Ideas for Improving Community Goals

[Obsidian Ant]

Community Goals are a hot topic, but in this thread I don't want to talk about the failings of CGs or what is wrong with them as such (there is a great constructive feedback CG thread here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...-content-delivery-and-story-progression-tools). Instead what I want to post here are ideas for improving CGs.

Trade and Combat CGs have been following the same template for pretty much years now, and that same template has been extended to the Thargoid story. Looking around the Internet (these forums, Reddit and YouTube - it is very clear there is growing dissatisfaction with that). There are a lot of reasons for that and some people will disagree with the way those sentiments are expressed. However, I think we can all agree that Community Goals for the Thargoid story (and in general perhaps) could be improved.

Creating content in Elite takes a lot of time and work for Frontier. So any changes to CGs would ideally need to use existing game assets and mechanics so that Frontier can make quick and easy changes (I'm not a game dev. but I assume if the mechanics and assests already exist in the game, then it's easier to achieve than creating new assets and mechanics).

With that in mind - I was looking at the feedback and contribution numbers for recent Thargoid CGs and it seems the one people were most interested in was the Search and Rescue CG. I suspect a major reason for this is because it achieved two main things:

• It aligned with personal goals, allowing people to make plenty of credits.
• It aligned with community goals, achieving a global objective in an interesting location.

In short then, it carried people to locations where they could actively feel the affects of the Thargoids, allowed them to see the destroyed megaships and capital ships. It made use of assets and mechanics that are already in the game.

So the thing is, there are a ton of assets in the game that are underused. For example, the Thargoid bases, which took likely took many months to design and implement. However they are not used. The megaships and generation ships are merely sightseeing locations. The INRA bases are the same. None of these are used, and keeping them as mere "locations to visit" is - in my opinion - a complete waste of a game asset. It's even worse with the Military, Scientific and Civilian bases, as these currently serve no purpose at all.

So, if the ideal CG aligns with personal goals (making credits for example) and community goals (global objectives) - then it makes sense to use this to the fullest:

Possible CG ideas that use existing (underused) assets and locations:

• Rescue people from destroyed capital ships
• Search for salvage at Thargoid bases
• Scan the INRA bases to learn secrets
• Scan the defense data at the Military / Science Bases
• Identify what happened at the crashed Thargoid sites
• Explore the Thargoid Scout Site
• Gather data from Cmdr Jameson's crashed ship

Some of these have already been done in the past, which proves they are achievable, and many more variations could be created. These serve multiple functions, they make CGs varied and interesting, they make better use of great locations, they encourage people to visit old and new locations (rather than just sightseeing via YouTube and forums).

So, anyone have other thoughts and ideas on this?

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Station Evacuation CG: A Station is facing some sort of threat and needs the civilian population evacuated to neighbouring stations.
Chained CG from the above: those evac stations now need food, medical supplies and evacuation shelters delivering to them.

Exploration-style CG:a Faction wants to expand into a previously unoccupied system. They require Advanced Discovery Scanner and Detailed Surface Scanner data from that system - as much as possible - and from the surrounding systems. Players opposed to that faction can try to prevent that data from being scanned or returned. As a bonus, have crashed Nav Beacons on the landable bodies that also can be scanned for extra credit.

 

[Factabulous]

There have been 'data' missions before, so we could have one looking for details of Thargoid Hyperdictions between Sol and the Pleiades - turn in the data for CG participation. For extra points give a link to the report forms in the Aliens areas so that the community gets that information as well.

Edit: I think you only get the scans if you can disable the thargoid EMP - adds a level of skill which (some) people would enjoy.

Could also do one looking for Basilisk scans - ideally from multiple systems, though I think that wasn't possible when Ram Tah did his data missions.

 

[Factabulous]

The thargoid bases give Thargoid Structure Scans when you first scan them. Do a CG collecting them, as it will encourage people to visit more of the bases. Though there is no (easy) in-game way to find them all....

 

[MadDogMurdock]

Make the more generic CGs auto-generated based on system states.
Vary the time length and tiers to add variation.
Have significantly more of them (from the auto-generation) so that at least as many fail as succeed.
CGs that require materials and commodities should require sufficient quantities of all the materials, not just an aggregate total.

Basically, CGs are well past their sell-by-date as a story mechanism. Roll them into the BGS and move on.

 

[777Driver]

Could they at least change the name first.. Worst possible name I could think off... Ok, I could think of worse. Community goals still sounds like something thought up at the most boring executive meeting known to mankind.

 

[JeffRyan]

Possible CG ideas that use existing (underused) assets and locations:

• Rescue people from destroyed capital ships
• Search for salvage at Thargoid bases
• Scan the INRA bases to learn secrets
• Scan the defense data at the Military / Science Bases
• Identify what happened at the crashed Thargoid sites
• Explore the Thargoid Scout Site
• Gather data from Cmdr Jameson's crashed ship

Some nice ideas, I like the idea of using ingame assets. We do things like this in the PI.

 

[kofeyh]

There are endless ways to create a staged goal. Start with one mechanic, move into another, have yet more ways to contribute. Have outcomes shape the progression of the CG; give commanders a bit of player agency.

This requires time, and resourcing though. And I think that is actually the problem to solve. Ideas aren’t the missing link; they’re endless in number and combination. The time to institute versus resources to do so? That’s the actual challenge.

 

[Abomination]

Make the more generic CGs auto-generated based on system states.
Vary the time length and tiers to add variation.
Have significantly more of them (from the auto-generation) so that at least as many fail as succeed.
CGs that require materials and commodities should require sufficient quantities of all the materials, not just an aggregate total.

Basically, CGs are well past their sell-by-date as a story mechanism. Roll them into the BGS and move on.

This very much.

Also, if possible, adapt npc behaviour a depending on the situation.
If a system needs commodities, spawn a little bit more trade ship hauling that requested cargo,
if a system requests exploration data, make sure to add 'exploration' npc's in these target systems and let them actively scan / hover over planets.
Make it look like there's a whole community (of npc's) actively involved in these cg's.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

…
So, anyone have other thoughts and ideas on this?

CGs by their nature of being designed to allow large numbers of players participate over a long period of time (a week or in a few cases longer) require activities that can be repeated quite often.

Any CG idea needs to make this type of gameplay possible. Ideally the required action is varied enough to hide the basic concept of repetition behind an engaging task that needs to be done again and again.

Combat CGs and SAR CGs require actions that are varied. Trade or bring X of Y CGs aren't varied as the activity required to do is always the same.

To make collecting data from POIs interesting would require sufficient POIs at various locations and data that is specific to those POIs and the ability to scan those POIs multiple times without being able to just re-log at on POI.
Not sure if this is possible in ED without some significant changes to the game. (It would be cool though).

The data problem is obvious at exploration CGs. CGs where data from specific areas in space was requested, but all scan data from everywhere counted.

While I absolutely want more activities that are repeatable and varied, I don't think that they can be implemented in the game easily. Therefore any short-term solution to the "CG problem" needs to be based on something different than game mechanic.

The only solution I see is "better story telling".

Your point "personal goal" is important in my opinion, but I don't think it needs to be credits.
Doing the right thing might be enough, but for that FDev needs to make it possible/easy for the players to take a side, to make a decision to invest time and energy for a cause.
This is the point where the Thargoid story completely fails in my opinion. It's really hard to justify doing anything against the Thargoids.

There is an other aspect why "better story telling" is required. No matter how much fun and engaging CG activities might become, they will always feel separated and artificial without the player being able to relate to the reason why the CG happens in the first place.

Better story telling is the easiest solution form a technical point of view - it primarily just requires more and better GalNet articles.

Don't get me wrong, I would absolutely love to have CGs where going to specific places of interests are required and having to do something that is specific to the CG or the problem the CG wants to solve.
Scanning systems in a specific region of space (for example the border of Col70) with only system scans of systems in that region counting. Collecting data from Thargoid bases, other bases and maybe identifying what happened somewhere.
(Or maybe scan Aegis stations to uncover some potential illegal activities)

Let's hope that the game designers of FDev come up with interesting ways to make CGs more engaging and interesting.
In the meantime we need better story.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Make the more generic CGs auto-generated based on system states.
Vary the time length and tiers to add variation.
Have significantly more of them (from the auto-generation) so that at least as many fail as succeed.
CGs that require materials and commodities should require sufficient quantities of all the materials, not just an aggregate total.

Basically, CGs are well past their sell-by-date as a story mechanism. Roll them into the BGS and move on.

Some damn fine suggestions there.

 

[JonathanBurnage]

I'd like to see the standard length, success criteria and global rewards replaced. AFAIK every single CG (with the sole exception of the E3 Prof Palin CG) has followed the standard format of "this CG will run for one week" with it being deemed 'completed' after just tier 1. This doesn't give people much motivation to engage with the CG, as well as getting repetitive.

I'll explain by example. Some (not all) of the recent Aegis CGs, whilst well-supported in terms of number of contributors, didn't get very far in terms of tier progress. I suggest this was in no small part because once they reached tier 1, the new weapon/module would be available - the only additional reward for reaching further tiers was unlocking it at different types of bases. I think this was a mistake by Frontier - anyone can just go on EDDB and find a nearby suitable base (I think almost everyone engaging the Thargoids has frequented HIP 17692 - Blackmount Habitation by now), so there was little motivation for continuing other than to make some credits and gain trade rank.

Now, consider this alternative format:

Tod 'The Blaster' McQuinn seeks the support of independent pilots in developing anti-Thargoid weaponry.

This CG will run for up to (say) one month.

When T1 tons of materials have been delivered, the class 1 Ax multicannon will be unlocked.
When T2 tons of materials have been delivered, the class 2 Ax multicannon will be unlocked.
When T3 tons of materials have been delivered, the class 3 Ax multicannon will be unlocked.
When T4 tons of materials have been delivered, the class 4 Ax multicannon will be unlocked.

This is much more player driven - we can now influence directly when we get the bigger toys, rather than the current formulaic process of waiting for Frontier to put out a CG for each class in turn and then after a week it will inevitably succeed (bugs notwithstanding...). And make the T4 threshold something big. I'm pretty sure if Frontier put a huge carrot up and said "you're not getting this unless you really work for it" the system would be flooded with Condas and Cutters piling in the goods.

 

[Leo Sagan]

Something we had during the Cerberus plague (IIRC) : the top 10 players name and their current position (first, second, third etc.) in the station news during the CG. Granted, it wouldn't help the vast majority, but this could raise the competition feeling for the top 20 players. Besides, the code might still be there since it used to work that way during a few CGs. Not a major improvement but every bit helps.

 

[CMDR Zadian Lichtfrost]

After thinking about it a bit more and after an additional cup of espresso:

I think CGs can be broken down into three elements:

1. Reason
2. Activity
3. Reward

1. Reason
This is the global story element. The "why" the CG is taking place. Players need to get enough information about the reason the CG takes place to decide if they want to participate beyond the individual reward.
Who is running the CG. Why is the CG important. How does the CG affect the galaxy and the player.
Ideally this allows the player to align with the cause of the CG and become more involved in the story. If done right it makes the CG unique and important. Without a good reasons CGs become interchangeable.

2. Activity
The activity the player has to do to contribute to the success of the CG.
Ideally this is a varied activity that is (partly) unique to the CG that can be repeated without getting boring.
It would probably require significant changes to the game to make this different to the current situation.
A lot of things could be done, but implementing them is probably difficult.
Currently this is "bring X of Y" with Y being very generic. Combat bonds and bounties can be restricted to specific factions, some commodities are only available at certain locations, but everything else can be obtained everywhere.

3. Reward
The reward the player gets from participating at a successful CG.
The individual reward can be credits, maybe a decal or individual access to something.
The global reward is reason for the CG - new station, new weapons, eliminating a threat, wining a system, finding a cure, availability of things like ships, weapons, modules…

To make CGs more engaging all three aspects need to improve or be good enough for a lot of players to care about the CG.
Currently I think "reason" and "reward" are the easiest to change. "Activity" requires a lot of work from FDev.
I think even making one or two of those three elements better would increase the interest and motivation of players to participate in CGs.

Just increasing the individual reward won't help a lot in my opinion. If CGs are nothing but credit sources, then they become replaceable and boring in a short period of time.
I think this is one of the reasons why players complain about CGs, the CGs are just seen as money making methods (and often bad ones compared to other "get rich quick" activities).

 

[nosscar]

My personal view is that CG's should not be used and a new machanic is needed for delivering new content ect, but.....

As this is OA's thread about improving existing CG's using the assets we have available now, i will try to give my views.

Firstly the main problem for me was the grind, all CG's seem to need it, and have it, so to reduce that, maybe have something that is only a few, but riskier to collect.

Secondly change the tier system, why have 5 tiers collecting just more of the same.
So as an example, and to try introduce a story base to CG's, heres my idea.

As OA has said, there are many interesting existing sites that are just a site seeing tour just now.

So Teir 1, players need to bring just a few, maybe 5-10 of a item-x scattered around these various sites, FD could also maybe put a CZ around some of them for the PvP'erss, so you have to fight your way through to collect the item. But some out in the wild for explorers, So less items, but riskier to collect. And you would need to travel to some different sites for them too if it was 5-10 different items.

Now Tier 2, again small number of different items, hidden around the galaxy, not too difficult to find, maybe with some clues to there whereabouts, again 5-10 different items.

Same with tier 3-5, different ideas, some scanning missions, some in CZ, some on planets, (but no needle in haystack stuff).

A storyline could be given for each tier, so each tier is it's own story, with all 5 stories being the complete story and ending up with the rewards.

This idea is just to try remove the grind with fewer but more interesting to collect items. Different items for each tier would also lessen the feeling of a grind. A story to each tier would give a feeling of having a purpose.

 

[Flimley]

Apart from a lack of clear story telling/directing coupled with not directly informing all pilots through station and planet base menu screens (after all its a threat to us all?!). I really do not trawl through Galmap. There may just be general apathy regarding the content of these particular CG’s? Three in total was probably enough....

Delivery for parts etc for the building of the new Type10 would certainly shift cmdrs to a community goal I suspect. I humbly suggest it’s well worth Frontier testing that theory.

Flimley.

 

[Theodrid]

Let's use the various station and system types in a much more dynamic way, for example, if there is a 'master CG' to build a station then let's really build it.

From that master CG you have branching CG's, for example :-

Extraction station CG, collection of raw materials.
Refinery station CG, refining of said mats
Industrial and high tech CG, construction of parts
Combat/protection CG as mats are transported to destination and possibly intercepted.
Tourism CG, taking interested passengers/workers to see construction site and working it.

Frontier told us a long time ago that we would be able to see stations under construction and contribute to it, they should make it so.

 

[GaryII]

Possible CG ideas that use existing (underused) assets and locations:

• Rescue people from destroyed capital ships
• Search for salvage at Thargoid bases
• Scan the INRA bases to learn secrets
• Scan the defense data at the Military / Science Bases
• Identify what happened at the crashed Thargoid sites
• Explore the Thargoid Scout Site
• Gather data from Cmdr Jameson's crashed ship

Nice ideas, but are FD devs capable to implement those without critical bugs...I still remember piracy CG that was broken at start and then also was too hard for "casual players"...

 

[JonathanBurnage]

Great shout with the Type 10. They've kind of blown it with the Ax missiles and multicannons now (though maybe there will be other Ax weapons in future). But the Type 10 would be a great chance to redeem CGs.

Again, don't make the reward tiers just unlock it at more bases. Most people with the money for a ship like that will just pick it up from Shinrarta anyway.

Make us get to a high level of achievement before it is deemed 'complete'.
Mandate that certain quantities of different material types are delivered. Make some easy to get, and others harder.
Throw in something a bit different: "The Engineers will work overtime and finish a week early if you deliver 5000 tons of Lavian brandy for them to have a party at the end!"

 

[GreyAreaUK]

Delivery for parts etc for the building of the new Type10 would certainly shift cmdrs to a community goal I suspect. I humbly suggest it’s well worth Frontier testing that theory.

I'm not (entirely) serious about this, but: "We require Type-9's. Buy a Type-9, bring it to us, and we'll buy it for a 20% markup *and* give you a Sidewinder so you can go and buy another Type-9'."