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