Modes Powerplay open-only

[Jockey79]

Open is a better fit with PP because PP has a more streamlined singular objective and the variables are limited (and thus easier to implement).

In theory it is spot on for PvP.

But Frontier made it a PvE Token pushing game so it would fit the mode system.
Now if it had been made with PvP mechanics and rewards for PvP in mind, then I doubt many would object to it being Open Only.
And they could update it with PvP related content, so all can play it effectively. But no one seems to ask for a content update, the just scream "open only".
Which won't fix the fact it's a PvE Token pushing mechanic.

I get why Frontier made it fit the mode system, we'd already had events that were open locked and people were still grumbling over offline mode being dropped.
So they didn't really want to add more fuel to the fire and release mode locked content. I think somewhere in S.O.G. 2 or 3 (not sure which, the one just before PP)
even I had said they need to start playing fair with the mode system and either make everything available to all modes (events / content) or start making Solo / PG content and events.

Alas at the time, I assumed those wanting PvP would stick to Open. I didn't realise half those who moaned about the mode system would use it to circumvent PvP in PP.
I mean, who knew the loud voices on the forums screaming for everyone to be forced into open, were hypocrites hiding in PGs and Solo.

So really, PP needs PvP content adding to it to encourage people to play in Open.
Locking it to Open, while it's a PvE grind won't help it and will just cause the old arguments of mode snobbery to resurface.
With demands of locked Solo / PG content.

So as I see it, if Frontier want to honestly help Power Play they can;

1) Remove the toys from PP and then mode lock it (because the main reason for resistance is it has ship modules)
2) Add PvP content to Power Play so PvP is rewarded and can add to a faction not just waste everyone's time.
3) Start making mode specific content, then lock Power Play to Open (least likely, as it requires too much effort)
4) Scrap the whole of Power Play and end this argument (though the Open Only crowd will just go back to the BGS moaning)

My vote goes on number 2

 

[AP Birdman]

If it did, significant work would need to go into certain aspects which (currently) go against the new 3.3 mechanics BGS wise.

However, although its disheartening to see PP languish as it is, at the same time its underdevelopment might signal FD rethinking its role more deeply. Aside from mechanic tweaks (CC overhead, Consolidation, fort cost adjustment) all other proposals over the years have been hinting at making Powerplay something different via weighting, Open only (here) or proposals to make it more PvP in nature. It might have been that FD brought in PP too soon, in that Squadrons, carriers should have come in first (with the advanced communication tools and supporting gameplay) and then PP came in to plant the flag. I'm looking forward to hearing what FD have in store, as is the wider PP community.

Oh, there's no doubt the game would have to undergo a massive overhaul for it to all work right and for players to be happy with it but I really think that if they did, it would make the game WAY better. I daydream about if this game was open only AND crossplay with a galaxy full of players to shoot at and an actual in-game matchmaking system and a badlands area where players could do whatever they want, free of consequence.

I completely agree that PP was brought in too soon. There's a lot of elements of elite that are obviously placeholders. As it is right now it's completely pointless.

 

[Jockey79]

I'll agree that cheating was a bit too harsh if you'll agree that calling all the people here arguing for open only pp cry babies is a bit too harsh. I've seen a lot of salty cry babies on this forum and none of them have been in this thread.



If that's what it would take to get open only and dedicated servers, hell yeah, I'm in.

Fair play. Chilling out on the harsh comments
+1

The idea of a paid open only server was floated a few years back by some folks. I thought it was a good idea back then and still do.
There was even talk of a Kickstarter / GoFundMe to raise cash for the initial start for it, but nothing came of it.
And weirdly, a few of the "Open Only" voices were majorly against the idea.
But it's not because they were Seal Clubbers, "honestly" (yeah, right), it would split the player base too much (like it already isn't split).

Shame Frontier already shot the idea down, as they did state somewhere they don't want to try and maintain 2 BGS or have divergent stories/events on them.
I mean it's not as if the BGS has massive changes from day to day is it.
And if the Thargoid event moves any slower, my great great great grandchildren will die of old age (or boredom) before anything good happens.

 

[Rubbernuke]

But Frontier made it a PvE Token pushing game so it would fit the mode system.
Now if it had been made with PvP mechanics and rewards for PvP in mind, then I doubt many would object to it being Open Only.
And they could update it with PvP related content, so all can play it effectively. But no one seems to ask for a content update, the just scream "open only".
Which won't fix the fact it's a PvE Token pushing mechanic.

In a perfect world merit moving is ideal for PvP, because that is PvP- its you v another guy. The 'win' state for you is delivering, for him its destroying you. Thats the experience people enjoy, the thrill of escaping and succeeding. In Solo / PG you don't get that, and bulk hauling in that mode then comes down to a factor of time because every delivery will 'win'.

I get why Frontier made it fit the mode system, we'd already had events that were open locked and people were still grumbling over offline mode being dropped.
So they didn't really want to add more fuel to the fire and release mode locked content. I think somewhere in S.O.G. 2 or 3 (not sure which, the one just before PP)
even I had said they need to start playing fair with the mode system and either make everything available to all modes (events / content) or start making Solo / PG content and events.

Alas at the time, I assumed those wanting PvP would stick to Open. I didn't realise half those who moaned about the mode system would use it to circumvent PvP in PP.
I mean, who knew the loud voices on the forums screaming for everyone to be forced into open, were hypocrites hiding in PGs and Solo.

Merit hauling in Solo and PG bypasses the most dangerous ships (i.e. players). If NPCs were pro-active and killed on sight and patrolled more in beefy ships, it would be less of a problem. Its ED weaknesses that make Solo and PG so powerful; lack of opposition in CZs (AFK turretboats) and repetitive SC interdiction mechanics (in that repetitive interdiction would be annoying, but there is not other way currently to intercept in SC, or block via NPCs).

So really, PP needs PvP content adding to it to encourage people to play in Open.
Locking it to Open, while it's a PvE grind won't help it and will just cause the old arguments of mode snobbery to resurface.
With demands of locked Solo / PG content.

So as I see it, if Frontier want to honestly help Power Play they can;

1) Remove the toys from PP and then mode lock it (because the main reason for resistance is it has ship modules)
2) Add PvP content to Power Play so PvP is rewarded and can add to a faction not just waste everyone's time.
3) Start making mode specific content, then lock Power Play to Open (least likely, as it requires too much effort)
4) Scrap the whole of Power Play and end this argument (though the Open Only crowd will just go back to the BGS moaning)

My vote goes on number 2

In an ideal world that would be great, but FD need to actually sit down and dedicate the time. Now that 3.3 is out of the way (ish) the cut content schedule and future updates might provide that.

 

[Goose4291]

In theory it is spot on for PvP.

But Frontier made it a PvE Token pushing game so it would fit the mode system.

To be honest, PvE token pushing does (at least for me and a lot of people) work quite well within a PvP environment, as it generally encourages teamplay in the way pure killing doesn't.

Which is why game modes like Capture the Flag or Sector Control (See: Verdun/Tannenburg vs. Battlefield 1) type games (I'm literally in the process of making my first PvP ArmA mission in ages at the moment along these lines) seem to last longer as a product and can have more depth to them than spinning around shooting 3 other guys in an Arena, ensuring the mode and its associated games longevity.

 

[Jockey79]

In a perfect world merit moving is ideal for PvP, because that is PvP- its you v another guy. The 'win' state for you is delivering, for him its destroying you. Thats the experience people enjoy, the thrill of escaping and succeeding. In Solo / PG you don't get that, and bulk hauling in that mode then comes down to a factor of time because every delivery will 'win'.

Picking up tokens and moving them elsewhere does not "require" ( <- key point) interactions between players. Hence it's not really a PvP activity.
Any interactions between players while moving the tokens is 100% optional.

The only PvP currently is indirect PvP, by seeing who can move the most tokens (you v another guy). That makes it a PvE race.
Which does not make for good PvP game play and encourages people to avoid interactions to "win" the race.

Power Play needs something the "requires" interactions between players for it to be completed.

Merit hauling in Solo and PG bypasses the most dangerous ships (i.e. players). If NPCs were pro-active and killed on sight and patrolled more in beefy ships, it would be less of a problem. Its ED weaknesses that make Solo and PG so powerful; lack of opposition in CZs (AFK turretboats) and repetitive SC interdiction mechanics (in that repetitive interdiction would be annoying, but there is not other way currently to intercept in SC, or block via NPCs).

While player interactions can be more dangerous, look at some of the arguments made by the PvP crowd on these very forums for why people should play Open.
In the S.O.G. thread series it was a running joke over how PvP / Open Only people were shooting themselves in the foot by countering their own arguments.

We've been told how easy it is to avoid interdictions, avoid PvP, escape PvP, run blockades and so on.
Which if that's the case, it makes players less dangerous than NPCs, because NPCs are everywhere and players quite simply are not.
So with players so rare and easy to avoid/escape - it means the NPCs are the bigger threat.

As for the NPCs, yes they need some love.
Worse thing Frontier did was not let MOM lose with the NPCs
The few times she got a patch in, she was made to undo the changes as people cried they were too hard.
She should be allowed at least to play with the PP NPCs.

In an ideal world that would be great, but FD need to actually sit down and dedicate the time. Now that 3.3 is out of the way (ish) the cut content schedule and future updates might provide that.

Fingers crossed.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Picking up tokens and moving them elsewhere does not "require" ( <- key point) interactions between players. Hence it's not really a PvP activity.
Any interactions between players while moving the tokens is 100% optional.

The only PvP currently is indirect PvP, by seeing who can move the most tokens (you v another guy). That makes it a PvE race.
Which does not make for good PvP game play and encourages people to avoid interactions to "win" the race.

Power Play needs something the "requires" interactions between players for it to be completed.



While player interactions can be more dangerous, look at some of the arguments made by the PvP crowd on these very forums for why people should play Open.
In the S.O.G. thread series it was a running joke over how PvP / Open Only people were shooting themselves in the foot by countering their own arguments.

We've been told how easy it is to avoid interdictions, avoid PvP, escape PvP, run blockades and so on.
Which if that's the case, it makes players less dangerous than NPCs, because NPCs are everywhere and players quite simply are not.
So with players so rare and easy to avoid/escape - it means the NPCs are the bigger threat.

As for the NPCs, yes they need some love.
Worse thing Frontier did was not let MOM lose with the NPCs
The few times she got a patch in, she was made to undo the changes as people cried they were too hard.
She should be allowed at least to play with the PP NPCs.



Fingers crossed.

In this way the definition of 'interaction' requires refining, because in reality your game experience is drastically different in Open compared to Solo/PG with many more variables to consider.

In Sandros last proposal Open PP would condense down the combat arenas into your capital (since everything is inbound) and to control systems / expansions (as it is currently). In this situation the line between PvP and PvE becomes blurred and instead becomes objective based PvP, with cat and mouse area denial mixing activities together. It would be proper team based play, with haulers, swing role guys, hunters and all manner of mixes. Merit haulers in Open can either chance luck, or be part of a team with escort top cover. Deliveries then become less certain because they are either delayed or destroyed. Currently long term sniping is difficult because now we have Powerplay reports in stations, forcing Powers to now adopt last minute snipes for prepping / UMing- if this was in an Open only context time in these last days / hours becomes incredibly precious, with any loss of merit hoards a major loss.

In Open PP you could not min/max; your ship would have to have some defensive capability that compromises your hauling.

You need to know how to escape.

You need to co-ordinate with others.

You need to know how to fight when needed.

In Solo PG, PP NPCs do not use any engineered weapons or have 3.3 levels of armour. With a tough enough shield you can absorb their fire and calmly move on. In Open people can reverb torpedo you, or lr phase your merit crammed lightly armoured ship. If NPCs did that on sight regardless then they'd be credible. Currently only ATR have such weapons (reverb lasers / LR pulses). I know how bad these sting as I use a max speed Clipper to BGS, and even at 5km they still hurt. Do that over and over and then the player has to alter how they approach the challenge.

P2P weaknesses aside, its only a matter of will from FD. Issues regarding blocking and logging can be resolved- you opt in, and (just as beta has labelled what each mode does) have one for Open PP that spells out what might happen. You will get shot at, and you can't block players for doing so because thats part of this feature.

 

[Jockey79]

In this way the definition of 'interaction' requires refining, because in reality your game experience is drastically different in Open compared to Solo/PG with many more variables to consider.

In Sandros last proposal Open PP would condense down the combat arenas into your capital (since everything is inbound) and to control systems / expansions (as it is currently). In this situation the line between PvP and PvE becomes blurred and instead becomes objective based PvP, with cat and mouse area denial mixing activities together. It would be proper team based play, with haulers, swing role guys, hunters and all manner of mixes. Merit haulers in Open can either chance luck, or be part of a team with escort top cover. Deliveries then become less certain because they are either delayed or destroyed. Currently long term sniping is difficult because now we have Powerplay reports in stations, forcing Powers to now adopt last minute snipes for prepping / UMing- if this was in an Open only context time in these last days / hours becomes incredibly precious, with any loss of merit hordes a major loss.

In Open PP you could not min/max; your ship would have to have some defensive capability that compromises your hauling.

You need to know how to escape.

You need to co-ordinate with others.

You need to know how to fight when needed.

In Solo PG, PP NPCs do not use any engineered weapons or have 3.3 levels of armour. With a tough enough shield you can absorb their fire and calmly move on. In Open people can reverb torpedo you, or lr phase your merit crammed lightly armoured ship. If NPCs did that on sight regardless then they'd be credible. Currently only ATR have such weapons (reverb lasers / LR pulses). I know how bad these sting as I use a max speed Clipper to BGS, and even at 5km they still hurt. Do that over and over and then the player has to alter how they approach the challenge.

P2P weaknesses aside, its only a matter of will from FD. Issues regarding blocking and logging can be resolved- you opt in, and (just as beta has labelled what each mode does) have one for Open PP that spells out what might happen. You will get shot at, and you can't block players for doing so because thats part of this feature.

Now you're just willfully ignoring the points made and how the game works.

"its only a matter of will from FD." No it's not, Frontier would need to redesign the whole game from the ground up to get the game play you just described.
Because right now, it was made for P2P / instancing / Multi platform. So there will always be players you cannot see or interact with directly.
Which means your "problem" cannot go away regardless of what Frontier do.

Here is the video on the tech used to bring the game: https://youtu.be/EvJPyjmfdz0

You've also ignored that forcing Open Mode isn't going to bring the droves of players some of you seem to think it will bring.

On PvP vs PvE
We listen to both sides. While it's true that the PvP crowd do tend to be more vocal and in previous betas have given more organised feedback, we're well aware that the majority of players don't get involved in PvP. A few changes here are more focused on one or the other (torpedoes have no real place in PvE at the moment for starters), but overall I think they promote variety of loadouts in both styles of play, and will make both more fun. On a personal note: I play more or less entirely in PvE, so if anything my bias in favour of that .

So all that will is happen is a lot of Solo and PG players will just abandon Power Play.
And I'm sure less overall players will make it a "better experience"

So factor in the way the game was designed, the way PP was made a PvE token game and player attitudes.
Open Only would break it if not outright kill Power Play.

It needs new PvP specific content adding for those who want to influence PP with PvP.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Now you're just willfully ignoring the points made and how the game works.

"its only a matter of will from FD." No it's not, Frontier would need to redesign the whole game from the ground up to get the game play you just described.
Because right now, it was made for P2P / instancing / Multi platform. So there will always be players you cannot see or interact with directly.
Which means your "problem" cannot go away regardless of what Frontier do.

Here is the video on the tech used to bring the game: https://youtu.be/EvJPyjmfdz0

You've also ignored that forcing Open Mode isn't going to bring the droves of players some of you seem to think it will bring.


So all that will is happen is a lot of Solo and PG players will just abandon Power Play.
And I'm sure less overall players will make it a "better experience"

So factor in the way the game was designed, the way PP was made a PvE token game and player attitudes.
Open Only would break it if not outright kill Power Play.

It needs new PvP specific content adding for those who want to influence PP with PvP.

It is a matter of will from FD- the block feature is misused continually, and in a mode that is gang warfare needs changing or amending. Crossplay is now a thing in other games- I've not heard yet from FD if this is an insurmountable hurdle for ED or if again its another matter of will to do it. P2P is a problem there is no denying it, but with more and more of the game relying on that infrastructure FD have to improve it for the whole game to go forward.

That gameplay I described is happening right now but needs Open Only to make it truly fly and PP to reach its potential beyond a re-dressed CG. Having 3 separate Open groups is better than having 9 multi modes pulling in different directions with 6 groups having a profound advantage.

So all that will is happen is a lot of Solo and PG players will just abandon Power Play.
And I'm sure less overall players will make it a "better experience"

This is speculation, until you do it you won't know. For all you know there is an equal amount of people who would fill any gap- the response to the flash topics and polls proves that. Until FD do it, we can't tell either way- you can level the same arguement with the engineering or explorer changes with just as many grumpy people storming off because something is different.

Since we are throwing about quotes, here is Sandro with a 2018 quote:

Reasoning: We’ve saved the biggest change for last, as making Powerplay Open only goes way beyond the remit of a tweak. We’ve seen this topic discussed many times and we think it’s time we addressed it directly to get as much quality feedback as possible.

Notice how Sandro uses we and not I. This suggests EDs design team as a whole know this is an issue, but are frankly too timid to pull the trigger (which is ironic considering some other choices they've made).

FD time and time again have hinted at changing mode balance in PP. Until they do PP will always be unbalanced, but if you go the weighted approach you might as well go Open only because you'd need 90%+ reduction to make it work. Keeping it as now simply breaks the game and is not an option.

Open Only would break it if not outright kill Power Play.

PP needs a kick up the backside, because it will die anyway as more and more players use exploits to compete. Its normal now to see 300,000 merit bombs drop- when PP was new 10,000 merits was seen as a mountain.

In Powerplay the merit rules, and fortifying is your shield. Since players move all merits, it stands to reason they should be the targets. Those turret boats hoarding 100,000 merits would not exist if the threat of a roving player was there, even if the chance was not 100%.

 

[Jockey79]

It is a matter of will from FD- the block feature is misused continually, and in a mode that is gang warfare needs changing or amending. Crossplay is now a thing in other games- I've not heard yet from FD if this is an insurmountable hurdle for ED or if again its another matter of will to do it. P2P is a problem there is no denying it, but with more and more of the game relying on that infrastructure FD have to improve it for the whole game to go forward.

That gameplay I described is happening right now but needs Open Only to make it truly fly and PP to reach its potential beyond a re-dressed CG. Having 3 separate Open groups is better than having 9 multi modes pulling in different directions with 6 groups having a profound advantage.

I have no doubt people use the block feature wrong. People bought a game with a selective mode system and complain because it has a selective mode system.
So it goes to show, no matter how you design a feature, some people just want to break it to upset others.

Crossplay doesn't even come into this, not even sure why you've brought it up. It's being tested in another game, not this one.
It has just as much chance of failing as succeeding. And with Elite, is a limited gamepad player going to want to face a HOTAS + VR + Voice Attack player?
But I'd rather discuss the immediate issues now, not dream about issues years away.

The game play you described may be happening now, because those who want it are playing it - that's the whole point with the game design.
You get to "play your way", but so does everyone else. Not everyone wants to play Power Play your way and they don't have to if they don't want to.
I know my friends and I don't want to. We like to kick back, chill and move our Pve tokens about with a beer, background music and a nice conversation.

This is speculation, until you do it you won't know. For all you know there is an equal amount of people who would fill any gap

Did you not read the quote by Mark Allen? The majority of players do not PvP.
So for every PvE'er that stops doing PP, there isn't a queue of PvP'ers to take their place. You will end up with less people overall.

- the response to the flash topics and polls proves that.

They prove nothing as I've said before.

Over 3.1 million copies sold, just over 100,000 people on the forums and around 1,000 people posted to those threads.
And the data would be skewed on top of that because as Mark said, PvP'ers are more vocal than PvE'ers.
And we've not covered that some folks have Alt forum accounts, throwing the numbers even more

So less than 0.01% of players isn't "proof" of anything.
You need a proper poll locked to the game launcher (or needing the account key) for real information gathering.

Since we are throwing about quotes, here is Sandro with a 2018 quote:



Notice how Sandro uses we and not I. This suggests EDs design team as a whole know this is an issue, but are frankly too timid to pull the trigger (which is ironic considering some other choices they've made).

Never heard of the Royal "We" then?
(Also called Editorial We)

At the time of writing this, there was only 1 member of Frontier who has publically come out in favour of Open Only content.
Other members of the team either say no (DBOBE, MB) or abstain from answering using the Royal We ("We" are / are not considering it).

Never thought I'd be giving English lessons online

As for Sandro quotes, I love how Open Only advocates ignore his "the majority of players play in Open, by a significant margin".
Which means you're advocating stealing content from the minority of the players.

FD time and time again have hinted at changing mode balance in PP. Until they do PP will always be unbalanced, but if you go the weighted approach you might as well go Open only because you'd beed 90%+ reduction to make it work. Keeping it as now simply breaks the game and is not an option.

Sandro has twice brought up the topic of Open Only for Power Play.
That is a far cry from "time and again".

If that's your measuring stick, lets count up how many time DBOBE and MB said no to Open Only content.
A lot more than "time and again", in fact I have a whole WoI dedicated to Frontier staff saying no to Open Only content.

PP needs a kick up the backside, because it will die anyway as more and more players use exploits to compete.

Fixing PP and fixing exploits are 2 different things.

PP just needs new content adding specific for PvP'ers (new mission types being added locked to open perhaps)

 

[Rubbernuke]

I have no doubt people use the block feature wrong. People bought a game with a selective mode system and complain because it has a selective mode system.
So it goes to show, no matter how you design a feature, some people just want to break it to upset others.

In PP its about killing players or shooting them, because its only players that move merits otherwise its a CG. If you can block someone because they shoot you in a mode about shooting you, thats plain illogical. 3.3 has a profanity filter, and if you wind up being racially abused or threatened in an out of game way, report it using the provided report feature.

Crossplay doesn't even come into this, not even sure why you've brought it up. It's being tested in another game, not this one.
It has just as much chance of failing as succeeding. And with Elite, is a limited gamepad player going to want to face a HOTAS + VR + Voice Attack player?
But I'd rather discuss the immediate issues now, not dream about issues years away.

You brought up the issue of having console and PC players not being able to interact as justification for not having Open only because they cannot 'see' each other.

The game play you described may be happening now, because those who want it are playing it - that's the whole point with the game design.
You get to "play your way", but so does everyone else. Not everyone wants to play Power Play your way and they don't have to if they don't want to.
I know my friends and I don't want to. We like to kick back, chill and move our Pve tokens about with a beer, background music and a nice conversation.

In a game about players doing everything, you have one group that sits AFK in PG all week and drops hundreds of thousands of merits with zero danger of interdiction or destruction. You have another that hoard merits in open and take the chance they might be killed, waste that time and lose the expansion. PP in this way is broken- P2P might render the chance of meeting another player to less than 100%, but then it means the chance of meeting one is still greater than 0% forcing you to adopt non min / max attitudes.

Did you not read the quote by Mark Allen? The majority of players do not PvP.
So for every PvE'er that stops doing PP, there isn't a queue of PvP'ers to take their place. You will end up with less people overall.
Over 3.1 million copies sold, just over 100,000 people on the forums and around 1,000 people posted to those threads.
And the data would be skewed on top of that because as Mark said, PvP'ers are more vocal than PvE'ers.
And we've not covered that some folks have Alt forum accounts, throwing the numbers even more

A quote from 2016? And about the game at large or PP itself? It would be helpful if FD said what percentage PP is played in, and what % of merits is delivered in what mode from each power.

So less than 0.01% of players isn't "proof" of anything.
You need a proper poll locked to the game launcher (or needing the account key) for real information gathering.

You do need a proper poll, but you first need to make the choice clear and first remove the things that don't work in the game.

Before any Open only poll FD need to move unique modules out of powers to stop module shoppers. You need to remove merit decay, hauling merit quotas and related irks. You have to enact the 5C changes. Only then will it be fair because you can see a clear choice.

Never heard of the Royal "We" then?
(Also called Editorial We)

At the time of writing this, there was only 1 member of Frontier who has publically come out in favour of Open Only content.
Other members of the team either say no (DBOBE, MB) or abstain from answering using the Royal We ("We" are / are not considering it).

Never thought I'd be giving English lessons online

FD have (see below) offered to evolve PP 4 times. This suggests that the ED team ('we' as in the ED team as an entity with Sandro being the interface between us (the players) and the team) don't see PP working.

As for Sandro quotes, I love how Open Only advocates ignore his "the majority of players play in Open, by a significant margin".
Which means you're advocating stealing content from the minority of the players.

What I'm advocating is that rather than homogenize identical gameplay across features, FD should embrace they are different and provide compelling choices and experiences. The BGS is perfect for Solo and PG, along with pure hauling CGs. Open suits competing CGs and PP.

Sandro has twice brought up the topic of Open Only for Power Play.
That is a far cry from "time and again".

Its 4 times. Every time Powerplay updates have been posted, they include mode rebalancing or changes. There was an earlier one (from 2016?) for weighting merits, there was one earlier this year that was not widely distributed, one Open only (flash topic I) and the other Weighted (Flash Topic II). Thats a lot of hinting. Not once have FD said they want it to stay the same.

If that's your measuring stick, lets count up how many time DBOBE and MB said no to Open Only content.
A lot more than "time and again", in fact I have a whole WoI dedicated to Frontier staff saying no to Open Only content.

Sadly I bet none of those people ever play Powerplay. Michael Brookes played for about 2 cycles supporting Archon and that was it. FD don't understand PP at all.

Fixing PP and fixing exploits are 2 different things.

The exploits are unbalancing PP and have a profound impact. Fix the exploits and the problems in PP stop.

PP just needs new content adding specific for PvP'ers (new mission types being added locked to open perhaps)

What, such as hunting players who hold the merits while others defend them? Thats content thats emergent and continually changing each and every day.

 

[bigity]

Really?

Player 1 is ferrying tokens for Faction A in Solo
Player 2 is ferrying tokens for Faction B in Solo

Player Vs Player via Solo.

Who will win, who lasts longest, who can ferry the most tokens, tune in Thursday to find out more.



Best idea I've seen yet.

Yes, really, but you already know that.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

Well this is just going nowhere fast.

They never do because there is no solution that would please all.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

They never do because there is no solution that would please all.

You know in all these discussion what I find quite odd?

You opted it as well, and I have been trying to promote it for ages, just because it's something that would make me as a pure PvE player take note of the PvP side of this game (as an observer and supporter mainly).

People favour an Open Only switch to mechanisms actually dedicated to, designed around and focused on PvP. For years I have heard the sentiment how the core mechanism of Powerplay is boring. And by flipping a switch, there's angel choirs descending from the heavens and emergent PvP gameplay will be rampant. Any issues raised with just flipping that switched are waved away with: it'll be fine! You'll see. And at first, I could see why. Players, me included, thought this was going to be a short term solution. No time to implement new mechanisms around PvP. But that has turned out to be not the case. In fact, it's not even sure whether it'll go through. I'd still like it to, because whoever is right in their predictions, it'll be a fun experiment. And I'd even hope it would be a success, I'm very skeptical though. But happy to be proven wrong.

But since the urgency now has left the building, I would rethink being happy with the scraps of a failed feature being given a last hail mary at the expense of PvP players. Because might this not work, the developers can go: hey, we gave you what you wanted. Or when players are pushing for PvP centric mechanisms: hey, we gave you Open Only Powerplay, and now you're asking for more?

If I were a PvPer, I'd not settle for less. I'd not settle for a PvE bucket filling boring mechanism being shoved my way as if that is what I'd consider emergent, challenging gameplay.

There's about 3 ideas I floated which I hoped would spark some discussion. I'm not a PvPer, so I'm rather humble in telling these guys what they like (which I'm still not doing, I'm imagining: if I were a PvPer), but the response to any PvP focussed mechanism has so far been very non existent.

Oh well .... maybe I'm just odd ... or completely devoid of any understanding of what makes a PvPer tick.

Here's hoping OOPP will arrive and it will be a great success.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

You know in all these discussion what I find quite odd?

You opted it as well, and I have been trying to promote it for ages, just because it's something that would make me as a pure PvE player take note of the PvP side of this game (as an observer and supporter mainly).

People favour an Open Only switch to mechanisms actually dedicated to, designed around and focused on PvP. For years I have heard the sentiment how the core mechanism of Powerplay is boring. And by flipping a switch, there's angel choirs descending from the heavens and emergent PvP gameplay will be rampant. Any issues raised with just flipping that switched are waved away with: it'll be fine! You'll see. And at first, I could see why. Players, me included, thought this was going to be a short term solution. No time to implement new mechanisms around PvP. But that has turned out to be not the case. In fact, it's not even sure whether it'll go through. I'd still like it to, because whoever is right in their predictions, it'll be a fun experiment. And I'd even hope it would be a success, I'm very skeptical though. But happy to be proven wrong.

But since the urgency now has left the building, I would rethink being happy with the scraps of a failed feature being given a last hail mary at the expense of PvP players. Because might this not work, the developers can go: hey, we gave you what you wanted. Or when players are pushing for PvP centric mechanisms: hey, we gave you Open Only Powerplay, and now you're asking for more?

If I were a PvPer, I'd not settle for less. I'd not settle for a PvE bucket filling boring mechanism being shoved my way as if that is what I'd consider emergent, challenging gameplay.

There's about 3 ideas I floated which I hoped would spark some discussion. I'm not a PvPer, so I'm rather humble in telling these guys what they like (which I'm still not doing, I'm imagining: if I were a PvPer), but the response to any PvP focussed mechanism has so far been very non existent.

Oh well .... maybe I'm just odd ... or completely devoid of any understanding of what makes a PvPer tick.

Here's hoping OOPP will arrive and it will be a great success.

Yeah, really strange that isn't it? Its almost as if the hardcore PvPers don't actually want a mechanic that revolves around PvP....

 

[Jockey79]

Yeah, really strange that isn't it? Its almost as if the hardcore PvPers don't actually want a mechanic that revolves around PvP....

*cough* CQC *cough*

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yeah, really strange that isn't it? Its almost as if the hardcore PvPers don't actually want a mechanic that revolves around PvP....

The PvP hub initiative led me to think there is a player base that would go for such a thing.

All I want is a little civil war of feds vs imps. The great thing about it, being federal or imperial already is a thing. Players have allegiance with these factions while 'hating' the other faction. Many could be rallied to fight a civil war. It would be combat focused gameplay primarily, with PvE playing second fiddle for supply lines or something similar.

*cough* CQC *cough*

That's so detached from life inside the game. To make that work it would need organised tournaments, which are reported about in game, and the ability to be a spectator in game.

Might have worked as a battle sim where you could test build of your actual ships.

 

[Havvk]

The PvP hub initiative led me to think there is a player base that would go for such a thing.

All I want is a little civil war of feds vs imps. The great thing about it, being federal or imperial already is a thing. Players have allegiance with these factions while 'hating' the other faction. Many could be rallied to fight a civil war. It would be combat focused gameplay primarily, with PvE playing second fiddle for supply lines or something similar.


That's so detached from life inside the game. To make that work it would need organised tournaments, which are reported about in game, and the ability to be a spectator in game.

Might have worked as a battle sim where you could test build of your actual ships.

But seeing as how it died in its first couple of days upon release, that should tell you a lot about how the community values PvP.


I'll give you a hint; and it doesn't involve stroking e-peens like this is some kind of overwatch in space

 

[Agony_Aunt]

The PvP hub initiative led me to think there is a player base that would go for such a thing.

Agreed. Unfortunately the stars of that particular show don't seem to be evident in calling for PP to be made a real PvP feature either.

 

[Mouse]

It's been a long day, sorry I didn't get to this earlier.

You may not be giving a thought to other players but you're effecting them non the less.

Regardless of what YOU are thinking and what YOU are attempting to do you're still effecting something that other players are doing.

Actually if you really think about it you are not affecting another player at all. You do something, what you affect the the BGS. Other players do something, it also affects the BGS. No matter the outcome what is affected in the BGS. Shooting, Trade, Exporation all of it affects the BGS and can possibly change things in a system through the BGS not through affecting other players no matter how you spin it.

It blows my mind that theres even an argument about all of this.

I agree it blows my mind as well... that people keep trying to force the game to be what it's not is confusing. Can you PVP yes, does it do anything to the PP and or BGS no.

If you're going into pg or solo to undermine what other players are doing it's just cheating. The game may allow it but your still using the system to undermine what other players have done.

That is like saying that anyone who goes into Open to undermine Systems that are controlled by known PVE groups is cheating. Sounds rather stupid doesn't it... well it does for what you said as well. Playing in Solo/PGs even if you are undermining in PP... is... not.... cheating. What can be done in solo/pg/open can be countered in solo/pg/open. All modes can counter the other modes... no cheating.

I k ow this thread is about powerplay but the same goes for bgs. Both should be open only in my opinion.

If you want Open Only then go play EVE... it is Open Only. If you bought Elite Dangerous thinking it would be like that I am sorry but you were sadly mistaken. Quite trying to take others playstyle away.

I think that's a very good point, and probably what power plays was conceived for when they realised that the BGS war mechanics groups were using weren't really up to snuff.

I do suspect that again, FDEVS limited experience with multiplayer (even with Sandro, the one who seemed to be PP's champion, this seemed to be the case, as until ED he'd only had one game with MP capability in his portfolio, the godawful Haze) is what stopped it being implemented in a way that would encourage its design purpose.

Good post Goose and I agree.