Powerplay 2.0 deep dive - Frontier Live 27th March

[Rubbernuke]

Add to all this the enigma of the Python Mk2 and FD teasing about its enhanced PvP role in Powerplay that was not mentioned yesterday either.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I think that IF they want for PP2.0 to really work they should solve the main issues with good old powerplay: the grind.

Variety should be the key word to make the game enjoyable, and after variety they should think about balancing the different activities considering:

• time spent in completing a single action
• difficulty in completing a single action
• prepareness, aka how advanced should be a player to complete such action (which seems the same thing than difficulty but it's not exactly the same)

It's not easy, but they need to keep in mind such factors to make the game enjoyable.
And as for personal rewards... as I said many times before being pledged should grant some tactical gains for the single player, which should be incentivized to play for his power to keep such favours in as many systems as possible. For example, if your Power grants a bonus in bounty hunting in your Power's systems, it's only natural you would love to have that advantage in as many systems as possible. Same goes for environment changes, like availability of some specific commodities, or change in prices for some others etc.

This is why FD can be smart and leverage the mission system. You can then quantify risk, reward and allow the player to choose what they want to do. So you can have boring milk runs worth very little or have balls out hell runs into fiery gauntlets for legendary returns.

 

[Darrack]

Add to all this the enigma of the Python Mk2 and FD teasing about its enhanced PvP role in Powerplay that was not mentioned yesterday either.

I don't think the Python will have anything to do with PvP in PP.
What i think they were eluding to is that its another combat based ship to use against FDL etc rather than the normal Python which is multi role.

O7

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Making Powerplay too "PvP focused" may cause issues in exploits too. Let's say that a PvP kill will grant a much bigger effect in a system. We all know that the danger is that we will have secondary accounts that will get killed almost automatically in private groups to have a tactical advantage: such loop would not be in any way controllable nor evitable and it's a great problem to be accounted.

 

[Rubbernuke]

I don't think the Python will have anything to do with PvP in PP.
What i think they were eluding to is that its another combat based ship to use against FDL etc rather than the normal Python which is multi role.

O7

IIRC they explicitly mentioned it on livestream 2 or 3. In any case FD have something lined up and we'll know more about the special sauce when it arrives.

 

[galahad2069]

I once did some PvP trolling using mining lances to attack gankers.

There's no doubt it was a success since all of them must have died laughing.

 

[Narfiam]

The modules are ok - but they should be taken away if you un-pledge (and hence you would lose any engineering as well). And you should get attacked by NPCs while you remain pledged so you have to make an actual choice about whether they are worth the hassle.

Please NO!
Making me choose between Prismatic Shields and Packhounds is like making me choose between mom and dad.

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Well, they could write something explaining some key features of the future Powerplay. Ok, livestreams are cool and everything, but I think that to explain a new game mode you need some written text.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Please NO!
Making me choose between Prismatic Shields and Packhounds is like making me choose between mom and dad.

My way would be that you can have it all, but if you are caught using them by the rival powers they get angry.

So if you are an LYR guy with prismatics being scanned by Aislings guards will get you an Imperial kicking (or some other wrinkle).

 

[Darrack]

My way would be that you can have it all, but if you are caught using them by the rival powers they get angry.

So if you are an LYR guy with prismatics being scanned by Aislings guards will get you an Imperial kicking (or some other wrinkle).

Modules should be removed from PP altogether, nobody ever pledged to a power long term because of pack hounds.

O7

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I think asymmetry is inevitable with current PP mechanics because hauling several thousand tons of trinkets is basically the only way to meaningfully work the system.

Then either PP should be a PvE only activity (with potential for PvP for those who are interested in it) or someone needs to be creative than you are and figure out a way to make a meaningful PvP mechanic (note, i'm not saying i'm more creative than you are, I also don't have a solution... maybe I could figure something out if i put my mind to it, but i have little interest in it and not enough PvP experience outside arena style and RTS games). We can leave such thinking to great minds like @Rubbernuke

 

[aRJay]

Add to all this the enigma of the Python Mk2 and FD teasing about its enhanced PvP role in Powerplay that was not mentioned yesterday either.

But the Python 2 was on one of the banners we saw when they were showing off the new look concourses.

 

[Leadfoot]

Waste of time, CQC failed because not enough players have any interest at all in PvP, no point destroying PP going down that route.
The idea is to get more folks interested in PP, making into a side game like CQC wont solve that.

O7

Well, the whole idea was that if you log in to cqc, you know what you're getting into. It should be the same for logging into a CQC type of mode for power play only.

If players want to do power play in Solo mode only, it doesn't really accomplish much. The fifth column operations will always be there. That sort of thing is an unfair advantage to those of us that actually engage in power play.

An alternative to that would simply be anything done in Solo or player groups only provides 10% of what it would accomplish if you had done it in open.

No, I don't actually expect that that would be implemented; I'm just waxing poetic. o7

 

[Darrack]

Well, the whole idea was that if you log in to cqc, you know what you're getting into

Exactly and look how many folks were interested in that

O7

 

[Darrack]

An alternative to that would simply be anything done in Solo or player groups only provides 10% of what it would accomplish if you had done it in open.

So why would players like me bother with PP?
I defo wont be playing in Open, nor would any of my PG group so hey presto there's a few more down the swany, wont happen, Fdev want players to take part, forced Open wont help.

O7

 

[Rainbro]

Exactly and look how many folks were interested in that

O7

I think the years of neglect and longstanding design flaws probably contributed more than disinterest.

 

[Darrack]

I think the years of neglect and longstanding design flaws probably contributed more than disinterest.

The lack of interest in PvP gave Fdev no incentive to sort out the issues in CQC, whatever way you dress it up the majority of players don't come to ED for PvP.

O7

 

[Bard Voronwe]

Modules should be moved to Tech Brokers and be available only in the systems influenced by the Power originally of that module. Would be cool to have even more of them actually, especially for weapons, to have them in different sizes.

EDIT
Mostly to make the same with Prismatics, which are available in every size.

 

[Rat Catcher]

Exactly and look how many folks were interested in that

O7

I liked it, apart from the fact that at least 9 out of 10 games being matched against top tier players, so spending most of a round coming back from the 'rebuy' screen...

 

[Rubbernuke]

Modules should be removed from PP altogether, nobody ever pledged to a power long term because of pack hounds.

O7

I'm not so sure. For example I'd find it interesting if powers loaned you your module and that you could return it if you leave a power but if you stole it you got barred / hunted like a dog.