The New Guilds and Player Owned Stations Discussion Thread.

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

We already have chunks of space being bickered over. This is not a guild issue you are complaining about. This is a pvp issue you are complaining about.

- - - Updated - - -

Since your only contribution is denying that questions are valid, I'll just pop you onto my ignore list.

Here is a thought if you want to fix the pvp issue you are complaining about we need to address it with pvp tools. Ie pvp flags or something. There are lots of methods for dealing with pvp and you need to use them to deal with pvp.

 

[Arindor]

I've never quite understood this urge to have guilds in games, especially if they are detrimental to the game they've been implemented in ...

 

[Hellhawk666]

But that would still involve physical chunks of space being bickered over, which again leads us back to to guild ganking wings.

Influence does not have to have anything to do with territory. The existing mission system in stations is all about influence and status, yes? For both pilots and the station factions, yes? Does territory have anything to do with it? No. Implement player factions in exactly the same manner using the same tools as NPCs and you have an influence based system. If faction members wanted to fight over areas of space it would gain them precisely nothing and they would never get to exercise control over a station.

They might still form gank squads, but it would be to no purpose and people who would do that would do it anyway without any sort of "guild" structure.

 

[Stigbob]

Respecting the laws of the guild will not save the members to respect the law of the system - otherwise they are treated as criminals or so.
Powerplay now has a system which made a move towards putting more colours on the picture in this matter: being pledged to a power can affect one's rep in other systems. So in order to get the benefits, one has to make compromises. All optional so nobody is forced to pledge or be part of guild play if this system is extended to them. (But it's only one way to go and we are speculating here.)

Pre-emptive is a term based on interpretation from a specific point of view. Technically it's an attack like any of them and can be treated by the general regulations.

We need the bounty exploits closed before the law and order system can be relied on to function as an effective balance. It's better than it used to be, but guild level organization could be used to negate bounties pretty quickly.

(it doesn't really work in text but I've been using pre-emptive self defense to sarcastically describe aggressive behavior since Dubya made it famous)

 

[Steve50]

I've never quite understood this urge to have guilds in games, especially if they are detrimental to the game they've been implemented in ...

Me neither, but I guess some people can't function without belonging to a clan/guild/whatever. Modern gamer syndrome

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

Since your only contribution is denying that questions are valid, I'll just pop you onto my ignore list.

indeed ...... guild members flying around killing anyone who is not a member of their clan if they do not leave "their" territory or not following orders properly is 100% a guild issue.

is it linked to PvP? of course it is but guilds allow aggressive players to step it up from not only irritating to organised and potentially game ruining imo.

And I know some players keep banging the same drum of it wont happen in elite, elite will be different, but the simple fact is it is ALREADY happening in elite, but without the absolute guild support it does help limit it somewhat imo by making it harder to organise.

it is kind of like the argument some people say that it is person who shoots someone not the gun..... but as we in the uk can show when compared to our US neighbours........ if you dont allow them to have the gun from the get go it makes it a lot harder to commit the gun crime in the 1st place.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

I've never quite understood this urge to have guilds in games, especially if they are detrimental to the game they've been implemented in ...

They have never been detrimentAl in any game I have played in. They are helpful to their members. Often have similar playing goals.

Most games do not implement them like they do in Eve.

 

[jonny taco]

Modern gamer syndrome

What are you even on about here? Guilds in MMOs go back to the very beginning of the genre (15+ years ago fyi)... There is nothing "modern gamer syndrome" about guilds... Seriously, the unfounded anti guild strawmans in this thread are getting a bit out of hand.

 

[Stigbob]

Influence does not have to have anything to do with territory. The existing mission system in stations is all about influence and status, yes? For both pilots and the station factions, yes? Does territory have anything to do with it? No. Implement player factions in exactly the same manner using the same tools as NPCs and you have an influence based system. If faction members wanted to fight over areas of space it would gain them precisely nothing and they would never get to exercise control over a station.

They might still form gank squads, but it would be to no purpose and people who would do that would do it anyway without any sort of "guild" structure.

The stations have to be visited to take missions and work on influence, yes ?. CZ's and other locations have to be visited to complete those missions, yes ?. Stations, CZ's, NAV points, RES sites are physical locations, yes ?.

Those physical locations are all points within territory, ganking squads would camp them and the space in between.

The whole purpose of guild ganking is to deny entry to non-members and to drive up numbers through forced recruitment.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

That is a pvp issue. Not a guild issue.

You can claim it is a guild issue all day. That will not make it one. If your pvp rule set allows one to do that with minimal consequences. Which is what ED does well you are going to have problems. And not allowing guild tools will not fix that problem. Because it is not a guild issue. It is a pvp issue. That you fix by using pvp tools.of some sort. Pvp flags or a non pvp open or something. No amount of blaming guilds for pvp problems will fix pvp problems.

 

[Talarin]

How would (or could) a guild function without territory, you just don't want to answer the question.

I am. You seem not to be understanding the answer, I think because I'm thinking of them as a more simply and lower profile entity than you. Flip the question - why would an Association need territory? You're still projecting from other games onto Elite.

To repeat - Associations are not solely team vs. team entities.

Crime and punishment wouldn't be of any concern to a war-band from a rival guild making a mess in a hostile system, they would set off "loaded for bear" and return home for repairs.

Yes, and then answer to the local authorities and/or interested bounty hunters. And if FD would use a little more imagination in the way they handle crime and punishment they could more effectively discourage anti-social behaviour. As others have said - not a guild problem as this exists as a potential issue right now.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

What are you even on about here? Guilds in MMOs go back to the very beginning of the genre (15+ years ago fyi)... There is nothing "modern gamer syndrome" about guilds... Seriously, the unfounded anti guild strawmans in this thread are getting a bit out of hand.

No kidding. So far every complaint I have seen has been pvp related. Not guild related.

 

[Snarfbuckle]

Bounties in systems owned by a rival power (there are naughty people who would buy disposable sidey's and "help" each other with an outstanding bounty in the name of guild service), that could also cause problems for unaligned BH's using KWS in the home system.

Assuming that you OWN a system.

Player FACTIONS (not guilds) would be like any other faction in the game and they do not OWN a system and set their own laws. They are bound by the systems laws. They MIGHT be able to push it towards anarchy with a lot of effort but allowing a few hundred souls dictate the rule of law of an entire system is just stupid.

A faction might inhabit a station but never RULE a system.

This is not EVE and should never BE EVE.

 

[Lateralus]

Here's a thread I started with suggestions of how a player-faction/guild/clan could operate. It's a separate thread because there was lots to include in it and it's more of a 'how to' rather than a 'should we have it' thread;

https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=166755

EDIT: I think ideas in this post would help limit blockading factions etc as influence could be affected by solo players and open players, as it utilizes the bulletin board mission system.

 

[Stigbob]

indeed ...... guild members flying around killing anyone who is not a member of their clan if they do not leave "their" territory or not following orders properly is 100% a guild issue.

is it linked to PvP? of course it is but guilds allow aggressive players to step it up from not only irritating to organised and potentially game ruining imo.

And I know some players keep banging the same drum of it wont happen in elite, elite will be different, but the simple fact is it is ALREADY happening in elite, but without the absolute guild support it does help limit it somewhat imo by making it harder to organise.

it is kind of like the argument some people say that it is person who shoots someone not the gun..... but as we in the uk can show when compared to our US neighbours........ if you dont allow them to have the gun from the get go it makes it a lot harder to commit the gun crime in the 1st place.

Yep, it's the only thing I object to about guilds really too much focus on controlling other players.

You've reminded me of Jim Jefferies standup routine on gun control it's fantastic (bad language warning to avoid shocking granny and the budgie do not follow this link) :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZFLk5L70MQ

 

[Stigbob]

I am. You seem not to be understanding the answer, I think because I'm thinking of them as a more simply and lower profile entity than you. Flip the question - why would an Association need territory? You're still projecting from other games onto Elite.

To repeat - Associations are not solely team vs. team entities.

How would a guild co-ordinate wings/squadrons without a central location ?, even if territory wasn't a guild feature it would be claimed using guild chat channels to organize it. If guilds were restricted to influence within systems they would blockade systems/stations to maximize their influence. Guilds are about control.

Yes, and then answer to the local authorities and/or interested bounty hunters. And if FD would use a little more imagination in the way they handle crime and punishment they could more effectively discourage anti-social behaviour. As others have said - not a guild problem as this exists as a potential issue right now.

If they didn't use a guild chat channel to rapidly organize a disposable sidewinder related solution. Or bribe the local authorities as someone suggested a while back.

- - - Updated - - -

This is not EVE and should never BE EVE.

Which is why I oppose guilds.

 

[Hellhawk666]

The stations have to be visited to take missions and work on influence, yes ?. CZ's and other locations have to be visited to complete those missions, yes ?. Stations, CZ's, NAV points, RES sites are physical locations, yes ?.

Those physical locations are all points within territory,

All absolutely true.

... ganking squads would camp them and the space in between.

The whole purpose of guild ganking is to deny entry to non-members and to drive up numbers through forced recruitment.[/B]

This does not follow in a game with optional modes of play. ED is not EvE, and I for one do not want it to be.

 

[jprelph]

If you joined a guild that was trying to make you do things you did not want to do why did you stay in that guild? Are you really that weak willed that you followed them around like a puppy?

Whose to say I didn't leave? There's a reason that I stopped playing WoW and Everquest a long time ago and that is that because guilds are required to access some content then it's either put up with varying degrees of that behaviour, or don't access the content.

Sure guilds can make the problem worse

Which was my point, you're not going to get rid of it completely but making it worse does not seem like a good solution.

 

[Hellhawk666]

... Guilds are about control.

I don't agree player groups must necessarily be about control.
No point in continuing this as we will never reach concensus.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

You obviously have not been following crime statistics in the UK. Crime is higher now then before the gun ban. But this argument is not on topic. Please leave the political stuff someplace else.

Guilds do not focus on other players. The claim they do is a strawman argument.