But Power Play IS only politics... It is NOT faction warfare. If you want faction warfare play the BGS then. Push the given faction to war then you can have your combat if you wish. FD would have to change the scope and purpose of power play in order to do what you are proposing...which already exists. (albit you don't have a faction tag without power play which does create some odd questions)
Powerplay So, what are we going to do about PowerPlay
- Thread starter amadeus1171
- Start date
But Power Play IS only politics... It is NOT faction warfare. If you want faction warfare play the BGS then. Push the given faction to war then you can have your combat if you wish. FD would have to change the scope and purpose of power play in order to do what you are proposing...which already exists. (albit you don't have a faction tag without power play which does create some odd questions)
I tried playing golf at the weekend (doc said do more sport) and I now think they should make the distances shorter, make holes bigger and introduce more technology (laser targeting). The society I was with said "if you don't like it, go do something else" - damn cheek - "Doctor's orders" I said "I was only trying to help!"
Anyway back to working for the one that dyes their hair in Powerplay for the rest of the week, I suppose.
Anyway back to working for the one that dyes their hair in Powerplay for the rest of the week, I suppose.
Last edited:
I disagree. A warfare element is what myself and my cohorts believe is missing in Elite Dangerous. Mind you, that this was just recently emphasized by playing Star Citizen this weekend. 8 players in my Vanguard Hoplite playing against 8 other players in combat drills. We had a blast! It's also amazing how every ship in Star Citizen is relevant instead of the upgrade grind in Elite Dangerous. My Star Citizen experience has actually gotten my to fly an Eagle again just to build and/or substantiate it's relevance to myself.
I understand why you Mahon folks are so opposed given that it's known you folks can't fight well. I get the opposition, but again, powers with capital ships should be able to utilize them and if or when that became the case Mahon without Thargoid assistance would be in a world of hurt. PowerPlay as it is, IMO, is now long in the tooth and too abused by unscrupulous players to call it a success. It is a good stepping stone for better things though. Thing is, how long is it going to take for Frontier to step it up because MO, Star Citizen makes a good argument and it's still in Beta stepping to Alpha in the near future.
Now I'm not saying all this to dog Elite Dangerous. I'm saying all this because I give a damn about Elite Dangerous. Stiff competition for player interest is presenting itself. I for one would like to know what Frontier is doing about this regarding Elite Dangerous's development.
Last edited:
You make another good argument for Star Citizen. Thank you.
Did I mention the maturity level over there seems to be up several notches?
Diplomacy in PP has brought about a certain level of paralysis, but politics is still an important part of the game. The problem is and always will be that without collapse Powerplay cannot become a whole game as there is no 'end'.
I think its hard to compare SC with ED simply because the focus is different. SC is FPS up, ED is galaxy down. If anything the main problem with ED is that it lacks a focus to nail it down.
I think its hard to compare SC with ED simply because the focus is different. SC is FPS up, ED is galaxy down. If anything the main problem with ED is that it lacks a focus to nail it down.
You make another good argument for Star Citizen. Thank you.
Did I mention the maturity level over there seems to be up several notches?
I see the intent to joke, but the maturity level was up here when we were in alpha and beta, too. You launch a game, you increase the user base. The wider the net, the wider the variety of players.
I don't really see this is an argument for anything other than the current state of development.
As for Elite missing the potential to focus on the PvP war game and investing enough developer time to make every single ship useful in a variety of situations for cooperative and competitive play, you're right. The game is missing that.
Power Play is a political simulation of the Tier 1 NPCs in the same way the BGS is the simulation of Tier 2 and 3 NPCs along with their respective factions and governments.
Neither simulates war, except in the case where the BGS attempts to simulate war states. However, sadly, the Conflict Zone structure is 4 years old and was always a stop-gap of design, rather than good game design. Maybe they'll actually improve it over the next six months.
Power Play does allow for Team A vs Team B fights, but it is decidedly not a war simulation. It's an influence simulation, ostensibly built to be turn-based strategy, except that player actions drive the political forces.
FDev both designed Power Play to exist as Team vs Team PvP, but also as a system which relied on the concept that players wouldn't expend more effort than required of them for their desired results of self-interest. They never imagined we would great groups around powers, or massive organisations that deciphered how the maths worked out. It was meant to be hidden and background, just reflecting player actions for that week.
We've exceeded their expectations by gaming the system, both in regards to Power Play and BGS.
Ignoring personal attacks and the fact you are not reading anyone's responses in this thread, perhaps you will be happier in Star Citizen. I remain skeptical of that project, despite being a backer as well.
You make another good argument for Star Citizen. Thank you.
Did I mention the maturity level over there seems to be up several notches?
I really don't see the "maturity level" of Star Citizen you speak of. In fact it seems even lower in that game then here. Though I suppose given how you have been taking the responses here you may be part of the problem and not the solution
. Enjoy your new game!You make another good argument for Star Citizen. Thank you.
Did I mention the maturity level over there seems to be up several notches?
The point is quit complaining and enjoy it. If you don't enjoy it do something you do.
(The Royal you that is, not you personally)
Last edited:
1. Why are you answering my response to Rob? Is he or she not grown enough to answer for themselves?
2. Exploiting the system IS NOT something to be praised. I wish you people would stop that! What you call "Gaming the system," is a problem and often increases development costs of games. So next time it seems like a game company is nickel and dimeing you, Think about what I've just said here.
Last edited:
Ignoring personal attacks and the fact you are not reading anyone's responses in this thread, perhaps you will be happier in Star Citizen. I remain skeptical of that project, despite being a backer as well.
I really don't see the "maturity level" of Star Citizen you speak of. In fact it seems even lower in that game then here. Though I suppose given how you have been taking the responses here you may be part of the problem and not the solution
Thing is I'm not personally attacking you. YOU are taking what I said personally. My explanation, fact, and my opinions on what you quoted were not directed at you. I BEG to differ on the maturity level. I really do and I think you've done enough to support my opinion on the matter. ;-)
Oh, and another reply to a response for Rob. What, is Rob like 9 years old? Are these 2 your older brothers Rob?
P.S.--Trust me, we are reading all the responses here.
Last edited:
And finally we get to Rob.
If you think I'm complaining then stop reading the thread. Just say what you mean. You keep trying to be whitty and it has us really thinking that the two above that like responding for you are indeed, your older siblings.
Just picking that reply, because it's your latest, not because it's particularly relevant to the following.
The reasons I cannot take any of your suggestions seriously, Calrissian, are multiple.
* You have no foundation upon which to claim that PowerPlay is about war. The Empire has not declared war on the Alliance or the Federation, the Federation has not declared war on the Alliance or the Empire, and the Alliance has not declared war on the Empire or Federation. If any of those were to happen, it would be all over Galnet, yet it's not. While PowerPlay has been active, the Federation has even gone out of its way to condemn attacks against the Empire - doesn't really seem like something you'd hear in a case of actual war.
* You have absolutely no intentions of making PowerPlay a balanced activity. You're obsessed with the idea of crushing the Alliance, and you're trying to get the rules changed to accomplished that while completely ignoring that those changes would also affect the four independent powers.
* You clearly behave in a way that is indicative of a troll, and only seem to be interested in stirring biowaste rather than making useful contributions to the PowerPlay community.
1. PowerPlay is War. It's just for the most part a passive one or a Cold War. It is my opinion that it should be made to have more "Hot" War elements in it.
2. I have every intention to make PowerPlay a balanced and more interactive activity. We oppose those involved with the Mahon power because that is the way we choose to PLAY the GAME given knowledge of Mahon player activity. I did not create the playing board or deal the cards. I do feel however that a fair and interactive way should be implemented for the Imperial and Federation powers to better play with the cards dealt to them. Who knows? Mahon may be dealt a Thargoid card in the near future.
3. Me being a "Troll" is your opinion. I have gotten plenty of support in my opinions, actions, and views within these forums and the game itself.
The problem Martin is that yourself and several others are taking things too personally. It's a GAME! It's meant to be enjoyed and we all find and establish a part to play.
Last edited:
Tell that to the hundreds/thousands of ships I've blown up to undermine or expand.
It is very much war, at least for some powers.
Power Play is not a war game.
Combat Expansions are combat actions. Every Power with those has a specific flavour to them. Only two Powers have 'military strikes' and I think one of them is supposed to be 'security operations'. And Patreus is explicitly not making war against a superpower, but using a personal fleet to claim assets to repay the debts he's owed.
Undermining is also not warfare. It's crime.
Power Play is an influence game. Many of the galactic powers leverage their violent assets to secure influence.
That does not make it a war.
Does Power Play need a hell of a lot more variety in actions, tasks, and accomplishments?
Yes it most definitely does.
But we have to understand what Power Play is before we can even think about proposing new directions for it to go. What we have right now is a placeholder. In the same way Conflict Zones are a placeholder for intrastellar warfare. Yeah, those have been placeholders for 3+ years, and they do need improvement. But again, we have to understand what they are supposed to be before we push them towards improvement.
Power Play is a political simulation in the same way the background simulation is a socio-economic simulation. Power Play simply allows a player to interact on behalf of a Tier 1 NPC.
Combat Expansions are combat actions. Every Power with those has a specific flavour to them. Only two Powers have 'military strikes' and I think one of them is supposed to be 'security operations'. And Patreus is explicitly not making war against a superpower, but using a personal fleet to claim assets to repay the debts he's owed.
Undermining is also not warfare. It's crime.
Power Play is an influence game. Many of the galactic powers leverage their violent assets to secure influence.
That does not make it a war.
Does Power Play need a hell of a lot more variety in actions, tasks, and accomplishments?
Yes it most definitely does.
But we have to understand what Power Play is before we can even think about proposing new directions for it to go. What we have right now is a placeholder. In the same way Conflict Zones are a placeholder for intrastellar warfare. Yeah, those have been placeholders for 3+ years, and they do need improvement. But again, we have to understand what they are supposed to be before we push them towards improvement.
Power Play is a political simulation in the same way the background simulation is a socio-economic simulation. Power Play simply allows a player to interact on behalf of a Tier 1 NPC.
Last edited:
I don't know about that.
I'm pretty sure I've heard Sandro remark that they here happy that communities sprang up around the Powers "as they hoped".
Which would seem to indicate that the competition and conflict was intended.
Strategic analysis will come with any game that has sufficient depth. They must know that we figure stuff out. Look where they hide stuff - like the images in the audio, like the morse code in the static, like Dav's coded message at the end of a BGS livestream.
I think the real problem for Frontier is that they thought it would be a "Light the blue touch paper and stand clear".
But actually PowerPlay needs a producer to take the player actions and have that refelcted in the game, and also PowerPlay needs management and ongoing development.
It's settled into a "late game Monopoly" session.
The ladder isn't compelling enough, Frontier won't kill off the lowest performing power, and they find that each time they engage with a Player Base that they get gamed.
Example - the Winters Facebook group getting a plug in GalNet.
PowerPlay has provided me with some of the most compelling gameplay in Elite. But it's needs a producer and some development resources to grow and change and live.
That's my experience.
I played PP for six or eight months. It takes some time to decipher all that number and mechanics. But when you finally do and organize/collaborate on Discord, it feels like it's the best thing you can do on this game: the mix of politics, strategy, logistics... all in a long term collaborative scope.
Of course, like many others, I realised of the many errors/lacks the mechanics have (I'm not going to list them here), but as I was on a active group we were informed that our suggestions were taken in care and, eventually, some changes and improvements will occur.
Well, I took a break for half a year, and... ta-daaa!! no changes at all! Not a single one! But hey, now you can create your own character and of course, space bugs are coming! How exciting...
So, overall it's quite discouraging. I think Frontier has completely abandoned the best prospect of the game.
I played PP for six or eight months. It takes some time to decipher all that number and mechanics. But when you finally do and organize/collaborate on Discord, it feels like it's the best thing you can do on this game: the mix of politics, strategy, logistics... all in a long term collaborative scope.
Of course, like many others, I realised of the many errors/lacks the mechanics have (I'm not going to list them here), but as I was on a active group we were informed that our suggestions were taken in care and, eventually, some changes and improvements will occur.
Well, I took a break for half a year, and... ta-daaa!! no changes at all! Not a single one! But hey, now you can create your own character and of course, space bugs are coming! How exciting...
So, overall it's quite discouraging. I think Frontier has completely abandoned the best prospect of the game.