PLEASE MAKE POWERPLAY IN "OPEN ONLY"

You will have to present some evidence that it was in favour, I would disagree and say it was for the most part against, but then we are all subject to confirmation bias and tend to ignore ideas and posts that disagree with our preconceived ideas, this is why when you make a statement like this it must be backed up evidence, not should, must, otherwised it can be dismissed.

What is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
I went through and counted every mention of hard yes and hard no. You can do the same but in the end it was about 65% hard yes, with about a further 10% "Open only if they do xyz (mainly move modules to tech brokers).

Here is the link, you can do it too https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/powerplay-proposal.426940/

And here is that Obsidian Ant Poll:

132295


As you can see, even when the question is split into three (rather than a binary choice) Open only wins. If you add both weighted merits and open only (i.e. people feel the status quo is not good enough) 75% want Powerplay rules altered.
 
I went through and counted every mention of hard yes and hard no. You can do the same but in the end it was about 65% hard yes, with about a further 10% "Open only if they do xyz (mainly move modules to tech brokers).

Here is the link, you can do it too https://forums.frontier.co.uk/threads/powerplay-proposal.426940/

And here is that Obsidian Ant Poll:
And do you know how many youtube videos people can have. I can have 7 my self because I have 7 Clash of Clan accounts. And ask my family or friends to vote a certain way so is not Valid. Now if FRONTIER had their own poll. They can set it on player accounts. People who play the game.
 
Well, there is an argument that majority aren't always the best at knowing what is best for the game. Take for example the vote regarding ship transfer times, those who lost might agree with that statement ;)
Even FDev would never know until they put it in the game.
 
Will Lex Fernetti I don't blame people for their views. You want cut many player from having a feature they have payed for including mine that unfair.
 
Here's the thing, though. Even in Open, your risks vary wildly, based on where you go in the game, what time you play at, and where you are located on this planet.
Until recently, my typical play windows were during weekday global peak players on days I worked, combined with weekday global minimum players, on days I didn't have to work. My risk was practically non-existent, since I was playing outside of my local prime time.
Thats true to some extent now for some people. Others who fight in expansions or get caught UMing / forting might say otherwise, since (at least for the two powers I worked / work for now) the geographic spread is quite even, although it favours EU / US slightly. And when things get fraught players / die hards (delete depending on view) become more and more active as the cycle reaches its close.

The other is that the new proposal significantly reduces the places Powerplay ships need to go. Capitals are the hubs and will always have traffic of some sort traveling to stations due to inbound forting. Expansions and prep are also places that will have traffic- taking an extreme case, a million merit prep in a hotly contested system will have to be transported somehow.

My hub, Harma always has someone loitering for example. Unlike today where a bubble has 15 systems you could be in, in the proposal only the control system matters, reducing possible player areas down from 15 to 1.

Back then, should I have been rewarded as heavily as those who were playing during global peak players, which roughly corresponds to European Prime Time? On paper, my risk was greatest at that time, but in reality, due to how instancing "works" in this game, my risk was about as great as it was during global minimum: almost nil. Should the players in Tokyo, Japan, who were playing during their local prime time, have been rewarded poorly due to playing during global minimum players, despite their much greater risks?
And should the player who still connects via dial-up through AOL be rewarded as heavily as the one with the fiber optic connection, even though they're playing in the same city at the same time?
That's the problem with rewarding mode choice as opposed to rewarding actual risk. An Open player would get the same results, regardless of whether their risks are the same as those who are in Solo/PG because they play outside of their local prime time, or as great as the European Prime Time Player who is facing three times the number of players as the East Asian Prime time player.
And you really can't reward actual risk either. Once you start taking player actions into account, you inevitably get collusion between players, or between a player and their alt account(s).
If you take that risk according to those rules, then yes. While no system is perfect its the best we have. I understand what you are saying, and I do agree with it that direct PvP needs some form of recognition- however unless FD tell us this is happening its not a consideration, and instead we have an imperfect passive system instead.

And should an experienced Buckyball Racer flying a blockade runner fit for purpose be rewarded as heavily as someone who insists on following the "forum recommended Supercruise technique" in an unshielded Type-9? ;)
If you live and drop your cargo then thats worth the reward. In this feature death is the filter, not the ship you fly.

That's why I'm not fussed about the fact that all modes are rewarded equally. I'm absolutely fine with that. My reward for playing in Open is a more interesting game. I don't care that I'm flying under a self-imposed handicap, because I've also got other self-imposed handicaps above and beyond playing in Open, such as the pilot ejection rules. Should I get an even greater reward for that, compared to an Open player? Of course not.
But for those who fully engage in Powerplay its a frustrating experience. Some powers play in open because it allows a better game experience / requires more skill, while others attack them in open but fort in solo. One is harder to do than the other, but not rewarded at all. Some might say play in kind but then that stratifies the game into a boring haul-em-up and 'sort of shoot them in expansions maybe'. It can't be all things to everyone because people will choose. Its a bit like being in a war and choosing who can shoot at you. Ultimately the two extremes are either make it all solo or make it all open.

I want an Open that is fun to play in, with as many players as possible, with as little cheating and toxic behavior as possible. To me, the best way of getting that is ensuring that everyone who is in Open is there voluntarily, free from coercion, whether that coercion takes the form of gating gameplay people enjoy behind a PvP-wall, or simply bribing them to play in that mode. It won't eliminate it entirely, but for a PvE/PvP hybrid, Open Mode Elite Dangerous is a far better environment than others I've played in the past, and Powerplay better still in my experience.
Powerplay or not, toxic players will always exist and so will cheating sadly. If Powerplay is moved to open you opt in and hopefully be told what it involves. And if thats too much FD can weight merits which keeps everything as it is and softly encourages people into Open but keeps the choice of modes (at a cost).
 
And do you know how many youtube videos people can have. I can have 7 my self because I have 7 Clash of Clan accounts. And ask my family or friends to vote a certain way so is not Valid. Now if FRONTIER had their own poll. They can set it on player accounts. People who play the game.
So if I bought several copies of Elite I could skew the vote? If I won the lottery I could have Open Powerplay tomorrow :D

But the view on this forum and from Obsidian Ants forum in the same. I know you don't like it but you can see it for yourself.

Of course the other question is, how do you ask people? What would the question be since few people know or care about Powerplay in comparison to the games population. You would have people with genuine concerns mixed with slippery slopers who would vote the earth flat again against people who play the feature or those who are genuinely excited to have Powerplay change.
 
Last edited:
So if I bought several copies of Elite I could skew the vote? If I won the lottery I could have Open Powerplay tomorrow :D
Indeed, but so could others. I would guess it would balance out unless we have some major whales playing ED who would be so invested they would buy so many copies to skew things in their favour.
 
Indeed, but so could others. I would guess it would balance out unless we have some major whales playing ED who would be so invested they would buy so many copies to skew things in their favour.
So we can agree then that all forms of democracy have failed. May I suggest a Powerplay Danceoff to settle this.
 
You don't get a vote, you don't get no dance-off; this ain't no democracy. You get to sulk in a forgotten area of the forums and complain to the cobwebs.
 
So we can agree then that all forms of democracy have failed. May I suggest a Powerplay Danceoff to settle this.
A bake off would be better, then we could eat the results of the competiton!
We should settle this in the old way.. stripped-out shieldless cutters headbutting a station under autodock, at dawn... last one alive wins, briefly, but is cursed to spend the next year being accused of being an unrepresentative sample of a subset of a subset of a slippery ganking slope, that seeks to deprive any & all deprived & noble minorities of their birthright. Hmm, no more coffee for me this morning..
You don't get a vote, you don't get no dance-off; this ain't no democracy. You get to sulk in a forgotten area of the forums and complain to the cobwebs.
<<CITATION NEEDED>>
 
So if I bought several copies of Elite I could skew the vote? If I won the lottery I could have Open Powerplay tomorrow :D
Don't know why you would waste your Lotto on Several copies. But whatever floats your boat. I would hope you help players on consoles who can't afford Open mode.

But the view on this forum and from Obsidian Ants forum in the same. I know you don't like it but you can see it for yourself.
See here The thing. Anyone can Vote on Obsidian Ant Youtube even your Grandma and your extended family people even using dead people Email to vote. Please note. Some Companies if someone wanted to swing a vote their way. You can pay to have that done.

Of course the other question is, how do you ask people? What would the question be since few people know or care about Powerplay in comparison to the games population. You would have people with genuine concerns mixed with slippery slopers who would vote the earth flat again against people who play the mode or those who are genuinely excited to have Powerplay change.
If Frontier need to ask the right questions. I don't think Players should know what the poll about when they post it. But ask a group of questions. And start off by asking honest questions. How do you feel taking parts of the game away from some of the players that they already enjoy? Should Slow internet or slow computer prevent some players from playing parts of the game? Should parts of the Console gameplay be removed because they don't pay a subscription?

See questions that give more of an honest answer. It does not tell the group of players it Power play Open only. It makes people think. Hay they are people too.

Believe it or not. Shadow of war will take me a week or two to download.
 
Last edited:
Don't know why you would waste your Lotto on Several copies. But whatever floats your boat. I would hope you help players on consoles who can't afford Open mode.
Or make a feature thats worth paying for.

See here The thing. Anyone can Vote on Obsidian Ant Youtube even your Grandma and your extended family people even using dead people Email to vote. Please note. Some Companies if someone wanted to swing a vote their way. You can pay to have that done.
So now its a grand conspiracy? You do know its Powerplay we are talking about, right?

If Frontier need to ask the right questions. I don't think Players should know what the poll about when they post it. But ask a group of questions. And start off by asking honest questions.
How do you feel taking parts of the game away from some of the players that they already enjoy?
Should parts of the Console gameplay be removed because they don't pay a subscription?
The first is not an honest question. You are involving emotion. Its down to FD to juggle numbers and any net gain from making the change. Games are luxury items, you buy them or buy into them. If FD see more money via a feature being used more, then they will choose that.

Should Slow internet or slow computer prevent some players from playing parts of the game?
Why can't my GT 1030 not play Crisis at 4K? Games as a service change. You are saying over a decade (its projected lifespan) that nothing can change in ED?

See questions that give more of an honest answer. It does not tell the group of players it Power play Open only. It makes people think. Hay they are people too.
FD care about money, and if the game generates it.

How about these for actual questions?

1: Do you play Powerplay? How often have you used the feature and in what mode? Why did you use this feature (and why in that mode)?

These filter the people who don't know what they are talking about from those who do. Then you'd ask:

2: Do you think this feature would benefit from being restricted to Open only? Would weighting merits in favour of open be an option?

If you answered no to question 1, then you'd ask:

3: If Powerplay was restricted to open or used a system to reward playing in open, would you be tempted to play it? Would moving Powerplay specific modules affect your choice?
 
Or make a feature thats worth paying for.
What I read on this topic. Not everyone can pay for everything.

So now its a grand conspiracy? You do know its Powerplay we are talking about, right?
I am looking at polls that can be fixed. Not so easy if Frontier does the polls and uses Accounts. They can use the IP Address, Credit Card, User real name address. So it one person One poll.

The first is not an honest question. You are involving emotion. Its down to FD to juggle numbers and any net gain from making the change. Games are luxury items, you buy them or buy into them. If FD see more money via a feature being used more, then they will choose that.
They are all Honest Questions and emotions should be put in the poll to make it fairer. Lucky for us Frontier cares about its users. It does not focus on player PvPer greed.

Why can't my GT 1030 not play Crisis at 4K? Games as a service change. You are saying over a decade (its projected lifespan) that nothing can change in ED?
Old game.

FD care about money, and if the game generates it.
Frontier care more about customers than Greed.
 
What I read on this topic. Not everyone can pay for everything.
Which is surprising exactly how?

I am looking at polls that can be fixed. Not so easy if Frontier does the polls and uses Accounts. They can use the IP Address, Credit Card, User real name address. So it one person One poll.
I bet myself, WorldsGreatestForumDad, Bashy, Rinzler etc all have seventy sock puppet accounts. Maybe I'm Bashy, or he is me?

They are all Honest Questions and emotions should be put in the poll to make it fairer. Lucky for us Frontier cares about its users. It does not focus on player PvPer greed.
Frontier care about money, because they are a buisiness and not a charity. They are paid to be nice to you so you stay and buy more stuff.

How does emotion make it fairer? Surely objective improvement and making something unattractive to users attractive again is what makes sense in the end?

Old game.
Games as a service mean someone in the end will lose out. So far ED has ended 32bit support, Mac support, certain graphical effects are not in console versions, and as time goes on discrepancies will become greater.

player PvPer greed.
And here we are. PvP players are all baby eating fascists who want to ruin your game with a change that has a great deal of merit to it.

Frontier care more about customers than Greed.
Frontier are a listed company. They want to make games that sell, and if you have a part of that game that is not pulling its weight you do something about it. Sadly FD want to fix PP as cheaply as they can, and from those options tabled we have some interesting choices. To do nothing is frankly condemning the feature.
 
Don't know why you would waste your Lotto on Several copies. But whatever floats your boat. I would hope you help players on consoles who can't afford Open mode.

See here The thing. Anyone can Vote on Obsidian Ant Youtube even your Grandma and your extended family people even using dead people Email to vote. Please note. Some Companies if someone wanted to swing a vote their way. You can pay to have that done.

If Frontier need to ask the right questions. I don't think Players should know what the poll about when they post it. But ask a group of questions. And start off by asking honest questions. How do you feel taking parts of the game away from some of the players that they already enjoy? Should Slow internet or slow computer prevent some players from playing parts of the game? Should parts of the Console gameplay be removed because they don't pay a subscription?

See questions that give more of an honest answer. It does not tell the group of players it Power play Open only. It makes people think. Hay they are people too.

Believe it or not. Shadow of war will take me a week or two to download.
So firstly, console players can create numerous CMDRs for free & switch between them at will. PC players have to pay for a new copy of the game for each CMDR they wish to save. If Powerplay went OpenOnly, if they want to do Powerplay then Console players would have to have an online subscription (with all the other benefits that enjoys), PC players get Powerplay at no extra cost. Overall, PC players would still have the bum end of the deal for most people there tbh, but at least there is a financial balance of some kind. It really isn't a gross injustice.

Secondly, are you sure you don't want to blame Russian Hackers for rigging the Obsidian Ant poll? It wasn't brigaded, the ratios at the start and at the end remained stable within a few percentage points, and the number of votes kept rising consistently.

Thirdly, you mean Frontier should be asking loaded & skewed questions to suit you. If it was kept even more general, & out of a gaming context altogether, surely that would help players really not know what the poll was about when they post it? That way, you could ask a fair & balanced general question like "should baby seals be clubbed to death by trolls" and be sure of getting the answer you want. If you look at the way Obsidian Ant posted it, his questions amounted to "should people be allowed to remain free to choose how they want to do powerplay" versus "should powerplay be restricted to one mode only" To someone without a better understanding, the natural answer to that is to cry "FREEDOM" and vote for things to stay the same. Despite this, despite OA being an exploration-heavy content provider, who doesn't do combat AFAIK & has almost zero PvP content, the vote still came back consistent with the forum vote, strongly in favour of OpenOnly. In another context, 53% to 47% is apparently a democratic mandate. 53% to 25% however is a landslide, and 53% was only as low as it was because the vote was split between two 'change' options.

I recently spent 4 months on a contested theoretical-max. 2mb ADSL line, 5 miles from the nearest exchange. I feel your pain. Loading times between systems & dropping to instances could be nasty. But so what? sometimes I tended towards quieter spots, but we had expansions going on during that time & it wasn't gamebreaking or a big problem.
 
Top Bottom