![[DS]_Skol](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/179/179666.jpg?1575471284){kind=avatar}
Dude you like literally was saying opposite stuff. But when you got people posting actual arguments at you - you started backing so hard.
That you now say "let it die"
Plz stop. You start looking like my ex now
Change My Mind
- Thread starter Rinzler o7o7o7
- Start date
- Status
Dude you like literally was saying opposite stuff. But when you got people posting actual arguments at you - you started backing so hard.
That you now say "let it die"
Plz stop. You start looking like my ex now
As a small power, even if they're all in open, you can't do anything about that so why does it need fixing when it won't change anything?
Nah it just beeds to be open only where it can be played as intended and be alive again. Not gonna bother you solo players at all since you want it removed anyway.
So its a win win. You get it removed, and we get it open only. Everyone wins.
Let me get my Mystic Meg hat on.... "PP moves to Open, CLs go up 1000%" ...you're welcome!
Personally I feel the opinion of people (not saying you are one) who immediately cheat whenever something goes wrong should be discarded on general principle. You cant have a meaningful discussion about game design with people who feel they get to cheat whenever they feel like it.
You can shoot at them. Its not a complex discussion...
ED has never been advertised as a single player game.
How do you have a "single player console gamer" as the game requires an internet connection at all times?
[video=youtube;5hfYJsQAhl0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0[/video]
All of which has been made moot by the fact they cancel each other out, which has been repeated to you dozens of times. How about you take a leaf from your own post above and listen to logic for a change.
Powerplay could be a fun feature for players interested in a competitive feature, rather than the senseless grindfest it currently is. heck, you yourself have gone on and on about how terribly stupid PP currently is and why noone ever plays it. And now they want to change it suddenly it should stay this way?
But you don't get points for killing other players, do you? Most points come from leaflet delivery and killing AI?
I'll explain:
When you see a pledge carrying prep materials to an unwanted system, you challenge them. A way back in Antal we had a crazy bad prep that I flew out to investigate. It turns out it was a new guy in an Anaconda who I pointed to our Reddit and he came on board with us. 5C issue solved on that one.
But with my latest example, if we see someone prepping a bad system we would do the same. Challenge then kill. You are right in that it won't stop it all, but with regular patrols it would cut it right down, and cost real money and time to keep on doing it.
In Solo you can simply strip out everything, and the only limit is time travelling. If thats organised then it can rack up huge numbers. The Alliance reckon some use bots too, making a bad situation even worse.
In Open you can identify, strike or persuade. With the other changes in voting (so stupid preps are filtered out better) Open + changes = much less 5c. Plus, since we know commander names, we can then keep an eye out for them in future.
I'll be clear too: being beaten FAIRLY is great. Small powers don't expect an easy ride. Its rampant misuse of modes leading to game wrecking situations that we hate. Open goes a long way in sorting this out.
So what happens then? PP goes to open, no one plays it, no seals from solo show up, no mass flocking to sign up from the cutter crew? Do you move it back or is it just a "You have it, we want it" type thing? Like you're divorced wife taking your Ferrari even though she can't drive and has no licence? I'm shocked this game is even alive with the amount of wedges thats drove into it on a monthly basis!
It won't see its popularity rise significantly. So you believe that a tiny portion of the player base should get what it wants of the other 95%.
I think that's a rather dishonest and selfish position to take, myself. Demonstrably, it's bad for the game.
I can’t see how PP- and as a consequence, open itself- wouldn’t benefit from the proposed change. It would certainly tempt me to engage in PP related activities like never before. I really feel it could allow the game to grow in ways which were intended/envisioned from the start.
However, I worry about:
(1) the technical side- would the P2P setup allow for any significant group actions?
(2) the fact that, as many have mentioned, PS and Xbox accounts require paid subscriptions to access online content. Much as I’d like to say “meh”, it is a tiny bit of a kick in the teeth for console users who play PP in solo. Could they suck it up and forgive FD? Probably. How many of them even fall into the PPing non-subscription niche? God knows. How many PlayStation and Xbox users who bought ED (but who don’t PP) don’t actually choose to pay a subscription? Again, I don’t know. A lot of questions.
But FD won’t want to alienate the console crowd, so they must have some idea how many folks they could be ticking off. Maybe?
Anyhow it will be interesting to see what happens. I hope they can wangle it so everyone’s a winner in some way!
However, I worry about:
(1) the technical side- would the P2P setup allow for any significant group actions?
(2) the fact that, as many have mentioned, PS and Xbox accounts require paid subscriptions to access online content. Much as I’d like to say “meh”, it is a tiny bit of a kick in the teeth for console users who play PP in solo. Could they suck it up and forgive FD? Probably. How many of them even fall into the PPing non-subscription niche? God knows. How many PlayStation and Xbox users who bought ED (but who don’t PP) don’t actually choose to pay a subscription? Again, I don’t know. A lot of questions.
But FD won’t want to alienate the console crowd, so they must have some idea how many folks they could be ticking off. Maybe?
Anyhow it will be interesting to see what happens. I hope they can wangle it so everyone’s a winner in some way!
Last edited:
If it's dead it doesn't need Dev time at this moment considering the state of the game right now.
You can connect to the internet with your console to use Netflix, get trophies, download updates, shop in the store, but to play multiplayer games, you need a subscription. For console players, Open, Private and CQC are behind this paywall, even though they do have a net connection.
For Elite, this means a connection to a cloud of sorts, that allows FD to have centralised servers for saves, missions, bgs etc etc, tying a dynamic galaxy to a single player game, whilst making updates and content more centralised and therefore cheaper/easier to manage. Conversely - no net connection, no game, which is a bit of a drawback, but not a show-stopper for a single player.
I pointed this out on another thread, and the comment received more rep than any other I have made. Whilst they are not very vocal here, the single player console players are out there, watching, and voting with their wallets.
Last edited:
Whats so bad with the state of the game? Overall the game has improved greatly since its launch.
And this chanhe could be another block on that road to improvement. So if pp is the feature thats doing the worst in the game itself (cqc is its own thing) then it needs the most attention.
Plus its been more than long enough since pp has had a major update. The last major update about pp was the update that introduced pp.
Yeah this isnt an issue on console. Almost all games have a online multi player component that requires the subscription. I play on xbox and dont know anyone without it and have never met anyone without it. If they are voting with their wallet then they can afford the sub.
Last edited:
Yes and what will that accomplish towards the goal of still losing? It's not a complex discussion...
I did read your post...then I wrote point 2.
The notion of people in Solo...being "invisible" to those in Open is a redundant issue. That's the nature of Solo and Open, that's how they were designed and will continue to be, it's core functionality of the game. To extend that notion out into the sentence "It's unfair because when I am in Open, I can't get at you if you're in Solo", is not just redundant, it's kind of funny. That's why they are in Solo, because they don't want to be bothered by you. That's why you are in Open, because you are trying to find people to bother. I congratulate you both on your choices.Now, here's the crux of it. All that, was made complex...because some muppet designed a feature called Powerplay. Not only that, they beta tested it and the thing which beggars belief, implemented it into the game. I've given up trying to understand why that happened, just know that it did.
So Solo ain't gonna change...Open ain't gonna change....ever. The only rational conclusion is that Powerplay is not fit-for-purpose by design, has never been and if it's going to satiate the needs of both parties in the debate as outlined above, requires serious tweaking, if not setting fire to. This "solution" of making the existing Powerplay Open only as applied to the argument above, is not only very funny, it's somewhat derisible. There are many other methods through which those wanting PvP encounters can be satiated.
Explore those, not this. Unfortunately, we need someone who knows what they are doing to design it. Or if they are already in Cambridge...let them.
It's a very good question. However, it has a very simple answer. "Because that's the game we have". Solo/Group/Open are synonymous with each other, and together present the capability of the entire game as it is currently presented. Your question is a good one through your lens. At this point in time, many people looking and playing the game through many different lenses are now formulating equally good questions. "Why do you think it's fair to pick on me as an inferior target if you claim you just want PvP?", "Why not design PvP clusters into the game so PvP'ers can find a good fight, in a timely manner...without relying on existing features"?, "Why not just play the game by the rules we currently have as they are the same for everyone and there is already something for everyone in game"? are just three of them, equally valid.
Thus, if you are going to assume ED will continue to be "equal across all modes", or conducive to "blazing your own trail"...the suggestion of Open Only Powerplay is a non starter as even though you make a great point, in the framework of the game, it is redundant.
However, if you really, really think Open only Powerplay is a necessity, then continue to lobby FD. they'll implement it, and then we'll have two games.
Whatever they call the new game as a result of the implementation will be up to them, and those in favour of Open Only Powerplay will play it.
Powerplay could be a fun feature for players interested in a competitive feature, rather than the senseless grindfest it currently is. heck, you yourself have gone on and on about how terribly stupid PP currently is and why noone ever plays it. And now they want to change it suddenly it should stay this way?
I'm not convinced it's mutually exclusive. I agree with you it needs changing, I'm just saying the proposed method of doing that is substandard in approach. Assuming a repeatable approach is in place.
Last edited:
Well, shooting down bombers worked alright for the RAF.
A chance to interact. Find out if its noobs who dont know wahts going on. Talk to them and recruit them to the coordinated movement. See if its truly 5C and attack, take note of names and hunt those names, make them as ineffecient as possible and maybe discourage them enough to get them to stop. Instead of competitive space truckers 3304
- Status