Creating a construction mafia or: why we really should push for base building

schlowi123

S
I have seen some of the base building threads since april. But this one is different.
It shall not be discussed how awesome this would be, or the limitations on which planets to build, or what kind of bases to build, or what facilities these bases should have, or how to build the actual base in the end, or what to do if the player that owns the base is logged out etc. pp.

If that was discussed elsewhere, I apologize.

But I think that, if base building is included and certain small (?) modifications are made to some game mechanics I think that base building could become the reason for a lot of player created activity.

Let me elaborate on that.

First of all, an effort needs to be made to get a base of your own.
It should NOT be able to build a small (personal) base by going void opal mining for a day or doing the same mission twenty times.
It should take a single player several weeks of regular gaming to get a base. But then again, I'm using the vast majority of my time for exploration, so I'm used to "the grind". Thus some balancing for other types of players probably need to be made.

Secondly, base buidling should include raw material gathering (incl. water for your facilities).
A LOT of raw materials should be necessary to build a functional base.

Considering that vast amounts of raw materils are needed to build a base, this necessity could open an actual market for this stuff in the galaxy. Instead of going mining for yourself, you could just buy it. This would make the whole mining-thing meaningful and supply and demand logic dictates that suddenly player group mining conglomerates and single mining entrepeneurs may become meaningful, too.

This however would also require that we are able to pay with something different than the credits we have now.
The East India Company is doing this somewhat but their solution comes in the end also just down to exchanging credits.

If for example engineering materials could be exchanged (at player given exchange rates) that might be more interesting.
Another possibility would be exchanging (already engineered) modules. Just another market possibility just opened up.

Also: the problem of trusting the other party would open up the possibility for player lead "banks" and for player lead "protection groups".

Player 1 gives exchange currency to the bank and player 2 gives the needed raw material to the bank. The credentials of the bank are public. If the bank takes all of it, its "hunting season" for them. If the bank has a strong enough protection force it becomes a mafia and "meaningful" wars will be possible.

Also: since everybody wants to have a share of the cake, "transaction fees" lead to the reduction of the amount of the exchange currency in the market. Or more likely the accumulation of the same in the hands of a few with all the known consequences.

Yeah … all of that sounds awfully libertarian :( … I don't like myself for proposing it … but then, it is a game after all.


Thirdly, actual building materials need to be made from the raw materials.

This would require factories. Yes, yes, in the end it will be a "fiat lux"-mechanism for the creation of the building materials. But a timer for the creation could be applied. Thus, the need for more factories is necessary.

Such factories could be again in the hand of player groups.
These need protection, yadda yadda yadda.


Finally, transportation of the building materials. I would say that for a small base the building materials needed should fill at least several fully loaded T9's. You want a large landing pad? Double that amount.
This becomes especially interesting, if a player wants a base in a remote system (e.g. Beagle Point).

So player lead transportation companies may become a meaningful activity.
These need protection, yadda yadda yadda.


So, we have now an actual reason for mining, trading, transportation and likely figthing. This opens up more possibilities for meaningful player activities. This may make open play more attractive, too.

However, I personally think that a single player should still be able to build a base all alone. That would require some "state" facilities. These state facilities however should neither be "clogged" by player groups nor be more (much) efficient than player group facilites. Maybe a game wide limit in the amount of building material production per month per unique player could solve that.

Also, contracts should be "official" and a break of said contract will lead to "hunting season" for the offender.
And you see, actually meaningful bounty hunting is now implemented, too.


I don't know how easy or difficult all of this is to implement. Maybe a lot of these things don't even need to be in-game. External bounty hunting boards may work with external "banks".

The point is, that player lead construction activity could lead to other interesting developments inside the game.

All of this should still be possible

Commanders, please discuss.
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
schlowi123 said:
It should take a single player several weeks of regular gaming to get a base.
Click to expand...
This, I think, will be one of the biggest balancing problems.

1 player = several weeks ... well, let's say 10 weeks at an average 4 hours a day, so rounded up about 300 hours. That's a lot, though there are things already in game which would take longer. [1]

An "average" squadron of about 10 players, putting in the same amount of time, could build one in a week.

A large squadron of about 100 players could get it done in a day.

A really large squadron (or on the biggest end, a multi-squadron coalition) with 500 (or more) players could put up several bases each day with effort, or be more relaxed about it and still do one a day.

No easy answers to that, of course.


[1] CQC Elite generally takes around 600 hours, for example.
 

Faded Glory

Faded Glory
The issue is surely not how long something takes, but how much fun the gameplay is.

Of course it would (and should) take one player longer to build a base than a squadron working together, but in the end, if the collection of materials and building of a base aren't fun, but merely an exercise in acquisition it starts to become like real life, not a game that we are using to escape reality. :)
 

Navigare Necesse Est

Navigare Necesse Est
Krash said:
Just like every other base in the game, indestructable. I would like to buy the starter base using credits, which comes with basic functionality, such as a landing pad, shipyard, etc. If a cmdr wants to add advanced functionality, let the resource gathering begin.
Click to expand...
What's the point? There are already thousands of bases to land. Thousands of unfinished and deserted ones surely won't improve the game in any way?
 

Vasco Sapien

Vasco Sapien
I really dont like the idea of Base building in ED. Its a mechanic that does not interest me in the slightest within this game.
But if the rumour is true, im curious to see how Frontier impliment it. If its a Farm this, build that, invite your mates over to look at it... No mans sky kinda deal... Then huge yawn from me.
 

Ian Doncaster

Ian Doncaster
Faded Glory said:
The issue is surely not how long something takes, but how much fun the gameplay is.
Click to expand...
It's difficult to separate the two, though.

An activity can be fun for an hour, or ten hours, or even longer if broken up between other actions ... while not staying fun for the 100th or 1000th hour.

I like doing the occasional trade CG, hauling cargo around, meeting other players doing the same thing, seeing how fast I can tune my supercruise approaches, trying to find unused markets, etc. It's all good fun ... but not something I'd do every week, and I wouldn't want to, for example, try repairing a damaged station on my own despite it basically being the same "haul cargo from A to B" gameplay underneath, because after six months of the same thing it would be getting pretty dull.
 

Stealthie

Stealthie
schlowi123 said:
I have seen some of the base building threads since april. But this one is different.
It shall not be discussed how awesome this would be, or the limitations on which planets to build, or what kind of bases to build, or what facilities these bases should have, or how to build the actual base in the end, or what to do if the player that owns the base is logged out etc. pp.

If that was discussed elsewhere, I apologize.

But I think that, if base building is included and certain small (?) modifications are made to some game mechanics I think that base building could become the reason for a lot of player created activity.

Let me elaborate on that.

First of all, an effort needs to be made to get a base of your own.
It should NOT be able to build a small (personal) base by going void opal mining for a day or doing the same mission twenty times.
It should take a single player several weeks of regular gaming to get a base. But then again, I'm using the vast majority of my time for exploration, so I'm used to "the grind". Thus some balancing for other types of players probably need to be made.

Secondly, base buidling should include raw material gathering (incl. water for your facilities).
A LOT of raw materials should be necessary to build a functional base.

Considering that vast amounts of raw materils are needed to build a base, this necessity could open an actual market for this stuff in the galaxy. Instead of going mining for yourself, you could just buy it. This would make the whole mining-thing meaningful and supply and demand logic dictates that suddenly player group mining conglomerates and single mining entrepeneurs may become meaningful, too.

This however would also require that we are able to pay with something different than the credits we have now.
The East India Company is doing this somewhat but their solution comes in the end also just down to exchanging credits.

If for example engineering materials could be exchanged (at player given exchange rates) that might be more interesting.
Another possibility would be exchanging (already engineered) modules. Just another market possibility just opened up.

Also: the problem of trusting the other party would open up the possibility for player lead "banks" and for player lead "protection groups".

Player 1 gives exchange currency to the bank and player 2 gives the needed raw material to the bank. The credentials of the bank are public. If the bank takes all of it, its "hunting season" for them. If the bank has a strong enough protection force it becomes a mafia and "meaningful" wars will be possible.

Also: since everybody wants to have a share of the cake, "transaction fees" lead to the reduction of the amount of the exchange currency in the market. Or more likely the accumulation of the same in the hands of a few with all the known consequences.

Yeah … all of that sounds awfully libertarian :( … I don't like myself for proposing it … but then, it is a game after all.


Thirdly, actual building materials need to be made from the raw materials.

This would require factories. Yes, yes, in the end it will be a "fiat lux"-mechanism for the creation of the building materials. But a timer for the creation could be applied. Thus, the need for more factories is necessary.

Such factories could be again in the hand of player groups.
These need protection, yadda yadda yadda.


Finally, transportation of the building materials. I would say that for a small base the building materials needed should fill at least several fully loaded T9's. You want a large landing pad? Double that amount.
This becomes especially interesting, if a player wants a base in a remote system (e.g. Beagle Point).

So player lead transportation companies may become a meaningful activity.
These need protection, yadda yadda yadda.


So, we have now an actual reason for mining, trading, transportation and likely figthing. This opens up more possibilities for meaningful player activities. This may make open play more attractive, too.

However, I personally think that a single player should still be able to build a base all alone. That would require some "state" facilities. These state facilities however should neither be "clogged" by player groups nor be more (much) efficient than player group facilites. Maybe a game wide limit in the amount of building material production per month per unique player could solve that.

Also, contracts should be "official" and a break of said contract will lead to "hunting season" for the offender.
And you see, actually meaningful bounty hunting is now implemented, too.


I don't know how easy or difficult all of this is to implement. Maybe a lot of these things don't even need to be in-game. External bounty hunting boards may work with external "banks".

The point is, that player lead construction activity could lead to other interesting developments inside the game.

All of this should still be possible

Commanders, please discuss.
Click to expand...

.... and then I remembered ED has a bunch of different modes, including Solo.
 

CMDR Big Mike

CMDR Big Mike
Not sure why a lot of people think that needing endless T9s worth of anything is fun gameplay. Nor do I see why heaps of mats would be needed.

I think engineering numbers are already inflated like a hot air balloon. I think base building could be a neat idea, but this game needs to cut back on the inflation.

For example the guardian stuff, what’s the difference between getting one epsilon data pack and 20??? Repeating the same location 6 times. They need to strive for more engaging, less mindlessly repetitive mechanics
 

CMDR Big Mike

CMDR Big Mike
I think that functionally, a basic base should have a hangar for ships, restock, refuel, and module storage. For obtaining add-ons/ other features, maybe give players the choice between gathering mats or dropping credits.

I also think that is you want to keep a base private, it will cost money. However, the option to add a market and selling ships/modules could add a revenue stream for the CMDR, or at least let them break even.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom