Avoiding Group Control...

[Robert Maynard]

My point was that to begin with at least, people are going to be creating a lot of "test" characters before they settle down... meaning that the first few should be able to be deleted more or less instantly... or at least within the first week or so of account activation.

Any delay before the deletion of a character could be related to the total play time of the account.

.... although this would be exploited with new accounts in the hands of seasoned meta-gamers being allowed to spawn-gank-delete with swift repetition (in the beginning, anyway).

 

[Space_Killer69]

I'll be honest I was thinking of a few hours delay on the first character, in context of the thread. Long enough to get a feel for the game, start to learn the basics. Make some mistakes.

But not long enough to create a character and go re-join your ganking buddies in Sol or wherever the nearest sweet spot is for maximum mayhem.

Then once you'd been through all three characters, even someone as dumb as me would know the score and there's no reason for the game to babysit any more.

 

[MrFahrenheit]

I never had any problem with the G. in EvE.
I don't expect to have any in E: D
.

This^

 

[Razorwire]

Don't have a problem with that at all.

My original comment (that you quoted) was more about the cooldown timer on deleting characters. My point was that to begin with at least, people are going to be creating a lot of "test" characters before they settle down... meaning that the first few should be able to be deleted more or less instantly... or at least within the first week or so of account activation.

Ah, that makes a lot more sense.
I agree with your sentiment, but the hard part is enabling test characters for legitimate players, while making it hard to gank/delete/rinse/repeat with fresh characters.

How many legitimate players do you see getting into bounty debt on all three character slots? I can't see it happening too often myself, so maybe that's a useful trigger.

I have no problem with near-instant deletes on characters that have no bounty and no debt.

 

[JeffRyan]

So... anyone else noticed an upswing in requests that would enable the sort of thing I was talking about in this thread?

It seems the forum war has begun.

*cue dramatic music*
*oh and maybe some lightning*

 

[Jezzah]

Your not wrong there Jeff. But wait until after new year when the games released proper for the real influx of group/guild whinging.

 

[Bromley86]

So... anyone else noticed an upswing in requests that would enable the sort of thing I was talking about in this thread?

Strangely, what I've noticed in the 3 weeks or so since I last saw this thread, is just how much support there is already in ED for clans that I didn't know about (via the alliance feature, soon to be renamed wings (think I coined that one ) and the naming protocol, which is effectively anything goes).

 

[JeffRyan]

Strangely, what I've noticed in the 3 weeks or so since I last saw this thread, is just how much support there is already in ED for clans that I didn't know about (via the alliance feature, soon to be renamed wings (think I coined that one ) and the naming protocol, which is effectively anything goes).

Not actually surprising if you think about it...

 

[Bromley86]

Sorry, I meant that I'd assumed FD were totally anti-clan. I don't hold that opinion any more.

 

[JeffRyan]

Sorry, I meant that I'd assumed FD were totally anti-clan. I don't hold that opinion any more.

There's a difference between being anti-clan and anti-group control. The problem is these requests for mechanic changes seem to be originating a lot of the time with EVE players.

Whilst David is pro-player impact, how far along that road he actually wants the game to go is up in the air, since what he's said so far can be interpreted to support either side of this argument. Shame he didn't answer THAT question in the Q&A.

But he has had a couple of interviews with Scott Manley, who whilst a decent guy (we actually RL know a lot of the same people), is also a goon.

 

[Iskariot]

T
What worries me is what would happen to ED if that happened. And how could a group dominate Elite Dangerous?

I believe that if in game mechanisms would not be able to prevent this and if it would threaten the health of the Elite universe, that in such a case FD would intervene.

 

[JeffRyan]

I believe that if in game mechanisms would not be able to prevent this and if it would threaten the health of the Elite universe, that in such a case FD would intervene.

I think there's a battle in the forum starting as well...

 

[Bromley86]

I believe that if in game mechanisms would not be able to prevent this and if it would threaten the health of the Elite universe, that in such a case FD would intervene.

Define "health". Because once you try to intervene against an organised group, you're in trouble. Of course it's possible to do (ultimately, you can pull the plug on the server and tell everyone to sod off), but in reality it's hard to ignore 1,000 people all on-message vs. the rest who are distributed along a spectrum, useful idiots on one end and die-hard SP on the other.

 

[NoirWolf]

Sorry Jeff but that OP is a scare post if ever I read one. Goons dominate by numbers, yes? There are lets wildly assume 10.000 of them marshaling to come to Elite and you guys have 3 to 5 times that number at least, the advantage of people actually familiar with their tactics ( I fought alongside them for one of my stints in 0.0 during the first great war , I was aligned with RA who were nominally allied with the goons then) and the advantage of home turf, experience and limited player instances and what do you guys do? Panic...Christ you may as well hand the game on a platter with this mentality ( they win by making you lose the will to fight ).

Also Jeff instead of fighting guild implementation you should advocate for it so that it can be fully regulated by the game, perhaps even set hard limits to guildies in a instance so the crushing numbers of goons mean nothing.

Keep it up though like this and I will start suspecting that Mittani has reactivated the GIA and is already playing merry hell in here sowing panic and discord.

 

[JeffRyan]

Define "health". Because once you try to intervene against an organised group, you're in trouble. Of course it's possible to do (ultimately, you can pull the plug on the server and tell everyone to sod off), but in reality it's hard to ignore 1,000 people all on-message vs. the rest who are distributed along a spectrum, useful idiots on one end and die-hard SP on the other.

I think that's sort of what happened with EVE. The health of CCP's original vision was dealt a serious blow via various corporations (Goons are more the nail in the coffin) and by the time they realised what was going on and how far it had gone they just embraced it. Was less work.

 

[Cosmos]

There are 400 billion star systems. 70K populated systems.

I think there is place enough for everyone in game. You won't ever have some hero effect on the game if playing alone as you will if playing with others. Stands to reason.

Instead of continuing to seek the MP element of the game to be singleplayer.. how about playing it, you know, like it was MP?

And let whatever happens happen in game. We don't need to be calling Frontier up everytime someone 'bad' happens. Be part of the solution

 

[JeffRyan]

There are 400 billion star systems. 70K populated systems.

I think there is place enough for everyone in game. You won't ever have some hero effect on the game if playing alone as you will if playing with others. Stands to reason.

Instead of continuing to seek the MP element of the game to be singleplayer.. how about playing it, you know, like it was MP?

Read the OP buddy, this isn't about taking the MP out of Elite, you know I'm for that as much as you are. It's about stopping large groups with a set agenda from wrecking the game.

 

[Adept]

Read the OP buddy, this isn't about taking the MP out of Elite, you know I'm for that as much as you are. It's about stopping large groups with a set agenda from wrecking the game.

Worth remembering.

 

[JeffRyan]

Worth remembering.

I've just found myself arguing with EVE players far too often this past couple of weeks.

 

[Adept]

I've just found myself arguing with EVE players far too often this past couple of weeks.

I've been feeling much the same. The playerbase and the reputation of the game are both spreading, but I do wonder if we aren't seeing the opening moves in the campaign to warp the game into something more suitable for group vs group domination play.

I would hate for them to carry that baggage over from EVE / SA, and even more to see them succeed even in a small part. It would be financially disastrous for Frontier as well, and I really want Elite to succeed.