Powerplay: Ideas from the devs - Feedback wanted! #3

[Starlear]

merit decay is present specifically to reward Commanders who put in more effort over time than their peers.

This would be true even without merit decay; those who put in more time would get more merits. I am completely for removal of decay.

I would also like to make a suggestion: If you are pledged to a power, let merits be also gained from anything you do in a control system of that power to gain credits. IE, you could gain merits for bounty hunting, trading, turning in exploration data, etc. Maybe along the lines of 1 merit/5000cr or something like that. This would go a long way towards solving the problem of powerplay participation meaning that you have to give up your normal pilot activities. It would then also probably be necessary to make sure the powers each got flavored additions to their benefits, similar to the existing ones for bounties - where you make additional % of credits for trades, or for exploration data, or for selling metals/minerals. It'd let the powers get a "Oh, this power will let me advance as an explorer, so I will back them".

 

[DextersIndignation]

Hello Commanders!

Just another update for you folk.

The clear consensus is that a return to the old system of merit rating, even with the addition of favours, would not be wanted. So, going further down this line, I want to pose another question for you to consider: merit decay is present specifically to reward Commanders who put in more effort over time than their peers. This is true, even in the current implementation, even though you don't actually compete.

So my question is: would you prefer to see the merit system mutate into something like the favour system, rather than have both active at the same time (I think something along those lines has cropped up a couple of times)? Before you respond, have a think about what would be gained versus what would be lost: the system would be simpler, but less dynamic. In essence, it would likely be a little more like a XP bar/resource.

Now, whilst I'm reflective mode

Clearly, everyone wants missions. Understood. So do we! It's a matter of timing.

Also pretty unanimous is a desire for stronger connection to minor factions. Again, we're down with this. However, it's important to remember that A) powers and minor factions are on a different scale, and that B) both systems are pretty complex. But that's just a caveat, really - we'll certainly spend some more time going over options here (the great thing about brainstorming early is that we can look at all the angles).

The Powerflag seems to have a lot of support, but has two potential challenges: exploitation and the dilution of pledging.

The Up/Down vote has a lot of love; it looks like the only folk objecting are doing so because they want more communication tools. We'd like more as well, but there are resource and technical restraints to consider (but in time, we *will* consider them).

As someone pointed out earlier in the thread, this is very similar to how the DDF worked. Which means the same concepts apply to how we use this feedback. So, to be completely clear: nothing in this thread is guaranteed or promised. It would be remiss to act that way as we simply don't know what might happen in the future.

Instead, this is closer to a plan of intent; we use your feedback to help us shape what goals we want to hit going forward. That does not mean we will blindly implement suggestions. We still have to listen to our own hearts and heads as well. But, as with the DDF, this process is very useful at generating ideas from the folk who are playing the game, and at forcing us to reassess our choices, making sure they're robust enough.

Right, that's all for now, again, thanks for taking to time, Commanders!

If you are not allowed to discuss issue of balance, I understand.
I'm not happy, but I understand.


But surely if PP is to stay you need to give factions clear identities and reasons to exist.

I am pledged to ALD again I admit it is only for the MEGA OP benefits.

I feel that whilst this is the case many will only side with the faction that gives the best bounus's, the best toys and has the best safety nets.


I would love to fight for Hudson, but the payoff is silly...
You may get the same bonus to Bounties, but I lose out on weapons (The silly frag gun) and there is no way FD would have "FIXED" the turmoil issue if it was a FED problem.

I know many who want to be pirates
But Delain offers so little as for his weapon ... (Ask the players - they were not happy - How many quit pp over that one issue)

Perhaps and open discussion asking players (including he RP guys) what they would expect there power to offer and trying to supply that.


Someone earlier mentioned Hudson is the most popular which if I am honest does not seem to stack up to what I (or my buddies have actually seen), yet the claim originated from the same place that suggests the sidewinder is by far the most played ship???
Has someone got the numbers wrong?



EDIT
THE SIDEWINDER THING MAYBE DOWN TO ITS USE AS A BOOKMARK....
None the less does anyone actually play them?


If the numbers are right doe that mean there are 000's of players who play in a sidey for an hour or less then quit and never come back?

 

[xBlackLogic]

Take PP, throw it in the garbage, and start making the game we want again.

/end thread

 

[Quineloe]

Great to see that background sim and PP will eventually become integrated!!!

Regarding the flag, I guess I am personally still not too convinced. Not only because of potential dilution but also because of the impact in Open Play (not so much in Solo/Private).

Just think about the potential ramifications (and I am not talking in terms of exploiting the timing of switching it on and off)... Let´s take a wing that switches the flag on to do some undermining. Off they go to an enemy Power control system and start their undermining work. Most of these players ,depending on their power ethos, will soon (if not already) become WANTED in that system. Now let´s consider another wing in that system that has pledged to the local Power but has decided to go under the PP radar and switched off the flag. The undermining players dont have in principle a "casus belli" to attack those apparently not aligned players. The local players though can totally justifiable attack those players beacuse of their WANTED status any time the so wish whiule the undermining party has in principle no reason to attack them (other than a good pvp fight for the sake of it). The local wing has the initiative. Players defending control systems from undermining will have no incentive WHATSOEVER to show their flag up. This is compunded with the fact that eliminating hostile ships in local territory does not produce any reward PP-wise and therefore there is no need at all to activate the PP flag locally when on patrol duty.

So, you see where this is going. After a few of those attacks by "not aligned" players In Open Play, players in general will start to look very suspiciously at ANY other player they detect in their scannerthat has, in appearance, not pledged to a Power, and this will very often result in pre emptive interdictions without distinction. Now, dont get me wrong, PvP players will find this a great thing no doubt but those players that really are non pledged and want to play unaligned will probably have to run for their lives much more often than today.

That's why I said "attacking a pledged ship forces your own flag back on", and I think Sandro picked up on that.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Another idea that gets rid of flags:

Your rank within a power dictates your standing within said power:

Rank 1 is like a freedom fighter, while rank 5 is a full on citizen. Others can see your standing rather than 'Utopian'- it might say, 'Utopian Initiate',or 'Utopian Citizen' right through to 'Utopian Guru'.

Thus, its like a sliding scale. The higher up you are, the more restricted your dealings can be in other powers space. The lower down you are, the easier it is to mingle, but the less perks you get.

 

[Artie]

...
So my question is: would you prefer to see the merit system mutate into something like the favour system, rather than have both active at the same time (I think something along those lines has cropped up a couple of times)? Before you respond, have a think about what would be gained versus what would be lost: the system would be simpler, but less dynamic. In essence, it would likely be a little more like a XP bar/resource.
...

Yes, I am personally definitely for it. It may also work as I mentioned here, which may be solid compromise.

 

[edgar]

Speaking from the point of view of a CMDR pledged to Arissa Lavigny-Duval; the Rating 5 100% Bounty Bonus is a really powerful and attractive perk, on top of the 50m salary you get with it. I once managed to get up to 10k merits, but I suspect it was from when the merit decay was not working as intended, so it was a fluke. I was not able to play the following week after getting 10k merits anyway, so I never managed to enjoy the bonus itself, I just had the salary voucher to cash in afterwards.

If merit decay had worked as intended at that time, and I had instead had the chance to play the following week, I probably wouldn't have been able to enjoy the bounty bonus either, as I would have needed to spend my time building up 5000 merits to maintain my rank.

It would be nice if the activity that the perk related to / buffed, also earned you some Merits at the same time. That would give people the ability to still maintain something. Just award 1 merit, so people would still need to eventually go out and do things for 15 merits to really catch up, but it would mitigate the horrible feeling of being in "merit debt" or the feeling that unless you do something you will be punished with the loss of Rating. That feeling gives me a sadface!

I actually do think that some sort of merit / favour decay is appropriate, I just think that 50% loss per week is too severe. I think some people don't like the merit decay as well because it is so arbitrary. If the basis of the decay was more dynamic, for instance if decay was based on the Power's overall CMDR Productivity (busier Power = more actions = more throughput = more decay, just an example out of the air), or if the impact of the decay was lessened by your Rating itself (get to Rank 5 and your merits decay less), people would be more OK with the idea of merit decay.

 

[Derthek]

The only thing I like about powerplay is the freedom fighter idea. I lost my home and months of working the BGS in 1 week due to the advantage powers have over minor indie factions.

May I make a suggestion? Alow all freedom fighters to undermine any power at any time. That way we can have a united Galactic force working against these psychotic dictators in every corner of the galaxy.

I can imagine there will be Galactic peace in a year.

 

[Viajero]

Hello Commander Viajero!

I'm not sure I understand your concern.

In your example, the wing that had turned the Powerplay flag ON to undermine would always be at risk from everyone in the system they were undermining, thanks to Powerplay ships and the WANTED status they would get. This is realistically zero change from the current implementation (fact is, if I'm undermining in a system and I see a combat capable ship on my sensors, I already assume that it could be a bounty hunter out to profit from my demise).

The covert players defending would however, *have* to wait until the wing actually committed crimes before they could respond, and would be doing so only as standard bounty hunters, as opposed to the right to freely attack they would have as visible Powerplayers.

Non-Powerplay ships would, in my opinion, not have anything new to worry about - if they were secret Powerplayers in an enemy system, they'd have to leave, go back to a control system of their own and toggle their Powerplay flag on before they could cause any trouble. In essence, any non Powerplayn ship in a system *could* not be a Powerplay threat to it.

In addition, Commanders already have the opiuon of playing in solo or private groups so I don't really see how this would make things worse. If anything, I'd suggest that the flag might tempt folk into open a little, as they would have finer control over their level of engagement in Powerplay.

Of course, I could be misunderstanding, apologies if so.

Maybe it is not a big deal. As I said this issue would affetc more OPEN play. Hard to say until the system is tested:

Undermining players in an enemy control system, weather WANTED or not, currenlty typically would not pay much attention to non aligned players in a system they are undermining. Their own eventual WANTED bounties are not huge anyways and non aligned players would typically also go about their business seeing those WANTED pledged ships as busy with their PP stuff. Those encounters between pledged (WANTED or not) and non pledged ships are usually quiet affairs (unless they want to PvP for the sake of it).

Under a flag system, undermining players in enemy territory will most likely end up attacking preemptively anyone non aligned in the area when faced with the doubt. Because they know enemy Power ships with the flag off are also justified to attack given the undermining players WANTED status. Bountyhunting rights is all they need to actually play PP undercover, and those undermining ships will usually get WANTED status pretty fast.

In other words, with a flag system, OPEN pledged players have no incentive at all / dont need to have the flag on when playing PP defense.

 

[DextersIndignation]

Speaking from the point of view of a CMDR pledged to Arissa Lavigny-Duval; the Rating 5 100% Bounty Bonus is a really powerful and attractive perk, on top of the 50m salary you get with it. I once managed to get up to 10k merits, but I suspect it was from when the merit decay was not working as intended, so it was a fluke. I was not able to play the following week after getting 10k merits anyway, so I never managed to enjoy the bonus itself, I just had the salary voucher to cash in afterwards.

If merit decay had worked as intended at that time, and I had instead had the chance to play the following week, I probably wouldn't have been able to enjoy the bounty bonus either, as I would have needed to spend my time building up 5000 merits to maintain my rank.

It would be nice if the activity that the perk related to / buffed, also earned you some Merits at the same time. That would give people the ability to still maintain something. Just award 1 merit, so people would still need to eventually go out and do things for 15 merits to really catch up, but it would mitigate the horrible feeling of being in "merit debt" or the feeling that unless you do something you will be punished with the loss of Rating. That feeling gives me a sadface!

I actually do think that some sort of merit / favour decay is appropriate, I just think that 50% loss per week is too severe. I think some people don't like the merit decay as well because it is so arbitrary. If the basis of the decay was more dynamic, for instance if decay was based on the Power's overall CMDR Productivity (busier Power = more actions = more throughput = more decay, just an example out of the air), or if the impact of the decay was lessened by your Rating itself (get to Rank 5 and your merits decay less), people would be more OK with the idea of merit decay.

I guess the decay was to control "merit inflation" this would at least have the effect of keeping some value to the merit as credits are now treated like the Zim Dollar!

I accept the idea of Decay
I accept this favor thing too!


But level 5 should be a lot LOT less than 10k

100
200
400
800
1600

Make more sense!
Even if you scale up the pay to match...

Each merit could earn you what it would cost to buy?
Plus if you earn it you get a salary (even if less generous than the 50 mil)

maybe
1 mil
2 mil
4 mil
8 mil
16 mil


This would give many an incentive to aim for the top knowing that they will earn along the way, and they can achieve the top even if time poor!






but....


PS
I can understand if you wish to pay ALD double - lol

 

[Cmdr Eagleboy]

All this thread has really said to me is that we're stuck with Powerplay as a mostly separate strategic game unto itself, and not an integrated element of Elite-as-a-spaceship-game.

You haven't addressed the fundamental problem between the way Powerplay functions mechanically and the way Powerplay should connect to the galactic narrative that was already in-game. It's wholly disheartening. There are amazing suggestions in this thread from long-time respectable members of this community that would be far more successful at both providing the gameplay you want to provide and not trodding all over the storyline you introduced before this was bolted on top.

I think you haven't understand this actually. PP *is* storyline. It will be weaved around it. What we got so far is introduction.

Also PP is one of major sources of changes in galaxy. It will be more extended and integrated in system effects.

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

The clear consensus is that a return to the old system of merit rating, even with the addition of favours, would not be wanted. So, going further down this line, I want to pose another question for you to consider: merit decay is present specifically to reward Commanders who put in more effort over time than their peers. This is true, even in the current implementation, even though you don't actually compete.

If you want to reward CMDRs that put i more effort, you should, you know, reward those CMDRs, not penalise the others.

 

[Derthek]

If you want to reward CMDRs that put i more effort, you should, you know, reward those CMDRs, not penalise the others.

Yeah this is the obvious answer for me as well.

If a cmdr grinds upto top merit and another cmdr doesn't, isn't that already method of separating who has put in more effort than the other? Why over complicate things?

 

[Loskene]

I'd like if the powerplay flag system was more a passive thing than a toggle with a cooldown. This game has enough cooldown timers as it is. I think when you're in your power's home territory your pledge should always be visible. You're a local agent and everybody knows your name. In hostile territory your pledge shouldn't be visible until you're KW scanned. Then obviously make it so that powerplay agents' KW scanners connect to the database of known enemy powerplay agents as well as criminals. If you're KW scanned in hostile territory you can consider your cover "blown" and your allegiance will be visible on just a basic scan thereafter, until you are either destroyed or leave the hostile power's space.
I don't know if something similar's been suggested already, but I think it'd make for more of a feeling of spycraft and espionage for those who take part.

 

[Rubbernuke]

But again, why not treat merits like rep with your power?

If you get to certain thresholds your rep cannot decay back. For example:

An initiate earns 100 rep and pushes past a threshold and becomes a Citizen. But, if that player only earnt 50 rep, that rep would slowly decay back to 0, while now as a Citizen you must get 200 rep to push to the next step (but even if you did nothing, you are still a Citizen because you earnt that). It still makes you play, but it means not everything is lost.

 

[DextersIndignation]

PS

If Hudson stared a CG to hunt slavers and rescue slaves I suspect it would be popular!

Imagine

You scan a ship and get payed a percentage of the fine! and 15 merits!
You can kill any ship carrying slaves
You get 2 or 3 times the fine as a bounty! and 15 merits!
You get paid for each slave you save! and 15 merits!


he would rid the galaxy of evil slavers!!!!


PS

He could also sell an FDL with the driver in the middle, the class 4 slot moved forward (or somewhere useful) and he could sell a class 4 gimballed pulse laser!

 

[Sinsecato]

Sandro - The feedback I've seen related to this thread on Reddit and in my player group is generally quite positive. These ideas certainly address some of peoples biggest concerns with PowerPlay. Thanks for discussing these with us and listening to the feedback.

---

As for the most recent question you posed regarding Merit Decay, as well as the ideas of Power Flags and Favour, I have a suggestion for implementation that, IMO of course, keeps the positives of all three while being simple and straightforward


A player can choose to DeActivate their Power Flag once each cycle, and it remains off for the rest of the cycle. While it is off, obviously no Power benefits are active, and no Merits can be earned. At the end of the cycle in which the Flag is turned off, Merits decay as normal. The next cycle begins with the Flag set to off. If the player chooses to leave the flag off for that next cycle, the players Merits are frozen at their current level (and again no benefits are gained, eg salary). Frozen Merits and no benefits remains the case until the Flag is turned On again, at which point it remains On until the end of the cycle.


This accomplishes several things in a simple manner. The Flag serves its purpose of allowing players freedom to roam the galaxy. The decision to turn the Flag Off won't be made lightly, as it will keep the player out of PowerPlay for that entire cycle. (Possibly once any merits have been delivered in a cycle, the Player loses the ability to turn the Flag Off for that cycle). The cons of the Merit Decay system are addressed, as a Player can essentially "Pause" PowerPlay for a time and come back to only 1 or 2 cycles worth of Decay (depending on how you implement it) regardless of how long they have the Flag Off. The need for a Favour system is reduced or eliminated (though maybe it could be repurposed a bit -- for instance save up Favour points to spend on Power Specific benefits like reduced ship costs, 24hour reduced commodity prices, etc).


On another note, have you considered changing the Allotment Timer from 30 mins to 24 hours? I think this would benefit the gamplay in several ways, most specifically removing the current AFK Merit Farming while at work to get an easy $50mil every week, which gives Players able to do it (for instance Me) a bit of a Pay-to-Win style advantage (i.e. not based on actual real gameplay).

 

[Optio]

Merit decay is to harsh, period. Add favor, don't add favor -- reduce Merit decay...it's the main thing holding me back from really liking PP. If one week I have time to haul tons and tons of Industry Equip and earn a 1000 merits, great. But for the next few weeks I only have time to log-on and do some courier missions or pirate hunting, I shouldn't be so harshly affected -- I mean I was still the guy who hauled 100s and 100s pieces of equipment for you.

The missions really stink related to PP in the core systems of your pledged Power. Why are there not more missions for those who actually pledged there that are actually meaningful (i.e. reward Merit)? Just need more mission variety in general as well. The game is so big... you could come up with all sorts of interesting missions beyond "take this there" or "go there and kill X". For example, a cool mission would be go to a hostile system and hunt SSSs for a ship of your PP faction that is stranded/disabled and assist them...escort them and protect, deliver fuel, or pickup cargo, etc. Then when you follow them to their destination and you are rewarded with a little Merit and credits.

Lastly, merit rewards for certain actions are way out of whack. You mean I go into Zach Hudson's Military Strike zone and kill dozens and dozens of private military contractor spacecraft (many hard Pythons and Anas) I got next to nothing for merit? Really? But some sidewinder with no shields (yes it happens all the time) pledged to Edmund interdicts me in my FDL at Lembava and I kill him instantly and I get 15? That is wrong.

One more thing, make planets that are being contested by two Powers stand out more easily on the Nav Map (e.g. highlight a planet where the System Resistance could use your help against Zach Hudson and will pay you some credits to come help). The Nav Map needs to do all it can to enhance PP and not be a time sink trying to figure out and move around in.

 

[edgar]

But again, why not treat merits like rep with your power?

If you get to certain thresholds your rep cannot decay back. For example:

An initiate earns 100 rep and pushes past a threshold and becomes a Citizen. But, if that player only earnt 50 rep, that rep would slowly decay back to 0, while now as a Citizen you must get 200 rep to push to the next step (but even if you did nothing, you are still a Citizen because you earnt that). It still makes you play, but it means not everything is lost.

But in a scenario where we have ongoing cycles of actions being undertaken, if one commander does not put in any effort for a sustained time, why should their Power continue to recognise their past efforts, if those past efforts have long ago expired?

 

[teedle]

So my question is: would you prefer to see the merit system mutate into something like the favour system, rather than have both active at the same time (I think something along those lines has cropped up a couple of times)? Before you respond, have a think about what would be gained versus what would be lost: the system would be simpler, but less dynamic. In essence, it would likely be a little more like a XP bar/resource.

Yes! Do it with merits!

My ideal scenario

• Rank is now a superficial (or vote increasing) number that it itself decays. Rank is increased by newly earned merits from the week. It could even go up to like 50 when it doesn't need bonuses directly attached.
• All earned merits are in a non decaying bank that you spend on the (current) timed bonuses

We still get a decaying way to show our continuing effort. But it doesn't make us feel like we're losing all of the stuff we earned.