Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 41011121314
Results 196 to 204 of 204

Thread: If Open is to get something exclusive then PG and Solo also need something

  1. #196
    Originally Posted by Agony_Aunt View Post (Source)
    Sorry, but there is a difference here. As things are, PPers might flip a system to a government more suitable to them. If the governemnt is one that is good for them though, no need. You don't even need the same superpower.
    I think we're down to arguing semantics on this. Because theyre still changing a BGS faction to gain an edge, except replacing the one or two government types with the broader spectrum that 'superpower' allegiance offers.

    Originally Posted by Agony_Aunt View Post (Source)
    What we might now face though (depending on implmentation) is PPers running missions (because let's face it, running a variety of missions is a lot more intersting than that boring PP repetitive mechanics) for factions that are aligned. It won't even necessarily be intentional to hurt a player faction. Just people grinding out regular missions to help with PP.
    See, I didn't for one minute see this as the way he's envisaged it. I'm under the impression we'll have PP cookie cutter missions where the rewards are merits instead of BGS Influence ticks.

    As a side bar even then, as bad as it would be for a few PFs, it'd be interesting attempt to get the playerbase to groundskeep the lore on their behalf, seen as superpowers would actually feel more like a superpower, and mitigate the odd idea we have at the moment where an independent PF for example can be the prime controller of the federal heartlands.

  2. #197
    Originally Posted by withnail View Post (Source)
    They can flag the mission so they it has no rep or influence.

    We're into just making up arguments and avoiding any thinking that will adversely affect the argument.
    If that happened then I'd expect that many of the concerns would be removed.

  3. #198
    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    Game is for 7 years and up.
    Forums for 13 and up.

    Was there a point?
    Spoken like a true 12 year old.

  4. #199
    Originally Posted by withnail View Post (Source)
    They can flag the mission so they it has no rep or influence.

    We're into just making up arguments and avoiding any thinking that will adversely affect the argument.
    This is how I'm seeing it too. Pure merit based, maybe not even with a financial aspect to it (save merits earned per cycle, of course).
    I would hope that PP missions are a separate menu from regular missions. This would prevent complaints about PP clogging the standard board and non PP CMDRs could just ignore the feature. Actually, maybe have the PP missions in the PP menu itself.

    edit - I see Goose already touched on it.

  5. #200
    Originally Posted by Electric Kite View Post (Source)
    Spoken like a true 12 year old.
    Aww bless, you still don't have a point to make - but you need to be noticed.
    Now the grown ups are talking, so go play with your pacifier as you've nothing to contribute.

  6. #201
    Originally Posted by Jockey79 View Post (Source)
    Aww bless, you still don't have a point to make - but you need to be noticed.
    Now the grown ups are talking, so go play with your pacifier as you've nothing to contribute.
    You mean that tantrum you threw at the feedback thread is an adult behaviour?

  7. #202
    Originally Posted by Goose4291 View Post (Source)
    I think we're down to arguing semantics on this. Because theyre still changing a BGS faction to gain an edge, except replacing the one or two government types with the broader spectrum that 'superpower' allegiance offers.
    Don't we always? But i don't feel my faction has any risk of powerplayers destabilzing our faction at the moment due to how things work. We are compaitble with Mahon i think. But once the randoms start running missions to affect their power, that is where it might all blow up.

    Don't get me wrong, i think the inclusion of missions for powers is a great step forward. They talked about PP missions before 1.3 but then they were dropped. However, back then, if it goes in like i think, then we would perhaps have chosen a different superpower for our faction or a system well away from Powerplay. Perhaps this is a bit like the Grom situation. Some groups were badly affected by the appearance of a new power right on their heads. We may face a similar issue with the new mechanics.

    So, i'm hoping, that they separate out PP missions or let people choose a reward - either powerplay or BGS (in addition to the credits/materials,etc).

    Originally Posted by Goose4291 View Post (Source)
    See, I didn't for one minute see this as the way he's envisaged it. I'm under the impression we'll have PP cookie cutter missions where the rewards are merits instead of BGS Influence ticks.
    If so, i'll be more than happy.

  8. #203
    Originally Posted by OOF Waffe PR View Post (Source)
    You mean that tantrum you threw at the feedback thread is an adult behaviour?
    Says the salt miner who's only participation as of yet is tantrum throwing about PvE players.

    Truly ironic.

    Originally Posted by Agony_Aunt View Post (Source)
    Don't we always?
    Yep. It's what most of these arguments really end up boiling down to, except now it's "let's remove options/choices from PvE players because multiplayer!" being used as the defining excuse.

  9. #204
    Right, I think this thread has run it's course.

Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 41011121314