Page 15 of 16 First 1113141516 Last
Results 211 to 225 of 230

Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.
Thread: SQUAD GOALS: DETAIL REQUESTS

  1. #211
    Are you working on a solution to multi platform player groups? Should I "kick" and recommend members of different platforms to create a new and different Squadron? Because they won't enjoy this feature if I make them to work for my faction without joining another Squadron.

  2. #212
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    Repeatedly joining the same Squadron under a different alias is definitely a concern and something we're hoping to handle elegantly. We'll keep this option open but there may be better ways of handling that.

    This is a concern. As mentioned above, we'd like to handle this as elegantly as possible and we have a few options available. Is there a particular way you'd like to see this handled?
    I think all Cmdr accounts owned by the same player should be under one super frontier account.

    A ban of a Cmdr from a squadron should result in the ban of all cmdrs that that the player owns.

    A kick of a Cmdr from a squadron should only kick the Cmdr account in question, unless the kicker chooses the kick all cmdrs owned by the same player.

    If you believe that a player should have the right to anonymity, that the banner should not know which Cmdr account belong to the same player... Though they could figure it out if they read multiple accounts were banned in the feed.

    If a Cmdr was banned and the player used another account to join, finds they couldn't and asks the squadron leader why, the only reason that should be provided upon reading their profile is that the player has another account that was banned by the squadron. It shouldn't say which account or the reason for it.

    I'm personally in favour of complete transparency. A squadron should be able to look at a cmdr's application and see all connected accounts( on that platform)

    Currently, I believe to purchase a new Cmdr account, you have to purchase the game using a new frontier account. I'm hoping that these disparate frontier accounts could be unionised either by email address, ip or same payment method, by frontier.

    And that players would have to go through EULA breaking means to escape detection. Of which they run the risk of having all of their accounts shadow banned or outright banned.

    Do you have any thoughts or concerns of what I have outlined?

    Can you tell us more about the few options you have available?

  3. Click here to go to the next staff post in this thread. #213
    Originally Posted by SVL KrizZ View Post (Source)
    Are you working on a solution to multi platform player groups? Should I "kick" and recommend members of different platforms to create a new and different Squadron? Because they won't enjoy this feature if I make them to work for my faction without joining another Squadron.
    For the moment, it would be safe to assume that Squadrons would become multi-platform should we be able to offer true multi-platform support. Unfortunately I don't have any news on multi-platform support at the moment.

    That said, I'm very confident that Squadrons will still be really useful in bringing multi-platform groups (such as yours) even closer together than you already are. It becomes another tool with which to organise and communicate with each other on a specific platform and would just add to the existing tools you're currently using to bridge the platform divide.

    Originally Posted by Olivia Vespera View Post (Source)
    Currently, I believe to purchase a new Cmdr account, you have to purchase the game using a new frontier account. I'm hoping that these disparate frontier accounts could be unionised either by email address, ip or same payment method, by frontier.

    And that players would have to go through EULA breaking means to escape detection. Of which they run the risk of having all of their accounts shadow banned or outright banned.
    This would rely on us forcibly linking accounts by association, which becomes very complicated and difficult to manage. Consider things like family members, flatmates, taking your machine to a friend's house to play, having a similar name to another player, etc.

    That said, abusing multiple accounts is something we're aware of and would of course like to reduce the risk of, whether this is by an update to the EULA, an addition to the Squadron management tools in-game, or both.

  4. #214
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    For the moment, it would be safe to assume that Squadrons would become multi-platform should we be able to offer true multi-platform support. Unfortunately I don't have any news on multi-platform support at the moment.

    That said, I'm very confident that Squadrons will still be really useful in bringing multi-platform groups (such as yours) even closer together than you already are. It becomes another tool with which to organise and communicate with each other on a specific platform and would just add to the existing tools you're currently using to bridge the platform divide.
    Since we have ED on each platform, we are waiting for Cross-Platform. With squadron, a multi-platform play group will have 3 groups of the same name, one on each platform... I don't want to say bull... But...
    Please, do something about cross platform. Be more transparent about this part of the development. If it's really dead for Sony, tell us, do not leave us hope. But with microsoft, where are we? A cross platform between pc and xbox will be able to react sony ...
    So please, as long as you are not more transparent about your dev, we will always be in doubt and criticism, do something!
    We know you work, but without communication, it's still windy for us.

  5. #215
    Originally Posted by Vanguard View Post (Source)
    This would rely on us forcibly linking accounts by association, which becomes very complicated and difficult to manage. Consider things like family members, flatmates, taking your machine to a friend's house to play, having a similar name to another player, etc.

    That said, abusing multiple accounts is something we're aware of and would of course like to reduce the risk of, whether this is by an update to the EULA, an addition to the Squadron management tools in-game, or both.
    You're absolutely right. It would be too complicated to do that. There is another option What about increasing the probability and credibility that the Cmdr you're speaking to is the same person.
    Working with EULA, a cmdr's profile could have a forum username account attached to it if they so choose and a squadron could make that a requirement for admission.
    The first distant worlds required members to create an account to sign up for the expedition. In doing so, it gained rule 11 protections.

    11) You are one person; you are allowed one forum account.

    By tying it to the forum account, we increased credibility that the person who signed up was one person. If frontier forum accounts have OAuth2, community developers could utilize it to provide incentives for players to "volunteer" their information, thus providing these players proof that the are one person because of the services they have connected to. Discord is an example that takes this approach with battle.net and steam accounts. It allows several services to connect their accounts to its services. What would it take to do that?

    I'll leave it at that because this is turning into Suggestion post. Would it be better if we did this in private message or new a thread?

    Edit: with regards to the website detail request, here is a thread asking for what we'd like to see on the website. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...e-dream-thread

  6. #216
    Hey up!
    I'm not sure I've seen these questions answered:
    1. Can a Cmdr be member of more than one squadron at the same time? If not why not? There are many player groups I play with, so I would also want to join each of their squadrons.
    2. What do those attitudes (relaxes, family, devoted) mean? How does it affect gameplay for the Cmdrs? Is it purely descriptive?

    Cheers

  7. #217
    Will there be a follow up Livestream where the question raised since the last stream will be answered, or attempted to be answered ;-)

  8. This is the last staff post in this thread. #218
    Originally Posted by Olivia Vespera View Post (Source)
    You're absolutely right. It would be too complicated to do that. There is another option What about increasing the probability and credibility that the Cmdr you're speaking to is the same person.

    ...

    I'll leave it at that because this is turning into Suggestion post. Would it be better if we did this in private message or new a thread?

    Edit: with regards to the website detail request, here is a thread asking for what we'd like to see on the website. https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showth...e-dream-thread
    No need for PMs or new threads on this. I think we have a pretty good idea of what's possible and the ideas and concerns that several players have voiced. Thank you for your time.


    Originally Posted by madbilly View Post (Source)
    Hey up!
    I'm not sure I've seen these questions answered:
    1. Can a Cmdr be member of more than one squadron at the same time? If not why not? There are many player groups I play with, so I would also want to join each of their squadrons.
    This is something we're looking at currently.


    Originally Posted by madbilly View Post (Source)
    2. What do those attitudes (relaxes, family, devoted) mean? How does it affect gameplay for the Cmdrs? Is it purely descriptive?

    Cheers
    Purely descriptive, players can set their own descriptions and be as subjective as they like - they are still subject to change of course.


    Originally Posted by c00ky1970 View Post (Source)
    Will there be a follow up Livestream where the question raised since the last stream will be answered, or attempted to be answered ;-)
    More official feedback is something we'd like to do regardless of how we do it, yes.

  9. #219
    There will be a thread with the suggestions that will be taken and thinked by the dev team ?
    to know what will change compared to first shot

  10. #220
    Is there any plan to 'tier' squadrons based on population? You mention a cap of 250 but will there be varying sizes or types of squadrons (think Warframe in regards to varying clan sizes).

    I ask because this has a knock-on effect for gameplay, leaderboards, CG influence...etc, none of which is part of this topicm (I know). But, one of the things I really liked about Warframe's model of social mechanics is that smaller groups of players aren't forced to compete with or grind at the same level as much larger player organizations.

    With the expectation that the Fleet Carrier along any other 'game mechanics' associated with squadrons will involve heavy grinding of resources or missions, have you given any thought to small player groups that want to remain small, and how this feature (and all the features yet to be discussed/implemented built off it) will be enjoyed by or benefit them over the existing organizing options?

  11. #221
    Will commanders have a 'resume' or list of squadrons they have been involved in over time?

    Will this list be public?

    Will squadrons have the capacity to 'blacklist' a commander, preventing members other than the Leader from recruiting them?

    What is your attitude towards espionage, sabotage, or theft from a squadron as you begin to build this feature? (A La Eve Online) Will such actions even be possible and will they carry any sort of penalty (not gameplay question, more of rule enforcement such as griefing)?

    What is your attitude towards squadrons built towards dominating and controlling areas at the expense of other commanders - EX: a large squadron of players that work together to shut down CGs? Technically this exists already, but do you anticipate the squadron system enhancing or detracting from these sort of interactions?

  12. #222
    Could we please get more insight in the tecnical issues with the 250 squadron limit. Just so we might have some closure on that topic or try to help you build around those limitation.

  13. #223
    Is there any intention to look again at how Multi-crew and Winging works? Because right now, you can't have a Wing if someone is in your fighter, which with Squads would be equally frustrating.

    Please consider allowing submissions for Squad decals, with prior judgement of course. Maybe crowd source it, have a forum dedicated to submissions, and if enough people flag a submission for being questionable it can be looked at by a moderator here for final approval.

  14. #224
    I would like to offer something I imagine that can both help with the new PowerPlay mechanics and help with offering the players a quick, efficient and in-game way of communication to set up wing/operation groups without overloading the squadron channels that could lower the dependency of players to outside tools (like discord).



    Assuming there would be some sort of a page for squadrons with tabs and functions, like similar to PowerPlay page, I suggest a tab to exist there that is primarily some sort of a member list. Now what I imagine is, this list should be responsively alive and someone looking at this list would see the online members of the squad appearing on the top of that list (higher rank gets the upper slot). On this list, there is a couple of information about the player in that players own bar (private group/solo/open or distance to you like the friends list or whatever you wish) but most importantly there is a dominantly visible line of text there, perhaps with a little icon. On default, everyones "status info text" is displayed as "idle" or something when they log into the game (and resets to that when they log out). A player can click on some button there somewhere that say something like "Adjust/report/list/change my status" to access a menu of choices. Whatever choice this player selects from that list of status, now will be visible on that member list next to his name. I imagine these choices to be like "Looking for bounty hunting partner", "looking for xeno-partner" and so on. I can also imagine a couple of quiet more helpful statuses, such as "looking for mentor","looking for help" that can be used for newer or older players that have some trouble about specific something that requires a touch from someone else (forex:wing assasination missions) or more importantly "looking for trade partner" or something like "looking for trade escort". This latter one would offer the player who is looking to do some trading an alternative to not switch over to solo mode and do his ferrying with an easy way to go team up with friendlies and socialize to do his thing socially and with more fun meanwhile on a bigger perspective offering a chance for the game to increase the population of open further and making the game gain some +social points. Also one another status option should be, considering the new open powerplay mechanics, should be "looking for powerplay" implying this player is simply looking for teaming up for any activity involding powerplay and another status saying "looking for powerplay escort" meaning, this player is considering hauling powerplay materials and wants people to escort him on his run.

    For those "looking for escort" status, both for powerplay and trade, you might foresee that players who are escorting arent actually earning anything at all and might want to patch that up with something, but I am quiet sure that people wouldnt mind escorting a friendly squadron member with zero gain, at all.

    For the powerplay escort thing, you can easily foresee these kinds of winged operations will be organised by players, one way or another, but if used this way, it would be much easier and much smoother plus the benefit of not depending on other programs or forums or sites for it.

    Generally all this will considerably add to the number of social interractions that will occur and add more joy to it due ease of access. Also as I mentioned, I think this idea would considerably lower the dependency of using discord or similar outer software to organise stuff in a quiet unique and effective manner not much present on other games. Thinking from a players perspective, one player logging in for a new day and not looking to do anything specific that day, instead of booting up his squadrons preferred programs of communications before launching up in Elite, can simply drop over this live member list to see who they can team up with and where they can lend a hand with, thus easily generating stuff to do for themselves.

    Similarly and finally, squadron members now have an easy-to-access wingmate resource to tackle those wing-missions much more easily. Stating "looking for wing-missions partner" this also would patch up the lack of means to find partners easily for tackling some good ol' wing missions as is present right now, again, without the dependency to a big list of registered friends or without spamming the squadron channels with these trivial things.

  15. #225
    I have a pretty major suggestion for Squadrons:

    Allow squadron leaders to create custom ranks (let's say up to 10) and assign the officer permissions to each and every one individually.

    As an example, if I was to create a squadron, I would have at least three echelons for organizational purposes. Let's say this is Wing, Flight, Group (with Squadron being the highest echelon, so technically 4).

    The Group level would relate to the most basic play styles, so a combat group, a logistics group, and a reconnaissance group.

    The Flight level would break each group down further, relating far more specifically with common preferred roles of pilots, i.e. pirating could be a flight in the recon group, bounty hunting could be a flight in the combat group, heavy traders and miners are flights in the logistics group, etc.

    The wing level wouldn't necessarily correspond to flights, but would be more akin to a task force composed of a variety of flights, one example being a miner may work well with another miner and a couple bounty hunters for some protection, maximizing both play styles efficiency. Obviously this would be suggestions and the pilots would be free to reject having wing mates, but the goal of the officers would be to help those interested in wing activities to get wing mates.

    So based on this model, I would have Pilots, Wing Leaders, Flight Officers, Group Officers, and Squadron Administrators. This creates some promotion goals among those interested, and allows me to not have to give untested new officers complete control of the squadron, instead I could give a little control at a time.

    Simultaneously, I would like to recognize veteran pilots over new recruits, for people who aren't interested in officer duties but contribute to the group activities, especially.

    Another feature I would likely implement is a Brig rank, for players tagged by lower officers who may be a problem and want a hearing of sorts from Squadron Admins, basically a last stop before being kicked out of the squadron rank that strips the pilot of all squadron rights, including access to the fleet carrier (I know we aren't talking about the FCs yet, just an example).

    So to summarize that is 7 ranks off the top of my head with varying permissions...I could easily add several more specific administrative positions, so you see from an organizational standpoint how having more than 3 ranks would be wildly beneficial.

    Likewise, if my hopes and dreams come true and season 4 begins to add extreme, raid style thargoid encounters that requires large squadron activity to complete, having such an organizational structure will be useful there as well, but that may be getting too far ahead of myself.