Idea: Player corporations could be treated as an in-game faction

[Fangrim]

Err actually, using YOUR logic Eve shouldn't have them as they were already in Elite in 1984. Silly logic, don't you think?

The point is that we want Elite to be like Elite. If we wanted it to be like Eve, we'd just play Eve. The whole guilds/factions/clans thing isn't like Elite, it's like Eve.

Yes, very silly logic, which I also pointed out. I was referring to his logic, not mine.

And no problem, don't do guilds/corporations/etc, if this is too Eve-like.

I pretty much don't care what Frontier does, as long as it gives me an incentive to keep playing. Right now, there's not much to do, that I haven't already done in the first weeks of playing.

 

[Don_Von_Hulio]

Not a new idea or suggestion. It will get shot down just like all the others... no ingmae player owned factions plox

 

[Dogoncrook]

So the original thread that you refer too is in "essence make Elite more like EVE", and you decide to create a thread around your own ideas to make elite more like EVE...


Can we not have different games, that can offer different play types and styles around the same theme "Space"? Or must they all be the same therefore the UI is really the only difference. I brought Elite Dangerous warts and all as the design path is completely different in approach to EVE...

Therefore those who want an EVE like experience in elite, will much like those who want EVE to be a more Elite dangerous be disappointed... Really its about choice, as a consumer you choose a product that suits your needs... Would you buy a car if you wanted it to handle like a motorbike?

The details hardly matter at this point. I was looking for transportation, devs choice of course, now I'm sitting in a cardboard box going VROOM!

 

[Gorodd]

Won't happen. This topic has been discussed to death and FD explicitly declared something like this will never be implemented. Ever.

+1 agreed...this is not going to happen any time this year....there's a thread with a link to braben on video answering this question - he is not for guilds/corporates at all.

 

[Driver]

Ny point is to give something to care about, fight for, work towards.

Right now, there is no incentive for me to participate in the "evolving galaxy". Nothing you do, solo or grouped, changes anything, anywhere.

The PvP part is not important. That's just to add flavour, to give something worth doing PvP for. There is nothing now, except to try and get as high a bounty to your name. My suggestion is to give players something to do, that's actually meaningful.

Right now, there is no meaning to PvP.

Why does PvP need a meaning? All PvP does is given the twitch kiddies some pew-pew to sooth their short attention spans.

I don't need an incentive to play ED. Since you have the problem, why don't you come up with a suggestion that won't interfere with me?

 

[_Flin_]

Actually I'd be happy if corpprations / alliances had
- a roster
- a member management system
- matchmaking
- a chat
- a message of the day, for daily goals

There a plenty of factions around to choose from. Some with cool names.

 

[DaveB]

Since a fundamental part of the mechanics proposed by several in this thread is a "difference" in how you see the underlying universe between modes, and we've already had a definitive "No" on that, DOA.

 

[Ydiss]

Yes, but you could still make a difference. Maybe not on a galactic scale, but in a few local systems - definitely possible.

Even the smallest populations are several thousand strong. The whole point of ED is the lone pilot with friends, not system ownership.

If you allow two players to do it in a small system why stop there? Players would ask for more.

It's not going to happen. This was discussed at length early on and FD have been explicit. I understand you need an incentive to play. I'm going to guess your link was to that overbearingly negative thread that I'm avoiding - whole lots of discontent there. So I won't bother mentioning the game's going to improve and become richer over time.

It's a shame but ED can't cater for everyone. Some things won't ever happen. Others will take a long time to get right. You either buy into that or don't.

 

[Enride]

Won't happen. This topic has been discussed to death and FD explicitly declared something like this will never be implemented. Ever.

They also said we would definitly be able to play offline.
Nothing is set in stone

 

[Ydiss]

They also said we would definitly be able to play offline.
Nothing is set in stone

This has been used way too much to argue that a "no" could turn into a "yes.

It's not really possible to argue against it because nothing is 100% certain. So you're right. But it misses the point a bit. No one demanded offline be removed to change fd's mind. And so far, FD haven't suddenly changed their minds to change the core vision of their game - in fact removing plans for offline was to keep to that vision - so there's no precedent that actually gives credence to your assertion.

 

[amigacooke]

As it is now, there's not much that makes me feel like I have any impact on anything is this huge universe.

Sure, sometimes a faction takes over, or a war breaks out, but what does this mean to me? Absolutely nothing.

I have no sense of anything to fight for. Getting credits, bigger and better equipment, and exploring the same cookie-cutter systems only goes so far before everything becomes more of the same.

So what is your precise proposal to change that?

 

[Fangrim]

Why does PvP need a meaning? All PvP does is given the twitch kiddies some pew-pew to sooth their short attention spans.

I don't need an incentive to play ED. Since you have the problem, why don't you come up with a suggestion that won't interfere with me?

How will this interfere with you? This is absolutely no different than the game is today, except that some faction on som station is created by players, and give them some perks. You can still dock, trade, do anything at that stations that you can now.

Since a fundamental part of the mechanics proposed by several in this thread is a "difference" in how you see the underlying universe between modes, and we've already had a definitive "No" on that, DOA.

As I wrote, if this is a problem, then don't make any difference between Solo and Open.

So what is your precise proposal to change that?

/thread. ;o)

 

[Robert Maynard]

How will this interfere with you? This is absolutely no different than the game is today, except that some faction on som station is created by players, and give them some perks. You can still dock, trade, do anything at that stations that you can now.

The perks would appear, at first glance, to be rather generous - where's the money coming from to provide the discounts / enhanced sale prices? One of the arguments that usually comes up when talking about guild/clan/corp structures is "why is there no benefit for grouping up?" - the benefit is already there in force of numbers - why should an organised group need any more advantage than that?

 

[MadDogMurdock]

How cool is it to form a guild, when currently there's not even such a simple thing as a guild tag under your name?

Noone will know your affiliation, you might not even know who's in your guiild yourself.

And that's the of guilds right there! If you don't recognize the player's name, they aren't your friend.
Guild tags are a very lazy way to create 'community'.

 

[Enride]

This has been used way too much to argue that a "no" could turn into a "yes.

It's not really possible to argue against it because nothing is 100% certain. So you're right. But it misses the point a bit. No one demanded offline be removed to change fd's mind. And so far, FD haven't suddenly changed their minds to change the core vision of their game - in fact removing plans for offline was to keep to that vision - so there's no precedent that actually gives credence to your assertion.

True and i can respect them sticking to their vision.
They are chasing away alot of players though, this is a very asocial game in a time where social gaming is al the more important.

 

[Fangrim]

The perks would appear, at first glance, to be rather generous - where's the money coming from to provide the discounts / enhanced sale prices? One of the arguments that usually comes up when talking about guild/clan/corp structures is "why is there no benefit for grouping up?" - the benefit is already there in force of numbers - why should an organised group need any more advantage than that?

The numbers can be anything you want - right now there's a 10% discount for some backers at Founder's world. I think the discount should be at least the same.

Where's the money coming from for the Founder's world discount? Or the recent week-long discount at Ross <something>?

And that's the of guilds right there! If you don't recognize the player's name, they aren't your friend.
Guild tags are a very lazy way to create 'community'.

This is alredy done with NPC ships, what's the difference doing it with players?

Also while you might know who's your friend or not, others won't know that if they kill a commander, their faction rep will drop.

My whole idea is that a player can belong to and fight for a faction. A player faction in my OP, but it'd be also be cool if it was an NPC faction. Anything really to spice things up a bit.

 

[Driver]

How will this interfere with you? This is absolutely no different than the game is today, except that some faction on som station is created by players, and give them some perks. You can still dock, trade, do anything at that stations that you can now.

Your idea is predicated on the existence of player corporations and special perks for that corporation. Said corporation will then have a vested interest in preventing other corporations, or individuals from changing their special deal.

This could negatively impact me when I want to trade at that station.

Does this answer your question?

 

[Fangrim]

And this is different in how some guilds work together right now, claiming systems as "their own"?

Jotunheim Resistance, Goons, just to mention a few.

 

[Ydiss]

True and i can respect them sticking to their vision.
They are chasing away alot of players though, this is a very asocial game in a time where social gaming is al the more important.

Eve is highly sociable. I played it in its first year. I got bored because its content was 95% social and 5% actual "things to do".

I stopped playing and never looked back because the core design - point and click - wasn't for me.

Not every game has to be the same.

 

[Googol]

They also said we would definitly be able to play offline...

This forum's trigger for Godwin's Law?