Guilds in Elite Dangerous

[medwyn]

Kicking players out?
And what's the problem with that? The ability to build up a guild and acheive some things together is up for everyone. Assuming that only a few guilds are "valid" choices and you loose anything when you are out is not a well implemented system I can imagine and it's not what anyone would willing to create here in ED.

The need of domination over each other is a human failure. Guilds - in my terms - are to offer a higher level of gameplay where cooperation and discipline/fun can bring extra rewards for doing them. In experience and in contents. There's nothing to do with personal domination.
If a leader kicks me out of a group I would not go back there again anyway. There are plenty of others willing to play together with me, I don't need anyone's "mercy" or whatever.

So let this player domination misconception go please. Everyone can find who he/she is willing to play with and for what reasons or by what conceptions, there's no mandatory way.
Even in this forum - if someone puts me on the ignores list because he/she doesn't want to listen to what I say, it's his/her absolute right to use all tools provided to avoid my comments. It doesn't prevent me to say what I would like to say.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Kicking players out?
And what's the problem with that? The ability to build up a guild and acheive some things together is up for everyone. Assuming that only a few guilds are "valid" choices and you loose anything when you are out is not a well implemented system I can imagine and it's not what anyone would willing to create here in ED.

The need of domination over each other is a human failure. Guilds - in my terms - are to offer a higher level of gameplay where cooperation and discipline/fun can bring extra rewards for doing them. In experience and in contents. There's nothing to do with personal domination.
If a leader kinck me out of a group I would not go back thereagain anyway. There are plenty of others willing to play together with me, I don't need anyone's "mercy" or whatever.

So let this player domination misconception go please. Everyone can find who he/she is willing to play with, there's no mandatory way.

My comments regarding the ability for a controlled membership system to be used to kick players for whatever reason was in response to "there's no way to control players in a Guild".

The need to dominate (someone else) is, indeed, a human failing - the anonymity of the internet / online games allows people who would normally never attempt it to do so secure in the knowledge that there are likely to be no repercussions (unless things go way too far, of course).

With the lack of Guild features, there are no in-game features that facilitate groups of players should they decide to try to dominate others.

Given that in the EGX 2014 Q&A DBOBE says that there are particular aspects of Guilds / Clans that he find unpalatable, it would seem that one of the Developers at least would seem to agree, to an extent at least, with those who oppose the introduction of Guild features.

 

[whipdiddywhip]

it'd be interesting to redo this thread with a fresh poll, i bet a lot more than 500 ppl would vote and i bet the results would be different too

 

[Seonid]

it'd be interesting to redo this thread with a fresh poll, i bet a lot more than 500 ppl would vote and i bet the results would be different too

Roughly 1100 individual posters in this thread that was started 2.5 years ago versus a potential player-base in excess of 640,000. Exactly what do you think would be different?

 

[[VR] Mad Mike]

it'd be interesting to redo this thread with a fresh poll, i bet a lot more than 500 ppl would vote and i bet the results would be different too

I agree it would be interesting..... but not necessarily compelling regardless of the result.

I am biased so of course I would feel this way, but I do not think elite being a niche title with sometimes different mechanics than some otherwise popular mechanics is a bad thing... which is why I almost always default back to the "stick with the kickstarter and the DDA" position.

ie imagine if there was a poll. should super cruise be ditched in favour of cut scenes to areas of interest, and the majority voted YES!!!! .... does that mean it should be done because the majority have spoken?

what about Yaw rates? hypthetically should they be altered just because another game which has gotten sacks of cash has a different view on Yaw therefore elite should change?

Like i said, I would be interested on a poll on this (though for it to mean anything it would need to be tied to players with game accounts - which i do not even think is possible on here.. after all this kind of thing only really means anything to those who actually bought the game surely?)

 

[SteveLaw]

Maybe it reduces the effectiveness of most guilds, but I really doubt it would in the case of something like Goonswarm or the Enclave.

There is no point to adding guild support in game if it does nothing to increase their effectiveness.

 

[mossfoot]

ie imagine if there was a poll. should super cruise be ditched in favour of cut scenes to areas of interest, and the majority voted YES!!!! .... does that mean it should be done because the majority have spoken?

what about Yaw rates? hypthetically should they be altered just because another game which has gotten sacks of cash has a different view on Yaw therefore elite should change?

Like i said, I would be interested on a poll on this (though for it to mean anything it would need to be tied to players with game accounts - which i do not even think is possible on here.. after all this kind of thing only really means anything to those who actually bought the game surely?)

Exactly - you determine development based on what the majority wants and you get something that is only a minor variation of something else existing. Its why so many FPSs have become Call of Duty clones.

Giving people what they say they want isn't always the way forward.

That's not the same as saying "don't look at what other games are doing" or "don't listen to what people are demanding." By all means they should listen, but they need the freedom to ignore them as well to... er... well... "blaze their own trail"

TV analogy - J Michael Straczynski often tells of how much the WB network interfered with Babylon 5 in its first season, with executives often handing him "little yellow post-it notes" with suggestions and ideas on what to do with the show. Eventually he had to get quite creative in trying to avoid said executives and notes.

But by the second season the notes were dropping off and JMS had more freedom to do things his own way, so the show got better and better from seasons 2 through 4. Season 5 of course was problematic, but that had to do with the fact that he didn't think he'd get a chance to do season 5 and needed to end things satisfactorily at 4. TNT picked up the show and even offered him a spin-off, Crusade.

And what came back with the switch to TNT? Little yellow post-it notes. This time with helpful ideas like "try to make it more like professional wrestling" and "can we have a character who is a sexual explorer?" - I kid you not on the broad strokes of those two "suggestions".

When you get write down to it, most of us here on the forums (myself included) are like those executives. Well intentioned, wanting to see what we think will work best, but we're not part of the Dev team or process. And it's for the best if we get the chance to let people know what we want, but never feel entitled to get our way.

 

[Ghostickles]

As someone who tours the Teamspeaks, who visits with the groups, who belongs to Mobius: Multiplayer participation appears very low, especially compared with a good many other AAA games. (Can we see the numbers, FD?) I would advise employing a strategy which would encourage more of it and build some solidarity among players with basic features beyond Power Play. Even if I am not playing I think it would help this game overall, and I am comfortable with the three modes being a good safety net from any bad stuff the 'EvE players' may do. I thought this a wonder safeguard from such things. Please stop listening to these others, as you did with CQC, and make decisions which will benefit the game. Thanx.

 

[Odys]

The carrot and stick shouldn't be about "stuff" anyway. Stuff is AN element of the game, but not THE element. You don't see Han Solo trying to upgrade to a bigger, badder ship. He got the ship he wanted, upgraded it to the ship he loved, and is still using it 30 years later.

It's not what you have, it's what you do. So the focus needs to be on the devs giving us more to do, not acquiring more stuff.

You know, I really agree with you there.

I wanted this game to give me a chance to feel like Han Solo in the Millennium Falcon or Star-Lord in the Milano. So I would love it if picking a ship was a matter of aesthetic and preference, with more modular options.

I wanted a Cobra, I liked the cobras. But I need a 5million credit FSD or power plant and found myself needing money. The fastest way of getting that was trading, but I could barely fit my rares in my Cobra and quickly upgraded to an Asp so I had more cargo room.

I would love it if the game allowed me even more modular approaches to my ship than 1.3 started. I would probably keep my Asp as that cockpit offers me the most viewing angle of my surroundings.

+1 mossfoot

As for the guilds, I am starting to see how bad it would be IF a guild made a HQ in one of my favorite trade routes and killed me on site unless I joined them. I would hate that. I would hope that other guilds would come to the battlefield to keep a Hostile HQ like that from taking hold. It might be crap when they succeed, but it could be pretty dang fun getting rid of them in a United effort.

Faction GALNET news would make that possible. Community Goals driven to rid a sector of a hostile guild's power play would be fun.

At least if I joined a faction to get rid of a hostile faction, I could still travel to my favorite trade routes without being hostile in areas I was previously welcomed as "Respected Ally". Frustrating to be simultaneously Respected Ally and Hostile...

 

[Roybe]

I understand your point. However, I don't expect that most of the opposition to Guilds stems from the fact that membership control allows players to be kicked.

Most of the opposition occurs because the community does not trust FDev to maintain the 'no one can control anything' doctrine...something hard coded into the game, that cannot be changed.

So until people learn to trust FDev, this thread, and the Open Vs. thread will thrive as people continue to beat down the imagined forest fires these discussions 'must' create.

 

[Ghostickles]

Instead of 'Guilds' why not create 'Fleets', these could be an adequate replacement that do not imply granting ownership of things or anything more than 'a group of ships'? The more I think of this (_Flin_ said Squadron, brilliant) the more it seems a good way to be able to provide good matchmaking preference and build that solidarity social players enjoy without bringing up the 'own stations or systems' problem.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Instead of 'Guilds' why not create 'Fleets', these could be an adequate replacement that do not imply granting ownership of things or anything more than 'a group of ships'?

Aren't they Wings?

 

[Ghostickles]

Aren't they Wings?

Too small! Fleets would be comprised of wings, like a real space ship sci fi.

 

[Dave1235]

Instead of 'Guilds' why not create 'Fleets', these could be an adequate replacement that do not imply granting ownership of things or anything more than 'a group of ships'?

Glad you have changed your mind a bit, I have 4 ships (a small fleet) so no change needed here then.

 

[Ghostickles]

Glad you have changed your mind a bit, I have 4 ships (a small fleet) so no change needed here then.

Yeah, lets just miss the mark completely. Why are all these Solo players up on this topic?

 

[Dave1235]

Lol. Got any stats to back up the solo player comment? No? Then my memory is better than your guesses. I have even posted in the solo/open/groups thread a few weekends over the last month when I have been visiting diso and happy to share some rares.

Ps its an open forum for players to discuss things, why would I not comment. Fd have stated several times that they are not going to support guilds, I am just here stating my support for DBOBE's comments.

 

[Ghostickles]

Lol. Got any stats to back up the solo player comment? No? Then my memory is better than your guesses. I have even posted in the solo/open/groups thread a few weekends over the last month when I have been visiting diso and happy to share some rares.
Ps its an open forum for players to discuss things, why would I not comment. Fd have stated several times that they are not going to support guilds, I am just here stating my support for DBOBE's comments.

You should re read the thread, last I read from Braben was 'its not in the cards, at least not for the foreseeable future' which doesn't mean not.
Several of the posters to this thread admit elsewhere they play solo and while I certainly welcome discussion your post inferred dismissal of the topic, so its not really worth discourse with you beyond this, imo.

EDIT: Meanwhile, in other parts of the forum:

wouldn't say no to a group ship logo

 

[Cmdr Drex]

TESTED has 1400 members in our guild (recently renamed Interstellar United), and yet our teamspeak is a ghost town, Every update just alienates us more and more, I think there would be more people on if instancing alone worked, yet we are forced to fly around singularly until we see a wing, then group up our wing to fight or even see another wing.

The way this game plays atm is SOLO with friends. A multiplayer game SHOULD NOT be this way, this game has huge multiplayer potential but it hasn't really grasped that yet. The new combat addon that is coming with the xbox launch, is the right direction, I think Frontier is finally getting it. This game needs to be more dynamic, its too static right now.

Either change or rename this game "Elite: Grind" because that is what it is atm. (and no fighting NPC's has wore off on me and is no longer fun - been playing for almost a year and own every ship. Allied with all 3 factions, was at there top tiers (until they added more recently)), so I have played loong enough. They need to support the groups or all this "multiplayer" code work in this game is just worthless.

 

[Asp Explorer]

Other players don't have the same instancing problems. Put your PC into the DMZ and see if that helps you see more players.

 

[Ghostickles]

Other players don't have the same instancing problems. Put your PC into the DMZ and see if that helps you see more players.

Yes they do, there are two threads about it on page #1 right now, remember the one we both just posted to just a short while ago. .... You should not be required to DMZ a router to play a game in this day and age, besides wouldn't that be cause for potential security issues?
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=163186