Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not according to the actual rules of the game.
WHY!?
- Thread starter Commander Holroyd
- Start date
Powerplay is certainly not all about violence. A lot of it is about trucking.
Rules of what? Powerplay is a binary game of win / lose- V2 even more so...
Powerplay relies at a conceptual level something being against you- the problem up until v2 has been its NPCs have not kept pace with super engineered ships (unlike Open where other players make this equal).
PP has uniquely been the only part of the game where you are automatically at odds with others- hence why you pledge to a power (and thus have defined home / enemy territory). This does not happen with vanilla BGS where you can simultaneously work whoever you want- no pledge, floating rep (as in, you can repair a bad rep regardless).
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Yet no-one needs to play in a game mode where other players can shoot at them while being pledged and participating in Powerplay.
An activity being encouraged by a feature does not mean that anyone requires to present themself to be shot at.
Violence in PP is attenuating trucking since hauling keeps your power solvent.
Given that (in V1) merits are 1:1 effort based and not S curve based, one person could keep a whole power going- and it would take one person to stop them.
Which trade competitors can be - they don't have to kill each other though. Business rivals rarely do (nor do political rivals). We're not at war.
If solo had an equal threat level to Open, I'd agree.
However the two concepts of mode choice and Powerplay simply don't mix. Even FD have admitted this with each PP redesign. Powerplay paints you as an antagonist in a war of dominance- you are presenting yourself as a target to rival PP pledges and NPCs.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
It doesn't matter if players agree, or not - the rules of the game are what they are.
You are at war though, its a struggle for power.
No power trades with another, the nearest to that is being neutral re territory for Fed and Imps.
Powerplay has degenerated into what it is because no-one can agree (due to it being released incomplete) and that (until now) FD have done nothing to change it.
Once V2 is launched FD will be monitoring how it goes since chunks of V2 are PvP slanted.
They're not the same thing. Indeed, why would parts of the Empire be at war with other parts? And the shadow cabinet of the Federation really aren't at war with the incumbents.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Player agreement is of no moment in terms of in-game rules that apply. Noting that Frontier have discussed potential changes to the feature a few times and have, as yet, confirmed no changes with regard to the pan-modal nature of the feature, i.e. they said that Powerplay 2.0 will be pan-modal on release.
With regard to Frontier's monitoring, from what they have said they seem to be wanting more players to get involved in it by making Powerplay much more "in your face" - which suggests that players in all game modes may decide to engage in it.
Last edited:
Its not the Empire singular though. Its powerful figures within the Empire wanting to be more powerful- hence why you have a Galactic Standing for those figures and why they are different in how they conquer / control.
Hopefully it's more PvP oriented so there's a bit more excitement. I'm wondering if it will be lukewarm in that department, however, because so many people in the community are afraid of PvP.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Many confuse disinterest with fear - in a game where we all play with an immortal space pixie (with unlimited access to free ships) as an avatar, in the comfort and safety of our chosen play environment.
Every redesign FD have wanted Open to be influential, without fail.
The issue is ED allows you to all play by different rules, which is fine in the BGS way of doing things where you are a drifter, but bad in a direct confrontation such as Powerplay.
This does not mean one mode ruling them all, its acknowledging that some parts work in ways that are diametrically opposed and making sure they are kept apart.
For example in V2 you could easily make certain attacks only count INF wise in Open, but keep personal gain (for the rewards) active.
Whatever lets you sleep at night, Bob, the rest of us know better.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Do some really subscribe to the odd notion that playing a video game requires bravery or instils fear?
Watching the second deep dive FD certainly want that to be more of a thing.
IIRC (I may be wrong mind!) there was a loose line regards rebuy costs being lowered or removed- if thats the case then its a step to making V2 much more of a 'nothing to lose' mode you can take part in.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Removing loss on destruction would change things quite a bit.