Better player faction integration between outside and inside the game

[rootsrat]

Very eloquently put! Most player groups in the game are a benefit to the game. I believe the logistic of expansion (working out what the hell is happening in systems in which you have a presence), and mechanics of expansion (from where to where) are designed for smaller presences thatt your group - good effort getting to 32 by the way. I stopped the BGS with my friends a long time ago at controlling 6 and presence in 12 (hey cool down timers were longer). With 5-7 players the logistics to work out what was happening (there was a fair amount of pp inflience bombing around our area at the time), took a couple of hours every day. Not fun. Even with the advent of the "faction summary" in local news, I imagine 32 is a lot. I think I would be downloading eddb into a database and working out the minimum number of systems I had to visit to read the faction summary for at your size!

I understand the desire for recognition that this is home turf, to reward the effort pt in by players to achieve control of the systems, and control to actually give some control, I think it needs to be carefully handled to avoid putting too much content behind player controlled gates. A lot of hat you suggest seems benign, I would pick out "excorting low health ships" as an example of a step to far between the balance of groups and independent pilots. I suspect it was off the top of your head example.

Simon

Hence my initial suggestion was ONLY to give us ability to accept pledges to our PMF, so that our members can display our name. Nothing else changes and nobody is restricted to do anything.

I think that's a reasonable compromise? Hell, it's not even a compromise, as NOBODY IS LOSING ANYTHING! Also, with all the concenrns of power trips, person cult, dictatorships etc. - do you really think that if we've ONLY had what I proposed would cause any massive drama? I somehow can't see it. Of course there will always be groups that have drama, but that's gonna happen whether you are able to display your PMF name or not. And the drama will surely happen on the outside media, like that group's forum or discord or Team Speak or whatever. These things happen all the time and were you ever aware of them? We've had a drama in our group couple of times. Did you know? No, because it's all happened outside of the game.

Without any tools, global faction chat and stuff like that there is no way to experience the poostorm of other groups in game. And if you're part of that group you will experience it regardless of the PMF faction tag functionality being in the game or not.

I honestly think that my proposal is not over the top, it's a minor cosmetic thing, that does not affect anybody's gameplay, but has a big impact on enjoying the game by the people that create and curator their PMF's and it'd add the feeling like we're actually belong to our faction in game. There are hundreds of thousands of factions out there - is this REALLY such a big problem for people? I sometimes think that people oppose things just for the sake of it...

 

[Goliat]

For what it's worth - I'm fully supportive of being able to pledge allegiance to in-game Minor Factions.
But until that is implemented I am going to assume the Following:
Ship Name Prefixes:
INV ShipName = Imperial Naval Vessel
FNS ShipName = Federation Naval Ship (I haven't actually seen this in the wild yet let me know if I'm wrong)
ADF ShipName = Alliance Defence Force.

Then on the Ship ID:
AID = The Allies (Alliance German)
PLA = Pilotos Libre Alianza (Alliance Spanish)
AEDC = Alliance Elite Diplomatic Corps
AOS = Alliance Office of Statistics.
DAWN = New D.A.W.N. (Alliance French)
[NULL] = [NULL] (independent Alliance)
TCF = Terran Colonial Forces (Alliance Xbox)
AA (on a Fed rank locked ship) = Adle's Armada
AA (on a Empire rank locked ship) = Aislings Angels.
EDF = Viktore's Fans
TWH = The White Hussars (Polish)
TWT = The White Templars
AI = Achenar Immortals
AI = Angeli Imperium
CI = Communism Interstellar
ICU = Interstellar Communist Union
CNTRL = CoNTRaiL
MoM = Mercs if Mikuun
SEPP = Social Eliu People's Party (that's wrong sorry)
SDC = Smiling Dog Crew (or someone black hatting)
CODE = The Code
CANNON = CANNON
61= = 61 for Equality
DF or FROG = Diamond Frogs
DE = Dark Echo
DA = Dark Armada

Uh that's all I can remember without consulting INARA.

But my point is - we should be making use of the tools we have been given to identify ourselves.
Even if we want better tools.

Please correct TWH, it means "The Winged Hussars"

 

[DNA-Decay]

The complaint thread on that topic would suggest that there are concerns regarding false-flagging.

Flag Schmag.

I see someone wearing the short tag above - I ASSUME they're with that group.
Of course SDC or whomever are going to go around griefing unsuspecting CMDRs wearing Fuel Rats tags or whatever. (Not that SDC would ever do such a thing)

Don't care.

The reality is that most folks want to identify with their actual group.
What - SDC are going to grief noobs at Eravate while wearing ADLES?
So what - if I'm working somewhere and I see a wing of Adle's tagged ships I'm going to ASSUME that its Silk! and the gang. The CMDRs in Adle's are generally proud of their membership.

"They've sullied my group's reputation"
"They're not one of us".

False flagging operations are a legit mode of warfare. I've yet to see anyone claim actual advantage from a false flag operation.

I don't get what the strategic loss is.
To me it just seems like rustled jimmies.
People wanting control for the sake of having control.

If The Mad Bomber and his gang of merry pranksters badge up as CANNON to undertake their next UA bombing campaign - how is that different to now? 99% of CMDRs wearing the CANNON tag will be engaged in research, and the false flaggers will be lost in the noise.

 

[Han_Zen]

Flag Schmag.

I see someone wearing the short tag above - I ASSUME they're with that group.
Of course SDC or whomever are going to go around griefing unsuspecting CMDRs wearing Fuel Rats tags or whatever. (Not that SDC would ever do such a thing)

Don't care.

The reality is that most folks want to identify with their actual group.
What - SDC are going to grief noobs at Eravate while wearing ADLES?
So what - if I'm working somewhere and I see a wing of Adle's tagged ships I'm going to ASSUME that its Silk! and the gang. The CMDRs in Adle's are generally proud of their membership.

"They've sullied my group's reputation"
"They're not one of us".

False flagging operations are a legit mode of warfare. I've yet to see anyone claim actual advantage from a false flag operation.

I don't get what the strategic loss is.
To me it just seems like rustled jimmies.
People wanting control for the sake of having control.

If The Mad Bomber and his gang of merry pranksters badge up as CANNON to undertake their next UA bombing campaign - how is that different to now? 99% of CMDRs wearing the CANNON tag will be engaged in research, and the false flaggers will be lost in the noise.

The Canonn is not worried as no one seem to be able to spell it.

Suggestion: As a gentleman's agreement, all false flaggers will from now on use slightly wrong spelling.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Of course SDC or whomever are going to go around griefing unsuspecting CMDRs wearing Fuel Rats tags or whatever. (Not that SDC would ever do such a thing)

Don't care.

You may not care - however it leads to avoidable community drama.

 

[DNA-Decay]

Please correct TWH, it means "The Winged Hussars"

Corrected (sorry I was reading The White Guard recently) and CANONN and 61 FE

But it's just my list of who I assume you are if I see that SHIP ID
And It's buried on page ten of a high effort thread. It's not a reference.
Anyone with some Player Group credibility could start a thread to that effect with the list on page one.

 

[IndigoWyrd]

For what it's worth - I'm fully supportive of being able to pledge allegiance to in-game Minor Factions.
But until that is implemented I am going to assume the Following:
Ship Name Prefixes:
INV ShipName = Imperial Naval Vessel
FNS ShipName = Federation Naval Ship (I haven't actually seen this in the wild yet let me know if I'm wrong)
ADF ShipName = Alliance Defence Force.

Then on the Ship ID:
AID = The Allies (Alliance German)
PLA = Pilotos Libre Alianza (Alliance Spanish)
AEDC = Alliance Elite Diplomatic Corps
AOS = Alliance Office of Statistics.
DAWN = New D.A.W.N. (Alliance French)
[NULL] = [NULL] (independent Alliance)
SCL = Sap Core Legion (Alliance XBox)
TCF = Terran Colonial Forces (Alliance)
AA or ADLES (on a Fed rank locked ship) = Adle's Armada
AA or ANGEL (on a Empire rank locked ship) = Aislings Angels.
EDF = "I am Earth Defense Fleet"
TWH = The Winged Hussars (Polish)
TWT or WT = The White Templars
AI = Achenar Immortals
AI = Angeli Imperium
CI = Communism Interstellar
ICU = Interstellar Communist Union
CNTRL = CoNTRaiL
MoM = Mercs of Mikuun
UGC = United German Commanders
SEPP = Social Eliu People's Party (that's wrong sorry)
SDC = Smiling Dog Crew (or someone black hatting)
CODE = The Code
CANONN = CANONN
61 FE = 61 for Equality
DF or FROG = Diamond Frogs
DE or ECHO = Dark Echo
DA or DARK = Dank Armada
IPC = Independent Pilots Consortium
BBfA = Blood Brothers from Alrai
GOH = Guardians of Harmony
TIIQ = The Imperial Inquisition
13 XX= The 13th Legion
PC = Paladins Consortium
IHC = Official of Imperial High Command (you'd kinda want to be a name that can be googled)
MAGA = KOS
ROA = Reign of Annihilation
EGP = Elite Gaming Pilots (Russian)
GL or GHOST = Ghost Legion
EXO = EXO
EIC = East India Company
BO or OMEGA = Black Omega
PBSF = Pixel Bandits Security Force
MÖBIUS = Wait - why am I seeing this in open?
EDC = Elite Dangerous Community (Facebook - though this is so much total random city that I would be very surprised if they ever thought to wear a tag)
LOSP = League of Solo Pilots uh "Hi dude, were you mode cycling and lost track?"






Uh that's all I can remember without consulting INARA.
And these are only what I ASSUME the Player Groups will be using. If any Groups have an "official" policy let's get a thread stickied.

But my point is - we should be making use of the tools we have been given to identify ourselves.
Even if we want better tools.

You can add Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot to your list as well. Those would be my ship ID's.

You'll know my python in passing easily: Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot-013 | This Side Up.

Forum does not allow the use of the non-phonetic TLA.

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

Found this on YouTube it felt right to post and share it here:
https://youtu.be/I5O09bPjhMI

- - - Updated - - -

Corrected (sorry I was reading The White Guard recently) and CANONN and 61 FE

But it's just my list of who I assume you are if I see that SHIP ID
And It's buried on page ten of a high effort thread. It's not a reference.
Anyone with some Player Group credibility could start a thread to that effect with the list on page one.

http://i.imgur.com/2FH4HSB.jpg

That recruitment video was To honor the Army of one recruitment campaign of the U.S.A. We have a lot of retired military veterans in our fleet and we wanted to try and do something that honors there sacrifice and commitment to serve in the military.
We in the Earth Defense Fleet respect our veterans and thank them for their service!

 

[Robert Maynard]

Found this on YouTube it felt right to post and share it here:
https://youtu.be/I5O09bPjhMI

.... which just emphasises the fact that ship-naming and ID tags were not implemented to offer controlled access fleet tags.

 

[Le CMDR]

When we submitted our player faction, they only took the name, governance and system we asked for and did not add our 'lore'. We proceeded to use inara as our hub for info, great for communicating but its just another 3rd party site we need to play the game. i find tabbing out so annoying.

From what i reckon the ship ID tag will declare your allegiance to a minor faction or player group. and it wont move from that.

I would be happy to actually be a part of the faction we introduced to the game though so i like the idea, but im not holding breath.

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

.... which just emphasises the fact that ship-naming and ID tags were not implemented to offer controlled access fleet tags.

He also asked the question did Elite Dangerous evolved past it envisioned design goal? And he also asked the question if Elite Dangerous has evolved should their be some kind of fleet mechanics added to the game?
Just wanted to point that out as well.

 

[Robert Maynard]

He also asked the question did Elite Dangerous evolved past it envisioned design goal? And he also asked the question if Elite Dangerous has evolved should their be some kind of fleet mechanics added to the game?
Just wanted to point that out as well.

He's not the only one that has asked those questions - opinions vary with regard to the answers.

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

He's not the only one that has asked those questions - opinions vary with regard to the answers.

I agree. To be honest adding in PMF was a mistake on FDev's part. If they had no intentions to build on that foundation.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I agree. To be honest adding in PMF was a mistake on FDev's part. If they had no intentions to build on that foundation.

That rather depends on whether player controlled anything is in Frontier's development plan - and from DBOBE's comments at EGX 2014 it may not be (or not for some time, anyway).

PMFs permit players to have "their" Faction inserted into the game with their lore attached and then work for it - all very egalitarian in terms of no-one "in-charge", just like PowerPlay.

That said, I fully support the OP's request for control of Faction colours in terms of who is permitted to fly them - as the Faction in question would not exist (disregarding the few adopted NPC factions for now) but for the Player Group that requested its insertion.

 

[Vicktore Beskor]

I think this is the first massive multiplayer online game Frontier has ever did so you have to give them the benefit of doubt that they are doing the best they can do it must not be an easy learning curve. But on the other hand this is what happens when you try to reinvent the wheel.
When it comes to Elite Dangerous their are so many great things about it but their are some shortcomings as well. That is why we have to do our best as gamers to help them as much as we can with positive suggestions and constructive criticism.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I think this is the first massive multiplayer online game Frontier has ever did so you have to give them the benefit of doubt that they are doing the best they can do it must not be an easy learning curve. But on the other hand this is what happens when you try to reinvent the wheel.

Frontier would seem to have fulfilled the simple definition of MMO - and I would not expect a cookie-cutter approach to implementing features analogous to those found in other games, if they are implemented at all.

When it comes to Elite Dangerous their are so many great things about it but their are some shortcomings as well. That is why we have to do our best as gamers to help them as much as we can with positive suggestions and constructive criticism.

That implies that we, as gamers, might agree on the scope of proposed changes - any discussion on the topic has shown that we don't.

 

[Achirin]

I only browsed the 13 pages of comments but wanted to throw my 2c in.

As a solo player I like the idea of being able to identify the NPC minor faction I am supporting. I don't have a desire to create a player group, thought about it but I don't know anyone else that would join me. So I didn't waste Frontiers time. However, as was stated previously I don't think giving a player faction control over who gets to identify as an in game faction member is the right method. If you achieve ally status having a drop down list or something to choose from should be fine. Maybe restrict how often people can change? or even add a reputation decrease if you display and then swap? They take it as a personal slight of course.

I was recently informed the NPC faction I have supported since the week after I started playing just had a player group created and it's an option for them to "claim" the NPC faction as theirs. Yet they speak a different language and I have no interest in joining them. I should still be able to show my allegiance regardless of an actual player group.

 

[Steph]

All I'd like to see, as a group leader and creator of The Winged Hussars player faction is the ability for other players to pledge to my faction and for me to accept these requests. Then "The Winged Hussars" would show under their Commander names to indicate they are members of that faction.

This would be available only to the person that submitted the group and faction creation form to Frontier.

For me this runs slightly contrary to we CMDRs being "little cogs in the larger wheel", one CMDR being slightly more important than others etc.

For myself I would pledge to an NPC faction (the dear old Betel Free, which is basically umm, just me! ) but would have no desire to be its "leader" (it already has one in Galnet lore).

Perhaps having "locked" and "unlocked" factions (read: at least all the NPC ones) might work. I don't have any strong opinions about "guilds" and suchlike probably because I've never played a "Massively Multiplayer Online" game (unless you count a Multi-User Dungeon hosted by Edinburgh University around 25 years ago) so wouldn't get too excited about any decisions that were made.

I would probably like "affiliate membership" to be an option since I have been known to help out those nice Hutton Orbital Trucker types from time to time (they live 70+ light years away so our paths don't cross very often). Being tied to a single faction might be a tad limiting perhaps.

 

[Nuntius Mehen]

I am 99% positive this has been mentioned as an upcoming feature for Player Groups. If someone else can help locate or verify, that would be awesome. As an in game player group leader I agree on everything apart from your system asset comment. If my faction controls the system and we put the hard work in to maintain that control (I'm willing to wager I have the most difficult system BGS in the game, 17 Draconis.) it would be nice to have expanded options to play with assests and the system. Just my thoughts.

 

[Viajero]

I wonder what the support for this kind of idea is out there in the community... Please post your thoughts below and [modhat on] may I ask to refrain from vitriol, sarcasm, personal remarks, offtopic posts about how bad Elite is or derailing this thread to Open/Solo debate. Let's have a civilised and meaningful discussion for once.

I would imagine the support would be quite significant. And it would be great.

According to several FDEV statements in recent weeks FDEV seems to focus development in features that get "take up". Well, if that is true then the least FDEV should do is to acknowledge the (imo) tremendous take up of faction gameplay. I agree with you, my immediate player circle is also 99% driven by faction gameplay too.

Now, if this was developed I also think it would need an "in game" way for players to create or set up a faction without the need to apply via pm to FDEV admins and then wait for 3 months before seeing it in game.

As a stretch target I also think that such comittment to identify oneself with a faction in game should also bring some actual gameplay impact. For example one could conceive of such a commited player to get an extra BGS impact bonus when performing activities for his/her faction and a slight negative one when doing it for other factions etc. Rewards could also actually be slightly modified by this etc. Conversely leaving such a faction would require some kind of cool down etc.