Thanks for this in depth overview of the situation, naturally I do not support pirates in anyway but morally I completely disagree with your power being shafted and set to one side. I think Frontier really need to look at things more and maybe they would have a better idea. Considering it looks like they do not know how PowerPlay works almost 90% of the time.
Thanks for this in depth overview of the situation, naturally I do not support pirates in anyway but morally I completely disagree with your power being shafted and set to one side. I think Frontier really need to look at things more and maybe they would have a better idea. Considering it looks like they do not know how PowerPlay works almost 90% of the time.
Well the situation itself is more akin to a description of Hell, but the openness and communication of the devs is like Christmas.A Christmas soaked in petrol while Santa rattles the matchbox....
Last edited:
Thank you for this explanation. I have a few questions and some comments: Does this indicator need to appear in consecutive cycles, or will it be cumulative? If the latter, cumulative from what point? What will it take to have the warning rescinded? Do we need to simply expand to any system, or will it be more involved than that? Do standing deficits matter?
Currently, many powers do not have profitable expansion opportunities, and the game mechanics make it very difficult to force powers to lose valuable systems. It seems to me like you've designed a system that forces powers to expand in an attempt to force conflict, but the system makes it incredibly difficult to force the revolt of target systems. The only way to do so is to snipe a power into turmoil at the last moment, and most powers fortify accordingly.
Not expanding should be a viable strategy but there are no mechanics in game to make it easily possible, and collapse, as you've described it, will penalize that strategy immensely. A power that is lean and defensible should not be punished for expanding intelligently. Please do not force powers to take systems that destroy their economy.
That should not be the right answer. You've designed a strategic landscape that makes no sense, and are forcing strategic leaders to plan in ways that are counter-intuitive and preposterous. You mentioned before that Powerplay would receive some attention this season. Please consider postponing both the games and the introduction of the collapse mechanic until there are real changes. If you bring a new power and new players into the fold before resolving long-standing issues, you will put the final nail into Powerplay's coffin.
If this week's disasters haven't done so already.
Last edited:
Hi there, thank you for your hard work for 2.1 and fixing the issues with the tick in cycle 53.
I was wondering if I could ask more about what occurred in the glitch that prevented expansions and put eotinenses into turmoil?
It may be technical but it's nice to hear these things and how they were solved.
Last edited:
Whoever busts their hump to win the Dangerous games deserves much better than the status quo of PP.
having caught the tail-end of this thread... i believe there is no concern for a collapse to occur so long as you expand...
if this is all that is required.. then im sure you have a number of systems in close to HQ to fulfil that... thus resetting the problem for a small time
it is not a diffucult problem to overcome.. good luck you independant scallywags
if this is all that is required.. then im sure you have a number of systems in close to HQ to fulfil that... thus resetting the problem for a small time
it is not a diffucult problem to overcome.. good luck you independant scallywags
But put it together with the other zillions of (unnecessary) articles that were published some time ago about the Pegasi Pirate war, and you can clearly see a dotted arrow pointed towards Archon Delaine. I know they weren't from Frontier themselves, but clearly they fitted with their storyline.
How do you mesh this with the decision on preparations for week 52->53?
Patreus is in the bottom three, and hasn't had an expansion for at least four cycles so far. The preparation->expansion decision you made has made sure that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Patreus to get an expansion for this week AND next week, which puts him at five weeks with no expansions, possibly six.
Frontier's decision on the preparation has single handedly put Patreus into collapse. This is just one of the reasons that we're left shaking our heads when we see Frontier refer to that fix as being "a minor inconvenience".
Thanks for clearing that up Sandro.
In this case, what would you do? When collapse is active, will we have an announcement of your DM decision on the matter somewhere?
Hello Commander Rubbernuke!
If you are asking what the sequence would be if a power was in danger of collapsing and the cause was a bug (apologies if I've misunderstood), then it would come down to the details of what had gone wrong. But in such a situation, we'd want to be very clear to all pledges that we were stepping in and explain what actions we were taking. Powers undermining each other is cool and part of the game - bugs undermining powers is not!
Obviously, we're going to be doing our best to ensure that this issue does not occur when collapse is active
If you are asking what the sequence would be if a power was in danger of collapsing and the cause was a bug (apologies if I've misunderstood), then it would come down to the details of what had gone wrong. But in such a situation, we'd want to be very clear to all pledges that we were stepping in and explain what actions we were taking. Powers undermining each other is cool and part of the game - bugs undermining powers is not!
Obviously, we're going to be doing our best to ensure that this issue does not occur when collapse is active
Hi Sandro,
Sorry guys for hijacking the thread about a separate issue, but I was wondering if Winters pilots can submit a bug report to ask for credits back for the fast tracking used on the HIP 47328 preparation last week? I know that preparation merits were pushed over to this week, but not for Winters as we are in Turmoil.
Thanks,
CMDR BaconofDeath
Sorry guys for hijacking the thread about a separate issue, but I was wondering if Winters pilots can submit a bug report to ask for credits back for the fast tracking used on the HIP 47328 preparation last week? I know that preparation merits were pushed over to this week, but not for Winters as we are in Turmoil.
Thanks,
CMDR BaconofDeath
Last edited:
Hello Commander Rubbernuke!
If you are asking what the sequence would be if a power was in danger of collapsing and the cause was a bug (apologies if I've misunderstood), then it would come down to the details of what had gone wrong. But in such a situation, we'd want to be very clear to all pledges that we were stepping in and explain what actions we were taking. Powers undermining each other is cool and part of the game - bugs undermining powers is not!
Obviously, we're going to be doing our best to ensure that this issue does not occur when collapse is active
Thanks for the reply! Do you think its wise that you open a dedicated section of the forum to display these judgements in future? A central place would be very handy.
Thanks for the extensive communication in this thread, Sandro. I think a lot of trouble could be avoided if such kind of communication were seen more often, although I understand that it's difficult (and especially not *your* job) to answer every single question in the forum.
Nonetheless, what about the preparation issue? The community agrees on the importance of this case, and they are not OK with Frontier's current idea of how to handle it.
Nonetheless, what about the preparation issue? The community agrees on the importance of this case, and they are not OK with Frontier's current idea of how to handle it.
Alright, I missed that. I apologize. I do have a follow up question though.
Once the collapse mechanic becomes active, what time period will it be looking at in terms of "no expansions"? From the moment it's activated or does it look at the history of the power up until that point? I hope it's the latter, because otherwise we can still end up in a situation where things bug out.
Its not historical-so each time you fail to expand that's strike 1 but is erased when you expand.
Ah - that makes sense. If that's the case, then that's all good.
If it helps any, I collated Sandros quotes here> https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteAntal...rules_of_collapse_please_read_very_important/
Hello Commander Martin Schou!
Once a power is meeting collapse conditions (within bottom three, no expansion) then a count will increase for each cycle that sees the power remain meeting these conditions, until either collapse or expansion occurs.
As soon as a power manages to expand the collapse threat should be removed; should the power then fall back into the danger zone the count will start from the beginning again.
The idea is that to kill a power there should be a requirement to "lock down" expansion for a significant period of time, whereas all the power in danger needs to do is manage to expand to give themselves some breathing space.
Once a power is meeting collapse conditions (within bottom three, no expansion) then a count will increase for each cycle that sees the power remain meeting these conditions, until either collapse or expansion occurs.
As soon as a power manages to expand the collapse threat should be removed; should the power then fall back into the danger zone the count will start from the beginning again.
The idea is that to kill a power there should be a requirement to "lock down" expansion for a significant period of time, whereas all the power in danger needs to do is manage to expand to give themselves some breathing space.
Excellent. I was worried that we'd and up with powers risking collapse for no good reason.