Fleshing it out: Player Factions (or Guilds) Proposal (v2)

Player Factions & Wing Enhancements

Proposal for actual player factions to be added to the game

At this time of writing, Elite: Dangerous is in a strange place when it comes to player-factions; they exist (as in-game factions), however the way players are able to interact with them is pretty minimal & unsatisfying.

This is because;
  • They are essentially standard factions that someone has asked to be put into the game, with no extra features or mechanisms
  • Founders & leaders (players) of the faction have minimal control over the actual tactical direction or politics (in-game) after the faction has been created
  • There is no way to control/administrate faction membership/roster within the game
  • No dedicated method for displaying player faction identification (tags have to be requested from FDev, which is a hassle as you have to go through supprt)
  • NPC's who belong to the player faction treat member players the same as everyone else, even hostile
  • If the faction owns or is getting a megaship, the process of moving it around is manually controlled directly by FDev - involving communicating with support
  • Any player can become 'Allied' to the faction, but this is meaningless as far as player faction politics goes (there is no way for faction players to tell what relationship other players have to the faction as all this info is hidden)

These issues reduce the appeal of getting involved in player-faction activities and I think they need addressing to make faction & wing play more meaningful and enjoyable.

Suggestion: Use & expand already existing private group mechanics to manage faction rosters

It is my understanding that most player factions aleardy get a private group assigned to them with multiple admins/moderators setup to manage it, so it is logical we should use this system to enhance faction membership functionality.

On the 'Friends & Private Groups' screen, there would be another tab labelled 'Faction'. On this tab you would be able to see the faction you are a member of/admin of, some details on the faction (it's focus, member count etc..), and a list of all faction members with their status & rank in the faction visualised in some way.

Expanding upon the current PG functionality, there would need to be three levels of faction membership:
  • Super-Admin : Most likely the faction founder, plus a couple of other designated super-admins to manage the faction, their powers would include:
    • Accept or reject new applicants
    • Set membership level of members (Admin or Member)
    • Set member faction rank of any member (custom rank names)
    • Suspension of membership of existing members
    • Removal of membership of existing members (kick)
    • Set members into 6 internal faction ranks (each with standardised icon)
    • Set rank-names
    • Set default faction tag status (for everyone in the faction)
    • Set rival player faction relationship status (Hostile, Unfriendly, Neutral, Cordial, Friendly, Allied)
    • Issue faction orders/directives
    • Set megaship location if faction has one (once per week)
    • Set megaship visiblity to non-members
    • Set megaship accessibility to non-members
    • Set each rank's megaship voting strength (rank vote strength cannot exceed rank level e.g rank 3 could not exceed 3 votes)
  • Admin : Slightly less powers than super-admins, but given a few powers to help manage the faction:
    • Accept or reject new applicants
    • Set member faction rank of any standard member (custom rank names) up to rank of themselves
    • Suspenion of membership to existing members
    • Issue faction orders/directives
  • Member : Standard faction member, has no management powers
  • All membership levels :
    • View all members in the faction from the list with their status, rank and membership level (Member, Admin or Super-Admin)
    • Set own tag status (only for themself)
    • Use a 'Faction' comms channel in game (and on faction menu) to talk to all members at once
    • Has access to faction mega-ship if owned by faction
    • Gets a vote on megaship movement if ranks is high enough
    • Can access 'faction overview' screen

With these features, faction admins would have direct control over who joins the faction and what access-level/internal-rank they have. This would be an excellent method of faction management.

Joining a Faction

Unlike Powerplay, which is an open system for any player to join any Power at will - player factions usually require that any applicants formally request membership to become a member. Currently this is done outside of the game, which again, requires research and external websites, tools etc. With the roster system suggested above, players would be able to request membership inside of the game, in the same way as joining a private group works now.

The player wishing to join would send a membership request to the group, the faction admins would then either accept or deny the membership request, with it showing as 'Membership Request Pending' until an admin either approves or rejects the request.

On completing an application to a player-faction, the admins of the faction would be presented with the applicant's ranks and powerplay status, along with a list of their owned ships.

A player could only be a member of one player-faction at a time.

Player Faction Tagging

One of the main multiplayer issues in Elite Dangerous right now is that players don't know what player-factions other players belong to. Knowing who is representing who is necessary to increase the amount of emergent, inter-faction gameplay in ED. You might say that players have this facility in Powerplay, but PP is not really used for serious faction role-play by the majority of open players, who instead prefer to use it to 'module-shop' (one of powerplay's numerous design flaws). The interdynamics of player faction interactions are far more interesting/emergent to most players than powerplay is, as there is a greater sense of tribalism with factions that you just don't get with powers (which are too sprawling and internally-annonymous to get that effect).

The way I see it working is that Super-Admins will have control over how their member's default identification tags are displayed by setting a couple of options on the faction-administration screen.There would be the following tagging options;
  • Always show faction tags
  • Show faction tags in normal-space only
  • Show faction tags in supercruise only
  • Never show faction tags
  • Show tags by rank (checkbox list for faction ranks, set tags to only show on specific ranks)
  • * There would be a checkbox to either show or hide the faction member's rank (icon-only) next to their faction name tag
  • * Tags & ranks would always be displayed to fellow faction-members regardless of option selected here
  • * Choosing to hide your own tag-status would override the default option set by super-admins (but not for showing)

The reason for these options is that some groups may wish to hide their faction name in certain zones as it can give away their intent or compromise their safety. For example, pirates may wish to hide their faction tags in supercruise to avoid arousing suspicion, but then when in normal space want their faction membership to be known.

Faction tagging would also be very useful for large-scale multiple wing-battles. Currently there is a problem when player-groups bring more than one wing to a fight - all wing-mates are clearly marked as blue, but allied players not in the wing appear as neutral yellow. This can cause friendly-fire incidents, especially if someone is new to a player-group and doesn't know all the members. With my idea, everyone would have their membership clearly marked because allied players would always show tags to other members - and also everyone in your own faction would appear on the scanner as green, so confusion would be significantly reduced.

Tags would have a custom faction colour which would be set by super-admins in the faction management panel. This would make identification easier at a glance.

Internal Faction Ranks

There would be 6 internal faction ranks with standardised icons (to keep consistant UI), but the names of these ranks would be editable (by super-admins) as different groups would want different rank-names. The purpose of these ranks is to formalise in-faction status and provide a method of showing external players how senior the player is in their faction (has emergent gameplay value e.g. inter-faction politics). It is also used for internal-faction voting strength (see megaship control below)

As shown above, there should also be an option to only show faction membership tags on specific faction ranks (some player factions have semi-member ranks that the group may wish to supress tagging on).

Faction Overview

Once a commander joins a player-faction, they would get access to a UI area that is not usually accessible by non-faction players. The faction overview would provide an interface for summarising all the important information on faction activities and status. Without this it is very hard for member-players to keep track of what the faction is supposed to be doing, where they are supposed to be or how much success/difficulty they are experiencing in achieving objectives. Faction overview would contain the following sub-areas (tabbed):
  • Overview landing screen forming the central hub of the faction menu (like the station menu home screen):
    • Faction Name
    • Logo (FDev approval needed on image used)
    • Government type
    • Home system (& station)
    • Number of controlled systems
    • Number of systems present
    • Member count
    • Introduction text (paragraphs)
    • Focused activities (primary, secondary, tertiary)
    • Current orders (up to three active)
    • Megaship name, status & location ('no megaship' placeholder if not owned)
  • Orders Tab
    • This screen would show the current active orders for faction members (up to three directives at any one time. Ones set by super-admins would take priority and be highlighted in yellow).
    • Orders would not be editable text, but would function much like squard orders in an MMO shooter (text would be hard for FDev to moderate & maintain)
    • Admin set order directives:
      • Go to <system(s)>
      • Attack <faction> in <system(s)> (kill specific faction ships)
      • Bounty Hunt in <system(s)> (earn bounties off wanted ships)
      • Defend <controlledSysyem> (kill rival-faction players in contolled system)
      • Destablise <system(s)>/<station(s)> (kill clean ships, pirate clean ships, smuggle illicit goods)
      • Consolodate (distribute Powerplay cargo) for <power> in <system(s)>
      • Explore <planet(s)>/<system(s)>/<nebula(s)>/<sectors(s)>
      • Mine <commodities>/<materials> in <system(s)>
      • Pirate <system(s)> (pirate any ships)
      • Protect <system(s)> (kill wanted or aggressor ships)
      • Sell <commodities>/<explorationData>/<bountyVouchers>/<combatBonds> in <system(s)> at <station(o)>
      • Smuggle <illegalGoods>/<stolenGoods> in <system(s)> at <station(o)>
      • Support <faction> in <system(s)> (missions, trade, exploration data, bounty hunting/combat bonds for specific faction)
      • Support <power> in <system(s)> (sell PP commodities, undermine, military strike)
      • Support <superpower> in <system(s)> (missions, trade, exploration data, bounty hunting/combat bonds for any aligned faction)
      • Trade <commodities> in <system(s)>
      • Undermine <system(s)> (kill local PP ships)
      • *(s) = max 3
      • *(o) = optional
    • There would be an orders completed feed on this screen, updating whenever a member successfully follows a directive (member name, order followed, log description)
    • Completing orders would generate some credits or merits for the member (depending on order type). Not excessive amounts though as to avoid exploitation
    • By default, orders would last a week, but they could be either repealed/changed early, or renewed every week (this is to avoid orders becoming out-of-date)
    • Faction orders would display markers on the galaxy map (pink)
    • Local news/galnet stories could report on player factions issuing orders on systems dynamically (increasing emergent gameplay). *This reporting could be disabled for opsec purposes
    • Using a data-uplink scanner on an admin member of a player-faction would show the scanning commander the target's current orders until they leave the instance, providing some espionage gameplay potential
  • Membership Tab
    • Screen would should show a list of all the members of your faction and if you are an admin or superadmin, you would also see a seperate tab for new member applicant requests.
    • Members Subtab:
      • Scrollable list of all faction members
      • Search filter facility
      • Commander name, avatar, faction-rank, other ranks (combat, trade, exploration, naval + any others that get added), powerplay faction, orders completed count & current location (system + station if docked)
      • Send Message (switches to comms panel as a direct message)
      • Voice comms link request
      • Admin actions (edit rank, suspend, kick)
      • Super Admin actions (edit admin status)
      • Standard member hightlighted orange, admin highlighted white and superadmin highlighted yellow
    • Applicants Subtab (Admin Only):
      • Scrollable list of all applicants (including rejected)
      • search filter facility
      • Commander name, avatar, faction-rank, other ranks (combat, trade, exploration, naval + any others that get added), asset wealth(poor, low, moderate, high, wealthy), powerplay faction & current location (system + station if docked)
      • Send Message (switches to comms panel as a direct message)
      • Voice comms link request
      • Admin Actions (accept application, defer application, reject application)
  • Territory Overview Tab
    • Shows a listing of all systems where your faction is present, whether they are in control or not.
    • Each system in the item list would display:
      • System name
      • Economies
      • Security status
      • Population & Station count
      • Distance (ly) from home system
      • Faction influence % (+ rising/falling indicator)
      • Current state
      • Controlling faction name if not owned
      • Admin option to issue order on system
    • Controlled systems are highlighted green
    • Controlled systems under threat of losing control are highlighted purple
    • Non-controlled systems are shown as orange (or whatever the default UI colour is)
    • Non-controlled systems on the brink of control are highlighted yellow
    • Non-controlled systems recently lost are highlighted red
  • Megaship Tab
    • If a faction owns a megaship, members could view information about the faction's megaship and cast their vote(s) on where it should be moved to if anywhere. The megaship overview screen would display:
      • Megaship name
      • Megaship hologram (in style of station menu hologram)
      • Current system + time spent at location since last moved
      • Distance from star (ls)
      • Distance in ly from faction home system
      • Destination voting panel (switching to galaxy/system map to pick system/body)
      • Megaship Mangagement (Super-Admin Members Only) * See 'Megaship Location Voting & Management' below
  • Diplomacy Tab
    • Shows a list of all the player factions in the game with their relationship towards the player's faction highlighted (standard faction relationship types). Unlike relationships with minor factions, these relationships would be decided by the leaders of the faction based on encounters between members. This UI would inlclude the following features:
      • Listing of factions, with each one showing; Faction name, logo, home system, government type, allegience(superpower and/or power), number of systems present & controlled, member count, relationship towards your faction
      • Faction name search filter
      • Each faction in the list would have an overview page containing more detailed information about them (description, favoured activities, names of systems and stations they control, interraction feed between their members and your faction's members)
      • Super Admin option to set relationship for that faction (default is 'neutral' like always)
      • After setting relationship, ship contacts for the faction in question will be coloured accordingly (hostile being red, unfriendly-cordial set to UI default & friendly & allied set to green)
  • Faction Management Tab (Super Admins only)
    • Allows Super Admins to set various global options that apply to the faction, these would include:
      • Member Tag default visibility
      • Edit rank Names
      • Edit rank voting strength
      • Enable or disable dynamic order reporting in station/galnet news feeds
      • Set faction tag UI colour from hex colour picker

Megaship Location Voting & Management

Faction super-admins would be able to decide which system (within a certain maximum range) they would like to move the megaship to (and which system body they would like the megaship to orbit). Each member of the faction would get to vote on the proposed destination system if they have sufficient internal-rank. (voting strength depends on the member's in-faction rank which is set by super-admins & admins).

If there is insufficient votes (less than minimum number), the megaship remains in situ until another vote is successful. The megaship can only be moved once per week, but can be moved any day (megaship locations will have a 'tick', like the BGS, where they all update).

Super-admins would also be able to set the sensor-visibility/accessibility of the faction's megaship to non-faction members, options would be:

Sensor Visibility
  • Visible to all
  • Visible to all (excluding hostile player faction members)
  • Visible to members, allies, friendlies, cordials, neutrals & unfriendlies
  • Visible to members, allies, friendlies, cordials & neutrals
  • Visible to members, allies, friendlies & cordials
  • Visible to members, allies & friendlies
  • Visible to members & allies
  • Visible to members only

Megaship Docking Accessibility
  • Accessible to all (excluding hostile player faction members)
  • Accessible to members, allies, friendlies, cordials, neutrals & unfriendlies
  • Accessible to members, allies, friendlies, cordials & neutrals
  • Accessible to members, allies, friendlies & cordials
  • Accessible to members, allies & friendlies
  • Accessible to members & allies
  • Accessible to members

Super-admins would also be able to set the station's defensive/offensive behavior:

Megaship Offence & Defence
  • No hostile action
  • Defensive fire only (protects members from external aggression too)
  • Defensive fire & offensive fire against hostile ships
  • Defensive fire & offensive fire against hostile and unfriendly ships
  • Defensive fire & offensive fire against hostile, unfriendly and neutral ships
  • Defensive fire & offensive fire against all non-members
  • * Offensive fire would require a scan (NPC or player) before the station opens fire

Faction Chat Channel

Currently in ED, communication between players in a large group can be quite difficult. If they are not in a wing, players either have message eachother directly or have to rely on using external apps such as Discord & Teamspeak. These apps are very useful, but Sometimes it's easier just to use in-game chat so the players involved don't have to minimise their window etc. Currently however, there is no way of sending a message to a group who are not in a wing or in the local instance. With that in mind it would be a good idea if we had a 'faction' text chat channel as a suppliment to this proposed player faction system.

This would operate much like 'local' chat, but instead it would only be visible to members of your faction who are currently online and not be dependent on local proximity. This would make it easier for faction members to organise themselves quickly if something is going on, and would not require organising wings - which can be a bit of a distraction because it requires messenging serveral players individually.

Faction chat would appear as green blocks to distinquish it from local, direct or wing chat.

Manifest Scanner Upgrade

As players would now formally belong to factions, there should be a way for players to discover what missions other players are running (to see if they are working against their faction). I think that the manifest scanner should be updated so that it shows not only cargo & passengers, but also shows active missions the target is running, and for who.

This would provide a method for faction players to defend their controlled systems from BGS manipulation by other player factions (if they are in open... don't get me started). If the interferring player has faction tags, it could cause political drama (which makes the game more interesting and provides opportunities for diplomacy and/or meaningful PvP).

Player-Faction Scan Concepts
cIFs
 
Last edited:
Fully agreed and repped.

Something very much like that would actually make player factions, and not the current concept of "player supported faction that has a player faction tag somewhere".

About the security measures of megaships - If the megaship is set to appear only to members, and i'm winged with a non member, I drop at the megaship and activate wing beacon, will my wingmate drop and can dock at the megaship?

Also, I believe the section with megaship offence should work with starports as well, in some variation.

Very good and fleshed out suggestion!
 
Blah blah blah Eve
kneejerk reaction!

That's the thing that irritates my about this whole situation.

Its like... "Guys lets make a car, but we don't our car to be like the other cars on the road... sooo, the wheels will be square, and instead of putting the doors where they usually are, we will put an escape hatch on the roof."

"but we can have the wheels oval as a compromise?"

"NOOOO, Thats too close to round!!"
 
grumpy-cat-saying-no-4.jpg
I respect you and your group immensely dude, and your proposal is well thought out, but please...just no.

Let's leave ED as its own game. The entire crux of it is "blaze your trail", and giving an insignificant little pilot the chance to become significant.

That's not to say we have a perfect environment as it is. Developing content around minor factions, and progressing their expansion? Abso-damn-lutey. Do it. Like, a year ago. And I suspect as we go, we'd see a few features and minor organisational tools that do cater to players more interested in the faction/player aspect of the game.

If I wanted guild wars in space though, I'd just ask for first person EVE combat - and "guild wars in space" is what it would inevitably become given a push in the direction of deliberate dissociation from minor factions.

Tagging players with factions is what PP is for. Concerted efforts to achieve objectives is what CGs should aim to do. Having a "home" location is the remit of minor factions. Strip the best bits out of them and slam them all under the banner of "guild wars" and ED will become a different beast entirely.
 
Last edited:
I like a lot of this - lots of things in there which would be useful even to groups which weren't into either BGS or combat PvP and just generally make it easier to do community stuff of all sorts in-game.

With that in mind, a few ideas to make it more useful to the looser exploration community and similar groups.

1) Allow people to make their own groups without having to have a home system and faction at all (faction in that case just takes the name of the founder player and some tabs get greyed out). You could then use it for things like exploration expeditions where the IFF and faction chat features are still very useful, and maybe even use the Orders feature to advertise the next waypoint.

2) While for simplicity people should only be able to be part of one group at any time, let the admins whitelist people as being able to rejoin at their current rank (automatically cancelled if suspended or kicked, of course) - that way someone could join an expedition group, then rejoin their BGS group on their return (or switch into the BGS group occasionally to see if there's any crises they need to rush home for, for that matter).

3) Show all (online+same mode) members of your faction on the map and your comms panel.



On the BGS side I think faction-owned megaships of that nature would be extremely powerful (especially with the ability to stop non-members docking or even finding it, but even without that). At the very least I think you'd have to be limited to moving it to systems you were already present in and even that has some cans of worms around conflicts and retreat states. Canonn's being under partial FDev control and in the hands of a group that isn't particularly BGS-focused might be okay ... but I'm not sure it should set a precedent of anyone else getting one until we've seen how that first one works out.

One thing I see BGS groups wishing for a lot is a way to avoid wars with allied/friendly groups they share a system with, or to voluntarily retreat from a system they're letting another group have. A "concede" button which ended a war/election that tick, giving up any assets staked (if both sides press it, it's a mutual peace treaty and no assets change hands) or guaranteeing that a retreat succeeded at the end of its active period, I think would be very popular. On the other hand, like the megaship, giving that much direct control over faction activity (even if all it apparently does in this case is let you lose faster) might be a bit too good and make it hard to stop a player faction with anything but direct war with another player faction.
 
Fully agreed with the at least 70% I read in detail (skimmed the rest).

Elite's long term future is dependent on community created content, so give us the tools to create stuff!

One addition I would make is to allow factions to pledge to powers. In fact long term I'd like to see powers organically grow from factions which were strong enough / had enough factions pledged to them.

And for the people concerned about groups wielding too much power, there's really nothing to worry about. As things stand minor factions make almost no difference to the actual game anyway. Elite simply isn't player driven like eve is, so the potential power held is vastly smaller.
 
I respect you and your group immensely dude, and your proposal is well thought out, but please...just no.

Let's leave ED as its own game. The entire crux of it is "blaze your trail", and giving an insignificant little pilot the chance to become significant.

That's not to say we have a perfect environment as it is. Developing content around minor factions, and progressing their expansion? Abso-damn-lutey. Do it. Like, a year ago. And I suspect as we go, we'd see a few features and minor organisational tools that do cater to players more interested in the faction/player aspect of the game.

If I wanted guild wars in space though, I'd just ask for first person EVE combat - and "guild wars in space" is what it would inevitably become given a deliberate push in the direction of deliberate dissociation from minor factions.

Tagging players with factions is what PP is for. Concerted efforts to achieve objectives is what CGs should aim to do. Having a "home" location is the remit of minor factions. Strip the best bits out of them and slam them all under the banner of "guild wars" and ED will become a different beast entirely.

The thing is, most of these concepts are already a thing in the game.. They are just really convoluted, inaccessible and only reached through third party apps/websites.

These ideas would only bring into the game what is already active under the surface. Most of these suggestions could be described as 'quality of life' improvements (except perhaps the mega-ship stuff).
 
The thing is, most of these concepts are already a thing in the game.. They are just really convoluted, inaccessible and only reached through third party apps/websites.

These ideas would only bring into the game what is already active under the surface. Most of these suggestions could be described as 'quality of life' improvements (except perhaps the mega-ship stuff).

From an organisational perspective, I suspect you're quite right. People probably do manage "guilds" in a similar manner outside of ED.

What I am saying in a roundabout manner is that if this were implemented properly, it would have a lot of potential to shadow the rest of the game. It sounds good, and when you look at it, because it takes the very best aspects of the game we want and mashes them together under a different banner...you actually said it yourself: "...bring into the game what is already active under the surface"

Implement guild objectives as proficiently as you've outlined, and why would players need to bother with CGs? Implement base stations as exciting as this, and who the hell would care about their local faction and its expansion? Apply tags to players that mark them as hostile, and would PP be anything more than module acquisition?

Allow FD to develop each sector over time, and they still have the potential to make each part exciting and engaging...it's not like if we'd chosen the route of guilds from the start we'd already have this content. The main difference is that the content would be separate activities that players can engage in at will, guild or not, to shape the universe and themselves as they choose. Put it under the banner of guilds and as I said...ED becomes "guild wars". That's where the EVE comparisons come from; because that's the path EVE took to tying its content together. And what was the result? Guild monopolisation of the environment. You can't play the game and experience a fraction of what it has to offer without joining up to an established, effective guild, and following their objectives.

As I said, respect for the sincere consideration and planning here. It's just not the game ED is...and strike me down if I am wrong, and it turns out FD can develop two sets of content without one shadowing the other :)
 
Last edited:
sadly anything related to BGS and player-driven minor-factions (player to/with/against emerging gameplay)
seems to be stuck in sea w/o any wind to blow sails and fuel to power engines nor manpower to handle the paddle

i wish something changes in future (beyond 2.5) because there were (are) thousands to tens thousands players involved
(way more indirectly because minor-factions are the first 'deals' most players see and do)

yet e.g. there is sub-forum for leaders of player-groups (including those with minor-factions) ...
with multiple good idea threads on the same, similar or related subjects ...
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/forumdisplay.php/161-Group-Leaders
unfortuntealy for over year it reassemble nuclear wasteland with months of no activity as it seems most leaders gave up ...

there was good combination/excerpt post e.g. here
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/239469-Group-ranking-tools-proposal-and-interactions

+
... from my side long time ago (>2 years) i wrote those ideas (lot was tied to/revolved around BGS)
this is small excerpt of ideas how to bolster the player interest in minor-faction gameplay
i would like to point out that for most of those Elite: Dangerous got the code, UI, rule-set and assets in-game already

this is as extension next to power-play, as that should be only for factions which reach certain size/momentum

i wrote those 4 (+3) pages based on increasing frustration among our members and friends who were playing with us
decrease in esprit de group due to background simulation issues and limitations (no membership, no goals, no link)
nearly impossible keep players interest w/o rewards for helping (especially if they not from our group etc.)

i rewrote those ideas too many times, simplified repeatedly so hopefully it's easy read to understand

1. Player Status with Minor-Faction https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bQ8z-RR9S2pY5uMJCcN5o49q_o8ILK0pBMVlt_VsYDM/
2. Minor-Faction Goals (Tasks) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yBX8xoR4n16Me99tWv9j5ZLQ6gZKeyY79xvkAONRoNQ/
3. Station Goals (Tasks) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1KuxWbR-apAt-sByMd_eDv4_utMjnE23u07-5wXrkTVY/
4. In-Space construction https://docs.google.com/document/d/17jVdRheW6QioJNFtYYya8MQbwZyFulhLmj27dP-0U1s/
then later (>1 year) i wrote those (tied to BGS or directly related)
5. Minor-Faction issued licenses https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pSSHxJJFrf7Pl-Q9-gKqqfCwSr_6q1RfaQb_Ocdtg6c/
6. Improved minor-faction states https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hQHVsUUBOomIVtESYGfnHCWf2ma_ou-Wz5578NmyYp8/
7. Escort missions (never finished it) https://docs.google.com/document/d/1pLsNgQAbNco9Nop_-_c8wTVsUb0le95TfqdaSkzJBCY/
afaik first 4 was seen by FD staff, did some nods said some nice words but that's been year(s) and unknown to me if it had any effect toward things to come(edited)
i'm quite sure most users has own vision on the BGS-related things, so take it with grain of salt, it was just brainstorming with 'what if' ...

also on redit https://www.reddit.com/r/EliteDange...le_ideas_to_improve_minorfaction_gameplay_in/

some my older comments
the difference between VIP and the follower/member is that VIP is the highest level of trust you can obtain with multiple minor-factions
while F/M is only exclusive to one minor-faction at any point of time (so e.g. my one would be CHIMERA) ...

loss of status after repeated teamkill is there because of mistake can happen and you can actually unload quad rails salvo into stupid AI w/o shield crossing your fireline

any numbers are pure examples of what can be used and done
global goal available was hinted with the existing CG alike framework in mind (which works atm. only at 1 station or faction-controlled only etc.)

tho I think you missed the point of ACU (automated construction unit)
beacon > ACU deployment > construction (need to bring tons of material so anything could be built within minimum to maximum timeframe) > resulting structure is tiny automated station (outlook)
Outlook is like basic shell which can be then upgraded slowly toward Outpost early stage (again by delivery of tons of needed materials)

same method can be used to build ground variant of outlook, after all, it's automated, modular method which can be easily adopted by game mechanics
minimal timeframes are there to avoid abuse (size of groups) and various sizes of ACU again allow even the smaller groups to have something to do

also I think you missing the point of ACU and Outlooks, those are totally different types of stations than those which are sent via FSD to theirs location
FSD based station is huge and you would easily put thousand+ outlook mass into one such station ...

so imagine it as 2 different routes how to produce station ...
one is short range, slow, progressive, for small factions
the other one is very long range, at once, for major powers or superpowers / CG only
it's about variety

+
we need separate

STATION-goals
MINOR-FACTION goals

and those with theirs progress states (positive / negative)
including count of players taking part (including all solo/private/open or best show that as 3 counters)
that way there will be at-least some way to being able understand what's is happening

no help if there're still unbalance issues
like killing 20 civilians or authority ships has bigger negative effect than doing 20 missions (not mention the time needed)

about solo / private actions being able cripple PowerPlay and MinorFactions
w/o any way to counter it by other players be in other solo/private or open sessions
that's really tough to do right as long as they linked via economy and via influence and other effects

so I would start with the goals and indicators of progress or regress and more balancing
 
Last edited:
Love this idea and fully support it. +1

It's a shame there are so many people afraid to change the game and evolve it to meet the needs of a growing community. I hope that the people resisting or saying "no, just no" come around, otherwise this is going to remain a very stale experience come version 4 and onward.
 
I like it. ED needs more social anything, from factions (like EvE corporations), chats, and etc. As long as someone can choose to ignore the grouping system and not have any issues, it's fine.
 
Seconded. Elite Dangerous really needs a basic guild system. This would bring back many players and greatly improve the multiplayer experience with more depth.

Guilds are primarily about socializing and cooperating with other players of the same guild. You don't have to do combat. It would be voluntary to join.

Fully agreed with the at least 70% I read in detail (skimmed the rest).

Elite's long term future is dependent on community created content, so give us the tools to create stuff!

Seconded, the future of ED depends on emergent gameplay that's player driven with tools of a deep sandbox.
 
Last edited:
Took some time to read in detail so a bit late with replying :)

There's a lot of bits I like in this idea but to be honest I really don't want Elite to go the way of guilds and factions. I can see the appeal but I have other games for that kinda stuff and I bought Elite to be different.
It also put me off getting into Eve where every other direction I went I ended up in some Kill-on-sight no-fly zone or whatever because a group was protecting their space pixels.

It's a good arguement and well put together and if it were to be done i'd want it done this way. But I don't want it done at all if i'm honest. +1 for the time/effort and construction of the idea, much more valid and thought through than most players put it.
 
That's the thing that irritates my about this whole situation.

Its like... "Guys lets make a car, but we don't our car to be like the other cars on the road... sooo, the wheels will be square, and instead of putting the doors where they usually are, we will put an escape hatch on the roof."

"but we can have the wheels oval as a compromise?"

"NOOOO, Thats too close to round!!"

You've rather hit the nail on the head. Yet I think we are stuck because of Brabens ideology and the resistance from particular folks and groups which Frontier clearly favour.

The present in game faction stuff was an after of the fact fudge, and the manner in which it all started blatanty smacks of favoritism.

ED could be so, so much more, than its presently scripted state. Almost all the interesting stuff that goes on is player created despite the obvious glass walls/ceilings. Would like to acknowledge the good stuff though, the flight model, the immersion, the vistas, the sound, the art, the recent Thargoid stuff looks really cool too. But the gameplay, ugh.. template missions, endless grinds. It really falls short and in my view the only reason why this is the case is because of a 'carebear' ideology, for the want of a better expression. Its certainly not from a lack of ability from the talented devs.

I'm not sure ED knows what it is, and by trying to be all things to everyone it fails miserably when it comes to the gameplay. Its a sandbox without and sand, let alone bucket and spade. :(
 
Last edited:

OuterGTR

Banned
Damn! I had similar thoughts few month ago! I'll add a bit to the suggestion, if the author won't mind)

There is a thing with the factions, they also have resources they produce, sell and buy, they also need to be managed by, as you named them - Super-admins and Admins. They should have an abbility to put those resources into use for faction expansion, not just trading, off course it means building gameplay, but it should come someday anyway. And also giving more control with factions to the players will make exploration data more valuable, not in terms of credits, but in terms of faction progression. If a member of a faction is in an exploration tour, the scanning data will mark places in the galaxy, that the faction can use in order to obtain more valuable resources, or colonise new worlds! And I think that regular members can have more involvment in faction managment by making a suggestion about where the resources can be directed by (Super)Admins.
 
Back
Top Bottom