Powerplay PP vs BGS

[Agony_Aunt]

Again, I'm sorry, I did not mean to offend YOU, just to show that YOUR vision of the game is not what it was intended.

You didn't offend me. I'm just curious what the point of your question was.

I have no idea what you mean by " YOUR vision of the game is not what it was intended"

That's a rather bold statement, implying that you know what was intended yet i don't.

Who knows what FD "intended"? All we can do is judge the game based on what is actually delivered and FD's statements on things.

Because I think, and judging by the design of the game, BGS should not exist separately from PP. But for some reason many people do not understand or do not want to understand.

You are welcome to your opinion on that. It doesn't mean people have to agree with you. Some people think it should be seperated, some not.

None of it really matters though, FD will do what FD think best. We then decide which parts of the game interest us and which parts don't. As things stand, i stay away from Powerplay, because for me, its a snoozefest. If FD changed it in a way that was appealing to me, then i might partake. Or not, plenty of things to do in ED that don't involve competing over virtual territory.

 

[Riverside]

Strange I understand YOU, but why do I see others do not understand the design of the game.
Once again, you can have a race on the SRV, just because you like it, but you do not need to demand from the developers to make a figure of a man who waves the flag and gives the start of the race.

Perhaps it would help if you state what you think the intended way to play is - how you think the game was designed to be played.

 

[SergMx]

Everybody 'plays' the BGS regardless of whether they actively want to or not, it's the BACKGROUND simulation to the galaxy, and every player action has an effect on it. When players like me say 'they've only just started playing the BGS' what we mean is we've only just started to actively try to manipulate it favourably for the faction(s) we support.

PP is an opt-in activity, you choose whether or not you want to pledge to a power.

Those are the right words! I have always said so, BGS is to show that the world around is alive, not to flirt with it!

 

[SergMx]

Perhaps it would help if you state what you think the intended way to play is - how you think the game was designed to be played.

Hmm. There's a lot to write. For me, Elite is a tactical game with no strategy. For example, even playing PP you will always be an ordinary soldier and mercenary and never become a ruler-general.

 

[Screemonster]

This is what I'm writing about, when you play BGS without a PP you can't tell exactly who your enemy is, so when you attack another ship you're just a regular ganker/pirate.

This is the problem with your posts, here and in the suggestions forum.
You keep throwing "ganker" around and trying to say that all murders in game are ganks.
All ganks are murders, but not all murders are ganks. Not all ganks are griefing either - if SPEAR catch a notorious newb-killer in a system where he doesn't happen to be wanted, and they all jump him and blow him up, that's certainly a gank but it's not griefing. At worst, it's gang warfare.

Which is part of the game.
If I want to park my ship in a system and say "This is my territory, everyone else get out or I will shoot you" then that's an option too.
Right now I'm in the middle of putting the anarchy faction in charge of a system by supporting them on the mission board and fighting in conflict zones. If someone tries to stop me, then I will shoot them. If they're bounty hunting in the system, then they're not supporting the anarchists and that makes them my enemy.
Is it a crime to shoot them? Yes. Do I care? No.

 

[Riverside]

Hmm. There's a lot to write. For me, Elite is a tactical game with no strategy. For example, even playing PP you will always be an ordinary soldier and mercenary and never become a ruler-general.

In ED you are not a soldier, although pledging comes close because you choose a side (as you do in a CZ too) and are flagged as that to other pilots.

Lots of games put the player in the role as a soldier & you have clearly defined enemies & allies, red vs blue. In ED you are a lone, private businessperson, you can make alliances & enemies, and getting along with your neighbours is important if you do not have enough allies to be able to dominate.

Some enjoy the feeling of being part of something larger, that you can always call in backup if you spot a problem you aren't able to deal with alone, there is security in that & I can understand the appeal.

What I achieve or fail to achieve is only down to me however, and my ability to build relationships & a bank of favours (ie I help others in exchange for them helping me). I cannot rely on others, I must tread carefully. I've played this way since before powerplay was added to the game, before wings too for that matter

I also understand that faction supporters are the bane of powerplay BGSers, there is often a conflict of interest. One of my home systems is in Hudson space & in order to 'justify' it being controlled by a Fed Corp (my faction of choice for that system) I help to ensure the powerplay bubble it's in keeps it's fortification bonus. In turn, Hudson BGSers tend to be happy to have the occasional Fed faction around that they can feel some loyalty to, because they so often fight against Fed factions in support of Feudals & patronages. In another PP bubble (a Mahon one) I again made sure the fortification bonus applied (and still does) when I flipped a system in it to Anarchy.

My interactions with other players & groups are more nuanced than simply 'enemy' or 'ally'. Your enemy's enemy is your friend

 

[[VR] Bulbulunufus]

Many disagree but I'm quite happy the BGS and powerplay are intertwined. The amount of effort that goes into BGS in PP groups is substantial. Without the diversity it adds PP might well become nakedly boring. It also makes total sense that there's an interaction between the PP influence spheres and the minor governments that exist within them.

To me, it should mean something that a power is on your doorstep, and it gives a sense of multi-scale political scope, even if it might be painful (why shouldn't it be?).

It's just disappointing that the interaction makes so little sense in some cases, in terms of the favourable government types. There should be more scope for positive, lore-consistent interaction between PP and BGS. An obvious thing would be if, for example, a democracy being Federal buffed its effect on fort triggers compared to an independent democracy, for Winters and Hudson. Debuffs, conversely, could apply for factions of the other superpowers. Repeat the same thing for all faction types and for all powers. Create a power-superpower link alongside the existing power-minor faction link.

 

[Justinian Octavius]

Create a power-superpower link alongside the existing power-minor faction link.

FDev were going to do this as part of the maintenance update that they didn't have dev time to implement due to the refocusing of priorities. It would have been an improvement but everything is such a mess from a lore and in-game perspective (you can't create a Squadron that is aligned with both the Empire and an Aisling friendly Minor Faction) that the ideal solution for me would be to sever the BGS-PP link and make Powerplay interesting enough so that a Player Group does not feel it needs BGS to keep people interested.

CMDR Justinian Octavius