Powerplay 2.0 “Open” Rewards

[galahad2069]

I wonder how many hours are wasted spent every Cycle to fortify core systems for each power... I admit I don't like hauling and used it only when I was short of time to fill up my merits (which for the most part were done by undermining). I mean there's no big alternative: hauling or shooting.

Seriously, it would be better if whatever it is you have to deliver did not require cargo space at all. It should be some special kind of material, not commodity. So tonnage basically would not count, only the number of trips. That way you would not need any cargo racks and everyone could do all the 'hauling' in their best combat ship. One less reason for haulers to complain about how unfair it is to get attacked by dedicated combat ships of the opposition. Destroyed ships would drop all the PP material they were carrying ofc, so you could scoop it up and deliver it to your own destination. Unless someone destroyed you on your way there, in which case you would drop the mats... you get the idea.

Also, destroyed player ships should absolutely drop engineering materials as well.

 

[galahad2069]

Unfortunately, he is proposing changing solo, which I cannot agree with.

Oh come on, CMDR, do not stand in the way of progress.

 

[Rebel Yell]

Seriously, it would be better if whatever it is you have to deliver did not require cargo space at all. It should be some special kind of material, not commodity. So tonnage basically would not count, only the number of trips. That way you would not need any cargo racks and everyone could do all the 'hauling' in their best combat ship. One less reason for haulers to complain about how unfair it is to get attacked by dedicated combat ships of the opposition. Destroyed ships would drop all the PP material they were carrying ofc, so you could scoop it up and deliver it to your own destination. Unless someone destroyed you on your way there, in which case you would drop the mats... you get the idea.

Also, destroyed player ships should absolutely drop engineering materials as well.

Hah that's an interesting idea... I reckon that the PP 1.0 should have included other ways to undermine/fortify i.e. like powerplay specific missions sourced by local/nearby factions with proper government/super-power affiliation. I mean, like assassination missions where the target is an enemy power captain (and not the usual random Warren Buffet pirate) and so on. More or less what is going to happen with PP 2.0

 

[DemiserofD]

Oh come on, CMDR, do not stand in the way of progress.

I'm fine with progress - as long as it's progress in a good direction, for the majority of players.

Universal open only - or even open-encouraged - is something that only benefits a small group, and penalizes a large group. And perhaps most importantly, it wouldn't even achieve its goal. If my choices are to play in Open to achieve the best results, or not play at all, I'm just not going to play at all.

Which would be sad, because there ARE things that could get me playing in Open.

Like the idea I proposed; creating an area where players are on relatively equal footing, where pvp can take place and have meaning, that's exactly the sort of thing that I could enjoy and participate in. Give me a fair fight, I don't think that's too big an ask.

What's incredibly unfun are the people who want to be like sharks among the hauler minnows. There's zero enjoyment in evading a fully kitted out pvp ship in a hauler. It's just tedium, and a waste of time. The problem here is that there is no real 'win condition' for me; if I get past, I get exactly what I would get if the pvper wasn't there at all.

Y'know what it really reminds me of? The Exobiology minigame. A pointless waste of time to get what I am going to get anyway. It was removed with good reason.

To be frank, I think pvp in this game is very stale for everyone not a pvper, and it needs to be directly modified to make it more engaging, encouraging things like piracy, discouraging merely killing the target. Only then, only with greater variety, can it really take a broader place in a multiplayer environment.

 

[Felix DiCestria]

'Anyone else' includes a lot of people like me, so what kind of sacrifice are you talking about?

 

[galahad2069]

Like the idea I proposed; creating an area where players are on relatively equal footing, where pvp can take place and have meaning, that's exactly the sort of thing that I could enjoy and participate in. Give me a fair fight, I don't think that's too big an ask.

What's incredibly unfun are the people who want to be like sharks among the hauler minnows. There's zero enjoyment in evading a fully kitted out pvp ship in a hauler. It's just tedium, and a waste of time. The problem here is that there is no real 'win condition' for me; if I get past, I get exactly what I would get if the pvper wasn't there at all.

My suggestion (see above - in a nutshell: make PP cargo materials, not commodities, so no cargo rack required, you can 'haul' in your best combat ship) would solve that problem immediately.

 

[Rubbernuke]

More accurately, you're taking aesthetic factors that exist, and using them to justify changing the game to add more combat and pvp. The one does not lead to the other, and claiming that they do is, in fact, wishing.

Its the first time I've heard NPCs and combat as 'window dressing' rather than actually having a role. I could just as easily turn your argument back at you and say you are pretending hauling is something its not in PP.

It would need to be extensively modified to suit the new Powerplay system, so to say it's already ingame is inaccurate.

Now, first of all, I don't necessarily think that Hauling should be the ideal Powerplay task. The relative balance of the pvp megaship attack idea I proposed would need to be determined, and would likely be worth quite a bit.

That said, why shouldn't hauling be the ideal powerplay task? It's no more or less valid as any other playstyle in Elite. One playstyle must be the best. There's no reason in particular it shouldn't be Hauling.

Ideally, all activities would offer roughly comparable value, so you could play as you pleased.

Hidden traders and NAVs are in game. All the mechanics, ships, weapons and underpinning code is there too. RNG still exists, as do templates.

FD already have a mission system, its adding Powerplay related flavour and again using whats in game in new ways. For example passengers- you could make something of wanted passengers with dropping a spy without being scanned into a rival station. You also have a robust reward system, where players could choose personal merits, power merits or money (again, all in game). So its not building something from scratch at all- it would take work but nothing beyond what a Thargoid update has brought.

That said, why shouldn't hauling be the ideal powerplay task? It's no more or less valid as any other playstyle in Elite. One playstyle must be the best. There's no reason in particular it shouldn't be Hauling.

Ideally, all activities would offer roughly comparable value, so you could play as you pleased.

Hauling is valid in my eyes- where I disagree is that (in PP) it should be subject to being directly opposed or molested by NPCs, because the conquest part relies on the cumulative outcome of fortification. You want straight grind races, I want races that have chaotic outcomes.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Hah that's an interesting idea... I reckon that the PP 1.0 should have included other ways to undermine/fortify i.e. like powerplay specific missions sourced by local/nearby factions with proper government/super-power affiliation. I mean, like assassination missions where the target is an enemy power captain (and not the usual random Warren Buffet pirate) and so on. More or less what is going to happen with PP 2.0

In flash topic 1 Sandro did outline that:

 

[DemiserofD]

My suggestion (see above - in a nutshell: make PP cargo materials, not commodities, so no cargo rack required, you can 'haul' in your best combat ship) would solve that problem immediately.

Doesn't solve the problem of one side not WANTING to see the other. That's the biggest issue. If a hauler encounters a pvper, it wastes their time, and that's only ever annoying to the hauler.

See the Exobiology example; the minigame was just a pointless and annoying time-suck.

Its the first time I've heard NPCs and combat as 'window dressing' rather than actually having a role. I could just as easily turn your argument back at you and say you are pretending hauling is something its not in PP.

What else could they be described as? Again, even in the thargoid war, I lost half a percent or so of efficiency. It seems pretty clear that they're there for flavor, not to meaningfully shift balance.

And bear in mind, this was in a T10.

Hidden traders and NAVs are in game.

Like I said, that would be a more viable option from a development standpoint.

It just wouldn't BE hauling, and would once again reduce Powerplay down to an insignificant corner of the game that nobody bothers with. Not a great option.

You want straight grind races, I want races that have chaotic outcomes.

I think you are incorrectly assuming that adding pvp = chaotic outcomes. That's simply not true. Pvp is not inherently chaotic beyond the micro level.

To me, adding pvp to hauling is like adding a minigame to reload your guns every time you want to fire. Not meaningful, not fun, just a waste of time.

And on a large scale, PVP becomes just as predictable as any other activity.

 

[galahad2069]

Doesn't solve the problem of one side not WANTING to see the other. That's the biggest issue. If a hauler encounters a pvper, it wastes their time, and that's only ever annoying to the hauler.

If you don't want to see other players, then you probably shouldn't be playing a competitive feature of an online multiplayer game in the first place.

 

[DemiserofD]

If you don't want to see other players, then you probably shouldn't be playing a competitive feature of an online multiplayer game in the first place.

That's not it. It's that the game most rewards NOT seeing the other person. Why would anyone play in a way that actively hurts themselves?

It's like if Call of Duty gave you 1 point for every kill you got, but took away 2 for every time you died. Pretty soon the winners would all be whoever could find the best place to hide and never risk dying, since everyone else would only ever lose points.

 

[galahad2069]

That's not it. It's that the game most rewards NOT seeing the other person. Why would anyone play in a way that actively hurts themselves?

The game should absolutely not reward that, especially not in a feature that's competitive by design. That's what most suggested changes to PP are about.
Flying in Open should be encouraged/rewarded, blocking and clogging should be removed (at least for PP), cheaters should be permabanned.

Instancing will always have its limitations and there will always be idiots who will try to exploit the weaknesses of the system by VPNing to Antarctica, for example. So what?
There is no perfect solution to that (except for making the game server-based instead of p2p, which is ofc not going to happen), but I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of players are not cheaters or idiots, let those who like competitive gaming have fun.

 

[DemiserofD]

The game should absolutely not reward that, especially not in a feature that's competitive by design. That's what most suggested changes to PP are about.
Flying in Open should be encouraged/rewarded, blocking and clogging should be removed (at least for PP), cheaters should be permabanned.

Instancing will always have its limitations and there will always be idiots who will try to exploit the weaknesses of the system by VPNing to Antarctica, for example. So what?
There is no perfect solution to that (except for making the game server-based instead of p2p, which is ofc not going to happen), but I'm pretty sure that the vast majority of players are not cheaters or idiots, let those who like competitive gaming have fun.

That's exactly what your proposal does.

If I see another player, my hauling slows down. if I don't see another player, I can go full speed. Seeing another player is only ever a punishment, never a good thing. So why should I ever want to see another player?

If you force me to play in open, I'll swap over to wifi while I'm hauling, so nobody can instance with me, I won't bother fighting.

 

[rootsrat]

Obviously late to this party (I've been meaning to post here forever and keep forgetting). Anyway here's my few cents.

As a leader of a large BGS group (both manpower and controlled systems wise) I personally wholeheartedly support the notion to reward players more for playing in Open - when it comes to both BGS and Powerplay.

But I think the bonus should only affect the outcome of player actions, rather than any cosmetic items or Arx. And in fact rather than a bonus, it should be reduction in outcome value in PG/Solo. Why? Because while Elite is a competitive online game - especially when it comes to BGS and Powerplay! - there are legitimate reasons that someone may want to play in PG/Solo. Be it disability, age or whatever else.

By introducing bonuses for Open play, we would be taking the opportunity to earn those bonuses away from the people that are not really in a position to play in Open. By introducing reduction to PG/Solo actions, we still allow those people to participate, while keeping the spirit of competition for an online, multiplayer competitive game.

50% reduction would be fair I think. So people in Solo still contribute, but on a large scale it doesn't make sense to go Solo overall.

 

[DemiserofD]

Obviously late to this party (I've been meaning to post here forever and keep forgetting). Anyway here's my few cents.

As a leader of a large BGS group (both manpower and controlled systems wise) I personally wholeheartedly support the notion to reward players more for playing in Open - when it comes to both BGS and Powerplay.

But I think the bonus should only affect the outcome of player actions, rather than any cosmetic items or Arx. And in fact rather than a bonus, it should be reduction in outcome value in PG/Solo. Why? Because while Elite is a competitive online game - especially when it comes to BGS and Powerplay! - there are legitimate reasons that someone may want to play in PG/Solo. Be it disability, age or whatever else.

By introducing bonuses for Open play, we would be taking the opportunity to earn those bonuses away from the people that are not really in a position to play in Open. By introducing reduction to PG/Solo actions, we still allow those people to participate, while keeping the spirit of competition for an online, multiplayer competitive game.

50% reduction would be fair I think. So people in Solo still contribute, but on a large scale it doesn't make sense to go Solo overall.

Honestly, I personally find this sort of change to be the worst of both worlds. Going completely open only does exclude most players, but at least it does it cleanly.

One could imagine a situation where one side has 10 players and the other side has five, one of whom is a practiced ganker.

The 10 players, playing in solo, find themselves unable to keep up with the five players, because of the Merit disadvantage. As a result, they try playing in open, but that single practiced ganker is able to kill enough of them effectively, due to the massive Advantage PVP has over hauling ships.

Because of one player, 10 players are unable to effectively influence the game. Pvp has become the single important choke point which controls all others.

It would have been better if those 10 players were simply rejected from the start.

Now, consider the alternative. There are 11 players, and through concerted effort, they are able to ignore the penalty and win anyway. The other side feels enormously frustrated, and things are no better than before.

Finally, consider the last and worst alternative. Realizing that they must play in open in order to win, but still not wanting to participate in pvp, they throttle their connection, similarly to how people are currently throttling their frame rates to reduce heat gain from the super Cruise overcharge, and avoid instancing with anyone despite nominally playing in open.

Now, absolutely everyone is frustrated. The PVP side are frustrated exactly like before. The hauling side are frustrated at feeling obligated to throttle their Connection in order to win. Pretty soon, nobody wants to play anymore.

Of all options, the Merit debuff option has to be my least favorite.

 

[rootsrat]

Honestly, I personally find this sort of change to be the worst of both worlds. Going completely open only does exclude most players, but at least it does it cleanly.

One could imagine a situation where one side has 10 players and the other side has five, one of whom is a practiced ganker.

The 10 players, playing in solo, find themselves unable to keep up with the five players, because of the Merit disadvantage. As a result, they try playing in open, but that single practiced ganker is able to kill enough of them effectively, due to the massive Advantage PVP has over hauling ships.

Because of one player, 10 players are unable to effectively influence the game. Pvp has become the single important choke point which controls all others.

1 ganker will not be able to stop 10 players mate. He will be able to stop 1 player at a time. We have SCO drives now. Those 9 that remain will be able to easily haul the stuff while the 1 victim tries to escape (and they may be successful as well, it's not THAT hard to avoid a single ganker).

Plus, this is the nature of this game when you play in Open. You can get whacked. It is competitive part of the game. Hire an escort. Sacrifice 2 players to jump into PVP ships. Reorganise. Regroup. Strategize. Play with ship loadouts. HAVE FUN. If a competitive game feature is not fun to you - go do something else. Simple as that.

Granted, any - and I mean absolutely any - proposal that gives advantage for playing in Open will also need the current C&P system to be overhauled and adjusted to the current game reality. Heck, we really need C&P overhaul regardless of anything else already anyway, but that's a whole another topic

 

[Felix DiCestria]

I assume you're hoping for PP2.0 NPCs on par with Glaives?

It would be scaled to the player, but certainly at the high end they'd be tricky (especially in wings) using more advanced player weapons to dissuade tin box ships.

The real problem is trying to undo short sighted changes to the wider game without unwinding the game itself. For example hauling- you take off in total safety, can leave in total safety (due to NFZs and drop zones being so small), you fly virtually unopposed (the only small chance being in the destination system) and drop to a station already within range of its guns. Any pursuing NPC either drops down through the station or immediately turns away.

You can't alter drop zones 'globally' so whats needed is to remove the station and its safety (and provide jeopardy in normal space). This can be done via 'Hidden Trader' POI mechanics mixed with old school NAV scanning- so in effect you take off safely, but the destination becomes more involved and unpredictable.

At the destination you drop to the NAV, scan the buoy (to get a random rendezvous POI in that system) which puts you briefly in harms way (esp if you are being pursued). You can also use the FSS as well to reveal the POI, but that could have ramifications such as alerting NPCs or that you are not fully aware of ships around you.

You then have to get to the POI and get rid of pursuit. Why? Because like all hidden traders its a T-9 sat alone trying not to draw attention. If you drop with an NPC chasing you there is a chance the T-9 will be destroyed- so what this idea does is use NPC weakness on itself. The POI then becomes either defend the T-9, lose the T-9 (where you have to scan the NAV again for a new POI) or that you transfer your cargo by flying alongside. You could mix in RNG elements- different waiting transports (T-10, Cutter etc), friendly NPCs, maybe even random bonus objectives or surface POIs.

This fits the 'hidden war' aspect of Powerplay, randomises in system hauling times (and makes good use of SCO) and rewards tactical thinking. At higher NPC difficulties it would also suit wings acting as a team- you then have roles such as overwatch, patrol and delivery. Open based attackers might hunt these POIs down too (thus the need for overwatch and patrol). You could also mix it into V2s way of expansion into contested systems- the occupying power would use allied stations while powers wanting to infiltrate use the above method.

So in the end its a bit of both- better NPCs but also mixing in mechaics to mitigate the limitations.

The other approach might be using themed missions as a base- this way danger is priced in and has a varied objective. So with the hauling example, you can do lower level deliveries with low opposition but minimal merits, stack them or take more dangerous ones.

So if they were to go Glaive route you'd be looking at something very fast with a lot of firepower.... ah...

Which would mean the T8 is the fast hauler counterpart...

 

[DemiserofD]

1 ganker will not be able to stop 10 players mate. He will be able to stop 1 player at a time. We have SCO drives now. Those 9 that remain will be able to easily haul the stuff while the 1 victim tries to escape (and they may be successful as well, it's not THAT hard to avoid a single ganker).

Plus, this is the nature of this game when you play in Open. You can get whacked. It is competitive part of the game. Hire an escort. Sacrifice 2 players to jump into PVP ships. Reorganise. Regroup. Strategize. Play with ship loadouts. HAVE FUN. If a competitive game feature is not fun to you - go do something else. Simple as that.

Granted, any - and I mean absolutely any - proposal that gives advantage for playing in Open will also need the current C&P system to be overhauled and adjusted to the current game reality. Heck, we really need C&P overhaul regardless of anything else already anyway, but that's a whole another topic

Unfortunately, you forget that supercruise overcharge benefits gankers too. If anything, it benefits them more, because they don't have to do with the pesky slowdown at the end. I would not be at all surprised to see a single ganker able to take out three or four hauling ships, single-handedly.

As far as switching into a PVP ship goes, again, you cannot force players to enjoy things that they don't enjoy. Furthermore, as you yourself highlight, many players are physically incapable of Performing that way. Especially since this is a game that Trends towards an older audience.

No solution that relies on forcing players to be helpless targets will ever work. Best case scenario, it ends up as exactly what I am suggesting anyway; a dedicated PVP Arena where only PVP players matter. Worst case scenario, it ends up with network manipulation and literally everyone unhappy.

 

[rootsrat]

Unfortunately, you forget that supercruise overcharge benefits gankers too. If anything, it benefits them more, because they don't have to do with the pesky slowdown at the end. I would not be at all surprised to see a single ganker able to take out three or four hauling ships, single-handedly.

This is just theory. Also it depends heavily on an individual skill.

As far as switching into a PVP ship goes, again, you cannot force players to enjoy things that they don't enjoy. Furthermore, as you yourself highlight, many players are physically incapable of Performing that way. Especially since this is a game that Trends towards an older audience.

Correct. As I said before - if you don't enjoy competitive aspects of the game, which may result in your ship getting destroyed - do not engage in them. Why would you force yourself into doing something you don't like?

No solution that relies on forcing players to be helpless targets will ever work. Best case scenario, it ends up as exactly what I am suggesting anyway; a dedicated PVP Arena where only PVP players matter. Worst case scenario, it ends up with network manipulation and literally everyone unhappy.

Only thing is the target is not helpless. You are operating in hyperboles and exaggerations.

Well equipped hauling ship with an Elite SLF fighter is perfectly capable of escaping even a full wing of 4 murderboats.

How do I know? Because I've done that before during community goals, multiple times. And I'm not even that good of a pilot tbh.

 

[DemiserofD]

This is just theory. Also it depends heavily on an individual skill.

We could do the math, if you like. But the thing you have to remember is, PVP ships only need to accelerate. As soon as they get going fast enough, they can begin the interdiction. Hauling ships, by contrast, must still slow down. And super Cruise overcharge has virtually no impact on slowing down, only accelerating.

The results seem fairly obvious to me. Hauling ships will likely save about 50% of their time. PVP ships will save 90% or more.

Correct. As I said before - if you don't enjoy competitive aspects of the game, which may result in your ship getting destroyed - do not engage in them. Why would you force yourself into doing something you don't like?

The problem is, you are conflating competition with pvp. Not all competition puts your ship at risk of being destroyed.

I love competition. I do not overly enjoy pvp, though I do engage in it from time to time.

And the fact of the matter is, the proposed system would put all players under the thumb of PVP players, who will have ultimate control over whatever other activities are allowed to occur.

Only thing is the target is not helpless. You are operating in hyperboles and exaggerations.

Well equipped hauling ship with an Elite SLF fighter is perfectly capable of escaping even a full wing of 4 murderboats.

How do I know? Because I've done that before during community goals, multiple times. And I'm not even that good of a pilot tbh.

Can they fight back? No. Can they win? No. The only option is for them to High wake away. And that is not a win, that is just another version of loss. Honestly, given the current devalued state of credits in this game, it may be more of a loss than actually dying.

But more importantly, it is forcing me to engage in a style of gameplay I simply do not enjoy, where the best possible result is for me to never see any attacking players. What possible incentive do I have not to switch over to my Wi-Fi connection to avoid instancing with anyone I don't want to see?

Worse still, it has substantial knock-on effects with block lists, which are a critical part of the current moderation infrastructure of the game. Frontier would need to dedicate a substantially larger number of support members to handle griefing.

So I am just not going to play. And if players like me aren't going to play anyway, why not just Short Circuit the entire thing, create a dedicated PVP Arena where PVP players can actually play with each other like they eventually will anyway, and shorten the entire debate?