Powerplay Why are Solo and Private Groups allowed to influence Powerplay?

[CMDR John Casey]

Why? Because not all powers are created equally. Sure, if you're a combat pilot for a power that's been heavily involved in combat and attracts a ton of combat pilots, forcing everyone into open sounds like a fantastic idea.

Suppose instead that you're Torval, Sirius or Mahon - powers that pretty much have absolutely no interest for combat pilots - why are you so intent on ruining their ability to actively ruin the fun that their players can have? They have no pilots capable or even willing to defend them, because the game rules have actively discouraged combat pilots from joining them.

I didn't jump in this discussion because of Mahon, I support open Powerplay because it can create more variety in gameplay.

Your argument can be turned 180° : if the situation is like that is because the game rules - change the rules, the situation will change. Put merits for the same activities that produce credits (escorting cargos, killing players that have large bounties) and the scenario becomes profitable for everyone.

When I (Mahon pledge) fortify in open, I am taking a MUCH higher risk than any fortifier from Aisling, ALD, Patreus, Hudson, Winters or Sirius, because I have to bring my merits through a bottle neck. We all risk facing a rebuy screen, but Antal, Delaine, Mahon and Torval pilots fortifying are also risking a complete cargo load of fast tracked merits - which in my case works out to between 7 and 8 million credits.

Do you think that combat pilot in open have nothing to lose? I may be interdicted in any CS by an enemy wing and lose all merits in a heartbeat, eventually making that the system(s) I undermined won't be such. Obviously nothing like that happens because everyone is in solo to maximize their profits and minimize their risks.

 

[CMDR John Casey]

I don't want to deny my fellow paying players a downgraded game experience or to be penalised in anyway or form for playing in a particular mode.

Forcing others into Open because you prefer Open and want them to have same issues of player interference is a completely stubborn, arrogant and selfish attitude.

Open allows random player interactions. That is the ONLY thing it offers. If you find it challenging then play in Group play.

And if you want to 'gatecamp' systems in powerplay or CGs then honestly, go back to EVE.

We're talking about Powerplay, not the full game. I think that having an open only environment BESIDES the base game doesn't deprive anybody from anything in the base game. Instead it can create a living environment with different gameplay, which actually can be an upgraded game experience for everyone who wants it. If anybody doesn't want it, free to stay unpledged and enjoy the game as they are doing now.

 

[Quantrix]

We're talking about Powerplay, not the full game. I think that having an open only environment BESIDES the base game doesn't deprive anybody from anything in the base game.

Powerplay is part of the base game. Denying PP to solo players is denying part of the base game.

Stating that Powerplay is not part of the base game, is a typical example of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

 

[the100thmonkey]

PS: the game is called Elite: Dangerous and not Average: Lame.

Elite implies the idea of hierarchy, while dangerous is the "promise that was given". It has to be dangerous at each level and even more so, if you have farmed your combat rank or credit balance.

That's .

"Dangerous " is a PvE combat rank in the game. The name of the game is "Elite," which is also a combat rank (PvE) and also the name of the original game (which was solo.)

It's like saying that Fallout 4 is literally about radioactive fallout. Of course it's not, and only an idiot would claim that it was.

 

[Lestenio]

We're talking about Powerplay, not the full game.

You are talking about depriving me of something I paid for. No season has been advertised to work with a single mode.
If FD decide that 3.0 will be open only, that's fine, so long as they advertise it as such and don't restrict it several months later.

 

[Roybe]

Because the game is compeltely based on the idea that PVP=groups outcollecting PVE trophies.

This game is not based on Direct PVP. You can shoot others...for fun...but not profit.

 

[Tataboj]

You are talking about depriving me of something I paid for. No season has been advertised to work with a single mode.
If FD decide that 3.0 will be open only, that's fine, so long as they advertise it as such and don't restrict it several months later.

Everything would work fine! Playing in open would just have a little bonus for the power.

 

[Red Fox Four]

Because the game is compeltely based on the idea that PVP=groups outcollecting PVE trophies.

This game is not based on Direct PVP. You can shoot others...for fun...but not profit.

This ^

If you want the extra experience of meeting other random players, for better or worse, IN ADDITION to the rest of the game then you play Open.

If you do not want the extra experience of meeting other random players, then you enjoy the FULL GAME without the random players by playing in Group or Solo.

Solo = Experience the FULL GAME on your own.
Group = Able to form wing with friends.
Open = Able to meet random players.

Nowhere has it ever been implied that the game should have different content designed for different game modes. It has always been based on the fact that you can experience the FULL game in Solo mode, with the added OPTION to do wings in group and meet random players in Open.

Meeting random players is just a fun-factor added on top of everything else.

The sooner people realize this the sooner they will stop pushing for this EVEification of the game so they can start gate camping in Community Goals.

 

[Lestenio]

Everything would work fine! Playing in open would just have a little bonus for the power.

I was referring to the quote that making PP open only doesn't deprive anyone of anything since it's not part of the base game.

 

[Sans Daring]

I like to see it as a swimming pool. You can swim doing lengths of a pool, as an athelete or for fun, time yourself, challenge your personal goals, work within the rules of the pool and the structure of your own enjoyment, or you can swim doing lengths of the pool with others, challenging each other against set goals, for times all within the rules of the pool.

In our culture, there's no shift in value between someone swimming for personal or group enjoyment, be it for professional or for fun. People understand some people like to operate in their personal space but still work within the same rules as if they were in a team or group environment.

But in gaming culture, there is a growing divide where there shouldn't be. Different ideologies wanting to share the same infrastructure legitimately without being forced to enjoy the practice in one particular way. Powerplay is part of the game infrastructure that influences the game space for Solo and Open. Neither are more important than the other, just different ways to enjoy the fun of the same pool.

 

[Woofington]

If you want Danger then you should attack the Commanders already in Open Play, armed and ready to fight you in PvP and not keep pushing to force those not interested in engaging with PvP in there just so you can go sealclub Haulers with your FdL.

Why should the dangerous part only apply to others and not yourself?

Same applies to the so-called 'roleplaying a psycho' players who want more players into Open so they can kill players at minimum risk to themselves. The dangerous part should apply to them as well. Ergo, killing ships because you are a psycho should ban you from all stations in the entire bubble except anarchy systems, they should be forced to stay in Open as per their own arguments so they can be hunted by PvPers, they should be constantly harassed by NPC interdictions et.c.

Funny how the people who invoke the 'Dangerous' part of the game never speak of danger to themselves, but only about others because they lack balls to engage other PvPers but just want to do low-risk PKing themselves to artificially inject a sense of accomplishment into their own lives for a small ego boost.

So go out there, live by your Dangerous statement, and fight others who are interested in PvP instead of forcing your gameplay on those who aren't just because you have a desperate need to club baby seals.

Because its a trend: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

No one wants to force solo players into Open to be slaughtered. We'd like some compromise that allows Open users to not be affected by users who are effectively combat logging in order to avoid PvP interaction that could advance or deter a PP or CG. Whether that is locking players to their preferred game mode (solo, pg, open) and having seperate shards, or not allowing solo or PG to affect PP or CG, I don't know what solution is best but don't make up an argument to then argue against smh

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

No one wants to force solo players into Open to be slaughtered. We'd like some compromise that allows Open users to not be affected by users who are effectively combat logging in order to avoid PvP interaction that could advance or deter a PP or CG.

Premise is wrong.

Open players affect powerplay or community goals just as much as solo or group players.

Whether that is locking players to their preferred game mode (solo, pg, open) and having seperate shards

This is never going to happen. The game has always been advertised as having these modes of connectivity (that's all they are, various levels of connectivity to other game clients - there is nothing special going on other than that). If you didn't realise how the game was designed, you didn't research properly before paying your money - in exactly the same way as solo or groups players have paid theirs - and you are not arguing from a good position here.

or not allowing solo or PG to affect PP or CG, I don't know what solution is best but don't make up an argument to then argue against smh

Premise is wrong and this is a repetition of your first point.

The whole premise of the original post is incorrect, and the post title's premise more so.

There is nothing special - in terms of coding - about Open mode. It is merely a different level of game client connectivity.

Solo : do not attempt to connect to other game clients.
Group : only connect to game clients tagged with the same group name.
Open : try to connect to any game client not tagged as Solo or Group.

Each game client is playing the same game, affecting the same galaxy, and affecting the exact same background simulation. Absolutely nothing special at all going on.

The premise of the thread's title pre-supposes that Open mode has some kind of priority or superiority over group or solo mode. Nothing could be further from the truth. Each and every player of this game is primarily playing against the environment. Each game client which connects to a server has the same amount of influence - what you do in open has an equal effect on a solo player. You sell 1T of fish to Lave station, a solo player will see that effect if they are also at Lave station at the same time. And vice versa.

So let's stop with the arrogant viewpoint that Open mode players have some Braben-given right of superiority over players of different modes.

 

[CMDR John Casey]

You are talking about depriving me of something I paid for. No season has been advertised to work with a single mode.
If FD decide that 3.0 will be open only, that's fine, so long as they advertise it as such and don't restrict it several months later.

Powerplay is part of the base game. Denying PP to solo players is denying part of the base game.

Stating that Powerplay is not part of the base game, is a typical example of the "No true Scotsman" fallacy.

Powerplay was never promised in the kickstarter, it didn't exist until 1.3, it's not a season for sure. It is an added feature, which can be improved, or not, and it's a feature that it's not in good health, such as Arena (less and less players choose to play them). However, I'm not asking to remove rights from anyone. I'm saying that an improvement to the current situation of Powerplay may be boosting open (and Sandro seems to think in the same direction). Or that a new open-only feature, with different gameplay, can be added.

 

[Woofington]

Premise is wrong.

Open players affect powerplay or community goals just as much as solo or group players.




This is never going to happen. The game has always been advertised as having these modes of connectivity (that's all they are, various levels of connectivity to other game clients - there is nothing special going on other than that). If you didn't realise how the game was designed, you didn't research properly before paying your money - in exactly the same way as solo or groups players have paid theirs - and you are not arguing from a good position here.




Premise is wrong and this is a repetition of your first point.

The whole premise of the original post is incorrect, and the post title's premise more so.

There is nothing special - in terms of coding - about Open mode. It is merely a different level of game client connectivity.

Solo : do not attempt to connect to other game clients.
Group : only connect to game clients tagged with the same group name.
Open : try to connect to any game client not tagged as Solo or Group.

Each game client is playing the same game, affecting the same galaxy, and affecting the exact same background simulation. Absolutely nothing special at all going on.

The premise of the thread's title pre-supposes that Open mode has some kind of priority or superiority over group or solo mode. Nothing could be further from the truth. Each and every player of this game is primarily playing against the environment. Each game client which connects to a server has the same amount of influence - what you do in open has an equal effect on a solo player. You sell 1T of fish to Lave station, a solo player will see that effect if they are also at Lave station at the same time. And vice versa.

So let's stop with the arrogant viewpoint that Open mode players have some Braben-given right of superiority over players of different modes.

Premise isn't wrong. I get that this is a common problem in this thread. People don't want players in Private groups or Solo to affect the outcome of Power plays or Community goals in Open. Open players want PvP to be a valid means to affect a PP or CG outcome, yet Private groups and solo subverts this. This has nothing to do with Solo or Private groups being better or worse than open players.

This isn't a wrong premise, I don't even know what you could possibly mean by that.

Also the idea that a game can never change its design once it is launched is a faulty premise so your post is pretty darned ironic lol.

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Premise isn't wrong, do you understand human language?

Argument by insult is not going to get you very far.

People don't want players in Private groups or Solo to affect the outcome of Power plays or Community goals in Open.

Again - your premise is incorrect because that is not how the game is designed. The backbone of this game is its BGS - the Background Simulation. PvE.

Open players want PvP to be a valid means to affect a PP or CG outcome

Translation : PvP'ers want to be able to resolve PP and CG via explosions of other player ships.

Again - check your premises.

In no way does the explosion of a player's ship affect PP or CG's - it may slow down that one individual player's contribution, but whilst you're busy blowing up one player's ship, oh look 5 more have slipped past you and have completed their task.

Meanwhile - you don't get points or credits from that one explosion.

yet Private groups and solo subverts this.

No they do not. Because CG's and PP are both an exercise in PvE play. The only way you can influence them is by playing the environment - collect your PvE tokens then deposit them at the relevant station. That's it. Blowing up other player's ships does not get you those tokens, nor will it slow down your opposing force's progress in any significant manner.

This has nothing to do with Solo or Private groups being better or worse than open players, but man here let me link this again for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

I know what a straw man argument is, sweetheart, and I haven't been using it.

<snipped childish insult>

Also the idea that a game can never change its design once it is launched is a faulty premise so your post is pretty darned ironic lol.

The game's design is what has been touted from the kickstarter as has the way the BGS is the backbone of the game, and the whole philosophy of it. Those people like myself who were playing Elite, quite possibly before you were a twinkle in your mum's eye, knew what to expect in terms of what Elite is, its history, and the awesome accomplishments of David Braben and Ian Bell.

You bought into Elite Dangerous, and you had full knowledge of FDEV's intentions for the game and how it was going to operate in terms of the 3 client connectivity modes. Only now do you start having a tantrum over this?

 

[Quantrix]

Powerplay was never promised in the kickstarter, it didn't exist until 1.3, it's not a season for sure. It is an added feature, which can be improved, or not, and it's a feature that it's not in good health, such as Arena (less and less players choose to play them). However, I'm not asking to remove rights from anyone. I'm saying that an improvement to the current situation of Powerplay may be boosting open (and Sandro seems to think in the same direction). Or that a new open-only feature, with different gameplay, can be added.

If I buy the most simple version of the game today, I get PowerPlay. Therefore, it's part of the base game.

You're invoking a clear example of the No True Scotsman fallacy. And you don't even seem to realize it!

 

[Red Fox Four]

The fallacy in this thread, and the title of it, is assuming that 1) Open Play = PvP Mode and 2) Powerplay = EVE Online style war declarations.

There is nothing that is PvP focused in this game except the CQC mode.

Open Play does not equal PvP Mode.

Open Play is one thing only: a mode where you can meet random players.

How you choose to react to those players is completely irrelevant. You can choose to trade, wing, talk, ignore or attack them. The only thing Open Play does is allow those interactions between players.

Maybe you WANT the Powerplay to be some form of PvP centric EVE Online war declaration between the powerplay factions, but it's not.

Why is it not?

Because Open Play is not PvP mode, and Powerplay is not a PvP feature.

What part of this seems to be so unfathomably difficult to understand?

 

[Bigglesof206]

I'm perplexed by this still, those playing PP in OPEN seem to be the only people wanting to force a change on the community statements like:

"We're talking about Powerplay, not the full game. I think that having an open only environment BESIDES the base game doesn't deprive anybody from anything in the base game. Instead it can create a living environment with different gameplay, which actually can be an upgraded game experience for everyone who wants it. If anybody doesn't want it, free to stay unpledged and enjoy the game as they are doing now."

...appear to suggest that those wishing to play PvE can be excluded from PP, and it doesn't matter because we can play the 'main game' and forego, presumably quite happily, whatever it is we are misguidely enjoying currently?

How about we make PP solo only, and anyone who wants to shoot other CMDRs can go do it as a pirate in OPEN, because after all it's not the main game we're looking to exclude you from, is it? (same argument, I see no reason to favour one version over any other).

It REALLY gets my goat when people demand some restriction be applied to others, and try to justify it as somehow right or fair. As I said much earlier, I'd love for PvE PP to seperate from PvP, if only to enjoy the bleating when you realise nobody is going to fly freighters around for you to kill - as if there's something special about being able to take a loaded PvP ship up against a guy hauling supplies.

By the way, I bought this game with PP in it, when I did so FD didn't make any point about me not being as entitled as others to play in PP....so kindly stop the complete about what IS and ISN'T part of the game.

Dave

 

[Lucifer Hate]

The perfect example of why PP should only be allowed in open is the 5th column bullcrap that was being done a while back and may still be going on. They were able to do it in solo/PG which gave no way to catch and stop them.

 

[DanaM]

The perfect example of why PP should only be allowed in open is the 5th column bullcrap that was being done a while back and may still be going on. They were able to do it in solo/PG which gave no way to catch and stop them.

Ah, this chestnut again. Must've been a day or two since I've seen it.

Inaccurate use of "5th column," BTW.

As to your point, you are absolutely correct. There is no way to "catch and stop" people in Open who choose not to play in Open. This has been discussed at such length that I won't repeat all the back-and-forth here. I'll just leave you with this:

1) you are free to counter what people do with regard to the BGS by doing the same things they are. No, you can't pew-pew them. You:[mad] Me:[haha]

2) The game is designed this way. Don't like it? Maybe you should complain on the forum. How's that workin' for ya?[haha]

I love this game!