Powerplay 2.0 deep dive - Frontier Live 27th March

Just to shoot npc ships and haul cargo under some other pretext than what the rest of the game already provides? Are BGS buckets not good enough?
This question can probably be put back another step: why trade, bounty hunt, missions, etc. with the intent of filling the BGS buckets? Why not just wander through space rather than being tied to a faction and system. Similarly with the Thargoid war content - why fight with any strategic goal in mind, rather than just showing up and shoot some Thargoids somewhere convenient for you? And lots of players do just shoot the Thargoids they feel like and ignore the wider war, and run missions without caring about the BGS implications.

I think the appeal of Powerplay over the Political BGS - and certainly one that's not for everyone - is probably that it does guarantee both competition and collaboration.

There's only 11 sides (subject to change in PP 2, but still, likely to stay a fairly small number!) so you're much more likely to have people to work with and talk to, whereas a group supporting one of the tens of thousands of BGS factions might only have one or two people actively trying to move influence at any time.
Equally, the space requirements are such that the large groups do come into conflict at least a bit in a way that the results are somewhat unpredictable - whereas many BGS groups will never take part in anything resembling an even fight - so that gives room for both contests on the ground and strategic planning to be meaningfully tested against the opposition.


It'll remain to be seen how much actual effect PP 2 has and whether it actually matters except for keeping score who controls any particular system - there are advantages to it not doing! - but I suspect that won't be the primary reason people take part in it anyway.
 
Something I am still struggling to figure out is why anyone not interested in PvP content would choose to engage in Powerplay aside from acquiring the modules. Just to shoot npc ships and haul cargo under some other pretext than what the rest of the game already provides? Are BGS buckets not good enough? What difference is there, from a gameplay perspective or a roleplaying standpoint, in supporting the Prismatic Princess over captain Andy Anderson of the Allied Apathy Association?
There really isn't much reason to pledge other than RP, modules and joining a big player group to find folks to play with. But there can be specific reasons for specific gameplay—eg being pledged to Aisling gives your actions influence bonus in her space. If you set up your BGS shop in Aisling exploited system it's beneficial to pledge to her.
 
Hi it's me again, the noob. Something I am still struggling to figure out is why anyone not interested in PvP content would choose to engage in Powerplay aside from acquiring the modules. Just to shoot npc ships and haul cargo under some other pretext than what the rest of the game already provides? Are BGS buckets not good enough? What difference is there, from a gameplay perspective or a roleplaying standpoint, in supporting the Prismatic Princess over captain Andy Anderson of the Allied Apathy Association?

For me, there’s two reasons why I was stoked for PowerPlay, and a bit let down by the fact that earning merits boiled down to two uninteresting choices: ABA hauling, and NPC farming.

First and foremost, it’s primarily about role playing. During the gap between the Kickstarter and the Alpha, as I learned more about how the Elite Universe had evolved between FFE and ED, the character Inga Stevenson developed. I fleshed out her backstory, and spent some time in FE2 (not a fan of FFE) scouting the Empire for her homeworld. I eventually settled on Emerald, in the Cemiess system, as the most interesting one given her background.

I also decided she would be an Imperial Slave until release, to explain how she kept losing everything to the inevitable wipes and voluntary resets that happened prior to Gamma… which was announced right after I decided to do another voluntary reset. ;) Her good (though perhaps atypical) experiences with Imperial Slavery made her a traditionalist, and her background readily drew me towards messing with Federation factions via the BGS. Why would she mess with Imperial factions, if she approved of the status quo? Promote? Yes, but not mess with.

With the introduction of PowerPlay came a more nuanced view of Imperial Society. In the person of the four Imperial Powers, came four political movements is society: the Hawks, the Reactionaries, the Traditionalists, and the Progressives. Needless to say, Inga was naturally drawn to the Traditionalist, the future Emperor Arissa Lagivy Duval. Which is ironic, because as a non-combat oriented player, none of the bonuses, nor the module, was attractive to me. From a purely meta-gaming standpoint, the Progressive Aisling Duval would’ve been a better fit. But Inga’s background had her oppose the People’s Princess… at first.

After discovering that hauling merits was utterly uninteresting, and not being a combat-oriented player, I switched back to BGS manipulation. I set up shop along the Hudson/ADL border, and alternated between igniting the fires of revolution in Hudson's systems, and buffing faltering Imperial systems among ALD's systems. This occupied me a long time, until BGS 2.0 transformed BGS manipulation from byzantine trading of influence, reputation, and faction states, into a straight up influence grind. Grinding is uninteresting to me, so I departed on Distant Worlds 2, both to do some deep space exploration with the new exploration mechanics, and to give Inga a chance to do some self reflection, and write her memoir: "All the Good Names Were Take for the Memoir of an Imperial Slave."

Frontier’s decision not to have Imperial Slavery in-game mechanics reflect the in-game lore gave me, the player, a causus belli for Inga to switch factions. I'm a believer in world building via game mechanics, and so the fact that Imperial Slaves are transported as commodities, instead of as passengers as stated by the lore, suggests to me that the Pilots Federation is supporting unregulated Imperial Slave trading. She'd heard about the unregulated slave trade before, but hadn't realized that it was so widespread in the Pilots' Federation. And the Emperor was doing nothing about it! So she switched to supporting Aisling Duval and the Progressive movement instead.

The other reason why I was stoked for PowerPlay is that it added yet another factor to consider when it came to deciding which faction to work for. I'd always had role-playing considerations when it came to the game (which was a good fit for BGS manipulation... at least under BGS 1.0), so considering the PowerPlay angle added a new dimension to the game. I play games to make interesting decisions, and "no brainer" choices doesn't fit my definition of interesting. BGS 2.0 removed most of the interesting decisions I needed to make, but at least I still need to consider how it would affect PowerPlay.

Of course, having switched over from Arissa Lagivy Duval to Aisling Duval, I've noticed that to support the People's Princess usually requires me working against Imperial factions, which I find anti-thetical from a role-playing perspective, as well as to my long-term goals for the game. I'm hoping that PowerPlay 2.0 will correct this flaw in the design.

Finally, although I have little interest in Player vs Player combat, I found that once the... unpleasant players moved on from player-killing to 5C activities, the occasional PvP encounter was definitely a fun, though rare, experience. That was my one regret about moving to the BGS side of things: most of the PowerPlay action was focused on control systems and the occasional expansion, not exploited systems.
 
Last edited:
PP is not a PvP activity
Even playing PP V 1.0 in solo is PVP.
This question can probably be put back another step: why trade, bounty hunt, missions, etc. with the intent of filling the BGS buckets? Why not just wander through space...
There really isn't much reason to pledge other than RP, modules and joining a big player group to find folks to play with
Ahaha oh wow, thanks for the belly laughs people. Seriously my gut hurts and I have a tear in my eye. Needed that with the current state of the real world.

I'm reminded of the common retort I've seen in response to PvPer's asking for content. Essentially, "There's plenty of systems out there, go to one and fight each other" The reverse of this obviously being, "There's plenty of systems out there, go to one and roleplay you're the master of the universe." Sounds ridiculous, right? I just, cannot even with this.

I'm so floored by this predicament. Years of the community shaking fists and pointing fingers at each other and it's all because of uneducated, poorly implemented and flawed game design.

I hope Frontier delivers the goods so we can all hold hands and enjoy playing the game in the different, valid ways we desire. There is a way. Braben be praised, it will be revealed to us soon.

My fellow commanders, o7

edit - Darkfyre thanks for your detailed breakdown, I appreciate it. I think a lot of us here can trace back to pen & paper roleplaying and the joy of writing out our character's backstory. Thanks for sharing yours.
 
Last edited:
Fortification vs Undermining.
These are player actions counted against each other... an indirect form of PVP.
BGS is the same, work for faction and no need for a direct confrontation.
I would point out that the BGS (because of abstraction) is not indirect PvP, because its impossible to discern who is attacking since you have buckets within buckets anonymising everything - and that a BGS tick is roughly (waits for Dav thunderbolt) one day (ish). This means cause, effect and method are often mashed up (with only some states hinting at the cause).

Powerplay is indirect PvP at a very low level. It operates on a tick thats a few minutes within a cycle of 7 days- so anyone who drops a merit will have it appear on the tallies very soon. You also have station reports that are also near real time (or refreshed often based on visit) that illustrate attacks via shipping loss. So even in Solo the mismatch can be apparent if you check. Thus, it can be said to be indirect because although you can't see them, you can see via prompt UI feedback something is up.
 
I would point out that the BGS (because of abstraction) is not indirect PvP, because its impossible to discern who is attacking since you have buckets within buckets anonymising everything - and that a BGS tick is roughly (waits for Dav thunderbolt) one day (ish). This means cause, effect and method are often mashed up (with only some states hinting at the cause).

Powerplay is indirect PvP at a very low level. It operates on a tick thats a few minutes within a cycle of 7 days- so anyone who drops a merit will have it appear on the tallies very soon. You also have station reports that are also near real time (or refreshed often based on visit) that illustrate attacks via shipping loss. So even in Solo the mismatch can be apparent if you check. Thus, it can be said to be indirect because although you can't see them, you can see via prompt UI feedback something is up.
The BGS was probably a bit different for me because it was quiet where I was... until the end of it... when the shadows came.
For the most of it, there were only one or two suspects. I get your point in more crowded areas though.
 
Hi it's me again, the noob. Something I am still struggling to figure out is why anyone not interested in PvP content would choose to engage in Powerplay aside from acquiring the modules. Just to shoot npc ships and haul cargo under some other pretext than what the rest of the game already provides? Are BGS buckets not good enough? What difference is there, from a gameplay perspective or a roleplaying standpoint, in supporting the Prismatic Princess over captain Andy Anderson of the Allied Apathy Association?
I know plenty of others have responded, but it's worth noting that, if I carve your sentence up a bit... this:
to shoot npc ships and haul cargo under some ... pretext ... the rest of the game already provides

... is actually meant to be the BGS... meanwhile... the "bucket filling" to achieve strategic effects is what Powerplay is meant to be.

That is, the BGS is just meant to be the backdrop to shoot at ships and haul cargo... Powerplay is meant to be the pretext to who and why you do it to/for.

While it's a quote I wish I could find again, FD said[1] (probably in some livestream) that they were surprised it was the Factions that players took a liking to, rather than the Superpowers (being Feds, Imps, Alliance, Indys)... FD's mistake was that all the observable effects and action happen in the Faction layer... while nothing is observed to happen at the Superpower level.. so of course players attention will be drawn naturally to where things are happening.

Because the BGS was never designed to be that sort of mechanism (that is, the strategic group-vs-group border-shifting overlay), Powerplay was born. And it with it came nothing that players found interesting in the BGS... many of those excited by the BGS were looking forward to Powerplay, only to see it fall entirely flat on it's face. To recall my own experience, the contrast was this:
  • To support a faction to expand, I trade, bounty hunt, courier, salvage, explore and more, on behalf of that faction, before expanding to a neighbouring system and going to war in it, eventually toppling the incumbent government and seizing control of the assets.... along the way inducing economic boom, bust, civil unrest, famine and so on.
  • To support a Power (patreus, in this case) to expand, I... deliver pamphlets, which makes a number go up.

It just completely missed what made the BGS appealing. Which is why, IMO, if PP2 wants any hope to succeed, it needs to supplant the BGS by being the place to do all those BGS-like activities, and in doing so, destabilise the BGS to make any attempt to control it at a fine-level like that a foolhardy exercise at best.

[1] Others can recall this quote independently... none of us can locate it though... it's supremely annoying
 
This question can probably be put back another step: why trade, bounty hunt, missions, etc. with the intent of filling the BGS buckets? Why not just wander through space rather than being tied to a faction and system. Similarly with the Thargoid war content - why fight with any strategic goal in mind, rather than just showing up and shoot some Thargoids somewhere convenient for you? And lots of players do just shoot the Thargoids they feel like and ignore the wider war, and run missions without caring about the BGS implications.

I think the appeal of Powerplay over the Political BGS - and certainly one that's not for everyone - is probably that it does guarantee both competition and collaboration.

There's only 11 sides (subject to change in PP 2, but still, likely to stay a fairly small number!) so you're much more likely to have people to work with and talk to, whereas a group supporting one of the tens of thousands of BGS factions might only have one or two people actively trying to move influence at any time.
Equally, the space requirements are such that the large groups do come into conflict at least a bit in a way that the results are somewhat unpredictable - whereas many BGS groups will never take part in anything resembling an even fight - so that gives room for both contests on the ground and strategic planning to be meaningfully tested against the opposition.


It'll remain to be seen how much actual effect PP 2 has and whether it actually matters except for keeping score who controls any particular system - there are advantages to it not doing! - but I suspect that won't be the primary reason people take part in it anyway.
This. The main difference between Powerplay 2 and current BGS should be exactly this: Powers tend to be bigger of course and to have more peculiar effects on the systems they dominate, in the new PP2 we already know that this influence will be graphically visible, and that really helps the players, both casual and hardcore veterans.
I still believe that the main reasons to support your Power should be:
  • roleplay (of course)
  • sensible advantages and bonuses for players pledged in their Power dominions (so you will play to make them available to you in as many systems as possible)
  • peculiar characteristics for the systems affected by the different Powers (so that local communities could decide to support a Power for their personal reasons)
  • just the fun of it, and the opportunity to have fun by cooperating with same-pledged Players that you can find flying around your dominions or even have fun playing against your enemies (because being this a videogame is not that a tragedy to find some human enemy sometimes :p )
 
I know plenty of others have responded, but it's worth noting that, if I carve your sentence up a bit... this:


... is actually meant to be the BGS... meanwhile... the "bucket filling" to achieve strategic effects is what Powerplay is meant to be.

That is, the BGS is just meant to be the backdrop to shoot at ships and haul cargo... Powerplay is meant to be the pretext to who and why you do it to/for.

While it's a quote I wish I could find again, FD said[1] (probably in some livestream) that they were surprised it was the Factions that players took a liking to, rather than the Superpowers (being Feds, Imps, Alliance, Indys)... FD's mistake was that all the observable effects and action happen in the Faction layer... while nothing is observed to happen at the Superpower level.. so of course players attention will be drawn naturally to where things are happening.

Because the BGS was never designed to be that sort of mechanism (that is, the strategic group-vs-group border-shifting overlay), Powerplay was born. And it with it came nothing that players found interesting in the BGS... many of those excited by the BGS were looking forward to Powerplay, only to see it fall entirely flat on it's face. To recall my own experience, the contrast was this:
  • To support a faction to expand, I trade, bounty hunt, courier, salvage, explore and more, on behalf of that faction, before expanding to a neighbouring system and going to war in it, eventually toppling the incumbent government and seizing control of the assets.... along the way inducing economic boom, bust, civil unrest, famine and so on.
  • To support a Power (patreus, in this case) to expand, I... deliver pamphlets, which makes a number go up.

It just completely missed what made the BGS appealing. Which is why, IMO, if PP2 wants any hope to succeed, it needs to supplant the BGS by being the place to do all those BGS-like activities, and in doing so, destabilise the BGS to make any attempt to control it at a fine-level like that a foolhardy exercise at best.

[1] Others can recall this quote independently... none of us can locate it though... it's supremely annoying
Do I understand correctly YOU call BGS when a person does something in one (or a wing) and it can change the state in a billion system ?
 
Thanks again folks for answering my questions, especially explaining some of the history and deeper mechanisms within the game. Glad I started posting, feels like I've learned more info in less time from the forums than reading wikis and guides ever provided me with.

If it isn't clear I'm on both sides of the fence so to speak. Both the rp PvE and the PvP side of things as I enjoy both roleplaying and the unpredictable nature of human opponents. The magic happens imo when players can choose to immerse themselves but spill over from one facet of play to the other without anyone getting too butthurt.

The reason I found this all so funny is because it just seems like karma or justice for the PK apocalypse of UO and early mmo teething issues. I hope the irony here isn't lost on some of you.
 
Do I understand correctly YOU call BGS when a person does something in one (or a wing) and it can change the state in a billion system ?

Frontier, for better or worse, decided to use player actions to drive their dynamic background simulation. One Commander might not able to have much impact on the lives of a billion people… at first. But if you were to ignore the current “You can buy your own ship for that” level of rewards, when you start the game owning a humble Sidewinder, you’re already in the top 1% in terms of wealth… based on the “corn” or “beer”price index. An experienced player is effectively a small NGO in terms of influence: their decisions can easily affect multitudes, and who they choose to work for reaps the benefits of good publicity.
 
Do I understand correctly YOU call BGS when a person does something in one (or a wing) and it can change the state in a billion system ?
Err... no?

Player input matters, like @Darkfyre99 said... because FD wanted player input to shape the universe. But FD also wanted the BGS to be background by definition. Expansion, war and all that was meant to be the outcome of player activity, but players weren't meant to be seeking to deliberately cause it. But those very interactions and their diversity are what made it appealing, which is why for many, PP1 was a flop.

Powerplay would be a much better vector for large-scale changes to the background sim, as there's a vector of explanation that the player's interactions are part of a bigger machinery that is the Powers, as opposed to simply "the player's actions[1]".

But, my argument is that even if one person could change the state of a system of billions, it should be meaningful yet somewhat immaterial to the player experience. But that's an essay I won't do tonight.

[1] Though arguably, the "larger machinery" was the factions.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom