Player affecting factions even in Pvt and Solo

And if they made the BSG or PP open only, you'd just have a different demographic beating their head against a brick wall for the following two years or whatever until they left.
I'd be very surprised if any solo/PG players continued to lobby for PP to return to all modes if it got changed. Most of those against the idea don't seem to care about Powerplay itself it by the looks of it, but are more against the idea of open-only features. If it proved a very successful move, those against it would have a weaker agruement anyway.

Its the general rule of software development (or almost anything), you can't please all the people all the time. For those who open only is a critical feature, they may leave. For those who bought the game based on the premise of parity between modes, should FD change that, some of them will leave.
At the moment you have two systems in the game which relate to territory control, BGS and Powerplay.. neither of which support goal-orientated PvP very well. To me it would be balanced and likely please more people if one were open to all modes (BGS) and one was restricted to open to support and encourage the PvP gameplay Fdevs developers claimed Powerplay was created for.

In short, in order to please one demographic, FD would have to displease a demographic that is currently happy.
Yes, because having one territory control system aimed at PvE players and one aimed at PvPers is fair. Having two for one and none for the other is not. They would get over it. However, Elite has always failed to retain most PvP players long-term due to the lack of purpose PvP has. Keeping PvP groups interested in the game longer is good for Fdev, and by extension, good for PvE players because there will be more money available for development of all areas of the game.

The main question becomes, do FD considering the risk worth it and would such a change bring an overall positive result? And are they ready to handle the threads from those who are displeased that will be "FD lied to us!"..... remember offlinegate?

It doesn't matter if you think the devs never promised mode parity in perpetuity, those threads will exist, and you can be sure some of the gaming press will pick up on it as well. FD need to be certain they would want to do such a thing and have the data or analyses that shows it would be a good thing overall.
If they do a trial of OOPP they can see how well it works and use it to justify any long-term changes. It's hard to argue against facts and figures if going open-only results in a large uptake in interest. If it fails we can all forget about the idea.
 
Making the BGS an Open Play exclusive and shutting it down for all other Modes would be a terribly bad idea.

Why kill it off in favor of a minority?
How would FDev counter the resulting loss of Customers?
Would thay be ready for the huge wave of shi()storms?
What alternative Gameplay could they add exclusive to the other Modes to make up for taking the BGS away from them?

There'd be still 3 different Platforms that'd effect each other with no chance to ever see those Players.
Thus - even if implemented - absolutely nothing would be gained with regard to the OP query.

Hence.... it's better left alone and Working as Intended.
It almost certainly will be. Frontier have their work cut out fixing the current bugfest and working on the next big release.

The core problem with implementing this is that the only difference between the three modes is who you can instance with. Solo is just Open with no other players. Splitting off PowerPlay would mean introducing a large number of checks to see what mode players are in and what they are permitted to do. This would have performance, integrity and stability consequences.

It's a lot of work to implement a feature which will anger as many people as if pleases and Frontier are certainly sensible enough to realise that their time is better spent elsewhere.
 
Do we still allow mode hopping with impunity?
Yes, this is my preferred solution, with nothing restricted to any particular mode. I know some people would prefer PP (and other things) to be restricted to open only, but that's not the game i bought and paid for.

I have presented my alternate solution, which i'd like to see happen should FD decide to make PP open only.
 
I'd be very surprised if any solo/PG players continued to lobby for PP to return to all modes if it got changed.
You might be. I'm sure there are some who would complan, ranging from theose who do do PP from PP/solo (because if you listen to the OOPP proponents, there are hordes of players affecting PP from PG/solo), to those who remain objectors due to the principle of the matter.

It doesn't matter if you think their opinions are invalid, they will still complain.

At the moment you have two systems in the game which relate to territory control, BGS and Powerplay.. neither of which support goal-orientated PvP very well. To me it would be balanced and likely please more people if one were open to all modes (BGS) and one was restricted to open to support and encourage the PvP gameplay Fdevs developers claimed Powerplay was created for.
Yes, and i think this was a problem with PP in the first instance. Two overlapping territorial games i think was an idiotic idea. PP could have been an extension of the BGS.

If they do a trial of OOPP they can see how well it works and use it to justify any long-term changes. It's hard to argue against facts and figures if going open-only results in a large uptake in interest. If it fails we can all forget about the idea.
That's a fair comment, and should they do it its pretty certain they would look at the involvement of players and how it has affected the gameplay/dynamic.
 
Some features in DDF but not in the game have been discounted as being impossible (not AFAIK by FD but by people defending FD for not implementing them) because of the server based nature of the game.

so for instance persistant npcs and personal bases etc.

now, if we go on the premise of all modes are equal then that would mean FDs hands are tied if the people stating the above are correct. however i wonder... if PP went Open Only then, that would mean the "all modes are equivalent" then goes out of the window. Maybe FD could really go all in on maximising the use of the modes

so we could have solo only base building and RPG elements etc. hell, perhaps even allow P2P multiplayer with friends and as network infrastructure improves over time allow numbers of people in a PG doing this to increase.

IF FD are gonna make PP open only then i think it would be a real opportunity to embrace the advantages of solo and PG as well, for those cases where it is not feasible to have it all controlled via FD servers.
 
Putting it to a general vote would mean it's on par with Ship Transfer, which is the only open vote FDev have ever had. Power Play is a long ways away from being that important in the game and to the vast majority of players. It's miniscule compared to the effect Ship/Module Transfer has on the game, as that affects everyone because we all move from A to B.
And as has been stated, whether people like it or not they are being affected by PP. As people use the BGS to reinforce their PP actions.
So EVERYONE is feeling the effects of PP, so they deserve a say. You're only opposed to it, because we all know the answer, only a handful of people want to lock content out from the general population.

Also, I'd like to point out I don't use the transfer feature. Not everyone does use it as it takes too long and is too expensive.
I can move my stuff about faster than the transfer system does and I do it for free. I don't actually know anyone who does use it.
But everyone got a say.

So why was it okay for me to get a say over a feature I don't use, but you're playing games to find an excuse to stop me and others having a say over a feature we do use?
Even if I'd only ever done 2 play sessions of Power Play, that would be more times than I've looked at the transfer system.

I didn't even want the system, just like I don't think auto dock/undock/supercruise should be in the game.
But I'm not spiteful towards other players, so I'll be happy to leave them to it.
Shame other players cannot show me the same respect and just leave me to potter about for Aisling Duval.

How many PP'ers use the transfer system I wonder? How many use the auto features?
Perhaps I should be kicking up a fuss, as it gives them a clear advantage of moving several ships and modules about or letting them AFK the game while I do it the proper way.
Perhaps if people are pledged, all those features should be disabled.
 

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
And as has been stated, whether people like it or not they are being affected by PP. As people use the BGS to reinforce their PP actions.
So EVERYONE is feeling the effects of PP, so they deserve a say. You're only opposed to it, because we all know the answer, only a handful of people want to lock content out from the general population.
So where do you draw the line at what should be voted on by everyone?

So why was it okay for me to get a say over a feature I don't use, but you're playing games to find an excuse to stop me and others having a say over a feature we do use?
LOL

But I'm not spiteful towards other players, so I'll be happy to leave them to it.
Shame other players cannot show me the same respect and just leave me to potter about for Aisling Duval.
Who's being spiteful? I think you're seeing things that aren't there. This is not an attack on you, or any other player. There is nothing personal in any of this. Noone's out to get you here. May wanna take a step back and breathe if you believe so. You seem to take this way too personal.
 

The Replicated Man

T
You seem to take this way too personal.
Alas that is the case of most conflicts in the game regardless of the circumstances.

I get a good chuckle from people who are trying to argue about a game feature that they have little to no understanding of. Such as but not limited to (PvP, Powerplay or BGS)

Take me for instance. I am a PvPer. I have been for almost 4 years. I have done a bit of exploring, but wouldn't consider myself an explorer.
I am not going to waltz into the Explorer subforum and start tooting my horn and arguing with Explorers who know more about exploring than myself. That would be just plain foolish. Does a change to exploration affect me or my gameplay? Not really as It is something I don't do full time.

Pledging to a Power for a extended period of time but doing little to nothing in terms of "actual" powerplay doesn't make you a "Powerplay" pilot.

Same as going to a res site and shooting at a player doesn't make you a PvPer. It's something you have to do on a regular basis in order for you to fall into that category.

I think I can safely say that most people who have played Elite have tried most avenues of play. Powerplay, BGS, PvP, Thargoid Fighting, Trading, Exploring or Bounty Hunting among other things.

Not saying anyone doesn't have the ability to voice their own opinion, but people who dedicate their time to a specific style of play usually know better than just someone who is green in the field.
 
The game has become extremely watered down. With each passing update, the galaxy is less and less dangerous. More and more concessions are made to the casuals. IMO that is the state of the game.

So although I think one of the best things for the game is to only be able to affect the BGS from Open, so as to encourage more direct competition among players (vs seeing which player faction can out grind the other.... oh boy!), FDev is not moving in that direction. They seem to want the game to be a safe space. Elite: Safe (in) Space.
 

The Replicated Man

T
The game has become extremely watered down. With each passing update, the galaxy is less and less dangerous. More and more concessions are made to the carebears and the casuals. IMO that is the state of the game.

So although I think one of the best things for the game is to only be able to affect the BGS from Open, so as to encourage more direct competition among players (vs seeing which player faction can out grind the other.... oh boy!), FDev is not moving in that direction. They seem to want the game to be a safe space. Elite: Safe (in) Space.
That is a great photo :D
 
Not saying anyone doesn't have the ability to voice their own opinion, but people who dedicate their time to a specific style of play usually know better than just someone who is green in the field.
There is truth here however you also have to look at it from the opposite side of the coin as well.... I dont do PvP in ED (aside from CQC on occasion) and i am far from up to speed on the current PvP meta etc..... however i DO know that apex PvP builds are hugely different to a balanced PvE build - and whilst i do not use them i have seen them if you catch my drift, and those ships absolutely DO have a direct effect on my game - or do when i try to go into open at any rate -. With (some) players very vocal about trying to corral other players into open by removing or limiting game features not in open, then it is very much in my interests to weigh in what i consider to be balance issues with PvP builds despite not being a PvPer myself ......

I hope that makes sense.
As for PP I dont PP yet........... I am not dead against it going open only, however if it doesnt go open only, it is something i will dabble in in the future. i personally would rather it be tweaked so that PvP PP has a role in open but that there is still PP of some description in other modes...... BUT my toys will not be going out of my pram on this either way.

edit.... proof in point the post directly below yours from Oopsie!.

(I do wish the environment had FAR more teeth however, and not just talking npc ships either but collision damage with stations or the ground, or if you mess up on fuel scooping and what not) This stuff has been significantly reduced since launch but that is a separate issue
 
Last edited:
Oh this thread again...

BGS provides a living, breathing universe which reacts to all player actions. It must include solo/PG actions to achieve that.

You want open-only "strategy games"? Go do Powerplay and harass FD some more about why they haven't followed-through on open-only Powerplay... I'm all for Powerplay being open only because that's the "Group vs group strategic warfare" aspect of the game.

PS: Neither assessment of the BGS or Powerplay are my own; FD are on-record saying this, repeatedly.
 
Alas that is the case of most conflicts in the game regardless of the circumstances.

I get a good chuckle from people who are trying to argue about a game feature that they have little to no understanding of. Such as but not limited to (PvP, Powerplay or BGS)
I see that you are either misunderstanding the point, or deliberately misconstruing it.

This isn't about the gameplay "within" the feature we are discussing, or the mechanics of the feature itself - what we are discussing is "access" to the feature. For all players. In all Modes.
Your scorn and derision adds nothing to the discussion except tipping everyone else of to your own character. Thanks.


Take me for instance. I am a PvPer. I have been for almost 4 years. I have done a bit of exploring, but wouldn't consider myself an explorer.
I am not going to waltz into the Explorer subforum and start tooting my horn and arguing with Explorers who know more about exploring than myself. That would be just plain foolish. Does a change to exploration affect me or my gameplay? Not really as It is something I don't do full time.
This is nothing but unnecessary filler and waffle.

Pledging to a Power for a extended period of time but doing little to nothing in terms of "actual" powerplay doesn't make you a "Powerplay" pilot.
Don't necessarily agree with this sentiment - you're half-way there to get my agreement, but not 100%.

Do remember that a player who has pledged can still be a passive PP contributor - getting attacked by adversary power NPCs and destroying them is one such way that a player can do pretty much nought as an "active" PP participant, but still be a passive PP player and contribute, without going around looking for "actual" PP, as you termed it above.


Same as going to a res site and shooting at a player doesn't make you a PvPer. It's something you have to do on a regular basis in order for you to fall into that category.
Again - only half agree. It is perfectly valid English language to call somebody a PvP combat player if they shoot at other players. The clue is in the name. Your attitude appears to be one of misplaced superiority here - who are you to dictate the terms by which any player can denote themselves a PvP player? Do they need to get "approval" from the self-appointed PvP community, or do they need to be any good at PvP combat, what is the metric you want to dictate to other players and we will see if we can find some agreement.


I think I can safely say that most people who have played Elite have tried most avenues of play. Powerplay, BGS, PvP, Thargoid Fighting, Trading, Exploring or Bounty Hunting among other things.
Mostly agreed.

Long time player here and have tried everything that I might enjoy. Which means I haven't tried PvP combat and a few other things. I fully expect I'm not alone in not having tried "everything", even if I have done some PP in the early days.



Not saying anyone doesn't have the ability to voice their own opinion, but people who dedicate their time to a specific style of play usually know better than just someone who is green in the field.

Now here we have a classic case of a what I described above.
Again this is a discussion about PP being removed from modes - not a discussion of the mechanics intrinsic within the feature of PP.
Yet players are manoeuvring for some sway or authority or influence or control by unfair means - namely that they appeal to a false premise in order to make it appear that they should be the ones to dictate terms.

Quite disappointing, really, particularly as it is a transparent ploy.
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?


Yours Aye

Mark H
 
So where do you draw the line at what should be voted on by everyone?
Well by rights we all had our say in the testing phase of the feature.
Which a few people then said PP should be Open Only and Frontier disagreed.
I even have the quotes from FD on the Wall of Information (link in my sig).

That should have been the end of it, but as long as some people are going to be wailing banshees over it and keep demanding changes to a game wide feature.
Then everyone who will be affected (which in this case, is everyone) should get a chance to give their opinion on it.
It's not as if it's a massive issue, as you pointed out FD has done it before with Ship Transfer.
So just pop something in the launcher and get proper feedback from everyone, not just us few who use the forums.

Who's being spiteful? I think you're seeing things that aren't there. This is not an attack on you, or any other player. There is nothing personal in any of this. Noone's out to get you here. May wanna take a step back and breathe if you believe so. You seem to take this way too personal.
Really?
Okay let's review;

For my own part I don't engage in Power Play, but I see the points from both sides.
There were names popping up that I've never seen before, because they were Powerplayers. I don't dabble in that, so those names are unknown to me.
Yet you keep saying those who don't do Power Play shouldn't get a say over its future.
So why are you here? You don't do it remember, so you don't get a say according to your own standards.

I'm saying we are all affected by Power Play (which we are, like it or not) and should all get say.
And I do Power Play (from within my mates PG granted, we work for Aisling together), but somehow you try to discredit me by accusing me of only doing the module grind and tell me my opinion as a Power Player who thinks we should all have a say, is wrong.

This is you being warm and fuzzy, is it?

Because it looks rather hypocritical from someone who doesn't do Power Play telling those of us who do play it, who deserves a say and who doesn't.
And yes it is rather spiteful saying no one else deserves a say (in this case, non-forum users), even though you're here having your say on it right here.
 

Arguendo

Volunteer Moderator
Well by rights we all had our say in the testing phase of the feature.
Which a few people then said PP should be Open Only and Frontier disagreed.
I even have the quotes from FD on the Wall of Information (link in my sig).
And then FDev appeared to atleast consider the option, per the Focused Feedback thread. That happens. People change their minds.

Yet you keep saying those who don't do Power Play shouldn't get a say over its future.
So why are you here? You don't do it remember, so you don't get a say according to your own standards
You need to separate a couple of things.
Me discussing it here has nothing to do with me wanting to tell FDev what to do. I've said over and over again that they should ask the people who actually engage in it. That's completely separate from talking about it in this thread. If ever FDev were to ask me, I'd say the exact same thing: "Go talk to the ones who are doing Powerplay day in and day out. They know what works and doesn't." I just have an opinion on the matter, nothing more.
The day they start listening to what people say in every thread here on the forums is the day the game is utterly lost. As in life, you listen to the experts on the subject.

And I do Power Play (from within my mates PG granted, we work for Aisling together), but somehow you try to discredit me by accusing me of only doing the module grind and tell me my opinion as a Power Player who thinks we should all have a say, is wrong.
Nope. I asked you a simple question, and explained exactly why I asked that question. Whatever else you saw in that question is on you, not me.

Because it looks rather hypocritical from someone who doesn't do Power Play telling those of us who do play it, who deserves a say and who doesn't.
And yes it is rather spiteful saying no one else deserves a say (in this case, non-forum users), even though you're here having your say on it right here.
I don't think those words mean what you think they mean.
 

The Replicated Man

T
There is truth here however you also have to look at it from the opposite side of the coin as well.... I dont do PvP in ED (aside from CQC on occasion) and i am far from up to speed on the current PvP meta etc..... however i DO know that apex PvP builds are hugely different to a balanced PvE build - and whilst i do not use them i have seen them if you catch my drift, and those ships absolutely DO have a direct effect on my game - or do when i try to go into open at any rate -. With (some) players very vocal about trying to corral other players into open by removing or limiting game features not in open, then it is very much in my interests to weigh in what i consider to be balance issues with PvP builds despite not being a PvPer myself ......

I hope that makes sense.
As for PP I dont PP yet........... I am not dead against it going open only, however if it doesnt go open only, it is something i will dabble in in the future. i personally would rather it be tweaked so that PvP PP has a role in open but that there is still PP of some description in other modes...... BUT my toys will not be going out of my pram on this either way.

edit.... proof in point the post directly below yours from Oopsie!.

(I do wish the environment had FAR more teeth however, and not just talking npc ships either but collision damage with stations or the ground, or if you mess up on fuel scooping and what not) This stuff has been significantly reduced since launch but that is a separate issue
I understand your point. However I feel that It is so easy to actually make a ship that is both jump capable, and has defenses, for open play travel. All people need to do is invest a little time and have the engineers unlocked. Why I recently flew to deciat in my Travel Krait Phantom and I was pulled by a combat fit FAS, we fought and he ran away with 19% hull.

That's why in response to the common forum threads such as but not limited to: Griefers Everywhere!, Fdev help! I lost my ship in open to Griefers, Dirty Griefer Tactics etc, I just tell people the following.

If you die in Open, that is not on the Griefers, that is on you. Everyone has access to the same engineers and modules these Griefers do and it is so simple to actually make a ship that can survive open and escape or even beat an attacker.

I have heard the counter argument which usually goes like this; Why should I prepare for Griefers in Open, when all I can do is just play in solo? or I am not going to change my loadout just because some griefer is going to spoil my personal narrative. Or My min/maxed paper airplane gets 60ly! I can't sacrifice that!

All I can say to those statements is that those are just simple excuses and make the one saying them look like a lazy fool. You can't change Griefers but you can change the outcome of a gank in open by doing some simple engineering and having some common sense.

I wasn't making this post directly aimed at you personally, I just usually put it in somewhere in threads that head this direction.

Do you believe I got into a argument with a guy about a year ago who when I told to do some engineering, flipped out and turned out to be some anti engineer nutjob??? XD

I get a good laugh out of these forums sometimes lol!
 

The Replicated Man

T
Your scorn and derision adds nothing to the discussion except tipping everyone else of to your own character. Thanks.
This is nothing but unnecessary filler and waffle.
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?
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.
 

Robert Maynard

Volunteer Moderator
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.
Indeed - a doctor requires a licence to practice, based on qualifications, as they provide a duty of care to their patients who come to them seeking their services.

The only qualification required for a player of this game is ownership of the game.
 

The Replicated Man

T
Indeed - a doctor requires a licence to practice, based on qualifications, as they provide a duty of care to their patients who come to them seeking their services.

The only qualification required for a player of this game is ownership of the game.
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.
 
Top Bottom