Powerplay Powerplay and what I think needs to be done.

Which would be against the rules and anyone doing so should face punishment. Same goes for anyone modifying their router or firewall to stop themselves instancing with others.

On the other hand, someone could build up an impressive block list and after a few encounters and runs through enemy systems probably have a majority of opposing players blocked, and that would be totally legit.

Lateralus has raised the issue of bots, and bots could be scripted to also add to their block lists, so his hopes of shutting down bots, or even spotting them, might be problematic. You can't see them, you don't know they are there, which brings us back to the same situation we have with modes.
The blocking feature would need a rework for Open PP, as it would be ridiculous in a feature about conflict that you can block someone for shooting you.
 
I never, ever tried to close the discussion, or even tried to shut up the dissent,
Then perhaps stop using phrases that seem to be aimed at shutting down opinions? "Just leave powerplay to us" - how else should i have interpreted that? You're saying you belong to the only group with a valid opinion and my opinions should be kept quiet. That's how i read it.

Never ever wanted to do so but, excuse me is I say so, it's really difficult to discuss with people that deny the evidence only to go on with their idea.
What evidence? We are discussion options and opinions aren't we?

Let's take a couple of steps back.
Sure!

First of al, you can agree with that or not, but Open Play is a totally different kind of game. Is it better? Worse? Does it suit your likings? That's not the point, and you're still going around that thing even if I tried on and on to not talk about that, but just how it is different, far less effective and how it's made irrelevant by two different modes which are Private and Solo.
There's people who like Open better, and people who like Pvt/Solo, I'm not here to argue about that (same can't be said by you, you even mentioned that in your last reply).
Well, agree with part of what you say, but i still don't agree on the irrelevant. It can be less effective, usually depending on how many people are around and their intentions. A lot of the time in open you don't see any other players, so during those times its no different to solo. Hell, i'm located fairly center bubble and if running around doing missions i'll be lucky to see a single other player in a night's gaming. I'll usually send an o7 their way. Sometimes, i'll get an o7 back.

The only difference is that Open Player have not a game mode to measure how good they are as a team, period. Tell me differently and, again, you're intellectualy dishonest (and you're being a lot denying a fact as how Open is a totally different way to play the game, different, much more dangerous, not better or worse).
Agh, no. They don't have a game mode or feature to measure how good they are at PvP (either in killing or avoiding). Period. You can measure how good you are at the BGS or PP as a team regardless of mode. Because they are PvE activities. Should FD implement a mechanic around PvP, then naturally that should mainly take play in Open, then you would have a measure of how good individuals and groups are at PvP. But for the moment, the only real PvP focused feature that exists is CQC.

So we're arguing first of all about how this game style is made irrelevant, then we're looking for solutions, something to find for that. And no, even if you keep talking about PvP it's not what the Open Play community wants, we're not all a bunch of people looking for other CMDRs just to satisfy some kind of hidden miserable frustration, so a "PvP only" mechanic is not what people is looking for.
Well, you are arguing that, i'm saying otherwise. But sure, present solutions instead of arguing with me! It would be great if we could all go back to presenting possible solutions. Unfortunately, most people seems to just keep repeating "open only" like its the only possible solution, with no other thought. To give you credit, you have suggested more than just this, acknowledging other things would need to change in addition to it going open only.

I know some people are saying they don't want OO just for PvP, but that is exactly what you are asking for be added. A removal of the "safe" way of playing and ensuring that everyone has to engage in PvP. By this, i don't mean just combat, i include evading combat as a hauler. Of course, i have raised the question regarding just how many haulers will continue to haul in the face of player combatantants and its effect on the powers. Its a shame that rather than discussing that, and looking for possible ways it could be moderated in some ways, so PP doesn't become a gankers paradise, people around here seem not to want to acknowledge it. Perhaps they are optimistic and think it won't be. Maybe they are right. ;) Maybe if people will die a lot from attacks, the CC numbers would need to be reduced, especially if there was a drop in the number of haulers.

As you can see everything you said in your last posts is technically wrong in many ways.
Umm... no, i don't see that. But feel free to disagree with me!

You still think Open Play gives the same challenges as other modes: you're wrong, it's absurd to say differently.
You think that Open Players consider themselves better than others: again, wrong, we just want something to play with without some invisible entity that make your efforts irrelevant.
You think that somebody's looking for a pure PvP mechanic: newsflash, it's already been tried, it's called CQC and it didn't go that well (because people thought that a pew-pew only thing could be something that'd solve the "seal-clubbing" problem, right). World's not black and white: exclusive PvPers and PvEers are not the only kind of players in here, what about the grey area where you can find most Open Players?
I'm sensing strawmen here. I've never said it provides the same challenges. I do think some open only players consdier themselves better, and i think its abusurd to disagree with that. Just go hang out on any PvP oriented discord and wait for someone to mention PG or solo.

Its a shame about CQC, its not a bad idea. It might simply just be the wrong thing for the ED community. The amount of people looking for an arena style game in ED is probably small. People enjoy their customized big ships too much or just enjoy doing their own thing, flying a spaceship around. Some PvPers don't want fair fights. Some PvPers don't want a challenge. We see this time and again. Its unfortunate. Still CQC is quite good if you get into it, its just usually i'd rather be doing something in the main game rather than playing CQC.

You gave proof yourself about this kind of construct in your mind when you talked about "people finally hauling", well you've been proved wrong that time too, btw.
Darn it, don't you just hate it when your personal opinion is proven to be wrong? :p I'm sorry, maybe in your head you think you've somehow proven my opinion to be wrong, but that is in your head.

Why Powerplay? Well, because it was designed for that
If it was designed for it, then it wouldn't need making open only. Any intentions to make it PvP oriented utterly failed in that direction. Keep in mind, the only significant difference between the modes is PvP, so when we are discussing open only, we are effectively discussing PvP and it being an enforced part of the gameplay. Whether this is a good or bad thing depends on the person.

The real problem right now is that there's a part of the Community asking for a gamestyle of their own and there's other people fighting so hard to deny that to them. So don't put the mask of the "bad guy" shutting out people to me, I'm the propositive one in here, it's you that are fighting against something that other people are asking.
People? There are others? Come on guys! Get posting! I'm all alone here! :D

And i'm not fighting to deny you anything. I'm trying to discuss options, opinions, and theories. If, at the end of the day, FD decided to make PP open only, then i'd be interested to sit back and watch what happens. I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong and that PP flourshes and becomes a really good and engaging gameplay with lots of activity. What I expect is different, but hey, that's just me. I expect it to become a salt fest, with powers collapsing, accusations of combat logging and cheating to escalate, bad blood between player groups, etc... basically the same things you get in every game where PvP is the focus. Go read the Ark forums some time about the PvP servers ;)

You like to quote, then quote this: why are you fighting so hard? Would it be that much of a tragedy if Powerplay would become an Open Only game mechanic? Would it affect your gameplay in any way? Would it be so terrible to just ignore an Open Only Powerplay as I ignore mining? or exploration?
I'm not fighting. I'm enjoying a good debate. No, it wouldn't be a tragedy if it went open only. I'm against on principle because i believe FD should not pander to any particular group from any mode in order to favour a particular mode. As i just said in a previous post, i think modes are a good thing, although a split server would have been better. Then everyone could have had a version of PP on their own terms. But it didn't happen.

It wouldn't affect my gameplay as it stands, no. It would mean that should FD implement changes that I would be interesting in participating in, I would be forced to do that in open. While i do fly in open a lot these days, there are plenty of days when i don't want the open experience, usually when i'm drinking :p

When I say "Leave Powerplay to us" I mean "Leave us something suited to our gamestyle, where other people with a different idea can find their place to have fun".
Ah, well, sorry, it just doesn't across like that. But how about leaving PP cross mode, but look for other ways to improve it that would make it fun for more people, not less? And perhaps something that would make it more interesting for those in open without biasing against any mode? How would you feel if the PvE PPers started asking FD to remove PP from Open? It is a PvE game, and obviously the Open players are not intersted in PP, after all, aren't a majority of PP players in PG/solo? (not realy, just making a point based on how some people talk). Anyway, make it more inclusive, not exclusive.

Don't be that kind of guy that fights to not let people have things. THAT's shameful. You're not even involved, you don't know how it goes but you know for sure we can't have an Open Play game mechanic "just because" (or maybe "just because kickstarter"?)
I'm not fighting, i'm having a fun and challenging debate. In what way am i not involved? In PP? Because its rubbish as it is. There are others here who are in favour of open only, but are also not playing it because they don't find it good as it is. Are you telling them they are not involved? And its not "just because". I've explained my reasons. You can choose to accept or reject them as you please.

It is a matter of principle, in your case. For us it's a matter of having something to play with. Right now you're like the guys who were against mining during the focused feedback because "there's something more important to do first".
You have something to play with. We all do. Its just not necessarity good as it is, and I agree with you on that. Again, there might be more than one way to skin a cat.

As for the mining thing, hell, nothing wrong with those of the opinion that mining improvements should have been delayed in favour of other things. Sure, mining turned out well, but there are still probably plenty of people who would rather have had something else come first, and its a valid opinion. Don't start having a go at people who want different things to be implemented in different orders.

You see, I'm not in the sections of the game you care of telling people they should stay with what they have, you are.
Shame on me, right?
Erm, not sure what you are trying to say here. You think i'm trying to tell you that you should be happy with what you have? How can you think that after our many rounds of debate? Also... what sections? I'm confused by that.
 
Day 1 people know Powerplay inside out, they are long term beta testers. A lot of these people also run Reddits, Discords and organize PP, and over the years know why people leave and what would bring them back. New ideas are always welcome but for the most part they are simply repeats of what has been said over and over. Its not a case of 'winning', its simply not wasting time on issues that has been raised earlier on.
Sure, i understand that. What about all the people who might be interested in PP if it was made more inclusive though, rather than exclusive?

And i'm sorry, but not all of us were involved in these exclusive discussions either, so we don't know what features and suggestions were made during those periods, not what sort of bias of opinions were present. I mean, consider the sort of people who are active on those reddits and discords, its large the heavily invested, those who spend hours or days a week obsessing over the feature. They are naturally going to have a biased outlook on the situation, not necessairly one that thinks about inclusivity, perhaps with a focus on excluding people or groups that don't match their idea of who should be playing and how...
 
The blocking feature would need a rework for Open PP, as it would be ridiculous in a feature about conflict that you can block someone for shooting you.
Possibly they could make it so you can block other PPers in general, but it only would work if you unpledge. So in short, blocking doesn't work against opposing PPers.

Problem is, that then neuters one of the reasons for the block feature in the first place, which is the ability to block truly undesirable players. And i think we can agree, PP will have some of those should it go open only.
 
Agh, no. They don't have a game mode or feature to measure how good they are at PvP (either in killing or avoiding). Period. You can measure how good you are at the BGS or PP as a team regardless of mode. Because they are PvE activities. Should FD implement a mechanic around PvP, then naturally that should mainly take play in Open, then you would have a measure of how good individuals and groups are at PvP. But for the moment, the only real PvP focused feature that exists is CQC.
PP when introduced was superior to the BGS at the time. Now the BGS is superior again. What place does PP have now? What does it offer over the new BGS?

I know some people are saying they don't want OO just for PvP, but that is exactly what you are asking for be added. A removal of the "safe" way of playing and ensuring that everyone has to engage in PvP. By this, i don't mean just combat, i include evading combat as a hauler. Of course, i have raised the question regarding just how many haulers will continue to haul in the face of player combatantants and its effect on the powers. Its a shame that rather than discussing that, and looking for possible ways it could be moderated in some ways, so PP doesn't become a gankers paradise, people around here seem not to want to acknowledge it. Perhaps they are optimistic and think it won't be. Maybe they are right. ;) Maybe if people will die a lot from attacks, the CC numbers would need to be reduced, especially if there was a drop in the number of haulers.
The whole point of Open PP is to have a massive, co-ordinated weekly fight for supremacy. Basic tasks become harder as you cannot guarantee any delivery or action. Each basic action requires more thought, protection and skill.

Its a shame about CQC, its not a bad idea. It might simply just be the wrong thing for the ED community. The amount of people looking for an arena style game in ED is probably small. People enjoy their customized big ships too much or just enjoy doing their own thing, flying a spaceship around. Some PvPers don't want fair fights. Some PvPers don't want a challenge. We see this time and again. Its unfortunate. Still CQC is quite good if you get into it, its just usually i'd rather be doing something in the main game rather than playing CQC.
Powerplay is not about being fair. Its about beating the odds- with solo and PG the only way to beat someone is to do more of it than them. You can't use skill, guile or tactics to offset your disadvantage.

If it was designed for it, then it wouldn't need making open only. Any intentions to make it PvP oriented utterly failed in that direction. Keep in mind, the only significant difference between the modes is PvP, so when we are discussing open only, we are effectively discussing PvP and it being an enforced part of the gameplay. Whether this is a good or bad thing depends on the person.
The PvP aspects failed as (along with the rest of PP) it was released half finished and was full of conceptual holes that were exploitable.

And i'm not fighting to deny you anything. I'm trying to discuss options, opinions, and theories. If, at the end of the day, FD decided to make PP open only, then i'd be interested to sit back and watch what happens. I'd be more than happy to be proven wrong and that PP flourshes and becomes a really good and engaging gameplay with lots of activity. What I expect is different, but hey, that's just me. I expect it to become a salt fest, with powers collapsing, accusations of combat logging and cheating to escalate, bad blood between player groups, etc... basically the same things you get in every game where PvP is the focus. Go read the Ark forums some time about the PvP servers ;)
Powerplay without the random element becomes a game of farming. It needs instability to make it less certain, and more dangerous.
 
Anyway guys, its been a fun debate, but i'll bow out now.

Hope at least some of you considered my points.

I'd have preferred to stay and discuss various options, but it just keeps cycling back to the same topics, so not much more to be discussed here. Its just another "make PP open" thread.

Kudos to those who have thought beyond this, even if they want open only, but understand it needs a lot more than that. ;)
 
Sure, i understand that. What about all the people who might be interested in PP if it was made more inclusive though, rather than exclusive?

And i'm sorry, but not all of us were involved in these exclusive discussions either, so we don't know what features and suggestions were made during those periods, not what sort of bias of opinions were present. I mean, consider the sort of people who are active on those reddits and discords, its large the heavily invested, those who spend hours or days a week obsessing over the feature. They are naturally going to have a biased outlook on the situation, not necessairly one that thinks about inclusivity, perhaps with a focus on excluding people or groups that don't match their idea of who should be playing and how...
Its not a matter of making PP inclusive, its making it relevant in the first place.

As I keep on saying, Powerplay needs a reason to exist to bring a section of players into it. Currently it has no reason to exist, as it is a poor relation to the new BGS. Open sets it apart.
 
Possibly they could make it so you can block other PPers in general, but it only would work if you unpledge. So in short, blocking doesn't work against opposing PPers.

Problem is, that then neuters one of the reasons for the block feature in the first place, which is the ability to block truly undesirable players. And i think we can agree, PP will have some of those should it go open only.
The thing is, while you should be able to block people it should not be for gameplay advantage (like, for shooting you in a game with guns). You also have a report feature, and an extensive log.
 
You see, you keep talking about "PvP" here and "PvP" that.

I will repeat myself, again: it's not a matter of PvP actions, it's a matter of PvE actions done in Open.
Please stop with the PvP thing. Nobody wants another CQC.

So, being this already cleared again and again tell me what's wrong in a single game mechanic based on the Open Only style that it's not a PvP-fight-to-the-death-only mechanic.

What will this thing deny to you?

PS Open Play is irrelevant if compared to Private and Solo, in every single game mechanic. You don't agree with that? Fine. Is it correct? Nope. But you're free to be wrong, you know.
 
What I mean is, if you are trying to evade other connections, surely the information FD use to run the game would see that you have never actually connected with anyone? I have never looked, but in log files would it say "connection refused" over and over?
They would and do have records like that yes, however, Frontier run into a very, very dangerous minefield when it comes to things like telling PC owners they can't download Peppa Pig and play Elite Dangerous at the same time. I'm obviously simplifying things massively there as there are a multitude of methods to 'hide' in open. Some are in Frontiers control in terms of EULA and ToS, others simply are not because of the method - P2P - that Frontier chose to implement. There are too many variables, too many 'grey areas' and a shed load of legal considerations that Frontier would prefer to steer well clear of.

Is it far from ideal? - yes, do I wish it were different? - yes.

But we all have to have a reality check here, P2P is what Frontier chose and what we have and until either Frontier see that was a mistake for the type of gameplay they would like to see or they change said gameplay to make it fair across a P2P connection then we're staying right here in unsatisfactory status quo land.
 
They would and do have records like that yes, however, Frontier run into a very, very dangerous minefield when it comes to things like telling PC owners they can't download Peppa Pig and play Elite Dangerous at the same time. I'm obviously simplifying things massively there as there are a multitude of methods to 'hide' in open. Some are in Frontiers control in terms of EULA and ToS, others simply are not because of the method - P2P - that Frontier chose to implement. There are too many variables, too many 'grey areas' and a shed load of legal considerations that Frontier would prefer to steer well clear of.

Is it far from ideal? - yes, do I wish it were different? - yes.

But we all have to have a reality check here, P2P is what Frontier chose and what we have and until either Frontier see that was a mistake for the type of gameplay they would like to see or they change said gameplay to make it fair across a P2P connection then we're staying right here in unsatisfactory status quo land.
Finally some constructive feedback. I totally agree that there would be difficulties and ways to hide anyway.

I think that probably FDev should add a new "game mode", Powerplay, with different rules about logging off and most importantly different rules about how ignoring works. The P2P problem is a sensitive one, but you know: most of times if you're downloading a lot, you simply have difficulties logging to Open, Powerplay would probably be the same.

Of course I think that Open Only wouldn't be sufficient to fix Powerplay, and I really wrote many many posts about that, but "Open Only" should be a founding concept of Powerplay, because, as I'm really tired to repeat over and over, this game lacks an Open Play Only mechanic, and there's plenty of people that would have a lot of fun with that, even potential customers.
 
Finally some constructive feedback. I totally agree that there would be difficulties and ways to hide anyway.

I think that probably FDev should add a new "game mode", Powerplay, with different rules about logging off and most importantly different rules about how ignoring works. The P2P problem is a sensitive one, but you know: most of times if you're downloading a lot, you simply have difficulties logging to Open, Powerplay would probably be the same.

Of course I think that Open Only wouldn't be sufficient to fix Powerplay, and I really wrote many many posts about that, but "Open Only" should be a founding concept of Powerplay, because, as I'm really tired to repeat over and over, this game lacks an Open Play Only mechanic, and there's plenty of people that would have a lot of fun with that, even potential customers.
I agree, and Frontier's fundamental mistake was not making PP open only from the very beginning and thus designing and enhancing it as such.
 
The dedicated mission server is hopefully a first step in a long term plan for FDev to move to a dedicated server infrastructure and away from peer-to-peer. Using pledged players instead of the entire player base could be an effective means of beta testing such infrastructure for FDev.

Open Only has many technical problems to overcome however it is mostly only 'ideal but not essential to have' as it should be possible to have a rule set for Powerplay that ensures players cannot harm a Power by accident or intent (5C). To me that means getting rid of or major reform of the economic model of game play; as long as sphere can be negative some players will use any means available to load those spheres on to a Power they don't like. That's human nature unfortunately regardless of the fact that most of the player base respect the gentlemen's agreement that 5C is not acceptable.

CMDR Justinian Octavius
 
The dedicated mission server is hopefully a first step in a long term plan for FDev to move to a dedicated server infrastructure and away from peer-to-peer. Using pledged players instead of the entire player base could be an effective means of beta testing such infrastructure for FDev.

Open Only has many technical problems to overcome however it is mostly only 'ideal but not essential to have' as it should be possible to have a rule set for Powerplay that ensures players cannot harm a Power by accident or intent (5C). To me that means getting rid of or major reform of the economic model of game play; as long as sphere can be negative some players will use any means available to load those spheres on to a Power they don't like. That's human nature unfortunately regardless of the fact that most of the player base respect the gentlemen's agreement that 5C is not acceptable.

CMDR Justinian Octavius
You know my opinion about that:

OPEN ONLY
For player interactions

NEW MATHEMATICAL (but not just mathematical) RULES
To avoid 5C completely

POWERPLAY MISSIONS/SCENARIOS
For gameplay variability

These three are the foundings the new Powerplay should be designed on.
 

The Replicated Man

T
The ideal scenario would be for FDEV to make Powerplay and BGS Open Only. Or at least offer a MAJOR incentive to conduct said activities in Open.

I think we all know the reason why. One group working against another to undermine them in solo using a army of bot accounts. Not fun. Seen it happen.
 
Considering Open Only by itself I still think the best thing would be to have two different Galaxies, but I understand how this is impossible even to imagine for FDev. So, I will stick with Powerplay only, it's the best chance we have, better focus on this and leave the BGS to the whole community (as every other part of the game).
 
Last edited:
Perhaps a side effect of open only PP, would be people winging up? Have a big ship transporting PP stuff, with two ships flying combat role escort.
I find flying in a wing more immersive, of course Frontier would need to improve the wing instances server side.

Anyway, thanks to all who considered and debated my original points, lots to think about.
o7 Commanders.
 
Perhaps a side effect of open only PP, would be people winging up? Have a big ship transporting PP stuff, with two ships flying combat role escort.
I find flying in a wing more immersive, of course Frontier would need to improve the wing instances server side.
That would be part of the benefit of Open Only hopefully. It is mostly a question of resources, if FDev can fix the mechanics and deliver Open Only then yes please. If they can only fix the mechanics or do Open Only then lets fix the mechanics now & hopefully get Open Only somewhere down the line.

CMDR Justinian Octavius
 
Top Bottom