Now I am beginning to understand, why you don't believe that you are sometimes being a (shall we say) harsh, in your phasing etc..Oh god, did I write that bad? Of course it's not, sorry if I wasn't clear enough sometimes.
Now I am beginning to understand, why you don't believe that you are sometimes being a (shall we say) harsh, in your phasing etc..Oh god, did I write that bad? Of course it's not, sorry if I wasn't clear enough sometimes.
OK. I can see the points you are trying to make. I agree, to have to compete against an invisible opponent, is ridiculous. The Open v solo power play, has always been an issue and warranted, in my honest opinion. Just as is the, only human opponent option in CQC; has been an issue from day one."Us" like "people asking for an Open Only Powerplay". You know: I'm not the only one, right? (Do I really have to make a point about that?)
I am not insulting you, trust me. And you keep talking about yourself, please stop that.
Nobody cares about you or me, so let's stop being so self-centered boy, people reading in here have no interest in that.
Let's get back to game mechanics then, which is far more interesting and constructive.
We were talking about how Open Play is a totally different game mechanic: it changes ship builds, player behaviour, effectivness etc. Do we agree about at least that, right?
The game right now offers a lot of different kind of cooperative group-centered gameplay opportunities, you basically do actions in the game, they are gathered by the servers, then the results are calculated for your group. Right now we've got the Background Simulation and everything done by Squadrons, how much they contribute in different activities, and there were CGs too but we need to wait until april to know what's going on about that. And then there's Powerplay, of course, almost forgot about that.
Every single of these game mechanics are most effective in pvt/solo, and you can't deny that, right? It's a fact, in pvt/solo you can easily go around shieldless if you are that much skilled, so you can haul more and faster, you can make money faster, do more missions, import more commodities to your favourite station, hell, you can even leave your shield-tank turreted ship for days n Powerplay Conflict Zones to gather merits. It's all a matter of effectivness.
So: being the main goal of playing for a faction is well... making that faction win somehow (that's what "playing" is usually about, nobody plays chess without even trying to win), you understand that private/solo becomes a sort of mandatory solution.
Right now people can have many other game mechanics, especially local ones, which are compatible with the "I don't care about the whole politics, leave me in my little space" concept that would bring people to the security of private servers.
So: Open Players remain with basically just Powerplay which, again, was designed with the intent of making people struggle against each other. When you design a trigger system you basically expect opposition one way or another, because the very moment that both triggers are reached the system itself is basically done for (another reason because Powerplay is basically stagnant).
So: I, an Open Player, am basically fighting against Private/Solo Players, which are advantaged by the very fact that not only I, but any other Player (even a solitary one) could actively oppose them. Then, if I want to win, I should play in pvt/solo, to be able to grind as they do, maybe with those shiny bots they use to prepare systems 24/7 (it's not the amount of merits that's astonishing, it's the pace of those preps that betrays them as the Alliance Office of Statistics reported many times).
So: you think you do not, but you kinda "force" people to play in a grindy, honestly boring way, leaving the status quo. Which is even understandable, but please not for every single game mechanic. What I (we) ask, is for a different type of game, with basically no ripercussions for the single player (no powerplay modules basically) where a different kind of game can be played.
Is it that wrong? Does it bother you that much to let other people have something to fill a hole? If it does again: you really are bad people.
Err... No I disagree, if the is allowed, of course. My ship is the best I can afford and fitted the way I play or what I am doing in the game. The Mode, makes no difference to me. Re-buys are the only consideration, when it comes to the mode I play. Nothing else. Now naturally, you would have an issue with that.
To make it plain. I cannot predict, who or what I will come up against. It is a totally random thing. I cannot foretell what weapons types I will need etc. etc. I do not know if the next player trying to kill me, is an Ace in a viper, or a noob grinder in a Cutter. Therefore I cannot prepare for a fight.
Asking is acceptable. Demanding and vilifying, condemning and generally blaming anyone who opposes that request; in support of their own game play style. Is not OK.Sorry for being harsh, I guess?
You see: you keep talking about your experience. I didn't claim that you in particular fly shieldless hauling ships or consider the mode you play in as a factor, and your single experience doesn't make a fact, it's your personal choice and experience and such it is, anyway that's something most people do in private and solo, we've got facts supporting that, like HQ Systems of the different Powers always deserted (only exception the occasional module shopper). Another example: nobody usually bothers about missles against NPCs, in an open environment you must do that, because you know... reverberating cascade torpedoes. Or even simply putting the lowest possible shield in your ship to have more cargo is a very bad idea in Open. So you can disagree of course, but it's kind of neglecting voluntary the fact that private/solo players are advantaged by the very fact they are not in such a danger to justify a decently defended build.
And that's the cool thing about Open Play: the danger, the fact that you have to be smart and not rely on your ship, or cooperate with other players. Trust me: I fortified in Harma, in Open, during a Community Goal. I had escort of course, but they tried to kill me: they did not. But again I understand that not everybody wanna play this way, so for people who like this kind of gamestyle I ask some kind of game mechanic, in fact a revamped Powerplay, to have something to fight for.
Again: is it that wrong to ask? A fair playground for us?
You probably don't understand that you are asking for a different game altogether. Bringing some sort of open-only enforcement into Elite with its shaky instancing will only result in a competition in a different ways people can cripple their networking. This will happen as soon as you give some sort of a bonus for playing in Open.What I (we) ask, is for a different type of game, with basically no ripercussions for the single player (no powerplay modules basically) where a different kind of game can be played.
Is it that wrong? Does it bother you that much to let other people have something to fill a hole? If it does again: you really are bad people.
You probably don't understand that you are asking for a different game altogether. Bringing some sort of open-only enforcement into Elite with its shaky instancing will only result in a competition in a different ways people can cripple their networking. This will happen as soon as you give some sort of a bonus for playing in Open.
I understand what you are asking and just trying to point out that there is no way to properly enforce this gameplay the way you want it. A separate Galaxy won't solve this issue in any way. A separate server may be where you enforce who can play and who cannot, leaving you to play power-play with a few friends.I only ask you guys to aknowledge the fact that there's people asking for a different kind of gameplay too, that could coexist with the main game, without touching it too much, which is an Open Only Powerplay more disconnected to the BGS.
Please. There are not 4 million players in the game. Considering Steam charts the average number of players sits around 5000. https://steamcharts.com/app/359320
1500 on the contrary is a relevant quantity.
Steam Charts !!!
LMAO.
Wow, just wow.
You do know the game released on PC long before it was on Steam right?
I can log in and play independent of Steam, as can many others.
Plus once some Steam folks found out Steam take 30% of all Steam sales, they unlinked their accounts and moved to the independent launcher.
Citing Steam for evidence is like asking Mystic Meg the lottery numbers.
So as I said, using actual real numbers, direct from Frontier - the people who make the game and have the numbers from independent accounts AND Steam accounts.
Over 4 million copies of Elite have sold, 1,500 people were involved in the focus feedback and not all of those wanted Open Only.
The Mobius Group has 40,000+ members, who want PvE BTW. If the Mobius Group had been bothered to post on the focus feedback, the trolls who want Open Only would have been washed away in that sea of posts.
the trolls who want Open Only
The Mobius Group has 40,000+ members, who want PvE BTW. If the Mobius Group had been bothered to post on the focus feedback
I understand what you are asking and just trying to point out that there is no way to properly enforce this gameplay the way you want it. A separate Galaxy won't solve this issue in any way. A separate server may be where you enforce who can play and who cannot, leaving you to play power-play with a few friends.
The Mobius Group has 40,000+ members, who want PvE BTW. If the Mobius Group had been bothered to post on the focus feedback, the trolls who want Open Only would have been washed away in that sea of posts.
The 'trolls'? Who are they? From what I saw these 'trolls' put forward decent arguments for the option, while loud shrieks and table thumping came from those who did not. I can't remember Open only advocates posting threads like "What is Sandro playing at?" for example.
Obsidian Ants poll 0f 7.7K players had about 52% wanting Open, 25% wanting no change, and the rest wanting weighted merits. Thats 3900 votes from a neutral streamer for the option- I know you don't like it, but a lot of people do.
Along with that giant 'if', they had a chance like everyone else and remained silent on the issue. Plus I find it deeply ironic and amusing that a PvE group that does not like PvP would want to vote on a feature where killing and pirating is welcomed.
No. It has a reported 40,000+ individual acounts, in varying states of activity which individual players can own multiples of, players who's loyalty might not lie with the hard-core anti-open rhetoric of its more zealous elements (for example, I had a membership at one stage before I was 'purged').
Wow, a YouTube Poll... stop the press!!
/facepalm.
Interestingly, I'm one of the 150K subscribers and I'd hardly call him "neutral".
But each to their own I guess.
And again, not really a reliable source of information. As anyone can vote on them, just create a free email and vote over and over.
Now if Frontier do a poll, tied to our accounts, then I'll listen. Until then, worthless polls are worthless.
And again, not really a reliable source of information. As anyone can vote on them, just create a free email and vote over and over.
Steam Charts !!!
LMAO.
Wow, just wow.
You do know the game released on PC long before it was on Steam right?
I can log in and play independent of Steam, as can many others.
Plus once some Steam folks found out Steam take 30% of all Steam sales, they unlinked their accounts and moved to the independent launcher.
Citing Steam for evidence is like asking Mystic Meg the lottery numbers.
So as I said, using actual real numbers, direct from Frontier - the people who make the game and have the numbers from independent accounts AND Steam accounts.
Over 4 million copies of Elite have sold, 1,500 people were involved in the focus feedback and not all of those wanted Open Only.
The Mobius Group has 40,000+ members, who want PvE BTW. If the Mobius Group had been bothered to post on the focus feedback, the trolls who want Open Only would have been washed away in that sea of posts.
Now if Frontier do a poll, tied to our accounts, then I'll listen. Until then, worthless polls are worthless.
Well if you want to discount "varying states of activity" - look how many PvP'ers have openly said they don't play - so their voice is worthless I guess, which is cool - makes my life easier when I can link them here for their answer to open only, if you're not actively playing, no voice.
So are you saying then that Obsidian Ant is a useless hardcore PvP troll enabler then? As far as I can tell he occupies the middle ground and attracts subscribers and viewers based on that.
As opposed people who own alt accounts get to vote 'officially' over and over? Admittedly we only have two datapoints but the trend from both is that Open based Powerplay has a lot of interest.
I bought a copy and do not play anymore.
I'm also in mobius and only used it for mode switching.
Steam charts are at least an indication rather than pulling nonsense out of the air.
Of course you do. How many copies of the game are you up to now?
Even then, I suspect that If you got the result you didn't want though, you'd find some off-tangent reason to discount it.
As always, you're strawmanning to try to misdirect from the fact your original statement I quoted is hideously wrong.
So to be clear, I repeat:
1: Mobius numbers are based on account numbers.
2: Players can have multiple accounts.
3: Mobius 'numbers' can't differentiate between active (currently playing) and inactive (not playing) players.
4: Regularly yourself and the rest have repeated in many mode 'discussions' how Mobius isn't a single 'hive mind' entity. I'm citing myself as an example of this, as has Withnail in their response to you. Yet now because it suits your agenda, Mobians are all automatically going to block/oppose Open Only Powerplay.