Petition To Allow CMDRs To Join Multiple Squadrons

[Vasco Sapien]

Not signed.
One Squad, loyal or leave.

 

[NeilF]

Being in a squadron is mostly titular at the moment, right? Squadrons can't give you rebuys, mats or other perks?

Be in one squadron and play with your non squadron buddies as usual.

The Fuel Rats will Rat whether or not they are in a squadron.
Canonn will science no matter either.
Truckers will truck, however catalogued.

Is there a squadron chat that is not limited to squadron members only?

And if/when Fleet Carriers offer more involved gameplay for Squadrons? Might you not like to have your Fleet Carrier aid you in some Mining, or some Xeno Combat? Well it can't, because your Squadron is predominantly a Powerplay one, and it's being used for that...

Meanwhile if you could switch to your second or third Squadrons when you're interested in Mining or Xeno combat, no problem.


Consider if Fleet Carriers can play a part in something like Distant Worlds 2? What you going to do? Not enjoy that feature of the exploration trip? Or leave your current Squadron to join a dedicated Distant Worlds 2 one?

Does this not all seem needlessly clunky/limited to you?

 

[Han Zulu]

I'd suggest it would be better if the standard squadron mechanics simply allowed you to join say up to 5 squadrons rather that creating a manual process for FD creating squadrons which in self still means the mechanics need to added to allow joining multiple squadrons by some means.

Allow CMDRs to join 5 squadrons, but only one of type/role Powerplay/Faction etc.

Sure. I was thinking that as well. There are several ways of solving this, but I know that this issue was brought up months ago and all the suggestions provided in this thread has already been made, yet FDev didn't address any but kept the concept of single squadron signup. In other words, I doubt that anything will change on this front whatever we say. Unfortunately. I think we'll see a lot of small squadrons, and just a few large ones, because everyone wants to keep some freedom to their choices. Basically, I suspect they won't work the way they were intended. They'll be more like persistent wings instead of guilds.

 

[Frigna the Hutt]

I prefer not.

 

[kilvenny]

In this game a squadron is not always military, whereas in most MMO's they are.

A squadron needs to be designated as military or none military. Military being its tied to a faction and/or power. Players should only belong to one military faction at a time, but potentially any number of none military factions.

 

[cyberus]

My question remain still unanswered.....
Op how you see you self being in 2 difrent squadrons which are at war? ( power alignment for example )

Tbh I don’t see the work around this matter that’s why only by this single reason I can’t support your petition so long you can’t prove that it can work in such situation.

 

[Quester91]

Nope, not going to sign. 1 guild per character is enough.

 

[EUS]

Nope.
Already too much whining about 5C activities (perceived, and/or proven).

 

[Drelthar]

You seem to think squadrons prevents you or others using discord. It doesn't do that at all, no reason you can't do both.

It'd b e great if I could put discod in my comms window.

Currently, while I am signed up to a load of discord chats, I never look at them in game, because it's not... in game.

 

[Nadreck]

You seem to think squadrons prevents you or others using discord. It doesn't do that at all, no reason you can't do both.

...How?

Are we being given a facility or plugin to relay squadron comms to specific non-members?

Or are you assuming that all squadrons will have a designated "Commuications Officer" to relay comms manually?

 

[TatankaPrime]

You should be able to join multiple squadrons, but only be active in one at a time. That way you could have your day job squadron be one thing, but switch over to community squadrons for things such as the Fuel Rats, Distant Worlds, Buckyball, etc.

Would be nice if membership was cross platform as well, but I know that's likely stretching it a bit on the wish list.

 

[AveCandido]

No ... no....no ...no ....nooooo

 

[Parmo]

No.
It will end up with Fifty Shades of Squadron.

 

[CMDR Cosmic Spacehead]

No thanks.

If wars, alliances and such are a thing, it'll mess it up if you can somehow be on both sides. Plus you'll have to display multiple squadron tags...

 

[T. Somtaaw]

I say NO to joining multiple squadrons. However it would be cool to have a separate function called Expeditions or something like that, so commanders from multiple squadrons could temporarily join. Like I mentioned, this could be a temporary group that can be created for commanders from multiple squadrons to join for temporary shenanigans. So it could be used for expeditions or say temporary alliance cooperative work between two or more squadrons. Make it to where these special groups automatically disband in a couple months.

 

[Ozram]

It's hard enough for some people to have enough activity with one squad, so a big no from me here.

All the guys who want to have multiple squads, you never tried leading a group, have you?
It's a pita to watch your roster and see that your pilots are too busy with RL and a few other groups to be active in your squad when it counts...

You want to do many different things? That's the reason you want multiple squads? Then join a squad that does multiple activities. Easy solution.

Actually I have and partly that’s why I’d like the option. I’m with one group now that has players in my time zone but there was a group I helped found and I’d love membership there as well.

 

[TheSisko]

Listening to QA's round-table stream, safe to say that squadrons is getting a pasting on there, especially the limitation of only being able to only join one squadron.

 

[Kaocraft]

+1 Signed.

Alternative stopgap measure: let squadron admins "whitelist" any CMDR name they want so that specified people can join/unjoin/rejoin without needing an application and approval.

 

[Ozram]

I am not a fan of people being "members" of multiple groups. It gives the impression that player groups are mere communities, not people working together as a unit.

So, my suggestion would be two-fold:
1. Allow the creation of Communities in addition to Squadrons. Canonn, DWx, Fuel Rats, FUC, etc are all examples of entities that perhaps aren't really squadrons, but consists of players from different groups coming together to do things outside of their core group activities. Cmdrs could "pledge" to Communities, just like they can for Minor Factions. Not really sure if there should be a limit to how many communities players can join, but that's probably more of a coding issue than anything else.

2. Allow Squadrons to ally with other Squadrons, not just Minor Factions. This would preferably come with a designated colour code on the scanner for cmdrs in an allied Squadron.
Alternatively a "support" function could be implemented, where you can be a member of one Squadron (which also determines your tags), but can "officially" support one or more other squadrons. Not sure where that would be displayed for other cmdrs though, but a new tab somewhere in the lefthand panel among all the other scan related info would be appropriate.

But then I can’t be OBS and CobraKai!
Actually, I quite like your suggestion.

 

[Kaocraft]

Quite apart from any technical issue that might arise (and those seem to be easily resolvable), I get the impression that some people regard it as morally wrong to allow squadron mechanics to be available to players supporting multiple causes (unless the squadron itself does), and the game should somehow physically prevent them from doing so.

Which is... odd.

If you don't approve of multi-squadron membership, then don't join multiple squadrons, or let people into your own squadron if they are members of other squadrons. No need to impose that restriction on everyone else.

This is a game in which you can gain ranks in rival navies, and also command multiple battleships all on your own. Restriction to one squadron seems conceptually very counter to the rest of the game.

Not everyone wants to be bossed around, or to boss other people around. That doesn't mean that they don't want to work with others, and IIRC there was some mention of different specified levels of squadron cohesion.

Agreed.

The whole concept of "loyalty" is meaningless if it's an automatically default enforced thing by the game. If some Squadrons want to demand exclusivity then let them do that by refusing to admit any members who are also involved with other squadrons. If other squadrons want to have allegiances or just act as more open-ended organizations they should have the freedom to do so. It's dumb to think you shouldn't be a member of the Fuel Rats and Canonn at the same time, for example. I can be a member of the Carpenter's Union and simultaneously a member of the Audobon Society and the Catholic church.

This "enforced monogamy" with squadrons is clearly nothing to do with good design and everything to do with what is easiest to program and keep track of. We're for sure NOT getting multiple squadron membership anytime soon, because it would require a bunch of new UI solutions and probably changing a lot of how data works behind the scenes. And that's a shame. It should have been built properly from the beginning, but I think the best we can hope for are half-measures and quick-fixes to make the problem more manageable. Either that or Squadrons go right in the toilet from day 1.