Page 20 of 24 First 161819202122 Last
Results 286 to 300 of 360

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: SQUAD GOALS: SUGGESTIONS & SUPPORT

  1. #286
    Perhaps this is a technical issue but I am wondering why only squads can use their fleet carriers? It feels like this could be a permission set by the Squadron Leader. Allowing this would provide a lot more flexibility to player groups. If there was an explorers squad, and they wanted to open themselves up to all explorers as a base for repair, refit, ect. past the colonia, this system would not allow that. Or perhaps a trading squad wants to make their carrier a trade hub, or plenty of other things I cant think of. It seems that as a tool for social interaction, taking this option away seems unnecessarily restrictive. Again, it may be a technical issue in which case I would love a correction. Thanks, 0rillian

  2. #287

    Minimum member requiment

    Dear Developers,

    I am quite dissapointed about the minimum member requiment. I don't see why you need to exclude the casual players. I have already put more than 1000 hrs into the game but I still consider myself a casual player (This thing itself desers a whole topic *grindgrind*) If I am correct you are planning to lock the carrires behind a minimum member requiment. As a casual player I usually play with two of my real life friends. They are even more casuals. So you think it is ok that we cannot have our own mining or exploration "base" just bkuz we cant spand hrs upon hrs in the game every day? It is sad and unfair.

    Please reconsider to cancel the minimum member requiment for carriers!

    Best Regards,
    CMDR Horkol

  3. Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #288
    Originally Posted by Six6VI View Post (Source)
    So, how do we know who we can trust with a squadron invite? Will it be possible for a player with nefarious intent to perform a save wipe, hide all previous behaviour, join a squadron as an apparently 'new' account and proceed to infiltrate and besmirch their reputation by committing acts that are counter to the stated squadron ethos?
    This would theoretically be possible. It's down to the Squadron leader to identify and take appropriate action against any Commanders found to be infiltrating the Squadron ranks for nefarious purposes.

    Originally Posted by Slange Lands View Post (Source)
    Allow fellow squadmates to donate raw, encoded, and manufactured materials to a squad bank to be allocated at the discretion of the Squad Mistress?
    This would enable player-to-player trading which we're not looking at for Squadrons. Squadron banks are intended to be a one-way street to getting Squadron upgrades for now.

  4. #289
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    This would theoretically be possible. It's down to the Squadron leader to identify and take appropriate action against any Commanders found to be infiltrating the Squadron ranks for nefarious purposes.
    Will there be option to perma-kick a Commander to ensure they won't come back under a different name? (It's happened to me - outside of the game of course, but it only shows there are people out there that are willing to change their in-game name to infiltrate ranks of other groups).

  5. #290
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    This would enable player-to-player trading which we're not looking at for Squadrons. Squadron banks are intended to be a one-way street to getting Squadron upgrades for now.
    Why ?
    All MMO in the world have that ...
    The Dev team might have his own vision for the game, OK but that point, it's the only thing i can't understand....

    Why i can't be able to give the material to engineer a frag canon to a friend ?
    He love frag and i hate them....
    I won't need the material but him, he need it, why can't i help him ?

  6. #291
    I don't know why everyone keeps referring to the term "Squad(s)".

    In military aviation, a wing is a unit of command. In most military aviation services, a wing is a relatively large formation of planes. In Commonwealth countries a wing usually comprises three squadrons, with several wings forming a group (around 10 squadrons). Each squadron will contain around 20 planes. Winging up is not the same as being in a wing.

    Thus, a fleet carrier should only be granted to those who have sufficent member's of established winged pilots, ranging from one to four in size, whom are just one wing of ten for example in a squadron. And no more than three or four squadrons to a "WING". Thus if a group doesn't have sufficent member to considered a "WING" then no fleet carrier is needed. And I might add, the carrier must be in control by an Admiral or King. thus giveing some credence or purpose to obtaining the rank.

  7. #292
    Hi FDev, the more I've thought about things, the more this has turned into a wall of text, so I'll try keep things brief and in bullet point format. Just so you understand where I'm coming from, I've been a player since Premium beta, have ~1600 hours in game, and currently run a small player group focusing on coop play and the BGS.

    * Is the current plan good?

    I think this is an excellent addition to the game overall as Elite will live or die on the strength of the community and the tools you give us. I'm really excited to see what you've got lined up in terms of carrier gameplay.

    * The purpose of Squadrons

    We need to be extremely clear on what Squadrons are for. I see them as coherent groups that work towards a specific purpose (BGS, PVE, whatever), not just collections of individuals.

    You should be very careful in catering to non-exclusive groups (Canonn, Fuel Rats, Mobius) as this may compromise the core design. I see no issue in only allowing membership of one Squadron.

    * A workaround for non-exclusive groups

    Consider allowing Squadrons to be set up as 'non-exclusive'. These squadrons will be there to facilitate the previously mentioned groups but may need some level of limitation depending on any Squadron mechanics (carrier limitations? Player benefit limitations?)

    • Extremely large player groups

    My suspicion is that the game currently has a very large number of small player groups (<50 members), and this will be even more so once Squadrons are implemented.

    Therefore care must be taken in analysing feedback, to ensure these ultra large group edge cases don't dominate the conversation.

    • Squadron size limit

    The speed limit in Supercruise is 2001, so the squadron size limit should be another significant figure. Suggestions are - 255, 314, 628, 1984, 2001

    • Group type suggestions

    Family Friendly Casual (0-5 hours per week), Dedicated (6-15 hours per week), Hardcore (16 hours plus).

    Including the hour bands there is important so that everyone has the same expectations.

    • Group tags

    Serious, non-serious, roleplay, military, research, new player friendly, Elitist, mentoring

    • External site

    This isn't a high priority as long as the in game group management is good including promotions, demotions, blocking, kicking, approving, filtering etc.

    Would rather see the journal output sufficient information that external sites could use that to auto update Squadrons.

    • Social tools

    A persistent message board for members would be extremely useful!
    Message of the day sounds very good, lets us give jump schedules, mission priorities etc.
    Sending bulk inbox messages would be fantastic and allow us to really bring things to life
    Auto feed of important events sounds excellent and should include carrier status.

    We should be able to nominate a faction to support which would mean we get updates on influence and state.

  8. #293
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    This would enable player-to-player trading which we're not looking at for Squadrons. Squadron banks are intended to be a one-way street to getting Squadron upgrades for now.
    This looks like a terrible missed opportunity. Squadrons = Gather in groups but keep being isolated in a solo experience.

  9. #294
    Can we have one name for all iteration of a squadron on each platforms? This should not break the 'no cross platform' thing, but insure we have naming coherence either our members are PC, PS4 or Xbox pilots.

  10. #295
    Hi Devs

    I’m coming at this from the angle of the freelance cmdr who doesn’t settle down with any faction and likes to change play style dependant on my personal objectives and mood, i have however helped out community groups on occasion when objectives align and I like the overall concept you’ve put forward for the squadrons and have been following the discussion somewhat from a distance until now as it seems to have condensed into the two areas of player numbers and joining multiple groups. So will structure my thoughts in these...

    Squadran Diplomacy
    - Confederated (allows auto admin between member & associated)
    - Allied (faction member show as blue on flight&message GUI for recognician)
    - Friendly (shows as Green on flight&messages GUI)
    - Neutral
    - Hostile (Shows as red on flight&message GUI)
    - War (Red with similar permissions to engage outside the C&P system)

    Player numbers
    I think the numbers here are acceptable as they stand as large factions will be involved in multiple activities at any one time. So it wouldn’t be unusual to have branches within the squadron for example Canon to have a Maia & Guardian branch. The suggestion that these could form a close alliance would be ideal. Perhaps even a series of affiliation levels ranging from confederated - allied-friendly-neutral-hostile-war. Each with some auto admin to lighten the load on the officers and leader.

    Summery
    - Diplomacy options allowing confederated option allowing multiple squadrans to combine into lager formations
    - allows auto administration options allowing member to freely move between groups

    Joining multiple squadrans
    I think the ability to join multiple squadrans is essential, but i dont think you should be able to assist other groups in setting up squadrons everywhere which is what will happen. So i suggest adding an extra level of membership ‘affiliate’ which has no privileges other than seeing the Squadran GUI, and including some auto admin to match that will allow commanders to automatically shift status to upgrade their membership in any confederated squadrans. (With a notice on the group feed Elvis has left the Squadran)

    Summery
    Membership expanded to include an additional option
    - Leader - fonder full admin rights - (1 per cmdr) & unable to move
    - Officer - limited admin rights as set by leader - (1 per cmdr) & unable to move
    - Member - can contribute to chat etc.. as stated - (1 per cmdr) able to move into affiliated positions held
    - affiliate - no permissions (multiple per cmdr) membership will be downgraded to this if you move to a confederated member auto admin enabled. If moving to unaliagned squadran then will have to wait for acceptance from officer/leader of faction.

    Wow that was hard to write down in a coherent form. Hope it comes across ok, I appreciate the intricacies i’ve Glossed over but hope its clear enough to get an idea of my thoughts.

    I really like the focused feedback sessions btw.

    All the best Devs hope you have a great summer and good luck with work and life.

    Cmdr Valleys

  11. #296
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)

    This would enable player-to-player trading which we're not looking at for Squadrons. Squadron banks are intended to be a one-way street to getting Squadron upgrades for now.
    wait, are upgrades paid only with credits?
    Does that mean that a single billionaire player can have all the updates his squad needs in a single minute of play?


    Are there any unique material requirements for Carrier ship development?
    iron ore or blueprints? How will this work?

  12. #297
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    This would theoretically be possible. It's down to the Squadron leader to identify and take appropriate action against any Commanders found to be infiltrating the Squadron ranks for nefarious purposes.
    In that case, please consider adding some kind of cumulative CMDR 'score card' so leaders and (pre) approved (by pay grade) officer(s) can see who's actually contributing to the carrier / other squadron overheads and when last online.

    Directing 200, able to review and discuss who's who with the Leader and four Marshals meant we avoided kicking many that shouldn't be. Quitting also reset their 'score card', and a matching point pool they could use for exclusive items.

    We were always full but needed everybody reliable enough to show up for server wars.

    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    This would enable player-to-player trading which we're not looking at for Squadrons. Squadron banks are intended to be a one-way street to getting Squadron upgrades for now.
    Will carriers have fuel scoops or will there be a commodities market so CMDR's can dock fuel tank optimised ships and just sell it, instead using of a new GUI or synthesizing multiple fuel limpets? Do carriers use jumponium materials instead?

    This introduces a CR based squadron balance that always increases in direct relation to player activity since joining to show a cumulative peak loyalty. A second number could show peak minus credits withdrawn in the form of resources.

    Resources could include engineering materials, if the carrier has a storage module fitted and only if used for a blueprint: "You do not have any X, use SQCR Y/N?" And, only if the carrier has completed the Remote Workshop upgrind path.

    People might like to haul bulk fuel in so they can draw on it later defending the carrier in small, local fighters with extra HRP instead of FSD or scoops. Some might enjoy collecting rare materials and like a better exchange to donate overflow.

    Non-mission incentives to join, stay and make some effort. Or, identify those who don't.

  13. #298

    Squadrons and NPCs

    In an effort to bring squadrons and fleet carriers to life even when there are no commanders around can we incorporate NPCs into the squadrons.
    Some examples below:

    1. Squadron Baracks: Your NPC crew and be sent back to barracks where other Commanders can hire them so some people can train up crew members.
    2. Squadrons can have NPC admin staff/crew (cost associated to maintain?) who can be assigned to different duties to increase / decrease rate of research
    3. Fleet Carrier can have number of admin staff / crew the proportions of the crew roles could affect the carrier abilities...a bit like pips in power management (e.g. more gunnary crew = better defence, more engineering = better jump abilities/ lower jump cost, more support = better outfitting / repairs
    4. Can we build in passengers? i.e squadron specific passenger missions which tie in with BGS / Power Play or a tourism squadron which Benefits from doing tourism missions or a travel squadron.


    Basically I feel that Squadrons could TIE TOGETHER most aspects of game play if done right.

  14. #299

    If this works

    Add a simple alliance like feature. Nothing major but something like an extra tag showing the alliance and maybe let members enter other squadrons carriers but with limited functions.

  15. #300
    Squadrons should be placed into their own private groups and never be allowed in open play.

    Owning a carrier should cost the squadron each week to be used. So something like 10 million each week or it goes offline and becomes a floating hulk without anything working on it. It also must be vulnerable to attack and players/npcs must be able to destroy the carrier as well.

    I see no advantage to having this feature in the game and never asked for it. All I see is more gameplay being put behind massive multiplayer walls where the solo commander is slowly pushed out of the game due to lack of things to do.

    With missions that now cater to wings which is half of the missions I now can't do unless I feel like joining someone in a wing to do them with and now the advent of squadrons I just think the developers have lost their way and forgotten about the solo players.

    I play Elite Dangerous to relax and get away from people, but now more and more content is being put behind multiplayer walls this game is becoming more like Eve Online which is a game I left due to the huge alliances and player corps and their demands to push out/ kill off small player groups and solo content. Which the developers have gladly done.

    Never wanted nor asked for wings, never asked nor wanted squadrons and don't see a point to them.