Should Elite Dangerous add clans/player factions in the future

[Ziggy Stardust]

I really don't see what's the problem in having player owned assets. Some may say put them out of the bubble. And perhaps that's fine. But it would work even if it were IN the bubble. The regular stations are already there in the bubble, and that's not gonna change.

So what if X Guild/Clan built an outpost in, say.... Eravate, around an empty planet? It's not gonna affect any other players.

This hypothetical outpost, which services would it provide?

 

[Hawkmoon]

Why do people keep doing this, Elite D;' was right from the start a non-clan game, so if you wanted a game with clans then don't buy it simple, just because a lot of people who did not bother to read up on the game or just ignored the information now want clans is not a valid reason to add them. Elite is based around a simple premise, that you are alone in a big universe that is the game that the backers backed (those are the people who made it possible to have ED). If this was ever considered (and I for one don't think it ever should be) then those early backers who gave over money via Kick-starter (and I am not one of them) should have a deciding vote overruling everybody else. They put up their money to help DB develop ED and so they should have the deciding vote on such a major alteration to the game.

 

[AJW]

Heh. You guys are can be so tight in the butt sometimes.
Can't even take a fun "what if" poll at face value. Loosen up a lil.

Um, it's you that is insisting that this joke 'poll' has any meaning, not me. And please try to make your posts look a little less like something scrawled on a toilet wall, it does little to add to your already limited credibility.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

And the 'poll' doesn't even specify what having guilds/clans in the game would entail anyway. People are 'voting' for something, without saying what it is they are voting for. So even if the developers agreed to 'add clans/guilds' nobody would know what it was they'd agreed to. Meaningless polls give meaningless results...

This is the main problem with the poll, and with every discussion on the subject.

I get told: Look, no one is asking for clan owned structures.
I get told: Of course clan owned structures are a part of having clans/guilds in game.

This is constantly painted as a discussion between pro- and anti-clan/guild, while it most definitely isn't.

The only possible answer to the question: "do you want clans/guilds in game", is "in what way?"

 

[AJW]

Customer: "Dear FD, please make Elite like OtherGame"

FD: "Dear customer, please go play OtherGame".

At least, that is how they probably should respond. People buying a game and then complaining that it isn't another one entirely are unlikely to ever be satisfied, and any attempts to do so are more or less guaranteed to upset the people who bought the game for what it actually was. In the age of the internet, it isn't difficult to find information on game content, and anyone who thought they were buying a clone of something else that had spaceships in it clearly hadn't taken the time to look.

 

[Varrag]

This hypothetical outpost, which services would it provide?

Perhaps it could work somewhere along these lines (taken from basic concept I am keeping around):

Building of outpost/land base is a process which goes through several stages, each one providing different services. Example: level 1 - small landing pads and refueling; level 2 - medium landing pads and ship restock; level 3- ship refitting/repairs, mission generator and UC office; level 4 - market and bounties office; level 5- shipyard.

 

[Hawkmoon]

They "play" with minor faction Because FD give only this joke.
Give to people possibility to colonize, and they'll recruit All they're Irl/Ig friends to build a perfect system.

Elite need it and i really don't underdand why it was not in the first to do List.
Elite want ONLY be the poor copy of the Old game or it's an other game Who Take place in. 2016?

Not only FD but the people who put up their money via Kick-starter to enable the game to be developed. They back the game the DB said he wanted to make, they could have played EVE or backed SC but they liked what DB was proposing and put their money behind him, to say that you know better and they are wrong is just about as arrogant and ignorant as you can get. I do understand the people who want to have other features in ED but, they have to realise that it was never meant to be the game that they want and was never sold as such.

 

[Varrag]

Not only FD but the people who put up their money via Kick-starter to enable the game to be developed. They back the game the DB said he wanted to make, they could have played EVE or backed SC but they liked what DB was proposing and put their money behind him, to say that you know better and they are wrong is just about as arrogant and ignorant as you can get. I do understand the people who want to have other features in ED but, they have to realise that it was never meant to be the game that they want and was never sold as such.

I am pretty sure that you could name at least one game feature which hasn't been advertised -or even mentioned- during the KS campaing, or later in the development. ED is a game that evolves, perhaps slower than some of us might want, but it does. It's up to us players to ask questions and give suggestions. Whether FDEV will respond or not is another matter.

 

[dxm55]

Perhaps it could work somewhere along these lines (taken from basic concept I am keeping around):

Building of outpost/land base is a process which goes through several stages, each one providing different services. Example: level 1 - small landing pads and refueling; level 2 - medium landing pads and ship restock; level 3- ship refitting/repairs, mission generator and UC office; level 4 - market and bounties office; level 5- shipyard.

Yes, that. Thank you for filling in.

A standard space station. Except perhaps docking, rearm, refuel and repair fees will go to the station's owners.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I am pretty sure that you could name at least one game feature which hasn't been advertised -or even mentioned- during the KS campaing, or later in the development. ED is a game that evolves, perhaps slower than some of us might want, but it does. It's up to us players to ask questions and give suggestions. Whether FDEV will respond or not is another matter.

Yep. Despite whatever backing the game received at the early stage, it may evolve into whatever the community petitions for. Or it might not.
The problem is with people who're resistant to even suggestions of potential changes that run contrary to what they envision for the game.
Polling, suggesting, debating about what could be is all good. It's not guaranteed to happen after all. What's the harm in that?

 

[Robert Maynard]

Yes, that. Thank you for filling in.

A standard space station. Except perhaps docking, rearm, refuel and repair fees will go to the station's owners.

The issue with "fees will go to the station's owners" is that they would probably not have paid for the station in the first place.

 

[dxm55]

The issue with "fees will go to the station's owners" is that they would probably not have paid for the station in the first place.

All this is assuming it's a player owned asset. I'm sure that if building a station required monumental effort for a clan in terms of resource gathering, "crafting" and synthesis to produce modules, then in some ways, they would have paid for it in effort expended.
So credits for use of the station would probably be small compensation.

Of course this is all just speculation. If the game doesn't allow it well, nothing then. Won't happen.

 

[Hawkmoon]

I am pretty sure that you could name at least one game feature which hasn't been advertised -or even mentioned- during the KS campaing, or later in the development. ED is a game that evolves, perhaps slower than some of us might want, but it does. It's up to us players to ask questions and give suggestions. Whether FDEV will respond or not is another matter.

Game features are different to basic game mechanics, the whole ethos of ED is a lone pilot in the big universe, that is the game the DB said he wanted to make and that is why people put up the money to enable him to do it. Why would you think is OK to then change such a major game feature, that sets ED apart form just about every other game out there. If suddenly people call for EVE to abolish clans, there would be a massive outcry and rightly so because the game is based around that feature so why can you not see that the opposite is true with ED.

 

[Robert Maynard]

All this is assuming it's a player owned asset. I'm sure that if building a station required monumental effort for a clan in terms of resource gathering, "crafting" and synthesis to produce modules, then in some ways, they would have paid for it in effort expended.
So credits for use of the station would probably be small compensation.

Of course this is all just speculation. If the game doesn't allow it well, nothing then. Won't happen.

Not to discount the effort involved, as I would expect it to be considerable should such a possibility exist, the continuous passive earnings (i.e. even when all members were offline) is the bit that causes me an issue - effectively being rewarded for not playing the game.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Perhaps it could work somewhere along these lines (taken from basic concept I am keeping around):

Building of outpost/land base is a process which goes through several stages, each one providing different services. Example: level 1 - small landing pads and refueling; level 2 - medium landing pads and ship restock; level 3- ship refitting/repairs, mission generator and UC office; level 4 - market and bounties office; level 5- shipyard.

I see potential issue from 3 on, namely the mission generator, market and bounties office. I am assuming the shipyard has the usual shipyard pricing.

Are these controlled by players, or does for instance the mission generator generate missions like they do at AI controlled outposts. Is the commodity market controlled by the player, or is this subject to the BGS? Bounty's office I take it is the contact screen? Do you see this as a place where players can hand in their bounties, or also as a place where bounty's can be set?

As you notice, I'm looking to see in what way the player can influence the BGS. At the moment as you know there are already issues with the BSG without all this player influence. So I feel player influence is extremely unwanted there.

My personal preference for player owned outposts/bases is to focus on the social aspect of guilds, and not include economic facilities. For economical transactions you will impact the BSG and this has a large effect on the game as a whole. Even to the point where exploits/loopholes/bugs would be able to have an impact on the whole economical model it controls. When the focus is on the social aspect, there are many more degrees of freedom, and it would add functionality and features instead of transfer it to another place.

In all of this I haven't talked about my distaste of guilds and clans. Which is substantial. You only have to see the tone in this thread to get an illustration of my dislike.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Except perhaps docking, rearm, refuel and repair fees will go to the station's owners.

Why?

 

[Snarfbuckle]

A better way to do things would be the follwing:

-Allow CMDR's to JOIN a minor faction

-CMDR's can get ranks in said faction

-Faction stations that CMDR's belong to will give a minor reduction in station service costs

-Lowered rank requirements for missions given from faction station that CMDR is member of.

Just like before but now we could actually BENFIT from helping a minor faction by getting some kind of bonus.

 

[Talarin]

"Separate the two topics" is what the discussion has been about for the 54 pages of this thread. A median ground has been approached by the majority of posters (again, count them if you wish) on what 'guild things' they'd like to see that have broad support: "better comms" "group organizing tools" "no player assets/ownage of space". Then the extremists come in with, on one hand, "We want control of assets and space and everything because we are a lot more creative than FD and we know games better and E|D will die because we'll tell all our friends not to buy it or to quit," and on the other, "no guilds they sux h8em no factions they've ruined many games."

Or, in the case that I responded to: "This is only the start of the slippery slope - they're just seeing what they can get away with". Do is that not both disrespectful and extreme position? I found it so.

I'm pointing out the flaw in your point: People have asked for station ownership features completely separately from any conversation about guilds/clans. They will probably continue to do so - even if the mooted clan features are implemented because they genuinely believe that will enhance the game. But the two feature sets do not go hand-in-hand.

(Plus, as an aside, player owned infrastructure WAS talked about by none other than DBOBE himself; when he discussed mining bases being set up by a player. It's not the sort of infrastructure that many players are asking for, but it's worth bearing in mind when we talk about the longer term vision for the game.)

Why do people keep doing this, Elite D;' was right from the start a non-clan game, so if you wanted a game with clans then don't buy it simple...

It was never a "non-clan" game. If it were, we wouldn't have the engagement with player groups that exists right now. Nor, to the best of my knowledge, have FD ever said "player owned assets would never happen". There's a few myths kicking about this thread and even if they have some basis in reality, players should feel encouraged to put their ideas forward for the game. I assume that we collectively want it to be as good as it possibly can be - so please try to show some respect to those giving up their time to write an idea on the community forums.

Admittedly it can be frustrating to see the same ideas again and again - but self-appointed gatekeepers of the "Elite" ethos are becoming a tad too militant in my view - and not just in this thread. Only FD get to decide what goes in or out the game.

This is the main problem with the poll, and with every discussion on the subject.

I get told: Look, no one is asking for clan owned structures.
I get told: Of course clan owned structures are a part of having clans/guilds in game.

This is constantly painted as a discussion between pro- and anti-clan/guild, while it most definitely isn't.

The only possible answer to the question: "do you want clans/guilds in game", is "in what way?"

I considered the question to be trying to gauge a high-level interest. The poll results themselves don't interest me, even if had shown a large majority either way. With regards to the sliding scale of clan-features, that's inevitable. Some would just like grouping/social features. Some (like me) would like those, plus the ability to integrate ourselves into the minor faction systems. Some will want full blown EVE-style corps. But that's true of pretty much any feature.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Just like before but now we could actually BENFIT from helping a minor faction by getting some kind of bonus.

By requesting a bonus, you're implying that the reason to create guilds and clans is to get richer quicker.

Is that your motivation?

I considered the question to be trying to gauge a high-level interest. The poll results themselves don't interest me, even if had shown a large majority either way.

Good mentality towards all and any internet poll results

With regards to the sliding scale of clan-features, that's inevitable. Some would just like grouping/social features. Some (like me) would like those, plus the ability to integrate ourselves into the minor faction systems. Some will want full blown EVE-style corps. But that's true of pretty much any feature.

Yep. But for discussion's sake it's rather important to specify which flavour someone is arguing in favour or against.

In this thread I argued against guilds/clans because I felt player owned commercial structures should not be controlled by players. I got told, no one is arguing for that, we just want better comms and organisational guild structures. And I feel there's much merit to that request.

A couple of pages on, I get told: of course player owned structures need to be included. Every MMO does this, so why wouldn't Elite?

 

[Varrag]

Not to discount the effort involved, as I would expect it to be considerable should such a possibility exist, the continuous passive earnings (i.e. even when all members were offline) is the bit that causes me an issue - effectively being rewarded for not playing the game.

Well, it's a matter of fine tuning. These passive earnings (interest from all transactions going on in station - handed bounties, sold fuel, repair services, etc, which should be equally AND automatically divided among the clan members) may be rather symbolic, depending on number of players who visit said outpost and have to attend some business there. Disproportionaly high income should be prevented in any case.

On the other hand, player owned outposts/bases may also require regular maintenance in form of resources and/or money which clan members must put into it on regular bases to keep it running. This part can be used as tool to balance the profits.

I see potential issue from 3 on, namely the mission generator, market and bounties office. I am assuming the shipyard has the usual shipyard pricing.

Are these controlled by players, or does for instance the mission generator generate missions like they do at AI controlled outposts. Is the commodity market controlled by the player, or is this subject to the BGS? Bounty's office I take it is the contact screen? Do you see this as a place where players can hand in their bounties, or also as a place where bounty's can be set?

All things I've mentioned are 1:1 reflection of currently existing services we can find on NPC stations.

By far the best solution -possibly the only realistic- would be to leave all that to BGS so that the clan owned outposts work within the frame of already existing game mechanics - just like other NPC controlled facilities do. But as you might have noticed in my previous posts, I don't appreciate how the BGS plays out at the moment: it feels clumsy, cryptic, unreliable and generally poorly executed. BGS needs work, partially because of the reasons you've mentioned: exploits/bugs/loopholes. Placing clan owned assets in it right now would be a mistake. It's not ready for that, yet.

I don't think that too many people are actually happy with BGS anyway. FDEV should pay more attention to it, be it with or without the clans.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Well, it's a matter of balance and fine tuning. These passive earnings (interest from all transactions going on in station - handed bounties, sold fuel, repair services, etc, which should be equally AND automatically divided among the clan members) may be rather symbolic, depending on number of players who visit said outpost and have to attend some business there. Disproportionaly high income should be prevented in any case.

Players accruing credits when not playing would be a significant change to the game - it's not simply a matter of balance and fine tuning, in my opinion - unless all players were to be offered the same benefits in some way....

 

[Varrag]

Players accruing credits when not playing would be a significant change to the game - it's not simply a matter of balance and fine tuning, in my opinion - unless all players were to be offered the same benefits in some way....

Yeah I forgot the part where the player owned outpost also requires maintenance (added now... sorry for ninja'ing my post ). So it's not only profit but also money-sink. Balance.

After all, this part (about the interest from station services) may be as well left out completely if it turns out too controversial. I don't think it is, but that's just my opinion. Naturally, I can speak only for myself, but as far as I am concerned I'd be happy if my buddies and me would be just given means to build our outpost, maintain it, defend against other clans, and above anything else - to welcome our fellow explorers on it. Profit from station services we are providing isn't our primary motive... quite far from it, actually.