Supergroups...isn't it time for a change?

[Giovanni Valia]

This is the "Cosmic Council" SG isn't it. Why not just use discord to coordinate for events, teaming, etc. 300 SG limit x 8 coalitions should be more than enough...

[Black Zot]

19 minutes ago, Giovanni Valia said:

This is the "Cosmic Council" SG isn't it. Why not just use discord to coordinate for events, teaming, etc. 300 SG limit x 8 coalitions should be more than enough...

 

As I recall, they once said that about 1028K RAM.

[Excraft]

3 hours ago, Snarky said:

The Super Groups, Star Teams, Super Teams, call them what you will, would ideally be long term groups that form in game.  Not account wide, but character specific.  In this way a Ice Dom might belong to their "main SG" and also Super Teams 1) Dominators of Rogue Isles 2) Ice Guild of Paragon 3) League of Calamitous Intent 4) Friday night levelling crawl 5) TF Saturday Excelsior

 

THis would allow for more of a connection to other players in the game, better teaming due to knowing the people on your team.  Yes, it is easy to team on Excelsior.  No, it is not always pleasant.  Yes, it is a LOT more pleasant when you have run with the peeps regularly.  Kapeesh?

 

Sounds like you can accomplish what you're after with private chat channels and sharing base codes.  You invite people you're familiar with and use that to form your teams.

[Snarky]

47 minutes ago, Excraft said:

 

Sounds like you can accomplish what you're after with private chat channels and sharing base codes.  You invite people you're familiar with and use that to form your teams.

I see what you are saying.  I prefer if it is an codified system for a couple reasons.  Not everyone is good at/likes those options.  Also, if that was working to accomplish the goal of creating long term character connections it would be obvious by now.  It is not obvious, not to me.  It is obvious to me the SG system creates long term character connections.  

 

I do like where this is going though.  Zeroing in on the issue I am attempting to address (thenk you everyone for helping me think out loud) which is long term character interaction with other established characters they game well with.  

 

What you just said is also intriguing.  If, big if I know, there were chat channels with a visible roster (the 'face' of an SG) that were character specvific and you could join a decent number of (5+?) I believe it would solve the bulk of the issue I believe needs to be addressed.

 

Again, the issue is making play experience better through having established groups you can easily game with.  I do have a great SG I very recently joined on Excelsior.  Up until now I have been exclusively PUGing (and I team a lot...) On Virtue I was part of a small but active group called Brickhouse.  

 

We all know good teammates can make a gaming session incredibly easy, fun, and productive OR bad teammates can make a session frustrating and near useless.  Having more options to network a character that are easily visible, intuitive, and usable is a very good way to promote stronger teamming and in the end greater enjoyment.  Transact for Victory!

[Shenanigunner]

2 hours ago, Black Zot said:

 

As I recall, they once said that about 1028K RAM.

 

640K, on the PC side; 128K, on the Mac side. Both from the reigning genius of the hour. 🙂

[Excraft]

2 hours ago, Snarky said:

I see what you are saying.  I prefer if it is an codified system for a couple reasons.  Not everyone is good at/likes those options.  Also, if that was working to accomplish the goal of creating long term character connections it would be obvious by now.  It is not obvious, not to me.  It is obvious to me the SG system creates long term character connections.  

 

Not sure this makes any sense.  What's so hard about typing in a chat channel?  How else are you creating teams if you're not using chat channels or Discord?  Seems like a complete waste of effort to code something for this when you can accomplish everything you're looking for with a minimal effort right now.

[Ukase]

On 3/27/2021 at 5:56 PM, Snarky said:

To pick up a name being bandied about for making the game better "Star Teams"  (referring to 5 person teams better concentrated to make content interesting: although I think it is interesting as is) and I suppose we are talking about a lot more than 5 in most cases.

 

But yes Greycat what I am interested in more than storage (I have a storage base SG, and having one or two toons not in it is not an inconvenience, throw them a few hundred mil and be done with it.  My main only generates revenue.  What does it need with storage...?)  anyways, more important by far than storage is the Grouping, semi permanent like a SG that allows a network tailor made for that toon.  Yes coalitions are great.  But as a lowly serf in a big SG I do not control the coalitions of who we associate with.  Again, i see this as a way to get better connected to a few groups that really meet one individual and/or toons needs.  A main SG can be great!  But the flexibility to add some side groups that you fit in well with is not an unworthy concept to explore.  All Tanker Group?  I still remember the Tanker Tuesday peeps from live.  I never joined (I Brute lol) But wouldnt it be great if they had a Star Team where they could see if their peeps were online and shout out in Star Team chat?  Or, again, a RP group, or a Dark Themed Group, or The League of Calamitous Intent?  Having these connections outside a SG would deepen the interest in the toon and increase the ability to consistently find teams that work well together.  In my opinion.

I understand this limiting feeling you're having. When I use my base tp power and have to enter my own Personal SG passcode because the characters in that very large, lag-infested SG with teleporters that are further away from the entrance/exit portal than in my own, it annoys me that I can't simply choose my own base, but must enter in the pass code, or, alternatively, load into the character's SG base, then use my personal sg macro. Only takes an extra 10-20 seconds, but it still annoys me. 

But, as we know, coalitions are limited and not chosen by the membership, but by the leaders of the SG. 
So what solution is there? 

Try this: Make a character, and have no intent to actually play them. Put that character in the big sg you belong to, being sure to simply log it in once every week or so to keep it looking "active". Pull your main character out, place him in your own personal SG, then form coalitions with those groups you seek to coalition with. You would still be welcome to team with the SG you currently belong to with your main. You'd still see the big SG chat in the private channel they have given you access to. It's not a perfect solution, but it's a bit of a workaround. You'd still have to form your own coalitions with the type of SGs you mentioned, but you'd have that option. 

The only thing missing would be the name of the big SG that you currently belong to. You'd still have access to the SG base with the macro found in the discord, as well as your own base, and any you're in a coalition with that allows it. 

I wish I could come up with a better solution, but that's the best one I have. 

 

[Shred Monkey]

I agree the current SG system as implemented is lacking.  But I also think global channels and friends lists basically cover the gap.  The problem would be if one of the SGs you are tied to doesn't use a global channel and only speaks in SG channel.  

 

 

[Snarky]

I thought about this today.  There are a few good 'work-arounds" that have been offered.  Some of them are actually in use by quite a number of players.  I definitely appreciate this type of feedback.

 

My concern about the "work-arounds" is that they are just that.  I just talked to a player yesterday that had not logged in since live.  New to Homecoming.  I saw a question he had in Help and immediately switched from Grandville to Blueside to look him/her up.  I found them in Talos, but they were in LFG so couldnt accept team invite.  No issues, of course they were right by the train station lol.  

 

I chatted with them, dropped some Inf on them, gave a few tips.  Always nice to see a new/returning player.  So sad they want to be a hero, yet I keep hoping they will see the wisdom of being truly chaotic!  Tangent.  Okay, so...  They were in LFG.  ding ding ding.  They had been asking about DFB.  I pointed out that we formed teams and the LFG thing was not so good.  You see, we mostly all know the "work-around"  New/returning players do not.  

 

What I would love to see is the ability to join several long term groups.  ("Shadow SGs," no base, so no storage abuse if that is the concern) What the groups would have is a SG name, roster, window to see who is on, etc.  A virtual SG with no real estate.  Bonus points if you can name them something wicked for Redside.  But this would allow Tanker Tuesday teams, Master Blaster Disaster, Ice Cold Monday group, RP groups, that a character could join, and have access to long term social groups that they want to be a part of.  Not, work arounds, not side roads and shortcuts through alleys everyone local knows, I am talking big modern state of the art freeways with lights and directions and easy on and off ramps.

Edited March 30, 2021 by Snarky

[ZacKing]

It's not that hard to find teams here.  Joining multiple groups is kinda what coalitions are for.  you have your separate chat channel for it.  your "problem" is basically solved with coalitions.  might be a good idea to increase the number of or get rid of the coalition limit though.  would also be cool to get a separate coalition roster tab like the SG one where you can see who is on and in what group.  No idea how easy that would be to code though.

[Ukase]

I think what's missing is not a coalition for the sg, but a coalition for the player. The leaders of my SG may have a history and fondness of the groups the sg is in coalition with, but I don't know who any of them are, save a couple, and one of them is in our sg with an alt. 

I can't fathom the type of headache this would cause in the coding, though. It's a nice to have kind of thing, but I don't see dev time being spent on it, as there are other things that likely will return more value. Opinions will vary on that of course. It's tough for a lot of us to have a real clue as to what would take too much time and what wouldn't if we're not looking at the code, and don't know null pointer exception from a garbage collection method. Many times a simple solution seen by an experienced programmer can result in a lot of uncompilable lines by one not so experienced. Kind of like playing a dark defender in pvp. In the right hands, quite efficient. In the wrong hands, chum bait.