Powerplay should not be made Open-only. Here's why... [EDITED]

[Redomus]

Redomus should be given 100 billion credits and heres why...

<Insert whine>

If whine ==1 THEN

{
Goto_Start();
}

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

Yeah I like to tell other people who have a similar profession, which then clearly makes me an expert, that they are wrong all the time too.

Honestly I've given feedback to frontier too. And as I have said, i have concerns as well. But i am not asking them to shove their change because obviously I have better context than they do, despite all the telemetry and multiple feedback channels they have.

Not sure if that's a snipe at me or not... -.-



But lol if you think I think I know better than Frontier what their architecture is capable of or not - ask me to come up with Frontier's back-end server architecture and I'd crumple to the ground. All I know is what I discern how the game client connects to both the back-end, and other game clients. Then I see what is being proposed. Then I see how the proposed change can be countered.

If you are in fact taking a swipe at me in terms of me "thinking I'm smart", or just "trying to win all the things", that makes me a little bit sad because I'm just trying to objectively point out how Powerplay was designed, what was said at the time - both of those are my OP - and now the conversation has turned to game architecture pointing out reasons as to why I think such a change may not be the panacea some think it will.

I'm definitely not smart - I'm posting stuff in an online gaming forum fer frack's sake

Yes it will be interesting. They are also under extreme pressure to not make a change that is contentious. And they have people saying this should not happen because I have some feels and also am very smart about this too.

I think Sandy has a very hard road ahead of him. He's a brave guy. He keeps trying. Not always in ways I agree with. But that's okay. Because he's still trying.

Cause the alternative is they just roll over and give up after being stymied by endless protest and the game goes into the long tail.

I'm all for change, if the change is worth the development effort involved. What I don't like seeing is dev time being squandered on something which I suspect has a high likelihood of not achieving the goal set out by the change.

 

[Sterling MH]

With respect, I am happy to have a civil discussion

As Ta'lon said, all answers are replies, but not all replies are answers. A discussion requires more than just posting back and forth. An so far I've seen none of that here from you, only "here's my point" "no, here's my point", "no, here's my point". Try a conversation rather than "discussion".

 

[kofeyh]

I'm not having a go. It's just this forum is chock full of experts and it's hard to know when people are being genuine.

And I have no problem with the developer squandering time on anything that isn't my thing in game. Because it will be someone else's and its exceedingly greedy of me to assume the entire thing should be built on my timetable.

Its not squandering time to try and improve power play. There have been endless requests and posts and discussion on this.

 

[vanya234]

Nope. The post links back to the original so it can be seen. And theres a reason why the post decorum is to not keep nesting back to the OP in replies: it means there's redundant noninformation making the signal impossible to read.

You DO know what it means when it says "(Source)", right?



Ah, so when someone breaks into your house and changes the contents of it to contain less of it, you shrug your shoulders and go "Well, can't halt change, can we?"

No. No, not even you buy that hogwash. Oddly enough, neither does anyone else when you use it on them

You cut out essential information from my argument in an effort to shore up your own. Your attitude makes it clear you aren't interested in a debate but you are merely trying to prove you can yell and insult people the loudest.

I qualified my statement by saying that from my point of view, it seems like the general consensus right now on YouTube/reddit is for open to be PvP only. It is an obvious assumption that no one knows what the majority wants. But if the devs proposed this publicly then maybe they have an idea?

The breaking into the house analogy is completely misplaced. Elite is not your house. It is fdev's house. Games change all the time.

 

[Crimson Kaim]

Redomus should be given 100 billion credits and heres why...

<Insert whine>

If whine ==1 THEN

{
Goto_Start();
}

else:

open.site("https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/427676-Powerplay-should-not-be-made-Open-only-Here-s-why/page16")
create.post.complaint()
OpenPlay.difficulty=PvP

ERROR: line 5, PvP, stack overflow.

 

[Genus]

Not to divert the thread but I don't agree with this point. Regardless of the activity levels here the forums do not represent the majority of the player base. FD should be using their own internal metrics on what parts of the game are being played, what modes, how many people, to guide their areas of focus. I suspect that they already are. Then, player feedback is taken to improve and refine.

You mean in follow up to the Customer Poll suggested?

 

[Sterling MH]

You'd still be able to interact with PP via the missions that are being proposed. Voila, powerplay participation for solo/pg players.

Uh, nope. That isn't a response to "the value in making current content PVP exclusive when instead it could be made to make more sense in the game as a whole and without removing game relevance from players regardless of what mode they're in". You need to reply to what he said, not segue off to a non sequitur and pat yourself back on a reply you thought was an answer.

 

[Genus]

I'm definitely not smart - I'm posting stuff in an online gaming forum fer frack's sake

Otherwise known as the coalface.

 

[Sterling MH]

The breaking into the house analogy is completely misplaced.

No it isn't. what it is is a clear analogy you cannot argue aainst so you pretend it isn't valid.

Elite is not your house. It is fdev's house. Games change all the time.

No, I paid money for Elite. Just like you paid money for your stuff. You DID pay for your stuff, didn't you?

So, try again, that was a strike.

 

[EUS]

Since you can't PvP in solo or a PvE PG, if this were true, then nobody outside the PvP groups and Open would be doing PP and there's nothing to deal with. Or it's not true, in which case the argument fails.

It's not an argument, it's Sandro's words.
Here's his quote. His intent, and mandate is to implement consensual PvP, which (as far as I know) does not *officially* exist as of now, no matter what the PvPers claim (the whole "when you log in to open you consent to PvP" argument).

Powerplay is fundamentally about consensual player versus player conflict.

 

[vanya234]

True - however as there is no requirement to own the game to create a forum account and that the total number of forum users is small in relation to the number of franchise units sold, simply asking forum users does not necessarily give an accurate picture of what "most players want".

The method used last time Frontier wanted to find out what the player-base wanted was an official poll - not on the forums. We'll see if they do that again. Arguably this topic is hotter than the last one polled.

Yeah agreed it seems like that's the way to solve this

 

[tolm]

100% agree. PvP doesn't have to mean combative Player shooting Player, it can be strategic - different players attempting to manipulate opposing influences - which is what I always took Power Play to be. If they want to turn Power Play into "pew pew", well, that's "not cricket" as someone said although I have suggested turning Community Goals PvE only with the same (or comparable) rewards so both Combative PvP and non-Combative PvP / PvE folks have a mode each.

 

[Sylveria]

Indeed. Although building trust should also be focused upon, in order to lend weight to the perceived results of such polls.

Aye, and displaying the results of such polls in the Feedback Forums would also be a good way to enhance the trust- showing there is indeed good reason for proposals to begin with.

A simple chart of votes, for example. Then, let the "discussions" begin.

 

[kofeyh]

No it isn't. what it is is a clear analogy you cannot argue aainst so you pretend it isn't valid.



No, I paid money for Elite. Just like you paid money for your stuff. You DID pay for your stuff, didn't you?

So, try again, that was a strike.

Please read the EULA that you skipped because too long and you know what it says anyway.

None of us own the game. We've been licensed access to it. We own access to ones and zeros. I own the box the install disk came.in though. As that was part of the kickstarter reward.

But I do not own the game. I don't own the universe servers or the right to dictate what happens on them. It isn't mine. None of it is. I'm just allowed to access it, for the price I paid to do so.

 

[vanya234]

No it isn't. what it is is a clear analogy you cannot argue aainst so you pretend it isn't valid.



No, I paid money for Elite. Just like you paid money for your stuff. You DID pay for your stuff, didn't you?

So, try again, that was a strike.

A strike? Try again? Really dude?

The EULA grants you a license to use the game. You pay for that license. Your analogy of breaking into a house implies that you are the owner of the house correct? You are not the owner of the license to play the game. Therefore, the analogy doesn't work.

 

[lefty1117]

Uh, nope. That isn't a response to "the value in making current content PVP exclusive when instead it could be made to make more sense in the game as a whole and without removing game relevance from players regardless of what mode they're in". You need to reply to what he said, not segue off to a non sequitur and pat yourself back on a reply you thought was an answer.

This has been debated exhaustively the last two days. The reasons for bringing powerplay into Open-only are clear. There are major loopholes regarding people using solo/pg filters to prevent themselves being interdicted, which is a means for one power to prevent activities such as foritification, for example. The capability for solo/pg to do this degrades the integrity of PP and has caused many players to quit. This is no secret and has been a common refrain from probably the very first cycle.

What I answered with is indeed a way to make the content make more sense in the current context - enable Solo/PG players to contribute via the mission system, while we close the PVP interdiction loophole. The only "content" being restricted is a solo/pg player's ability to perform activities which are subject to a PVP response, because they don't want to do PVP. If you don't want to do PVP, then you shouldn't engage in PVP activities. Sandro has stated that these activities are now PVP activities and FD does have the right to change their game. It's up to solo players to decide if they are OK with that or not, but Mission interaction with PP is indeed a way for solo/pg players to stay involved.

Is that a clear enough answer? This is derived from the actual proposal - no secrets here.

 

[Cheese Helmet]

@Genar-Hofoen

And? Saying "yes it works" isnt going against the statement that powerplay is intended for pvp.

 

[DeathStroke]

+REP OP

This whole open only PP is just a ploy to get players in open. The epitome of lazy FDev-ness, 'let's take an existing system, beat the crap out of it with our keyboards, horribly mangle it into something else, all to get the players to do something we want them to do, but most players don't want to do'.

 

[Sterling MH]

A strike? Try again? Really dude?

Yes. I explained why it didn't apply. You didn;t answer the question. Therefore the answer was nonexistent. If you want to try to answer my question, you need to try again.

"The EULA..."

Sorry, still doesn't answer my question. Strike two. Try again.