I would definitely like to see support for guild oriented gameplay as another option, especially now when we have player named minor NPC factions. This was small step, but step in good direction nonetheless. Devs should use this as foundation to expand into several areas, while in the same time keeping it within the basic BGS frame. Few points to consider in this regard...
There are some interesting points here.
- players can actually join their chosen minor faction and display their tag
YES! Give me the option to put a custom decal on my ships too.
I'll pay for that. I promise I won't draw a willy (although actualy paying for it would encourage 99% of players not to do that anyway.)
- ingame faction chat channel, as well as BBS, should be provided
Frankly, I just don't think this is necessary. The chances of FD creating something better than the tools already available, albeit outside the game, is minimal, or would require an absolute ton of work that I feel would be better focussed on other things. Teamspeak, for example, works just fine without being in the active window. If I need to check something, I ask my comrades. If I need to check something else, I alt-tab out to the forum. I use borderless mode so it switches very quickly. Personally, I don't care for arguments about "immersion" - if I'm into the game sufficiently that I need to go and check something on the clan website, I'm immersed enough, surely? Basically, I don't think that clan-related tools are a necessity, or even important; better ones already exist. I appreciate, though, that you might disagree. I don't know what EVE had, as I've never played the game, and I don't do MMOs (I don't consider Elite to be an MMO, incidentally.)
- minor player factions can take over other NPC controlled stations within their home system simply by declaring war (current influence mechanics is total nonsense)
I see one issue with this, and that is that it's absurdly easy to win a war against even a very dominant NPC group, provided that you have a few competent CMDRs, know the mechanic, and that there are no players opposing you, which will be the case for 99% of such conflicts. Essentially, declaring war and overrunning a system places the player in an even more especially privileged pisition within the BGS, something I understand to be rather divorced from the fundamental ethos of the game -
system factions declare war; the plyer choses to support, ignore or oppose that. Obviously, if you pushed the faction to that point, you're likely to support that "decision".
- minor player factions can expand into unoccupied/empty systems (see hardcoded limit below)
I agree wholeheartedly, provided that it works within the BGS, i.e. that the player faction is treated just the same as any NPC faction. NPC factions won't expand unless they are pushed. You can practically guarantee that an active plyer group will push their factions.
- one way to expand is building new outpost (big stations are off-limits)
Why? Provided it's all done within the BGS, I see no reason why construction of a starport would need to be off-limits. I totally agree that a non-injected outpost mechanic should be included, by the way. I just don't understand why you think sufficiently organised and dedicated groups shouldn't be able to push their faction to starport construction. If it can be flipped, I'm happy
this endeavour works as series of different 'mini-CGs', but supported within the game and triggered exclusively by players decision (no interventions from the devs)
- outpost requires regular maintenance: players must provide certain amount of resources and money on weekly basis to keep it running; if neglected, outpost becomes abandoned and then automatically removed from the game after some time
Sure. Would that be a trivial amount for the factions that are essentially one or two players though? As long as it scales from small to large, it would work. My understanding is that the vast majority of player groups aren't actually that large, hence the recent balance passes on the BGS to make influence more easily manipulable.
- outpost on the other hand provides an interest to all faction members: percentage from the total trades, bounties, cartography data and other activities taking place on outpost is to be spread equally (should run automatically again)
I agree, comrade
- player factions can declare war onto other player factions and either take over their outposts, destroy, or push them into the 'abandoned' state
But again that basically favours larger groups. In a highly social game such as EVE, it makes more sense. Indeed, in an open-mode-only game, it would work. However, what's to stop a large player group declaring war on a much smaller group and grinding the "war" out in solo/private group with no possible opposition, even if the smaller group are far better at PVP? Solo/PG is not going to go away, and NPCs will always die to a well-organised wing of PvE pilots.
- at any given time, player faction can claim no more than 3 systems and total of 6 outposts (just an example)
Well that's us boned then. We'd already exceeded that well before 1.4. It would make for interesting conflicts, as factions that want to stay within the bubble would tend to gravitate towards the very high value systems, but it would penalise groups that have little interest in the politics of the three major factions, and again would confer a massive advantage on large groups.
This is my general concept. If Frontier decides to implement something along these lines, I think both camps should be satisfied: groups get more toys to play with, and lone wolves aren't being affected in any way. This part of the game would run on totally different layer.
I like many of the ideas. When you say "totally different layer", are you advocating a separate BGS for this? Simply put, that's not going to happen, from my understanding of the developer's position.
