Don't know about you, but I always check other cmdrs in a system the moment I spot them.
Should Elite Dangerous add clans/player factions in the future
- Thread starter dementia
- Start date
Don't know about you, but I always check other cmdrs in a system the moment I spot them.
The EVE university is awesome : I downloaded many (MANY) of their vids / mp3 talks to learn the game. I even tried to join them once IIRC, but never got any answer from them (no hard feelings, very busy corp). You're correct, there are MANY different ways to appreciate EVE, the corps being one. But I used to do 3 things in the game :
1) Exploration in lowsec
2) Sleepers hunting in WH space
3) Heavy trading in hisec
I don't see why these 3 activities would be better in a corp. I made a large amount of money doing this during a whole year solo, never really had friends in EVE, and had fun while doing it, plexing my 4 accounts.
Respectfully, I insist : solo gaming is not a sin. The only sin I can think of when it comes to video games would be playing one when I'm bored with it. ;-)
Last edited:
Oh you mean the instancing mechanic that will allow the effect of territorial conflict to affect people?
That was suppose to be a joke, right?
If people want to explore areas, there's private and solo sitting there ready for them. Or they can think of the conflict between player groups a part of the galaxy in Open, I don't see the need of separating player created content and NPC generated content.
Lol, you don't really need me to bring up blockading attempts by certain groups do I? Complete with deliberately blocking landing pads etc. Not saying that certain disruptive activities aren't permitted by the game (nothing says that groups can't attempt to blockade for example, and a blockade is after all an attempt to disrupt other activities), but I think we all know that any griefing / ganking minded groups will use the improved communications / coordination just as effectively as every other group.
Please inform me how often do you actually interact with other players and at what times do you not check out another Cmdr in the system when you know you are vulnerable...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
One proposal in a previous thread on this topic was to create a new Open-Guild mode - to allow like-minded players to play in the same mode.
Would this further fracture the player-base? Who knows. When the advice to players who don't like guilds is to play out of Open, I would not expect much of an increase in fragmentation.
And what makes you think the community cannot combat that exactly? What makes the community powerless before the more confrontational player groups?
Blockades are a part of any normal content, unless you want to call every NPC that brings any inconvenience upon any players to be disruptive, as well.
Then I might have to question why are you even playing the game.
Such activity is easily negated and laughed at. Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing entertains me more than making guildies cry
That's my point though. Guild territorial control is omitted by design. Adding it now imposes it on everyone - even the other modes will be affected by resultant changes in the BGS, if nothing else. And how happy will guilds be by having their control efforts undermined by activites in the other modes? The 'solution' of 'move to solo' is not a solution - it is nothing more than guild-oriented players saying they want something omitted by design and if the rest of us don't like it, we can stop playing the way we want (and can do quite happily in the current design) and move to another mode.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
The hollow square - another player means caution/danger. But I still can't identify who they are without facing them, thus closing the range and increasing the risk to me. Now, remove the hollow square and we might get somewhere close to where we should be.......
I don't know what form of territorial control are you thinking about, the system and its content's functionality are still operational, merely slapping a name tag to it doesn't really affect it much at all.
The current mechanic PP employs in terms of undermining/control/expansion is incompetent, and as a coordinator of a specific power for five months straight since the beginning of PP, I have more than enough of an understanding to analyze it.
The BGS is broken beyond belief as many on the forum have repeatedly pointed out.
The design you speak of encompasses this sort of territorial control since BGS is one of the original concepts, and players having the ability to influence the state of a system. Then by that extent, players can congregate and amplify their influence on systems, merely providing these players a tag to fall under doesn't seem to be asking for something that is outside of design. If anything, the fear of anti-social players is more apparent than ever, forcibly separating player generated content and npc content in Open.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
You do know that turning on the person is going to make yourself harder to interdict... right?
And the first thing that shows up on the scan is the name of the player, which then you can effectively drop into low wake and then high wake out of the system if you feel vulnerable...?
This is why I asked how much interaction have you actually done with players...
Remove the hollow square in terms of what? Removing players or branding them to be the same as NPCs?
If the former, I don't think I have much to comment further if that is your extremist mentality.
If the latter, sure, but I better not hear about complaints in regard to wanting to distinguish Cmdrs from NPCs.
Do you call Microsoft Micro$oft too?
Elite does not have a lot of the things that other multiplayer games have, I'm not sure if it's intentional or not.
Like, it might be nice to be able to create a chat channel, and invite people into it, because, of things like Player A and Player B are friends. Player B and Player C are friends, but Player A and Player C don't know each other. Having a chat channel along with their mutual friend B, allows them to talk to each other, and introduce themselves.
Navigating the friends list can be a bit awkward too, sometimes.
But, maybe having such a chat channel would take away from the intended atmosphere of the game. Maybe you're supposed to feel isolated and alone in space ?
And for npc generated content - Elite has 30 odd years of backstory to it by now, there's some kind of story that is going to occur in the future, with Thargoids or something, maybe, and I think maybe Frontier wants people to be interested primarily in that story, and less so about clan/guild/organisation drama stories. Like, in other games, the vast majority of the players are more interested in the Group X vs Group Y stories, and the entirety of the npc factions and the background story is dismissed as "lol, lore", or "lol, rp".
Like, maybe Frontier wants the story of Elite to be the thing that makes people choose it, rather than any of the other space sim type games, and is wary of anything that could overshadow that.
some comments about this kind of thing, have mentioned wanting "mmo industry standard" things, which I dunno, why must every game be p.much the same apart from the visuals ? Like, there's mmos where you outfit a magic warrior dude, and mmos where you outfit a scifi fighting robot, but they play exactly the same, more or less. Only the visual setting differentiates them.
Like, it might be nice to be able to create a chat channel, and invite people into it, because, of things like Player A and Player B are friends. Player B and Player C are friends, but Player A and Player C don't know each other. Having a chat channel along with their mutual friend B, allows them to talk to each other, and introduce themselves.
Navigating the friends list can be a bit awkward too, sometimes.
But, maybe having such a chat channel would take away from the intended atmosphere of the game. Maybe you're supposed to feel isolated and alone in space ?
And for npc generated content - Elite has 30 odd years of backstory to it by now, there's some kind of story that is going to occur in the future, with Thargoids or something, maybe, and I think maybe Frontier wants people to be interested primarily in that story, and less so about clan/guild/organisation drama stories. Like, in other games, the vast majority of the players are more interested in the Group X vs Group Y stories, and the entirety of the npc factions and the background story is dismissed as "lol, lore", or "lol, rp".
Like, maybe Frontier wants the story of Elite to be the thing that makes people choose it, rather than any of the other space sim type games, and is wary of anything that could overshadow that.
some comments about this kind of thing, have mentioned wanting "mmo industry standard" things, which I dunno, why must every game be p.much the same apart from the visuals ? Like, there's mmos where you outfit a magic warrior dude, and mmos where you outfit a scifi fighting robot, but they play exactly the same, more or less. Only the visual setting differentiates them.
Yep... this is the thing that I miss the most about not having a group chat channel. I have friends that can't use voice comms, and friends who won't. It's very lacking in the game.
If that were the case, why have a chat channel at all? Added to the fact that they can't stop players from using voice comms. I don't think imposing solitude on those who don't want it is a very good idea. There are parts of this game that are pretty tedious. Chat channels can make those times go by s bit faster.... Hutton Orbital anyone?
I think if done right on both sides, it could increase interest in the stories. Players who don't bother with the forums could be kept abreast of developments via clan mates on the chat channel.
It took a while to rinse the "usual MMO" stuff out of my head after coming here from a particularly confrontational game. But now I find the lack of constant harassing and harassment refreshing. I like the approach FD have taken so far, and thus gives me confidence that they could easily add clan features without enabling griefers any more than they are currently.
And what, pray tell, "clan" features would you like? How would they benefit Elite as a whole?
Last edited:
You mean like PP does?
I don't quite see how player groups could affect other players any more than powerplay does.
All of the affects are filtered through the BGS now. Even with PP. The effect that concern some come from players imposing direct combat between pilots. The BGS asks you to do PvE tasks to move yardsticks. Many player groups want to insist on using direct confrontation to move those sticks. So long as the BGS is the mechanism for control, I'll be fine with it. Player Groups are great, as long as they can't be used to dominate smaller groups, or individuals, all is well.
Individuals can always evade it in the same way they can evade pp undermining shenanigans in open. By going private, solo or in open by just avoiding the current hotspots.
Evading is not the point. The design approach used by FD, so far, is to ignore PvP as a mechanic, and create their systems around PvE activities. The concern I have is over-arching. Once you let player groups dominate areas of space, the game devolves into cult wars. Individual players get swallowed up by the large groups flexing their muscles. Telling players to move to other modes, and to avoid hotspots is putting one playstyle above another. Why should individual players be forced to avoid certain systems, or confine themselves to modes they wouldn't have chosen otherwise?
By FD building their player group/clan/cult system around, and through the BGS, they give players a chance to rally around a Faction, but not stifle the individual. Space is, and should be, free for any Commander to access in any of the modes.
Last edited:
dynamicbob
Banned
Increase the support actions available with regards to minor factions ( allied commanders to x minor faction) will be presented based on their support for that minor faction with a weekly powerplay like voting amount. Which each NPC faction within the gameworld will have a list of actions ( expansion, going to war with other factions, new colonies, local community goals), a set time frame for commanders to vote upon actions (could be tied to pendign states) and the most votes will determine which way that faction goes in temrs of its movements as a minor faction ingame.