Powerplay Powerplay "meeting" with FD

[Space2504]

It,s a bit hard for the player base to get behind you when your referring to us as the screaming multitude.

I'm referring in general to the content of the forums, not to anyone specific. Would it be better to have some sort of discourse with a rep from each power or have to invite every single player, I mean where to you draw the line on who's invited and who isn't.

It seems to me that a small group of passionate players may be able to achieve something - inviting everyone is not going to produce anything of value... Maybe they should just give up trying to improve anything or understand why there was an issue last cycle.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

i think that is an area there is always a lot of potential fro friction, some rp their PP while others were playing it like political chess with actions attached to each move. 2 very different approaches too the game, and frequently not compatible, or misunderstood mindsets. those who don't RP are always in the 1 mind (psychiatric well being aside) and those that do are forever wearing 2 hats, and it is often difficult to know exactly which hat an RP player is wearing at any given time.

i'm guessing your character can be a bit of a drama queen at times then? i can understand that, for those unsure or unaware of the RP, there is no separation, you being headstrong and dramatic in character would simply be seen as you being headstrong and dramatic as a person. its also very easy to slip in and out of character without even realising it too lol. some people have a far more interesting walk through life than i.

I always make it abundantly clear when I'm RPing and when I'm not.

I wouldn't call my character a drama queen, but I certainly won't hesitate to protest if I feel that something other people are doing is not fair or right, as you're seeing in this thread. A lot of people don't like that, because it means they can't get away with doing shady stuff that isn't in people's best interests. I'm sort of like a vigilante, a freedom fighter of sorts who stops people from being jerks by creating reddit/forum threads

 

[Rubbernuke]

You speak about this as if it's like FIFA, what are you so concerned will happen?

It's not as if certain players will get gold Farraguts or billions in dirty cash.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

You speak about this as if it's like FIFA, what are you so concerned will happen?

It's not as if certain players will get gold Farraguts or billions in dirty cash.

What could happen when you invite a group made entirely of a certain demographic of people, with interests which conflict with the vast majority of the playerbase, for a lobbying session with the game dev? Nothing good I'd imagine.

 

[Cori]

Hopefully one of the things that will be discussed is the unwelcome discovery that, if PowerPlay does go belly up for some reason (no, that is not the phrase I wanted to use), the current implementation apparently does not allow the restoration of a past known good state: in other words, there's no back-up. That was quite an eye-opener.

 

[Malvenue]

It has come to my attention that several self-appointed powerplay "representatives" from various powers have hoped to set up a meeting with FD in order to influence developer decisions regarding powerplay.

Whilst I agree that the powerplay system could be much improved, this kind of lobbying by self-interested parties is unacceptable and should not influence FD policy.

I urge Frontier not to attend any meeting except one which is public. Being selected arbitrarily by whomever is organising the meeting should not be a requirement for being able to speak with the developers.

Regards,

Jezza

Pot meet kettle.

 

[Ben Ryder]

Yup it should be public and open to anyone and everyone who wants to chip.

There are groups of players who are putting forward spokespeople who have represented the groups in the past and have helped grow and nurture them.

I have had a look at a fair few of those groups and I have not seen any self-appointed representatives.

How about taking a positive look at this Jezza and stop trying to get in the way of progress. There is nothing to stop you from contacting FD on your own behalf publicly or privately with or without the support of others so please get out of the way of others communicating with FD as they wish, especially if they have backing from the player groups that they attend.

I may have misunderstood the underling message in your opening post. If I have, please except my apologies.

Your Pal Ben

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

Yup it should be public and open to anyone and everyone who wants to chip.

There are groups of players who are putting forward spokespeople who have represented the groups in the past and have help grow and nurture them.

I have had a look at a fair few of those groups and I have not seen any self-appointed representatives.

How about taking a positive look at this Jezza and stop trying to get in the way of progress. There is nothing to stop you from contacting FD on your own behalf publicly or privately with or without the support of others so please get out of the way of others communicating with FD as they wish, especially if they have backing from the player groups that they attend.

I may have misunderstood the underling message in your opening post. If I have, please except my apologies.

Your Pal Ben

Yes, you have certainly misunderstood.

I couldn't be happier that FD is willing to do this and listen to the community. However, it's not fair for a few people who are organising it to decide who gets to attend and who doesn't. I am also a bit confused as to your opening sentence as that does seem to conflict with the rest of your post.

 

[myrr mac]

This seems more like you are just miffed that you arent at the negotiations table yourself. Build your own table and stop trying to burn other peoples tables. Carpentry is hard work.

 

[Rubbernuke]

What could happen when you invite a group made entirely of a certain demographic of people, with interests which conflict with the vast majority of the playerbase, for a lobbying session with the game dev? Nothing good I'd imagine.

So what issues do you think would or would not be communicated in this meeting? What is this conflict of interest?

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

This seems more like you are just miffed that you arent at the negotiations table yourself. Build your own table and stop trying to burn other peoples tables. Carpentry is hard work.

*sigh*

I don't know if you were aware of this but I semi-retired from powerplay quite some time ago. I would likely not choose to attend this meeting for that reason.

I don't wish to attend. Why would I want to?

This has nothing to do with me, and I'm not sure I would be willing to be a part of such a meeting.

Read the thread before replying.

 

[Ben Ryder]

Let me clear up your confusion.

Yes it should be open. Yes any one should be able to attend and yes it is brilliant that groups are putting forward spokes people rather than swamping FD with several thousand discordant voices.

Do you think that if it is a controlled meeting that it wont be broadcast by the attendees and that they wont share or ask for the opinions of others?

If I were one of these spokes people I would open up the discourse.

So who exactly are these self appointed representatives? I've seen no evidence.

It really seems like you have an axe to grind or are just stirring without offering anything positive of substantial value or proposing any kind of workable solution.

You are not helping matters. Please have a think and try a constructive problem solving approach.

 

[myrr mac]

*Sigh*

No respect for quality woodwork.

 

[Goose4291]

So what issues do you think would or would not be communicated in this meeting? What is this conflict of interest?

Easy example: You (and I) are pro-powerplay and want to see it impact more on the BGS. Several groups are opposed to Powerplay but embrace BGS gameplay. If you chaps were to go to a meeting with Frontier to advocate more powerplay impact on the BGS, these other parties would see your concepts for extra BGS impact as being a conflict of interest, due to your investement in Powerplay.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Easy example: You (and I) are pro-powerplay and want to see it impact more on the BGS. Several groups are opposed to Powerplay but embrace BGS gameplay. If you chaps were to go to a meeting with Frontier to advocate more powerplay impact on the BGS, these other parties would see your concepts for extra BGS impact as being a conflict of interest, due to your investement in Powerplay.

That would be true for some, but my 15 minutes of fame would be addressing things like the lacking commitment to power play, the lack of meaningful role play or fiction. I would be talking about the issues within the boundaries originally set out for Power play...grind, 5c. This should not be a brainstorming session, it's nuts and bolts.

 

[CMDR Sergeant Jezza]

Easy example: You (and I) are pro-powerplay and want to see it impact more on the BGS. Several groups are opposed to Powerplay but embrace BGS gameplay. If you chaps were to go to a meeting with Frontier to advocate more powerplay impact on the BGS, these other parties would see your concepts for extra BGS impact as being a conflict of interest, due to your investement in Powerplay.

Excellent example, thank you.

People who are "leaders" of powers are going to think of things that way. I think the opposite, BGS should have more effect on powerplay - give player minor factions the ability to resist power exploitation.

 

[Rubbernuke]

So you are afraid of the scope of the discussion then?

 

[Space2504]

Excellent example, thank you.

People who are "leaders" of powers are going to think of things that way. I think the opposite, BGS should have more effect on powerplay - give player minor factions the ability to resist power exploitation.

Now this one I absolutely agree, there are far more people that do not do PP than do, the BGS should be insulated from PP activity. It'd be unfair for those that do BGS influence to also potentially have to work in opposition of PP activity.

Though as mentioned, I don't believe this is in the scope of the meeting, it's not a meeting to discuss future changes, only current issues. I also don't see FD upsetting a huge portion of the player base.

 

[Goose4291]

So you are afraid of the scope of the discussion then?

No, Jez is advocating that any discussion be open, public and available to all for particiapation (which I'm not keen on, as it'll descend into anarchy due to the volume of attendees).

Whereas I'm merely asking that it's outcome be made public to anyone who wants it, to avoid for example, pre-CSM drama issues that occured in Eve with such discussions going on behind closed doors.

 

[Rubbernuke]

Now this one I absolutely agree, there are far more people that do not do PP than do, the BGS should be insulated from PP activity. It'd be unfair for those that do BGS influence to also potentially have to work in opposition of PP activity.

If there are that many BGS player groups then it would be easier to wind up Power play and degenerate current Powers into groups.

In the end it's up to FD to look at this feedback and decide the balance, not us. All we can do is tell them what is wrong and what could be done.