Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
When Will commented recently regarding Powerplay his wording indicated that some of the proposals from the first Flash Topic were being considered.
Player affecting factions even in Pvt and Solo
- Thread starter 3Times4
- Start date
Hmm, I liked them because there was a synergy between them that would have come together to create flashpoints for conflict, which I found quite exciting. Some is better that none obviously, and all ideas need a process of refinement. I do hope that the intent to create conflict hotspots is carried forward.
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://d2aefvhu2f0gi9.cloudfront.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
No worries I have no problem what ever your opinion was, i was just unsure which one you supported as, lets just say, Sandros said a lot of things
..... for the record i will provide a link to the original Sandros proposal for PP for those who are interested (wow time flies it is over 3 years ago now)
Powerplay - Collusion Piracy and More
Hello Commanders! There's been quite a lot of interesting discussion about "collusion piracy", and I'd just like to throw some more thoughts into the pot. For clarity, collusion piracy is when Commanders intentionally let fortification commodities be taken by opposing powers in order to...
And since I'm in the mood for pulling hand grenades
, here's another thing to chew on: I'm currently rather taken by the concept of a success multiplier for Commanders in Open Play. this modifier would not improve personal gains from power play activities, but it would magnify the effectiveness of a power's actions (expand, oppose, fortify, undermine). And the effect would probably be significant.My thinking for this? At the moment, any way I slice it, I can't come to any conclusion other than Commanders in Open Play have a tougher time than those in Private Groups or Solo. So the playing field is basically uneven as it stands and in this case, maybe change could make things better.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The "Open Play bonus" was revisited in the second Flash Topic and did not form part of the first Flash Topic - which might indicate that Frontier are not considering it.
for the record i will provide a link to the original Sandros proposal for PP for those who are interested (wow time flies it is over 3 years ago now)
Powerplay - Collusion Piracy and More
Hello Commanders! There's been quite a lot of interesting discussion about "collusion piracy", and I'd just like to throw some more thoughts into the pot. For clarity, collusion piracy is when Commanders intentionally let fortification commodities be taken by opposing powers in order to...forums.frontier.co.uk
For the record and absolute clarity on my position, here is a link to the proposals I have been referring to throughout:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/powerplay-proposal.426940/
lol this is like a parliamentary debate, we should start refering to each other as honourable gentlemen before every post
lol this is like a parliamentary debate, we should start refering to each other as honourable gentlemen before every post
I'm still wondering when this became about powerplay, and not the BGS >.>
lol this is like a parliamentary debate, we should start refering to each other as honourable gentlemen before every post
I'm neither honourable nor a gentleman
But I do believe in being clear about which points we are discussing, if we are to discuss the points effectively.
I'm still wondering when this became about powerplay, and not the BGS >.>
open only BGS is a dead duck, there is nothing to talk about on that front imo... IF that is the only discussion on the table then i dont think there is anything to discuss, that isnt (or better not anyway!) ever going to happen. may as well just ditch all the modes full stop and make the game "only available with paid online subs! " on console if that is to happen.
PP i think is the only thing FD have ever hinted there is wiggle room on and is open for (realistic) discussion.
Because stopping Solo and PG players from having any influence on the BGS is never, ever, going to happen. No Solo player would play in what would, essentially, be a facsimile of the real Galaxy.I'm still wondering when this became about powerplay, and not the BGS >.>
neither are politiciansI'm neither honourable nor a gentleman
But I do believe in being clear about which points we are discussing, if we are to discuss the points effectively.
. but more seriously you are right, i think we were talking at crossed purposes To be clear I would be fully in favour of giving open PP a boost to its effect, whilst at the same time still keeping personal rewards exactly the same in other modes, just only having X percentage effect to the powers compared to open PP. (his 1st proposal)
I would stomach OO PP but it would not be my 1st choice. (his 2nd proposal)........ however a carrot to this would defintiely be reomoving all PP targets from all modes other than open, and instead spawning non PP targets in their place. IF I cant get involved in PP in my mode of choice then dont give me useless targets.
but the BGS........... I actually find it bordering on offensive the players who demand all BGS effects be removed from modes other than open. On this point i say people should not buy in ignorance and do some homework on the product they are buying before trying to essentially stop me from playing the game i paid a (comparatively) LOT of money to play by changing it into something i never would have backed.
Last edited:
Still confused why Powerplay is being discussed though...
What I was "suggesting" (it was just an IF, to think about
) was precisely PP having their own skins and trinkets - vanity items. That wouldn't mean other parts of the game not having their specific vanities too. By having in-game collectibles, you would have a reason for playing PP in open, without giving a game advantage like it gives now, with the prismatic shields and so on.But I repeat; it was just a "what if..."
Cheers
absolutely... I wasnt attacking you for your suggestion, sorry if you thought i came across that way it is not my intentionWhat I was "suggesting" (it was just an IF, to think about
But I repeat; it was just a "what if..."
Cheers
like i said, if it was done in tandem with all features having earnable trinkets, then i would be cool with it, but i am not sure PP should get them if no other features do. just my 2p.
Brainstorm:
An holographic projector limpet that could be dropped anywhere (outside stations of course), and would emit an holographic banner from a specific Event and Pilot's ID. The servers would record these positions (only the last one deployed by a player), and pass them to solo and private instances also. Like personalized graffiti grieving. XD
Imagine the entrance of a station full of holograms, and the authority ships busy collecting them, and arguing about it. "No graffiti allowed! Fines will incur!"
And the players arguing; "I can't even see the damn entrance! Damn these hobos!"
An holographic projector limpet that could be dropped anywhere (outside stations of course), and would emit an holographic banner from a specific Event and Pilot's ID. The servers would record these positions (only the last one deployed by a player), and pass them to solo and private instances also. Like personalized graffiti grieving. XD
Imagine the entrance of a station full of holograms, and the authority ships busy collecting them, and arguing about it. "No graffiti allowed! Fines will incur!"
And the players arguing; "I can't even see the damn entrance! Damn these hobos!"
Goose4291
Banned
It's the cycle of these discussions sadly.
Someone will be along in due course to present a coffee-shop level psychological analysis of those who PvP, and why they're really bad people IRL as well.
except it is you who are the one who decided to attempt to poke that bear 1st, despite having 15 pages without it.
PvP-ers are described as "one of the most unpleasant groups in the galaxy—not actually evil, but bad-tempered, self righteous, officious and callous", and having "as much sex appeal as a road accident".
They're pretty bad at poetry, too.
I really don't know what to say about pvp players. In those old times where no net was available, people played pvp on LAN and phone lines (Duke nukem 3d).
It was normally a group of friends, harassing each other to madness, trying the worse and having great fun. Everyone knew what they were doing, deathmatches were deathmatches, conquer the flag was teamwork, and the few games that offered cooperative play (everyone against the machine), people would really try to cooperate, despite always having that jerk on the team that was trying to mine all the fun.
But now, things seem more serious. I keep repeating, it's only a game, have fun. But when the stakes of loosing are higher than a simple respawn, I guess it's natural to hate the grievers.
But considering a minimal number of social-disabled chumps, I tend to think of PVP'ers as people who just want to have fun doing things that they can't in real life.
It was normally a group of friends, harassing each other to madness, trying the worse and having great fun. Everyone knew what they were doing, deathmatches were deathmatches, conquer the flag was teamwork, and the few games that offered cooperative play (everyone against the machine), people would really try to cooperate, despite always having that jerk on the team that was trying to mine all the fun.
But now, things seem more serious. I keep repeating, it's only a game, have fun. But when the stakes of loosing are higher than a simple respawn, I guess it's natural to hate the grievers.
But considering a minimal number of social-disabled chumps, I tend to think of PVP'ers as people who just want to have fun doing things that they can't in real life.
I was just having a HHG2G inspired joke. I had hoped it was clear I wasn't being serious.
PvP-ers aren't that much like Vogons.