Plus 1
Guilds in Elite Dangerous
- Thread starter JohnStabler
- Start date
- Status
Plus 2 for good measure!
Exactly, and Elite has always been about the individual being the boss. Can't dock in a system because you're not a member of a particular guild? I don't think so. I paid money for this game, and I want to play it how I damn well like.
So that's a big "NO!" from me ... obviously
I Votet no, because guilds quite soon may become a force factor that can controll the hole game.
But I would like to see game mechanics that would allow to build up small gangs (about 5 ships and up to 10 Players) to play togather.
That would be big fun especially for
Traders with escorts
Pirate gangs
Bountyhunters
But wee will see in wich diretion ths game is going in th gamma phase.
But I would like to see game mechanics that would allow to build up small gangs (about 5 ships and up to 10 Players) to play togather.
That would be big fun especially for
Traders with escorts
Pirate gangs
Bountyhunters
But wee will see in wich diretion ths game is going in th gamma phase.
People who role play are weird... and I mean those that seem to have a third person monologue going on when they play. Or the people who "get married" ingame.... only to find out the person whose supposed to be the chick is actually a dude (SURPRISE *sarcasm*).
I once got to the point in a game when anytime I seen the word "desu" in region chat I'd just quit immediately and go outside and watch the grass grow...
I once got to the point in a game when anytime I seen the word "desu" in region chat I'd just quit immediately and go outside and watch the grass grow...
IMHO Traditional Guild mechanics are de-stabilising to the overall game as they allow several key concepts to be side-lined or negated. Hence, I think the reason we have Groups and Wings/Alliances, which give the social benefits and some of the grouping benefits but avoid some of the "gameplay" negative aspects.
ED Implementation:
Friends
Grouping
Wings/Alliances
You get the social aspects of multiplayer. The ability to call on likeminded friends for aid and assistance, the ability to achieve things together or just hang out and vegetate if that’s your desire.
Traditional Guild mechanics:
Guild Rosters.
Guild/Clan Tags.
Guild Shared Assets/Bank/Hanger
.
Then the “Slippery Slope” argument, which is only a fallacy as long as it hasn’t come to pass yet, of “Guild Content.” As much a prediction as a fallacy for some.
Guild Rosters,
A list of people you may/or may not be able to interact with depending on the vagaries of your, and their Internet connection. It has the benefit for you as an individual in allowing you to call for assistance from a wider field of acquaintances, than if you were to be restricted to actual friends.
This removes several gameplay mechanics, hiring bounty hunters, hiring wingmen, and allows others easier stuffing of instances to lock out potential adversaries etc….
Grouping may well enable the same to a lesser degree, however with grouping you have to at least know the person you call on, to know you can group and instance together, not just grab a random name from a supplementary “not-real” friends list.
Guild Clan/Tags – The whole reputation mechanic is debased when dealing with other players. In effect by wearing a guild tag your individual “combat rep” is immaterial as an adversary is not fighting you he is potentially fighting your guild. You may be the worst pilot in the galaxy, but your advertised affiliation may become the deciding factor.
In general, unless both sides are in guilds, which give them some form of support, the Tag alone may become a constraining factor to gameplay.
Likewise Pirate rep/Trader rep/Elite Rep etc. All are diminished and potentially subservient to the Guild Rep. It allows the Rep-less to inherit the reputation of those who made it, those who haven’t earned status to be granted it at the touch of a button.
The pooling of assets allows the risk/reward balance to be diminished and depending on the size of the pool almost negated. One lost ship is nothing when the cost of losing it is shared amongst a thousand, likewise the chances of all 1000 players suffering a catastrophic loss at the same time is greatly diminished.
As well as encouraging the growth of larger and larger mega-guilds to minimize overall risk it allows for greater profit to be made and potential trading losses to be reduced. Obvious example – trader in a guild discovers a lucrative opportunity, but lacks the cash resources to maximize the return, just call on the guild bank and “poof” – instant millionaire, instant maximum profit.
In case you haven’t guessed, I’m pretty much against traditional guilds. The way I see it, overall, the benefit for the game and the players playing it is diminished, just to make life easier and reduce risk for a few. The only way to compete becomes to join in the rat run, and then the only sure winner is the one with the biggest guild in a game that isn’t, to my view, intended to be guild wars but “You, your ship, and a few mates against the Galaxy.”
I much prefer the more personal Group/Wing concept but will reserve final judgment until I’ve seen it in action.
ED Implementation:
Friends
Grouping
Wings/Alliances
You get the social aspects of multiplayer. The ability to call on likeminded friends for aid and assistance, the ability to achieve things together or just hang out and vegetate if that’s your desire.
Traditional Guild mechanics:
Guild Rosters.
Guild/Clan Tags.
Guild Shared Assets/Bank/Hanger
.
Then the “Slippery Slope” argument, which is only a fallacy as long as it hasn’t come to pass yet, of “Guild Content.” As much a prediction as a fallacy for some.
Guild Rosters,
A list of people you may/or may not be able to interact with depending on the vagaries of your, and their Internet connection. It has the benefit for you as an individual in allowing you to call for assistance from a wider field of acquaintances, than if you were to be restricted to actual friends.
This removes several gameplay mechanics, hiring bounty hunters, hiring wingmen, and allows others easier stuffing of instances to lock out potential adversaries etc….
Grouping may well enable the same to a lesser degree, however with grouping you have to at least know the person you call on, to know you can group and instance together, not just grab a random name from a supplementary “not-real” friends list.
Guild Clan/Tags – The whole reputation mechanic is debased when dealing with other players. In effect by wearing a guild tag your individual “combat rep” is immaterial as an adversary is not fighting you he is potentially fighting your guild. You may be the worst pilot in the galaxy, but your advertised affiliation may become the deciding factor.
In general, unless both sides are in guilds, which give them some form of support, the Tag alone may become a constraining factor to gameplay.
Likewise Pirate rep/Trader rep/Elite Rep etc. All are diminished and potentially subservient to the Guild Rep. It allows the Rep-less to inherit the reputation of those who made it, those who haven’t earned status to be granted it at the touch of a button.
The pooling of assets allows the risk/reward balance to be diminished and depending on the size of the pool almost negated. One lost ship is nothing when the cost of losing it is shared amongst a thousand, likewise the chances of all 1000 players suffering a catastrophic loss at the same time is greatly diminished.
As well as encouraging the growth of larger and larger mega-guilds to minimize overall risk it allows for greater profit to be made and potential trading losses to be reduced. Obvious example – trader in a guild discovers a lucrative opportunity, but lacks the cash resources to maximize the return, just call on the guild bank and “poof” – instant millionaire, instant maximum profit.
In case you haven’t guessed, I’m pretty much against traditional guilds. The way I see it, overall, the benefit for the game and the players playing it is diminished, just to make life easier and reduce risk for a few. The only way to compete becomes to join in the rat run, and then the only sure winner is the one with the biggest guild in a game that isn’t, to my view, intended to be guild wars but “You, your ship, and a few mates against the Galaxy.”
I much prefer the more personal Group/Wing concept but will reserve final judgment until I’ve seen it in action.
That is already happening when the Beta comes in on July 29 with groups and alliances. So far noone has an answer for why we "need" guilds to make the game "better". The only thing they give us is noise about "so many people want it that FD will have to put it in" (the poll results say very different, and why would FD "have" to change to suit what one group of players wants?).
I'm not personally going to take advantage of any guild features, I'll play my own game. However I think they would give an interesting dynamic to the world. I'm against guild specific content but I do think that being a part of a guild could bring it's own advantages and disadvantages. It would be fascinating to move into new solar systems and find them controlled by in the main by certain guilds. The only thing is, as Elite's online is managed by instances doesn't it mean that guilds could set-up shop in a solar system however if I travel to that system I may actually never see them? I find that to be a little disappointing.
Instancing and the grouping mechanics ensure that PC's can never control any part of the galaxy, there's no point anyway the play area is too large for Territorial Domination type games, so again the need for Guilds to control territory does not exist.
Mechanics that promote co-operation and communication are very welcome.
Mechanics that promote 1up-manship, control, hierarchies and general thuggery are not.
I have failed to play a single modern multiplayer game so far with guilds that didn't totally bias the game towards them. Forget playing casually by yourself or a friend. Or even less casually, the fact remains at some point you hit the glass ceiling that you can only break through by being in a guild.
No thanks. I want a game, I want to have some fun and I don't want other players deciding for me what is or isn't fun to do. That's not to say I want to play offline solo, I don't... Ii like multiplayer, I just like EVERYONE playing to the same rules, defined by developers.
Elite is for me he first game to be looking at a proper co-op system, where you and a few friends can help each other to achieve tasks as defined by the game. Thank you... Because it's something everyone I know wanted of sequels to Skyrim and they got the monstrosity that is ESO.
If you want to socialise on own forums and chat programs outside of the game, then go for it. All for people gathering around common likes etc... But no to enforcement in game, no to game mechanics pandering to guild content and 'difficulty levels'. I am sure some people have positive guild experiences, but for every nice small, social guild there are a plethora of the other kind and frankly they have no place IMO in this game.
Mechanics that promote 1up-manship, control, hierarchies and general thuggery are not.
I have failed to play a single modern multiplayer game so far with guilds that didn't totally bias the game towards them. Forget playing casually by yourself or a friend. Or even less casually, the fact remains at some point you hit the glass ceiling that you can only break through by being in a guild.
No thanks. I want a game, I want to have some fun and I don't want other players deciding for me what is or isn't fun to do. That's not to say I want to play offline solo, I don't... Ii like multiplayer, I just like EVERYONE playing to the same rules, defined by developers.
Elite is for me he first game to be looking at a proper co-op system, where you and a few friends can help each other to achieve tasks as defined by the game. Thank you... Because it's something everyone I know wanted of sequels to Skyrim and they got the monstrosity that is ESO.
If you want to socialise on own forums and chat programs outside of the game, then go for it. All for people gathering around common likes etc... But no to enforcement in game, no to game mechanics pandering to guild content and 'difficulty levels'. I am sure some people have positive guild experiences, but for every nice small, social guild there are a plethora of the other kind and frankly they have no place IMO in this game.
Well said
I think quite a lot of people are tired of your bleating when they don't agree with your point of view. FD have pretty much stated what ED will and will not be, as far as I can see many have just re-iterated that statement - it is FDs intellectual property after all.
My bolding
In mmo's, the leaders of the most powerful guilds are mostly people who spent a insane amount of money on the game just to be powerful. And they have "wars" between each other which have no use.
I really hope Elite: Dangerous does not do guilds and microtransactions. Then multiplayer would be ruined.
I really hope Elite: Dangerous does not do guilds and microtransactions. Then multiplayer would be ruined.
It would be just moronic not to allow corporations since you can make one out of the game with free tools like a forum and a ts channel and be even more dangerous for the general gameplay since in the game those guys will never be labeled nor recognized as a group.
Are those thinking ED won't allow corporations and alliances REALLY believing that? Where the heck have you been living so far??
Are those thinking ED won't allow corporations and alliances REALLY believing that? Where the heck have you been living so far??
It would be just moronic not to allow corporations since you can make one out of the game with free tools like a forum and a ts channel and be even more dangerous for the general gameplay since in the game those guys will never be labeled nor recognized as a group.
Are those thinking ED won't allow corporations and alliances REALLY believing that? Where the heck have you been living so far??
From the Elite FAQ:
http://elite-dangerous.wikia.com/wiki/Elite:_Dangerous_FAQ
"Will I be able to build an empire and own space stations and fleets?
You will be able to own small inflatable asteroid stations as depicted here as part of an update, but you won't be able to own large sations, build empires or own fleets, since that would change the nature of the game. For example, why would you pilot space ships yourself, when the most efficient way to make money and progress in a game is to sit back in an office and hand out commands?
It's also problematic from a lore and immersion standpoint, since the game is simulating realistic societies, social structures and time scales, so building an empire would involve a lot of resources and politics that only big nations can afford and would stretch over months or years, even building a large space station can take a month or more. So as an Elite federation pilot, you will only be able to aid in building empires and large space stations, by taking missions to transport resources and defend them etc, but you are too low on the social ladder (not important enough) to be able to command or own these kind of things. "
So, in light of that. Where have YOU been living?
I was busy learning to read, you should repeat that class prolly, since this
is not exactly the same as this: will I be able to form a corporation with my mates in game?
Just slightly different <3
Also please find me an MMO where a single player is able to build an empire and own a station. Mind you, key words are: SINGLE PLAYER and MMO
is not exactly the same as this: will I be able to form a corporation with my mates in game?
Just slightly different <3
Also please find me an MMO where a single player is able to build an empire and own a station. Mind you, key words are: SINGLE PLAYER and MMO
It would be just moronic not to allow corporations since you can make one out of the game with free tools like a forum and a ts channel and be even more dangerous for the general gameplay since in the game those guys will never be labeled nor recognized as a group.
Are those thinking ED won't allow corporations and alliances REALLY believing that? Where the heck have you been living so far??
I really don't see why you and the few other apologists keep demanding guilds etc and stating for a fact that they "will happen" or some dire threat will emerge, when you are going against everything that THE PEOPLE WRITING THE GAME have said will happen. No, you're not going to be able to force them to make this the same as some other MMO just coz you want it that way. No it doesn't matter how many people in a poll say they want guilds (even though both the current polls on the subject are 2:1 AGAINST guilds).
Sure you can get together on a website, chat on a private chat utility etc... you can even call yourself a guild if you like... but with max 32 people per instance, groups, alliances, and ignore lists it aint gonna matter. If the rest of us don't like the way you play your game you're gonna find the universe to be a very lonely place, and eventually FD will put a stop to it if you try to break their game. Hold your breath till you turn blue and stamp your little feet all you like - it just don't matter and it aint gonna change.
Why don't you try playing David Braben's game, instead of trying to force him to make another EvE? You might just like it if you give it a chance.
To be honest, after reading through all the pages, I'm still confused what exactly people that want guilds actually want (that won't be part of alliances or friend lists).
That said, I feel like it is not exactly place for guilds/corps/whatever. There isn't any motivation for guilds - player owned stations, conquering system for ownership, player capital ships. And for social guilds, why won't friend list/alliance be enough? Do people really need /g chat filled with hundreds of people (whom 99% of them are quiet)? If it it just about that, wouldn't chat channel with only all friends solve it?
Frankly, I like and appreciate elite for where it is heading. The randomness and not necessity for others is welcomed, same as the option to play with friends if I choose so.
edit - To expand a bit; I am more excited about the possible "spur of the moment" alliances, rather then organized guilds. I wouldn't be looking forward to play as a specific way, whether it being smuggler or bounty hunter and thus being KoS for several guilds that have the opposite moral stand. But a possibility of making a new friend for helping out or taking a leap of faith and momentarily team up with someone to overcome an obstacle, even with the chance that they would stab you in the back, makes the "one pilot" thing an refreshing way to play.
That said, I feel like it is not exactly place for guilds/corps/whatever. There isn't any motivation for guilds - player owned stations, conquering system for ownership, player capital ships. And for social guilds, why won't friend list/alliance be enough? Do people really need /g chat filled with hundreds of people (whom 99% of them are quiet)? If it it just about that, wouldn't chat channel with only all friends solve it?
Frankly, I like and appreciate elite for where it is heading. The randomness and not necessity for others is welcomed, same as the option to play with friends if I choose so.
edit - To expand a bit; I am more excited about the possible "spur of the moment" alliances, rather then organized guilds. I wouldn't be looking forward to play as a specific way, whether it being smuggler or bounty hunter and thus being KoS for several guilds that have the opposite moral stand. But a possibility of making a new friend for helping out or taking a leap of faith and momentarily team up with someone to overcome an obstacle, even with the chance that they would stab you in the back, makes the "one pilot" thing an refreshing way to play.
Last edited:
- Status