Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Presumably the heatmap would be related to hazardous player/player encounters and not just ships flying through untroubled?
Powerplay Powerplay Solo/Private Exploit Problem
- Thread starter EndangeredProdigy
- Start date
Well its a start. But still pretty exploitable with solo. Get forts. Go to system. Dock. Switch to open. Cash in.
How would this help with people using solo/pg
Because your freedom stops at my nose.
If I choose to directly interact with you, well, that's my choice.
If I choose to ignore you, then I have several game options that enable that choice.
Yeah sorry that logic applies both ways. So why should the person who who wants to oppose you be kept from doing so? People wanna play powerplay and oppose commanders actions directly, why should you be free to stop that? Because you dont want opposition? Well that works both wats too.
Simple solution seems that powerplay isnt for you then. Because powerplay is about direct competition amongst players. Whether that means playing keep away from other players trying to stop your delivery or anything else. Youre saying you wanna do multi player alone. And that makes no sense.
The heatmap would simply track player ships with weapons, so any threat is picked up- its like the trading heatmap. It would need to be weighted properly, but it would eliminate the 'but instancing' arguement. Admittedly it makes an abstraction of combat, but then having Open / PG Solo abstracts combat even further so its not really any different.
I see it as: as you plot courses each system has a threat level based on commanders in the heat map- so a Fed hauling forts via Cubeo you'd get a bonus because you are travelling through an area with a very high chance of interception. You could say its an exploit by going there, but you are risking real commanders at the same time.
Players in PG Solo would never encounter an enemy (and even then its convoluted with PG) so weighting would always be 0 (no bonus multiplier). In the Open Heatmap idea weighting from a heatmap would multiply values such as carried merits.
So an Open player who is taking more risks therefore gets a higher merit reward because he is risking more, and this system takes into account instancing. Solo / PG do not get the bonus as the threat is practically nil- this helps balance out modes so an Open player will be more effective than a Solo one.
I see it as: as you plot courses each system has a threat level based on commanders in the heat map- so a Fed hauling forts via Cubeo you'd get a bonus because you are travelling through an area with a very high chance of interception. You could say its an exploit by going there, but you are risking real commanders at the same time.
Players in PG Solo would never encounter an enemy (and even then its convoluted with PG) so weighting would always be 0 (no bonus multiplier). In the Open Heatmap idea weighting from a heatmap would multiply values such as carried merits.
So an Open player who is taking more risks therefore gets a higher merit reward because he is risking more, and this system takes into account instancing. Solo / PG do not get the bonus as the threat is practically nil- this helps balance out modes so an Open player will be more effective than a Solo one.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The simple answer? Frontier chose to make direct PvP completely optional in their game design when they published it over five years ago while, at the same time, designing the game around a single shared galaxy state that all players both experience and affect.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
That's rather a shift in emphasis from Sandro's musings - at that time the bonus was to the Power only, not the player.
Well the threat is material enough to the player, so the bonus should be for both really. A Cutter with 750 merits is worth a lot to the Power and the player.
Which i have no problem with until we look at powerplay and how that affects it.
Except that they all run the risk of being caught and killed at any time. Your argument is invalid. Last I checked, a spy can't hop modes to waltz into an empty base and steal intel or sabotage operations. It's not that you never see them, it's that they operate right in front of you without you being aware.
The heat map would attract trouble to those areas, so after a while they would both become the same anyway.
The well known 3rd party site www.inara.cz already has something like a heat map included guys!
For those of you who don't know. It's on the "galaxy tab" listes as "Security Report". It's not really a map rather a list. But it does it's job. It shows where cmdr vs cmdr kills have occured and is sorting them in order after kill count: high, medium and low threat with the systems alongside. So everyone can see which systems are dangerous.
The only downside, it only registers kills from cmdrs using "ED market connector" (another well known 3r part tool: link here) afaik.
If Frontier would implement something clean and easy like this in game, it would be awesome.
For those of you who don't know. It's on the "galaxy tab" listes as "Security Report". It's not really a map rather a list. But it does it's job. It shows where cmdr vs cmdr kills have occured and is sorting them in order after kill count: high, medium and low threat with the systems alongside. So everyone can see which systems are dangerous.
The only downside, it only registers kills from cmdrs using "ED market connector" (another well known 3r part tool: link here) afaik.
If Frontier would implement something clean and easy like this in game, it would be awesome.
Last edited:
I don't see anything that says 'security report'. I would really like to see this list, as it sounds like a great feature. But once again Inara drives me away by being difficult to navigate.
And yes, everyone should be using EDMC.
Thank you. I guess no one really uses EDMC, if there are that few murders being tracked right now.
Or.....the 'gweefas' are committing less 'murders' than people make it seem.
