Player conquerable systems that reward 'shares' in the system economy

To summaries, commanders could be able to have a 'stake' in a system in the form of 'shares' for a successful effort in joining a player led side to conquer a system. The percentage of shares they'll own would be based upon their contribution & the amount of players partaking on that side. There shares in the systems would pay them a weekly sum of credits in correlation to the systems population size & economy status (e.g booming would boost the value of your shares)

The amount of conquerable systems would scale up & down depending on active player population. so for example, have currently 20 conquerable systems in & around the 'bubble' as an end game feature that allow players to trigger wars on such systems, join a side & fulfill missions to contribute to the target in an effort to annex the system. The reward would be a percentage share in the system economy thus giving the commander a reason to defend the systems interest & run missions to boost the economy. Given that the ownership will be based upon shares in the system, it would mean that it may not always be totally profitable if the % share in a system is so small due to an excess amount of players choosing the strong side instead of the underdog side, which could also help to naturally implement a cutthroat style opportunism among commanders that would see them switching to multiple sides to support their own interest instead of nailing your flag to one mast. For example, one day you could be fighting alongside some NPC Corporation offering a percentage in shares to all commanders whom contribute to the taking of the system, the following week you could be running economic missions to boost it economy & thus the value of your shares. The third week you catch wind of an impending attack to annex the system, with either seeing it as a forlorn hope to defend the system & thus selling your shares for a quick money boost or instead defending the system while buying up shares being sold in panic to increase your share control & thus the value of your shares. You could possibly sell your shares, break ties and join with any other faction attempt to annex it to see if you can gain a bigger share hold.

-----
Share system
-----

Commander actions are weighted against each other if they're on the same side among the amount of commanders on the same side that calculate their %. E.g If one commander preforms 5% of all contributions among a 100 commanders participating on the same side, it would mean the other 99 commanders would hold roughly 0.95% of the share of the system economy. So just under 1%

If the system in question has a population of 20 million & is in Boom this would increase the value of said share, so for example
Credits Per Million Population: 10 Million (20 million population x 10 million = 200 million)
Economic Status: Boom (20% Bonus to 'credits per population'
System in Question worth with Bonus applied: 240 Million Credits
Weekly Share payout to commanders with a 0.95% share: 2.82 Million

The above is just an example, in actual fact there could be other factors, such as the NPC faction you're supporting may have their own demands for the annexation venture, such as a required 40% controlling share in the system that would be weighted against the commanders end contributions in the venture. This is not to say this could be fixed, for example some NPC factions may demand a smaller controlling share of perhaps 30% making it more profitable for commanders to support this NPC faction in its war of annexation. So for example:

If one commander preformed 5% of contributions, the NPC faction requires its 40% share stake, the other 99 commanders would see the remaining 55% of the system economy profits shared among them if they contributed equally. Would give each commander a controlling share of 0.55% thus a weekly profit of 1.32 million.

Overall depending on how much the NPC faction is demanding share wise for the venture would increase/decrease the amount of leg work needed to trigger the war possibly. Such as obtaining the logistic quota before hand to trigger the war.
-----
Share Controlling that leads to 'player controlled systems'
-----

Just an idea & probably difficult to achieve, to perhaps allow player controlled systems & thus more of the administrative duties being available that would require to be funded & supported from the highest stake/share holder from their system profits. So if a player as managed to achieve a controlling share of the system they can have the option to take personal control of its administrative duties or leave it under NPC control but will have the burden of injecting some of their profits to meet it system needs to avoid famines, fend of pirate attacks, improve shipyard, trading opportunities, system defence patrols etc. Such a system held in such a manner would be difficult to hold unless missions issued by said commander are fruitful enough to entice commanders not to switch sides & seek to overthrow them. This would make it more difficult for clans to obtain a monopoly over said system or systems, since if the wealth isn't trickling down, there is no motive to keep such a commander/clan running affairs of a system that a NPC led faction cannot do with its controlling shares.

----
Buying & Selling Shares
----

Commanders at any point could be allowed to offer their shares to the highest bidder to make a quick buck while allowing other commanders with power mongering tendency to achieve a controlling share of the system to Usurp the original NPC faction that they helped to conquer the system. While said NPC faction will always retain it share of the system, it could also start to become a rival in said system too to the commander for obvious reasons opening up other intrigue & backstabbery for other commanders to indulge in.

---
Preparing for war (Offense/Defence)
--
Perhaps in order to annex a system, part of the contributions will be producing the supplies to last X amount of days to extend how long the campaign timeframe to take said system can possibly last, since supplies are always key both in offence & defence. So X defending system will only need to defend said system adequately until attacking faction runs out of supplies (time) to complete it objective/quota

----
Why it as to be a limited amount of systems based on active players
---
Such a system imo would only work & bring commanders to these hot spots if the focus is on fighting for limited resources to be exploited, or it will begin losing it meaning & uniqueness. The idea is to see these systems frequently changing hands within reason in a somewhat 'king of the hill' mode that allows all commanders to have an actual stake in a system & a reason to run missions or preform combat duties.

---
Can this work in singeplayer or more catered for open play only
---
imo i think this should be more for open play given the stakes/risk of PvP will be higher & thus the rewards should be so too, especially since i see this as a end game mechanic in some regards. It could have some singleplayer involvement perhaps in more passive missions but i believe the charm begins to wear off if such external influences from a safe area can affect such a system. The way around this is to perhaps have a singleplayer alternative running parallel with another set of systems separate from open world dedicated to the same purpose but perhaps limited in terms of its rewards to convey the smaller risk being taken.

-------------
These are just general ideas, by all means feel free to criticize or better elaborate or give other mechanics that could do it better. My main goals here are to see Commanders have an actual 'stake' in a system & a reason to fight tooth & nail for it or seize it while also getting more interaction & creating commander run narratives & news & ofc a bit of drama.
 
Last edited:
hmmm am i missing something? why is this a bad idea? Surely if its limited to something like 20 systems, i doubt its gonna affect those whom don't want nothing to do with it surely? I mean currently, you do missions and stuff, but there isn't any end game there, or feeling of a stake in a system or faction. kinda seems like its all for nothing really. Surely the galaxy big enough to accommodate some other mechanics. Unless their some actual explanation for why this would infringe or break someone else gameplay, or if its not possible due to limitations of some sort? Something more then 'nooooo' would at least enlighten me and bring me round to your opinion.
 
Last edited:
This is not what Elite is. It is not what Elite is about. We’re not heroes, conquerers or champions. We’re little tiny cogs in much larger gears, in much more complex machines. We’re not even pawns, or the pawns of pawns.

And that’s one of the things that make Elite so great.

But fear not, for there is something out there that will satisfy this urge to dominate you feel. It’s called “EVE”.
 
This is not what Elite is. It is not what Elite is about. We’re not heroes, conquerers or champions. We’re little tiny cogs in much larger gears, in much more complex machines. We’re not even pawns, or the pawns of pawns.

And that’s one of the things that make Elite so great.

But fear not, for there is something out there that will satisfy this urge to dominate you feel. It’s called “EVE”.

wow, haven't been on the forums for like a few years, but the mentality doesn't seem to have change. So folks are still traumatized by EVE or fear the encroaching creep towards some similarities to EVE. You say we're tiny cogs in a machine, yet 'space carriers' are planned. In the modern world these are force projection assets used to dominate/control areas/shipping lanes that few nations are able to field. I don't see how having a 'share' thus a 'stake' in a system is anything different to today world of obtaining shares in a company or in ED terms a corporate system. A controlling stake would naturally give you more control over the companies/system direction.

I'd say most of you's are running around in anacondas or pythons the equivalent to some Russian Billionaire Oligarch whom usually owns shares in a football club or varies other ventures. That does not seem like a 'small cog' imo. At the same time you're unraveling the secrets of guardian tech engaging with the alien critters. I would not say these are 'tiny cog' mechanics for 'pawns' or commanders stamping their name on a system as being the first to explore it.

It like me recommending you too 'euro truck simulator' or 'farming simulator' if you wanna be a small cog in a complex machine.
 
Last edited:
wow, haven't been on the forums for like a few years, but the mentality doesn't seem to have change. So folks are still traumatized by EVE or fear the encroaching creep towards some similarities to EVE. You say we're tiny cogs in a machine, yet 'space carriers' are planned. In the modern world these are force projection assets used to dominate/control areas/shipping lanes that few nations are able to field. I don't see how having a 'share' thus a 'stake' in a system is anything different to today world of obtaining shares in a company or in ED terms a corporate system.

Car Carriers exist in the modern world too, yet the man who drives it is no shareholder nor force projectionist.

I suspect, like so many other riders of the Hype Train, you’ll be rage-quitting in December when these Carriers do not turn out to be the massive mobile death machines you’re making them out to be.

I fully expect them to transport a number of ships from one place to another. I don’t expect much more than that. Yet so many are anticipating becoming the next Captain Francis Emerson Bardwell, and you won’t.

But what do I know? No more or less than anyone else here. These carriers could be the nails in the coffin for me if they turn out like the Hype Train garbage people keep ranting about, but somehow I doubt it.

I have no fear or trauma resulting from my brief stay in EVE. In fact I greatly enjoyed my short time there, and my part in the Goonfleet/BoB merger that brought the game to a standstill until the ransom was paid.

Ok, so I was playing for all the “wrong” reasons, but even all these years later, it’s still the same toxic community of auto-grinders more concerned with where they’ll get their next Isk-fix than anything I’d actually want to play. Bleh. That is simply not welcome here.
 
Last edited:
Car Carriers exist in the modern world too, yet the man who drives it is no shareholder nor force projectionist.

I suspect, like so many other riders of the Hype Train, you’ll be rage-quitting in December when these Carriers do not turn out to be the massive mobile death machines you’re making them out to be.

I fully expect them to transport a number of ships from one place to another. I don’t expect much more than that. Yet so many are anticipating becoming the next Captain Francis Emerson Bardwell, and you won’t.

But what do I know? No more or less than anyone else here. These carriers could be the nails in the coffin for me if they turn out like the Hype Train garbage people keep ranting about, but somehow I doubt it.

I have no fear or trauma resulting from my brief stay in EVE. In fact I greatly enjoyed my short time there, and my part in the Goonfleet/BoB merger that brought the game to a standstill until the ransom was paid.

Ok, so I was playing for all the “wrong” reasons, but even all these years later, it’s still the same toxic community of auto-grinders more concerned with where they’ll get their next Isk-fix than anything I’d actually want to play. Bleh. That is simply not welcome here.


I've never played EVE, heard the tales. But as someone independent from all that i don't see the harm of allowing a handful of systems to have more player involvement out of the million systems currently in game.

Also on car carriers, those folks are merely employed to drive cars to a show room in the interest of the company they work for. Same can be said about Aircraft Carriers that are carrying out the interest of their nation. Now like the driver of the car carrier can seek to open his own car carrying firm, the cab drive a cab driving firm so can private military companies seek to obtain heavy military gear usually in the interest of overthrowing/launching coups or preforming mercenary work at the behest of other organisations, such as my example of supporting a NPC faction in the taking of a system for a share in the system economy. Some companies also do offer employee a share in the company as a means of motivation. I thought it would just be a good way to offer players a stake in a system that makes running missions or doing combat duties in that system more meaningful.

Also on the speculation of the in game carriers and how they will work. I suspect they will be a deployable asset to a system then something you can drive around, but i also suspect their will be some administrative control by the player owning it & most likely a means to make cash if commanders are using it to service their ships, but again it all speculation on my behalf. In honestly, the bigger ships have never appealed to me due to upkeep. Also the talk of 'premium currency' seems like this could be going free to play in some areas minus the expansions. Which i would welcome to grow the player base (althou could have it drawbacks since cheaters will have nothing to lose), but at the same time would like some actual systems that more player involvement can influence and benefit players directly thus giving them a stake in risk/reward.

Overall not sure why folks are so hostile to this, given its a big sandbox. Seems to be a us or them, or threats of rage quitting. I'm just suggesting something that would give commanders a stake in the sandbox, that relatively small, that would not affect the sandbox at large.

Didn't you used to work for Lehman Brothers back in 2008 OP?

good one

It sort of sounds like 'Elite: Stockbroker' 🤔


come on dude, hardly gonna get electronic trading and commanders waving slips in the air at open market time. Its just a motivation mechanic to run missions within a system that contribute or enhance your stake in the system. Hardly gonna take over the sandbox with this mechanic in a elite dangerous monopoly version.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom