Jump to content

Ghoster

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    59
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Ghoster

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Poland
  • Interests
    music, philosophy, space exploration
  • backer_title
    Bronze Founder
  • Alpha
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

446 profile views
  1. Appreciate your response - I didn't even realize I'm eligible for Alpha 3. What I certainly do not like is the fact that, I cannot upgrade my Bronze Pack to anything. That's kinda punitive imho. I would gladly throw some additional money, but by upgrading my existing pledge, as packs are reeeaaaaally expensive.
  2. I guess Novaquark doesn't want any more of my money, since my Bronze Founder Pack not only isn't eligible for any rewards, but also, as everyone, I have to pay full price for any of the Supporter Packs. That's like punishing me for pledging "too little" at the start. So be it. Packs are ridiculously expensive anyways.
  3. Ghoster

    Hello!

    Welcome @Carrefour! Have a great time here!
  4. Well - the main reason for wanting to try playing solo would be a satisfaction of having my little and insignificant 'legacy' worked out just by me. It may be not obtainable in DU environment, but it's something tempting for me. This absolutely DOES NOT MEAN not communicating with other players and not respecting the rules that apply on their respective territories. Think of me as someone who's dreaming about self-sustaining his little life as a space nomad, being able to move from location to location and experience life as someone who contributes to re-building civilization on his own terms, helping whenever he can, provided he agrees with the principles of some encountered orgs (being rather pro peaceful coexistence, technological advancements, infrastructure building, diplomatic solutions rather than warmongering), while staying away from hostiles. It's probably the longing for some kind of Lucky Lucke's type of roaming freedom, just without chasing some villains part. Yes, loners are on disadvantage, however I believe it always can be balanced a little with some effort. Of course, I advocate for my playstyle, just as other respective members advocate for theirs. However my playstyle wouldn't be disruptive for big groups of players, it won't really break anything, if correctly applied. And yes - manpower is a challenge for loners, and a big argument for cooperation. However, social interactions can be sometimes hard, and sometimes crowd thinking makes you a piece of a puzzle/bigger picture, and you might be forced to do something you don't really support or agree with, but you just want to stay safe and accepted. I don't want to feel squished by great power play, just to contribute to some epic fleets clashes or grand destruction. I would like to control my involvement, I want to have good options. I'm not trying to say I'll always play like this, however for now it seems most attractive. At the start of a game I don't want to over-invest in social structure which might turn out toxic or pursuing different set of gameplay principles than mine.
  5. Hi Alex, have a good time here, I'm Jacob by the way!
  6. Well, I guess it's a part of my nature, that principles matter to me. It somehow feels ok to be punished as a tresspaser, but not ok to be robbed of everything because someone feels he can do it. It's a different kind of loss, different kind of pain, even in a game, you know. I pretty much realize I've never had a thick skin (what can you do? People are different, some things you can't choose) and I'm not made for high-competitve gameplay, still loved the idea of DU and being a part of it, I just look for a most suitable formula for my own personality. I don't need excessive stress - due to some different real life stuff I had always enough of it. I don't expect whole world to respect my playstyle, however I want to avoid griefing as much as possible, of course provided I do what I can not to give people reasons to attack me. I'm not aimed at making enemies and my approach should revolve about idea of relative neutrality and universal respect. Of course neutrality is not set in stone, however it's something I want to try. About retaliation - it only applies to single attackers. If a small group decides to grief solo player, the latter is on a lost position. That's why I would love to see a kind of balancing role of defense systems, that puts the attacker at much higher risks than defender. It's just a thought. If I can make them feel punished just by attacking me and paying dearly in exchange for dubious reward, it will just be a best detterent. I don't want to engage my emotions and playtime to retaliate to some evident trolls. I believe DU should provide me with much better and construtive options, driven towards rebuilding civilization. Of course, you're right about protecting my assets and keeping most of them in a safe zone, it's a given. Probably, building and maintaining anything outside of safe-zone will be a big experiment, especially in an early game - still want to try it at some point, since it could be fun and exciting, and I don't want to feel 100% isolated from the playerbase. I'm also fully aware that I have to maintain my protection systems, it's something completely normal. I just want to be sure that, those protection mechanism will be really deterrent for most of griefers, that's all. I want to them simply to be effective and worth investing my time and resources in. So all in all - reasons behind actions are important to me, my own reasons, and other player reasons. After all, it's maybe a part of gameplay too?
  7. Yeah...different tribes among EVE crowd thing...it's becoming very clear now.
  8. A dealer never uses. Unless, it doesn't apply to smugglers.
  9. And reputation train best train, right? Edit: of course it was supposed to be a tank. That's the effect of not drinking coffee today, folks.
  10. Yes, I've noticed earlier some different factions/tribes among EVE crowd. I'm always up for supporting the NRDS ones, even if SOME PEOPLE find their approach more risky for themselves.
  11. 1) You digress, and oversimplify, but let me just say - Han Solo contributed to destroying some really evil forces in the galaxy. Of course, one may think that destroying whole planets is a great way of enforcing your vision and policy, however seems like many disagreed. Yes, but Han Solo was a smuggler, we just don't know what exactly was he smuggling and where. 2) Ok, I'm glad that you trust NQ and their judgement, however it's you bringing so much references to EVE culture and events from EVE. NQ is probably refering to some aspects of EVE, but I'm not sure exactly which. Is it scale, single-shard universe, massive ship battles, or ton of (differently defined) griefing? DU is created around rebuilding civilization in a new place, which may or may not end up in a very dystopian scenario. 3. Last thing I want to do is to become a scammer - I just freaking believe in being fair, as it is my sign of respecting other people in their wanting to live and prosper, just as much as I want to - it's probably somehow connected with sympathy/empathy, don't know for sure. I will consider every fun role giving me an opportunity to be useful solo - prospector seems ok. If it won't work, I'll become a freakin' turret gunner or maintenance robot in some large vessel.
  12. Same here. I don't mind being punished by deliberately flying on some guarded territory owned by org, or get destroyed by mining on territory claimed by some org, or get destroyed by provoking someone to attack me by being totally reckless. I just don't want to be trolled and destroyed because some small amount of players simply enjoys ruining other's game experience, and they do it, because the game mechanics is perfect for their playstyle, and very risky for mine.
  13. Just bear in mind - you bring examples from EVE community - some people here, me included, cannot refer to EVE community - we haven't played the game, and we're not responsible for the shape of your universe, nor for the approach of any particular members of that community towards other members of that community. I despise zerging, by the way, doesn't bring me any satisfaction to feel stronger in group. Ok, I cannot work as advocate for smugglers - I haven't even considered being the one And this narration about heroine, opioids, painkillers - there is no drug mechanics in DU, so your analogy, as complex and interesting as it is, is not refering to DU. In DU there will be no monopoly on some substances (no substances at all!), no patents on drugs, no prescriptions, etc. As far as I know - correct me if I'm wrong. I smuggling mechanics even a planned feature? About heroine and opioids - heroine is probably much stronger than any opioid prescription drugs (unless we're talking about some hardcore painkillers for terminally ill patients, however you could kill yourself by taking a relatively high dose for a first time), and I wouldn't say that drug dealers import heroine because of bad Big Pharma - they would have been doing it anyways as long as there would be demand for it, and probably it would be. Just as in case of cocaine. Of course, we can always say that, the state should just legalize heroine to prevent smuggling, but that's a much broader topic. Also - synthetic opioids, as far as I know ARE painkillers by design, and they're created by companies to make money by killing people's pain. Prescriptions are a method of limiting access to potentially addictive/dangerous drugs. Of course, some people are just getting addicted, but that's a part of our complex nature and genetic predisposition. I could literally become addicted to my lovely sleeping pills, if I wouldn't adhere to gentlemen's agreement with my doctor. Just sayin'. ALSO: forgive my grammar.
  14. Yes, indeed you're right about PvP and multi-crew ships - in EvE, as far as I understand, you were the ship, and not an avatar like in DU. I cannot say anything about safety mechanics in EVE, as I haven't played the game, not once. I can only say that, DU will somehow find balance between people playing hardcore mode PvP, competitive high-risk, and more casual players, oriented towards neutrality, building, exploring, not messing with people, but careful enough not to tempt you with giving away all the resources for free. I understand the notion of self-defense and I wish it would cost you dearly to attack my settlement, just because you can. I just hope for a right balance, that's all. I may want to join some good and fun community, where I can contribute to mining or manning larger vessel, however it would be fun and interesting not being forced to play only in group in order to just be able to keep going. I don't know either if all gameplay mechanics regarding safety and control over PvP aspect are already final in DU, and not subject to change, that's why I'm not sure if we already know the final state of things in this matter. We don't know the details of forcefield mechanics around bases/settlements, the stats of ground turrets, or simply how much resources you will need to estabilish any proper defense. Of course, you can always say that no defense is good enough for a proper group of attackers, however it may or may not be worth it to attack someone, depending on cost/reward ratio. It's a matter of fine tunning I guess, and not set in stone, right?
  15. I think you're completely wrong, and interpret people's intention as you see fit, to make your arguments stronger. I don't see how most people planning or considering playing solo want to feel important for your org or any other large and significant org. Simply - I'm not a person and a player who's war/conflict-driven in the first place, and I don't want to be limited in my play just to a safe zone, because you advocate a scenario where there is a rule of the strongest in any part of the galaxy outside of safe-zones, even outside of some org's TCU's range. If the strongest is happened to be an org run by a bunch of psychos (which may or may not happen), then the whole part of the galaxy is ruled by psycho's ideas, and the rest has to either accept it, or overrule the psycho, or die. It's pretty obvious you guys play this game for a PvP, for an epic conflict among big, well-structured orgs, and it's ok for me. Just please, for the love of any God out there, if there is one, don't impose on other players, especially those who're not coming from any other large MMO, that if we don't share your vision of the game, then we're either "dumb", or "antisocial", or we want respect without earning it, or we want to be an empire without an effort, or we don't want to communicate, or we don't understand NQ's vision on the game, or, last but not least, that we're hyenas in disguise. I know it's convenient to do so. If rebuilding civilization is about creating a large war zone, where anybody who want to just keep away is considered a potential threat or potential victim, then maybe yeah, this game is not for me. Maybe I just don't see this game like a space wild west.
×
×
  • Create New...