Corporation Headquarters & Membership Bonuses

Under the current game mechanics, corporations are merely a tool for players to identify themselves and communicate more easily. Outside the largely meaningless leaderboards (On which rankings are achieved by quantity over quality) there are very few advantages or interesting elements to being in a corporation. Given that creating one actually costs a hefty chunk of real world money, I propose some additions to the game that aim at changing this.

 

 

Corporation Resources

 

First and foremost, a corporations needs a collective resource pool. I propose that corporations automatically collect a (very) small percentage of the income of each individual member in matches and acquire this in a ‘corporation account’.

 

Members would also be able to donate credits into this account.

 

Additional resources could be added, such as Ore, Fuel, etc. if we want to make things more interesting in the future. These could tie in with assets on the sector conquest map and capital ship construction. These resources could be obtained through mines and other space stations, as well as specific PvE missions which involve escorting your convoys. People with more imagination than myself can go wild here.

 

 

Corporation Headquarters

 

This is where the real proposal comes in. I’d like to see a physical structure, be it a space station or a structure on the planetary surface, which acts as the physical headquarters of a corporation. This HQ would have a number of stages and expansions to it which enhance it’s capabilities.

 

Why?

To make being a member of a corporation more interesting and to add further common goals to the game.

 

How?

Buildings would require a credit cost to construct, and undergo a certain construction time. Once constructed, they will be subject to a weekly or monthly upkeep costs, which over time reduces the amount of net credit income a corporation gets in their account.

 

A corporation should be able to de-activate buildings to reduce this cost, but this triggers a cooldown before the building can be activated again. (To prevent abuse in trying to avoid the upkeep payments by timing this)

 

 

Upgrades could include:

Corporation Warehouse - Provides additional passive warehouse capacity for all members. Useful for everyone without causing any balance issues. Obviously DLC warehouse increases should go on top of this - rather than providing a fixed limit.

 

The provided bonus would get larger with each upgrade.

 

Corporation Ammo Depot - 2 upgrade levels: Provides corporation members with access to Military (cheaper than blue and no loyalty requirement) and Experimental Ammo types.

 

Corporation Missile Depot - 2 upgrade levels: Provides corporation members with access to Military (cheaper than blue and no loyalty requirement) and Experimental Missile types.

 

Corporation HQ - Numerous upgrade levels: Provides corporation members with various small stacking bonuses to loyalty gain and/or credit income (to off-set the corporation tax)

 

Shipyard / Academy - A few upgrade levels: Provides corporation members with small stacking bonuses to synergy gain.

 

 

None of these bonuses have to be big, they’re just there to make things interesting and to make it just interesting enough to warrant getting those buildings constructed. It would give corporations something to work on together, and add to our immersion of the game.

 

Ideally, some sort of screen where we can view our Corporation HQ in all it’s glory would be pretty nice too. I’ve left this fairly open to get people their inspiration and ideas flowing - but you can see where I am going.

Мore resousrses than the iridium is a no-no IMO.

*shh* do not give them ideas. They may charge us for fuel tanks before each match in next version ^^.

 

But seriously I do not mind the bonuses, but military and experimental ammo and missiles should not be able to be bought w/o loyalty requirement.

Unless requirement for T3 experimental is R10. for example. And ofcourse ammo only since now there is no way (or I hope so) that you can draw experimental ammo and have to 10-30% it.

 

 

 

EDIT : Since now we can not see other members’ loadouts there should be like veteran room or w/e you call it where I can make a picture/blueprint of my current loadout on ship X and post it. 

Other members who have the ship and want guidelines on what to put as modules can check it and few other blueprints for ship X. Compare and see if they like.

I like it, It would encourage players to find and join corporations. As you stated, it’ll provide people with common goals, and in an environment that is about teamwork - this is good.

 

I also like the idea of resource management. :>

 

I would like to propose this though, joining a corp that has an HQ should provide you with the ability to dock at the HQ, so you can view it in the background in between battles.

If there is an option for members to add more than their percentage in any way, I welcome changes for corporations to become more important. However, I do not want to see corps only be viable with full member-count, so any system should make also smaller corps viable and not make corps into mass grinding mechanics only.

 

Also, I do not really see the need for warehouses, rather more ways for tactical play, also intercorporation play. Of course, having the ability also to have different goals to achieve as a corp would be nice, so that not every corp simply tries X and gets Y bonuses at stage Z. So I’d rather see expansions in modules, where you can build each module separately, or upgrade it - say 3 times - to acquire certain things in the corp, not a consecutive upgrade order.

 

A corp HQ with a free roam mode would be nice to finally be able to set up keybindings without having to idle in a match of any sort or do quick duels to test ship fits. At the moment the lack of a free flight mode does make me irritated.  Which is of course not a corp only problem. Just mentioning it coz of Miaw’s comment.

 

Also, I dont really mind if the interaction ingame stays minimal and functional, such tools like fit propositions, etc. can be done much better on websites, posting fits in the chat or similar like we know from eve would be of course really awesome,  but I’d rather see more things added for transparency and thirdparty apps, like releasing datasheets at each patch, in that sector, and more effort on making the social tools like chats etc. ingame really bug-free. Also note, that for corps without web presence, we do already have teamspeak servers, which should be better advertised (maybe in a common thread), and steam offers pretty nice tools for that too.

 

This game is neat since it seems to be a thin scripted layer on the engine - I would not want it to bloat with unused GUI features, if it would be better to solve that in a more decentral manner, like browsers - which not only run better next to this game, but would also run on steam, which has a webkit browser inside anyway.

If there is an option for members to add more than their percentage in any way, I welcome changes for corporations to become more important. However, I do not want to see corps only be viable with full member-count, so any system should make also smaller corps viable and not make corps into mass grinding mechanics only.

My suggestion included a ‘donation’ option - which allows the one-way transfer from members to the corporation account. I couldn’t agree more on the ‘smaller corps’ issue. Bear in mind WPK is technically a small corp, we just make a lot of noise and have a (far) above average activity level per individual member. We wont ever recruit more than 50 ish people, we’ll never fill out an entire corp because that’s always been one of our primary mission statements. Quality over Quantity. As such, I will always champion game mechanics which don’t favor only corporations with more people.

Also, I do not really see the need for warehouses, rather more ways for tactical play, also intercorporation play. Of course, having the ability also to have different goals to achieve as a corp would be nice, so that not every corp simply tries X and gets Y bonuses at stage Z. So I’d rather see expansions in modules, where you can build each module separately, or upgrade it - say 3 times - to acquire certain things in the corp, not a consecutive upgrade order.

Mutually exclusive choices would be great, and enable corporations to differentiate one another. The Warehouse is for pack rats such as myself, who have nearly filled their storage space even with the maximum 1100 space.

 

A corp HQ with a free roam mode would be nice to finally be able to set up keybindings without having to idle in a match of any sort or do quick duels to test ship fits. At the moment the lack of a free flight mode does make me irritated.  Which is of course not a corp only problem. Just mentioning it coz of Miaw’s comment.

 

Also, I dont really mind if the interaction ingame stays minimal and functional, such tools like fit propositions, etc. can be done much better on websites, posting fits in the chat or similar like we know from eve would be of course really awesome,  but I’d rather see more things added for transparency and thirdparty apps, like releasing datasheets at each patch, in that sector, and more effort on making the social tools like chats etc. ingame really bug-free. Also note, that for corps without web presence, we do already have teamspeak servers, which should be better advertised (maybe in a common thread), and steam offers pretty nice tools for that too.

 

This game is neat since it seems to be a thin scripted layer on the engine - I would not want it to bloat with unused GUI features, if it would be better to solve that in a more decentral manner, like browsers - which not only run better next to this game, but would also run on steam, which has a webkit browser inside anyway.

Bear in mind that any form of API / external app access requires server power and thus associated costs. As well as development time, maintenance, etc. I’d love to see things like that in the future but not until all in-game things are fully polished and we’re all dancing and prancing around like happy hippos.

In the mean time, some relatively small changes in-game could have a profound effect on our enjoyment both short and long-term :slight_smile: (Like chat improvements, corporation interface improvements, leaderboard improvements, profile improvements, etc. etc.)

As such, I will always champion game mechanics which don’t favor only corporations with more people.

Why favor corporations further?  The squad advantage is obvious.  I generally play a game here and there, do something else for a while, and maybe go back, maybe not.  Most of the players in the game aren’t in corps, and changes like this would try to force corps for advancement.  It would also encourage corps to be created solely for the purpose of getting the special modules.  Buy one T4, get T3 experimentals and stay in T3.

 

One thing that could be nice is being able to trade or gift things to another player.  I have modules I’ll probably never use again, I should be able to gift them to someone I find in battle who gives me impression they can use it and deserve it.

Why favor corporations further?  The squad advantage is obvious.  I generally play a game here and there, do something else for a while, and maybe go back, maybe not.  Most of the players in the game aren’t in corps, and changes like this would try to force corps for advancement.

This game is designed around team work and playing in squads/corporations. The advantage is obvious and the implications corporations have on the social dynamic and interaction within the game is profound. Without corporations, this game and its community wouldn’t exist. The vast majority of events, activities and player interaction is generated by these corporations.

They also provide players with a social platform, an outlet, friends and allies akin to their play styles which draws them back into the game on a daily basis. You will see that as you go up in tiers, you will encounter more and more players who are in corporations - as most experienced players will eventually look for one if they enjoy the game enough to play it longer term.

Encouraging players to socialise and play in groups is good for the game, as it gives players a higher level of immersion/interaction and ultimately more reasons to keep playing.

It would also encourage corps to be created solely for the purpose of getting the special modules.  Buy one T4, get T3 experimentals and stay in T3.

They’re not ‘special’ modules - and you can compete perfectly fine in blue equipment. The differences are fairly small. If people want to form corporations together to get access to said modules, then it kind of proves my point: they just bonded over something they have in common and want to achieve together. Even if they do nothing else and never form into a competitive corporation, this just increased their interaction with other players and their immersion in the Star Conflict universe.

One thing that could be nice is being able to trade or gift things to another player.  I have modules I’ll probably never use again, I should be able to gift them to someone I find in battle who gives me impression they can use it and deserve it.

This concept doesn’t currently fit in the Star Conflict economy and it has been stated that there are no plans to add player to player trading at the present. It would mess with the speed at which people progress and their excitement at acquiring new loot.

I bear that very much in mind, Tac, since I do that stuff usually. In actually all stages of development.

 

I was not answering to you about the API-stuff, but to a follow up, tho. Even if it seems different from outside, developing GUI stuff in a 3d Engine with stuff like Lua to work to all satisfaction about more functionality, that could have been done outside the client, is more cost and more primarily time intense in the end, than building a simple webservice, or similar, which also puts away strain from the lobby servers by simply showing some infos from the db over http. I just meant, it would be better to solve that outside of the game instead of focusing too much in details, which do not really have directly to do with the game-part. So yeah, I very much agree with your statement there. Actually, that’s what I was saying.

 

The datasheets e.g. would be pretty easy to do, (simple serialization) instead of half hearted updates on a wiki page, and I am sure - pretty sure about myself since I already begun that part - that people would also start to put together stuff to use for corporations about fits and similar. We already saw some tools come up.

 

Only Live Data needs an API, and while I mentioned it, it would be definitely a good direction, the game needs way more polish as it is. Also, the extent of a full blown Read-Write API like in Eve is pretty much over the top. So we agree totally.

 

I would not directly say mutually exclusive options for corps, just not fixed stages you have to unlock in a row, because that is hell of annoying. Instead having multiple modules, you can unlock or install or buy or whatever, so the corp can grow in the direction it needs to, and not every corp is kind of “classified” by which level his unlocks would be.

 

I read that with the donations, also liked that, I wrote it to underline, that any solution there may come should keep in mind, not to simply make quantity corps better. I am pretty sure, we are on the same page here, too, given the similarities of our corp philosophies anyway in not even trying to be maximized in player numbers.

I am pretty sure, we are on the same page here, too, given the similarities of our corp philosophies anyway in not even trying to be maximized in player numbers.

 

This.

 

It needed quoting. It’s the primary reason I respect your corporation.

Agreed… I remember posting something like this, lol. Good to see I am not the only one on the forums who wants to see something like this.

This would be a very good idea.

This game is designed around team work and playing in squads/corporations. The advantage is obvious and the implications corporations have on the social dynamic and interaction within the game is profound. Without corporations, this game and its community wouldn’t exist. The vast majority of events, activities and player interaction is generated by these corporations.

It helps turn the game into “C2W,” corp to win.  The vast majority of players I see are not in corps.  Even when there are a lot of corps in a battle, I see few obvious squads.  To say that corporations are the lifeblood of the game ignore the players who don’t belong to one.  If everyone not in a corp boycotted for a week, there would be a week with wait times longer than game times.

 

They also provide players with a social platform, an outlet, friends and allies akin to their play styles which draws them back into the game on a daily basis. You will see that as you go up in tiers, you will encounter more and more players who are in corporations - as most experienced players will eventually look for one if they enjoy the game enough to play it longer term.

Some people just play to have fun, not socialize.  It’s not facebook, it’s a game.  I’ve had conversations with strangers repeatedly, in chat and with messages.  I’ve never seen them again.

 

Encouraging players to socialise and play in groups is good for the game, as it gives players a higher level of immersion/interaction and ultimately more reasons to keep playing.

They’re not ‘special’ modules - and you can compete perfectly fine in blue equipment. The differences are fairly small. If people want to form corporations together to get access to said modules, then it kind of proves my point: they just bonded over something they have in common and want to achieve together. Even if they do nothing else and never form into a competitive corporation, this just increased their interaction with other players and their immersion in the Star Conflict universe.

It’s still an explicit benefit to corp members.  A corp created for loot does nothing to increase interaction.  They join, play, get easy loot, and that’s all.  The “Captains” went to the tournament more than the Kings.  Out of all the active corps, how many actually participated in the tournament?

 

This concept doesn’t currently fit in the Star Conflict economy and it has been stated that there are no plans to add player to player trading at the present. It would mess with the speed at which people progress and their excitement at acquiring new loot.

Trading may not fit, but you may find someone who flies ships you have special modules for when you don’t use those ships often or at all.  Doing that would encourage friendship and socialization among players more than requiring corps.  Adding in trading with standards or credits would complicate things a lot, but gifting modules/weapons wouldn’t.

True, it benefits those in corporations, but shouldn’t there be benefits to joining a corporation? I lose interest in games that have little diversity. I think adding more features to the corporations is a good idea.

It helps turn the game into “C2W,” corp to win.  The vast majority of players I see are not in corps.  Even when there are a lot of corps in a battle, I see few obvious squads.  To say that corporations are the lifeblood of the game ignore the players who don’t belong to one.  If everyone not in a corp boycotted for a week, there would be a week with wait times longer than game times.

At higher tiers, this is no longer the case and the vast majority are in corporations. I don’t ignore the players who choose to not play in corporations but at the same time we should not limit the available options for corporations just because some people prefer to fly solo. This isn’t a Call of Duty style game, Star Conflict has MMO elements of which corporations are a major part.

And it’s the corporations which are causing the majority of interaction, intrigue and rivalry within the community.

 

Some people just play to have fun, not socialize.  It’s not facebook, it’s a game.  I’ve had conversations with strangers repeatedly, in chat and with messages.  I’ve never seen them again.

That is their choice - this shouldn’t be a reason to limit those who do choose to socialize. Player interaction is an element some of us are interested in. I don’t see how these suggestions would limit the fun of people who decide to ignore corporations.

 

It’s still an explicit benefit to corp members.  A corp created for loot does nothing to increase interaction.  They join, play, get easy loot, and that’s all.  The “Captains” went to the tournament more than the Kings.  Out of all the active corps, how many actually participated in the tournament?

There will always be a disproportionally small segment of the player base representing at any tournaments - this is the case in all competitive games.

 

Trading may not fit, but you may find someone who flies ships you have special modules for when you don’t use those ships often or at all.  Doing that would encourage friendship and socialization among players more than requiring corps.  Adding in trading with standards or credits would complicate things a lot, but gifting modules/weapons wouldn’t.

Gifting modules/weapons would allow us to speed up the progress of some people in unpredicted and unintended ways and has wider implications than you might consider at this moment. Such as indirect credit-gifting just to name one…

Long story short; why should we have to limit the available options and incentive to join corporations just because some people refuse to play with others? If anything, that’s all the more reason to do it and encourage them to find like-minded folk. It’s these same people who complain that corporation-squads have an advantage over them, yet they refuse to do anything about it.

We will have some kind of customize able Corporation Hangar in the future, but I cannot give more details at this point.

What about Corporation Alliances? 

 

Some corporations want to make large alliances or teams with other corps. 

 

What special provisions would they have? a different tag? Special perks?

 

I want that aspect added as well EvilTac. 

Agreed - I’ve specifically mentioned this aspect in one of my other suggestions.

 

It can be found in detail [here](< base_url >/index.php?/topic/20586-corp-alliance-chat/?p=210670).

Of course, if you somehow find 149 champions other than yourself, I wonder how you’ll handle the recruitment? feel free to send them my way :stuck_out_tongue:

Of course, if you somehow find 149 champions other than yourself, I wonder how you’ll handle the recruitment? feel free to send them my way :stuck_out_tongue:

Not entirely on-topic, the Corporation forums would be more suitable, but we’re actually closing on the maximum number of people we will recruit in WPK very rapidly. We’ve started sending 95% of the current applicants to other corporations, and tend to have a [set list](< base_url >/index.php?/topic/20578-looking-to-join-a-corp/?p=210900) of corps we recommend based on their experience level, time zone and personality.

 

On-topic; The maximum member limit for alliances as stated in the post for that suggestion as discussed above - is very important to me. It ensures that a group of smaller corporations can band together vs. larger ones, rather than having a “5 corps per alliance” rule or something similar, which would still massively favor quantity over quality.

 

It’s also a much better way of balancing the max size of any alliance as it allows the ‘many small corps’ vs ‘a few big corps’ power blocks.

This is a super good idea, I also want Corporations own Hangars where you can see your allies ships!