Obviously that makes you a dirty cheat... or at least some would see it that way... probably 2.8% of the game's population.Oh dear, it looks like I must be offending some as I am currently grinding for Aisling to get Prismatics - and I am doing it in Solo.
PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"
- Thread starter CMDR KOBAL
- Start date
There are eleven powers keeping eyes on each other.
Yes, I guess I must be. I will stand in front of the mirror and give myself a jolly good talking to.
It is harder. You face full engineering builds, more weapons, more dynamic problems. Hauling in solo or PG is easy if you can take off and land without decorating a wall.
Why should the easy path reward the same? Thats not exactly balanced is it? If everything revolves around a flat skill ceiling its not a feature that allows skill growth.
Weighting is the fairest mid point to that, and satisfies keeping it available as it is now.
Do you pick assassin missions and expect them to be uniform in difficulty and reward? Of course not. People will choose the difficult missions but expect an enhanced reward.
The change would be (in this context if I remember right) free from a dev perspective, since it costs nothing to change modes. But for some players it would require a sub.
I agree with this one. Sandro claimed that the aim of PP (unlike the BGS) was to supply a consensual PvP community endgame. You can see that all the way through the design. The reason for the Leaflet Deliverer (The alleged Postman Pat Simulator) is because there must be a bottom tier which the rest of the game can prey on and everything else is built up from that. The issue is that no-one who plays the bottom tier is in open because they get interdicted all the time, so they flip through to pvt or solo to make the deliveries count (Because the PvE enemies are not as good as the PvP ones), thus defeating the purpose of the game mode.
As I've said before, they need to move PP into open only and make the PP rewards available behind the tech brokers for people who can't/won't play in open. If the game mode is broken because of the promise that all game modes (open, pvt and solo) count the same, then the game mode must either be removed or it really has to be altered so that it's fixed.
When this was proposed, there was too much panic from the community that meant that CGs and the BSG would be only counted if they were performed in Open Only as well. I understand that that would be a step too far, especially when you count players who can't/won't get into Open, because there isn't a way to compensate players properly in those circumstances where you could in PP if you put the rewards behind the Tech Brokers.
Problem is. We've been going around this issue again and again in the time since Sandro proposed the change to Open (How long is it? 18 months?) and nothing has been announced or even hinted at. So I'm coming to the conclusion that PP is being left to whither and die. At least with CQC Discords, people can arrange matches and so that game mode can be kept going, but as far as PP is concerned, I think it's RIP.
Well FD are not strangers to alienating playerbases.
I suspect neither of us will be changing our minds on that point any time soon.
The other part to people pushing FD for an answer is exactly that; should people like me still invest in it? If Will came on today and said no, people would have a definitive answer and all these discussions would go away instantly.
No, we have to agree to disagree on it.
If you believe thart I have a bridge to sell you may be interested in!
And finally something we can all agree on. FD won't tell us anything either way until it's a fait accompli.
So far all we have from FD is that Sandro was a supporter of OOPP, and suddenly Sandro no longer works on ED (at least not customer facing).
What we certainly do not know is whether those two things are related. If they were, then we'd have an answer, but we are just putting 2 and 2 together and making 2.8% as usual.
If you think that then you clearly have no understanding of what goes on in these forums.
People will still demand, argue and act as if they are the bosses of the devs just because they purchased a copy of the game; making demands and telling the devs what they should do with their own creation. Some (on both sides of any arguement) seem to act as if they are the official mouthpieces, the prophets, of Frontier Developments. Sometimes the mindless arguing on these forums is as entertaining as the game itself.
Its not as crazy as it sounds. Plus people who are invested in communities etc can decide whether to continue supporting them since they take a significant amount of time.
So, making changes to stop or reduce the effect of 5Cing wouldn't make it different to play? I'd argue it would make it better.
Powerplay missions like were mooted would make it different and better to play. Powerplay missions by themselves could tempt me into partaking in PP. It would (in theory) add some vareity to the grind at least, and variety is one of the best ways of alleviating the feeling of grind. Of course, i'd still like to see some rise and fall mechanics for powers, because that is a really lacking component from my point of view.
I dare say that adding powerplay missions (depending on how it worked) could bring in more players to PP than making it open only, and you know FD, they are more likely to improve a feature if they see it is popular.
Last edited:
If you think that then you clearly have no understanding of what goes on in these forums.
People will still demand, argue and act as if they are the bosses of the devs just because they purchased a copy of the game; making demands and telling the devs what they should do with their own creation. Some (on both sides of any arguement) seem to act as if they are the official mouthpieces, the prophets, of Frontier Developments. Sometimes the mindless arguing on these forums is as entertaining as the game itself.
From a personal perspective:
I ran a (or the) Utopian Reddit for a number of years, wrote fiction for the power and lore stories in GalNet / local station feeds. I did a lot in game for communities, and kept things going when FD abandoned Powerplay. Now, if at the start of that FD said 'Powerplay is being removed' I'd have not bothered, simply as its hard work trying to make something out of what we had and just bumbled about.
In my view it makes the current design more workable, but it does not add anything to an old design that is eclipsed by gameplay elsewhere in ED. Without something to make it stand out its just an expensive BGS shadow.
They sound great, a shame they have no detail (yet, hopefully).
Whatever improvements FD do will be good, but Powerplay has had hardly anything done to add gameplay to it. All its additions have been to correct mistakes and flaws- overhead curves, merit totals, consolidation- none of that made anything more exciting to play.
I don't know where the majority lies. You may be totally correct. If I'm in the minority, I have no problem with accepting a proposition that suits the majority. I'll just move on from the idea of this game becoming great and look for another game.
But the fact that we don't have meaningful pvp now makes the current number of people doing pvp an inaccurate measurement of who would enjoy a game with meaningful pvp built into it.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
.... and there's a vast amount of normal space in each system where players could collude - at any time of the day or night. Not sure that collusion watch would be compelling gameplay for anyone.
I think I've lost the train of this; what collusion are you talking about?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
True - however I don't think that they go out of their way to do so - as would be the case in this instance.
They do know that every single player bought a game that does not require PvP to engage in any normal in-game feature - they can only guess at how many players might want Powerplay to be PvP-gated and what effect that might have on players that don't consider it to be a welcome change.