Powerplay Powerplay Solo/Private Exploit Problem

[Rubbernuke]

For PvP kills, perhaps scaling the merits by the opponents ship engineering, powerplay notoriety level etc might make player kills better rewarding, since if you apply the same to NPCs the NPC has no engineering at all and no notoriety.

But how do you prove you have had a hostile encounter when transporting fort materials? Just like ramming its impossible to judge from numbers and telemetry what is intentional.

An idea might be marrying the heat map / shadow NPC killing; if you are working in open in a 'hot zone' you get more as the threat is quantifiably greater than a low travel zone.

Each jump could count as a multiplier so a one hop, low threat zone would net no bonus, but jumping 10 times through red hot Imperial hell nets you a big bonus. This would make distant fortifying more lucrative and attractive, with close in low effort systems netting you little.

 

[Memau]

That, I think, is the only way to move forward with this debate. The big issue to address is how to reward CMDRs who survive hostile encounters, how to monitor for collusion, and whether some collusion has a purpose. Personal rewards for surviving hostile encounters make sense, that way abuse and exploitation of the mechanic doesn't give the entire Power a boost, but simply the CMDR.

I remember when FDev killed off collusion piracy, and the fact that they didn't stop preparation sabotage at the same time negated the benefits that Consolidation brought against combating preparation sabotage by a fifth column.

While improvements were made, we are still saddled with the enduring issue of preparation sabotage being the most efficient way to destroy a Power.

Under such a system how do you define such an encounter: another player in your instance, hostile pledged player in your instance assuming no false flagging and all enemy pledges are hostile and not in fact friends, having to divert to another system to evade players, being interdicted, them dropping on your low wake, firing on you, making you drop cargo or destroying your ship? Such a system that rewards players just for surviving/avoiding these encounter would then hugely benefit 5C by allowing them to amplify their impact through pretend hostile encounters or through opposition by organised communities and their allies in other Powers (yes there is politics in the PowerPlay communities beyond what is displayed in game).

How many times can you log to menu to return to the same hostile encounter and further increases your bonus? Such a mechanism seems ridiculously complex to define, calculate and is open to abuse when compared to a blanket bonus for open which benefits the coordinated action of players in open. A blanket open bonus would actually reduce the impact of 5C where it is done in solo/private group and if it is done in open, Power is not penalised for taking action.

A bonus for encountering X if A, B or C is true but not if D and E or F are true in system G, H but not system I seems an unnecessarily complicated solution with a significant risk of abuse. So a bonus simply for conducting activities in open might not be perfect, but has less scope for abuse without in game consequences. It's not the final solution as there are still issues such as blocking player etc that would need addressing, but it would be an enormous step. I hope Fdev take all these points from everyone in this discussion on board and I hope that one day they will implement some or all of the changes the communities have long hoped for. Despite all that it's been amazing o7

 

[Rubbernuke]

Under such a system how do you define such an encounter: another player in your instance, hostile pledged player in your instance assuming no false flagging and all enemy pledges are hostile and not in fact friends, having to divert to another system to evade players, being interdicted, them dropping on your low wake, firing on you, making you drop cargo or destroying your ship? Such a system that rewards players just for surviving/avoiding these encounter would then hugely benefit 5C by allowing them to amplify their impact through pretend hostile encounters or through opposition by organised communities and their allies in other Powers (yes there is politics in the PowerPlay communities beyond what is displayed in game).

How many times can you log to menu to return to the same hostile encounter and further increases your bonus? Such a mechanism seems ridiculously complex to define, calculate and is open to abuse when compared to a blanket bonus for open which benefits the coordinated action of players in open. A blanket open bonus would actually reduce the impact of 5C where it is done in solo/private group and if it is done in open, Power is not penalised for taking action.

A bonus for encountering X if A, B or C is true but not if D and E or F are true in system G, H but not system I seems an unnecessarily complicated solution with a significant risk of abuse. So a bonus simply for conducting activities in open might not be perfect, but has less scope for abuse without in game consequences. It's not the final solution as there are still issues such as blocking player etc that would need addressing, but it would be an enormous step. I hope Fdev take all these points from everyone in this discussion on board and I hope that one day they will implement some or all of the changes the communities have long hoped for. Despite all that it's been amazing o7

For direct PvP you could only do it directly between hostile commanders, and that on death the 'worth' of a kill is calculated by ship size, module capability, held merits etc.

For fortifying, I'd envisage you plotting a course and the game calculates (based on current system activity that is hostile, the amount of fort materials) a value based on these variables.

In this way it would reward playing in open as it takes into account seen and unseen potential enemy threats, as well as the value of what you kill. It is also a 'one rule to rule them all' in that you can apply it universally between modes and it scales accordingly. Lastly it also takes into account matchmaking, as its the activity in other instances that builds the background data.

 

[aspiringexpatriate]

(yes there is politics in the PowerPlay communities beyond what is displayed in game).

Really? Are you sure? I had no idea!

---

Of course it's ridiculously complex to define and attempt to restrict exploits. That's what we paid money for FDev to figure out. They could simply define menu logging or disconnections under 'unrewarded behaviour' or not reward hostile encounters between CMDRs on your friends list (sorry, PvP Bros) unless the encounter ends in ship destruction, or any number of other criteria.

We can throw out suggestions all we want, but to throw up our hands and say 'impossible' might as well be giving up the ghost entirely, as so many power players have done already. FDev have the data, they have the logging, they make the rules. It's not impossible, it simply currently takes too much developer time for minimal reward in their eyes.

 

[ever]

hahaha
hahah
ha
ahhh.....

every three months or so there is a new thread about this, I created myself one about 2 years ago. nothing happens and nothing will happen. for consolation: PP activity is irrelevant anyways.... play for fun

 

[vanya234]

Yeah this particular issue with powerplay is the main reason I haven't logged into the game in a long time. It's really frustrating to see your powerplay efforts nullified by players in solo. The argument that you could compete with those players passively by hauling/undermining more than they are makes for a pretty bland experience in my opinion and significantly adds to the grindy criticisms associated with Elite.

I think powerplay has the potential to be a great end game activity but it's hindered by the solo/open issue and this debate has obviously been going on for a long time. I understand that some players don't want to be forced into PvP and that's cool. But the inverse to that point is, if you don't want to do PvP, what is the draw of powerplay for you in the first place? There are myriads of ways to make money that are a lot better than the powerplay salary you get.

I just wish there was more player interaction in powerplay with those you're competing against and, having spent a lot of time participating in powerplay, there is virtually none.

 

[vanya234]

Actually PP is fun regardless of the direct PvP, that you can not see how others might find it fun/interesting reflects only your own bias towards PvP.
PP is a token moving contest, it provides an option for direct PvP for those that want to engage in that action, but it also offers the PvE players their own fun.
PP should not be restricted to one mode.
Its not about credits/modules for some players. For others those two items are everything, it allows all types to enjoy the game.

Well if that's the case, then it seems to me that there is a severe lack of balance for those who do powerplay in open versus those in solo. For example, if a player in solo is saving up their merits and then handing them in right before the cycle tick, there is no way for a player doing powerplay in open to counter that. If that same player were saving up their merits in the same way in open, there would at least be a chance for those in the opposing faction to engage that player and prevent them from doing that (i.e., a blockade at the nearest control system).

My point is that powerplay is designed in a way that severely hinders people wishing to play in open while providing a significant advantage to those in solo. Players engaging in indirect pvp in solo have no one to counter their actions. It seems to me that some sort of change should be implemented to accommodate those in open who are involved in powerplay. At its core, powerplay is a competitive activity. In open, you are effectively competing against an invisible opponent.

 

[Robert Maynard]

In Solo one is competing against invisible opponents too.

.... and the whole game is written around unavoidable indirect PvP with completely optional direct PvP - it's up to each player whether they choose to engage in direct PvP.

 

[vanya234]

In Solo one is competing against invisible opponents too.

.... and the whole game is written around unavoidable indirect PvP with completely optional direct PvP - it's up to each player whether they choose to engage in direct PvP.

In Solo, one is by definition alone obviously. That person is ok with having invisible opponents in open. In Open, one would assume that there would be opportunities to use tactics and strategy to engage the opposing faction directly rather than merely trying to out-haul or out-undermine each other. But this opportunity doesn't exist even though it could be implemented with some sort of adjustment to how merits are counted in open. Powerplay is like this feature that is billed as competitive in all senses of the word but it's really just who can haul more stuff and spend more time hauling.

Obviously, this is how the game was designed and I doubt it will ever change. I just find it odd that nothing is being done to give open players some sort of incentive to keep participating in powerplay.

 

[Robert Maynard]

There was a brief period, two years ago, when Sandro mused on the forums about an Open play bonus for PowerPlay (for the Power only, not for player rewards, and not the BGS either). When asked, nine months later, whether it was happening he said that it was not and there were no plans to do so (although the way it was phrased seemed to be careful to not say it was completely ruled out). It was contentious then - which is possibly why it was not done (although it might have been lack of Dev time - as it has been said that, as PowerPlay is not the most popular game feature, it's difficult to prioritise Developer time to changing it).

This is indeed the way that PowerPlay was implemented, approaching three years ago, and every player who bought the base game has it as part of their feature set, regardless of their chosen game mode.

 

[vanya234]

I find it odd that some open players feel they deserve an incentive to play in open. PP has always been a token moving contest. The idea of using merits in regards to PvP kills was discarded because of the ease with which it could be exploited. Any incentive to open would have to be based around actual resistance be encountered, not just clicking an option on the menu.

Open is its own reward in and of itself, if you feel cheated by your choice to play in open, then choose a different mode. If you do enjoy open and it is more enjoyable than the other modes why do you need more incentive?

Perhaps Im just daft but I dont see the need.

I find it odd that you don't see this from an open player's perspective. Open being a reward in and of itself does not address the point in terms of the mechanics of powerplay.

You keep referencing this token moving contest phrase but I do not remember powerplay ever being billed as that. It came out as a competitive part of the game that sounded like you could engage in wars with other factions, set up blockades, etc, etc. Once certain players started hauling or undermining in solo, there was nothing to compete over anymore. If playing in open inherently suggests that other players are going to be there, why have a supposedly competitive feature of the game be an essentially non competitive solo affair? (aside from the hauling race).

Powerplay is obviously not what I thought it was. I think that the nature of the powerplay feature in open should be inherently 'open' in all senses. Be that with a merit bonus or however the developers see fit to make powerplay in open mean something in terms of competition between players. ​

 

[vanya234]

There was a brief period, two years ago, when Sandro mused on the forums about an Open play bonus for PowerPlay (for the Power only, not for player rewards, and not the BGS either). When asked, nine months later, whether it was happening he said that it was not and there were no plans to do so (although the way it was phrased seemed to be careful to not say it was completely ruled out). It was contentious then - which is possibly why it was not done (although it might have been lack of Dev time - as it has been said that, as PowerPlay is not the most popular game feature, it's difficult to prioritise Developer time to changing it).

This is indeed the way that PowerPlay was implemented, approaching three years ago, and every player who bought the base game has it as part of their feature set, regardless of their chosen game mode.

Yeah that's true. I really doubt they'll dedicate any resources to it at this point. I just always figured that if there was more of a 'danger' element to powerplay, that would attract more people to participate in the warring and blockades and so on. Maybe if the rebuy cost was decreased but that's another debate.

edit: *any resources to it

 

[vanya234]

You see I do play in open. I even do PP in open. However PP has always only had fortify/undermine as the actions that push the sliders.

PP offers (now and then) the option to engage in PvP for a specific reason, it was never made to be the way to swing a power. The instancing alone removes the ability to stop every player (probably not even a majority) who is working against your chosen power.
Direct PvP remains (and always has been) an option for those that find it enjoyable and as with everything else FDev made it possible for everyone to avoid that direct PvP if they so choose.
Some people find PvP fun and engage in it and PP offers that. Others do not enjoy PvP but do have fun working for their power with PvE and PP allows for that as well.

Its not a one or nothing option. Why you want to make it as such is beyond me.

Do you think more people would play in open? I doubt it.

Sure fortify and undermine are the only actions that push the sliders but those actions are being carried out by people. The third possible action should be, if one is in open, to directly confront the opposing player doing the fortifying/undermining or have some mechanic that makes up for the lack of a counter. If you want to avoid PvP that's totally cool but it doesn't seem fair that you get to avoid the risk of PvP in solo powerplay and rack merits effortlessly while those in open are trying to figure out what those in solo are doing and where to haul or undermine next. The PvP option for powerplay is not truly 'there' because there's no one to PvP with.

In my personal experience, instancing is not that big of an issue. Sure, you won't see some players sometimes but I have had some really fun moments trying to run a blockade or hunting for underminers in a contested system so it works for the most part. You can definitely swing a system one way or the other if you can see who's doing the undermining in that system.

I'm not suggesting an all or nothing, no powerplay for solo players situation. What I would like to see is some sort of opportunity for open players to stop the undermining/fortifying they can't see because it's going on in solo. This could be a penalty for holding onto merits until cycle tick, merit bonuses, a real time counter for merits submitted, etc, etc, there's been a lot of ideas in this thread. Not penalize the players in solo but even out the situation for those that choose the PvP powerplay option.

Anyways, I think more people would play powerplay if the devs let some emergent content type situations happen more often with wars and whatnot and then advertised it because I think it would be pretty cool. Will it happen probably not.

 

[vanya234]

I dont buy the danger aspect bring more people to PP. The ones that dont want to engage in PvP (direct) certainly would not find it more fun. Blockades are bound to fail with the blocking mechanism and the instancing aspects of the game. Mini blockades for sure but actual effective blockades not under the current peer 2 peer system.

The idea of reduced rebuys has been floated more than once and for some reason some of the hard core (vocal) PvP types shout it down every time. I think it would actually be a great idea might even bring more people out to play direct PvP not all of them but maybe some.

Not sure what the blocking mechanism is sorry it's been a long while since I've played. I mean blockade in terms of patrolling a system for fortifiers/underminers.

Yep I think if they reduced rebuy costs, more people would come into open to do powerplay. I just think there's so much potential for some unique player to player experiences if a few things were tweaked in powerplay and I think there's a lot of fun to be had there.

 

[PierceSG]

Most players are doing PP just for the stupid Powerplay-only modules.

Make them available without the need to participate in Powerplay, and you'll see a massive drop in the participants. (I would love to see that happen as I can't be to go work on any of the PP faction.)

Any ideas on forcing players into Open only will not work. Players will either find other methods to avoid other players via out-of-game methods, or just drop Powerplay. The rewards are too low for the amount of time you have to sink into. If you are doing prep/fort, then you will have to sink more credits than the PP will reward you with.

Players hauling for merits have a lot to lose (if they pay for more cargo to haul) versus the players that will interdict and shoot them.

They will also waste more time and effort in a hot/popular system while playing in Open for no discernable rewards vs doing it in PG/solo.

Players doing undermining in Open are also doing it for no discernable rewards vs doing it in solo/PG (except for the thrill in playing against a real human behind the controls). Fittings for anti-NPC is different, and also much more lenient versus fitting for anti-player that can still do anti-NPC efficiently. (E.g. Lasers versus ammo-based weaponry. Bi-weaves versus Prismatic with SCBs. Hull-tank vs shield-tank. Time before RTB for anti-NPC builds in comparison to anti-player builds.)

Open is its own reward for players craving the player with player interaction, and should only be played together by like-minded players. Players should not try to hamstring the gaming experience for players that prefer to play in solo/PG.

I did think of suggestions to incentivice players to participate in Open play, but it will probably be a waste of effort.

Having a bonus that matters will only cause more displeasure from the Solo/PG crowd. It will also lead to more exploits that will make the Open enviroment to be as devoid of players as Solo (block list, network configurations, bandwidth throttling, etc), which makes it pointless to limit the reward to Open only. And if the bonus is so small that it doesn't do enough, solo/PG players will stick to solo/PG.

And in the end, what makes players (most, not all) avoid Open (or just straight up PvP) is the hard grind for credits.

Seeing how FDev goes about nerfing credit mills, and the cost of ships (and their A rated modules) that are medium-sized and above, it is not hard to see why players are so risk-adverse.

Say, a A-rated Vulture will probably cost around 20-24m? That will be around 500k re-buy? Looks like a small sum of credits, but for players who do not know how to earn credits via non-combat means, it will be a grind. Don't even mention ships like the Fer De Lance, or Federal Assault Ship, or the Alliance Chieftain.

Fun to fly in, but a pain in the when you lose it.

And even if you know the way to grind credits via non-combat method, doing it in Open will risk not only your non-combat ship, but also your mission objective. Which upon failing because you died, will cause your reputation with the factions to drop. Which will also means you lose the access to the better paying missions, and have to waste more time to gain the rep back, which again if done in Open will be a risk to lose even more. Not to mention that you have to pay for the loss of cargo too if you are doing hauling missions. (Do you see where I'm going?)

Open is a novel idea, but implemented in a wrong way. Right now, it doesn't do enough to protect players who do not want to participate in non-consensual PvP activities.

 

[Goose4291]

In Solo one is competing against invisible opponents too.

.... and the whole game is written around unavoidable indirect PvP with completely optional direct PvP - it's up to each player whether they choose to engage in direct PvP.

Square peg round hole argument, as invisible opponents dont have any opportunity to incinerate your cutter carrying 792t of merits, which is what Vanya234 was talking about.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Square peg round hole argument, as invisible opponents dont have any opportunity to incinerate your cutter carrying 792t of merits, which is what Vanya234 was talking about.

Indeed not - bearing in mind that direct PvP is entirely optional in this game, in PowerPlay too - as it's been consciously implemented in all three game modes. Other players are an optional extra in this game.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

Indeed not - bearing in mind that direct PvP is entirely optional in this game, in PowerPlay too - as it's been consciously implemented in all three game modes. Other players are an optional extra in this game.

And thats one of the biggest flaws with powerplay. It should not be equally effective in all game modes. The entire point of it is to pit players against each other. Allowing powerplay to take place in solo and pg undermines the point of powerplay.

 

[Rob At Work]

And thats one of the biggest flaws with powerplay. It should not be equally effective in all game modes. The entire point of it is to pit players against each other. Allowing powerplay to take place in solo and pg undermines the point of powerplay.

I think your view is a bit narrow TBH. In warfare political or otherwise, opponents use every means possible to get the upper hand some are overt and some are covert and may never be discovered. It isn't always obvious and in your face like a boxing ring.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

I think your view is a bit narrow TBH. In warfare political or otherwise, opponents use every means possible to get the upper hand some are overt and some are covert and may never be discovered. It isn't always obvious and in your face like a boxing ring.

Totally agree on yout last sentence. But covert would mean like using fast uncatchable ships and/or silent running or some other means of being undetected or evasion rather than just "lol different game mode and im untouchable"