The Wings discussion thread

[Cathalo]

The issue with design is that there will always be those who push the design envelope as far as possible - therefore emergent play-styles appear - if wings facilitate ganking then we can be sure that it will increase - some players are just like that.

The mob mentality is a human trait and it exists in every single MMO or online game where it is allowed to exist. In a "play to crush" environment it becomes even worse because the winning side will single handedly run all of the losing player guilds out of the game. When the dominant winning faction has nobody left to fight they will get bored and leave the game too, leaving you with a very small and often inactive player base. I have seen it with so many games over the years (1996 Ultima Online prior to rep patch, Shadowbane, SWG Pre-cu, Asherons Call, Pirates of the Burning Sea, Darkfall, etc) and I'am a hardcore PvP player who wishes that this game succeeds where the others have failed. Please don't make false promises that you cannot keep as all of those other titles did.
----
----
Keep solo players involved in PvP, allow the skilled ones to take out wings on their own and you will have a best seller on your hands. Give in to the mob mentality and you will have the same failed concept that every other game has.

 

[Janichsan]

First of all, NPC wings are an addition, not a replacement for the solitary NPCs. Secondly, most here seem to forget that you already can run into groups of NPCs right now: system authority always comes in groups, you can find groups of three or four pirates at USSs, criminals can occasionally spawn in small groups at RESs and navigation beacons, and I don't think I have to mention the number of ships at conflict zones.

NPC wings won't change much. The game will be as playable for solo players as it is now.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

I don't think the Hud argument is a good one bc the hud could probably be redesigned/rearranged in a few hours while Wings probably took weeks (or months) to implement.
You wouldn't want your weeks of development project to be prevented by such an easy to fix restriction.

I personally think the sweet spot would have been 8 members (or at least 6) per wing, 4 seems to be really low.
You could form decent groups with 8 members with 2-3 different ship types and still allow up to 4 wings per instance, which seems more than enough.

 

[Vasea Azure]

I`m a little bit disappointed about the max number of the players in Wing. I understand that in 32 instance it make sense, but it could be at least 6 or 8.

 

[CMDR Carbo]

Thank God I have no friends.

Thank Frontier now you will never get some.

Lol, just kidding.

 

[Hadron-Higgs-Boson]

hehe Well yes... a 32 player wing would automatically be a PvE wing, I hadn't considered that. Can you imagine how loudly they'd wail and gnash their teeth in the forums at finding no-one in the entire universe to shoot other than themselves with their mega-wing?

oh yes, of that Im sure, but can you imagine the fun of formation flying a 32 player wing against a capital ship?

I'm pleased Wings is coming with 1.2, Im hopeful it will be built upon for both pvp and pve and will turn into somethin bigger, but right now its just basic (very) grouping mechanics and nothing else

*whoosh* the sound opportunity makes as it goes flying by

 

[Sanderson]

No more so than your thinly veiled insults at anyone who doesn't favour your choice of playstyle and demands that they "go play solo". They would be considered aggression and/or flaming, which as I'm sure you're aware is against the forums rules. However, to the matter at hand...



In any "generic" instance, assuming it has the maximum of 32 players (which you've already alluded in a previous message on this very thread your belief is that it's normally closer to half of that), there's going to be a great number of players not involved with "your" eight person wing, possibly up to half of them, which immediately rules out 16 players from our "generic" instance. There will also be some players who DO become involved with your wing but are either in smaller wings or are solo. There will also be players who encounter your wing in small cargo ships. So unless you're planning on forming a wing of unarmed haulers and confronting a single anaconda with it, it would be very difficult for a "generic" wing to be overcome by a single player. FD have said that that DON'T WANT WINGS TO DOMINATE, and a four player wing CAN'T DOMINATE, thereby fulfilling FDev's desires in this area. If your belief is correct that most instances only have approximatley 16 players in them then an 8 player wing would CERTAINLY be a dominant force in that instance.



Of course not, I can only assume by your heated disapproval and your comments.



I was patently aware that it was a typo, but even trying to "read around" the typo it still didn't make a lot of sense to me.

No where did I ever say or demand people "go play solo" I said attempted blockades and griefing can be avoided by going to solo.

You're making assumptions that are simply incorrect as far as what I'd like and my "play style". I'm neither "heated" nor particularly upset or emotional at all for that matter in regards to wings.

 

[Sandmann]

While the instance size (and 32 is ludicrously small, but that's the fault of the ludicrous decision to go p2p for player interaction, but that's another story) is probably the legitimate reason for the decision

Agreed... both that the instaence size is way too small, and that the instance size is the major reason for the 4 player cap on wings. I'm sure the small instance size is due directly to their decision to use a P2P networking system rather than a server/client one... however I'd point out that in the gameplay THEY envisaged there's nothing actually wrong with an instance based setup. It's only a problem if you want large scale multiplayer functions, which was never on their agenda.

This isn't a simulation. This is a simulation in a straightjacket.

You're right, it's not a simulation, it's a multiplayer version of "the seminal space trading video game". It is what it is... the problem is that people are expecting it to be something it's not.

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

You're making assumptions that are simply incorrect as far as what I'd like and my "play style". I'm neither "heated" nor particularly upset or emotional at all for that matter in regards to wings.

Well, the good thing about opinions and assumptions is that we're all entitled to them. Good-o, if you're happy with it as it stands perhaps we can stop this back-and-forth?

 

[Sanderson]

Agreed... both that the instaence size is way too small, and that the instance size is the major reason for the 4 player cap on wings. I'm sure the small instance size is due directly to their decision to use a P2P networking system rather than a server/client one... however I'd point out that in the gameplay THEY envisaged there's nothing actually wrong with an instance based setup. It's only a problem if you want large scale multiplayer functions, which was never on their agenda.



You're right, it's not a simulation, it's a multiplayer version of "the seminal space trading video game". It is what it is... the problem is that people are expecting it to be something it's not.

That's completely wrong on all counts. David said many many times he hoped people would play together to shape the galaxy (and more) and large scale multiplayer functions was always the idea, certainly not to be "the seminal space trading video game". Wherever did you get ED was designed from the start as "the seminal space trading video game"? I realize that's essentially what it is today but, it was never intended to be "the seminal space trading video game". Trading was but a fraction of the "dangerous" galaxy David described in his "vision" speeches and I can direct you to quite a few of his "vision" talks where he directly contradicts your claims in your statement.

That was the primary reason for cutting offline because people would miss the rich, dynamic, ever unfolding multiplayer experience FD was supposed to create.

 

[Hadron-Higgs-Boson]

<snip>David described in his "vision" speeches and I can direct you to quite a few of his "vision" talks where he directly contradicts your claims in your statement.

Problem is it's not that hard to point to DB speeches where he contradicts himself too

 

[Sandmann]

That's completely wrong on all counts. David said many many times he hoped people would play together to shape the galaxy (and more) and large scale multiplayer functions was always the idea, certainly not to be "the seminal space trading video game". Wherever did you get ED was designed from the start as "the seminal space trading video game"? I realize that's essentially what it is today but, it was never intended to be "the seminal space trading video game". Trading was but a fraction of the "dangerous" galaxy David described in his "vision" speeches and I can direct you to quite a few of his "vision" talks where he directly contradicts your claims in your statement.

David also said it was supposed to be about "one man in his ship", not corporations and guilds. You can't cherry pick the bits that support your argument and ignore the bits that don't. The players are already being given the chance to "play together to shape the galaxy" with the comminuty goals. They may not be to your tastes and I agree that they're not working very well yet, but that is the way they chose to fulfil that promise - NOT by allowing marauding wolf packs of hundreds of ships to scour the galaxy of any foolish trader or lone pilot.

ED is the fourth in the Elite series, and they all follow a common thread (as with all sequels). Elite (the first one) was described as "The Seminal Space Trading Video Game", and is still described that way on wikipedia, which is what I was quoting. ED is simply the fourth instalment - David Braben is making the game (as HE said in a video interview) that he WANTED to be able to make in 1984. He never intended it to be a successor to the large scale MMO's like Eve, in fact he's said plainly that while he has nothing against those games he doesn't want ED to be one of them. The problem arises when some players expect it to be a gankfest and it isn't.

 

[Tinman]

Again though, a design decision that hasn't really taken into account how people play. I don't necessarily want a HUD to display Wing status, I'd prefer the Wing to talk to each other over comms and tell their status, scream for help when their shields are failing. There's too much emphasis on reading displays when action kicks off. Seriously, they went to an RAF base the other day, since when does a pilot have to worry about reading a display of health stats of his squadron. They rely on tight comms.

And even organising a multi-Wing group won't guarantee you'll be in the same instance if you fly to a system together by the sounds of it. They've gone with instancing and it's starting to cripple any real expansive multiplayer potential now.

Come on Frontier, stop hiding behind weak excuses for bad design.

Please explain to me how a game like this would work without instances...even if everything was run on a dedicated server there would still be instances. They might possibly be slightly larger but that's it. They would still need to be there in a "twitch based" multiplayer game.

 

[Kramster]

I was expecting 4 - 8 in a wing considering the way the game is instanced. I do think 'wing' was a poor choice of wording, 'flight' would have been more descriptively accurate at least for me. If groups were too large then the need to be in open would be negated and players might just as well enter 'group' play. Players who require more than this can still use third party comms to play with friends as long as instancing is geared for friends/wings having priority when entering an instance.

It is not the lack of wings that has hampered social play but the random nature of the instancing system and the difficulty it causes when trying to get together with friends. Even with wings players can be in different systems and therefore in different instances so, unless they have priority, regrouping in the same instance may still be an issue. Hopefully the way players are placed in instances is part of the 1.2 update an hopefully it will work.

I love ED but it is severely hampered by it's multiplayer systems to such a degree it may well kill a great game.

 

[Sanderson]

Problem is it's not that hard to point to DB speeches where he contradicts himself too

I know and that's the root cause of a lot of the disappointment from myself and many others. However, IMO, 4 player wings doesn't help the situation very much or so it would seem.

 

[popuptoaster]

If you play World of tanks or world of warplanes or warthunder (air or ground forces) you'll already have seen how even just one good 3 man platoon can dominate a team of 15 players.

My clan often set up multiple 3 man platoons in WoT and attempt to get them into the same game on the same side, when it happens those 6 players, on coms and with a coordinated plan can wipe out a team of randoms in minutes usually with no loses so i can perfectly well understand FDs reluctance to allow large wings in an instanced game.

people complaining about the size now would soon be moaning if a private group of 10 players in a wing all dropped into an instance and attacked everything that was entering and exiting a station, we already get enough complaints about loan pirates shooting up traders or miners or even players in fighting ships in supposed safe areas.

 

[Sanderson]

David also said it was supposed to be about "one man in his ship", not corporations and guilds. You can't cherry pick the bits that support your argument and ignore the bits that don't.

ED is the fourth in the Elite series - they all follow a common thread. ELite (the first one) was described as "The Seminal Space Trading Video Game", and is still described that way on wikipedia. ED is simply the fourth installment - David Braben is making the game (as HE said in a video interview) that he WANTED to be able to make in 1984. He never intended it to be a successor to the large scale MMO's like Eve, in fact he's said plainly that while he has nothing against those games he doesn't want ED to be one of them. The problem arises when some players expect it to be a gankfest and it isn't.

Where does anyone at FD ever say ED was designed to be "the seminal space trading video game"? I can show lot's of videos and interviews where it isn't supposed to be "the seminal space trading video game" despite the fact that, as it stands today, that's what it is.

I didn't realize Wikipedia designed ED and what a game is (like ED is today) doesn't mean that's the way it was meant to be or "envisioned" as. As I said above, I'd be happy to show you outside of this thread where ED was not designed as "the seminal space trading video game" but, that really has very little to do with the OP.

 

[Sandmann]

If you play World of tanks or world of warplanes or warthunder (air or ground forces) you'll already have seen how even just one good 3 man platoon can dominate a team of 15 players.

Exactly this. Players operating as a functional group and using real group tactics can easily overwhelm much larger numbers of individuals. There's a multiplication factor when you form a cohesive, functional group.

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

Where does anyone at FD ever say ED was designed to be "the seminal space trading video game"? I can show lot's of videos and interviews where it isn't supposed to be "the seminal space trading video game" despite the fact that, as it stands today, that's what it is.

I didn't realize Wikipedia designed ED and what a game is (like ED is today) doesn't mean that's the way it was meant to be or "envisioned" as. As I said above, I'd be happy to show you outside of this thread where ED was not designed as "the seminal space trading video game" but, that really has very little to do with the OP.

I'm sorry if you don't like the description, or you feel that the videos etc may have mislead you. I guess the nature of advertising is to overstate, but I don't believe that a little man is going to appear and wash my dishes for me if I use a certain brand of dish washing liquid. You have to take all advertising with a grain of salt.

Fact is though that ED is "Elite Part 4" which most of us realised early on from all the interviews, dev diaries, and simple history... and that Elite was "the seminal space trading video game", by it's own admission. There's an expression that normally is applied to people but also applies to sequels... "The apple never falls far from the tree." So if you have a sequel to a space trading game, it's unlikely to call of duty in space ships. You can show me all the videos etc that you feel are contradicting my statement, but the game is what it is and it could just be that it's you who misunderstood what it was supposed to be and not me, since I'm the one who's (reasonably) happy with the game and you're not.

 

[JupiterJoe]

Thank God I have no friends.

I don't have any friends either. I don't really understand the benefit of being in a Wing. Logistically, I think it will end up becoming more trouble than it's worth. Getting four people to want to do exactly the same thing for the time it takes to get anything meaningful done in ED, will be tough. I predict that encountering Wings of four players will be come very rare after a short time, especially considering the amount of space we all play in, making all this fuss over the size of a Wing a moot point. Frankly, I want FD working on nothing but planetary landings. After that's done, FD can tinker 'til their heart's content.

 

[Sandmann]

I don't have any friends either. I don't really understand the benefit of being in a Wing. Logistically, I think it will end up becoming more trouble than it's worth. Getting four people to want to do exactly the same thing for the time it takes to get anything meaningful done in ED, will be tough. I suspect that encountering Wings of four players will be come very rare after a short time, making all this fuss over the size of a Wing a moot point. I want FD working on nothing but planetary landings frankly.

The advantages to fighting, hunting, pirating etc in a wing are fairly obvious, but for those not into that it's a lot more hassle than it's worth. It's touted by some as a way for traders to operate safely in open using the old World War 2 convoy mentality, but the reality is that convoys are just bigger, slower targets with soft centres and a few pointy bits on the sides. Even if you had a wing of say two T9's and two Asps or Cobras, the T9's could only jump as far as the combat ships so would be slow, and the two combat ships wouldn't be any sort of match for a wing of four cobras/vipers/eagles. There maybe be some advantages to 2-3 miners teaming up with a combat ship for security but it'd be quite boring for the combat guy. I can't see if being particularly useful for explorers at all, unless they include some sort of range extending or fuel sharing mechanics or something along those lines.

It's basically wolf packs.

 

[Sanderson]

Exactly this. Players operating as a functional group and using real group tactics can easily overwhelm much larger numbers of individuals. There's a multiplication factor when you form a cohesive, functional group.

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



I'm sorry if you don't like the description, or you feel that the videos etc may have mislead you. Fact is though that ED is "Elite Part 4" which most of us realised from all the interviews, dev diaries, and simple history... and that Elite was "the seminal space trading video game", by it's own admission. There's an expression that normally is applied to people but also applies to sequels... "The apple never falls far from the tree." So if you have a sequel to a space trading game, it's unlikely to call of duty in space ships.

Again, ED was never designed to be "the seminal space trading video game" and you can't provide a single supporting interview, dev diary or video to support that theory, no matter what Wikipedia says. Trading was intended as a part of ED, not "the" game and there's no where you, or anyone else, can show it to be otherwise.

You seem to think that I'm a PvP guy, or a guild,group or Eve type gamer, all of which couldn't be further from the truth if you'd stop letting your emotions get the better of you on your crusade to crush anyone you perceive as "that type of player". Again, in regards to me personally, your completely incorrect.

Having said that, outside of the potentially impossible to implement more than 4 player wings, I think the decision to limit it to 4 was a bad one, for reasons that's has nothing to do with pvp, griefing, guilds or the other things you've incorrectly assumed.