Powerplay in Solo

[Robert Maynard]

Oh, cmon Robert, that's a massive red herring fallacy, and you know it.

# of games sold =/ number of active/regular players. Not even close.

FDev have previously published the average # of hours pople play Elite before moving on. This number was so low (in ED terms, pretty good vs other games, but barely into Engineering timescales) that the majority of people who bought the game before horizons were not even around when Horizons/Engineering dropped. So no, many people who stopped playing before Horizons didn't have engineering.

Of those holdouts who now have free access to Engineering or the Epic generation, how many will completely ignore an easily accessible feature? That some of the Epic generation might not have gone all in for Engineering in the first 60days is irrelevant. How many of those who continually completely ignore Engineering it will commit to Powerplay - which is currently more of a tedious grind than Engineering!

Only Frontier have the data to analyse to support either side of the discussion - and they don't publish it.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

I don't respond well to people who accuse me of trolling.

Here's the deal: you and others wanting a special merit badge for the "risk" of Open when you yourselves willingly choose that extra risk are who don't seem to 'get it'.

Whatever you think you stand to gain by forcing this wedge, sowing division in the community, is your business I guess. But obviously most of us are sick of this topic.

Nobody made you play Open. Make peace with your own choices and be quiet. Please.

You responded fairly well . What I'm after is a feature that attracts and retains players. Emphasising open play is the only route to that at the moment. There are, however lots of ways to do it. My group and others do it by nurturing that culture within our own ranks, but we can't influence everyone, and for me open play should be "designed in" to the feature (needn't be by forcing modes), unless the devs can come up with a better way of equalising risk at the really consequential moments of powerplay gameplay.

The issue won't go to bed because it's self-evident to so many that this is needed, hence the posters like OP with their "bright new idea" appearing every two days. If you don't care about powerplay, don't read the threads.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

Except it would not be "fun for everyone else" - as not everyone is interested in PvP in the first place. That players don't like it when others don't play the way they want them to (even while playing within the game's rules) is obvious - which applies to those who don't like being shot at in Open as much as it does to those who complain about players engaging in pan-modal game features in modes other than Open.

It is not fun for everyone (not everyone but uptake suggests it's a reasonable generalisation) else currently because powerplay is no fun without open play and so they ignore powerplay in a game where powerplay is optional.

 

[Ethaidan]

I don't respond well to people who accuse me of trolling.

Here's the deal: you and others wanting a special merit badge for the "risk" of Open when you yourselves willingly choose that extra risk are who don't seem to 'get it'.

Whatever you think you stand to gain by forcing this wedge, sowing division in the community, is your business I guess. But obviously most of us are sick of this topic.

Nobody made you play Open. Make peace with your own choices and be quiet. Please.

Hey Znort! I found an example of the downshouting you say doesn't exist... right here, in this 7 page thread!

Telling someone they just don't get it. Check.
Accusation of sowing Discord in the community. Check.
Telling someone 'the majority' are sick of the discussion. Check.
Telling someone to be quiet. Check.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Powerplay should be an Open only activity. Influencing Powerplay by fortifying systems or even opposing systems in solo is something that shouldn't be possible, no one can stop you! Powerplay is meant to be a struggle between factions/powers working against one another. Groups of players targeting specific systems with other groups intervening. That seems like the ideal vision, not a bunch of invisible pilots carrying pamphlets to various stations and calling it a day.

What really sucks, in my opinion, is having a group of people in open that are actively trying to push a specific system a certain way, but are unable to do so since there can be dozens of players in Solo, their own little universe, stopping players in open.

I can understand wanting to play in solo, but Powerplay itself shouldn't be influenceable in Solo, is all I am trying to say. I know this has been brought up before, but is there any specific reason why it is?

Edit: I was also thinking, if this idea of mine of Powerplay in Solo is REALLY that desired, perhaps we can keep Powerplay in Solo and simply halve the merits and influence that players actions have in solo? That way they can still have an effect, however to be as efficient as possible, you would need to enter into Open!

So what platform do you play on?
Are you rocking a PC?
Are dominating with a Playstation?
Are you superior on a XBox?

Well it does not really matter what platform you are on, you platform of choice is obviously the greatest to be on.

Now the important thing, there is no cross-play, so you cannot meet players on other platforms, even if they choose to also play in open... And since we all share the same galaxy, from your point of view, all those "solo" players working against you, might just be players in Open on other platforms... And some of them might be making the same complaint as you, why are players in solo ruining their effort?

 

[Old Duck]

I was also thinking, if this idea of mine of Powerplay in Solo

This idea of yours, huh? I hope you do some research of prior art before you apply for your patent.

 

[Robert Maynard]

The issue won't go to bed because it's self-evident to so many that this is needed, hence the posters like OP with their "bright new idea" appearing every two days. If you don't care about powerplay, don't read the threads.

While "so many" consider that change is required, that disregards the fact that the "so many" don't represent all players - and all players bought access to the feature in all game modes whereas only some players want it PvP-gated / PvP-weighted to Open.

The threads recur simply because Frontier have not chosen to give the Open only / Open bonus proponents what they want - and this discussion has been ongoing for over eight years now.

It is not fun for everyone (not everyone but uptake suggests it's a reasonable generalisation) else currently because powerplay is no fun without open play and so they ignore powerplay in a game where powerplay is optional.

While some may find Powerplay not to be fun without Open play the same cannot be claimed of all participants in the feature.

 

[Brrokk]

That poor horse.

 

[Robert Maynard]

And unless risk can be quantified then it never will, hence why weighting is the safest option given what we know FD might do. Plus Solo rewards players for the absence of danger (esp. with engineering) so how is it thats not in the same bracket?

In which case, it may never occur.

If you don't have the possibility of meeting a rival who has the capability to destroy you and rely on RNG to spawn innefectual NPCs, what difference is there, and why should willfully avoiding danger the same?

When the developer is on record as considering the modes "equal and valid choices" (which was an answer to a complaint that players in Solo and Private Groups could attack Factions and players in Open could do "nothing" [not nothing, of course, just not force their attacker to engage in PvP] about it)

In the end you have the possibility via RNG of an NPC encounter- why is that different to the possibility of other players? For most people the chances would be the same for either, and in Open that is cumulative regards all you come across.

Simply because the possibility, like the other players, is optional and results from the choice of those who choose to engage in the feature in Open.

In Powerplay you know ahead of time what sort of opponent you'll see- combat power expansions and UM, hauling for prep, fortification etc as well as knowing when they are going on (so to oppose or help). Not to mention PMF bases and FCs.

The type of opposition may be known - however the likelihood of encounter varies.

 

[khalismur]

Actually, if you were around when the idea was floated by a member of FDev staff (and by your forum date you were), paying attention to those threads did show a majority of posters in favour of many of the proposed changes, but a lot of posts from less posters opposing any changes. So...

That's very true. There's 5~10 "forum-players" or so I call them, who each have 4 or 5 digit post count, who all "like" each other posts and who always oppose such ideas and spam all threads all day.

The fact that threads such as these appear so frequently means it's a feature worth investigating, but then you'll have the same 10 people opposing anything. Been there done that. Threads get derailed, offtopic, people start posting irony messages or meme pictures and eventually get forgotten or locked.

Also, the fact some people have 10000+ posts shows how much they actually play the game vs spend time online

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

While "so many" consider that change is required, that disregards the fact that the "so many" don't represent all players - and all players bought access to the feature in all game modes whereas only some players want it PvP-gated / PvP-weighted to Open.

The threads recur simply because Frontier have not chosen to give the Open only / Open bonus proponents what they want - and this discussion has been ongoing for over eight years now.

While some may find Powerplay not to be fun without Open play the same cannot be claimed of all participants in the feature.

Yes it's a question of which players you want to detriment. And we'll get back to "how can you know" - FDev have the only definitive stats, and have a privileged view of what the impact of a change might be.

And you're wrong about why the recurrence of then topic, it is a spontaneous conclusion about a systemic problem with the feature on the part of those who engage with it, which needs a systemic solution. Open-only is on the one hand the "FDev way" - least effort, and on the other anti-the-FDev-way, by restricting mode. Puts them in a hard place.

My question to you regarding fun would probably be "do you do powerplay?" And the follow-up "why not", or at least "why not more?".

 

[Rubbernuke]

When the developer is on record as considering the modes "equal and valid choices" (which was an answer to a complaint that players in Solo and Private Groups could attack Factions and players in Open could do "nothing" [not nothing, of course, just not force their attacker to engage in PvP] about it)

Which goes against what was said about Powerplay directly (which was the lead designer admitting PP was distinct and unique in ED) and that since then no mention of mode equivalence has ever mentioned Powerplay at the same time, or at all.

Simply because the possibility, like the other players, is optional and results from the choice of those who choose to engage in the feature in Open.

Which does not take away the possibility when it does happen- or at all. Open unlocks all possibilities against you, solo locks them away.

The type of opposition may be known - however the likelihood of encounter varies.

Which means it could happen- and that you have to risk more to do the same level of work you do in solo.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes it's a question of which players you want to detriment. And we'll get back to "how can you know" - FDev have the only definitive stats, and have a privileged view of what the impact of a change might be.

And you're wrong about why the recurrence of then topic, it is a spontaneous conclusion about a systemic problem with the feature on the part of those who engage with it, which needs a systemic solution. Open-only is on the one hand the "FDev way" - least effort, and on the other anti-the-FDev-way, by restricting mode. Puts them in a hard place.

My question to you regarding fun would probably be "do you do powerplay?" And the follow-up "why not", or at least "why not more?".

It can be considered that, from the outset, Frontier have chosen not to favour those who prefer PvP in terms of their impact on the game, or ability to stop others engaging in game features, by the inclusion of three game modes that share the single galaxy.

It may be a spontaneous reaction from players who don't accept that the game does not force others to play with them or penalise them for not doing so. At some point the responsibility rests with the player who buys the game in terms of ensuring that the game meets with their expectations.

I have, at times, engaged in Powerplay - not at the moment though. Never say never (unless it is made Open only, of course - I have zero interest in PvP).

 

[Robert Maynard]

Which goes against what was said about Powerplay directly (which was the lead designer admitting PP was distinct and unique in ED) and that since then no mention of mode equivalence has ever mentioned Powerplay at the same time, or at all.

Indeed - the then Lead Designer did refer to Powerplay in those terms in the investigative Flash Topic (that he was at pains to state was investigative only and not a fait accompli) before he moved to another project.

Which does not take away the possibility when it does happen- or at all. Open unlocks all possibilities against you, solo locks them away.

Of course it can happen - to those who wish to engage in pan-modal game features in Open - their choice.

Which means it could happen- and that you have to risk more to do the same level of work you do in solo.

Indeed - by choice. Much like choice of ship, choice of engineering, choice of how much time to spend "gittin gud" in terms of PvP combat (for those so inclined).

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

So what platform do you play on?
Are you rocking a PC?
Are dominating with a Playstation?
Are you superior on a XBox?

Well it does not really matter what platform you are on, you platform of choice is obviously the greatest to be on.

Now the important thing, there is no cross-play, so you cannot meet players on other platforms, even if they choose to also play in open... And since we all share the same galaxy, from your point of view, all those "solo" players working against you, might just be players in Open on other platforms... And some of them might be making the same complaint as you, why are players in solo ruining their effort?

There are many reasons why you might not instance. Players must be opposed (if directly) by those on the same platform, and preferably in the same time zone - this is known by everyone here, and every group I know does that (even those whose open play culture is... patchy). Favouring open play for PP is about equalising risk and guaranteeing a possibility of meaningful in-context encounters providing gameplay possibilities (as "hunters" or, in my case usually, "quarry", both are fun with a team, for reconnaissance, forcing a tactic change, etc.).

Would requiring open play result in better or worse equity of risk across different player groups do you think? And I mean after taking into account factors like blocking and TOS violations?

Must a measure be a perfect solution before it can be implemented, or merely contribute a desired effect which outweighs detriments and balances the cost of dev effort?

 

[Rubbernuke]

Indeed - the then Lead Designer did refer to Powerplay in those terms in the investigative Flash Topic (that he was at pains to state was investigative only and not a fait accompli) before he moved to another project.

And yet thats the only time PP has ever been actively talked about and from someone who actually cares about the feature- no other dev has even said Powerplay. All pan modal talk (quite rightly) was about the BGS since then.

Of course it can happen - to those who wish to engage in pan-modal game features in Open - their choice.

But the existence of having Open is more than that though. You can't know who is in it or who is around the corner.

Indeed - by choice. Much like choice of ship, choice of engineering, choice of how much time to spend "gittin gud" in terms of PvP combat (for those so inclined).

All the things you don;t need in solo which greatly simplifies what you need to do and face.

 

[Robert Maynard]

But the existence of having Open is more than that though. You can't know who is in it or who is around the corner.

Open is there for those who wish to play in it - there's no requirement for anyone to do so. That some enjoy the frisson of the potential of a hostile player encounter is obvious, just as it is obvious that some have no interest in being engaged in PvP by a hostile player.

All the things you don;t need in solo which greatly simplifies what you need to do and face.

Indeed - however players in Open don't set the challenge for any player other than those who they instance with.

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

It can be considered that, from the outset, Frontier have chosen not to favour those who prefer PvP in terms of their impact on the game, or ability to stop others engaging in game features, by the inclusion of three game modes that share the single galaxy.

It may be a spontaneous reaction from players who don't accept that the game does not force others to play with them or penalise them for not doing so. At some point the responsibility rests with the player who buys the game in terms of ensuring that the game meets with their expectations.

I have, at times, engaged in Powerplay - not at the moment though. Never say never (unless it is made Open only, of course - I have zero interest in PvP).

You might consider that...

I also dislike your assumed punitive attitude on behalf of anyone interested in open powerplay. Most simply see a connection between the sieve-like implementation of risk in a mode whose consequences players opted in to, and the weak uptake of the feature. The other factor being the weak content, which can be massively enhanced by the insertion of player factors in team and opposition.

You'd be surprised how easy it is to engage in PP in an organised group in open without block or TOS violation and still not encounter PvP, by choosing your activities - I recommend you try it, you will never run out of things to do.

 

[Vedmo]

And unless risk can be quantified then it never will, hence why weighting is the safest option given what we know FD might do. Plus Solo rewards players for the absence of danger (esp. with engineering) so how is it thats not in the same bracket?

I think this is really the crux of the topic, whether or not mode choice is a difficulty option deserving of a rewards system. To me it is not, but I understand why people view it as such, as in practice it can sometimes play out that way.

We have been given three choices, play alone, with select others, or with all others. I've never viewed that as a difficulty selection. It isn't easy or hard mode, and I don't think it exists to set bars at which different rewards can be given. Between networking, platforms (and subscriptions), a simple desire for a single player or multi-player experience, there are many reasons these modes exist that have nothing to do with rewarding anyone for which they choose at any given time. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I think they were put into place for accessibility reasons and to appease a larger audience, not to offer the fairest pvp or PP experience to those who want that from the game. The only benefit from mode choice is playing the game how you want to.

OOPP may be way better than what we have now for many, but I am against changing the game over the possible effect of a fundamental option while disregarding the purpose of that option.

Although now that I just re-read all of that, it appears I'm saying I am placing game accessibility over game quality, and I'm not too sure I agree with that. Crap, I've just talked myself into not having a position. What a mess.

 

[Robert Maynard]

You might consider that...

Quite, opinions do, of course, vary. However it's the game we all bought, regardless of play-style preference.

I also dislike your assumed punitive attitude on behalf of anyone interested in open powerplay.

What else should attempts to actively exclude / reduce the effect of players who paid just as much for the game with respect to existing pan-modal game features that some players want to be changed to suit their optional play-style be called?

Most simply see a connection between uptake of the feature and the sieve-like implementation of risk in a mode whose consequences players opted in to, and the weak uptake of the feature. The other factor being the weak content, which can be massively enhanced by the insertion of player factors in team and opposition.

... and some consider the fact that players in Solo and Private Groups affect the game an "abomination" and want those modes to have significantly less effect on the galaxy or even be removed. Not all players want the same thing.

You'd be surprised how easy it is to engage in PP in an organised group in open without block or TOS violation and still not encounter PvP, by choosing your activities - I recommend you try it, you will never run out of things to do.

I've other things to do at the moment.