the brave freedom fighters resisting the cruel rule of the Galactic Federation. Because I’ve earned the favor of those less than scrupulous Federation officials, it puts me in the perfect position to betray them, such as diverting Federation VPs from their destination into the hands of those afore mentioned freedom fighters.

And it worked! At least it did pre 3.3. Can’t speak to how effective it is after the BGS revamp, given that I’ve be3n exploring non-stop since the 3.3 Beta, but not once did I ever have to break character and and start meta-gaming.

Powerplay’s greatest failure in my eyes is that I can’t do something similar while playing it. If I want to earn Merits by fortifying or undermining, I have to break character by either doing ABA cargo hauling, or via the pew pew. She’s an Imperial agent, dang it, not a stevedore or a common thug. I’ll grant you that that part of her personality is a reflection of my tastes, but I’m not that much of a gaming masochist to create a character who likes the kind of things I don’t.

That is why I fortify and undermine indirectly, via the BGS, rather than directly via earning Merits. It lowers Fortification costs in the case of the former, and raises fortification costs in the case of the latter. But if Powerplay had been better designed, there would be no Powerplay specific actions.

The thing is though, a lot of this is done outside of Powerplay and is not dependent on it- Powerplay leaders for example have developed more outside (i.e. Galnet, Codex) than in Powerplay itself. The actual interaction part between players and NPCs is identical across powers, so what potential for roleplay is there in that?

 

[Darkfyre99]

The thing is though, a lot of this is done outside of Powerplay and is not dependent on it- Powerplay leaders for example have developed more outside (i.e. Galnet, Codex) than in Powerplay itself. The actual interaction part between players and NPCs is identical across powers, so what potential for roleplay is there in that?

You can pretty much say this about any part of this game, or any game in general. You can reduce them to their individual game mechanisms, distill them into numbers and formulas and stats on a table. Roleplaying, at least for me, is the antithesis of that. There may not be a difference mechanically, but to me, the difference emotionally between actions done on Inga’s behalf, on behalf of ALD, and against the cruel Galactic Federation, are profound.

 

[Rubbernuke]

You can pretty much say this about any part of this game, or any game in general. You can reduce them to their individual game mechanisms, distill them into numbers and formulas and stats on a table. Roleplaying, at least for me, is the antithesis of that. There may not be a difference mechanically, but to me, the difference emotionally between actions done on Inga’s behalf, on behalf of ALD, and against the cruel Galactic Federation, are profound.

What I'm trying to get straight in my head is the impact of moving PP to Open in this context, and seeing what emotional ties attach to what underlying parts of the game.

 

[lenna]

But it would do- everyone retains access, those who do take risks in Open get better rewards for it

I disagree that there is ANY valid justification for such scaling.

The only real risk of playing in Open is having to deal with certain types of PvPers who do not know how to behave. No-one should have to put up with them but they are unavoidable in the Open mode, and there are no reasonable measures FD can implement to stop them without becoming too draconian over PvP overall.

All modes in ED are equal and should remain equal from a PvE gameplay perspective - and like it or not PP is PvE gameplay.

 

[Darkfyre99]

What I'm trying to get straight in my head is the impact of moving PP to Open in this context, and seeing what emotional ties attach to what underlying parts of the game.

For me, not much... because unlike many roleplayers, I firmly believe that PvP should, at least in theory, have a role to play in my game. It's why I tend to be more atttracted to PvE worlds with open-PvP, even though I know the so-called "PvP community" (note the sarcastic quotes) will do what they always do: drive most of the player base away by being utter and unmitigated jerks, until the Devs put up some hard coded wall between actual PvPers and the rest of the player base, making what should be a fantastic vehicle for role-playing into something devoid of any true meaning, because it has been literally segregated from the rest of the game's mechanics by developer fiat.

That is, assuming the game's servers didn't get shut down because the game's developers didn't react in time.




In my opinion, role-playing that is not expressed via the game's mechanics is simply fanfiction. As much fun as it is may be to write fanfiction, the reason why I play games like this is because bringing characters to life via the game's mechanics is also a lot of fun.

A prime example of this is in my signature below. Fun fact, the woman in my signature below is not Inga Stevenson. She's an actress, Abby Wong, who will play Cmdr. Inga Stevenson in the 3310 Achenar Broadcasting Company's production of "The Adventures of Inga Stevenson, Slave of the Empire!" which in turn is based on the actual Inga Stevenson's autobiography, All the Good Names for a Memoir of an Imperial Slave Were Taken. It's actually part of a private joke of mine, because I've never made it a secret that Inga's a native of Emerald in the Cemiess system, a terraformed world with a surface gravity that is just at the upper limits that unmodified humans can endure on a long term basis.

In other worlds, Commander Inga Stevenson is a Heavy Worlder. If we're ever allowed to change our avatar's height and build, I'll be making her short, stocky, and muscled.

Now Abby Wong wasn't Abby Wong for a long time. She was nothing more than a concept. That is until Cmdr. Inga Stevenson accepted a "Whirlwind Tour" contract from Actress Abby Wong of the Achenar Empire League. It was a match made in heaven. Cmdr. Inga Stevenson was trying to raise enough money for her first Large Ship to participate in the Buckyball Race "Grom in 60 seconds," whose theme was that the BRC was doing stunt work for a movie production. Here was an actress from Achenar, who actually looked a bit like Inga. The game had manifested my private little joke within the game itself, provided her with a back story, and had ensured that Abby and Inga would meet. The only thing that would've made it better was that if NPCs would've been persistent, so that Inga could've built a friendship with her in the game, as opposed to that friendship being purely fictional.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I disagree that there is ANY valid justification for such scaling.

The only real risk of playing in Open is having to deal with certain types of PvPers who do not know how to behave. No-one should have to put up with them but they are unavoidable in the Open mode, and there are no reasonable measures FD can implement to stop them without becoming too draconian over PvP overall.

In Open its quite easy to see the discrepancy: you face the whole arsenal of weapons (no NPC uses torpedoes, ion mines, Grom bombs etc) and with full engineering. Only ATR carry or fly full G5 kit in other modes, while pirate lords sometimes have engineered weapons. Its from this that scaling is one 'soft' way to even things out. AFK turretboats in PG can rack up hundreds of thousands of merits quite safely because no NPC can counter them. In Open the same boat takes the risk of being found out (since its sat in an old school CZ, and powers these days rarely have more than one expansion).

Open Powerplay is also opt in- so you are agreeing that you represent someone that others may not like. Powerplay also means you might step on a PMFs toes, and they may come after you as well- this is fair because they then get a chance to oppose your occupation (or help it).

The other is that Open mode does not disallow you from pledging. From my understanding its only merits that do not survive mode switching, so you can swap at will and keep your time bonus with that power (for voting for example). This would need more clarity from FD though, as its not clear if or what parts of the UI survive in what mode.

In the end its an incorrect perception (IMO at least) that players think Powerplay is peaceful- its not. Its you helping a power overcome its rivals. In material terms even if you haul, you are still opposing. In roleplay terms you are doing something that is contra to another power. Utopia hauls dissidents for 're-education' while Archon hauls defeated enemies as slaves.

All modes in ED are equal and should remain equal from a PvE gameplay perspective - and like it or not PP is PvE gameplay.

At its most basic level it is, because its these gathering or hauling activities that generate merits. However because everything ultimately is played at its most efficient this way (hauling for example) you wind up with bland haul races that enforce bland gaming patterns. Take Antals recent turmoil- it was fortified top to bottom in days, again. The current way to complicate that is to UM systems, while in the new proposal you have two ways of doing it, direct UM and capital system attacks. Both can be directly opposed as well, or helped. Instantly Open (or weighted) has given players more gameplay options.

 

[Rubbernuke]

For me, not much... because unlike many roleplayers, I firmly believe that PvP should, at least in theory, have a role to play in my game. It's why I tend to be more atttracted to PvE worlds with open-PvP, even though I know the so-called "PvP community" (note the sarcastic quotes) will do what they always do: drive most of the player base away by being utter and unmitigated jerks, until the Devs put up some hard coded wall between actual PvPers and the rest of the player base, making what should be a fantastic vehicle for role-playing into something devoid of any true meaning, because it has been literally segregated from the rest of the game's mechanics by developer fiat.

That is, assuming the game's servers didn't get shut down because the game's developers didn't react in time.




In my opinion, role-playing that is not expressed via the game's mechanics is simply fanfiction. As much fun as it is may be to write fanfiction, the reason why I play games like this is because bringing characters to life via the game's mechanics is also a lot of fun.

A prime example of this is in my signature below. Fun fact, the woman in my signature below is not Inga Stevenson. She's an actress, Abby Wong, who will play Cmdr. Inga Stevenson in the 3310 Achenar Broadcasting Company's production of "The Adventures of Inga Stevenson, Slave of the Empire!" which in turn is based on the actual Inga Stevenson's autobiography, All the Good Names for a Memoir of an Imperial Slave Were Taken. It's actually part of a private joke of mine, because I've never made it a secret that Inga's a native of Emerald in the Cemiess system, a terraformed world with a surface gravity that is just at the upper limits that unmodified humans can endure on a long term basis.

In other worlds, Commander Inga Stevenson is a Heavy Worlder. If we're ever allowed to change our avatar's height and build, I'll be making her short, stocky, and muscled.

Now Abby Wong wasn't Abby Wong for a long time. She was nothing more than a concept. That is until Cmdr. Inga Stevenson accepted a "Whirlwind Tour" contract from Actress Abby Wong of the Achenar Empire League. It was a match made in heaven. Cmdr. Inga Stevenson was trying to raise enough money for her first Large Ship to participate in the Buckyball Race "Grom in 60 seconds," whose theme was that the BRC was doing stunt work for a movie production. Here was an actress from Achenar, who actually looked a bit like Inga. The game had manifested my private little joke within the game itself, provided her with a back story, and had ensured that Abby and Inga would meet. The only thing that would've made it better was that if NPCs would've been persistent, so that Inga could've built a friendship with her in the game, as opposed to that friendship being purely fictional.

I think the base problem is between those players who want or like segregation of activities against those who want it 'as it comes' bracketed in the billed 'shared galaxy'- with both being simultaneously right and wrong. I think ED sits awkwardly across this, and that Powerplay only makes things worse.

My only thought really is that Powerplay needs to be divided, with Open Powerplay being complementary to the BGS side (which would exist for everyone) along with Powerplay themed missions that would be the ideal way to give Powers flavour- so you can then see what Powers do 'behind the curtain' that lead into the Open side. For example Archon could have slave roundups, where you pick up lifepods from recent battles.