power play 2.0

[DNA-Decay]

I find notions like "I played solo until I got good" or "open is full of gankers" or "I play games to escape - I dont want to interact" to just be expressions of cowardice.

Players tend to be a lot more powerful than NPCs. If there are players camped somewhere you want to be, then you're going to need to do something about that.
Find an alternative route, or destination, try at a quieter time, toughen up, go in a group, etc.

If ED went open only I forsee that groups would form similar to Hull Seals or Fuel Rats - offering protection. For example to escort explorers returning to the bubble. Or escorting CMDRs to Jamesons, or Farseer. And because these Protectors would have to be capable PvPers, that role would likely attract many of the same folks doing the ganking.
Do you remember how SDC trained the escorts for the Salome event? And then of course Harry Potter betrayed at the last minute.

We will never have a hive of scum and villainy unless we make the scum an unavoidable part of life.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

If ED went open only I forsee that groups would form similar to Hull Seals or Fuel Rats - offering protection. For example to escort explorers returning to the bubble.

I was part of a group escorting returning explorers to the bubble, back in the old days.

It slowly drifted apart due to lack of business - not because of the modes, but because NPC opposition to returning explorers was reduced through versions 2.0 and 2.1 to essentially zero. There were the occasional players to look out for in theory (and we flew ships which could at least provide a few minutes' PvP distraction) but I must have run about 50 escorts in Open - when the group was in its heyday we had a decently high profile among some of the exploration communities - and I think one of them had player opposition actually show up.

Nowadays we also have Fleet Carriers which allow explorers to sell their data in anonymous systems a long way from inhabited space (or pick them up in uninhabited space and drop them off right outside their destination station) ... and we have Apex which allows an explorer to dock in some anonymous safe system on the outside of the bubble and then fly in complete safety to their destination; in the ultra-rare event that someone does shoot them when they finally reach the destination station they don't lose anything except the cost of the Apex journey and can just try again.

The only thing capable of making an explorer escort group viable nowadays would be a return to 1.0's aggressive NPCs showing up anywhere within 500 LY of Sol even if you didn't carry cargo - and even then, the exploration community nowadays would probably just park a few FCs at 550 LY in various directions and call it done. Modes are completely irrelevant to it, players being able to intercept each other hasn't been a design goal for years even if both parties are in Open.

 

[angusmadmac1]

I find notions like "I played solo until I got good" or "open is full of gankers" or "I play games to escape - I dont want to interact" to just be expressions of cowardice.

Players tend to be a lot more powerful than NPCs. If there are players camped somewhere you want to be, then you're going to need to do something about that.
Find an alternative route, or destination, try at a quieter time, toughen up, go in a group, etc.

If ED went open only I forsee that groups would form similar to Hull Seals or Fuel Rats - offering protection. For example to escort explorers returning to the bubble. Or escorting CMDRs to Jamesons, or Farseer. And because these Protectors would have to be capable PvPers, that role would likely attract many of the same folks doing the ganking.
Do you remember how SDC trained the escorts for the Salome event? And then of course Harry Potter betrayed at the last minute.

We will never have a hive of scum and villainy unless we make the scum an unavoidable part of life.

You see using words like cowardice isn't really conducive to a balanced conversation. Stinks of get guid scrub or hiding, carebears or a myriad of other names in conversations over the years ( if you ain't playing my way your wrong and should be penalised).
If EDO went open only the numbers would drop. PvP is such a small minority group within the whole player base. It has little or no effect on BGS or even PP and with the instancing issues of P2P, where we can be in the same place but different instances ( which one is the one hiding ?) .
ED has all options for all people . Accept it and play and enjoy the game .

 

[DNA-Decay]

You don't need to be into PvP to use Open.

It just adds more and better challenges.

 

[angusmadmac1]

So PvP adds more to the game ? As the game doesn't become harder because you selected Open ? I disagree but thats my opinion. Sometimes people don't want that interaction .

 

[Rebel Yell]

So PvP adds more to the game ? As the game doesn't become harder because you selected Open ? I disagree but thats my opinion. Sometimes people don't want that interaction .

Almosst everything is PvP in the game... shooting at CMDRs' ships is just one of the various things that one CMDR might do.

 

[angusmadmac1]

Almosst everything is PvP in the game... shooting at CMDRs' ships is just one of the various things that one CMDR might do.

Thargoids ? BGS ? Power play, exploration, trade not one of them depends or even needs PvP. Piracy was something I didn't have the finesse for I always ended up blowing up my target . So I suppose depends on your definition of PvP.
I can play the game and have done in open with no non consential PvP for too many years now. But my ships do have enough engineering to get out of trouble if required or I just sit there and let them be happy ?

 

[Rebel Yell]

Thargoids ? BGS ? Power play, exploration, trade not one of them depends or even needs PvP. Piracy was something I didn't have the finesse for I always ended up blowing up my target . So I suppose depends on your definition of PvP.
I can play the game and have done in open with no non consential PvP for too many years now. But my ships do have enough engineering to get out of trouble if required or I just sit there and let them be happy ?

If you do BGS in a system, you may act against or support factions backed by other players, or interfere with others, so bottom line it is PvP because players are in competition for something and that's PvP definition from my point of view (as if you do wars for one or for another)... selling explo data in stations, can have impact on elections (if any) and again on factions influence. These are just some examples... but broadening the "definition" it makes 99% of the things you do in the game as PvP-related.

 

[Walter2]

If you do BGS in a system, you may act against or support factions backed by other players, or interfere with others, so bottom line it is PvP because players are in competition for something and that's PvP definition from my point of view (as if you do wars for one or for another)... selling explo data in stations, can have impact on elections (if any) and again on factions influence. These are just some examples... but broadening the "definition" it makes 99% of the things you do in the game as PvP-related.

But that definition is degrading the value of the language just to reinforce your point of view and cannot be taken seriously. The generally accepted position - and clearly the position taken by the vast majority of contributors over the past 10 years - is that PvP refers just to player v player combat.

The hugely more common PvE - that everybody takes part in - has a far, far greater influence on the game than any direct player interaction. I must concede the fact that players manage factions (not a feature of the original game design, and nobody "owns" a faction) has changed the dynamic somewhat, but not to the extent that your revised definition implies.

 

[Rebel Yell]

But that definition is degrading the value of the language just to reinforce your point of view and cannot be taken seriously. The generally accepted position - and clearly the position taken by the vast majority of contributors over the past 10 years - is that PvP refers just to player v player combat.

The hugely more common PvE - that everybody takes part in - has a far, far greater influence on the game than any direct player interaction. I must concede the fact that players manage factions (not a feature of the original game design, and nobody "owns" a faction) has changed the dynamic somewhat, but not to the extent that your revised definition implies.

"PvP can be broadly used to describe any game, or aspect of a game, where players compete against each other."

Player versus player - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Of course there's no universal definition of it, but PvP = "combat" is absolutely restrictive.

 

[Kaocraft]

I wanted Elite to be a single player offline self-contained experience and that’s what Frontier said they were making once upon a time but that’s not what we got and it’s not something we’re ever getting.

If the game has to be online and so much of the ebb and flow of significant events has to be player driven, and if so much of the game balance and the variety and fidelity of things we can do MUST be hamstrung by always-online multiplayer requirements; well: yeah I do think at some point it’s reasonable to have a layer or two of meaningful gameplay which actually USES (and therefore requires) the so-called “multiplayer” functions around which this has been built.

As it stands right now it remains the worst of both worlds. Buggy instancing and no persistence of game states, entire surface sites or battles in progress resetting, changing, or disappearing altogether if you log out or the game crashes (which of course it does frequently), things like hinged boxes in bases “opening” and then there’s another closed lid inside the open lid and then another one and then there’s three layers of invisible randomized items which you can only pick up through the object geometry by playing mouse pointer hide and seek. Boring weapons; nothing is powerful or has high risk/reward or interesting economic tradeoffs because it all has to be balanced around a potential griefer alpha-striking someone for the lulz or a an OCD farmer logging in and out over and over again at a crashed spaceship. This also why all the AX gear is silo’d off from everything else.

If all our play mechanics must be narrowed in scope and creativity and interconnectedness in service to the premise of this so-called MMO; I think we can stand to have SOMETHING which actually makes use of this premise and even relies upon it to work.

So yeah: while I have no idea whether or not I would in fact enjoy an open-only PowerPlay, I absolutely think it’s reasonable for Frontier to do something like that. The current implementation is such an absurd layer of gui and mechanical complexity for basically no benefit to anyone. It’s boring and largely worthless. I am fully onboard with NOT participating in an Open Only Powerplay if I find it excessively competitive or trollish or whatever, but I am absolutely certain that this kind of grand strategy competitive wargaming layer would scratch a crucial itch for a lot of people who would otherwise get bored with Elite or else channel their pvp-ing energies into generally disrupting other players for no reason.

Right now ALL pvp is griefing, because it serves absolutely no in-game purpose.

 

[Rebel Yell]

Right now ALL pvp is griefing, because it serves absolutely no in-game purpose.

Amen