plmkoi

Well even if they don't balance out and space is economically superior to planet side, I think you are misinterpreting the strategic benefits of planets for military. While space is going to be cheaper to produce goods, planets is what I would call "the center of gravity" and here are three reason why. If we take for example planets is Star Wars, they have shields that prevent orbital bombardment and so it requires sending in a ground force to destroy said buildings. If the studio includes automated defenses of a certain scale, they can make planets more strategically valuable, based off resources needed and the scale (think massive batteries or solar farms etc). Easier to just build a large turret next to building A and connect it with wires over another hardened structure to protect said battery/cpu when it is out in space. A planet is unlikely to get destroyed compared to a space station no matter how big. So in a war situation it is more sound to stock pile your hardware on a planet that can be in a underground facility. This then makes the situation more like a war of attrition where the defenders goal is to retain their city and wear out the defender. As long as the city has enough resources, it then becomes a matter of who breaks first. This will also make the Han Solo game play more realistic as the attackers, if they are unable to siege the city, will need to have a blockade to prevent additional resources/reinforcements from coming. Planets are very important for large organizations as you can just use the factories to reconquer the space you have lost. Unless you destroy that organizations center of gravity which is them being on the planet, they will just take back the territory in space. As another organization you also don't want no hardware on those planets as you push deeper into the organization because they will also threaten your "lines of communication" which is a kiss of death of a campaign. I don't think it is necessary to balance out either as just the fundamental game design should be enough. Space is going to be economically superior to build a bunch of stuff and that sounds reasonable with no fuel costs like it is to get goods off planet side. But space is very vulnerable and organizations that are totally space dependent with no planet territories or going to be easily destroyed in a war no matter how big.

Well I am only going to say that it is common sense that video games build on the forerunners of previous games. Let's make sure we use that grey matter and remember that a portion of the concepts in this game comes from Eve. As for automated turrets, it has already been put in that it will be added to the game, but not as effective as a human controlled one from what I understand. I don't think you even bothered to read the suggestions as ExtendedBacon seems to get the idea. As for your last point is moot as just claiming that griefers will be blocked and not putting in your own words how, proves the age old concept, that it is easier to tear down other peoples idea, then putting in your own solutions. You are already showing support for the rep system with the color coding which is why I question if you actually read or understood the post. Your answer is silly as this makes a player run organization having to micro manage over just having 2 systems that one is server controlled and the other stream lined by something that a diplo can actually do. It would also behoove you to read up on the Eve forums/reddit more often. It has been discussed that another reason for Eve's gradual/substantial decline in population is corp management/leadership. Yes, it is fun for the first year or few, but then it becomes not fun and a chore and results in burn out. People who claimed to play Eve usually never played in a serious leadership position and the tedious work does burn everyone out. We don't need the npc police as that is a waste of dev time in my opinion. The point is, to utilize the security system so that players who just want to grief or w/e would just be flagged for no consequence kill on sight and allow players who doesn't want to service griefers with their structures to ostracize them. As for the attackers can bide their time, that right there just means it is working as what else could the griefer do? Going to just keep bumping you? Call you mean names? The rep system is irrelevant outside of the players territory, so this makes me wonder if you have actually read through the suggestion. Community word of mouth is highly unlikely as most of the mmo games tend to be tribal. The whole point of putting in this system is to avoid the pitfalls of tribalism that is currently killing Eve right now. Once this studio releases the game it is next to impossible to fix the game later down the road. CCP obviously never thought that far ahead and so at this point all they can do is wait till the sub base can no longer pay the companies bills. Yes, your reading is roughly spot on what the rep system is meant for and really has 0 impact outside a players controlled structures. This is a forum and so I hope to see other responses in regards to how this could be improved. This is just in my opinion a stream lined version of the RDMS system as instead of having to type in everyone or organization, you can just use a system that is already in Eve that any idiot (like myself) can do. The difference being that to avoid rep's abuse of jumping out of a organization, so you can utilize the services it will just follow you, over having to manually type that individuals characters name. This is really how the sec status would play off this idea on top of creating actual consequences. Why does a player that owns a bunch of buildings, has to type in every single name of people that can be taxed using refineries or w/e? Don't want people what wants to pk randoms? sec status = red kill on sight/no access. You set the player org red because they like Harem anime and that is heresy in your eyes? play org = red and if individuals leave to avoid that rep hit to use your facilities has to talk to a diplo that controls that function. The sec status would just make it easier that anyone that isn't a pk'er can use your facilities and so people that might be from a drastically different time zone and possibly don't speak your language can use your facilities and you make coin from them. I look at both systems as a way to filter out people that you don;t want on your territory. One is the general population and the rep version is to notify that org or player that they are/aren't welcome to weed out undesirables from the general population.

I have read through the rights management and find it a great tool to manage your own groups, but when trying to apply it to other organizations/players, it is in my view quite tedious. I would believe that it is easier to just right click an organization or player and set the standings over creating tags for every organization or individual. I see the tagging system as tedious bureaucracy that adds a lot to the workload for leadership and we are already seeing how that is killing Eve. But I will wait until seeing a video that goes into depth of everything you can do with the tagging system and how it is streamlined before I drop the standing proposal. As for the security status, I did add that it is put on planets with an ark ship. I haven't seen anything in your post of possible exploits and so not sure what you mean. I only recommend the security status since it will be easier on newer players. CCP is learning as we speak of the bad practices of telling people to HTFU (harden the fu** up) with lowering sub numbers on top of stagnation. But if we are expecting DU to have a life of a decade, then sure we can discard the security status idea. The point is to give newer players a chance to explore and test out the game and minimize the griefing. I would say it is quite naive to assume that player organizations won't set up shop near the initial ark zone just kill players for the lulz. We can do better then other dead sandbox mmo's by providing a small safety net for new people entering into the game. Because there were multiple mmo's that implemented the same system of safe starting town and a gank fest risk free outside.

After reading all these comments, I feel like 99% of the people never played a game similar to DU. Turrets is a must/mandatory! This studio is not making a survival, theme, single, or even small group game similar to rust. Their goal/vision is to create a civilization creating MMO. People advocating for no turrets are either A) want to make it easier to grief/troll people or B ) Might want play a game like Space Engineers or a similar. Now knowing the vision, how can we implement it? I say that we should have an assortment of turrets in game ranging from anti personnel guns to something that can take out a battleship. They are automated and can be applied to static structures or even ships and there is no hard limit to the amount of turrets a player can put on their ship/structure. The only difference is that there is an increased response time when it comes to the fire rate and tracking of enemies compared to using a live human. Sounds broken? Yea, if I didn't come up with a blatant rip off utilizing another system. This system is taking the same mechanics that Eve has when it comes ship fitting. You can have a 1 man base operate a automated turret that can take out a battle cruiser, but it is dependent on available power from a power source. Obviously the large the turret & more of them the more power it consumes from the power source, as they require a certain amount of power used to fire a shot before going into a cycle (rate of fire). I say "power source" comparable to gas and that the power source recharges X amount of energy per second. If the power source you built or bought has a power limit of medium turrets, then you need to upgrade your power source with modules or the the turret will just offline your base. There is a way to balance this and if you have played Eve you should know it, just balance the block that is required to start the build of an item or the item itself. If you haven't played Eve, just download a tool called Pyfa and you can fit ships. The hull has limitations on the amount of power output and cpu output, so technically you can put battleship modules on a battle cruiser. But you run the risk of not being able to fit other modules because of the increase power/cpu intake from said module. Automated turrets on ships will be limited based off the size of a ship and so they can't be upset if there fighter sized vessel can only fit an anti personnel turret. The reality is, that if Nova doesn't put a variety of automated turrets this will squeeze out the small groups. So a player will have 2 choices, join massive player blob for security/protection or expect to lose ships that you invested all that time in constantly. You already see it in Eve null sec with a major blue doughnut, as humans are naturally risk adverse. If you don't think so, please prove me wrong and load yourself up with valuables and take a plane ride to Libya and show off that bling. Most of the comments here are blowing it out of proportion on balance and for me just going off the videos put out, the projects scale based off the amount of players/time. This game is already going to be the most resource intensive game for players and forcing them to park a ship without any automated defense, well this game will go the way of the dodo bird.

I apologize it took a hot minute to get to this part, but work, education, getting back into eve, moving, and etc took up a lot of time. I should be able to participate weekly at this point. Keep in mind this is just an idea and can always be refined. How can it work for Dual Universe? I would say one major city already pre-built with a lot of amenities for both new/old players and generic offices/factories that players can rent which is like a high sec zone. The quanta going into these facilities would just be a large currency sink that goes to the developers. The rest of the territory being land plots that players can rent out (again going to the developers) and paid monthly out of whatever wallet the player chooses. Money goes up dry, then the plot is back on the npc market adjusted to inflation rinse & repeat. Probably throw in turrets into the area, any players that tries to aggress and kill players in this zone lose a sec drop that makes them a flashy red and puts them on to a kos (kill on sight) list. Anyone that engages that flashy red can do so penalty free and maybe earn a quanta or two and anything that drops is lootable for the killer. Newbro lands having impenetrable security with the biggest security drops and it lessens the farther edge you get to the outskirts of the city and into the land plots. Same concept as Eve high sec in that you are safe, but not un kill able safe. This is all planet level. Space, I would put it to 50km all around you can get npc ships that blast a player that tried to agress/kill another player and the response time being 16 secs at the edge of that space surrounding the planet and going as low as 8 secs near the atmosphere. If a player can get out before the npc police arrives well it sucks to suck, but they lose the sec status anyway and it puts emergent game play in the sense of corporate espionage. Not sure how the map is constructed, but if it large I would put one high sec zone per region with a gate that can insta warp people to other high sec zones for players that just want to sit in high sec planet. Sec Status we can just use Eve as an example of -10 to 0.0 to 10.0 (honestly think it should just be -10.0 to 0.0). You get -10 you get blapped as soon as you enter past the 50km mark from you being an a-hole and do a bunch of stuff the dev's would deem is griefing or the unwashed masses i.e w/e. For players that realized that griefing/piracy is a hard life style and stops before they get lower then -5 they can trade at a space station construct so they can access the main market hubs and services of that high sec zone. Things we don't do that makes it trivial that CCP implemented: we don't make npc dog tags to sell on the market that can raise sec status, npc response is used against both the ship & pilot, you can't grind up your sec status as like the skill que it is time based (if you rage quit well actions have consequences so get another account or gtfo), people that trade within the area of 100km get sec drop of like -1 or something. At the end of the day: High sec planet/space = safe, but not un killable safe. If there is a will there is way in suicide ganking. As much as people qq on Eve about suicide ganking it is actually used in market pvp as a tool against your competitors with locator agents. It doesn't deny people the avenue of being a griefing a-hole, but it does have costs that one has to pay either in game or out of pocket. The 100km rule puts people far enough out in law less space that their convoy toon can get axed themselves and encourage those players to boost the back water markets. Why go to a main trade hub when I can pay 20% more in another region until my sec status builds up Sec status applies to one planetin that region in a 100km area or w/e distance and has 0 impact outside of it so you can go 50,010km and if you are killed the npc police will sit there with their space doughnuts and laugh at you. Gate has gate guns of course. I prefer the npc police not to be uber powered where they are unkillable like current concord and takes effort at the risk of a larger drop in sec status If players find this all too extreme, then we can add a 3 min rule of you can't loot or salvage the wreck without a major sec status drop. At the end of the day this is just a rough rough draft and this is a forum that we can discuss. But for the people who claim to be "Eve" players, please don't be delusional. Why is Eve still popular after 17 years? It is because there is a moderately safe zone that players can engage commerce in. I look at the sec status as an in game version of any major city in the U.S. It is safe to go shopping in the mall and etc, but that doesn't mean someone can't mug you in the parking lot that only the security cameras catch and police eventually arriving to your location of distress. Literally 99% of Eve player base is the derogatory term used "carebear" or if you want to lie to yourself that you are a hardcore pvper "krab". People are going to be risk adverse and that is just plain human nature. The people that are on this forum that are screeching here for FFA pvp or the game is garbage is the same war cry I hear in a lot of places. This vocal minority is so selfish that their only skin in the game is at most their kickstarter investment at best or that pre order in comparison to the developers lively hood. People who are using Eve as their reference point is delusional as everyone gets their supplies from a major trade hub that has the high sec status and now invulnerable npc's that insta kill anything. If you were thinking that you are escaping the blue doughnut coming to DU without any protection other then a 20km zone and no market you are quite delusional. So please share your thoughts on the refined/revised idea and lets discuss.

Abstract/TLDR Version: The purpose of this proposal is to give a general simple system that will empower player organizations/provide a little security, but without the use of some structure like Eve empire npc space + npc police. I recommend utilizing a standing system and a security status based off of player actions. With the security status being independent and completely regulated by the game. I also understand that there were previous threads related to this, but in my perception it seemed overly complicated and sometimes, I wasn't sure if they were trying to create npc mission mechanics. Both of these are standings with one being automated by the game and the other players or player run organizations labels and their perceptions. Part One: Security Status I completely understand a lot of concerns when it comes to pk’ing and griefing. Turning the lands into a Mad Max world, of players brutalizing other players for no other reason than just for the “lolz”. To combat this I recommend putting in a security status that starts at 0.0, which effectively means you are neutral. All players entering into the game will start here and they won’t be flagged and are effectively considered non criminals. Now, what happens when players go below 0.0? Well this is where they are flagged as a criminal for their actions (I will put numbers only for examples and allow others dev & community to decide). So players that might engage another player by firing on them might drop the security status by .5, which now puts the individual at -.5. Killing a player results in a -1.0 and this will also include looting (might as well loot them if you kill them). After a certain point like -5.0, these players are considered a pariah. So basically it becomes a shoot to kill and anyone can engage, whether you are a pirate or a law abiding citizen. So now we know the penalties of engaging in pirating, how do you raise your security status? Here this might be controversial, but this is because of the detrimental flawed system that Eve currently has. I recommend that it is time based and the reason being that the actions to consequences has to be significant. This is also a good way to rehabilitate players in regards to committing anti social behavior. Length of time is up to the developers/community on the gains and since we are doing time based skills, well in my view it only makes sense that your reputation should be the same. This doesn’t prevent people from living an outlaw life style, and only requires commitment. Now, what is the benefit of implementing this system? Well for one, it encourages players to build large cities once the developers add certain modules (Automated turrets). This creates an environment of security and encourages the devotion of said resources. To prevent the possibility of players being duped or brain dead the studio can implement a tutorial that explains the system. We can also go as far as a safety system that Eve has ,akin to a safety on a gun. Where a new player entering will automatically have it set to green on their U.I and a notice will pop up if they decide to shoot someone or etc. They can click on said said button that allows them to do w/e they want as acknowledgment that they understand the consequences for their actions. Each entity can decide what the bar is for access to their territories. It can be draconian and that anyone not a neutral will be killed on sight by modules or players. Or tolerance for the criminal elements and anyone from neutrals to hardcore criminals being allowed. I recommend player enforcement over modules use and modules only has a yes or no of security status enforcement. Purpose is to make cities taking the support anyone route serious devotion and a page out of history that pariahs being forced to live out in the wilderness. I would only implement this automated mechanic on a planet that has an ark ship or a player controlled territory. Being in space and planets with no safe zones, I would consider to be the equivalent of null and so it should go wholly off player/organizations standings. *additional info= only applies to something like a small moon and once off planet it becomes lawless or w/e. Point is to give a significant area for "carebears" to live on. Podcast #4 RDMS Part two: Player Standings aka labels Now for the standing system. The purpose of this is to allow player organizations to set standings on a scale of -10 to +10. This can easily be expanded on by allowing people to edit and gain certain privileges set by certain roles instead of typing each individuals name. As we all know that some player organizations might hold grudges from a previous incident or rivalries. The purpose of including said system is to utilize the same modules (automated turrets), a player run organization has more control over their territory. They can determine what other player run organizations are friendly and in their eyes trustworthy so the said modules doesn’t open fire on them. The process can be as simple as someone with the authority like a diplomat can set individuals or an entire organization as red hostile or blue. Doors and other amenities provided by the entity setting the standings can also be denied. This also can be applied to setting preferential rates/discounts for allies utilizing services like a refinery, a factory, real estate taxes, and etc. This also allows player territories that are unable to utilize modules to have some enforcement of unsavory characters that live the outlaw lifestyle. Here we can probably throw in a bounty system where the Tortugaisque city to deal with players that can’t follow said rules. Example, a player run organization (A) that preys on new players for the “lulz”. Another entity named (B) doesn't condone such activities and flags the entire organization red at -10. So this effectively flags them from access inside structures and kill on sight if they decide to enter said organizations territory. Even if a player leaves said organization the negative standings of the other entity will not change. This will require a player to contact the diplomat and request to have their name taken off the list. This is to prevent dodging being flagged by bailing out of said organizations and as a way of corp history, which at this time I am unsure if it will be implemented. I will state that this is a label that only impacts the player in the player organizations territory when it comes to shoot on sight or utilizing their services. In Space it is irrelevant other then maybe war declaration mechanic or if you want to kill them just because. I have read other proposals and in my perception, they are overly complicated. Eve kept it simple, your standings with a player or organization start out as neutral. Now if you decide to join an organization that has set you -10, that is their prerogative and it is nothing more then a label outside of their territory, whether it is from an individual or organization. The standings should only come into play when accessing that organizations territory for services or not to be shot on sight. You can change it as an individual at any time so you know that person has done something wrong to you and you can choose to add a reason or not. Player run organization can also change it at anytime, but it is not mandatory for it to be reciprocated and so your members might be confused when the other organization that is marked friendly is killing your members. This will make handing out a diplomat position a position of serious trust. Conclusion: I see both systems as being crucial because it gives the players the tools to run everything themselves outside of the starting zone of no pvp. I also believe that these features can be expanded on and is a simple system that isn’t overly complicated. Now, there are assumptions that abuse would be minimized or creative solutions can deter such activities. Example I.e a neutral player is already in the city and a diplomat sets the standing negative to pk the individual. So make standings take a downtime or certain length of time to be enforced and the player notified of the negative standing being set on them. Without the said system I fail to see what the incentive is to avoid tribal instincts i.e shooting anybody not apart of your player organization and allies. These systems will automate a lot of the interactions, with in my view minimal intervention of the leadership in a player run organization. This may also be the first time where a system can be setup that encourages a completely player run system, just using these tools to exclude certain unsavory characters and encourage lone wolves not to be killed on sight and partake in trade, social engagement, and etc. So any lone wolf that doesn’t want to be apart of any player run organization can still visit a city of entity X to trade or w/e. I will attempt to answer any concerns and would very much like to hear any criticism over this idea. This can help us as a community to either refine this idea or scrap it for a better system to manage large swathes of players. I am also reserving the second post as this discussion might actually produce things that I never thought of or other input that is much more creative and so I would like to post changes here for people to see as they go through the discussion (of course citing the individual responsible for credit).

Yes, they did mention they are going to put in limitations so you can't use lua to automate a lot of things. In regards to pvp it will be less efficient or slower then having a live person controlling it. I do disagree on mining not being allowed to be automated to some degree, only because it is quite easy to put in things that require to control from a person. Mining in this game isn't as easy as Eve as you actually have to find the ore instead of warping into a belt. I can assure you that it will improve a lot for newbies once the game is released, as the fundamental game design forces you to be social. In Eve you can have one person control everything in industry with a bunch of alt accounts and the same for pvp where you can multibox several accounts in a fleet. The scale of the projects for an organization is going to be limited to the amount of people that they can recruit. The videos shown of the space station already makes it painfully obvious that the effort and work required to create and defend such constructs is going to be be large. You can already see what is likely to take place from just observing how Eve turned out, with their corp's and alliance structure. Newbies will be give a ton of resources in regards to skill books, ships for pvp fleets, currency making activities, and even mentorship.

I mean Eve has this happen all the time, an alliance or large entity loses a war they end up having players drop out and be absorbed by other organizations. I also believe that people grossly underestimate the power of newbros in pvp. Here say lore, Goons was an entity that got crapped on by a veteran alliance of another organization called Bob and every fight they would get massacred. But the catch is these newbros were flying less expensive ships and with everyone can make an impact attitude you can overwhelm vet's with their more expensive ships with overwhelming numbers. You are also assuming that veteran outfits aren't going to try real hard to recruit newbros and try to attack them. The reality, from what I have seen in the videos, a large entity it would behoove them to get as many bodies as possible. The scale of these projects for anything large like a station is at least going to require hundreds of people. I am unsure if any people from Eve coming into this game would be to organize at this level right off the bat.

The individual is kind of wanting this. Which if the game is going to go skill over time, this is a must in my opinion. Because with the skill over time aspect, the different skills will most likely be attribute based and so training random skills will actually take weeks longer then if you optimized it either with math or someone else's math and coding. Example: I am in Eve training leadership skills (charisma/will power attribute) that give people in my fleet buffs, but if I decide to train gunnery (perception/will power) and don't switch my attributes, what would have taken 2 weeks for a level 5 advance skill in information warfare is going to take 4.5 weeks (as it is going off the will power attribute). With the game limiting you to attribute changes every 365 days, would be a bit frustrating if you were forced to train mining skills and hate it, then proceed to change to pvp which you enjoy and wasting more time until that 365 day mark. If they use the attribute system, each point of attribute gives a certain amount of skill points (exp) per second and if the warfare skills has 1 million sp to level it and your attributes with bonuses primary attribute giving 100 sp per min, will power 500 that would translate 1 day. This is an gross oversimplification of how things work, which is why you are going to want third party tools to optimize your time in skill training. * I don't agree with people seeing your skills in game as that gives full intel and makes pvp easier on top of removing a lot of the ambiguity. This actually encourages griefing as you can then see the person is new and take a dump on their head for the lulz, where if it is hidden then they have to take a risk of attacking a player that is senior to them and will put them in their place. Also to get this info you would have to go to your account on the studios website and copy/paste the token api to the program for it to get regular updates on your skill changes which you only have access to unless you give it out, or the programmer collects it w/o your knowledge. But most people who does this on eve actually check the backend themselves.

I am going to seed 2 links here that might make the developers enforce the tos against such practices. One / Two Eve online has already tried it and the studio stopped it because of the gambling laws passed in the EU, but also the fact (from the grape vine) that a lot of people involved in the rmt was using it to launder isk. With the systems mainly outside of the studios control it was hard to determine if the isk being put in/out was clean or not. If a player won 50 billion isk, you can't tell if the person was lucky or they paid cash and the goddess of luck favored the person that day. 50 billion isk if we just use fuzzy math with today's plex rate is the equivalent of close to $500 you would have to purchase from CCP and if there was the market price of $4 mill pu. *grammar edit

Well the lead guy played Eve and so I would expect that at a later expansion it would be implemented in the same way (link to how eve has it done). Stronger boosters/drugs gives the strong stats in one area with a random probability to give you a certain amount of debuffs and you can lower % wise by training the appropriate skill and increase buff duration. The stronger stuff is illegal in npc space and so there was a profession early in the game where the lawless areas people would make the boosters (which certain groups specialized in linked here to utube) and smuggle transport them to the major trade hubs in empire space. Of course they had to kill or dodge npc customs while going through multiple gates. The above group had a monopoly and the video actually shows a major power bloc deciding they want to enter into that market using force. TCF was a French alliance with I don't over 2000 people against probably a 100-300 player group specializing in narcotics trade. People used boosters in pvp because of certain buffs and it was legal to make the synth ones in empire even though it gave you a very low % of stat buff's.

Not to be mean, but this is a lulzy suggestion. This idea can't be implemented because the fundamental game design is already in place since last year. Here are some of the problems: The developers have already implemented a rights management system to prevent unauthorized people from editing or damaging your property without your explicit permission. So assuming that people are going to search for ore, resources, and etc, they are going to accidentally stumble on to your operation regardless if you have a tcu or not. The difference being that the tcu will show that there in no point in going to that area since they wouldn't be able to impact the environment and probably be shot on sight. I mean the game play style you want to implement here sounds like you can just pick up a survival game on Steam and do it there. I fail to see how it would be beneficial for an "mmo = Massively multiplayer online" and if anything detracts from the mmo experience. This has nothing to do with me wanting to oppress anyone or be pvp bloodthirsty sociopath and just the fact that this is a single shard game that is going to have hundreds of players if not thousands playing through multiple time zones. Now if you would like to add dampeners or w/e to block out radar for assets a group puts out topside I am all for it. But throwing a bunch of artificial hurdles to allow you to play a single player play style in, again an mmo doesn't make much sense. I think people are making grand assumptions that the planet is going to built like crazy with people taking over territory all over the place, when in reality the planet is going to be scorched as bigger groups mine the hell out of the planet to establish their presence in the game.

It doesn't have to prevent group play, just discourage it. I honestly played a lot of mmo's and the theme park ones like Rift/Wow/etc I never saw the point of joining a guild as I can do the content solo. Where when I played my first mmo Age of Conan and on a pvp server (I was ignorant of "pvp server" meant) I joined a guild like others pretty fast. The reason was just like others it was a hardcore pvp server where even the starting zone of the Tortuga Island once you left the city to the quest areas people will gank you. Heck, it was so bad there was someone that grinded mobs of 1exp in the starting zone quest area to get to lvl 20 to gank people in a zone of 1-12. It was so bad that I tried to help a player that was getting ganked by another player of similar level and after the ganker was dead, attacked me, which I would assume the player thought I killed the ganker so I can take that players booty for myself. Eve online same thing with the harshness. The above player types were created with the focus on theme park mmos that have a bit of pvp in them. Eve Online, Darkfalls, Mortal Online, and maybe Dual Universe is going to encourage more group play because of game design. When the environment is harsh players are going to have to decide to either group up or stay solo and endure the hardships, which many people fall to the former. It is interesting as I heard of the same mechanisms in the social sciences that people in general tend to group up regardless if they are introverts or extrovert just to survive in a harsh environment. As for the alternative? People are just going to leave the game. Sandbox mmo's are unique niche game type and most people that played heavy into theme park mmo's just can't adjust as it tends to mirror the real world a bit in certain aspects. I also don't buy into that concept of introvert being scared to talk to people. In Eve you are going to struggle a lot if you refuse to talk to people and try to do some of the activities. I still participate in group activities, whether it is joining a CTA or assisting others in logistical op's. I just don't care to socialize anymore then the bare minimum of asking for reps or doing the job I volunteered for (scouting, tackling, and etc).

I am skeptical that people would get much when it comes to research in the social sciences utilizing DU, the main issue being the anonymity that players can hide behind. But I can say that recording the historical events of player politics might be thorough this time unlike Eve. It is a pity as a lot of the history in Eve is pretty much lost and I would compare it to basically the ancient times of the Bronze Age with a lot of info/drama being on the forums and a lot of them being shut down (scrapheap challenge).

I can assure you, that this is unsustainable for a sand box mmo. Now if this was a theme park mmo then I would absolutely agree with you, as most theme park mmo's tend to and should go F2P/B2p. Now why would a non sub model be detrimental to the game and how can a sub model benefit the game? Proliferation of griefing accounts with F2P(B2P to some degree) and this is no joke. You have an mmo game that might include the possibility of losing in game assets/ time invested and you want to give people the ability to do this with no risk? I can assure you that the developers/GM's will be overwhelmed with the amount of cheaters/griefers that would take advantage of the system, which detracts from developing the game. We are already seeing this with rmt/bots in Eve where every ban wave another 100-200 accounts are created immediately afterword and banning accounts isn't easy as false positives means one customer that is going to bad mouth your game. I would like to that CCP just banned 100 something corps with nothing but botters and word on the street as they say they were replaced within 24 hours. If the J.C decides to implement a sec system that isn't garbo like Eve's, you will now have a way to curb anti social/sociopath behavior. I played Eve online back in 09' and you had gankers that could target you in a secure area and kill you take your loot and laugh at you, but this wasn't a regular occurrence. Since CCP went with a semi F2P model this has gotten to ridiculous proportions (I see at least 3-5 transport wrecks every day I log in) and now it a detriment to the game. For me to travel and bring my goods to another market I either have to wait for a few months to train into a freighter that has a ton of hp + purchasing one that costs 1.5 months of plex or travel in a transport ship that has smaller capacity, maneuvers/initiates warp as fast as a 100 year old person getting out of bed and I can get dunked by 1-2 some 2 month alt accounts for the lulz. A sub model that the studio is proposing is very feasible and mostly beneficial, but with some downsides. Pretty much all players that play in western/first world countries are going to drop cash for a sub and this is because no one with actual disposable income wants to grind for plex. Now people from the 2nd world countries/etc are going to be able to leverage the use of Dac's which is basically the equivalent of plex. I can assure you that many players in the 1st world countries will dump cash into dac's to just get easy in game money legally (if the studio prices them right) and put them on the market. How sustainable is it? Well I will admit I dropped over 2-3K in plex since 09' and just recently started to try and actually farm for the in game money instead and I know others that dropped +10k over their 5 years. The fact is (I know I might get penalized by the rules, but real talk as I say) a lot of people that actually has a good chunk of disposable income doesn't like to farm/grind. Myself I would rather drag my sack across a mile of broken glass then farm/mine over doing pvp or more fun activities. The only downside to the Dac system is rmt side of the house will take advantage of it, but it will benefit players that can't afford to pay due to currency limitations. When I joined a null sec alliance in Geminate region, I recall a couple players while unemployed because of the financial crisis was able to play as long as they devoted a certain amount of hours to farming/isk making activities. They were able to always play until they found a job and can get back on to a sub plan and I know tons of Eastern European players that were able to do the same as well. I am confident that you and others are going to be better hustlers then a lot of the players in the west because when you don't have a safety net of a sub, but have actual time, I have seen crazy ingenuity to make isk from players. I am doubtful on the pricing being high rates as the in game currency is hard to manipulate if the studio is watching it. All it takes for the studio is to do a sale and the market will be flooded. I noticed in Eve, people has some serious impulse problems. Instead of I don't know waiting and seeding the market, they act like full tards and dump them on the market resorting to an easy 20% drop in price that takes a month or two to get back up to the premium price it was at. Worse now as they moved all in game time from the forum to plex and so it is so transparent with the in game tools to see total volume and line graphs on the avg movement of said product. When it was on the forums it was super easy to manipulate and I also took part in said actions. *edit tried to fix format issues

Well if J.C actually played Eve, I am sure he is probably going to put in some war declaration system that gives (on eve at least) 24 hours for the war dec'ed party to gather their forces and defend themselves. As for constructs being damaged I am unsure if he is going to put in the flawed system of the Eve citadel system/entosis or something along the lines of the pos reinforcement timer. Pos being a player owned star base that is floating in space and allows the the people into the force field to reship or drop off goods/etc. The reinforcement timer is basically the towers are filled with a fuel called Strontium Clathrates which is farmed by players in ice fields. This fuel has to be measured so that you can have it usually 8-16 hours or 36 hours when it comes out of invulnerability and preferably during the attackers "off peak time" aka EU tz player org attacking and you swing it to U.S Mtz or w/e tz your group has the most players that can participate. This allows you to gather people to repel the attackers or repair/refuel modules or worse case scenario last a bit longer for the evacuation of assets. The above starbase system does require certain amount of resources per hour to stay anchored and you do have to constantly refuel the modules or risk it coming offline and anyone coming to take w/e they want.

Thank you for the replies and I do intend to be a backer, but participation might vary depending on features at release. I am perfectly content on waiting as long as the folks at Star Citizen for the game to have the features that might make it more enjoyable.

Curious to see how many people recognize the title. I have heard more about this title recently and decided to look into the game. I am currently consuming a lot of info in regards to the games development and the features this studio would like to implement before I start participating in the forums. I will admit here, that I am a skeptic when it comes to mmo games and the visions that many put out. I suspect that just like a few of the more popular mmo forums (Aoc, CF, and etc), that I might ruffle some feathers because I tend to go deaf on the hype. My field of study is military history and hobbies tend to be heavy into wargaming and strategy games. I do play mmo's, with the first being Age of Conan on the hardcore pvp servers and eventually getting involved with Eve in 09 around the fall of BoB. I use to be a care bear in Eve, but over the years I have been more into the pvp aspects. I tend to also favor games with cooperation and like to join groups to have a vision or goal. I look forward to discussing this game with other fellow comrades. If anyone can answer this, it would be great. Does the studio rely solely on Discord for their NDA feedback if I become a member? I am curious as I don't really do Discord and this is the first studio that doesn't host their feedback in a forum and uses Discord. I hope this doesn't end up a double post as I am unsure what occurred during sign in. If so I apologize in advance.