Powerplay If FD decided it could take the time to implement Open Only for Powerplay, do you think it should go to a public vote?

Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
So, tried to have this discussion in the other active thread, but it keeps getting derailed.

Let's assume FD decide they have the time and resources to make Powerplay open only. Not just that, but implement other features that will make Powerplay a lot more interesting and dynamic for players. The lay out their plans and say, well, either we (FD) can make the decision, or we can leave it up to the players as to whether Open Only happens (regardless of the other changes proposed).

Would you support the idea of it going to a public vote and be accepting of the outcome, regardless of which way it goes? Or would you prefer FD make the call, and be accepting of the outcome, regardless of which way it goes?

So, this thread is not about whether you support open only or not. That discussion has plenty of other threads to happen in.

Its about whether you think, should FD say they can and are willing to do it, whether you trust the community to make the right decision (from your perspective) or you trust FD more.

Or maybe you don't think either would make the "right" decision, in which case, you're boned either way :D

Personally, i don't think FD would do it if it was left up to them. On the public vote side, i'm not certain, i think it could go either way, although i suspect its more likely to be a no.

Due to the contentious nature of the topic, i'm also not sure which is best. Should FD take responsibility for such a wide reaching decision, or should they let the community decide? On the one side, they will get blamed by those who are on the losing side of the vote if they make the call, on the other side they will get criticized for letting the community deicide if it goes to public vote. They are going to get criticized regardless.

Its a hard call, but overall, i think this is something FD should let the community decide, and let the community take the blame either way :D
 
I am all for democracy in real world matters. But honestly I think games and artworks should be made by one creative person or group with a vision and not be subject to public votes for every development step.

I am just wondering if actually there is anyone with a vision for the game at FDev??? But I believe they have a plan and they are working towards it. So I don't think there is any sense in polling and voting for those things. But I might just be wrong in my assuptions too...
 
Its about whether you think, should FD say they can and are willing to do it, whether you trust the community to make the right decision (from your perspective) or you trust FD more.
They should not just say they can and are willing to do it... they should simply do it.
Whether I trust the community or FDev does not matter at all. Who cares about who I trust? Who trusts me? Who trusts who? It is not worth discussing.

Even though I am not a fan of multiplayer at all, and would have strongly preferred Elite to be a single player game, I think Powerplay should obviously be Open only.
It could become a great platform for multiplayer in Elite... but it needs to be developed further.

FDev could organize a public vote on this topic, but to be honest I think they should not bother.
They should simply show some developer decisiveness in this case.
Multiplayer needs more love and Powerplay is the obvious way to go about it (but not the only way).
 
That would be like a... PPexit vote, no? Do you really want to spend the next 3 years with FDev arguing over which bits of PP are included, whether there's a BGS backstop, and how many red lines they need before there's a vote of no confidence in DBOBE?

Sounds way too political for my taste.
 
They should not just say they can and are willing to do it... they should simply do it.
Whether I trust the community or FDev does not matter at all. Who cares about who I trust? Who trusts me? Who trusts who? It is not worth discussing.

Even though I am not a fan of multiplayer at all, and would have strongly preferred Elite to be a single player game, I think Powerplay should obviously be Open only.
It could become a great platform for multiplayer in Elite... but it needs to be developed further.

FDev could organize a public vote on this topic, but to be honest I think they should not bother.
They should simply show some developer decisiveness in this case.
Multiplayer needs more love and Powerplay is the obvious way to go about it (but not the only way).
Ok, you think FD should make a decision, and wouldn't be ok if they decided to not do it?

EDIT: typo
 
As Arkadi said (and I already told you many times in the "derailed thread" you mentioned) it is very difficult to make a poll about this, because unlike the other poll we had we're not talking about a single and very limited detail in the game, we're talking about the very design of a game mechanic as a whole.

Most importantly the true nature of the discussion, "Should Powerplay go Open Only?", would become something more like "OPEN OR SOLO???? DECIDE NOW OR WE'RE ALL GONNA BE DOOMED!1!11!!".

So my answer is: yes, this would be interesting in the ideal situation where people asked for their opinion would have any interest in Powerplay at all, or even consider how Powerplay would be the only game mechanic affected by that in the future.

But this has been made a bigger (and political) matter by people who are not interested in Powerplay at all, which, by the way, I think it shouldn't be (and that's the reason why I kept telling you those things in the other thread). Many people with no interest at all in Powerplay are struggling so hard to be part of the discussion, as it was during the Focused Feedback, when a game mechanic abandoned by the majority of Players suddenly became the hot topic not because of the game mechanic itself, but because Open Play was identified by the majority of the very same players left playing Powerplay as an ideal solution for the game mechanic itself.

Things have become complicated with Open Only Powerplay, and that's not Powerplayers' fault. Well, not the ones botting and 5Cing, of course. Or maybe they would like that too, if they're trying to sabotage the game to force their hand on FDev to fix it. Honestly: 5C patterns have become quite unexplicable the last few cycles.
 
Last edited:
At face value, the argument for keeping things as they are is the easier to understand & agree with. It requires a non-decision to just not change anything, and preserves freedom and choice for all, Liberte, Equalite, Fra/Soeurternite. Etc. (Snip this for Jockey's wall and you are cherrypicking shamelessly) ;)
In practice Solo/PG modes in Powerplay have relegated Open play to an irrelevant indulgence, and contributed in large part to Powerplay withering on the vine. The other problems which took effect later are mechanics flaws, empowered by private modes. These flaws make defence massively overpowered and resulted in every power with a functional playerbase filling the bubble so no worthwhile expansions are left. As it stands all this is only rectified by Cmdrs joining their sworn enemy and using overpowered sabotage to cripple it from within. Its as if (war-time analogy alert!) stalemate on the Western Front was resolved by the French donning german uniforms and vice-versa and each side crossing no-man's land to man each other's defences. And then destroying them, before the french in german clothing march off to Berlin and trash it unopposed, while the germans do the same to Paris.
It's a farce, a broken set of mechanics in their death-throes, and when players realise and get fed up with it they leave in large numbers, which is going on all the time. A kernel of powerplay playergroups remain, but it's a shrivelled husk that wont survive forever. Powerplay needs fixing. We had a Focussed Feedback proposal a year ago which provided an inspired set of solutions, and it needs implementing in full imo.
All it takes are libertarian feelies to get the argument to keep things as they are. On the other hand it requires understanding of the end of the end-game to realise why this is (counter-intuitively) removing player-choice, replacing teamplay with relentless grind against enemies who never sleep, and never stop, feel no remorse, etc.. and providing the basic restriction of Open-Only powerplay is an essential component of a set of changes that would allow it to survive & thrive.
That would be like a... PPexit vote, no? Do you really want to spend the next 3 years with FDev arguing over which bits of PP are included, whether there's a BGS backstop, and how many red lines they need before there's a vote of no confidence in DBOBE?

Sounds way too political for my taste.
The difference here is FDev dont have to negotiate terms agreeable to 27 other developers, and they already have a cohesive plan to implement which addresses all the major problems from numerous angles.
It's way ahead of where brexit is even now, and needs minimal development time to implement, (a tiny fraction of the effort put into exploration & mining mechanics, for example)
 
In the end, as FD and Sandro said, its not a democracy and they pull the trigger.

From what I gather any updates and improvements have to justify themselves and are agreed by patrons inside FD. If they look at PP at face value they'll see that it now is a bizarre, inferior cousin to the BGS with no real purpose. Open PP gives PP a purpose within ED, and I hope they do it- otherwise Powerplay will simply languish in obscurity as the BGS gets the limelight.

My only real demand is that FD come forward sooner rather than later and tell us what they intend to do.
 
My only real demand is that FD come forward sooner rather than later and tell us what they intend to do.
Have to agree. Sandro dropped the same bomb twice with no firm result either way from FD, which leads to these speculation threads and continued debates.

But rather than FD giving a firm statement, they just said nothing decided.
 
Or maybe the vote over ship transfer times?
That was a detail, not a great decision on a whole game mechanic. It's different. The most similar thing is what happened with BGS: in the end they followed some ideas and abandoned some others, like multiple conflicts for example, and there were many large groups that strongly opposed that solution. I've got a fairly large pmf (25 systems) and I honestly welcomed that solution, it proved a right choice in the end.
 
I don't understand why they don't just disconnect it from the main game and make it its own mode.

Open
Arena / CQC
Power Play
Private
Solo


Have Power Play Mode override any block/friend list weighting for the MM and anyone who gets weird "connection problems" can just be blocked from joining the PPM.
This way, those who want PP are sure to be playing with others who want PP and know no one is "hiding" in any mode. Then everyone else can carry on playing ED as normal with the bonus of people in PP not getting in the way.

Also, this would mean fewer instances for those doing PP (as all PP'ers would be matched with only other PP'ers), meaning it would be easier to try and blockade a system from incoming pamphlet runners and credit dumps etc, rather than be in one full of none aligned miners, explorers and traders who are of no value to PP.

So I vote for PPM.
 
I don't understand why they don't just disconnect it from the main game and make it its own mode.

Open
Arena / CQC
Power Play
Private
Solo


Have Power Play Mode override any block/friend list weighting for the MM and anyone who gets weird "connection problems" can just be blocked from joining the PPM.
This way, those who want PP are sure to be playing with others who want PP and know no one is "hiding" in any mode. Then everyone else can carry on playing ED as normal with the bonus of people in PP not getting in the way.

Also, this would mean fewer instances for those doing PP (as all PP'ers would be matched with only other PP'ers), meaning it would be easier to try and blockade a system from incoming pamphlet runners and credit dumps etc, rather than be in one full of none aligned miners, explorers and traders who are of no value to PP.

So I vote for PPM.
But would you rather a vote on this or for Fdev to decide?
 
Ok, you think FD should make a decision, and wouldn't be ok if they decided to not do it?

EDIT: typo
Nope. I don't think that is what I said.
As I said... I personally do think they should do it. For me that is the obvious destiny of PowerPlay, but...
I would be okay with it if they didn't, simply because it doesn't matter one bit if I was not okay with it. I am a realist. My opinion is not very important.

And that was the other point of my post. Who cares whether I or you are okay with anything.
It is FDevs game. They can't please everybody anyway.

I am for example not okay with the game not having an off line option, as was promised. Does that change anything?
So it is therefore pointless to discuss this in such a context.
 
Last edited:
I don't understand why they don't just disconnect it from the main game and make it its own mode.

Open
Arena / CQC
Power Play
Private
Solo


Have Power Play Mode override any block/friend list weighting for the MM and anyone who gets weird "connection problems" can just be blocked from joining the PPM.
This way, those who want PP are sure to be playing with others who want PP and know no one is "hiding" in any mode. Then everyone else can carry on playing ED as normal with the bonus of people in PP not getting in the way.

Also, this would mean fewer instances for those doing PP (as all PP'ers would be matched with only other PP'ers), meaning it would be easier to try and blockade a system from incoming pamphlet runners and credit dumps etc, rather than be in one full of none aligned miners, explorers and traders who are of no value to PP.

So I vote for PPM.
This really makes sense. I would vote for that solution.
 
This really makes sense. I would vote for that solution.
I do not think it makes sense at all.
Power play could be a great 'vehicle' for PvP in Open.
Separating it would most likely mean its certain demise.
Many think that CQC should never have been separated either.
 
Status
Thread Closed: Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom