Serious discussion on proper fleet mechanics

[the100thmonkey]

The game needs to not only cater to Lone Wolf Commanders out there doing there own thing. It also needs to cater to those of us who actually enjoy the social interaction of playing in small, medium or large groups.

One of the issues with discussing controversial mechanics on this forum is that posters tend to represent their views in maximal language and employ uncharitable interpretations of others' statements to defeat opposing views rather than achieve any kind of common ground.

Would it be better if we didn't call it "Fleet Mechanics" and called it "Social Tools" instead? That sounds friendlier, right?

Who is this directed at? It would make it easier for the person to respond.

"Minor Faction Tags" would be a HUGE improvement in gameplay for a lot of players. They don't even have to be visible to the rest of the world (although I'd gladly and proudly fly an EDF tag).

There are player-group decals incoming. I'll be applying mine the moment it's available (no idea when this will be). While this doesn't prove anything, it does suggest that FD are responding to common requests for faction-level play. How are they going to work out who can apply which decal? I sincerely hope they're not going to be making these available manually. If it's going to be automatic, it will require some kind of pledge system to work.

What would "Minor Faction Tags" give us? Well ... it lets Frontier Developments track what different player groups are doing in the game. It would streamline things like the current Colonia initiative to build a new bubble around Jaques. Instead of having the community vote to see who gets a colony site (that will turn into a popularity contest) Frontier could track the number of players associated with a specific faction that are actually out there making an effort.

They probably already have exactly that kind of data, but applied to wings. I'm pretty sure they will also keep records of who associates and interacts with whom, and can reconstruct exactly that data without implementing any kind of guild system. On the other hand, you make a good point regarding colonisation decisions - such a system would prevent large-but-lazy player groups influencing decisions in a manner out of proportion to their contribution. Personally, I'd prefer to see colonisation automated as part of the BGS and for the "decisions" about which systems are colonised to be automated based on criteria that can be inferred with experience, allowing groups to predict where a colonisation will occur.

I also want the moon on a stick.

Opting in for a type of group 'mail' that would allow me to leave important messages for my friends would also be awesome, but not necessary. I don't think we really need a ton of new features added to the game that are already implemented by good third-party tools (i.e. Teamspeak, Discord).

I wholeheartedly agree. Infact, I've caught heat on this forum previously for suggesting that a great many of the "social tools" people have been asking asking for are, in fact, done better by companies that focus on those tools.

I'll give you specifics of how I'd like to see Minor Faction Tags implemented:

1. Player begins doing missions for/trading with/selling exploration data to a minor faction.
2. Once Player is "allied" with the minor faction player can visit the "contacts" menu in one of the Faction's starports and "pledge" to the faction.
3. If player drops below Allied or becomes Wanted by the minor faction they lose the tag until the they clear their criminal status and/or once again raise their reputation back to Allied.
4. Allied status alone and not carrying a minor faction tag should unlock faction rewards in the form of reduced prices in the shipyard and outfitting in that faction's starports.
5. We don't necessarily need the faction tag to be visible to every player but two players that are pledged to the same minor faction should appear 'green' in each other's HUDs.

Interesting ideas. Personally, I'd prefer the tag to be applied in a similar fashion to Powerplay. A lot of BGS work involves doing certain... somewhat-less-than-legal things, even in your home systems. Moreover, you see plenty of wanted NPCs aligned to factions. Maintaining faction affiliation even when wanted would open up another avenue for meaningful, faction-oriented PvP. It might also allow the recycling of code too.

Rather than discounts, I'd like to see availability locked behind faction rep - if you consistently shoot ships aligned to a minor faction that controls a station, they should simply refuse to sell you modules and/or vessels. I'm not about to sell you a gun when I know you've killed my mates!

I understand that many Lone Wolf commanders out there have no interest in this kind of thing and may actually be opposed to it. In previous Elite games we were ALL Lone Wolfs but we're multiplayer now. Don't force ALL of us to play as Lone Wolfs and we won't force you do join a PMF, okay?

Who is this directed to?

 

[Jaiotu]

Either I don't understand what "fleet mechanics" means, or you're wrong and you have social groups. You can't currently move and act as a fleet, other than bgs actions, ua bombing, etc. If that's all you want, you don't need any changes.

The one major change I'd like to see is the addition of minor faction tags. I can understand why some people might argue for a fleet "bank" (especially as new players join the game in future seasons and will be totally at the mercy of players flying ships that have been honed across seasons and seasons of upgrades.)

I posted what I'd like to see earlier up in the thread: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...et-mechanics?p=4517415&viewfull=1#post4517415

 

[the100thmonkey]

It's an exageration? How exactly? You don't think large fleets will impact the gameplay of individuals? Or do you not think it's against what fdev have said over and over that they want?

If anything, you'll find I understated the case.

But you're failing to acknowledge that there already co-ordinated groups in the game with manpower in the hundreds. In the Dangerous Games, the EGP mobilised thousands of CMDRs.

Ghost Squadron is HUGE. The Earth Defense Fleet isn't tiny either. The only way to prevent large fleets from impacting gameplay of individuals is to provide an offline mode or force us all into Solo but even Solo doesn't prevent groups of players from organizing large-scale covert actions that effect other people's gameplay (UA bombing as an example).

^That.

Sandmann, it doesn't serve your position if you are either not cognisant of the facts or misrepresent them. That's not to say that you don't have a point - moving the focus of the game to an RvR "step on your sandcastle coz we can" style of gameplay would detract massively from what are, for me, key elements of the game. My understanding of the thread is that this is not being asked for. There's feature creep and acknowledging how some players play the game.

 

[Sandmann]

The one major change I'd like to see is the addition of minor faction tags. I can understand why some people might argue for a fleet "bank" (especially as new players join the game in future seasons and will be totally at the mercy of players flying ships that have been honed across seasons and seasons of upgrades.)

I posted what I'd like to see earlier up in the thread: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...et-mechanics?p=4517415&viewfull=1#post4517415

Mister 100 monkeys above mentioned there's group decals coming, would that do the same thing?

As for the bank idea, they won't even give us individual bank accounts, loans etc despite there being a "bank of zaonce" in the game. I can see fdev being concerned with balance issues with group banking... "Be solo and start in a sidewinder, or join our gang and we'll start you in the ship of your choice". It'd screw with their barely implimented economy too much.

 

[Sandmann]

But you're failing to acknowledge that there already co-ordinated groups in the game with manpower in the hundreds. In the Dangerous Games, the EGP mobilised thousands of CMDRs.

^That.

Sandmann, it doesn't serve your position if you are either not cognisant of the facts or misrepresent them. That's not to say that you don't have a point - moving the focus of the game to an RvR "step on your sandcastle coz we can" style of gameplay would detract massively from what are, for me, key elements of the game. My understanding of the thread is that this is not being asked for. There's feature creep and acknowledging how some players play the game.

I'm aware, but as I said in my reply to that, that's not fleet mechanics (despite them callings themselves a fleet) because they can't ACT as a fleet. It's a social group. If - as described - that's all they want then the game & existing external tools.already serves their purpose. Introducing new, unplanned features that change the game's direction isn't neccisary, and is ONLY useful as a "toehold".

 

[the100thmonkey]

Mister 100 monkeys above mentioned there's group decals coming, would that do the same thing?

As for the bank idea, they won't even give us individual bank accounts, loans etc despite there being a "bank of zaonce" in the game. I can see fdev being concerned with balance issues with group banking... "Be solo and start in a sidewinder, or join our gang and we'll start you in the ship of your choice". It'd screw with their barely implimented economy too much.

Personally, I'm against group treasuries. It'll be like the Sothis-billionaires who have no idea how to fly their massive ships.

 

[Sandmann]

Personally, I'm against group treasuries. It'll be like the Sothis-billionaires who have no idea how to fly their massive ships.

I think you just said the same thing as me, though more succinctly. What's your view on the group decals vs tags?

 

[the100thmonkey]

I think you just said the same thing as me, though more succinctly. What's your view on the group decals vs tags?

I'll have my group's decal applied the moment it's available. I'm also in favour of being able to pledge to a minor faction in the game.

 

[Sandmann]

I'll have my group's decal applied the moment it's available. I'm also in favour of being able to pledge to a minor faction in the game.

But do you think those decals supercede the percieved need for the group "tags" some want?

 

[Jaiotu]

Who is this directed at? It would make it easier for the person to respond.

It wasn't directed at anyone in particular. To the forums in general. It seems that when Vicktore mentions "Fleet Mechanics" people think he wants Elite to be Eve Online. From the discussions I've had with Vicktore on Discord and Teamspeak I can tell you that this is not the case. Reframing the conversation around "social tools" helps define that what we are talking about is tools that help players cooperate with each other not tools that help us fight huge fleet battles against other players.

They probably already have exactly that kind of data, but applied to wings. I'm pretty sure they will also keep records of who associates and interacts with whom, and can reconstruct exactly that data without implementing any kind of guild system.

Factions tags would be easier to track then trying to reconstruct data. Instead of forcing Frontier to 'guess' it would give them empiracal data.

I also want the moon on a stick.

Here you go:

Spoiler

I wholeheartedly agree. Infact, I've caught heat on this forum previously for suggesting that a great many of the "social tools" people have been asking asking for are, in fact, done better by companies that focus on those tools.

Wait? Someone agreed with someone on the forums? This should be in Galnet News!

Interesting ideas. Personally, I'd prefer the tag to be applied in a similar fashion to Powerplay. A lot of BGS work involves doing certain... somewhat-less-than-legal things, even in your home systems. Moreover, you see plenty of wanted NPCs aligned to factions. Maintaining faction affiliation even when wanted would open up another avenue for meaningful, faction-oriented PvP. It might also allow the recycling of code too.

The key element of the system I described, which I failed to mention, is that it helps prevent "5th Column" membership where someone might fly with the faction tag but actually be working AGAINST the faction. Forcing players to keep a positive reputation with the faction helps keep them from working against it. The only other way to achieve this would be having a PMF leader moderate group membership. I'd prefer that the game moderate membership and not give that control to players.

Rather than discounts, I'd like to see availability locked behind faction rep - if you consistently shoot ships aligned to a minor faction that controls a station, they should simply refuse to sell you modules and/or vessels. I'm not about to sell you a gun when I know you've killed my mates!

I'm all for better crime and punishment. I'd love to see career criminals loose access to basic Station services.

Who is this directed to?

Again: Nobody in particular. That was a less then simple way of me implying that to many times people on these forums only look as far as to see how THEY want to play Elite without compromizing the vision of how other people want to play it. Last week I got read the riot act by someone because I reponded to a post by saying that I'd love it if the game had a feature that another forum user had suggested. Discussions like this one aren't likely to change how Frontier implements future features. They're discussions. Sometimes people just want to voice their opinion and there's no need for people to get nasty about it.

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

Mister 100 monkeys above mentioned there's group decals coming, would that do the same thing?

As for the bank idea, they won't even give us individual bank accounts, loans etc despite there being a "bank of zaonce" in the game. I can see fdev being concerned with balance issues with group banking... "Be solo and start in a sidewinder, or join our gang and we'll start you in the ship of your choice". It'd screw with their barely implimented economy too much.

Group decals could work but you'd need a LOT more decals then what Frontier has planned in order to cover every single player group. Right now the group decals are limited to groups that participated in the Dangerous Games and only those players who participated in them.

As far as the 'bank' concept goes I'm not actually for the idea I simply understand why some people argue on its behalf.

 

[Sandmann]

It wasn't directed at anyone in particular. To the forums in general. It seems that when Vicktore mentions "Fleet Mechanics" people think he wants Elite to be Eve Online. From the discussions I've had with Vicktore on Discord and Teamspeak I can tell you that this is not the case. Reframing the conversation around "social tools" helps define that what we are talking about is tools that help players cooperate with each other not tools that help us fight huge fleet battles against other players.



Factions tags would be easier to track then trying to reconstruct data. Instead of forcing Frontier to 'guess' it would give them empiracal data.



Here you go:

Spoiler

https://richardwiseman.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/att00004.jpeg

Wait? Someone agreed with someone on the forums? This should be in Galnet News!



The key element of the system I described, which I failed to mention, is that it helps prevent "5th Column" membership where someone might fly with the faction tag but actually be working AGAINST the faction. Forcing players to keep a positive reputation with the faction helps keep them from working against it. The only other way to achieve this would be having a PMF leader moderate group membership. I'd prefer that the game moderate membership and not give that control to players.



I'm all for better crime and punishment. I'd love to see career criminals loose access to basic Station services.



Again: Nobody in particular. That was a less then simple way of me implying that to many times people on these forums only look as far as to see how THEY want to play Elite without compromizing the vision of how other people want to play it. Last week I got read the riot act by someone because I reponded to a post by saying that I'd love it if the game had a feature that another forum user had suggested. Discussions like this one aren't likely to change how Frontier implements future features. They're discussions. Sometimes people just want to voice their opinion and there's no need for people to get nasty about it.

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



Group decals could work but you'd need a LOT more decals then what Frontier has planned in order to cover every single player group. Right now the group decals are limited to groups that participated in the Dangerous Games and only those players who participated in them.
.

That assumes that fdev WANT to support "unofficial" player groups. If anything, the opposite seems true to me. Fdev seem to like to control (or at least authourise) every part of the game, especially those that they activley support.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

There are player-group decals incoming.

Woot?

Source?

If true, my current avatar is highly appropriate

 

[Jaiotu]

Woot?

Source?

If true, my current avatar is highly appropriate

It was announced on a live stream. The only groups getting decals are those that participated in the Dangerous Games and only those players who participated in the Dangerous Games will be getting them. Great if you happen to belong to one of the handful of factions that got selected for the games. Meaningless to me since I was at Beagle Point (long after they awarded the DWE decal) and didn't participate in the games.

 

[Sandmann]

It was announced on a live stream. The only groups getting decals are those that participated in the Dangerous Games and only those players who participated in the Dangerous Games will be getting them. Great if you happen to belong to one of the handful of factions that got selected for the games. Meaningless to me since I was at Beagle Point (long after they awarded the DWE decal) and didn't participate in the games.

Ahh so more of a.certificate of participation than an official recognition of player groups.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

It was announced on a live stream. The only groups getting decals are those that participated in the Dangerous Games and only those players who participated in the Dangerous Games will be getting them. Great if you happen to belong to one of the handful of factions that got selected for the games. Meaningless to me since I was at Beagle Point (long after they awarded the DWE decal) and didn't participate in the games.

Doh! /5 chars

 

[Jaiotu]

Ahh so more of a.certificate of participation than an official recognition of player groups.

Official recognition of player groups goes back way before this.

 

[Sandmann]

Official recognition of player groups goes back way before this.

Yeah I know. I meant the decals are more a certificate of participation than a "visual player group tag".

 

[Jaiotu]

Yeah I know. I meant the decals are more a certificate of participation than a "visual player group tag".

Ah. Gotcha. Exactly. Anyone who supported Adle's Armada in the Dangerous Games will be getting that decal. A lot of our EDF members will be getting that one even though we aren't part of AA.

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

From what I can see this thread has two discussion going on.
1- proper fleet mechanics
2- meaningful interaction with the game environment (PMF)

You may all be wondering why I keep bringing this topic up. Let me explain. I think many of you feel I am narcissistic megalomaniac and that I sit in front of my PC wearing my Sky Marshall outfit. Well you could not be farther from the truth. I am a simple truck driver from NYC and I am also a biker who owns two Harley's.
So what dose that have to do with elite, well nothing but that dose mean I am not what most people think I am.

So why proper fleet mechanics? Well it is because of how proud of my fleet I am. They are not just my fleet mates they are my friends and I am not just building a fleet I am building a community of friends. And I really don't care what shape or form proper fleet mechanics come in what I do care about is that my fleet members experience in elite is rewarding and evolving. I can sit here and make a list of all the "proper fleet mechanics " I want in the game but I won't their are many threads on that topic by commanders who can do a better job at it than me. What I wanted from this thread is to make FDev understand that their are those who play elite who feel elite could be more. I know that is vague but I did not want to go into semantics.

I don't want elite to become a Eve clone but we all have to admit their a things about Eve they got right. And group organizing tools they got right.

And has far as meaningful interaction with the game environment well I have this to say,please FDev take off the training wheels and let the players do for themselves. Why do we always have to run to an npc for everything. Just like what I said about ship transfer. I felt it should have been a player to player interaction instead of going to a npc to get it done. YES INTERACTION WITH OTHER PLAYERS IS ALWAYS RISKY BUSINESS!!!! But that's what makes it exciting. Npc's are predictable and boring. Everyone complains about the grind in this game, you know why everything feels grindie I will tell you because we deel to much with npc's the game has become to predictable. Adding meaningful player interactions adds unpredictability. And that is exciting and risky.

 

[Sandmann]

I don't want elite to become a Eve clone but we all have to admit their a things about Eve they got right. And group organizing tools they got right.

See, this is where you're wrong and you just don't seem to get it. When we say "ED is not Eve" we mean that ED is not a game that is about group mechanics, it's a game about individuals. You can be as proud of your "fleet" as you like, but ED isn't about that, and introducing it (as you keep on wanting/requesting/demanding) would fundamentally change the game from ED into something else.

Oh and I ride too... Triumph here.

I don't own a sky marshal costume however. Or chaps.