Player affecting factions even in Pvt and Solo

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
My argument wasn't coming from a License perspective, as that was already talked about (People who actually do certain aspects of the game full time) and are experienced in said area vs someone who isn't.

My comparison was referencing knowledge, not license to practice.
Doesn't change my response - one does not need in-depth knowledge of the game to buy and play the game, nor does one require to gain it to continue to play the game.

The "if you don't play the feature and have an in-depth knowledge of the feature, you shouldn't be allowed to express an opinion on the feature" attitude is not expressed here for the first time - it's a fairly common attitude among those who seek to change the game in ways that might be contentious. However, it's not up to an unelected subset of the player-base to make decisions on behalf of all players....
 
Last edited:
Ok Thanks.

In regards to: Perhaps PP players, or PvP combat players in particular, believe that the rest of us are not as clever as they are and can't see through the false premise?

Not at all. However its generally accepted that a person who specializes in a certain field, take a doctor for instance, would have far more experience and knowledge on a certain topic ie medicine than the local clerk at your local health food store.

Same goes for Elite my friend.
I love a good analogy so please do not take this the wrong way as i am mostly teasing, however I would say you dont have to be a gourmet chef to be able to tell if a meal tastes like crap or not ;)

I am not anti engineer at all, (though i think their affects are far far to over powered) however i do have strict rules - of my own making so that is on me i guess - to make it impossible for me to build ships which are essentially invincible against AI.... These rules keep the game interesting and challenging for me against ai, but does mean my ship will always be an order of magnitude weaker than other builds.
This is a choice i make so it is on me... but it only really works because i know i still get the full game experience in PGs, This does suddently change if features get taken and locked to open.
I also feel all equipment should have a place in the game.. and if it doesnt it should not be in the game.... therefore E rated gear should be fit for purpose. I dont buy a car and then before i even dare drive it outside feel the need to get it striped down and rebuilt to GT3 spec.

Personally the loss of PP I could live with ideally so long as there were carrots thrown in there as well (cant have PP, therefore dont spawn PP targets instead spawn other ships instead - so many times my instance is just full of anoying PP targets). but i totally see the problem where players who DO enjoy PP but who do not play in open would feel agrieved.

also there is the issue of the equipement locked behind PP.
 

The Replicated Man

T
I love a good analogy so please do not take this the wrong way as i am mostly teasing, however I would say you dont have to be a gourmet chef to be able to tell if a meal tastes like crap or not ;)

I am not anti engineer at all, (though i think their affects are far far to over powered) however i do have strict rules - of my own making so that is on me i guess - to make it impossible for me to build ships which are essentially invincible against AI.... These rules keep the game interesting and challenging for me against ai, but does mean my ship will always be an order of magnitude weaker than other builds.
This is a choice i make so it is on me... but it only really works because i know i still get the full game experience in PGs, This does suddently change if features get taken and locked to open.
I also feel all equipment should have a place in the game.. and if it doesnt it should not be in the game.... therefore E rated gear should be fit for purpose. I dont buy a car and then before i even dare drive it outside feel the need to get it striped down and rebuilt to GT3 spec.

Personally the loss of PP I could live with ideally so long as there were carrots thrown in there as well (cant have PP, therefore dont spawn PP targets instead spawn other ships instead - so many times my instance is just full of anoying PP targets). but i totally see the problem where players who DO enjoy PP but who do not play in open would feel agrieved.

also there is the issue of the equipement locked behind PP.
That is fair :)
 

The Replicated Man

T
The "if you don't play the feature and have an in-depth knowledge of the feature, you shouldn't be allowed to express an opinion on the feature"
That is not what I am trying to say. As I mentioned earlier everyone is welcome to their own opinion, however it is my opinion that people should show more respect to people who have more experience, instead of trying to argue and making themselves look like fools.

That is all :)
 
Ok Thanks.

In regards to: Perhaps PP players, or PvP combat players in particular, believe that the rest of us are not as clever as they are and can't see through the false premise?

Not at all. However its generally accepted that a person who specializes in a certain field, take a doctor for instance, would have far more experience and knowledge on a certain topic ie medicine than the local clerk at your local health food store.

Same goes for Elite my friend.
False premise again, my good man.

To stay on topic - but also in the metaphorical sense stay with your doctor as well - what you are trying to do is to block other peoples access to medical cover, just because you are more familiar with the principles of medical treatment.

We aren't talking about the principles of medical treatment in this thread, this conversation about OOPP is instead the discussion about access to medical treatment.

That is why you may well be the SME on PP itself, but you cannot, in all conscience, then say that because any other player is less qualified than you at PP then their access to it, or restriction of access to it, is not of their concern. It is absolutely their concern, and deep down we all know this to be true.

In that context, I'd be grateful if you'd refrain from saying:

"I know about Power Play. Therefore it should be Open Only." < --- this is not a logical fundamental standpoint so far as I can tell...

Yours Aye

Mark H
 
We aren't talking about the principles of medical treatment in this thread, this conversation about OOPP is instead the discussion about access to medical treatment.
Have to disagree, a better comparison is "Who would you go to for sound advice on medical treatment?"

Discussing changes to a game feature is all well and good for anyone who plays the game, but when it comes to making recommendations or suggestions for making it better, it doesn't make any sense at all that that the voices of those who do not participate in the feature should have as much weight as those who do.

I haven't engaged in Power Play yet, but I gotta say I'd rather have the people who do be far more influential on the future of that aspect of the game over people who are neither as invested in nor as knowledgeable about it. Common sense just tells me that is better for the health of the game overall.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Discussing changes to a game feature is all well and good for anyone who plays the game, but when it comes to making recommendations or suggestions for making it better, it doesn't make any sense at all that that the voices of those who do not participate in the feature should have as much weight as those who do.
Therein lies the issue - one specific suggestion for "making it better" wouldn't make it better for all players, it would lock some players out of it (if they don't enjoy PvP - and no-one requires to enjoy PvP to have bought the game as PvP is entirely optional in all game features [insert caveat regarding CQC/Arena]).

Proposals to make the feature better for all players would likely be welcomed by all players, and might well increase participation in the feature overall - the proposal to PvP-gate the feature is the contentious one.
 
Therein lies the issue - one specific suggestion for "making it better" wouldn't make it better for all players, it would lock some players out of it (if they don't enjoy PvP - and no-one requires to enjoy PvP to have bought the game as PvP is entirely optional in all game features [insert caveat regarding CQC/Arena]).

Proposals to make the feature better for all players would likely be welcomed by all players, and might well increase participation in the feature overall - the proposal to PvP-gate the feature is the contentious one.
Totally agree only insofar as only people who actually engage in PP should have much voice in such a discussion. Random Joe-blow player who does NOT engage in PP really isn't relevent to the discussion anymore than someone who doesn't even play the game. If significantly more active PP players do play it in Open and almost all of them think that making it Open only will make it better, they are probably right. On the other hand, if a large chunk of PP players are playing it in Solo/private group and think it should remain as-is...then they are probably right.

If it is split down the middle...tough call.
 
Have to disagree, a better comparison is "Who would you go to for sound advice on medical treatment?"
Again - we aren't talking about the actual "treatment", but rather every player's access to it.

You don't rescind any patient's (paid for) access to NHS treatment just because that patient is not a doctor.


Allow me to put it another way. I happen to be a member of the Armed Forces. You would even have to call me a Subject Matter Expert in my area of expertise. Yet I would never presume I had any more right to author Government Policy on the use of the Armed Forces, which has an effect on all of the country's population, than any other layman on the street. Those particular aspects are separate and distinct.


I keep asking the same question about the motivation behind OOPP.

What is it exactly and precisely that you are trying to achieve?

But I keep getting no direct answer. Just a vacuum of ignorance. I can only guess at the reasons for this and some of the deductions are not exactly pretty outcomes for the game. Yet here we are still talking about it, in the context of that vacuum. Which isn't helpful.


Yours Aye

Mark H
 
Again - we aren't talking about the actual "treatment", but rather every player's access to it.
Not actually accurate. What is being discussed is what would make it better. Access is just a by-product of that. And I would argue that anyone who isn't already taking advantage of freely available healthcare certainly shouldn't be a part of a discussion on how to make existing healthcare better.
 
This is where I'll agree to disagree - every player bought access to Powerplay, regardless of play-style preference, as part of the base game.
Sure, but every player also bought access to being able to "Explore the galaxy" but I would not want Frontier to listen too closely to folks who have never left the Bubble if making any changes to that mode of gameplay. Appeasing people who do not use a game feature at the expense of those who actually do use it just produces watered-down gameplay that NO ONE ends up enjoying.

It's not like making PP Open only actually means anyone 'can't use the feature'. We all have access to Open.
 
Last edited:

The Replicated Man

T
Interesting viewpoints from both sides. In the end it's up to frontier but I seriously doubt that Open only powerplay will be released.
Considering Sandro was removed as the figurehead and that FDEV have been very quiet about it.

I think one one side we have the PvPers who really want a reason to PvP in game (CQC is just CQC, you can't compare it to PvP in game. They are totally different) and right now all we have is just people who are bored and going to Engineering systems to gank etc because PvP is quite stale IMO.

And then we have the PvE community who don't want to PvP for some reason (And they have the right to choose) and they don't want to be forced into a PvP scenario regardless if it's Powerplay or not.


For now we will just have to wait and see. I feel it's on FDEV's Back Burner . FDEV apparently feel that people are more interested in Thargoids and Guardians than PvP, or anything else in the game right now. Honestly with the new Interstellar Initiatives I just don't understand why they are even bothering going down that route but hey, It's FDEV. Noone knows what they are going to to next.
 
Totally agree only insofar as only people who actually engage in PP should have much voice in such a discussion.
Here you are dead wrong. And if you can't see why, then no wonder the discussion rumbles on.
You appear to be convinced that no other players should get any kind of say in this, and expect your say to be the defining one. Can you not see a problem with this?


Random Joe-blow player who does NOT engage in PP really isn't relevent to the discussion anymore than someone who doesn't even play the game.
Again - dead wrong. I'm also going to take a stab in the dark that you think those players who DO engage in PP, but do so from PG and Solo, have their say in the feature removed as well?


If significantly more active PP players do play it in Open and almost all of them think that making it Open only will make it better, they are probably right. On the other hand, if a large chunk of PP players are playing it in Solo/private group and think it should remain as-is...then they are probably right.

If it is split down the middle...tough call.


It's not really a tough call at all.

If you come out with what you are actually trying to achieve, you may well get a ground swell of support.

If, truly, the PP dynamic would be improved FOR ALL PLAYERS, then this is definitely what would happen. However, the vacuum of information on what exactly it is that you are trying to push is the very reason that this ground swell is not apparent. Perhaps the "notions" being put forward by the PvP community simply does not appeal to most players ("notions" as opposed to fundamental gameplay expectations - which are not forthcoming - so the "notions" are all we have to go on at the moment.)

Yours Aye

Mark H
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Sure, but every player also bought access to being able to "Explore the galaxy" but I would not want Frontier to listen too closely to folks who have never left the Bubble if making any changes to that mode of gameplay. Appeasing people who do not use a game feature at the expense of those who actually do use it just produces watered-down gameplay that NO ONE ends up enjoying.
Frontier will, of course, decide who they want to listen to - however they will very likely consider the likely effects on the player-base as a whole of any change (and, after the Offline-Gate debacle, will very probably carefully consider how any change is perceived more widely).

Has Powerplay been "watered down" since implementation? It's been available in all three modes from its beginnings, after all.
 
Has Powerplay been "watered down" since implementation? It's been available in all three modes from its beginnings, after all.
Heck if I know, I've only been playing for a few months. :)

I don't PvP (at least not yet), nor do I engage in Power Play (yet). My voice is definitely not one that I want Frontier to give much weight to on this topic, to be completely honest.

Really I'm just an outside observer that has been following this thread because Power Play does interest me and I will get involved in it sooner, rather than later, so any discussion on changes to it also interests me. Being an outside observer, I like to think my viewpoint is completely unbiased at least.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
Really I'm just an outside observer that has been following this thread because Power Play does interest me and I will get involved in it sooner, rather than later, so any discussion on changes to it also interests me. Being an outside observer, I like to think my viewpoint is completely unbiased at least.
Everyone has their own preferences, preconceptions and biases (however mild they may be) - regardless of how new they are to the game.
 
Not actually accurate. What is being discussed is what would make it better. Access is just a by-product of that. And I would argue that anyone who isn't already taking advantage of freely available healthcare certainly shouldn't be a part of a discussion on how to make existing healthcare better.
And that is exactly the point. Every single person in the UK has access to the NHS right now. Yet here we are - some self-appointed politico-doctors on this forum are campaigning to cut access unless you are already a doctor.

Saying that you want to make it better is just fluff here. Better How?
All we are hearing is "make it Open Only", as if you have decided that this will, in fact, make PP better, without spending any amount of investment in analysing the actual outcome of that closed minded and blinkered campaign.
I've already gone to great lengths to try to discuss the potential outcomes of locking PP to Open Only, yet it appears that nobody wants to take part in that discussion. I can only guess at the reasons why, and it isn't a helpful conclusion.
 
Top Bottom