I do love this game, however from my various posts - well that may not come across so readily reading most of my previous posts, as I do have some issues with the game direction. Nonetheless, I do love it and I think it has vast potential; but that potential could grow in a variety of ways and some might not be in a direction favorable to the kind of gameplay I personally would like to see. I'm not trying to speak for everyone, the old joke "opinions are like buttholes - everyone has them and they all stink."
The history of our species has been conflict and war. Since the time of men and women forming small groups to hunt wild animals to the present day, there have been many civilizations that have tried to rise to power and conquer the known world. The last great military attempt at this was WW2, the last political attempt - well the cold war, but it continues doesn't it?
Human interaction in a game of conquest leads people to naturally form groups of like minded individuals. We have done it since the stone age. The Civilization series of games, Empire series of games, Pirates, WW2OL, the list goes on and on.
We live today because our ancestors managed to survive. Our history is full of stories about Empires, great warlords, and famous battles. Only in the last few decades has there been anything close to stability. We learn our history so as not to repeat the mistakes made in the past. It is a past filled with violence and the human desire to control everything.
Powerplay seems to be a bad attempt at emulating this human action. I read the galnet and watch the PP bubble, and what I see is a desire, built into this PP scheme, to sort of restrict expansion, to keep a status quo so to speak so that no single power gets overrun and eliminated. Things are throttled down to mitigate both expansion and contraction of powers. I could be wrong, but that is what I see, and contributes to my non participation in PP.
I've also seen a lot of back and forth on the value of guilds/houses/factions controlled and operated by human players. I suspect there is a lot of concern about what impact player controlled systems might have on the game. I find this reasonable. All I can say is that I think the game would be richer for at least a try at this type of system building. We have a big area to play on, so the location would not have to be near SOL, it could be 10,000 LY from SOL and ED could monitor how it worked and make a decision on its viability.
So what do I see as a benefit to implementing something like this over the current PP?
- For one, I see group formations similar to PP but run by players.
- I see our current tasks being given new meaning and purpose. You explore, mine, fight, trade, for your groups benefit. This is what humans did/do.
- It does not mean that traders or visitors from another group could not go to those systems, but as in real life; you might require a permit and as with PP if in conflict you are a target.
- This type of gameplay will naturally lead to conflict, either solved by politics (treaty) or by war (the end game of politics) not conflict generated by the background computer program, but rather from human players.
Letting player groups decide where to explore, mine, expand, defend. Allowing humans to manage economies, create a military, build stations/outposts, and decide on scientific pursuits. Now it's not just the grind to buy that conda or get elite status. You have a purpose. You can build your Empire.
Or not. Just tossing an idea out there. It sure wouldn't be an ocean inches deep!
The history of our species has been conflict and war. Since the time of men and women forming small groups to hunt wild animals to the present day, there have been many civilizations that have tried to rise to power and conquer the known world. The last great military attempt at this was WW2, the last political attempt - well the cold war, but it continues doesn't it?
Human interaction in a game of conquest leads people to naturally form groups of like minded individuals. We have done it since the stone age. The Civilization series of games, Empire series of games, Pirates, WW2OL, the list goes on and on.
We live today because our ancestors managed to survive. Our history is full of stories about Empires, great warlords, and famous battles. Only in the last few decades has there been anything close to stability. We learn our history so as not to repeat the mistakes made in the past. It is a past filled with violence and the human desire to control everything.
Powerplay seems to be a bad attempt at emulating this human action. I read the galnet and watch the PP bubble, and what I see is a desire, built into this PP scheme, to sort of restrict expansion, to keep a status quo so to speak so that no single power gets overrun and eliminated. Things are throttled down to mitigate both expansion and contraction of powers. I could be wrong, but that is what I see, and contributes to my non participation in PP.
I've also seen a lot of back and forth on the value of guilds/houses/factions controlled and operated by human players. I suspect there is a lot of concern about what impact player controlled systems might have on the game. I find this reasonable. All I can say is that I think the game would be richer for at least a try at this type of system building. We have a big area to play on, so the location would not have to be near SOL, it could be 10,000 LY from SOL and ED could monitor how it worked and make a decision on its viability.
So what do I see as a benefit to implementing something like this over the current PP?
- For one, I see group formations similar to PP but run by players.
- I see our current tasks being given new meaning and purpose. You explore, mine, fight, trade, for your groups benefit. This is what humans did/do.
- It does not mean that traders or visitors from another group could not go to those systems, but as in real life; you might require a permit and as with PP if in conflict you are a target.
- This type of gameplay will naturally lead to conflict, either solved by politics (treaty) or by war (the end game of politics) not conflict generated by the background computer program, but rather from human players.
Letting player groups decide where to explore, mine, expand, defend. Allowing humans to manage economies, create a military, build stations/outposts, and decide on scientific pursuits. Now it's not just the grind to buy that conda or get elite status. You have a purpose. You can build your Empire.
Or not. Just tossing an idea out there. It sure wouldn't be an ocean inches deep!
Last edited: