Guilds in Elite Dangerous

[Robert Maynard]

Which is like giving those who'd like to play in a guild the middle finger, considering people have been asking for the feature (295 pages didn't write themselves because nobody wants guilds).

When something is requested or asked for over and over again, usually the message any sensible developer should take away is, that there is a desire for the feature. It doesn't matter if the feature is controversial. In that case, they have to find a solution with which both sides of the argument can live.

Yet, Frontier's stubborn stance on guilds is definitely not a classy treatment of the issue and is foremost among the very few points where I'm decidedly unimpressed by them.

It very much depends on whether the frequently requested thing fits in with the developer's vision of the game though. We could demand rainbow lasers and neon smoke trails for our ships 24/7 - I doubt that Frontier would acquiesce. As well as that, the game design was published over two and a half years ago - to introduce Guilds now would be quite a change - and possibly not a pleasant one for a significant proportion of those who have already bought the game. Another thing to consider is that, regardless of polls here on Frontier's official game forums or elsewhere, there is no poll data that is guaranteed to have only been voted on by players of the game - this forum certainly does not link game ownership with forum membership - so, no-one knows how many players would actually want Guilds to be introduced in to the game - the poll that started today will also suffer from the same ambiguity of result validity, regardless of which way it goes.

An argument could be made that all those "anti-guild" people may complain, but they will not have their enjoyment of the game lessened if guild features are released. I've seen some pretty outlandish scenarios floating around ("all high-profit trade routes will be camped by griefers!"), but realistically it won't make much difference to an independent pilot. At the same time time, not having those features *does* lessen the enjoyment of the game of those who are in player groups.

The way to guarantee that "anti-guild" people would not have their enjoyment of the game lessened if Guilds were ever to be implemented would be to introduce a new Open-Guild mode setting on the matchmaking server and restrict Guild features to this mode - that way any player who wanted to be affected by Guilds would choose to do so on a session-by-session basis. I would expect that adding another game mode setting to the matchmaking server would be trivial in comparison to designing, developing, testing and deploying Guild features.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

Guilds only effect games where they mishandled pvp. Guilds are not the problem. Not handling pvpers is the problem.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Guilds only effect games where they mishandled pvp. Guilds are not the problem. Not handling papers is the problem.

There is no way of controlling PvP that is not "gamey", in my opinion.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

Pvp flag. Call it advanced ecm. You have to deal with the pvp problem. Not allowing guilds does not solve this problem. Dealing with scumbag pvpers is what needs to happen. I don't play open anymore because I don't appreciate dealing with jerks whose goal is to just kill players.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Pv flag. Call it advanced ecm. You have to deal with the pvp problem. Not allowing guilds does not solve thisnproblem. Dealing with scumbag pvpers is what needs to happen.

Answered in the new Guild poll thread - at no time has Frontier proposed a PvP flag - it came up in general design discussion early on in the DDF though and was rejected as too gamey.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

And now have people leaving open play because they are not dealing with the pvp problem. That is ALWAYS a problem in every game that has it. Because some people are just horrid. The problem is not guilds and has never been guilds. Every single complaint about guilds is about pvp jerks. Not allowing guilds does not prevent these jerks. Did not allowing guilds prevent the Code? No it did not. Groups can use team speak or ventrilo to do all they need.

 

[Mohrgan]

And out now have people leaving open play because they are not dealing with the pvp problem. That is ALWAYS a problem in every game that has it. Because some people are just horrid.

The obvious answer to your dilemma is Private Groups. You can avoid PvP, and still fly with others. I think that was fixed rather elegantly.

 

[Taimaru]

Unless there was a way to guarantee people would not have their enjoyment of the game reduced if Guilds were implemented, I would stop playing Elite: Dangerous if Frontier introduced Guilds - simple as that.

Robert Maynard's solution - Open-Guild mode - looks like a simple and effective solution. +1 Rep.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

No it was not fixed. Unless you consider everyone playing in group mode and Noone playing in open is a solution. And that still does not deal with the fact we really need guild tools so those who want to play with other people can communicate better. Guild tools do not cause groups like the code. Bad pvp implementation does.

- - - Updated - - -

Your enjoyment is not reduced by guilds. Your enjoyment is reduced by bad pvp implementation

 

[Robert Maynard]

No it was not fixed. Unless you consider everyone playing in group mode and Noone playing in open is a solution. And that still does not deal with the fact we really need guild tools so those who want to play with other people can communicate better. Guild tools do not cause groups like the code. Bad pvp implementation does.

- - - Updated - - -

Your enjoyment is not reduced by guilds. Your enjoyment is reduced by bad pvp implementation

We accept the PvP implementation that we have - it is gradually approaching something more akin to the DDF in terms of consequences for actions.

With respect to Guilds, from what I have heard from DBOBE (EGX 2014 Q&A - watch his facial expression when the question is asked and compare it to his animation when discussing the previous question) and read recently that has been attributed to him (E3 interview with Arstechnica), I would not expect anything soon, if at all.

 

[Mohrgan]

No it was not fixed. Unless you consider everyone playing in group mode and Noone playing in open is a solution. And that still does not deal with the fact we really need guild tools so those who want to play with other people can communicate better. Guild tools do not cause groups like the code. Bad pvp implementation does.

- - - Updated - - -

Your enjoyment is not reduced by guilds. Your enjoyment is reduced by bad pvp implementation

Oh, ok. I'm glad you cleared that up. But, seriously..... I see FD's design as good or better than a flag. Not only can I decide if I want PvP, I can also decide whom I play with. FD has delivered total flexibility. What could be better?

People use mechanics to there own purposes. Guilds can, and often do, create problems when released into the wild. That has been a given since very early in Elites' development. That continues to be part of FD's stance. FD had hinted at some feature intended to help player groups along. Let's see what they deliver, and go from there.

Isolating guilds from the general population seems to be an acceptable compromise. If somehow Elite has to have guilds, let it be done that way.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

Guilds are not what cause the problem. Bad pvp implementation causes the problem. Every complaint I hear about guilds boils down to a bunch of pvpers group up and are jerks to people someplace. The guild portion is not the problem. The pvper portion is the problem. If they weren't going around killing people you wouldn't care. So rather than nix guild deal with the actual problem. Which is the pvper being a jerk to everyone ruining other people's enjoyment.

Hell you have groups like the code doing exactly what I see the complaint about guilds. And there are no "guilds"

 

[Mohrgan]

Guilds are not what cause the problem. Bad pvp implementation causes the problem. Every complaint I hear about guilds boils down to a bunch of pvpers group up and are jerks to people someplace. The guild portion is not the problem. The pvper portion is the problem. If they weren't going around killing people you wouldn't care. So rather than nix guild deal with the actual problem. Which is the pvper being a jerk to everyone ruining other people's enjoyment.

You've said that before, and I still see things differently. Isolate guilds from the general population, and I could relent, some, in some of my views.

 

[Cmdr Corran Antilles]

S tell me what exactly is your complaint about guilds and tell me how I am wrong.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Guilds are not what cause the problem. Bad pvp implementation causes the problem. Every complaint I hear about guilds boils down to a bunch of pvpers group up and are jerks to people someplace. The guild portion is not the problem. The pvper portion is the problem. If they weren't going around killing people you wouldn't care. So rather than nix guild deal with the actual problem. Which is the pvper being a jerk to everyone ruining other people's enjoyment.

Hell you have groups like the code doing exactly what I see the complaint about guilds. And there are no "guilds"

Other than a rather gamey PvP-flag, how would you suggest PvP is dealt with? Also, "fixing" PvP does not mean that Guilds are a good idea.

 

[Robert Maynard]

This thread has been closed in favour of this thread on the same topic which has a new poll!