The Open v Solo v Groups thread

[Agony_Aunt]

I regularly gain fines & bounties from stuff like base assaults & killing politician missions but rarely do anything that gains me notoriety either, the time taken for notoriety to cool down acts as quite a deterrent to breaking the local laws as you suggest. I've set up some lawless assets around my territory then taken that asset owning local anarchy faction down below 7% influence so they won't lose the assets unless someone deliberately pushes them up to start a war too, because that allows me (and anyone else) to do things that might be against the law somewhere else in that lawless space. Ideally I'd have every asset but the controlling station be owned by the local anarchy but that's pretty hard work & one or two assets are usually as much as I can (be bothered to) do.

Before Notoriety bounties would last a while & I used to use that time to 'lay low' by going exploring so in that respect notoriety is a lesser punishment than what preceded it but still, it punishes breaking the law, not murder of innocents and not PvP unless someone commits a crime by doing it in lawful space. I helped put San Tu back to lawless ages ago (it's since been returned to lawful a couple of times) to help the PvP hub train players without needing to worry about notoriety.

I don't think notoriety or any of the C&P stuff adds much to PvP, it's just consequences for crimes that also captures crimes via PvP.

One of the issues with PvP fights is pre-emptive self defence, where the oppressor has not yet gained a bounty for assault or murder of an innocent (unwanted) player (or NPC). IRL pre-emptive self defence is allowed (self defence is an absolute defence in law & does not require the attacker to strike first eg they could threaten you with a weapon & you disarm them before they actually attack).

Notoriety is intended to be a consequence for breaking the law. That it's also acting as a deterrent to PvP first strikes (and pre-emptive self defence) is a side effect. I'm sure lots of people (possibly including some FDev staff) hoped it would act as a deterrent to ganking but I don't think that was ever an intended primary effect.

TL;DR I agree waiting for notoriety to cool down can be frustrating (it's supposed to be) but gaining it can be fun and avoiding it in the first place even more so

Don't know what to say. Your experience is different from mine. Getting notoriety seems really easy to me, and i don't find wating for it to expire to be fun.

 

[CMDR John Casey]

So do you get extra merits for Commanders ??
No . So I disagree with the whole premise of PP2 is PvP . PP2 is filling buckets of merits.
You don't have to PvP to PP2. Some may read into it what they want but there is no PvP specific bonus in game.

Before you got only 1 merit for killing a CMDR and in specific situations (I don't remember exactly, it happened only once).

Now last I got was 224 merits for a kill on a CMDR undermining my home system. It's true that you get the same for PvE kills, but at least now they're on par.

There's also the bonus on rebuy such that if you're killed in one of your systems you don't pay a full rebuy (progressive discounts as long as you rank up, until 100% discount).

So, I feel that there's been a change with this update in how PvP activities are seen. Maybe it's not a bonus but it's not a malus anymore.

I don't mind you spending hours looking for the enemy ( different instances timezones and even games ) I will carry on in open filling up those buckets and when you lose and say everyone is hiding in PG and solo I will smile and enjoy my gameplay.

Yeah, I don't need spending hours looking for the enemy, as I play in open I have sometimes your dedicated PvP wings coming to "slow down" me. But I will just switch system for like 10 minutes, the time they get bored, and keep doing what I'm doing, smiling and enjoying my gameplay.

 

[angusmadmac1]

Before you got only 1 merit for killing a CMDR and in specific situations (I don't remember exactly, it happened only once).

Now last I got was 224 merits for a kill on a CMDR undermining my home system. It's true that you get the same for PvE kills, but at least now they're on par.

There's also the bonus on rebuy such that if you're killed in one of your systems you don't pay a full rebuy (progressive discounts as long as you rank up, until 100% discount).

So, I feel that there's been a change with this update in how PvP activities are seen. Maybe it's not a bonus but it's not a malus anymore.



Yeah, I don't need spending hours looking for the enemy, as I play in open I have sometimes your dedicated PvP wings coming to "slow down" me. But I will just switch system for like 10 minutes, the time they get bored, and keep doing what I'm doing, smiling and enjoying my gameplay.

So the answer is no bonus ? So the next question which is more numerous Enemy NPC or Enemy commanders ?
The point I'm trying to make as the game stands now is that for a more efficient use of PP is to kill NPC's to fill up those merit buckets. Because NPC are readily available in any instance or mode .
So technically you can PP2 without any PvP and win ?
PvP is more like an additional opportunity rather than the main gameplay

 

[Riverside]

PvP is more like an additional opportunity rather than the main gameplay

Yes. PvP kills can be cheesed by colluding players (or alt-accounts) though so presumably there are either additional rules or it will be identified as OP & nerfed eventually.

 

[CMDR John Casey]

The point I'm trying to make as the game stands now is that for a more efficient use of PP is to kill NPC's to fill up those merit buckets. Because NPC are readily available in any instance or mode .

You're not making any point, you're just stating the obvious.

 

[angusmadmac1]

You're not making any point, you're just stating the obvious.

Yes that was the point it's obvious to some but others may not see it??
My favourite quote is " you can lead a hearse to water but you can't make it sink"

 

[Jockey79]

Before you got only 1 merit for killing a CMDR and in specific situations (I don't remember exactly, it happened only once).

Now last I got was 224 merits for a kill on a CMDR undermining my home system. It's true that you get the same for PvE kills, but at least now they're on par.

There's also the bonus on rebuy such that if you're killed in one of your systems you don't pay a full rebuy (progressive discounts as long as you rank up, until 100% discount).

So, I feel that there's been a change with this update in how PvP activities are seen. Maybe it's not a bonus but it's not a malus anymore.

We will see how long this lasts until some group is caught cheating, at which point the Nerf hammer will be out.

Yeah, I don't need spending hours looking for the enemy, as I play in open I have sometimes your dedicated PvP wings coming to "slow down" me. But I will just switch system for like 10 minutes, the time they get bored, and keep doing what I'm doing, smiling and enjoying my gameplay.

If it's the same few people you bump into, throw them on your block list.
Then you can stay in open mode without having to mode swap

 

[Morbad]

PvP is more like an additional opportunity rather than the main gameplay

That's the best kind of PvP gameplay, IMO.

Outside of deathmatch type games, which I mostly lost interest in by the late 90s, I prefer objective-based gameplay that goes beyond purely racking up body/kill count. Of course, destroying one's enemies should have all sorts of implicit benefits to all sorts of objectives, but the moment it becomes the end in and of itself is the moment that an otherwise immersive simulation turns into a game within a game.

Yes. PvP kills can be cheesed by colluding players (or alt-accounts) though so presumably there are either additional rules or it will be identified as OP & nerfed eventually.

If CMDR kills aren't worth any more than NPC kills, then even colluding players aren't going to have an edge...it's nearly as fast to iterate NPC kills as it is willing CMDR kills.

Anyway, the whole PP merit system is a silly layer of abstraction that shouldn't be needed and just reinforces the lack of supply chain, logistics, and demographic simulations, not to mention the lack of consequence mechanisms. Destroying enemy craft wouldn't need to award merits, and would be harder to abuse, if the loss of the vessel itself came from somewhere and cost something.

 

[Rebel Yell]

So technically you can PP2 without any PvP and win ?

Yes, but nobody cares as all one can win is pixels.

PvP is more like an additional opportunity rather than the main gameplay

PvP is where the fun is... and situationally it is, indeed, the main gameplay:

 

[Riverside]

If CMDR kills aren't worth any more than NPC kills, then even colluding players aren't going to have an edge...it's nearly as fast to iterate NPC kills as it is willing CMDR kills.

You're probably right, but if it is as simple as rewarding player kills the same as NPC kills does allow Cmdrs to collude in a controlled environment. As you suggest appropriate NPCs are probably pretty reliable to find too & even if it does provide a significant advantage presumably all powers will employ the tactic so the playing field would remain level.

I don't think the merit system is silly, it's rewarding players for using whatever playstyle they prefer or are best at to contribute to 'the greater good' and having a target on ones back (by pledging) does at least make it easier to understand why someone (or an NPC) is shooting at you in a competitive environment; if they are not on your team and they are pledged to another team they are your enemy - simple.

Not sure what you have in mind when you say:

Destroying enemy craft wouldn't need to award merits, and would be harder to abuse, if the loss of the vessel itself came from somewhere and cost something.

Of course there could be no abuse if there were no reward but in terms of player on player kills they could be carrying explo/bio data, cargo, uncompleted missions etc (to which there is a cost attached). You don't need to know they will lose this stuff, only to assume they might for them to be a valid target. IMO that's what the merits represent.

 

[angusmadmac1]

Yes, but nobody cares as all one can win is pixels.


PvP is where the fun is... and situationally it is, indeed, the main gameplay:

View attachment 409709

But that's all it is really pixels you aren't winning anything . Blowing up a pixel or wining a pixel .
But fun is pretty much subjective and down to the imagination of the player .

 

[CMDR John Casey]

Yes, but nobody cares as all one can win is pixels.


PvP is where the fun is... and situationally it is, indeed, the main gameplay:

To resume the old Powerplay: why should I play it if no one can win? (Wargames-like quote)
This new version seems more interesting as it's easier to lose/acquire systems than before. The old PP besides being convoluted, was also boring (and broken because of the 5C mechanics).

In my opinion, the PG/Solo/Open discussion can't be based on the number of acquired merits, it's pretty clear that it's more or less the same in all modes (as it should be), maybe with some slight advantage for PG/Solo because in open you may be "slowed down" (but there are one million ways to avoid it, so it's marginal).

I agree with RY—it's just a question of what makes the game entertaining or not, and in the end, it's a subjective aspect. In Powerplay, some people are just interested in "winning," and maybe they enjoy filling those buckets at max speed 24/7 (honestly, that's for me a guaranteed burnout). For others, the entertaining part is roleplay.

Personally, I enjoyed it when at the beginning of Elite, there were a lot of players around: the Lugh event was probably the most fun I had with the game. If the new Powerplay can bring back a bit of that atmosphere, I'm all in for that. If the devs added some (small) incentives for playing Open, I see no problem, only as someone said above "additional opportunities".

 

[SteveWW57]

To resume the old Powerplay: why should I play it if no one can win? (Wargames-like quote)

As an old wargamer who still plays a lot, it is often not about winning or losing, it is about having fun. That is why there are not just "competition" style games which can be fun, but scenario type games where often one side is going to "lose" no matter what. Then it is about achieving limited objectives (hold out for so long, escape, inflict casualties etc)

 

[Morbad]

I don't think the merit system is silly, it's rewarding players for using whatever playstyle they prefer

That could be done organically, within the bounds of supply and demand.

Of course there could be no abuse if there were no reward but in terms of player on player kills they could be carrying explo/bio data, cargo, uncompleted missions etc (to which there is a cost attached). You don't need to know they will lose this stuff, only to assume they might for them to be a valid target. IMO that's what the merits represent.

If the game's economy wasn't a placeholder, most conflicts would be closer to a zero-sum game and every enemy loss would be your gain. No representative tokens would be needed; gains realized would be a logical and self-evident extension of depleting the opposition's resources and/or preserving your own. Scorecards are for boxing matches, not real fights.

The problem is that none of the underlying placeholder mechanisms were ever fleshed out (or were actually degraded/depreciated), so we're mostly left with a collection of poorly integrated and very gamist abstractions.

 

[Riverside]

That could be done organically, within the bounds of supply and demand.

Yeah. It can also be done with Merits Take it or leave it imo, it's just had an overhaul & isn't going to be overhauled again anytime soon. I haven't taken to it.

I enjoy what I do (otherwise I wouldn't do it of course), faction support level BGS stuff is deep enough gameplay for me & I don't either do enough to really notice the elephants in the room wrt depth & fake economics while I'm in the game or even use all of the levers now available to me anyway (I don't do on-foot stuff for example, except exobio which gives no inf just Credits & ARX) but where I have the opportunity I'll form fleeting, temporary or longer term alliances with Cmdrs I meet whose skillsets complement mine (or vice versa that I can try to help). That's my main motivation for playing in open, to meet other people & get richer interactions than any NPC or game mechanism can give me purely on it's own merits. Some of that involves getting shot at as part of the handshaking process.

I'm not really a team player & certainly don't enjoy being a cog in a machine so Powerplay has never really appealed to me personally (I'd like to be able to pledge to my own little fiefdom though).

Merits are used as an alternate form of 'currency' which seems to be an effective motivator for plenty of players who are less interested in the big picture & just want numbers to go up

 

[Darkfyre99]

Yes, but nobody cares as all one can win is pixels.

That's all any video game is: pixels on a screen. It's the value that one assigns those pixels that are important, and that value varies between people. I place much higher value on roleplaying than any other factor, which is why I don't care if I win or lose, but how I go about it. I may never flip the system I'm undermining, but that system is important to my character both personally and politicially, and thus she'll continue her efforts... no matter how hopeless they may, or may not, be.

PvP is where the fun is... and situationally it is, indeed, the main gameplay:

View attachment 409709

That's definitely a YMMV thing. I have no desire to ruin my game to actually be effective at PvP. Therefore, I must be content about the fact that I've expended a mere percent of the effort to engineer my ship compared to the opposition, and I can still complete my objective despite their efforts.

Not that there's much opposition, even in Open.

 

[Rebel Yell]

But that's all it is really pixels you aren't winning anything . Blowing up a pixel or wining a pixel .
But fun is pretty much subjective and down to the imagination of the player .

Well... bottom line is the human factor that makes the difference.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well... bottom line is the human factor that makes the difference.

Which holds for being on the receiving end of an interaction as well as initiating one.

Noting that the importance / value of pixels seems to vary dependent on the context, e.g. players are told that they should not worry about losing a pixel ship vs. some players seem to get annoyed when they can't make a player lose a pixel ship.

 

[Darkfyre99]

Well... bottom line is the human factor that makes the difference.

Which is why I have no desire to attract the usual suspects to this game, or any aspect of it.

Some people are simply not fun to play with. It doesn’t matter if they’re keep away because non-PvPers can enjoy their game in peace in other modes, or are using those modes themselves for an ephemeral advantage, I already won’t directly interact with 99% of the population already.

Compared to that, the comparison between that an 99.3% is a distinction without a difference.

Especially when we’re scattered all over the Bubble.

 

[Riverside]

Especially when we’re scattered all over the Bubble.

I certainly agree that some people are just jerks, and exactly who that is will be a matter of perspective or at least opinion. I've had positive interactions with players others certainly think are unpleasant or too rowdy to play with and very poor interactions with some group leaders that had dozens or even hundreds of players in their groups who I presume respect their leadership enough to be in their group.

But I have an issue with saying that we're all scatter around the bubble. I think the overwhelming majority of players that have an issue with Opens poor reputation (in their view) comes from hotspots (Deciat & Founders being the two main ones but CGs & stuff too). FDev creates those hotspots to encourage players to mix.