Better player faction integration between outside and inside the game

[CMDR Heydan Seegil]

They need to work on just making player factions a possible thing. We have roughly 22 people in the Confederacy of Vulcan now and because we are late comers to the show having only started after Leonard Nimoy Station was created in Horizons we've been what feels like black balled from becoming a in game minor faction or having any presence. We've applied several times and sent e-mails to the community manager, but haven't gotten so much as yes or no on it. I get that the lack of communication is not really what your petition is about, but generally the system for player factions just fails. Its kind of tough hanging in the wind especially when we actively manage and promote out own sort of CGs for the sector by either running trade convoys, fighting wars, racing, or whatever.

Just saying the lack of communication is awful.

 

[rootsrat]

I'd be curious to hear what kind of level gate people would feel was appropriate, if FD would only allow this as an automatic entitlement.

I've just checked and I am still allied which factions I last interacted with 2 years ago, though some I have declined to friendly only, which suggests that reputation is reasonably stable once acquired. On the other hand I have been allied with an "enemy" player faction and had that rep slide down to hostile pretty quickly - like overnight.

The issue with people flying flags of convenience would be they starting conflicts with other play groups on your behalf.... doing things which lowered your reputation with the community etc.

I think the biggest upside of an automated process (aside from it not requiring frontier to maintain a contact list and make server side changes to every different commander who wanted to pledge for a faction following a check with whoever is the designated gatekeeper) is that it unless a player group wanted a name or location change, it removes FD from the process of faction adoption. Any commander who wants to display a pledge to any faction can do as long as they pass the entry.

Yes, I can definitely see the benefits of the automated system and it's most certainly the easier solution from technical and maintenance point of view.

From the player group's contextual point of view, a player-controlled one is much better. To be perfectly honest, I'd be happy with either (while still preferring my original proposal), as long as FDEV would implement it at all and allow us to have our PMF's displayed in the HUD.

 

[CMDR Ahab]

I might have missed something, but don't remember seeing any mention of using a PP style decay system in the thread. For what it's worth, I'm not so sure about this as this would not only hurt players who have limited time but would also limit playstyles as well to just sticking around their local areas (e.g. I'm primarily an explorer who helps with expansions for various Alliance factions by selling exploration data). That was one of the things that killed PP for me personally.

Apologies if this is slightly off-topic but it occurs to me that as the main GUI (other than Mining, Bulk Trading, BH, etc.) for the BGS is essentially the Mission and Passenger boards that's something then that should be looked at as at the moment my biggest gripe is that the factions themselves just feel too similar. What would be great to give more of a flavour to our chosen factions would be a way of submitting custom mission templates, approved by our own members and vetted in a similar way to how Galnet articles are, keeping the ones which are already there of course. No idea how feasible this would be as suspect that a lot of work would need to be put in behind the scenes, but as an added bonus could also be used as a system to submit generic templates for generic factions as well.

Anyway, hoping that my rambling made some sense, going to run away now to hide from the incoming flames

 

[Mohrgan]

Yes, I can definitely see the benefits of the automated system and it's most certainly the easier solution from technical and maintenance point of view.

From the player group's contextual point of view, a player-controlled one is much better. To be perfectly honest, I'd be happy with either (while still preferring my original proposal), as long as FDEV would implement it at all and allow us to have our PMF's displayed in the HUD.

Take into account that nothing would change with your Player Group at all. All of the control you have over your info is maintained. Tags would become a reward for dedicated and continued support of the Faction. Rather than a recruiting tool. i.e. 'You can wear our Tags as long as you do as I say'. This is not a reflection on you, or anyone, but it is a common enough occurrence elsewhere.

- - - Updated - - -

I might have missed something, but don't remember seeing any mention of using a PP style decay system in the thread. For what it's worth, I'm not so sure about this as this would not only hurt players who have limited time but would also limit playstyles as well to just sticking around their local areas (e.g. I'm primarily an explorer who helps with expansions for various Alliance factions by selling exploration data). That was one of the things that killed PP for me personally.

Apologies if this is slightly off-topic but it occurs to me that as the main GUI (other than Mining, Bulk Trading, BH, etc.) for the BGS is essentially the Mission and Passenger boards that's something then that should be looked at as at the moment my biggest gripe is that the factions themselves just feel too similar. What would be great to give more of a flavour to our chosen factions would be a way of submitting custom mission templates, approved by our own members and vetted in a similar way to how Galnet articles are, keeping the ones which are already there of course. No idea how feasible this would be as suspect that a lot of work would need to be put in behind the scenes, but as an added bonus could also be used as a system to submit generic templates for generic factions as well.

Anyway, hoping that my rambling made some sense, going to run away now to hide from the incoming flames

I suggested a Rep Decay mechanism to weed out pretenders, and reward real activity. It would not be essential. What would be required is; a threshold for negative activity that would automatically remove your ability to display a Faction's tags. 5th Column work could still happen, but it wouldn't be free, and it couldn't persist very long. The negative activity could still work against the Faction, but the cover of being in the group would be lost.

 

[goemon]

With the BGS you would sign up for a faction and then work against it? Your rep would drop pretty quickly doing that, there could even be a mechanic whereby you need to maintain a friendly relationship or better to keep membership.

oh, agony! you could do a lot of things to block a factions progress while gaining reputation or at least not loosing it... smuggling to black markets, pushing systems into expansion which don't have systems in expansion range forcing investment ... pushing a faction into conflict by working for it to cancel out an expansion (if timed nicely)... so many options i'm allied with most (non-player grouped backed) minor factions i'm working against day-to-day (tick-to-tick). anyway, you can do this already today with or without a faction shown in hud.

i think, what rootsrat is referring to is mainly cases where people would use a minor factions name while "harming" other players or player groups. I'm positive that as soon as such thing is ingame without gating by players, we would see players showing their allegiance to "order of moebius", "the code" or "the canonn" while ganking at CGs ... players who wouldn't be connected to the group at all of course, just for a giggle. but i'm also positive that one could find a mechanic to make that less likely to happen often. also, as we do know from gating private groups by their owners, that is neither a way to make sure that those things don't happen.

 

[CMDR Ahab]

I suggested a Rep Decay mechanism to weed out pretenders, and reward real activity. It would not be essential. What would be required is; a threshold for negative activity that would automatically remove your ability to display a Faction's tags. 5th Column work could still happen, but it wouldn't be free, and it couldn't persist very long. The negative activity could still work against the Faction, but the cover of being in the group would be lost.

So say a player who had been away from the game for a while or was off doing activities somewhere would still keep the faction tag similar to how PP works when they just retain their basic rank with no other benefits?

Forgive the slightly noobish question.

 

[Jane Turner]

Yes, I can definitely see the benefits of the automated system and it's most certainly the easier solution from technical and maintenance point of view.

From the player group's contextual point of view, a player-controlled one is much better. To be perfectly honest, I'd be happy with either (while still preferring my original proposal), as long as FDEV would implement it at all and allow us to have our PMF's displayed in the HUD.

I too would be happy with either but happier with automated and I certainly wouldn't say anything other than Hell-Yeah if the only option was player controlled gating

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

I feel with respect to the others opinions that an open ended system is a breeding ground for chaos I feel we have seen that already in PP mechanics. And to be honest I feel that a small amount of control is more of a reward for those like Rootsrat who go the extra mile to create something special that adds to the content and lore of elite. And by adding in some kind of player gate it frees up the developers from haveing to make some kind of balancing mechanism that is fair to all.
Like Rootsrat I have put a lot of time and creativity into the Earth Defense Fleet so I understand the connection he has with his PMF.

 

[Anuranium]

To OP:
If I could plegde to a minor faction similar to how it is currently implemented in powerplay I for one would be all for it. That way you get to see who is with the faction in the HUD - HOWEVER the system is also prone to fift columnists who work against the minor faction, which of course makes things a bit interesting

In other words, a visual aid to who you affiliate yourself with, be it powerplay or a minor faction without handing over control to the leaders of each faction/guild.

 

[shadragon]

Sounds like something that could be managed in a similar manner to Private Group membership - and only if a member of a particular Player Group could the player display the Faction Affiliation of that Player Group.

I'd like to see this happen.

I see issues with player groups. Not for any of the reasons mentioned by rootsrat, but it's only a matter of time until a player group declares a chunk of space as "theirs" and kill all unaligned players on sight. Others will follow, then we'll have nothing but tribal areas. Yes, I know you can go into PG or Solo, but the whole idea is to breathe life back into Open and not force more people out of it. Player groups can cause real issues for single players like myself who do their own thing while wandering far and wide.

PowerPlay needs a revamp and this could come under that.

 

[rootsrat]

I see issues with player groups. Not for any of the reasons mentioned by rootsrat, but it's only a matter of time until a player group declares a chunk of space as "theirs" and kill all unaligned players on sight. Others will follow, then we'll have nothing but tribal areas. Yes, I know you can go into PG or Solo, but the whole idea is to breathe life back into Open and not force more people out of it. Player groups can cause real issues for single players like myself who do their own thing while wandering far and wide.

PowerPlay needs a revamp and this could come under that.

Well, exactly same thing can happen now though, regardless whether we have PMF's or not and whether we can affiliate with them in game or not.

I.e. we (TWH) could make a public announcement that HR 8444 is off limits to anyone but The Winged Hussars. I know all the names of my group members, so we could shoot anyone that's not on the list. Would any solution that is proposed in this thread change, prevented or allow this? No. Neither of the proposed solutions in this thread is related to what you're describing in any way.

 

[Jason Heik]

That is a super great Idea! We're about 50 in my faction, and it would help a lot to have some tools ingame to deal with members and such. The only thing is, and I beleive it's the elephant in the room here. I think player faction were an Aftertought. There is absolutely no system '' other than the BGS'' to make changes or anything. It takes between 6 weeks and 6 month for a player faction to be included in game, that is if you are lucky, if not, you don't get accepted and you just don't know about it. Even the player faction thread has been closed by Brett so that he could get on top of all the demands and emails&stuff.

The management of this little concept is too small for it's popularity. If one man has to answer for all the Player faction inquieries on top of all his other duties, it's only normal that the waiting line keeps going farther and farther away.

Ourself have been waiting for more than a year on a change of government type, so yeah!

That being said, it would probably be a good idea for us '' faction leader'' to have a word with frontier on that subject, we're bringing social in this game, and from my point of view, it's the main reason most of the players stays on Elite.

We need an UNION!

 

[john_obrien]

I think this is a good idea. I also propose other changes to how new powers could emerge that would allow factions to be Power Play powers here: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showt...play-Powers-Being-Created-and-Payment-Changes

 

[Agony_Aunt]

We need an UNION!

[video=youtube;KdOCWUgwiWs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdOCWUgwiWs[/video]

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

I see issues with player groups. Not for any of the reasons mentioned by rootsrat, but it's only a matter of time until a player group declares a chunk of space as "theirs" and kill all unaligned players on sight. Others will follow, then we'll have nothing but tribal areas. Yes, I know you can go into PG or Solo, but the whole idea is to breathe life back into Open and not force more people out of it. Player groups can cause real issues for single players like myself who do their own thing while wandering far and wide.

PowerPlay needs a revamp and this could come under that.

I understand your concerns but their is a few points I would like to make.
1- just as groups can do bad thing they can and sometimes do good things as well. We in the Earth Defense Fleet manager our systems to keep the healthy and valuable. We clear out negative states like lockdowns and out breaks. We also submit application for CG's and do our best to keep the safe for all commanders who want to participate in them.
2- with in the Earth Defense Fleet we do not mandate participation we reward it I have spent hundreds of dollars over the course of the two years that the Earth Defense Fleet has been established on the frontier store. Buying ship skins and now name plates for members as a matter of fact I will be buying the winner of our in house PvP tournament the season three pass when it becomes available.
Now I agree with for all the good the Earth Defense Fleet dose there maybe those who do bad. But that is a risk we all take in life nowhere is safe not even in video games

 

[duckofdeath]

I would like to see something similar. Though, I'd prefer if they took it even further. Make your profits working for your chosen faction higher, including increased profits on exploration data, commodities, bounties and such. Even more profits if you do work that benefits the faction at its current state and reduce your profits if you do "wrong things". Maybe even reduce those profits when dealing with (helping) other factions, as an incentive to stay loyal. Skip the "hostile" tag outside your system from PP. We'd be regular "citizen" not agents. Have the game mechanic let enemy pirates and such target us more, instead.
The mechanic could go even deeper, with competing factions offering you great rewards if you betray your home faction. With great credit penalties and long bounty periods as possible punishment if you're caught.
To reduce the risk of abuse, there could be a FIFA-like limit on how often you get to switch. Say, twice every 12 months.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

I would like to see something similar. Though, I'd prefer if they took it even further. Make your profits working for your chosen faction higher, including increased profits on exploration data, commodities, bounties and such. Even more profits if you do work that benefits the faction at its current state and reduce your profits if you do "wrong things". Maybe even reduce those profits when dealing with (helping) other factions, as an incentive to stay loyal. Skip the "hostile" tag outside your system from PP. We'd be regular "citizen" not agents. Have the game mechanic let enemy pirates and such target us more, instead.
The mechanic could go even deeper, with competing factions offering you great rewards if you betray your home faction. With great credit penalties and long bounty periods as possible punishment if you're caught.
To reduce the risk of abuse, there could be a FIFA-like limit on how often you get to switch. Say, twice every 12 months.

I believe what rootsrat is aiming for here is baby steps, something that might be pallatable for FD. If you present a full buffet before FD as a suggestion, the most likely response you will get is: "Nice, but not something we can consider at this time". They didn't have time to implement Engineers fully (dev comments from the release) they didn't have time to implement powerplay as fully as they liked (again, dev hints/comments), for whatever reason, there is something always driving FD forward onto the next thing, and big things, headline features, get left barely touched after release (barring bug fixes).

So, the best chance we have of getting something that we can use is something that won't take up massive amounts of dev time. Something they can squeeze into the schedule. And then, when they have done that, we can see if we can get a little more....

Always worth remembering though, if they do agree, it means we have some devs and designers not working on something else. There is always a price.

 

[rootsrat]

I would like to see something similar. Though, I'd prefer if they took it even further. Make your profits working for your chosen faction higher, including increased profits on exploration data, commodities, bounties and such. Even more profits if you do work that benefits the faction at its current state and reduce your profits if you do "wrong things". Maybe even reduce those profits when dealing with (helping) other factions, as an incentive to stay loyal. Skip the "hostile" tag outside your system from PP. We'd be regular "citizen" not agents. Have the game mechanic let enemy pirates and such target us more, instead.
The mechanic could go even deeper, with competing factions offering you great rewards if you betray your home faction. With great credit penalties and long bounty periods as possible punishment if you're caught.
To reduce the risk of abuse, there could be a FIFA-like limit on how often you get to switch. Say, twice every 12 months.

While the idea seems interesting to explore, I would be against going this far. I think for now all the groups really need is a way to show they are creators (and curators?) of their PMF and that they belong to it by displaying the faction name on the HUD, as NPC's do - without having any effect on the gameplay of other players whatsoever.

Fair to everyone, the groups have a QOL improvement, non-group pilots don't lose anything and can still fully support/work against any faction of their choice.

After giving it a little thought, I'd be for merging 2 main ideas from this thread:

1. The ability to display minor faction name in the HUD when you reach Allied status, but only for genuine in game factions
2. PMF submitter controlled pledge system for Player Minor Factions only.

This way we, the group leaders would have control over who wears our colours and the players could still pledge to thousands of NPC factions out there. Although I realise this is very unlikely to be implemented...

 

[RamirezKurita]

1. The ability to display minor faction name in the HUD when you reach Allied status, but only for genuine in game factions
2. PMF submitter controlled pledge system for Player Minor Factions only.

This way we, the group leaders would have control over who wears our colours and the players could still pledge to thousands of NPC factions out there. Although I realise this is very unlikely to be implemented...

That does cause two very odd scenarios to occur though. Firstly, player groups that adopt an NPC minor power suddenly get shafted compared to those that win the lottery to get their own minor faction; secondly, it locks out players who want to become involved in a player named faction but want nothing to do with the player group of the same name.

 

[rootsrat]

That does cause two very odd scenarios to occur though. Firstly, player groups that adopt an NPC minor power suddenly get shafted compared to those that win the lottery to get their own minor faction; secondly, it locks out players who want to become involved in a player named faction but want nothing to do with the player group of the same name.

Can't have everything when it comes to your second argument. It's a faction created and supported by the group of players. There are hundreds of thousands factions out there to choose from. You make a valid point about the adopted factions. Scrap that idea then