Powerplay 2.0 deep dive - Frontier Live 27th March

[aRJay]

I

Like I said earlier, we need to see a dev / Arthur go through the motions of what a pledge does to improve their power. So to me this would be:

How do you pledge (and what perks / bonuses do you get)
What do I do- is it mission based, BGS based etc and do a mission from beginning to end:
1: Select an area you'd want to improve using the new PP map (and explain how it works)
2: Travel there and do the job, perhaps going to rival powers and see reations from NPCs
3: Return and collect the rewards (and explain them).

While I did enjoy seeing glimpses of new things its like being given three jigsaw pieces from a 10000 Ravensburger beast. I know it was a last minute dev substitution but as time goes on the presentation needs more structure and illustrative. But then we do have three / four more livestreams and the forum / ED offical page to post information.

Also what effect does PP have on those not signed up and, particularly if it is BGS based, what effect on it do those of us who aren’t signed up have.

After all as I understand it my actions in buying/selling/shooting NPCs/cashing in bounties etc affect the BGS even if I am not trying to do so.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Also what effect does PP have on those not signed up and, particularly if it is BGS based, what effect on it do those of us who aren’t signed up have.

After all as I understand it my actions in buying/selling/shooting NPCs/cashing in bounties etc affect the BGS even if I am not trying to do so.

Well thats the other question- are these station changes restricted to V2s version of control systems, or is it everywhere? PP V1 has passive perks (like LYRs discount or other powers effects on things like gold IIRC) so I assume some things will be imposed on PP territory.

 

[Darrack]

There will be no Open only PP.
There will be no tier reward system across the modes as some suggest/want.
They are spending time to try and restart interest in PP, anything that drives folks away from their new baby would be a spectacular own goal.

O7

 

[SergMx]

Sounded more like they were talking about how players organised into groups for the Thargoid war. I wonder how Powerplayers feel about the suggestion that they will be able to organise for Powerplay V2, since clearly that never happened for V1

You understand what the main difference is and what the war against the Thargoids proved to us. These are the differences between PVP games and CooPerative games. Many more players prefer to play together against NPCs than to fight among themselves. In a cooperative game, everyone works together and ALL players ultimately win.
I know many people don’t like to play and lose.

 

[Rubbernuke]

The answer to most of these is station interiors based on the stream.

As for what to expect I remain by what I said in some earlier thread - expect more of a reshuffling/re-naming (polishing?) of existing stuff rather than much new or game-changing here.

But its not though. We have at least one new 'state' (stronghold) which comes with other features, and hints that fortified, exploited and contested have new meaning. They can't exist in isolation without other changes.

Another question is with the map- is CC gone? How is profitability of a system calculated (if at all)? Something has changed, but without more context its hard to fathom.

 

[amigacooke {macOS}]

But its not though. We have at least one new 'state' (stronghold) which comes with other features, and hints that fortified, exploited and contested have new meaning. They can't exist in isolation without other changes.

Another question is with the map- is CC gone? How is profitability of a system calculated (if at all)? Something has changed, but without more context its hard to fathom.

Looks like a classic Frontier wait and see.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Is it, though? It's barely a "sim" at all - it's an algorithm that runs once a week, responding to player actions and setting new states based on which goals were reached and which ones weren't. With the added bonus that if goals are reached early there's nothing to do, and if it's clear that they won't be reached by the end of the week nobody bothers to attempt them.

.... which is basically the same as how PP works now, I guess.

Powerplay is literally buy cargo X, fly to point B repeatedly with no variation. Or you go to a nav point / POI and shoot the same spawning ships with little or no flavour at all. Everything is fixed, nothing changes.

With the BGS you can choose what you do, you can mine, trade, BH, engage in state based POIs, have a semi functional security response (despite it being mostly non engineered)- all of which are morphed by underlying background states and events.

I'd much rather have the latter than the former, because it uses the strengths of the BGS to vary whats going on.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Looks like a classic Frontier wait and see.

I kind of feel for them because the last minute substitution threw things off and that livestreams are not the best way to show us V2. Powerplay is rules based (and more suited to written posts where you can be clear) with very little flash and (IMO) very difficult to convey via chat.

 

[Rat Catcher]

anything that drives folks away from their new baby would be a spectacular own goal.

Without being a damp squib...
... look at Odyssey, I may think it was precisely what the game needed, but am in a minority (allegedly) - EDO was so successful it could be referred to as an 'own goal', surely?

 

[Felix DiCestria]

This has been discussed at length in the Hotel California thread(s)...
PP was developed as a PvP feature.
The problem with that is that it was incentivized with modules which appeal to PvE players.
If they wanted to go for the proverbial 'Open Only, PvP' thing they have to withdraw any incentive that would appeal to PvE players.
Even something as trivial as an XP bonus would be seized upon.

 

[amigacooke {macOS}]

I kind of feel for them because the last minute substitution threw things off and that livestreams are not the best way to show us V2. Powerplay is rules based (and more suited to written posts where you can be clear) with very little flash and (IMO) very difficult to convey via chat.

Is it likely we were going to get that much above what was presented yesterday? I’m guessing there is still a ways to go before PP2 and feeding info out gradually appears to be FDev’s modus operandi.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

I think that CC are gone at least as we used to know them (basically an accumulate indicator to keep all the Dominions together), but that is really speculative. I keep looking at how systems seem to be distributed in the new Galaxy Map, if there's no more Control Systems as we used to know them there's no point in having the CCs as we used to have. Maybe they will still be there by name, but their role will be different.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

To get viable PvP you kinda need skill based matchmaking based on a rating and that just makes things more toxic even without the ganking aspect in most games. Without that you can end up with widely asymmetric encounters due to skill difference even if both sides have the same tools

Using PP to add (and remove, if you can blame your team!) stakes from PvP encounters is a good idea, but the stakes for each individual PP action are so low it's not really engaging.


The answer to most of these is station interiors based on the stream.

As for what to expect I remain by what I said in some earlier thread - expect more of a reshuffling/re-naming (polishing?) of existing stuff rather than much new or game-changing here.

Hey, how about CQC based PP!

The powers that be realize there's a lot of senseless loss of life and ships, so in order to resolve disputes between powers they fight it out in CQC!

I'm sure it would be a winner!

 

[Rubbernuke]

This has been discussed at length in the Hotel California thread(s)...
PP was developed as a PvP feature.
The problem with that is that it was incentivized with modules which appeal to PvE players.
If they wanted to go for the proverbial 'Open Only, PvP' thing they have to withdraw any incentive that would appeal to PvE players.
Even something as trivial as an XP bonus would be seized upon.

I'd say conceptually PP was really the combat and territorial war companion to the BGS, but was left behind when the BGS was pushed by players and eventually the devs.

What I see here is FD making PP go back to its original concept where (PP) goes beyond the vanilla states and visibly shows what effects it has. The station changes and stronghold state seem to move far beyond what factions can display or change- and I assume added to that you'll have power based bonuses too.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Here's a for instance:

Someone is undermining your attempt to keep a power in a system
They are ferrying goods into your system to prop up a rival faction
They have a tag saying they are from the opposing power
You are in your system patrolling it to make sure that does not happen
You spot the interloper actively working against you by hauling for the other power
You are armed to the teeth and prepared for combat, he is not
You attack and destroy him for actively working against your power.

Is that considered by you to be legitimate PvP because by your definition given he is not prepared to fight back and you are. You are 'ganking' him. But I deny that that term fits in this stated instance.

The reason why we need to have some elements of Powerplay weighted towards open is that this type of gameplay cannot exist without the open element. A person can (and I'm reliably informed do) set up a bot to make this automatic, safe in the knowledge they can help undermine a system that is player versus player without ever having to interact with a player wishing to stop them.

Again, i'm not talking about legitimate or non-legitimate PvP. Again you're missing the point or you're trying to steer the conversation away from what I was saying.

What I am saying though is PvP where one side is flying a trader and the other a combat ship is asymmetrical and not a great solution for people who are looking to test their PvP skills in a meaningful way.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Is it likely we were going to get that much above what was presented yesterday? I’m guessing there is still a ways to go before PP2 and feeding info out gradually appears to be FDev’s modus operandi.

If it were me doing the livestream I'd be reading off notes and certainly do it pre-recorded when talking about the 'rules'. I mean, imagine trying to explain the BGS and what it does in ten minutes, it would be difficult.

 

[Darrack]

Without being a damp squib...
... look at Odyssey, I may think it was precisely what the game needed, but am in a minority (allegedly) - EDO was so successful it could be referred to as an 'own goal', surely?

Im going to be controversial and say that EDO was nowhere near as bad as folks made out at launch, i had very little issues with it, a few bugs yes but having played the Alpha it was expected.
I love EDO but as with everything its always the vocal minority that dictate success/failure.
I have no idea how PP2.0 will pan out but i cant see for one minute Fdev making it even more of a niche activity, i am pretty much reassured at the moment that it wont require PvP or that they will penalise those of us that play in Solo, those expecting huge sweeping changes need to prepare for disappointment.

Agree with Rubbernuke though, i would like more activity's in PP like the BGS stuff, but i do like the fortification system as it is, even on my own i can make a difference, the day i stop feeling that my time isn't rewarded is the day i hang up my PP boots.

O7

 

[Rat Catcher]

What I am saying though is PvP where one side is flying a trader and the other a combat ship is asymmetrical and not a great solution for people who are looking to test their PvP skills in a meaningful way.

Surely, as long as "Ship go Boom!!!", what does it matter?

 

[amigacooke {macOS}]

their PvP skills in a meaningful way.

Isn’t the basis of PP trying to boost your side? I fear that ploughing through easy meat victims would be encouraged by PP unless there is some very clever design work.

 

[IstvaanDCIV]

To get viable PvP you kinda need skill based matchmaking based on a rating and that just makes things more toxic even without the ganking aspect in most games.

Could you elaborate on this part? I'd have thought that having people smack around newbies would generate far more salt than more even matching up.