Oh, a Guild poll, its been a whle since the last one. Still usless, but oh well ^^
Should Elite Dangerous add clans/player factions in the future
- Thread starter dementia
- Start date
Last edited:
Very useless poll as it has nothing to do with reality. Player factions are already in game, I could understand a poll asking if we think FDEV should improve mechanics for them but it doesn't make sense to ask for something that already exists.
Yes, yes and Yeeeeeeeees! A player community e.g. bigger than 250 or maybe 500 or maybe 100 (what works best) players should be visible ingame, should have the ability to build and design an own base (maybe without trading rights not to compromise game mechanics) and should be visible (the home base) with their banner in the Galaxy view.
Great!
Great!
Last edited:
Absolutely yes, Elite Dangerous is very lacking in MMO, socialization features.
Players factions are not directly created and controlled by players. Players have little influence in Player Factions. Player Factions are manually added with heavy control by Fdev.
A Guild is fully controlled and managed by Players! That is the fundamental difference.
Player Faction is Not a Guild:
- There's no player faction wide-chatrooms
- Players cannot claim any solar system, station, outpost, planet, spaceport.
- Players cannot manage the membership of a Player Faction
- Players cannot assign roles and specific management controls to players in a Player Faction
- Players cannot have ship decoration of their player faction
Elite Dangerous is not Massively Multiplayer at all! The economy is barely player driven. Players are isolated in 4 players per wing! There are no chatrooms for global, faction, power or regional chats in-game... literally nothing!
Elite Dangerous is a very anti-social, shallow sandbox currently. That is why it's getting such harsh criticism on Steam, Metacritic etc.
Fdev seems to be afraid to give players the ability and freedom to create their own outposts, stations, guilds, chatrooms. Elite will continue to be shallow if they don't empower players to make emergent content.
Players factions are not directly created and controlled by players. Players have little influence in Player Factions. Player Factions are manually added with heavy control by Fdev.
A Guild is fully controlled and managed by Players! That is the fundamental difference.
Player Faction is Not a Guild:
- There's no player faction wide-chatrooms
- Players cannot claim any solar system, station, outpost, planet, spaceport.
- Players cannot manage the membership of a Player Faction
- Players cannot assign roles and specific management controls to players in a Player Faction
- Players cannot have ship decoration of their player faction
Elite Dangerous is not Massively Multiplayer at all! The economy is barely player driven. Players are isolated in 4 players per wing! There are no chatrooms for global, faction, power or regional chats in-game... literally nothing!
Elite Dangerous is a very anti-social, shallow sandbox currently. That is why it's getting such harsh criticism on Steam, Metacritic etc.
Fdev seems to be afraid to give players the ability and freedom to create their own outposts, stations, guilds, chatrooms. Elite will continue to be shallow if they don't empower players to make emergent content.
Last edited:
aehmmmm... No.
There are already minor factions established and this is enough. You can join one of the existing groups or
create your own under the umbrella of FD. This is good as it is and will evolve over the next years, so there
is no need to this.
Regards,
Miklos
There are already minor factions established and this is enough. You can join one of the existing groups or
create your own under the umbrella of FD. This is good as it is and will evolve over the next years, so there
is no need to this.
Regards,
Miklos
Honestly, no. Why would we want to manually control who can come into our systems when we're already have an administrative load with our own members? If passes exist I would expect them to be controlled by the NPC faction and at most the player controllers could ask for them to be on or off.
Then play in solo. Or with your friends. Or just realise that with the p2p networking the chances of you meeting up with another player is actually really slim.
Shocked to see that the plurality is against it. There are already player groups like The Code for instance, and not having in game features just stifles people wanting to do that. And if you don't want your experience "ruined" by other players that's what Solo is for.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Open "belongs" to all players - not just those who crave large player interactions.
A big no from me.....certain players don't need more in game rationalizations for acting like a certain part of the male anatomy in bundles. Just my $0.02.
yes please, i'd like to be able to pledge to my own faction and be able to police in our controlled systems. we dont need clans like in games as eve , where players control everything, but i'd like to be able to give our faction some more direction and power. for example be able to give the pool money together to make a certain type of mission pop up more often, target certain factions. with those missions. there's a lot of things we can do without having every player controlled system Blocked of by permits or things like that
Eh... I'm not too hot on the idea. Seems to make the game fun for the few but less interesting for the many. Elite has always been a "solo" game about a lone pilot, not a gang v gang kind of thing.
I'm getting sick of this community bashing the idea of connecting players in any way what so ever. If you dont want to play with other people go play solo, or go play another game... It makes no sense to me while the vocal minority gets to make decisions that stifle innovation in such an opportunistic game.
As of yet in elite I have not:
- Been interdicted by another player
- Engaged in combat with another player
- Seen more than 3 players at one time in any given part of space
either tell me what i'm missing, or stop complaining. You all sound really anti-social, and exhibit social avoidance behavior to compensate. I really hope that frontier listens to their customers on a whole, and not only the few on the forums that bash anyone looking for pvp or connectivity between players
As of yet in elite I have not:
- Been interdicted by another player
- Engaged in combat with another player
- Seen more than 3 players at one time in any given part of space
either tell me what i'm missing, or stop complaining. You all sound really anti-social, and exhibit social avoidance behavior to compensate. I really hope that frontier listens to their customers on a whole, and not only the few on the forums that bash anyone looking for pvp or connectivity between players
Technically isn't running a dynasty a way to blaze your own trail?
Robert if it belongs to all then you can't complain about the actions of others unless FD have said its not allowed aka any exploiting, but then you have to accept Player groups as an existance.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Open is at it is - the proposals would change the face of Open and probably adversely affect players who choose not to join a clan / guild / corp. Those who resist changes may simply be seeking not to be adversely affected by the proposals - facilitation for player groups is not in-game yet, after all.
its pretty sad that this is a justification for focusing on single player gameplay in an online multiplayer framework. Not that i disagree with you, frontier has to make the game for small, medium, and large player groups, and that is appreciated.
If FD were to change tack and go the Clan route, they would have to structure it so the Clanned up players get no advantage over the un-clanned. That is why the clan system that has been started is based off of in-game Minor Factions. That is the way FD are approaching this issue. I for one encourage them to continue down that path. No direct player ownership of any resources is key to any Player Group systems.