fd
Nice constructive comment, there.
Player affecting factions even in Pvt and Solo
- Thread starter 3Times4
- Start date
It's the comment that this tired, done-to-death, pointless debate deserves.
So you agree that it is a pointless debate and Power Play should be left as it is, then?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Just as those who bought a game that in no way requires any player to engage in PvP to participate in any game feature (except CQC/Arena, of course) will continue to complain about the lack of PvP-gated features?
Yes, I think the OP is a pointless debate - Frontier aren't going to change a fundamental aspect of their game's design and start spiraling their costs upwards by maintaining separate servers. Where's the business case for doing that?
I thought Sandro's proposals for Powerplay were very good. And I mean all his proposals, the Open-Only aspect was just one part of the bigger picture.
Yes, those too. Forum is full of moaners.
I would tend to agree with your basic premise - IF what I had said was anything other than intuitively obvious and demonstrably concrete.
I phrased it that way on purpose. You might see it as arrogant. I might agree with that if it was my first post on exactly the same point, that others are simply wilfuly ignoring it out-of-hand (even though it is patently obvious what I was originally saying) You might see it as arrogance, however, my intention was to get people's attention abruptly - so that they then question in their own minds why this might be the case. Why was I getting their attention so abruptly? Which I then later go on to clarify...
If the people I was addressing had bothered to invest some mental energy in my previous posts, then I wouldn't have phrased it later in stronger language (solely as a response to those who keep ignoring the point and then keep telling me I'm wrong, without reason.... and this is where I can see your bias coming out... label the guy who has a meaningful material as "arrogant" and then use that label of "arrogance" as a reason to then justify the group's wilful ignorance of the meaningful material),.
I had been driven from gentle persuasion in previous posts when I was feeding people the information they need to make a proper value judgement - which they refuse to assimilate - to later writing the stark obviousness in words that can't really be misinterpreted.
Reference to "Arrogance". You know - it is quite prevalent that when there is a difference of opinion between 2 adults that when one puts forward the view that is more demonstrably the view that ought to be taken, the person who had the "wrong" notion accuses the other of being "arrogant". Such is human nature.
Bearing in mind the vacuum of why you think Open Only would be better for PP...
Perhaps it is now on the self-appointed OOPP campaigners to tell the majority of players (including those players who engage in PP, but prefer to do it in their PG or Solo modes) why the self appointed minority campaigners insist that everybody else should have no vote? < -- When it is phrased like that - do the self appointed campaigners of OOPP have a reasonable answer? And am I being arrogant in requesting that the self appointed campaigners finally explain why?
Yours Aye
Mark H
Conjecture.
Goose4291
Banned
You regularly get an answer, it's just you refuse to accept it as one and then vaguely allude to how it's all smokes and mirrors for a hidden agenda.
Nope. Not true. Never seen an answer in detail (*). EVER - just the transparent and FIRST order effect that is the desired outcome, not the further implications for PP.
Go on...
Indulge us...
Tell us about it...
In detail - what the further second and third order implications would be for the entirety of PP as a coherent game feature...
Now that you've bitten to my post, own it and follow it through with some meaningful discussion. (I forum PvP dare you, LOL.)
(I'll start you off - if going Open Only were just to get all PvP combat PP pilots into Open - I can tell you, you already know, that this is a feature that is available to you right now... you may wish to include in your answer why this isn't being utilised right now
)Looking forward to some meaningful discussion
Mark H
(*) - if you ever have in a thread I've participated in, then maybe add a link to that specific post - then you can say you were right about me ignoring it. But I very much doubt that this will be the case, and your "you regularly get an answer" is just, as always, empty fluff. However - I am very much prepared to stand corrected, because I'm generous like that
As a reward, you will get an public forum apology if you are correct that proper answers have been forthcoming. But be warned Mr Goose, I am looking for the full implications, both positive and negative, and not just a list of your desires devoid of any actual analysis and sound conclusions.WorldsGreatestForumDad
Banned
Whats wrong with powerplay having its own rewards.
Dont tell me this place is gonna throw a fit if we get different ships and tools only available through powerplay?
Get a grip folks.
I'd even go as far as to say it should have its own currency.
Dont tell me this place is gonna throw a fit if we get different ships and tools only available through powerplay?
Get a grip folks.
I'd even go as far as to say it should have its own currency.
Last edited:
Goose4291
Banned
Except we don't have to look far to see what I'm referring to with you dismissing people as having 'ulterior motives'.
I refer you to you're earlier post, in this thread:
Why would someone bother reiterating their stance to you for the 9 millionth time in this thread, when you're simply going to dismiss it with that sort of level of arrogance and pomposity?
So the question as I see it is will oopp make PP better (subjective of course)
By itself I dont think so: however, I am open to changing my mind.
What would be the purpose of OOPP?
If its to make everyone who engages in it open to all other players, unless the networking./instancing is improved I dont see that as a viable realistic outcome.
In addition to timezones. platforms, instancing limits, and node jumps there is the block list as well as router settings traffic flooding and probably others I have no idea of. (not advocating the use of these tactics)
The blocklist would be fairly easy to over come, just make it go away if pledged. (how easy from a programming stance I have no idea)
Router settings well thats something that would probably require a new network handling setup, same would go for traffic flooding etc. Not impossible to do but I am not sure either.
Could it increase the number of players you might instance with? Maybe, but thats kind of an unknown it could also mean fewer people not more engage in PP.
So unless other improvements were made as well as OOPP I just dont see it having a meaningful effect on PP.
As Ziggy has stated (probably others as well) there should be some kind of actual agency for players other than the shiny modules, and in my opinion some actual changes to make it more meaningful.
Respectfully
By itself I dont think so: however, I am open to changing my mind.
What would be the purpose of OOPP?
If its to make everyone who engages in it open to all other players, unless the networking./instancing is improved I dont see that as a viable realistic outcome.
In addition to timezones. platforms, instancing limits, and node jumps there is the block list as well as router settings traffic flooding and probably others I have no idea of. (not advocating the use of these tactics)
The blocklist would be fairly easy to over come, just make it go away if pledged. (how easy from a programming stance I have no idea)
Router settings well thats something that would probably require a new network handling setup, same would go for traffic flooding etc. Not impossible to do but I am not sure either.
Could it increase the number of players you might instance with? Maybe, but thats kind of an unknown it could also mean fewer people not more engage in PP.
So unless other improvements were made as well as OOPP I just dont see it having a meaningful effect on PP.
As Ziggy has stated (probably others as well) there should be some kind of actual agency for players other than the shiny modules, and in my opinion some actual changes to make it more meaningful.
Respectfully
If you have the response, then let's just hear it, for the first time (not the nine-million-and-first
).If you don't have the confidence in your position, then continue the personal attacks.
Your call.
Careful about posting well judged, well reasoned, well written and balanced responses on this. Which your response is - very well balanced and containing some good analysis of second order effects. The OOPP crowd just don't want to hear it and just don't want this level of balanced response, because, you know, the more that this balanced analytical response is provided, the more that they refuse to engage in actual discussion of whether it would be good for PP, or not. And from your own conclusions, it would appear that going Open Only would probably do nothing to improve PP.
It might improve PvP play, but there's nothing at the moment stopping those that want to PvP in the PP environment from doing so, yet apparently, they don't appear to be using that feature fully. For PvP I mean. Even though PvP combat is it's own reward!
Nice post, and one that the self-appointed OOPP campaigners could learn a lot from
Yours Aye
Mark H
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
IF the game was such that all vanity items in the game were earnable by doing in game stuff and every feature and each faction had their own paint jobs and ship kits etc and we had some form of in game trophy cabinet where we could see all of our unlocks - a bit like the bobblehead wall in fallout (which is exactly how the game should be imo.;..... i would have immense fun just trying to "get them all" ) then i would have no issues with PP having its own cosmetics even if in open only. (i would probably just log into open, do PP and get the skins before bailing but that is by the by)
however the game isnt like that, so what you are suggesting is making PP a special snowflake feature which would be the only feature which rewarded the player with skins and trinkets..... and that I am less in favour of.
all his proposals? how could you want them all, some were contradictory. Yes Sandro proposed OO PP, however he also proposed a 2 tier PP, with 1 tier in open and 1 tier in the other modes. AS far as the player would see, both would be exactly the same, they still would rank up the same way and get any and all rewards BUT the influence in solo would have a modifier put on it so that its over all effects of PP were reduced compared to the influence if done in open.
so, there you have 2 proposals both antagonistic to each other so not sure how you can want both (personally i prefer the bottom of the 2 options myself)
If Power Play is made open only and the winnable toys aren't made available in other ways to those in PG or Solo then a good proportion of those PG and Solo players who want to win those toys will play in Open but will find other ways to avoid PvP interaction.
And there are many ways.
true... but then the game is already full of ways to exploit it, hell many of the youtube commentators make videos encouraging use of exploits and showing how you can get every spawning numbers of mats etc.
So sure some would definitely exploit it if it was put in place..... but also many wouldnt. I wont lie and say i have never exploited the game, Christ, FD pretty much forced the issue when they did the barnacle farming CG..... Anyone who got in the top 50% of that who claim they didnt exploit the mode hopping instance refresh is a liar imo....
but after a while i realised it was killing the game for me so i stopped......... for the most part.... i still refresh res on occasion etc but i feel dirty doing it.
The game at its core is designed to encourage you to exploit it. I think it is part of the game which is terribly designed but it is what it is. Far better the kill the exploits, make things persist far more and then balance the game better....... but that is more work and doesnt lead to better eye candy sales shots.
I don't use any "exploits" at the moment, and never have. If I get a poor RES, I stay there. But if I want to earn a Prismatic shield for my new ship and I couldn't do that in my PG, I certainly would. I would, of course, not do anything specifically against the rules, but I certainly would menu-log as soon as I saw another player and block every player I saw. I would certainly mode switch if that works. (e.g. pick up Aisling's leaflets in Open, switch to Solo, fly to my destination, back to Open).
Others, of course, would take less "legal" routes, from straightforward "combat logging" to frigging their router's settings to make PvP impossible.
The OOPP supporters would then start howling about all of the things that ex-solo players are doing to avoid being their entertainment-du-jour and demanding that Frontier do something to put a stop to it. More effort taken away from fixing bugs and adding features that everyone wants.
I was referring to agreeing with all the points in his first proposal. Apologies for the lack of clarity on that.
(Tbh I completely forgot about his alternative proposal, it didn't really wash with me.)
Last edited: