Powerplay PP Proposal: revisit influence changes according to game mode

[StiTch]

Inspired by a post I made in another thread, it's everyone's favourite topic: the difference between Open and PG/Solo! Don't y'all love me <3

Okay so srs bsns time: I have a reputation for being spicy but if this thread takes on any conversation I will make it clear I'm dropping all pretense of said spiciness and would appreciate the same courtesy in return. This is an honest and unbiased proposal. Any mob mentality or dragging the conversation to outright Open/solo arguments, or worse PvP/PvE arguments, and I'll request those posts are removed. I see this as a worthy topic and am passionate enough about this to request open, straight conversation here.

Previously there have been proposals that PG/Solo work shouldn't influence the PP BGS. That's not this discussion. I am strictly advocating changes that don't affect the CMDR's personal reward, and don't actually change the base mechanics, so that all players may still contribute.


The proposal, in simple: players working in PG/Solo receive merits that give the CMDR the same personal reward/progression with power, but in terms of power progression, have reduced influence.

This results in - among others - more dynamic gameplay, more interesting team play, stronger role playing, and the potential de-stagnation of power competition.


FD's stance thus far - undecided (thanks for this quote, Rob):
Sandro Sammarco, Live Stream 6th December 2016
"I was musing out loud about potentially Open Play Powerplay having some benefit to success over and above Private Groups and Solo - I just want to reiterate that was just me musing, we're not going to do that at the moment, there are no plans to do it, but it is still an interesting thought, nothing's ever completely off the table but nothing to announce at the moment."


The explanation (complete with anecdote): I would argue that all PP has done is remove from the game experience, not add to it. At least before PP the bounties weren't so localised that they became irrelevant; now CP is in part drastically required because there's no consequence the moment you do a single hyperspace jump.

But PP itself hasn't actually brought anything to the game to justify that. Take a moment to look at what the mechanics naturally support. A lot of the methods of supporting a power are conflict based - not just in pew-pew terms, but in that they are meant to be competitive.

In the current climate that competition is too easily enacted through a PvE grind. Consequently those that wish to actually support their power do so via a PvE grind. But does the game really, really need more of that? Where is the difference between fighting in an expansion conflict zone, and fighting in a normal conflict zone, other than that one gives you direct credits and another gives you power merits?

Well I can tell you what the difference should be. Playing in Open in my iCutter, in the only available CZ system for an expansion, I had one chap in opposing power come to stop me and fail. He was doing sweeps of the CZs for CMDRs from my power to halt. But after I rekt him (enjoyable fight) he came back with a wing (and not the kind soft enough to best in a 1-on-3 when they all had feedback rails), shooed me off, and after which they all continued to patrol the system.

I could have jumped in PG and farmed BAU. But I didn't because that there is the difference between PP and a standard CZ; there is supposed to be a concerted effort to compete for a system, and it only gains flavour and dynamics when that competition meets head on.

So instead I jumped in my iCourier, ran between the several CZs there, and if the patrol were to jump in I'd harass them before leaving for a new site. So already, PP has taken on flavour in three potential ways; to support my power I have to compete with others, it encourages team playing, and I am in a small ship I didn't intend to be in so I can zip between sites to fight and harass-instead of sitting in my iCutter butchering NPCs by holding the trigger and moving a bit. Basically I went from mindless farming...to roleplaying.


The condition: This has to absolutely not affect solo/PG rewards for the CMDR itself. the only thing that would change is how much they progress the power. The beauty of this being that consequently PvE guys get to fill their boots still and support their power, but anyone up for PvP or intense power progression instantly gains more meaningful gameplay. And isn't PvPers having something to do what both sides of the community want? There's no good telling them to stop pew-pewing everyone and making players content if players refuse to actually give them any content to do, on the basis it hurts some sense of being entitled to absolutely everything.

...

Go.

 

[Schlack]

Previously there have been proposals that PG/Solo work shouldn't influence the PP BGS. That's not this discussion. I am strictly advocating changes that don't affect the CMDR's personal reward.

I don't powerplay now except in emergencies but when I did I was spending money rather than making it. I and many others care little for personal rewards. It was the power progression that was the incentive for action.

The same open/solo arguments also apply to this suggestion.

Any particular benefit to open punishes those with poor internet connections (I had one until fairly recently).
As well as PG and solo there are now 2 console platforms these cmdrs will never meet.
PP and BGS are 24 hour activities, players from different continents will rarely meet.
Time spent in system for delivering PP grind tokens is minimal - meaning meetings are rare for delivery elements.
Space is gorram big, cmdrs will rarely meet anyway as the area of operations are so diverse.
Even in open there are different instances

Powerplay is fundamentally designed as a PvP via PvE. What is suggested here will not actually do much to change the rarity of PvP opportunities. The personal vs power rewards is still discriminatory. The fundamental game architecture is that CMDRS meeting is relatively rare.

 

[StiTch]

I don't powerplay now except in emergencies

Powerplay is fundamentally designed as a PvP via PvE. What is suggested here will not actually do much to change the rarity of PvP opportunities. The personal vs power rewards is still discriminatory. The fundamental game architecture is that CMDRS meeting is relatively rare.

I think if you did PP regularly you would have a different view on this.

This comes in two sorta forms depending how you want to support your power. When doing the more menial tasks such as leaflet delivery, you can expect minimal obstacles, even in Open. And that's kinda how it should be; relatively uninterrupted, but if someone DOES want to shoot the messenger, go for it. It's just rare.

However fights for expansion systems are different - please see my little anecdote. For the record that expansion system was patrolled by the same opposing guys over at least a couple of days. There was just the one to expand to, and in that one, there was Open opposition.

One can reasonable expect then that in this kind of activity, there will be regular opposition, and that's how it should be - fighting over a system. So it exists, even within Open alone, the ability to choose a more peaceful contribution, or a more competition based on.

 

[Schlack]

I think if you did PP regularly you would have a different view on this.

Been there, done that, retained my view. There are fundamental game design, platform and timezone obstacles to PvP in powerplay (and BGS) as stated above. This suggestion doesn't incentivize anything, it just punishes those that don't play in open.

 

[Schlack]

Thinking about it a bit more there may be a way for FD to structure PvP into powerplay by utilizing the CQC/multicrew mechanics. Something along the lines of:

Go to station X
Sign up for PP "Battle" for expansion to system Y.
Other players sign up on either side until there are sufficient players
Battles are waged at CQC assets
Battleships deploy at location and CMDRS fight in SLFs deployed from the capitalships to earn merits via PvP

 

[StiTch]

Thinking about it a bit more there may be a way for FD to structure PvP into powerplay by utilizing the CQC/multicrew mechanics. Something along the lines of:

Go to station X
Sign up for PP "Battle" for expansion to system Y.
Other players sign up on either side until there are sufficient players
Battles are waged at CQC assets
Battleships deploy at location and CMDRS fight in SLFs deployed from the capitalships to earn merits via PvP

To be clear, I am not interested in creating a brand new set of mechanics that's PvP exclusive.

And wouldn't dedicated PvP mechanics be seen as even more punishing to solo players?

But really though - "punishing" to solo/PG players? I made it clear this would not affect their personal gain. Same credit intake. Same ability to buy modules. ALL that changes is how hard the power progresses. You can still support them, and still support them from Open in less aggressive tasks.

Why so scared of such a tiny, basically superficial change to PG/solo play in PP, if it fixes so much elsewhere? Is there seriously some internal concern about any content at all giving a nod to Open play?

 

[goemon]

i always tought that the basic concept of powerplay was to give reason for competitive player vs. player or player with players vs. other players gameplay (not necessarily combat). great story you shared. i think, powerplay should give incentives to have something like that happening more often.

but I'm somehow missing out a suggestion how to do so in your post?

 

[StiTch]

but I'm somehow missing out a suggestion how to do so in your post?

Well the main crux of this suggestion is simply to progress the power more. Specifically howthis is achieved would better be answered by FD if it were ever implemented; I don't have the technical answers. I just wanted to make it clear that personal rewards remain consistent between game modes. I've done a fair bit of PP and come greatly to grips with the practical side, and have less knowledge of the BGS side...

You're absolutely right that on some level, PP is about competitive play; as such that's why I would personally like the difference to be in that power competition. There are lots of PvE activities where we can talk about differing personal awards. Support ALD, and want her to do well? Take to Open and barricade the expansion system or something. Players then can drop into PG, where they can evade harm, but they would do so being able to make less direct contribution to the power than if they had to find a way to counter the opposition in Open.

I would personally be more than happy to provide even stronger incentives, but anything that's particularly pro-open will be met with vehement opposition before anyone's even listened to the proposition.

 

[Sneake Llama]

I don't powerplay now except in emergencies but when I did I was spending money rather than making it. I and many others care little for personal rewards. It was the power progression that was the incentive for action.

The same open/solo arguments also apply to this suggestion.

Any particular benefit to open punishes those with poor internet connections (I had one until fairly recently).
As well as PG and solo there are now 2 console platforms these cmdrs will never meet.
PP and BGS are 24 hour activities, players from different continents will rarely meet.
Time spent in system for delivering PP grind tokens is minimal - meaning meetings are rare for delivery elements.
Space is gorram big, cmdrs will rarely meet anyway as the area of operations are so diverse.
Even in open there are different instances

Powerplay is fundamentally designed as a PvP via PvE. What is suggested here will not actually do much to change the rarity of PvP opportunities. The personal vs power rewards is still discriminatory. The fundamental game architecture is that CMDRS meeting is relatively rare.

Alot of people say this but I don't understand this. I run into friendly and unfriendly pilots ALL THE TIME when I am doing power play activities. 1 pilots experience doesn't equal another pilot's experience I guess. But it really irritates me when someone claims this, because then I want to shout that you are giving the wrong impression. Entire groups organize campaigns for certain systems and there is constant confilct.


As to the OP, it just makes sense. It reminds me of those games where if you played competitive matches against NPCs (like racing for example) your rewards were never as good as if you raced against another human. I think the same thing applies to Power Play.

 

[Nanoliz]

What people often like to forget, is that as it is, Powerplay punishes people playing in Open. Take out your big ship in an expansion or while Undermining on Solo or Private. You can sit in the system for the whole cycle without fearing anything, no way your merits will get crushed by NPCs.

Now try to work with a highly opposed Power and go try to expand in Open. At any moment, a PvP squad can come and destroy you. That same PvP squad that will then go and oppose you in Solo, free of everything.

If risking everything, as it should be in Powerplay (remember, it's Power controlled by people to battle other Power controlled by other people), isn't beneficial, why do so? Why not play the entire game 24/7 in Solo and be done with it?

How in the world is someone playing risk-free should have the same influence as someone who has to constently watch his 6? Well, in Powerplay that is. I think BGS as a whole should have the same influence no matter the mode, except maybe for the combat conflicts. You should be able to oppose other players in conflict zones. Just like i should be able to oppose a Power trying to expand in my territory.

Excuses are what then make an entire Power to play in private, enjoying working risk-free, while never hesitating to go in Open with PvP ships to hunt down the ones that actually risk something.

 

[Sneake Llama]

Been there, done that, retained my view. There are fundamental game design, platform and timezone obstacles to PvP in powerplay (and BGS) as stated above. This suggestion doesn't incentivize anything, it just punishes those that don't play in open.

i don't see how it punishes when they can earn the 10,000 merits they need to get to Rank 5 the same exact way (albeit easier) in solo play. The only difference is that their influence or percentage yield toward their respective system triggers for undermining/fortifying are less effective than open. That seems fair. That influence loss has no direct "punishment" on their personal ship or person. They can still easily earn merits and make their way to that Rank 5 50mil salary.

 

[goemon]

Well the main crux of this suggestion is simply to progress the power more. Specifically howthis is achieved would better be answered by FD if it were ever implemented; I don't have the technical answers. I just wanted to make it clear that personal rewards remain consistent between game modes. I've done a fair bit of PP and come greatly to grips with the practical side, and have less knowledge of the BGS side...

You're absolutely right that on some level, PP is about competitive play; as such that's why I would personally like the difference to be in that power competition. Support ALD, and want her to do well? Take to Open and barricade the expansion system or something. Players then can drop into PG, where they can evade harm, but they would do so being able to make less direct contribution to the power than if they had to find a way to counter the opposition in Open.

I would personally be more than happy to provide even stronger incentives, but anything that's particularly pro-open will be met with vehement opposition before anyone's even listened to the proposition.

i see

of course, there is the problem of gaming the (any) system ... people switching to solo, and back to open to deliver their powerplay commodities etc.

but that aside, i think the idea of actions in open having more effect for the power, while giving the same "single player" rewards to players in all modes is generally good idea. make it a modifier, so people like me who are forced to play solo in between for connection reasons ( tethering via 64 kb/s for work reasons regularly) can still contribute ...

isn't that basically the thing sandro was thinking about back then?

anyway, your story is a good reason to bring it back on the table, as i think most players would love to experience such stories if they choose to play powerplay for a power (not for a module).

 

[Schlack]

But really though - "punishing" to solo/PG players? I made it clear this would not affect their personal gain. Same credit intake. Same ability to buy modules. ALL that changes is how hard the power progresses. You can still support them, and still support them from Open in less aggressive tasks.

Having solo/pg players efforts count less essentially makes them second class PP citizens. It does not incentivize open play, it punishes solo/pg play. This suggestion would be taking an existing benefit and reducing it. The blow might be softened on a credit basis but who the hell plays PP long term and seriously for credits/modules other than the damn credit grinders undermining 10,000%.

It also makes absolutely no sense in the context of a galaxy shared across PC, XBOX and PS with no cross platform play, different timezones, instancing and the scale of the area of operations. CMDRS will rarely meet in a PP context no matter what mechanisms are put in place. Its not that I'm against such, I just recognise the realities and restrictions of the game design.

 

[Sneake Llama]

Thinking about it a bit more there may be a way for FD to structure PvP into powerplay by utilizing the CQC/multicrew mechanics. Something along the lines of:

Go to station X
Sign up for PP "Battle" for expansion to system Y.
Other players sign up on either side until there are sufficient players
Battles are waged at CQC assets
Battleships deploy at location and CMDRS fight in SLFs deployed from the capitalships to earn merits via PvP

I actually really like this idea. Though maybe this could be an "add-on" instead of a replacement. CMDRs engineer their ships specifically for PP PvP so I wouldn't take that away from them. But I really like this idea.

 

[StiTch]

i see

of course, there is the problem of gaming the (any) system ... people switching to solo, and back to open to deliver their powerplay commodities etc.

..

anyway, your story is a good reason to bring it back on the table, as i think most players would love to experience such stories if they coose to play powerplay for a power (not for a module).

Thanks for your support It'd be nice to see PP get the roleplaying and emergent gameplay it deserves.

As abuse goes, I can see one ugly yet elegant solution - simple have two different types of merits. Merits earned in Open have a slightly different name, and then it's not about where you turn them in, but where you earn them.

Having solo/pg players efforts count less essentially makes them second class PP citizens.

I can't take such hyperbole seriously.

But on the topic, what could possibly make a particular crowd feel any more like second class citizens than saying that any special content they want must be relegated to a ridiculous out-of-game brawl that runs poorly and doesn't use their actual ships? Or pretending to have a heart attack every time content giving a nod to them is mentioned?

I'm trying to be non-incendiary for once, but the selfishness I've seen here and in another post is unreal. Multiple complaints that PvPers use others for their content and yet multiple complaints when actually giving them some content is suggested. What's it to be...?

 

[Sneake Llama]

Thanks for your support It'd be nice to see PP get the roleplaying and emergent gameplay it deserves.

As abuse goes, I can see one ugly yet elegant solution - simple have two different types of merits. Merits earned in Open have a slightly different name, and then it's not about where you turn them in, but where you earn them.




I can't take such hyperbole seriously.

I can't REP, so I will give this a thumbs up for brilliance. That is a solution that makes sense.

 

[Schlack]

I can't take such hyperbole seriously.

That's a little unfair as you are essentially talking about 2 classes of PP contributor. The Open upper class and Solo lower class. let the class warfare commence!

 

[StiTch]

That's a little unfair as you are essentially talking about 2 classes of PP contributor. The Open upper class and Solo lower class. let the class warfare commence!

Well not unfair at all.

Firstly, let me remind you that PP was supposed to be competitive. It's about powers at war. If you want your day-in-day-out PvE grind, there's BHing, or naval CZs, or assassinations, etc. etc...

Secondly, in light of it being competitive, is it not "unfair" that this warfare is being fought from Solo/PG for the most part so that a power can be progressed as hard as possible without interruption? We've taken something about warfare and competition, and almost deliberately made it best supported by avoiding conflict.

If I were being "unfair" I might have said no contribution from Solo/PG, or different monetary rewards. This is, IMO, the least incendiary possible change to improving PP. No changes to personal rewards.

It would be sad to see all content in ED reduced to "sit in solo holding the trigger for maximum efficiency" because FD were too scared to test the entitlement of players saying that all content has to be equal.

 

[Schlack]

It is inherently unfair that one class of player is not as effective as another. Now it can be argued that as the risk is lower so should the advantages be. I don't quite buy that argument for the reasons given about that the basic game design and other factors are impediments to meeting in space. e.g. an Australian player on a poor connection will have all the benefits of the open "bonus" but far fewer of the risks.

If the aim is to increase the open population to generate more interesting cmdr interactions and more emergent gameplay the incentives have to be right. Having a lesser effect for solo is as much an incentive not to play PP as it is to play in open. The "why bother" effect comes into play.

A fairer incentive would be to reduce the risk of Open play (for those that are scared) by having some form of open only power backed additional insurance (for ship/cargo) to blunt potential losses. Nobody is punished, risk taking is incentivized.

 

[StiTch]

It is inherently unfair that one class of player is not as effective as another.

Ah, not at all like the way that it's more effective at present to work in PG/Solo?

If the aim is to increase the open population to generate more interesting cmdr interactions and more emergent gameplay the incentives have to be right...

A fairer incentive would be to reduce the risk of Open play (for those that are scared) by having some form of open only power backed additional insurance (for ship/cargo) to blunt potential losses. Nobody is punished, risk taking is incentivized.

Actually this is about improving PP, not trying to rewrite the demographics.

I suspect there would be little population change. Most solo players that I know couldn't give a rat's backside if what they were doing gave a little less influence, because they are already a small part of a much larger machine, and because they tend to do activities for their own sake and not the orchestrated progression of a power.

Really the players this would influence are the PP focused players deliberately using PG/Solo to progress their power without risk.

I do love however that you want to encourage risk...by reducing risk

Ultimate dream mode would be for a change such as this to bring some movement back to PP. When PP was put forward we heard things like "with enough work, you can knock a power out permanently by taking all relevant systems". How laughable is that now, with players doing all their PP work unhindered, consequently all basically doing the same amount of work, and so powers just kinda stay put? They're completely stagnant.