Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Off topic discussion zone.

Moderators: winston, another_commander, Cody

User avatar
Wolfwood
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 734
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:53 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Wolfwood » Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:34 am

Cody wrote:
Commander McLane wrote:The whole thing is becoming rather too complex for my old frazzled brain, I think.
My sentiment exactly. The more convoluted they make each of these relatively minor aspects of the game, the less appealing it begins to feel.

I fear the game will have too many of those "A-ha! But you did not take into account this!" moments...
Author of Tales from the Frontier - official Elite 4 anthology.
Author of Marcan Rayger adventures - unofficial fan-fic novellas set in the Frontier universe.

User avatar
DaddyHoggy
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Posts: 8501
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:43 pm
Location: Newbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by DaddyHoggy » Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:45 am

From what I read here - being a career "bad guy" (i.e. forceful opportunist) in ED will actually be very difficult - if every misdemeanour's logged and accountable for.
Selezen wrote:Apparently I was having a DaddyHoggy moment.
Oolite Life is now revealed here

User avatar
Gimi
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Posts: 2073
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Gimi » Fri Mar 22, 2013 8:48 pm

Next topic up for discussion in the DDF:

“Everyone, out of the universe!” Player Groups in Elite: Dangerous
Sandro Sammarco: Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous wrote:Elite: Dangerous is a multiplayer game with a core single player component. Or perhaps it’s a single player game with a core multiplayer component. You see, in truth, we want you to be able to play the game whichever way you choose and have a bunch of fun.

Whether you’re looking for a deeply atmospheric and exciting experience or a social arena full of interesting player to player interactions, or something in between, we want you to be able to look at the game and say, “I can do that here!”

But there’s no denying that this comes at a cost. Several in fact, including the particularly thorny issue of how we work out who is going to meet who when playing.

Our plan is to use a player controlled grouping system, but as you will see, although the concept seems pretty straightforward, there are plenty of odd corner cases to deal with.

Current Plan:
  • There are a number of commander groups
    • Each group contains a list of commanders
    • Commanders can only be matched up at a location if they share at least one group
  • The basic group list contains the following groups
    • A basic group that all normal commanders start within: the All Players Group
      • When a commander is detected committing a serious enough crime against another human commander they can be temporarily included in this group, even if they have previously removed themselves from it
        • A commander cannot remove themselves from the group in this instance until an in-game penalty timer has expired or they pay the appropriate bounty fine
    • A Personal Group: the commander can add and remove other commanders from this group
      • As the name implies, this group is personal to the commander
      • This group starts with all other players within it
      • Once this group contains less commanders than the All Players Group the commander is removed from the All Players group
        • Commanders have access to toggle between using All Players Group or Personal Group
      • The player does not have to ask permission to add or remove a player from this group
        • The player can easily “remove all” from this group, effectively making the game a single player experience in moment to moment game play
          • The player’s galaxy meta-game can still be effected by events from other players
          • The player can use a commander name search function to add and remove players
      • Just because a commander is included in a group does not guarantee that they will be matched – both commanders need the other to be present in their Personal Group for the possibility of a match to occur
      • Removing a player from this group prevents the player from being matched, but does not remove the player from the current location if they are already present
    • The Dangerous Players Group: commanders created using the hardcore (ironman) rules set are initially placed within this group instead of the All Player’s Group
      • The Dangerous Players Group acts in all ways as the All Players Group
  • Players can become allies with each other
    • An ally request must be confirmed before it becomes active
    • Obviously, players must share a group (All Players Group or Personal Group) and be able to match up to become allies
    • Allies can only be matched up with commanders that are present in each ally’s Personal Group or All Players Group
  • The grouping rules are in addition to player reporting tools
  • There is a cooling off period (minutes) for removing a commander from the Personal Group, or when switching between using the All Players Group and Personal Group during which the decision cannot be reversed, to limit exploitation
Issues:

Some points to consider (that I am worrying about, anyway):
  • Is the ally grouping restriction too restrictive? Should it perhaps work the other way around (Commanders can match up as long as they exist in *one* ally’s Personal Group)?
  • Do we need multiple player personal groups?
  • Can you think of additional commands/methods of manipulating groups?
So, does this sound like a brave new world of player-determined multiplayer, or a messy set of byzantine rules that will baffle the most ordered mind? Does it cover most situations, or are there gaping holes that we aren’t addressing? Do we think the proposal is actually the solution – or do you have a much better alternative? Inquiring minds want to know!

So, some potentially useful headings; let’s group up and solve this puzzle:

All Players Group
Personal Groups
Dangerous Players Group
Allies
Interface
Alternatives
Last edited by Gimi on Mon Jun 24, 2013 7:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
"A brilliant game of blasting and trading... Truly a mega-game... The game of a lifetime."
(Gold Medal Award, Zzap!64 May 1985).

User avatar
cim
Quite Grand Sub-Admiral
Quite Grand Sub-Admiral
Posts: 4018
Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2011 6:19 pm

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by cim » Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:33 pm

Gimi wrote:Next topic up for discussion in the DDF:
Now this is one I was waiting to see what they did with it.
Sandro Sammarco: Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous wrote:When a commander is detected committing a serious enough crime against another human commander they can be temporarily included in this group, even if they have previously removed themselves from it
I still really don't like this - feels way too meta-gamey. Your punishment for committing a crime is not a fine or a fleet of Vipers ... it's to have a bunch of really annoying (or even outright abusive) people who you deliberately excluded from your universe put back in it.

From the previous post on the legal system that could easily prevent you from taking part in various events or missions if there was any chance of human players being on the opposite side. (Take part in a Federal raid on an Imperial outpost? Better hope there aren't any humans defending it for the Empire, only NPCs.) They'd have to be extremely careful with what counted as a "serious enough" crime - in a way that didn't necessarily correspond to the in-universe seriousness with which the offence was treated.

A rule that you couldn't remove people from your Personal Group for X time after committing a serious offence, or switch away from "All" if you were already in it, sure. Stops you killing someone and retreating to your Personal Group of one to be safe from retaliation.

(Of course, the way they're setting it up, it's possible that no-one at all will be in the "All Players" group except these criminals, since you only need to get fed up with one person enough to ban them from your universe and you're out of that group... Well, I guess newbies, trolls, and the deeply unpleasant might well be there too.)
Sandro Sammarco: Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous wrote:A Personal Group: the commander can add and remove other commanders from this group
  • This group starts with all other players within it
  • Once this group contains less commanders than the All Players Group the commander is removed from the All Players group
What's not clear from this description is what happens when new players buy a copy of Elite: Dangerous. Are they automatically added to your Personal Group or not? (They seem to be trying to do two different things with the Personal Group: "I don't want player X in my universe" and "I want to play just with a few friends", which imply very different things about the answer to that question)

Another thing that's not clear: three players, A, B, C. For simplicity they exclude everyone from their personal groups, then A and B mutually include each other, and B and C mutually include each other. All three of them then enter the same system. Do all three end up together, or does B end up with one and not the other?
(Do they perhaps need a "friends list" and a "banned list" so that it tries to group you with as many friends as possible, including friends of friends, without including anyone at all, ever, who is on your "banned list"?)
Sandro Sammarco: Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous wrote:Can you think of additional commands/methods of manipulating groups?
A command to use player X's Personal Group as your personal group, perhaps (provided that you are in X's personal group). That way if you've a bunch of friends who all want to play together but otherwise alone, they don't need to coordinate everyone changing their groups any time a new friend signs up. (Or allow players to set up and switch to non-personal groups, which achieves the same thing in a more discoverable way)

User avatar
DaddyHoggy
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Posts: 8501
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:43 pm
Location: Newbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by DaddyHoggy » Fri Mar 22, 2013 11:11 pm

And this, Ladies and Gentlemen, is why Oolite is and always should be, a single player game, because anything else is too ruddy complicated!
Selezen wrote:Apparently I was having a DaddyHoggy moment.
Oolite Life is now revealed here

User avatar
pagroove
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 3033
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:52 pm
Location: On a famous planet

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by pagroove » Sun Mar 24, 2013 11:34 am

Gimi wrote:Next topic up for discussion in the DDF:

“Everyone, out of the universe!” Player Groups in Elite: Dangerous
Sandro Sammarco: Lead Designer- Elite: Dangerous wrote:Elite: Dangerous is a multiplayer game with a core single player component. Or perhaps it’s a single player game with a core multiplayer component. You see, in truth, we want you to be able to play the game whichever way you choose and have a bunch of fun.

Whether you’re looking for a deeply atmospheric and exciting experience or a social arena full of interesting player to player interactions, or something in between, we want you to be able to look at the game and say, “I can do that here!”

But there’s no denying that this comes at a cost. Several in fact, including the particularly thorny issue of how we work out who is going to meet who when playing.

Our plan is to use a player controlled grouping system, but as you will see, although the concept seems pretty straightforward, there are plenty of odd corner cases to deal with.

Current Plan:
  • There are a number of commander groups
    • Each group contains a list of commanders
    • Commanders can only be matched up at a location if they share at least one group
  • The basic group list contains the following groups
    • A basic group that all normal commanders start within: the All Players Group
      • When a commander is detected committing a serious enough crime against another human commander they can be temporarily included in this group, even if they have previously removed themselves from it
        • A commander cannot remove themselves from the group in this instance until an in-game penalty timer has expired or they pay the appropriate bounty fine
    • A Personal Group: the commander can add and remove other commanders from this group
      • As the name implies, this group is personal to the commander
      • This group starts with all other players within it
      • Once this group contains less commanders than the All Players Group the commander is removed from the All Players group
        • Commanders have access to toggle between using All Players Group or Personal Group
      • The player does not have to ask permission to add or remove a player from this group
        • The player can easily “remove all” from this group, effectively making the game a single player experience in moment to moment game play
          • The player’s galaxy meta-game can still be effected by events from other players
          • The player can use a commander name search function to add and remove players
      • Just because a commander is included in a group does not guarantee that they will be matched – both commanders need the other to be present in their Personal Group for the possibility of a match to occur
      • Removing a player from this group prevents the player from being matched, but does not remove the player from the current location if they are already present
    • The Dangerous Players Group: commanders created using the hardcore (ironman) rules set are initially placed within this group instead of the All Player’s Group
      • The Dangerous Players Group acts in all ways as the All Players Group
  • Players can become allies with each other
    • An ally request must be confirmed before it becomes active
    • Obviously, players must share a group (All Players Group or Personal Group) and be able to match up to become allies
    • Allies can only be matched up with commanders that are present in each ally’s Personal Group or All Players Group
  • The grouping rules are in addition to player reporting tools
  • There is a cooling off period (minutes) for removing a commander from the Personal Group, or when switching between using the All Players Group and Personal Group during which the decision cannot be reversed, to limit exploitation
Issues:

Some points to consider (that I am worrying about, anyway):
  • Is the ally grouping restriction too restrictive? Should it perhaps work the other way around (Commanders can match up as long as they exist in *one* ally’s Personal Group)?
  • Do we need multiple player personal groups?
  • Can you think of additional commands/methods of manipulating groups?
So, does this sound like a brave new world of player-determined multiplayer, or a messy set of byzantine rules that will baffle the most ordered mind? Does it cover most situations, or are there gaping holes that we aren’t addressing? Do we think the proposal is actually the solution – or do you have a much better alternative? Inquiring minds want to know!

So, some potentially useful headings; let’s group up and solve this puzzle:

All Players Group
Personal Groups
Dangerous Players Group
Allies
Interface
Alternatives
It sounds very complicated. I rather have the game more like pure elite so that players who commit crimes are shot down by large viper fleets.
For P.A. Groove's music check
https://soundcloud.com/p-a-groove
Famous Planets v 2.7. (for Povray)
Image
http://aegidian.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13709

User avatar
Disembodied
Jedi Spam Assassin
Jedi Spam Assassin
Posts: 6314
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:54 pm
Location: Carter's Snort

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Disembodied » Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:09 pm

One thing that seems to be missing is something like a Clan Group, where the rules of engagement could be set by the Clan. That could allow for groups where piracy does not result in the pirate automatically being kicked into the "all players" group - in other words, where piracy against PCs would be "legitimate", because a group of like-minded humans had decided that they were OK with having genuine human-controlled pirates (as opposed to griefers) in their group. PvP isn't a problem: although I don't play multiplayer games, I don't think I'd have a problem with being killed by genuine human opponents who were roleplaying pirates or some other "enemy"; that's part of the game. What's not part of the game is a tooled-up warship lurking around blowing up tiny little newbies for "fun", because said warship is being flown by an adolescent with serious self-esteem issues.

As far as I understand it, being booted into the "all players" group is seen as a penalty, to discourage griefing (although what might happen is that the "all players" group ends up consisting of nothing but griefers and newbies). But it's not clear exactly how, or why, this might happen:
When a commander is detected committing a serious enough crime against another human commander they can be temporarily included in this group, even if they have previously removed themselves from it.
Two points need clarification, I think: the definition of "serious enough", and the phrase "can be" (as opposed to "will be").

There will presumably be some method of measuring the relative power of an attacker vs. the ships they attack. It might be possible, then, to provide other disincentives to griefing via the in-game reputation system, by adding suitably negative epithets to a character's name, e.g. "the Yellowbelly"; "the Chickenhawk"; "the Pathetic"; etc. if they spend their time picking on the weak and worthless. ("Worthless" is the important thing here: pirates should prey on the weak, but only on the rich weak; zapping a newbie in a Sidewinder for 2 tons of food should not be a financially viable activity for a pirate.) Of course these epithets might become inverted badges of "honour" among the griefers, but - given their aforementioned adolescence and self-esteem issues - maybe not. Especially if they couldn't change them, until a certain length of time had elapsed.

CmdrLUke
Deadly
Deadly
Posts: 170
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2008 3:23 pm

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by CmdrLUke » Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:40 pm

DaddyHoggy wrote:And this, Ladies and Gentlemen, is why Oolite is and always should be, a single player game, because anything else is too ruddy complicated!
Amen. Each of the proposals reads like a legal document. Bleh, that's not fun. Elite's about flying & fighting & trading in an open universe while believing you're at the helm of the ship looking out into the stars. I never had an interest in any of the follow-ons to the original because they look too "space-sim"-y for my taste: you're always on the outside looking in instead of at the seat with the stick in your hand, life on the line...
"What happens in the Anarchy, stays in the Anarchy..." -- CmdrLUke

User avatar
pagroove
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 3033
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 11:52 pm
Location: On a famous planet

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by pagroove » Sun Mar 24, 2013 1:56 pm

CmdrLUke wrote:
DaddyHoggy wrote:And this, Ladies and Gentlemen, is why Oolite is and always should be, a single player game, because anything else is too ruddy complicated!
Amen. Each of the proposals reads like a legal document. Bleh, that's not fun. Elite's about flying & fighting & trading in an open universe while believing you're at the helm of the ship looking out into the stars. I never had an interest in any of the follow-ons to the original because they look too "space-sim"-y for my taste: you're always on the outside looking in instead of at the seat with the stick in your hand, life on the line...
+1. It always should be Elite. Sometimes the community seem to forget that. Probably a lot of the players want a new Eve Online.
For P.A. Groove's music check
https://soundcloud.com/p-a-groove
Famous Planets v 2.7. (for Povray)
Image
http://aegidian.org/bb/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13709

User avatar
Gimi
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Posts: 2073
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Gimi » Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:50 pm

pagroove wrote:+1. It always should be Elite. Sometimes the community seem to forget that. Probably a lot of the players want a new Eve Online.
I assure you, this is not what anyone (but a very few maybe) wants. Eve online is what people use as an example to explain what they don't want.

There are some quite interesting discussions going on about groups. I'm reading what you are posting here and comparing with what is being discussed and posted in the DDF and most of the concerns here have been raised in the DDF. I genuinely believe that FD are trying to get this right in the multi-player setting. I'm still not sure I understand how they intend this to work, and there are a lot of questions in the DDF. A few have been answered, while those posted over the weekend still remain unanswered. I'm still sitting on the fence and trying to work it out.

Edit: This post on the FD forum is worth reading. It sort of explains what the multi-player system has to cope with. Not an easy task.
"A brilliant game of blasting and trading... Truly a mega-game... The game of a lifetime."
(Gold Medal Award, Zzap!64 May 1985).

User avatar
Cody
Sharp Shooter Spam Assassin
Sharp Shooter Spam Assassin
Posts: 13680
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:31 pm
Location: Corke's Drift
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Cody » Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:29 pm

Ooh... we mortals now have access to the DDF Archive.
Their dreams a tattered sail in the wind

User avatar
Gimi
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Posts: 2073
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: Norway

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Gimi » Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:48 pm

Cody wrote:Ooh... we mortals now have access to the DDF Archive.
Prepare for a head ache if you go there though.
"A brilliant game of blasting and trading... Truly a mega-game... The game of a lifetime."
(Gold Medal Award, Zzap!64 May 1985).

User avatar
Cody
Sharp Shooter Spam Assassin
Sharp Shooter Spam Assassin
Posts: 13680
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:31 pm
Location: Corke's Drift
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Cody » Mon Mar 25, 2013 2:56 pm

Gimi wrote:
Cody wrote:Ooh... we mortals now have access to the DDF Archive.
Prepare for a head ache if you go there though.
<nods> I've already lost the will to trawl through that lot, I think.
Their dreams a tattered sail in the wind

User avatar
DaddyHoggy
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Intergalactic Spam Assassin
Posts: 8501
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:43 pm
Location: Newbury, UK
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by DaddyHoggy » Mon Mar 25, 2013 5:59 pm

Cody wrote:
Gimi wrote:
Cody wrote:Ooh... we mortals now have access to the DDF Archive.
Prepare for a head ache if you go there though.
<nods> I've already lost the will to trawl through that lot, I think.
Security through obscurity... :wink:
Selezen wrote:Apparently I was having a DaddyHoggy moment.
Oolite Life is now revealed here

User avatar
Wolfwood
---- E L I T E ----
---- E L I T E ----
Posts: 734
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 9:53 am
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: Elite: Dangerous - Design Decision Forum

Post by Wolfwood » Mon Mar 25, 2013 6:10 pm

The DDF Archive's been open to me since the beginning, but I've not bothered to read more than a couple of posts there (and only the first post on the thread in both cases). Legal documents don't interest me that much...
Author of Tales from the Frontier - official Elite 4 anthology.
Author of Marcan Rayger adventures - unofficial fan-fic novellas set in the Frontier universe.

Post Reply