How could player-owned outposts / bases work?

[Dharrch Streynjer]

So...no Bob Marley memorial station anytime soon...because...whatever Im too tired with this constant bickering to argue anymore.

Im seeing a lotta disagreement based on nothing more than the opinion it could be used for nefarious means, even when its been made clear its really just a personal item. Give it another page sand someone else puts out the "no death stars" ballix as well which is just hilarious really considering nobody is asking fer one.

Anyway, I give up...the naysayers win the internet today ^

Nice one Vms. But no!
Nobody wins just yet LoL
As far as I'm concerned, the more we debate this the more likely the Devs wil take notice, and then maybe, just maybe, they may spot an idea that strikes a chord and go away and get it all wrong again. [haha]

o7

 

[Dharrch Streynjer]

Sorry, I'm going a little off topic here...

I primarily go exploring in a fully combat loaded Vulture, military hull, the works. I've visited dozens of real world nebulae in it in the game, the latest being the Skull and Crossbones Nebula some 15K LY or so out toward the rim. If you're not trying to race somewhere or reach the most difficult ends of the galaxy, a jump range of about 20LY or so is sufficient for efficient basic exploration. Sometimes I'm out for months at a time and I've never had the need to bother with AFMUs and the like. I'd say I enjoy the challenge, but there isn't much of one in terms of survivability. What motivates me is finding new cool looking systems and seeing real world celestial phenomena up close and personal, and of course traveling the vastness of the cosmos, even if it is through the filter of playing a video game.

I'm not going to tell people what exploration is for them though; the above statement about efficiency is regarding potential systems scanned per time, fuel scooping efficiency, supercruise and above world handling, and similar. So, it's from a game mechanics context.

I hear you but my Asp-X is capable of 120lyr jumps with mat powered jumponium and I still have trouble reaching the ends of the exposed galaxy... Longer jumps require Neutron stars which are really only common in the bubble.
With just a 20lyr jump I wouldn't get to where I want to go at all. Even with jumponium. Where is that you might well ask? It would, for preference, be where nobody else could go. Failing that. It's as far as I can.
Kudos to you for being able to stay out months without much damage, but I suppose the awsome hull & shields on a Vulture helps a lot with that. I do wonder though. How do you manage to scan all the planets in a large system without losing integrity since I only get a couple of weeks worth of supercruising before I lose sufficient integrity to require a trip back to civilisation?

o7

 

[lenna]

I suppose the awsome hull & shields on a Vulture helps a lot with that.

Hardly, the Vulture has higher shields but less hull. Shields only come into consideration during high G landings really, even then it is dependent on the ship as to what level is needed to avoid landing hull damage.

How do you manage to scan all the planets in a large system without losing integrity since I only get a couple of weeks worth of supercruising before I lose sufficient integrity to require a trip back to civilisation?

If you supercruise at max chat all the time then you will lose integrity, keep the throttle in the blue marked area of the HUD throttle status display and integrity loss should be minimal to non-existent. There is no avoiding all integrity loss but you can minimise the damage through appropriate throttle control.

I have a mostly A-Spec (Bi-weave shields + Military Grade Hull + A-Spec everything else) Asp Explorer myself and I do not find integrity loss an issue during exploration unless I do something really stupid.

 

[Crank Larson]

Ionger jumps require Neutron stars which are really only common in the bubble.

Eh? Neutron stars are positively rare near and in the bubble. But there are massive neutron fields around 1000Ly above and below the galactic plane starting around 5000Ly outside the bubble (I think - though depending upon your route, you can actually find a fair few en-route to the fields). Once in the neutron fields, you can jump from neutron to neutron pretty much to the other side of the galaxy.

All you need to take with you is an AFMU.

 

[Dharrch Streynjer]

Hardly, the Vulture has higher shields but less hull. Shields only come into consideration during high G landings really, even then it is dependent on the ship as to what level is needed to avoid landing hull damage.

If you supercruise at max chat all the time then you will lose integrity, keep the throttle in the blue marked area of the HUD throttle status display and integrity loss should be minimal to non-existent. There is no avoiding all integrity loss but you can minimise the damage through appropriate throttle control.

I have a mostly A-Spec (Bi-weave shields + Military Grade Hull + A-Spec everything else) Asp Explorer myself and I do not find integrity loss an issue during exploration unless I do something really stupid.

Aha. It's the something really stupid shields I need to add to my ship then :¬)

Seriouosly though, thanks for the advice. i hadn't realised that I need to slow it down a bit. Not something I do as a general rule.

 

[Dharrch Streynjer]

Eh? Neutron stars are positively rare near and in the bubble. But there are massive neutron fields around 1000Ly above and below the galactic plane starting around 5000Ly outside the bubble (I think - though depending upon your route, you can actually find a fair few en-route to the fields). Once in the neutron fields, you can jump from neutron to neutron pretty much to the other side of the galaxy.

All you need to take with you is an AFMU.

I may have gotten confused with Earth Like planets there. Even so. If you're out in the unexplored regions I doubt you can rely on finding neutron stars when you need one.

o7

 

[verminstar]

Aha. It's the something really stupid shields I need to add to my ship then :¬)

Seriouosly though, thanks for the advice. i hadn't realised that I need to slow it down a bit. Not something I do as a general rule.

In terms of weight, military grade bulkheads are heavy and kill range but they do allow one to stay out much longer. Its SC itself that wears the hull down over time more than anything else, and I say this as an OCD scanning type who spends probably 95% of my time in sc while running no sheild at all. Its only real function is fer high G planets so its a non essential item thats deactivated both to allow one to run a small power plant, and to run cold to make swoop and scoop faster, and start FSD while still scooping.

As much as I hate agreeing with rlsg right now, he/she is right on the money. And its been nearly 5 months since I saw the inside of a station with 98% hull left and I dont use heatsinks because one cannot synth new ammo fer them and they become dead weight. Fer farming neutrons though, one would always use heatsinks...one is not totally dumb ^

 

[Avetorian]

Can't rep you again, so have some kudos instead.

Overall, you have kind of reinforced the points I have been making - there is no justifiable need for having player owned bases (even temporary ones) and developmental efforts around enhancing gameplay should be focused around our ships and their on-board facilities.

Correction, There is no justifiable need for YOU. Other explorers have described how having a small deployable outpost would benefit them on their travels way outside the bubble. We define our own needs and desires in whatever virtual realm we exist in, Just because you don't need it, and other people here don't does not mean we shouldn't have it.

The arguments that go against player owned bases are . This is a 1-1 scale virtual world, that means earth is the size of earth, it would take you, the same time to travel around the world in the game as it would in real life flying at the same speed as an RL aircraft, that is just one world, there is billions of worlds and billions of star systems. There is enough room for every single person to have a base, and still not even leave a noticeable mark on the galaxy.

The people who have expressed things like player owned bases and such, have for the most part expressed this in the fact they want to do all of their operations away from the bubble, having a resting spot and maybe living out where they are for the long term. OP Forget the naysayers It was already expressed back in 2014 during a presentation by David Braben that we would in fact at some point be getting player deploy able outposts.

What I will say though is that before we get player bases, we need gameplay to warrant them, like more things to find out there, basic atmospheric landing like ammonia based worlds, ice/volcanic, worlds with atmosphere but very little in life. We'd need stuff to be on the worlds to find, to warrant an extended stay which might warrant and base, which might enhance your ship gameplay in deciding how you want to approach this what vessel you'd want a packaged outpost on that will have the tools necessary to conduct your exploration and research your findings.

 

[WR3ND]

I hear you but my Asp-X is capable of 120lyr jumps with mat powered jumponium and I still have trouble reaching the ends of the exposed galaxy... Longer jumps require Neutron stars which are really only common in the bubble.
With just a 20lyr jump I wouldn't get to where I want to go at all. Even with jumponium. Where is that you might well ask? It would, for preference, be where nobody else could go. Failing that. It's as far as I can.
Kudos to you for being able to stay out months without much damage, but I suppose the awsome hull & shields on a Vulture helps a lot with that. I do wonder though. How do you manage to scan all the planets in a large system without losing integrity since I only get a couple of weeks worth of supercruising before I lose sufficient integrity to require a trip back to civilisation?

o7

What's integrity good for? Losing it doesn't seem to affect exploration proficiency and survivability much that I can tell.

 

[lenna]

The arguments that go against player owned bases are .

Correction, arguments FOR player owned bases are . Let's be blunt here, ED is not EvE/SC/other-game and we should not be trying to emulate such games.

As for explorers needing base camps, that is ... they just need to learn how to load out their ships and fly properly.

 

[Urbanski101]

This keeps coming up....looks like this one will run and run until FDev say one way or the other if this is something they'd even consider.

My take on this, player owned stations / bases with trading rights, influence over the system (BGS) and control over security......no thanks.

Small player owned, instanced personal moon / asteroid base which is actually just a glorified hangar...ok, maybe....but it sounds like a lot of resource for not a lot of actual gameplay (weirdly I'd quite like this feature but way, way, way after they have developed the game further in 3.0).

I do think ED needs some money sinks outside of the ships and modules.....what those money sinks end up being is up to FDev.

 

[Avetorian]

Correction, arguments FOR player owned bases are . Let's be blunt here, ED is not EvE/SC/other-game and we should not be trying to emulate such games.

As for explorers needing base camps, that is ... they just need to learn how to load out their ships and fly properly.

Nope you are full of it. Do you put your hands on either side of your face and move your hips side to side while making these idiotic statements? "OMG EVE ONLINE OH NO PLAYER OWNED BASES!" jesus. As I said before we'd need gameplay to warrant them, and this can happen in Elite, just as it happens in any other game that is an MMO. I am being blunt. you have your values, and the people who want this stuff to have theirs, you do not get to decide what is best for everyone, THE OP has expressed for a desire to have this in, THE DEVELOPERS HAVE EXPRESSED A DESIRE TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IN!

Now if you pay attention, I said that before we get them there needs to be gameplay and content to warrant them. I gave examples and such, you have your head in the clouds, seriously. I'm glad you enjoy flying your ships around planets and not interacting with them, that's you. The rest of us want to do more on those worlds, having small bases to park at, do research and exploration, and various other activities. Your little tips have nothing to do with future gameplay content. SO with out further adieu, here is a tidbit from the past.

Player Stations – This feature was first hinted at before the original release of the game in 2013. There has been little comment about it since. At the time Sandro Sammarco had said,
“We will not have player build ships/stations/buildings in release 1. This will happen – but the specific timing and content is up for discussion.”

During the release stream for the 2.2 Beta David Braben was asked if players will ever be able to own their own stations. He responded by saying, “It’s an interesting one, we have been talking about that for a while, there are a lot of challenges with that, particularly around game balancing, but yes it’s certainly a candidate feature.”

You see that? you are done. Bye bye.

 

[verminstar]

Correction, arguments FOR player owned bases are . Let's be blunt here, ED is not EvE/SC/other-game and we should not be trying to emulate such games.

As for explorers needing base camps, that is ... they just need to learn how to load out their ships and fly properly.

Cool...as you think its and all the arguments are and as we being blunt here...does that mean I get to ignore your arguments if I think they ?

Whatever...I already know the answer ^

This subject has come up before, it will almost certainly come up again and its something Im still hopeful to hear more about despite yer obvious half glass empty approach. This has absolutely nothing to do with emulating any game whatsoever...comparisons have been made certainly but merely to demonstrate that they can indeed be popular if done right.

But as yer minds made up then its pointless debating it with ye...yer opinion is one Ill choose to ignore as ...hope ye dont mind but Ill continue to argue the case in support of it regardless what yer opinion of it is ^

 

[lenna]

...

Candidate feature like off-line mode which was scrapped, and keep in mind the "balancing" aspect (BGS impact will also probably be part of that consideration). There is a distinct difference between saying something is a candidate feature and saying it is going to be implemented.

Most of the arguments presented in this thread for Bases basically are Total and utter ... no ifs, buts, or maybes about it... the rational largely stinks of wanting to adversely affect other people's gameplay (e.g. hints at desires to stock pile UAs which can be for only ONE reason - to mass UA bomb places).

I have generally objected to direct and arbitrary placement of player owned stations/bases... it is too easy to abuse it... (especially in a PvP context)

I would expect (and support) something along the lines of ESO Homes more than the arbitrary placement that some want.... such an approach would be instanced and ownership should not affect anyone else's gameplay in any direct sense.... the locations would have to be picked carefully by FD to minimise the opportunities for exploitation by griefers and gankers.

I think there is more merit in having larger exploration focused craft (c/f something between a Panther Clipper and Jaques Station) than arbitrarily place-able player owned stations/bases.

The more people like yourself argue for arbitrary placement the more the rest of us are going to push back - It is Newton's First Law in action.

 

[Avetorian]

The more people like yourself argue for arbitrary placement the more the rest of us are going to push back - It is Newton's First Law in action.

You and what army? It's not your call to make, and since you can't back up your claims, nor provide any counter argument other than "hand wavium" statements, I'm just gonna ignore you. I guess you just didn't consider that you and the nay sayers might actually be a minority.

There's not even a requirement to present an argument for player owned structures, this is an open world sandbox game larger than ANY OTHER GAME IN EXISTENCE. This game practically demands it. The arguments that are against this are due the sheer size scale of the game, there is no reason to not have it. You are trying to forcing a play style on others which goes against what was advertised on the front g page "Blaze your own trail"

You have no argument. There are many ways to improve exploration while adding something like a deploy-able structure to facilitate research, rearming repairing and so on.

IF we went with your attitude towards player bases, then why are you proposing panther clippers or larger player owned ships? We don't need them now for exploration so what's the point? If we go by your logic, you don't need anything but an ASP Explorer or a Cobra to do exploration.

Personally I've liked the idea of having a large ship and basing my operations out of the ship as I move around and explore, but again gameplay and content are needed to facilitate that. I can see plenty of oppertunities for player deployable structures and plenty of oppertunity for ships. I am say we should have more, you are saying we should have one or the other. No thanks, there is plenty of room in this galaxy for the game to be much more, MUCH MUCH more.

Everyone has their cup of tea, and the world doesn't revolve around just one. There is nothing I can say to convince you that you should just leave it alone when someone asks for these things, there is nothing you can say to counter, The last time this was talked about with Devs it was 2.2, and they are still looking at it. This is all I have to say in my response to you.

I will continue to encourage people like the OP ask for these things. It's a good thing, Variety is the spice of life, you guys are playing in a real scale galaxy and have an issue with any variation in how you do things. Shame, specially when this is supposed to be a one to one simulation of our galaxy, in reality many commanders would have their own little camping sites on other worlds and so on.

 

[Dharrch Streynjer]

What's integrity good for? Losing it doesn't seem to affect exploration proficiency and survivability much that I can tell.

I've not personally experienced it as far as I know, but I've read posts where if you let it drop below a certain level you will experience module failures. I only recently found it in "Advanced maintenance", but when I did it was extremely low and cost a fortune to repair. I was aslo suffering from random problems with the ship which may or may not be related.
As a result I now keep a closer eye on it.

 

[Dharrch Streynjer]

Candidate feature like off-line mode which was scrapped, and keep in mind the "balancing" aspect (BGS impact will also probably be part of that consideration). There is a distinct difference between saying something is a candidate feature and saying it is going to be implemented.

Most of the arguments presented in this thread for Bases basically are Total and utter ... no ifs, buts, or maybes about it... the rational largely stinks of wanting to adversely affect other people's gameplay (e.g. hints at desires to stock pile UAs which can be for only ONE reason - to mass UA bomb places).

I have generally objected to direct and arbitrary placement of player owned stations/bases... it is too easy to abuse it... (especially in a PvP context)

I would expect (and support) something along the lines of ESO Homes more than the arbitrary placement that some want.... such an approach would be instanced and ownership should not affect anyone else's gameplay in any direct sense.... the locations would have to be picked carefully by FD to minimise the opportunities for exploitation by griefers and gankers.

I think there is more merit in having larger exploration focused craft (c/f something between a Panther Clipper and Jaques Station) than arbitrarily place-able player owned stations/bases.

The more people like yourself argue for arbitrary placement the more the rest of us are going to push back - It is Newton's First Law in action.

I think we've reached the level of "I'm right! You're an idiot"..."No I'm right! You're the idiot".
Frankly that makes you both idiots.

Whatever the reasons for having player owned bases. There's simply no genuine reason not to so that pretty much is that.
rlsg mentions minimising the effects of gankers, but we all know that won't happen. Gankers and griefers are a fact of life, and the devs have underestimated their impact on the game since day one as far as I can tell.
I don't want larger exploration craft. I have a cutter which is as large a craft as I could ever want. However I will always use my ASP-X for exploring. I may in the future need to RNGneer an Annie for extreme long range exploration, but I don't want to. I don't like the Annie it flies like a pig and is hard to use with Coriolis and Orbis stations.
Stop comparing the homes on Elder Scrolls Online. I don't play that game, and only know of it because you forced me to Google it with your ignorant use of acronyms only you understand.

Finally who are "the rest of us" that you mention. I only see you regularly and a small number of others who post once or twice then leave. I can't tell if you are in a minority or not, but I think I see more posts for player bases then against in this forum.
Either way I say "push away" by all means but keep the childish and insulting behaviour out of it please. I will do the same.

 

[JonSnowman]

I'd like to be able to construct my own station via something like a community goal. IE: gather various materials and return to a system to complete the requirements.

I'd also like to see each player get their own faction/system, as well as the ability to align those with other players creating larger factions / super powers.

Once your station is complete you can see your other craft going in and out of there, flown by members of your faction etc. Missions you see on the mission board would be related to other various upgrades / expansion into other systems via wars, etc...

Perhaps you start with an outpost then via various mining/trade missions you get what you need to upgrade to a large pad/Coriolis etc. Even the passenger missions could be integrated - go to a system to pick up administrators to work in your station, or something like that.

Basically changing the BSG and missions to actually require something from the player, and give something back to the player. They way it always should have been.

 

[Miklos Atreides]

Player owned stations have only limited purpose in the current context of the game.
It should be handled like an owned property on Earth. You can build up your house there with the garage (landing pad) beneath.
Number of slots to store n ships inside is maybe bound to your properly filled wallet.
Done. (more or less).

If there are traffic and business engaged (outposts, stations, colonies) I would opt out for those player owned stations because they can't get
bound into game context. Some will argue to change the context, but this will change the entire game and how it behaves, smells and feels.
It has to be rewritten in its internal logic nearly from scratch and it will be no Elite anymore in the end.
Therefore this is a not desireable way to go for me.

To bind player owned asset to the game mechanic as it is today will enable BGS to take over player created and payed assets and
that will make those players angry and unpredictable. Hence setting up a player owned colony or station is something which is
creating the end of Elite that we know and love today and therefore is better not seriously considered.

Regards,
Miklos

PS: There are a lot of people who would like to manage stations and who want to make them successfull in business regards. Please let me
ask for a Station Managers game. It would give us all the things to do with player owned assets. Lockdowns, Civil unrest, politics. etc etc.
Only disadvantage is that we will not sit in a cockpit anymore. But if linked to the universe it will have some fans for sure and gives a lot of
fun to those who like business simulations. Here on a galactic level.

 

[liquidphantom]

If they were to be allowed, then it should be out of the bubble only, tie it in with a human expansion story or part of the Thargoid war.

Even a basic outpost should cost 100's of billions of credits if not into the trillions, with a high maintenance cost which if not paid scraps the station. There should be a ridiculously large transport cost for getting the station into position even.