The New Guilds and Player Owned Stations Discussion Thread.

[Bran Tse Mallory]

I see some people using the old 'What impact would guild features have on you?' argument getting used as well as the stupid logic to justify this such as roster screens, how would that impact you?

As a guild leader for 14 years I can honestly say that a good guild needs non of these things to be present in game, it just gives you a sense of entitlement to start asking for more guild related content at the cost of increased game play.

Guilds will, I assure you, have fights with each other. These will no doubt be friendly battles or even a league... Then come the threads about players stumbling into a system and getting told to leave, 'this system is for our private war', not like you can just change instance to get away from them. What's next? Guild leader boards, guild war status, tax for entering our system/station, price setting and the list of possible demands goes on and on...

Trust me, the well organised guilds are here already they just don't need to be pampered to.

 

[Talarin]

It's been put forward previously as the only way to guarantee that only players vote. However, given that players may not play all the time or may even take breaks from the game, how long should such an in-game poll run? Another point would be that no-one would know which way the result was going until it was announced.

FD announce the referendum via email (they have email addresses for all accounts)
FD take their 100% baseline based on how many players have logged in inside a given time period (to allow for the fact that lapsed players aren't going to vote).
A certain proportion of that number (say 65%, but it could change based on the issue at hand) have to vote within a certain time period (again, can vary, but say 2 weeks)
You'll either get a yes vote, no vote or no quorum (which is an automatic no)

Regarding no one knowing how the result was going - I'd say that was desirable.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Regarding no one knowing how the result was going - I'd say that was desirable.

I would agree.

 

[Yaffle]

The "Apathy Guild"

The Drunks of Sol approve!

If they could be bothered...

 

[Cody]

If they could be bothered...

There is that... now, where did I put that bottle?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

FD announce the referendum via email (they have email addresses for all accounts)
FD take their 100% baseline based on how many players have logged in inside a given time period (to allow for the fact that lapsed players aren't going to vote).
A certain proportion of that number (say 65%, but it could change based on the issue at hand) have to vote within a certain time period (again, can vary, but say 2 weeks)
You'll either get a yes vote, no vote or no quorum (which is an automatic no)

Regarding no one knowing how the result was going - I'd say that was desirable.

The pertinent info is, Are the Scots going to vote, and if they decide to at the last minute do FD reserve the right to cancel the poll afterall

 

[Genar-Hofoen]

The pertinent info is, Are the Scots going to vote, and if they decide to at the last minute do FD reserve the right to cancel the poll afterall

I'm a Scot and I'd vote!

 

[Scream Cheese]

Actually, I'm not at all worrying about EvE player under the bed

The reason is - and I still don't understand why people don't get this - Elite is the grand-daddy of games like EvE, the X series, etc. , and it has 30 years of its own lore and game play style.

The other thing you don't seem to get is that ED is basically a revamped remake of the original Elite. With added bells and whistles. A lot of the decisions on how ED should be were decided from 2 years ago. ED was funded - I believe - by people like myself who played the original Elite and have always wanted a modern day version of it.

ED is basically a single-player game with the option of having other players in your same instance. Note that ED's definition of MMO differs somewhat from say the EvE definition of MMO - in fact I'd go as far as saying that where ED is concerned, calling it an MMO is stretching the definition to straining point - and for Elite that's the way it should be.

It's always been known that this would appeal to one kind of player, and wouldn't appeal to other types of players. It seems to me that the majority of players of ED like the way the game plays now, and that guild-proponent players are in the minority.

The guild-proponents are asking FDEV to change the direction this game is going, in a manner in which the majority of players would not like. This is why you are seeing such strident NO's in this thread and the other threads preceding this.

Again I'll re-iterate what David Braben - you might know who he is - has stated that guilds just don't feel right, for this game.

I disagree that that definition stretches 'MMO' to the breaking point. It stretches it well past the breaking point. It's like calling Shogun: Total War 2 an MMO, because you can have multiplayer interactions in the single player campaign if you turn on the feature that allows players to replace AI generals in campaign battles.

The fact is, labelling something an 'MMO' creates a broadly similar set of expectations in the minds of most of the people who hear it. Applying it in a way that's fairly significantly different from those expectations (as a 'mostly single player experience with the occasional presence of other players in your instance') and then marketing it based on that niche interpretation without making it absolutely clear in the marketing material is more than a little dishonest. This isn't just a case of Steam putting the MMO tag on the game because that was the closest fit; the marketing guff on the Steam page, which was presumably written by Frontier, pretty heavily emphasises the 'massively multiplayer' and 'connected' nature of the game.

Personally, I enjoy the game as it is, and whilst I'd like to see things change, a lot of the 'standard' MMO features outside of communication tools that are actually useful get a great big 'meh' from me. I bought the game on the basis of spaceships and recommendation from some friends, not because it was an MMO. However, I can absolutely understand, sympathise with and - to an extent - support players who bought the game being told they'd be getting an MMO, and instead received something that is most definitely not an MMO by many (most?) standards. Similarly, I can sympathise with 'old guard' players who were told they were getting one thing in the design documents but which the game hasn't (at least so far) delivered.

I also don't really agree with you on what the majority of players want, but I don't agree with the other side either. Both this forum and the E: D reddit clearly have massively different opinions, probably because they cater to entirely separate parts of the community. This forum seems to skew heavily towards the longer-term players and Elite fans, reddit would appear instead to have a membership more composed of the people who bought the game based on the 'spaceship MMO' marketing. Getting a feel for what the general userbase actually wants would have to be a lot more involved than a poll on two sites that clearly cater to different sections of the community that are fairly incompatible in what they want.

Saying 'you don't get it' isn't helpful and is entirely pointless. The answer will just be 'So? I was sold a game that said it would do X and I'm irritated it doesn't.' That's a perfectly valid complaint. If 'X' isn't what 'Elite' is supposed to be, maybe Frontier shouldn't have been selling it as though it were. The fact is, though, the game would have a much smaller playerbase if they'd done that.

 

[Cody]

What's this... the Scots are allowed to vote?

 

[Robert Maynard]

What's this... the Scots are allowed to vote?

<grumbles> Wotchit!

 

[AnnuverScotinExile]

The pertinent info is, Are the Scots going to vote, and if they decide to at the last minute do FD reserve the right to cancel the poll afterall

I'm a Scot. And unlike the referendum that you may be referring to, I would at least be allowed to vote, since presumably the heinous crime of living in England is not enough to exclude me. I may have to declare that I don't live in Slough, though.

 

[Scream Cheese]

What's this... the Scots are allowed to vote?

They kind of forced the issue by sacking Space-York.

 

[Yaffle]

Fascinating as the Scottish votes point is, can we stick to the actual topic please?

 

[StuartGT]

Yeah, if it all ever only revolved around this set of features, I don't think we'd have had all these long debates in the first place. Instead, basically as soon as the word "guild" is dropped on these (and other) forums, "station ownership" is mentioned in the same or the following sentence.

So here is my ad hoc proposal for a guild feature that might work in a way that is yields no more influence over the game and other players as the current status quo, while still satisfying the call for guild management tools and some sense of guild recognition:

• 2 or more players can form a guild (may actually be called differently in an actual implementation).
• A player can only ever be in a single guild (much easier to implement and deal with, both for FD and the players, than a multi-guild system).
• A guild must choose a unique name and a short-hand tag (no more than 4 letters). The tag is shown in front of any member's name (e.g. "SPQR CMDR Gaius Iulius Caesar"), the full guild name only in the details in the contact list (e.g. "Senatus Populusque Romanus").
• Players can enable and disable the display of guild tags globally.
• A guild has a single, global text and voice channel that only members can access. (This is an extension of the wings comms mechanic.)
• A guild has a single leader, who may appoint officers who also have the right to invite or kick members. The leader can pass on leadership to any member at any time. Leadership conveys no benefits other than invite/kick rights and the right to appoint (or demote) officers. (No custom ranks, no multi-leader system, no voting system etc., keep the technical implementation as simple as possible.)
• Fellow guild members are shown in a distinct colour on the scanner, and shown on the galaxy map.(This is again an extension of the wings mechanic.)

I'd say if it would be no more than that, I would have no objections to that, because the same thing indeed basically already exists, just with out-of-game tools (forums, Teamspeak etc.), so these are all just convenience and quality-of-life features.

These rules all make sense to me, as a Open-playing lone-wolf player, and I see no reasons to not implement them

Limited Station Ownership I'm still unsure about, simply because no-one seems to have suggested how it would actually work?

• New stations, or existing ones currently controlled by NPC Minor Factions? (Probably the former)
• How is a station captured? Extensive combat against station defence-lasers & ships, while causing damage to the station? Does this work for Open, Group and Solo?
• Can a station be destroyed? If so how can a station be created/built to replace it? Is it fun & doable?
• Can a station be lost due to inactivity and/or poor management? How?
• What tasks do players have when they actually manage a station? Are these fun?
• Does a station manager have to park in a station all of the time? Won't this detract from One-Man-One-Ship gameplay? If not how will remote management work?
• If stations are to be run by guilds, what options/tasks/roles are given to guild members? Can these be done remotely, only in-system, or only in-no-fire-zone, or docked?
• What's the point of controlling a station?
  • Is it a revenue generator? How is revenue generated, taxes on trade, fines for loitering?
  • Control/restriction of commodities? How is this defined? Can availability of commodities be changed? How?
  • Control/restriction of functions (e.g. Shipyard, Upgrades, choices of available parts etc)? How is this defined? Can availability be changed? How?
  • Simply bragging rights?
• How would station ownership affect Open, Group & Solo players? Are there any restrictions?
• Would it be actually fun?

 

[CylonSurfer]

Better yet, if implemented, restrict Guild play to a new Open-Guild mode and then there's a guarantee that players don't even need to avoid the systems where Guild members are playing.

This sounds like the best solution - I'd switch to that game play mode straight away. Not that I personally want to own a station but Elite in it's current state is becoming a very boring shallow game. The missions are very shallow, they should have been fixed before any of this PP rubbish, or some new PvP mode.... People want to play coop to reach goals or fight one another by forming factions - these are basic requirements in this day and age - its not the 1980's anymore (thank god).

 

[GibMeister]

I would rather they start off with giving us our own hangers we can place in various places as a home base where we can do repairs, store modules and swap modules etc then once those mechanics are working properly they can think on player owned stations and systems.

As dandy says, we don't need to own stations, at the minimum we should be able to see our hanger with ships and be able to buy modules and store them and swap them about amongst our ships.
.
What I would really be happy with is the above plus the ability to store a defined tonnage of cargo, so you could collect items and sell them later perhaps when the market is favourable, or missions come up?
.
What I would love and be ecstatic about AND WOULD PAY FOR! would be to have the above in my own mini personal station located (only for use by owning player) amongst some roids or something - you know, a secret evil lair I could run to without the cops chasing me (refuels and re-arms could be carried out here too)!
.
Not interested in Player owned or Guild owned full size stations at all, that's really outside the bounds of this game in my opinion.

 

[Soliluna]

I disagree that that definition stretches 'MMO' to the breaking point. It stretches it well past the breaking point. It's like calling Shogun: Total War 2 an MMO, because you can have multiplayer interactions in the single player campaign if you turn on the feature that allows players to replace AI generals in campaign battles.

The fact is, labelling something an 'MMO' creates a broadly similar set of expectations in the minds of most of the people who hear it. Applying it in a way that's fairly significantly different from those expectations (as a 'mostly single player experience with the occasional presence of other players in your instance') and then marketing it based on that niche interpretation without making it absolutely clear in the marketing material is more than a little dishonest. This isn't just a case of Steam putting the MMO tag on the game because that was the closest fit; the marketing guff on the Steam page, which was presumably written by Frontier, pretty heavily emphasises the 'massively multiplayer' and 'connected' nature of the game.

Personally, I enjoy the game as it is, and whilst I'd like to see things change, a lot of the 'standard' MMO features outside of communication tools that are actually useful get a great big 'meh' from me. I bought the game on the basis of spaceships and recommendation from some friends, not because it was an MMO. However, I can absolutely understand, sympathise with and - to an extent - support players who bought the game being told they'd be getting an MMO, and instead received something that is most definitely not an MMO by many (most?) standards. Similarly, I can sympathise with 'old guard' players who were told they were getting one thing in the design documents but which the game hasn't (at least so far) delivered.

I also don't really agree with you on what the majority of players want, but I don't agree with the other side either. Both this forum and the E: D reddit clearly have massively different opinions, probably because they cater to entirely separate parts of the community. This forum seems to skew heavily towards the longer-term players and Elite fans, reddit would appear instead to have a membership more composed of the people who bought the game based on the 'spaceship MMO' marketing. Getting a feel for what the general userbase actually wants would have to be a lot more involved than a poll on two sites that clearly cater to different sections of the community that are fairly incompatible in what they want.

Saying 'you don't get it' isn't helpful and is entirely pointless. The answer will just be 'So? I was sold a game that said it would do X and I'm irritated it doesn't.' That's a perfectly valid complaint. If 'X' isn't what 'Elite' is supposed to be, maybe Frontier shouldn't have been selling it as though it were. The fact is, though, the game would have a much smaller playerbase if they'd done that.

This is what I have noticed also. I bought the game with the deal breaker being Oculus, I thought 'MMO, thats cool' but I have to say I haven't really noticed the MMO. I've met a CMDR only a few times, and felt the not felt any affect of any one else playing at all lol

- - - Updated - - -

As dandy says, we don't need to own stations, at the minimum we should be able to see our hanger with ships and be able to buy modules and store them and swap them about amongst our ships.
.
What I would really be happy with is the above plus the ability to store a defined tonnage of cargo, so you could collect items and sell them later perhaps when the market is favourable, or missions come up?
.
What I would love and be ecstatic about AND WOULD PAY FOR! would be to have the above in my own mini personal station located (only for use by owning player) amongst some roids or something - you know, a secret evil lair I could run to without the cops chasing me (refuels and re-arms could be carried out here too)!
.
Not interested in Player owned or Guild owned full size stations at all, that's really outside the bounds of this game in my opinion.

As I have mentioned elsewhere in the thread, this is pretty much exactly what I would want. And I think it is easily doable in the game, without affecting the subtle narrative and would provide a great way of increasing the depth in the game.

 

[telperion]

This poll just goes to show that polls should be ignored.

Loads of people just creating accounts to vote against the grain. Awesome! Well done.

 

[goblox]

Yes!!!! I say at least once a day how much more I would enjoy the game with this simple change

 

[Barking_Mad]

This sounds like the best solution - I'd switch to that game play mode straight away. Not that I personally want to own a station but Elite in it's current state is becoming a very boring shallow game. The missions are very shallow, they should have been fixed before any of this PP rubbish, or some new PvP mode.... People want to play coop to reach goals or fight one another by forming factions - these are basic requirements in this day and age - its not the 1980's anymore (thank god).

New missions are to be added, branching, further out etc. Not everything happens at once.