Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
There is no gate if the facilitating features do not exist.
Serious discussion on proper fleet mechanics
- Thread starter Vicktore Beskor
- Start date
There is no gate if the facilitating features do not exist.
Ah, but they exist in another game that the 'Fleet Commander' thinks we should all be playing instead. Poor oppressed 'Commander'.
It does seem to be more about advertising a particular Facebook-gang-in-space rather than looking at the possibility of introducing game mechanics that would benefit Elite as a whole 
It does seem to be more about advertising a particular Facebook-gang-in-space rather than looking at the possibility of introducing game mechanics that would benefit Elite as a whole
Well, to read this thread it would appear that there is only one 'fleet' - or at least, only on which is interested in these ill-defined 'mechanics'. Which rather suggests that it shouldn't be much of a priority for Frontier.
And now I am confused.
I supported the theory of the OP's ideas but why would a Solo player care what a "fleet" in Open does ultimately unless he is involved - I guess my idea of the PG/"Fleet" cut across all play modes - plenty of ED activities don't involve laser fire against other Cmdr's.
My thought was it would be good for the community as a whole (sense, purpose, comradery) that would extend even to Solo players - everyone with common goals and communication - even Solo players (like me due to lousy internet) can get involved in some form or fashion.
But if this is some Open/PvP/Rule the World power trip thing then perhaps we need to be clearer.
I supported the theory of the OP's ideas but why would a Solo player care what a "fleet" in Open does ultimately unless he is involved - I guess my idea of the PG/"Fleet" cut across all play modes - plenty of ED activities don't involve laser fire against other Cmdr's.
My thought was it would be good for the community as a whole (sense, purpose, comradery) that would extend even to Solo players - everyone with common goals and communication - even Solo players (like me due to lousy internet) can get involved in some form or fashion.
But if this is some Open/PvP/Rule the World power trip thing then perhaps we need to be clearer.
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
I have a suspicion that it is the latter - no proof though.
No you got it right this is not about creating empires it's about community and organization. I don't want to see content gates or special privileges but solo commanders needs and community commanders needs are fundamentally different
I don't know if there is really much of a difference to be honest.
A Solo player cares as much about his Power/Faction/Adopted system as anyone and wishes it to prosper with him along with it.
The only difference I see between the modes is PvP. But that's just me.
Well ultimately the ball in in FD's court.
But certainly comm, management tools, even faction tags would be welcome by me.
A Solo player cares as much about his Power/Faction/Adopted system as anyone and wishes it to prosper with him along with it.
The only difference I see between the modes is PvP. But that's just me.
Well ultimately the ball in in FD's court.
But certainly comm, management tools, even faction tags would be welcome by me.
Last edited:
You mean things like:
- Civil War
- War
- Expansion
- Civil Unrest
- Election
- Outbreak
- etc.
I.e the things the BGS already does that can be influenced and controlled by concerted player group action. So yes, the game does already support these things, it just doesn't let anyone gate access to it. Working as intended.
I believe the difference in the tool set needed by solo/lone (they don;t have to be playing in Solo, to be a lone Commander) and those in player groups are represented by: improved Comms, Membership, and Indetification/Tags. All of which the community embraces. We only differ on the scope of the Player Group system in E|D.
Many of the suggestions you make would widen the gap between the needs of the two groups.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
The difference here would be, you are writing about mechanics that are available to all players, individually. What I was responding to was a suggestion that FD develop missions/tasks for Fleet/Corp/Cult as a group, not accessible to individuals. I am advocating that the process we have now, stays as it is.
Okay. I'm a member of Vicktor's fleet but I think I have entirely different idea about the kind of social tools that would help player groups work together more cooperatively. Here are a few concrete ideas that I think would benefit everyone in the game, not just player groups but individual 'lone wolf' commanders as well. I'd love to hear any criticism as to why any of these features would be "bad" for Elite.
1. The ability to sort my friends list. I have friends from my expeditions into the Formidine Rift, Friends from the Earth Defense Fleet, Friends from pre-release beta, Friends from my time with the Children of Raxxla. Lots of friends but no way to group them in a way that makes sense. When I'm out in the Formidine Rift looking for the answers to the Galaxy's mysteries ... I want to see my Rift buddies and could care less about my peeps in the EDF (no offense guys, just not running missions for EDF right then!). Likewise when I'm back in the Bubble I'm more concerned about seeing the members of my PMF. Right now its all jumbled. Better tools to organize our friends list would be a nice feature that anyone could choose to use or to ignore.
2. Mail. There is already a nice tab in the Comms box for messages from NPCs that I can open as soon as I log in and get updates on stuff like missed deadlines. I'd really love the ability to send and receive messages to and from my friends. There was a scene in Imprint, the novella that game with 1991's Elite: Plus where the main character received a mail message while at a station. I loved reading that and want that kind of basic feature in the game. Sometimes when one of my game friends has been offline for a while I'd like to be able to "ping" them just to make sure everything is okay without having to be online at the same time. I have friends all over the planet in different timezones and we can't always be online at the same time.
3. Minor Faction Tags. The need for this is less obvious for the Lone Wolf type but let me try and make a case. The way I'd like Minor Faction Tags to work would be to have them handled by the game mechanics and not by "Fleet Leadership" or "Player Administrators". If you are allied with a minor faction then you can pledge to the minor faction. If your rep drops then you lose the tag. Minor Faction Tags don't have to be limited to PMFs. Players should be able to pledge to any minor faction, player or NPC, simply by virtue of reputation with a limit of one minor faction per player at any one time. The benefit would be that other players in the same group would see you marked as a friendly in their HUD. Other benefits could be price breaks in the Minor Faction's starports and reduced harassment from the police (i.e. fewer cargo scans, etc.) The label itself does not HAVE to be visible to other players so you don't instantly become a target to other players (though I personally wouldn't mind a visible tag.)
1. The ability to sort my friends list. I have friends from my expeditions into the Formidine Rift, Friends from the Earth Defense Fleet, Friends from pre-release beta, Friends from my time with the Children of Raxxla. Lots of friends but no way to group them in a way that makes sense. When I'm out in the Formidine Rift looking for the answers to the Galaxy's mysteries ... I want to see my Rift buddies and could care less about my peeps in the EDF (no offense guys, just not running missions for EDF right then!). Likewise when I'm back in the Bubble I'm more concerned about seeing the members of my PMF. Right now its all jumbled. Better tools to organize our friends list would be a nice feature that anyone could choose to use or to ignore.
2. Mail. There is already a nice tab in the Comms box for messages from NPCs that I can open as soon as I log in and get updates on stuff like missed deadlines. I'd really love the ability to send and receive messages to and from my friends. There was a scene in Imprint, the novella that game with 1991's Elite: Plus where the main character received a mail message while at a station. I loved reading that and want that kind of basic feature in the game. Sometimes when one of my game friends has been offline for a while I'd like to be able to "ping" them just to make sure everything is okay without having to be online at the same time. I have friends all over the planet in different timezones and we can't always be online at the same time.
3. Minor Faction Tags. The need for this is less obvious for the Lone Wolf type but let me try and make a case. The way I'd like Minor Faction Tags to work would be to have them handled by the game mechanics and not by "Fleet Leadership" or "Player Administrators". If you are allied with a minor faction then you can pledge to the minor faction. If your rep drops then you lose the tag. Minor Faction Tags don't have to be limited to PMFs. Players should be able to pledge to any minor faction, player or NPC, simply by virtue of reputation with a limit of one minor faction per player at any one time. The benefit would be that other players in the same group would see you marked as a friendly in their HUD. Other benefits could be price breaks in the Minor Faction's starports and reduced harassment from the police (i.e. fewer cargo scans, etc.) The label itself does not HAVE to be visible to other players so you don't instantly become a target to other players (though I personally wouldn't mind a visible tag.)
In my opinion, all of that stuff is overdue. I can find no argument against the suggestions made.
Indeed.
Well said sir!
Well said sir!
Hello commanders
I am sorry I have not posted in awhile the fleet has been very busy and I have also been busy in real life as well. I know my FANS miss me LOL. But after watching the live stream on Thursday 6,2016 with Sandro Sammarco and Zac Antonaci I felt it was time to get this thread back on track.
Now I have been thinking hard about everything that we discussed so far and I think I would like to rephrase the OP a little instead of discussing PMF I think we should call is Community Game Mechanics or (CGM). What this will allow is a broader discussion.
My feeling on this is that CGM contains everything we talked about in the past. PFM, player housing, and more meaningful player interactions. Now Mr. Sammarco said that they are still discussing all of this internally that is why I feel that this is an important topic to talk about right now so the FDev can get it right the first time.
I feel in my so humble opinion that their is one fundamental point we all have to discuss first before we move forward and that is the difference between a Solo commanders needs and wants compare to the needs and wants of a Commander who belongs to or manages a community of players.
As a community leader the tools I need to run the fleet efficiently and meaningfully are very different than those who fly solo. Not only that as a community leader I see the game in a different light I have access to more information about the game than a solo commander may have. Like participation levels of a group of commanders all at the same time. I also have access to information about the BGS that a solo commander may not have because as a fleet we track and store information on several systems with different economies and populations all at the same time as well and that provides me with a deeper look into what the BGS is doing at all times. I would also like to say that in the Earth Defense Fleet we almost run at 24 hours a day because we have commanders from a lot of different time zone from all around the world.
Solo commanders can not run 24 hours a day and they can only be in one place at one time.
So as you can see we have very different needs and wants. Let me say I don't want to see game play mechanics developed that is a gate to anyone everyone should be able to play every aspect of the game. But their are some tools and content that only a group can do and needs.
Now many commanders ask why should FDev be interested in developing CGM what is it for them. Well I am of the opinion that if a game wants to be successfull it has to have a broad appeal that way it can have a large player base and the more players Elite has the more FDev makes on cups, ship skins, bobbleheads and t-shirts and the more money they make on that the more the can spend on development for the game. To me that is a win win scenario. So let's not cut off our noses to spite are face. I and hope that Elite Dangerous is not just a niche game.
So that is enough for now, let the games begin.
I am sorry I have not posted in awhile the fleet has been very busy and I have also been busy in real life as well. I know my FANS miss me LOL. But after watching the live stream on Thursday 6,2016 with Sandro Sammarco and Zac Antonaci I felt it was time to get this thread back on track.
Now I have been thinking hard about everything that we discussed so far and I think I would like to rephrase the OP a little instead of discussing PMF I think we should call is Community Game Mechanics or (CGM). What this will allow is a broader discussion.
My feeling on this is that CGM contains everything we talked about in the past. PFM, player housing, and more meaningful player interactions. Now Mr. Sammarco said that they are still discussing all of this internally that is why I feel that this is an important topic to talk about right now so the FDev can get it right the first time.
I feel in my so humble opinion that their is one fundamental point we all have to discuss first before we move forward and that is the difference between a Solo commanders needs and wants compare to the needs and wants of a Commander who belongs to or manages a community of players.
As a community leader the tools I need to run the fleet efficiently and meaningfully are very different than those who fly solo. Not only that as a community leader I see the game in a different light I have access to more information about the game than a solo commander may have. Like participation levels of a group of commanders all at the same time. I also have access to information about the BGS that a solo commander may not have because as a fleet we track and store information on several systems with different economies and populations all at the same time as well and that provides me with a deeper look into what the BGS is doing at all times. I would also like to say that in the Earth Defense Fleet we almost run at 24 hours a day because we have commanders from a lot of different time zone from all around the world.
Solo commanders can not run 24 hours a day and they can only be in one place at one time.
So as you can see we have very different needs and wants. Let me say I don't want to see game play mechanics developed that is a gate to anyone everyone should be able to play every aspect of the game. But their are some tools and content that only a group can do and needs.
Now many commanders ask why should FDev be interested in developing CGM what is it for them. Well I am of the opinion that if a game wants to be successfull it has to have a broad appeal that way it can have a large player base and the more players Elite has the more FDev makes on cups, ship skins, bobbleheads and t-shirts and the more money they make on that the more the can spend on development for the game. To me that is a win win scenario. So let's not cut off our noses to spite are face. I and hope that Elite Dangerous is not just a niche game.
So that is enough for now, let the games begin.
Last edited:
The thing is, your ideas are based on the premise of a different game. One that is not "Elite".
You know this thread has existed many, many times before, and I see the same arguments trotted out in each one.
There is also a seeming confusion about the 3 modes - they should really have been called Connectivity Modes: "Do not connect with other game clients" , "Connect only with some game clients marked with the same private name", "Connect with as many game clients as possible with the name "open" ". But that's too wordy so they opted for "Solo, Group, and Open". It's all the exact same one game, just differing levels of client connectivity. Yes you can form a Wing of 4 players in 'group' and 'open'.
I won't trot out the Braben quotes about what he thinks about guilds and how they 'don't feel right' in this game - something I happen to agree with. Guild play just doesn't really suit the ethos of this game, and in the two years since ED went live there have been no real moves towards such things. That should tell you something.
Instead Frontier have acknowledged there are groups of players who like to band together, and given them a common ground to play on, but all solely based on the NPC factions, instead of allowing a lot of the 'non-Elite', 'doesn't feel right' stuff that is always being proposed. That again should tell you something.
"But Genar, hate to break it to you, guilds already exist in this game" - yeah I've heard that one before, and my retort is 'Oh so you can manage without any additional in-game tools then? Awesome. Carry on! o7'
I've said it before and I'll say it again - guilds/whatever basically don't fit into this game very well, if at all. Any move towards such mechanics and it would turn this game into Not-Elite.
As far as being a niche game, there's no harm in that, it was always recognised that Elite would fit into a niche of its own. That to me is part of the charm of the game, in actuality making it a refreshing change from other games which do have guild mechanics built into them. In fact I would go as far as to say that this is what makes this game unique enough to attract new players.
And so far I haven't seen any evidence that this game is in trouble due to lack of interest or players.
Regards o7
Connecting wings into a squadron could be a lot of fun and a step into the right direction.
I am sorry to say that I disagree agree with you on many points. To say that fleets should not be allowed in elite because they don't fit is a poor argument. Elite is a massive online game that will be developed over time and because fleets was not in at release dose not mean that it can not be introduced as the game grows.
Like I stated it would be in fdevs best interest to make elite dangerous have a broader appeal. More players means more money for development.
Community game mechanics dose not hurt the solo experience in my so humble opinion all it dose is provide new opportunities and options for those who enjoy playing elite together.
If a player seeks a solo only experience in a space game their are other online games that provide that be ensuring that no two pilots ever see each other.
That being said I don't want to change elite from being elite I would just like elite to provide the gameplay mechanics options that make a community type commander have a meaningful and immersive time while playing.
To be honest I feel that the Direction that they are thinking on using dose not go far enough and are shallow at best and the whole pledge to a minor faction mechanics is just the wrong approach. It is fraught with problems just look at what the PowerPlay communities deal with.
And I am well within my rights to disagree and suggest a better way. Like I have said before a solo commander dose not understand or even care about what a leader of a gameing community needs or wants. And that is the real root of the discussion. In my so humble opinion I feel that FDev should ask us the leaders of our fleets what we would like to see in game. If they open a dialogue between fleet leaders and developers together we could come up with an engaging and immersive and meaningful gameplay mechanics.