Powerplay Powerplay "meeting" with FD

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
So wow... I didn't expect this thread to continue but I guess that's just ignorance on my part. I'm seeing a lot of repetition of things already stated which is a common occurrence in threads with 10+ pages.


So what issues do you think would or would not be communicated in this meeting? What is this conflict of interest?
This is perhaps one of the best questions in this thread. I wish focusing on discussing actual topics of concern was the focus instead of the perceived hate.

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.
I happen to know for a fact that the Li Yong-Rui representative from SiriusGov is extremely level headed and very concerned about these issues. Many dedicated powerplayers are also very dedicated participants with local player factions in the BGS as well as the BGS heavily impacts powerplay through fortification and undermining triggers and local economies value.

In fact, during my time as a leader in Sirius most of our internal efforts were directed towards BGS gameplay to help the powers health over all. Many of the members of Sirius now spend most of their time supporting their own factions. Because of this I know for a fact that at least in one of the powers interest in preserving the autonomy and power of local factions is certainly on the board.

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.

You are making an assumption with this one Jezza. Not all of the powerplay leaders will share the exact same desires on what should be done.

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.

There, underlined and bold we have a little golden nugget. This is a meeting to expose problems within powerplay. I don't know why anyone thought that these people would have guiding control over actual implimentations in the future. If Frontiers Q&A's and dev responses in the past have been any indication the best you can hope for is to say something to them that gives them an ear worm and nibbles away. Frontier is very good about taking into account the wider audience with feedback.

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.

It's been stated many times, the meeting will be publicly posted after the fact for review by the wider Elite community. The only thing closed about this meeting is that it's being limited to a small group of people. People who as I've already stated are community leaders who are connected to a vast amount of players.

Though I love that you mention CSM. I personally felt jaded about EVE's CSM after a few years as it primarily consisted of representatives from large alliances. In my opinion development on features not related to territory holding gameplay for large groups (multiple thousands of people) was suppressed by these representatives and to this day the social and roleplay features that I felt were critical the the success of EVE Online (ambulation/walking in stations and related social aspects) were completely lost and canceled because of these representatives.

Frontier has specifically stated that Elite will never emulate that aspect of Eve. Thank goodness for that too, because that's why I stopped playing Eve even before I discovered Elite.

Now I will say, I'd love for there to be a group elected by the playerbase to provide feedback to Frontier with each candidate being elected for specific focus areas based on their gameplay experience. But Frontier already talks to members of our community and reads the posts on the forums. They aren't just going to pay attention to only the people at this meeting. But these people are the ones most aware of the issues and problems with powerplays mechanics, which is why Frontier wants to speak to them.



As a former leader I still have access to well over 50+ spreadsheets/databases of data and calculations on powerplay from various powers including Sirius. These group leaders work with the raw, hard data and understand the mechanics... And ontop of that they are still subject to all the exact same gameplay as everyone else who plays the game. This is a good group for them to talk to.

I really do wish people would stop fighting a positive. That being Frontier acknowledging an issue and meeting with people that can provide the most knowledgeable feedback on the problems facing us.

Let the meeting be small. I can guarantee there will be a discussion thread after the meeting where the wider community can declare either their support of what that group has said, or state their reasons for disagreeing with it. I bet you that thread will be read by every single developer working on powerplay and the affecting departments too.

This attitude that just because Frontier is meeting with a small group in a controlled environment that they are playing favorites or excluding the views of the wider community is erroneous. I can't fathom that Frontiers staff would make that mistake.

We all love Elite. If Frontier mishandles this, I'll be happy to call them out on it, but until they actually do something wrong, give it a rest. This kind of thread is poison to growth and quite frankly Jezza I'm rather upset that you set the tone of the thread the way you did in your OP. You could have addressed this topic in a much more civil and less accusatory manner. Nothing shady has been done yet and that should be evident by the fact that Frontier decided to do this meeting in response to a massive community uproar on these forums. Ignoring the fact that this originated from feedback on this forums and acting like this one little meeting is going to be the guide for all of the games future development is simply misguided.


Oh and as far as "self elected" is concerned. I didn't want to be a leader in powerplay. My community asked me to step up to it. And not just the existing leaders but other active members of the community. The same is true of the rest of the Sirius leadership and I can only imagine the same is true for the other powers.
 
Last edited:
If the meeting is just how to handle what happened with cycle 52 then at this point why even bother? The cycle wasn't paused so now we have effort (time and credits) spent on how things currently are. You'd do far more damage reverting 2 cycles than you do just living with the damage that's already been done. It's not like it's the first time a cycle appeared to have some buggy aspects.

Then going forward, it's better to pause powerplay than to let it run if you know things are screwed up for more than 1 day.

So what else would the meeting address if we're not talking about actually fixing what's wrong with it? I would think the above would be obvious so ...
 
Oh and as far as "self elected" is concerned. I didn't want to be a leader in powerplay. My community asked me to step up to it. And not just the existing leaders but other active members of the community. The same is true of the rest of the Sirius leadership and I can only imagine the same is true for the other powers.

Mahon's spreadsheet guys are not self-appointed either. In fact, most of them didn't even understand the point where the trust in them reached these values, since they were too busy making spreadsheets instead. Their position is one of merit and not of power and they can lose that trust just as easily if they don't stand up to the expectations of the players.
 
At this point I can't possibly keep up with the huge number of replies individually, but I will say this: the thread would not exist if there had been any transparency whatsoever with regard to who is invited to the meeting and why.

What possible reason is there for not allowing major group leaders, powerplay active or otherwise, into this meeting, other than because they have a different agenda to the organisers?
 
Again I can see your point, but tend to disagree with it - in an ideal world we'd run this democratically and vote on who we wanted to represent us, probably voting within each power, each power 'sending' two or maybe three reps to the meeting. Unfortunately I really can't see that happening,can you? I'm presuming that the 'self appointed' PP reps involved are reps from the Reddit groups? (I have no idea, I mean to say - if it's actually the graduating class from a local Mime school who's going then I'm bang on your side in protesting).

I'm rather more strongly against Quantrix view - I play in Mobius mostly (although I have been sneaking around Open a bit lately, but don't tell anyone or I'll be thrown out of the Carebear club), but I think PP's problems transcend modes - an effective solution shouldn't need to work in open only, or solo only, etc. Nor do I think the only fix we need is a better GUI - it would certainly help to an extent, but it'd be more help to those who already knew what they were doing....the uninformed Groombridge grinder (or even worse the guy who knows what he's doing but is only in it for easy credits) won't be any better informed because they're not looking at the screen in the first place. To apply some really simplistic logic, FD just about broke PP this past week - it's certainly had problems before, but Thursday was an order of magnitude worse, and I fail to see how reworking the GUI would have made the slightest difference.

Dave

Generally agree with the direction of thought here.
Unlikely FD will allow some kind of real time meeting. It's well known they read their own forum. It's likely they disregard the gigabytes of personal flame wars throwing mud on each others opinions.
What company would want to tie up additional valuable employee time to listening to more bickering?

Stay positive and back up your suggestions with facts and you'll go a long way toward helping FD shift PP toward a more pleasing experience.

-Pv-
 

Goose4291

Banned
It's been stated many times, the meeting will be publicly posted after the fact for review by the wider Elite community. The only thing closed about this meeting is that it's being limited to a small group of people. People who as I've already stated are community leaders who are connected to a vast amount of players.

Where has that been stated? I've not seen anything regarding this beyond being told repeatedly in this thread "It doesn't need to be made public, don't worry about it" type responses.

Though I love that you mention CSM. I personally felt jaded about EVE's CSM after a few years as it primarily consisted of representatives from large alliances. In my opinion development on features not related to territory holding gameplay for large groups (multiple thousands of people) was suppressed by these representatives and to this day the social and roleplay features that I felt were critical the the success of EVE Online (ambulation/walking in stations and related social aspects) were completely lost and canceled because of these representatives.

I don't want to get into what was wrong with the CSM (because I know there are issues), but it was more the idea of having openly available discussions everyone can peruse at their leisure and how that mitigates a lot of the toxic 'haves and have nots' these type of discussions can lead to where a select few speak directly to the devs. As you state yourself, you can trace the things you felt killed eve for you to the fact those CSM transcripts were available for everyone to read.

Let the meeting be small. I can guarantee there will be a discussion thread after the meeting where the wider community can declare either their support of what that group has said, or state their reasons for disagreeing with it. I bet you that thread will be read by every single developer working on powerplay and the affecting departments too.

Totally agree with this.

This attitude that just because Frontier is meeting with a small group in a controlled environment that they are playing favorites or excluding the views of the wider community is erroneous. I can't fathom that Frontiers staff would make that mistake.

Don't agree with this. Precedents can be sighted from the past where they've only talked to one group of people and messed other players game experiences, one of which funnily happened to your former power: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=199366
 
If some people get together and, by some miracle, actually make PowerPlay properly integrated, coherent and consistent with the ED galaxy, then I will do a happy little dance, and pledge to a Power for the first time.


But that doesn't sound anything like what's being discussed here. It sounds to me like a last-ditch, hail-mary pass, "make what is supposed to work, work" outreach attempt...

...to which I'll say, best of luck. The skill of seeing something not working, mixed with the drive to get off one's butt to fix it... is a good thing - and something should not be blocked through fear.
 
Don't agree with this. Precedents can be sighted from the past where they've only talked to one group of people and messed other players game experiences, one of which funnily happened to your former power: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=199366

I think you'll find that the issue there was that no one was consulted, not even the player group making the request.

On top of that, this meeting has nothing to do with setting policy or future features. It's how the last cycle was dealt with and to make sure the powers understand what will happen should the same happen in the future.
 
Last edited:
Mahon's spreadsheet guys are not self-appointed either. In fact, most of them didn't even understand the point where the trust in them reached these values, since they were too busy making spreadsheets instead. Their position is one of merit and not of power and they can lose that trust just as easily if they don't stand up to the expectations of the players.

Yep.

At this point I can't possibly keep up with the huge number of replies individually, but I will say this: the thread would not exist if there had been any transparency whatsoever with regard to who is invited to the meeting and why.

What possible reason is there for not allowing major group leaders, powerplay active or otherwise, into this meeting, other than because they have a different agenda to the organisers?

This meeting is specifically to help Frontier identify problems with Powerplay. It's not about group mechanics. Would it be helpful if Frontier explained why they chose specific groups? Probably. But to me common sense dictates that they selected the most prominant, open door communities for each of the powers. These communities being ones that do not require you to ask permission to join and place no requirements on their members for participation.

Not to mention, all of these communities are originating from Reddit, which when powerplay launched Frontier themselves encouraged using Reddit for power organization before we had power forums here on the Elite forums. Also it would be unfair to ignore the fact that all of these groups are subject to the community management guidelines of Reddit, a neutral entity that is completely indifferent to Elite.

If we ever do get group support, and have a meeting on group mechanics such as guilds etc, then I'll be first in line to ask for all factions to have a representative present for a meeting. But this isn't what that is about and trying to brand this as something it isn't is wrong Jezza.
 
As one of a Torval member for 52 cycles
Im not consulted who I want to send and who will represent me in this meeting as speaker for the Torval community, and 20 other Torval members with me are neither consulted, so I believe Antal makes a point.

That is between your group and the Torval subreddit.

I know this sounds extremely glib and dismissive, but this is a point better brought up on the Torval subreddit, where you are a moderator. I know who was invited from Torval, and while I don't know the reasoning, it's someone whose knowledge of PowerPlay mechanics and strategy I respect. I'm not naming names, because it isn't up to me to expose internal politics.

The same is true for Winters. I have known their representative to be a knowledgeable player, but if Persephonius is correct that he wasn't consulted, then he should bring this up with the Winters subreddit. Again, this shouldn't be a problem for him, as he too is a moderator of his power's subreddit.

All I can do is explain how I came to be the representative for Mahon. I was asked by rubberboots, and I've made it clear to the mods and strategy team in Mahon, that if I do not have the confidence of the majority of them to represent Mahon, then we should send someone else. I've seen one Winters rep back out, because he didn't feel he would be a good representative for them.

We're not trying to usurp PowerPlay (if we did, it'd be called The Scrolls of Vectron anyway) - we're trying to show Frontier that as individual players and organized groups, we are deeply concerned about the future of PowerPlay, if the treatment they gave it this cycle (their solution - bugs happen).
 
Uhh... Frontier didn't choose anyone. The meeting is being organised by the representatives themselves :/

Is that what you thought this whole time? That I was salty because FD didn't "choose" my group?
 
Last edited:
Haha... just wow. Torval has by far the most dedicated players that I have seen, and you guys weren't even consulted? It's obvious the organisers of this meeting are only inviting people who share their agenda.

Spoken as someone with absolutely no information on the subject and a paranoid agenda. Torval has a representative - it's not up to me to divulge who and why they were chosen; it's up to the Torval groups to decide on those things.
 
Spoken as someone with absolutely no information on the subject and a paranoid agenda. Torval has a representative - it's not up to me to divulge who and why they were chosen; it's up to the Torval groups to decide on those things.

If the leader of the largest Torval group was not aware that they had a "representative", the problem is far more serious than I thought. That's just ridiculous, absolutely no excuse for that complete and total lack of transparency.
 
Where has that been stated? I've not seen anything regarding this beyond being told repeatedly in this thread "It doesn't need to be made public, don't worry about it" type responses.

Not officially by Frontier yet, but I've stated it personally. I'm connected with many power leaders and people who will be participating in the meeting so I know for a fact that this will be recorded. If not by Frontier, by those participating. If for no other reason than to hold Frontier accountable if they ignore the feedback and to show the community as a whole that they are encouraging proper change that is good for the health of the game.


I don't want to get into what was wrong with the CSM (because I know there are issues), but it was more the idea of having openly available discussions everyone can peruse at their leisure and how that mitigates a lot of the toxic 'haves and have nots' these type of discussions can lead to where a select few speak directly to the devs. As you state yourself, you can trace the things you felt killed eve for you to the fact those CSM transcripts were available for everyone to read.

I agree that CSM is a separate topic. But I also agree, transcripts are awesome. The problem with transcripts as opposed to a recording is that things can be omitted easily which was done many times with Eve's CSM. I know that the power leaders are keen on out right recording meetings about powerplay due to the nature of back stabbing and a requirement of being able to hold each other accountable publicly. It's all part of politics and the need to do this was another driving factor in my self removal... lol

Don't agree with this. Precedents can be sighted from the past where they've only talked to one group of people and messed other players game experiences, one of which funnily happened to your former power: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=199366

I was a member of leadership during that Incident Goose4291. We were never consulted about that by Frontier. Many of us emailed Frontier on top of bringing up the topic on the forums and their answer was firm and "too bad, it's already done."

Citing that as a precendent would be incorrect, and involves making assumptions based on limited information. Frontier only ever acknowledged our complaints and took absolutely no action to correct them. MMU is still present in Lembava, despite massive uproar not only from the Sirius community but also many other powers as well. The only precedent set up here was that Frontier does not view powers as local rulers, even in their own HQ's. MMU wasn't consulted either by the way.. They provided a list of viable systems and Frontier chose to place them in Lembava, which ultimately hurt that faction because those of us in Sirius went to war against them to prevent the uncontrollable expansion through the player activity in the headquarters station. The MMU thing was an issue because their faction goes against the Li Yong-Rui ethos and drastically hurts the power and its uncontrollable expansion by controlling the HQ station Goldstein would cause unrecoverable harm to the power.
 
Last edited:
At this point I can't possibly keep up with the huge number of replies individually, but I will say this: the thread would not exist if there had been any transparency whatsoever with regard to who is invited to the meeting and why.

Each power gets one representative. Who that representative is and how they were selected is for that power's community to figure out and divulge on their own, because doing otherwise is going to result in a massive amount of internal politics spilling out into public where it does not belong.

I honestly do not understand why people who are apparently in the leadership of their own power are so keen on complaining about the selection process here rather than internally in their own community. If they were Mahon pledges, I'd be ripping into them in private for that, because that's where it belongs. This also means that if I'm not the Mahon representative at the meeting, it could be because I didn't have time, I was sick, I had connection issues or because the Mahon community doesn't trust me to do it properly - which one of those is the cause is, quite frankly, not anyone else's bloody business.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Each power gets one representative. Who that representative is and how they were selected is for that power's community to figure out and divulge on their own, because doing otherwise is going to result in a massive amount of internal politics spilling out into public where it does not belong.

I honestly do not understand why people who are apparently in the leadership of their own power are so keen on complaining about the selection process here rather than internally in their own community. If they were Mahon pledges, I'd be ripping them a in private for that, because that's where it belongs. This also means that if I'm not the Mahon representative at the meeting, it could be because I didn't have time, I was sick, I had connection issues or because the Mahon community doesn't trust me to do it properly - which one of those is the cause is, quite frankly, not anyone else's bloody business.

And what about people who aren't active in powerplay? We still need a say, this is going to affect everyone no matter what.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, if you aren't active, you probably don't have a grasp on how PP plays out in reality. You don't get to claim an extensive knowledge of something you don't participate in.

When and if the talk moves to making changes, you can chip in.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom