Should Elite Dangerous add clans/player factions in the future

[Ziggy Stardust]

After all, this part (about the interest from station services) may be as well left out completely if it turns out too controversial.

Much common ground in your reply to me.

How about non-monetary 'profits'. For instance, the number of advertising boards to indicate the amount of business going on. It's there, visible to all who visit to indicate how successful the outpost is. Instead of credits, player owned structures acquire status over time, which would be shown in game in all sorts of various ways. The outpost/station could go from a space-garage poor man's look to a shiny polished and glassy look. Would also provide bragging rights.

 

[Cosmo]

The people who voted YES to add clans/player factions have won with 54.49%!

Please add this with Horizons Fdev!

Yeah I forgot the part where the player owned outpost also requires maintenance (added now... sorry for ninja'ing my post ). So it's not only profit but also money-sink. Balance.

After all, this part (about the interest from station services) may be as well left out completely if it turns out too controversial. I don't think it is, but that's just my opinion. Naturally, I can speak only for myself, but as far as I am concerned I'd be happy if my buddies and me would be just given means to build our outpost, maintain it, defend against other clans, and above anything else - to welcome our fellow explorers on it. Profit from station services we are providing isn't our primary motive... quite far from it, actually.

That'd be great.

 

[Varrag]

Much common ground in your reply to me.

How about non-monetary 'profits'. For instance, the number of advertising boards to indicate the amount of business going on. It's there, visible to all who visit to indicate how successful the outpost is. Instead of credits, player owned structures acquire status over time, which would be shown in game in all sorts of various ways. The outpost/station could go from a space-garage poor man's look to a shiny polished and glassy look. Would also provide bragging rights.

Nothing to disagree with. Working towards the common goal, sense of the team accomplishment, and satisfaction for creating something shiny that belongs to us and can be seen and used by other players is powerful driving force by itself. Bragging rights included

 

[Talarin]

In this thread I argued against guilds/clans because I felt player owned commercial structures should not be controlled by players. I got told, no one is arguing for that, we just want better comms and organisational guild structures. And I feel there's much merit to that request.

A couple of pages on, I get told: of course player owned structures need to be included. Every MMO does this, so why wouldn't Elite?

Well, but that's just the example of that sliding scale. Not all players are suggesting the same thing or have the same vision; but the focus of the topic isn't about control of assets - it's about clan support. More people than not appear to be comfortable with the idea of clan support, it's just the format of it which is the question and that's worth a thread of its own (as this would get bogged down with the yea/nay arguments all of the time).

About ownership - the "other games have it" point of view is unoriginal but that doesn't mean that it's not worthy of discussion. Again, the questions could/should be broken apart into desire and format.

For example - if I were propose a player-owned mining station in which a miner could deposit their cargo for later collection with a larger ship I doubt many people would object. That's still a player-owned and created structure, with in-game legal rights associated with it. With a bit of thought around how instancing would work - it's not infeasible to introduce something like that because it could easily be designed within the game to be completely transparent to anyone who wasn't interested in it. (I.e. - it only ever appears in the owning players' island.)

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

Not to discount the effort involved, as I would expect it to be considerable should such a possibility exist, the continuous passive earnings (i.e. even when all members were offline) is the bit that causes me an issue - effectively being rewarded for not playing the game.

To get those payouts, should it even be considered, should require resupply of certain commodities and raw materials to manufacture the resupply equipment.

So to get a specific tier of bonus they have to deliver X many tonnes of each material per week.

Say, for tier 1 ammo resupply:
15 tons of each:
Iron
Nickle
Tungsten
10 tonnes:
Explosives
Polymers.


Repair:
35 tonnes:
Titanium
Polymers
Computer Components
Ceramic Composites

General requirements for each level of base support to support staff onboard:
15 tons food cartridges
15 tons Fresh F & V
15 tons Meat (various types)

And for that you get 5% or some percent of the proceeds, whatever the balance point is, devs can figure that out. Higher tiers would be more payback.

Payouts might be by effort of a pilot, or evenly shared among the responsible Minor Faction.

Services would not go offline if not resupplied, just no kickback to the Minor Faction.

This is just a sketch of an idea, but I think it has potential, and it removes the idea of being paid for doing nothing.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Nothing to disagree with.

Ok, this is seriously messing with my preconceived notions. Guild guy and anti-Guild guy agree on possible implementation of player owned structures.

I'm going to need a lie down.

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

Ok, this is seriously messing with my preconceived notions. Guild guy and anti-Guild guy agree on possible implementation of player owned structures.

I'm going to need a lie down.

Careful...

I am on for SPONSORED/SUPPORTED assets, not owned. =)

 

[Mohrgan]

I am standing firm on the notion, that FD has started, association or merging with existing minor powers. I think all Cult activities should be filtered through the existing BGS. I'm sure the likelihood of the expansion of the Player Group mechanic will be another layer upon the one they have already built. With that in mind, player group associated/sponsored station already exists. There won;t be the already existing player groups, and clans as well. So we should be discussing how FD should build on the existing system, not torturing ourselves with grand plans that won't fit in with the steps already taken.

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

I think all Cult activities

Well, I guess that makes you right.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Players accruing credits when not playing would be a significant change to the game - it's not simply a matter of balance and fine tuning, in my opinion - unless all players were to be offered the same benefits in some way....

No it wouldn't.

I pick up my salary from PP every week, awarded while I am offline.

 

[JosiahD]

The people who voted YES to add clans/player factions have won with 54.49%!

Please add this with Horizons Fdev!

Not exactly the resounding result some might think when one considers that a considerable proportion of those yes votes are, in fact, CONDITIONAL along the lines of 'yes but not right now' or 'yes, so long as it doesn't affect my game', and such. Which I kind of think was your point (ie sarcasm)? But then, it's a forum poll anyway and those are never exactly authoritative. Now, if Frontier actually conducted a survey themselves and sent same only to purchasers/players of the game we might get something that is truly reliable and meaningful in terms of results (and even that would be subject to the response rate). All this poll really confirms is how split the opinion is, and how contentious and divisive the topic of guilds/clans is. Reinforces for Frontier the need to tread VERY warily on this - which they've been doing all along.

 

[Robert Maynard]

I pick up my salary from PP every week, awarded while I am offline.

.... a salary which is awarded based on in-game activity by the player themself. It is not awarded to players who simply join a group of players who own something.

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

.... a salary which is awarded based on in-game activity by the player themself. It is not awarded to players who simply a group of players who own something.

*cough*
Well, if I log out for 3 weeks, I still get the salary as my points decay.


So same thing for supporting the Station. Haul goods to support it, get "merits" have a decay...

same mechanic, different method of earning points.

*brainstorm*
Heck, it is an entirely viable mechanic!

Register to support any Minor faction and support its stations, get merits for hauling goods or some method of combat support for the stations, like fending off attacks or turning in combat bonds.

Rewards would be much smaller, maybe the top tier is 5Mill, plus a bonus for in-system activities like trading, local combat bonds or bounties.
(replace my complex Haul X materials and make a set of generic commodities like PP has: Repair Support Package, Munition Support Package, Staff Support Package etc, or keep the other idea for more complexity. Such Packages would match an Economy, like Staff Support Package would be available in Agri economies only, Munitions in Extraction, etc )

Work just like PP, but on a much smaller scale.

 

[Louella]

Isn't there a quote from David Braben, or someone else, about how "making money from behind a desk", isn't really something he wants Elite to be about ?

 

[Varrag]

.... a salary which is awarded based on in-game activity by the player themself. It is not awarded to players who simply join a group of players who own something.

Which is not very different from regular (say, weekly?) costs that the clan members should provide in order to keep their base running. There is an oportunity for active gameplay right there.

 

[Robert Maynard]

*cough*
Well, if I log out for 3 weeks, I still get the salary as my points decay.


So same thing for supporting the Station. Haul goods to support it, get "merits" have a decay...

same mechanic, different method of earning points.

*brainstorm*
Heck, it is an entirely viable mechanic!

Register to support any Minor faction and support its stations, get merits for hauling goods or some method of combat support for the stations, like fending off attacks or turning in combat bonds.

Rewards would be much smaller, maybe the top tier is 5Mill, plus a bonus for in-system activities like trading, local combat bonds or bounties.
(replace my complex Haul X materials and make a set of generic commodities like PP has: Repair Support Package, Munition Support Package, Staff Support Package etc, or keep the other idea for more complexity. Such Packages would match an Economy, like Staff Support Package would be available in Agri economies only, Munitions in Extraction, etc )

Work just like PP, but on a much smaller scale.

The Powerplay earning mechanic is, of course, accessible by any player. Yes, it still rewards (on a diminishing basis) for 4 weeks of no play (from the point a player made top tier) - but after that it stops. It is not a perpetual earning system like what *seemed* to be being proposed.

Your leap to using the Poweplay earning mechanic in this case tends to align the proposal with the existing Player Group sponsored Minor Factions - with the addition of a mini-Powerplay merit / reward addition. Could work.

 

[Robert Maynard]

Isn't there a quote from David Braben, or someone else, about how "making money from behind a desk", isn't really something he wants Elite to be about ?

In his interview with The Escapist, page 3, he says:

The Escapist: Are you interested in seeing Elite: Dangerous move more into the Eve Online space?

Braben: I don't feel like that. The way I see it, the important difference between Eve Online and us is that Eve is an executive control game and Elite: Dangerous isn't. That's a big differentiator. What I see us doing is moving more into the richness of the experience and expanding the depth of space gameplay. I think the more games we have in the science fiction genre the better, because it's a genre that has been languishing for a bit. If you think about the way people work together in squad-type games like Battlefield 4 or even in Warcraft raids, the fun of it is in playing together and actually planning a little bit ahead. I've seen it a little bit in slightly more arcadey games as well, like Battlestations Midway, where a group of four players go against another group of four players and the difference in tactics makes a big difference. It's not symmetric. Someone might go in with a big Anaconda and essentially draw the fire, but then there will be other players in more nimble ships.

 

[CMDR Byr Goefin]

The Powerplay earning mechanic is, of course, accessible by any player. Yes, it still rewards (on a diminishing basis) for 4 weeks of no play (from the point a player made top tier) - but after that it stops. It is not a perpetual earning system like what *seemed* to be being proposed.

Your leap to using the Poweplay earning mechanic in this case tends to align the proposal with the existing Player Group sponsored Minor Factions - with the addition of a mini-Powerplay merit / reward addition. Could work.

I posted the idea to the Suggestions Feedback so we don't
clutter this up anymore than it is.

 

[relayer]

And game development is a commercial concern, not a democracy.

And the 'poll' doesn't even specify what having guilds/clans in the game would entail anyway. People are 'voting' for something, without saying what it is they are voting for. So even if the developers agreed to 'add clans/guilds' nobody would know what it was they'd agreed to. Meaningless polls give meaningless results...

+rep (emphasis mine)
This discussion is, or should be, about what exactly saying "I want Clans/Guilds" means.

 

[relayer]

You don't really need to define anything further than that.

Actually, you do, as everyone (including you) has some idea of what "Clans/Guilds" mean, as we have seen in this thread. There is broad support for some Clan/Guild tools - they've already been delineated. You seem to have your own idea of what having "Clans/Guilds" would entail. People have asked you to describe what you think Clans/Guilds would entail, We're still waiting...

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

Heh. You guys are can be so tight in the butt sometimes.

I didn't report you this time, but I will the next time you descend into this kind of nasty, juvenile insults. Once again, you are not helping your cause with this.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I get told: Look, no one is asking for clan owned structures.
I get told: Of course clan owned structures are a part of having clans/guilds in game.

This is constantly painted as a discussion between pro- and anti-clan/guild, while it most definitely isn't.

The only possible answer to the question: "do you want clans/guilds in game", is "in what way?"

^^^^ this exactly.

 

[relayer]

The problem is with people who're resistant to even suggestions of potential changes that run contrary to what they envision for the game.

You are dead wrong. Both sides of this conversation have proposed many additions (that means changes) that have the broadest support: in-game communication tools, supporting or having a minor faction named for you, clan/guild tags for ships and other changes.

What "runs contrary" are the suggestion by a few outliers to allow ownership-of-space/game assets. Thankfully, FD has maintained their position since the kickstarter: "no player ownership of in-game assets. Period."

You're throwing out "do you want Clans/Guilds/Gangs in E|D" as a general question and ignoring posts asking you for specifics. Then you base your assertions on this nebulous, vague question and use it as some kind of argument, which it isn't. Your evasiveness on how you think "clans/guilds" would work and what their features would be is what makes people resist this overly-broad "question" and ask for specifics.