Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    satoshi reacted to croxis in Limiting Script Automation will Hinder Economic Growth   
    I have yet to play a game where the act of mining (or resource gathering in general) was itself fun. That is the other balance to the equation.
    I'll quote Sid on this one. The fun in games is "a series of interesting choices." Game mechanics that stabilize into a status quo (Rust and infinite oil) will result in a boring game for all sides. Mechanics that never result in a stable equilibrium (Rust with limited oil) requires individuals and groups to reevaluate and iterate on their systems if they want to keep the status quo.
    Here is my ideal:
    * Everyone can get some basic resources and build simple constructs (like a small hover bike) themselves so they can bootstrap on their first play or after a total loss, but most will purchase from the market to fullfill most their resource and construction needs.
    * The players we consider miners wont really mine themselves, mining is generally automated and the miners manage more of the logistic side of things, be it keeping a cheap mining rig functioning or a massive pit quarry with numerous automated drones. A player who is good can run a massive rig, or a smaller one and pursue other gameplay.
    * Player choice is needed to keep it running. Neglect the mines too long and they will begin to not produce at capacity and even break down.
    * Profit = Income - Expenses.  Even a cheap rig will cost some money to run. If "everyone" is mining then mineral prices will drop to the point of being a loss. Others will flock to more profitable gameplay and prices will rise again.
  2. Like
    satoshi reacted to Saul Retav in Limiting Script Automation will Hinder Economic Growth   
    No one said anything about infinite resources. Although, technically resources will be infinite because the universe itself is infinite. You missed the point.
    I'm not suggesting anything too drastic. Using the phrase "free automation scripting" was a mistake on my part. Everything should have it's limits, but for a science fiction game those limits should at least try and be realistic (note: only being able to mine by hand is highly unrealistic).
    Mining "24/7" for an individual will be impossible anyways (due to server restrictions, automated scripts won't be able to run without an authorized player present).
    Let's forget combat automation for now.
    The ability to use automated industrial processes for mining is in no way "against emergent gameplay." If carelessly implemented, yeah, it would suck (almost as much as mining everything by hand). But it can be implemented thoughtfully, in a way that supports emergent gameplay and discourages automation abuse.
    Was the problem in your Rust example really automation, or the result of an infinite resource (crude oil)? If the clans had run out of oil they'd have had to employ a different strategy and, one way or another, be vulnerable to attack, right? It does sound like a messy situation and I'm genuinely curious as to what the contributing factors were.
    I was following along with your last paragraph thinking, "6 capital ships per day between 17 planets united under a common alliance? Heck yes! That level of interstellar warfare and player organization would be awesome!!" until I saw, "without a player spending a minute mining..." You see, I think you're missing the point. There would be players mining. Maybe not the millions of miners that might be required to keep up with that sort of operation if they were limited to mining by hand. But instead, at that point in the game, you'd have a bunch of players all working together in mining corporations, assembling, disassembling, repairing, and transporting mining equipment; transporting and storing fuel for the equipment; scripting, rescripting, and troubleshooting the equipment; transporting, storing, and selling mined minerals. And those are just the technical jobs I can come up with off the top of my head; you'd also need managers to orchestrate and organize the employees, and, if the org was big enough, you'd need upper-level managers to organize and direct the lower-level managers. That's what I see as "emergent gameplay" and player cooperation.
    To achieve this level of emergence would probably require certain game mechanisms:
    Frequently used elements eventually requiring repair/replacement. Abiding, to a degree, by the law of conservation of energy and the law of conservation of mass (AKA "no infinite material or energy sources"). And there's probably something else, but it's 1:20am and I'm going to bed.
  3. Like
    satoshi reacted to Wardion2000 in Preferred logout mechanics?   
    I prefer an immersive idea like the cryo unit or bed......   I don't think that would WORK but I would prefer it.  How about a mix?  If you log off in a cryo unit or bed you continue learning whatever skill you have selected.  If you log off onto a console whatever it controls still operates but under an in-game AI.  That would certainly help out on ships that need larger crews.  If you log off in the middle of nowhere....  Actually, how would they handle you logging off in the middle of nowhere?  For instance, I log off on the surface of a planet.  Another player comes by and builds a structure or digs a great big hole where I was previously standing.  Where would I go?  That might be a limiting factor on log off options itself.
  4. Like
    satoshi reacted to Circles in I would not want any human or alien AI in this game.   
    Sorry to give a simple answer, but I think that space is meant to feel empty, untouched lands, new horizons. No bots that have gotten there first. 
  5. Like
    satoshi reacted to SGCamera in I would not want any human or alien AI in this game.   
    Everyone will be in the same "shard/server".  Literally every single player.  And that's why not having NPCs works - because there should be plenty of players to make it feel lively.
  6. Like
    satoshi reacted to FireStartA in Concerns About PVP   
    I hope it is as toxic and as dangerous as Eve. What is killing Eve is lack of it.
    Blowing stuff up gives you the thrills and adrenaline, not digging in rocks. Sure, building is essential part, but has to be equally balanced with risk and danger.
    DU will have my money if I have guarantee that there will be small and large scale battle options, that are not instanced, limited or pre-arranged. 
    I understand the carebears' rant. They like building stuff and get angry when someone kicks their sandcastle, but there are also others who like competition and confrontation. So the carebear syndicate wants them out of DU?
  7. Like
    satoshi reacted to Warden in Concerns About PVP   
    To summarize or generalize, I personally still think that in many people's heads, there is an abstract wild fear about PVP, being "griefed", ganked, taken advantage of, etc.
    Now I realize I might have it easy or be potentially biased: I'm no hardcore PvP fan by default or through playstyle. I don't actively look for the confrontation or need it all the time. I don't intend to hold people up, rob them, ruthlessly destroy their creations, etc.
    But at the same time I do not hide and shy away from a fight. Defend myself or fight back if need be. I'm currently playing on a DayZRP community that goes with its own lore and setting.
    And boy, it's a blast!
    But why? It's the conflict, the survival, the unclear encounters. Anything can happen and at the same time, various factions formed that fight for power, influence and control over the region you play in. From government forces to remnants, to anarchists, communists (secessionists, in a nutshell), to psychopath groups or people and groups with their own agendas - so many interactions, so much to do. And at the same time, despite or due to the conflict, plenty to do for people who may not want to actively fight. Logistics, helping others, moving things back and forth in the war, obtaining intelligence.
    It's just an example from another game, and while DayZ may not be completely or very comparable to DU, some things remain pretty much universal in conflicts. As someone neither totally fond but not totally averse to PvP either, I can only suggest to look past potentially abstract fears for the future and embrace the possibilities you have in a potentially war-torn or always politically and economically contested universe.
    Don't let your fears control you and embrace the vast options that unfold before you, and you shall truly go through an immersive or epic experience with ups and downs. And when you look back one time, you will know it was worth the time investment. I want you all to eventually look back and say:
    "...and boy, has it been a blast!"
    Even if that means you stayed in safe zones most of the time. But that's fine. Unlike in DayZ and other comparable games, here, we have hard, actual or fully safe zones. Really, make the best of that instead of fearing what could happen. And if even that may be "too much" for you, then maybe DU might not be a game for you. For all it's compromises, there's still risk once you go into certain areas. That's just what it is.

    As for rank structures and taking orders...
    ...how would you define taking orders? What would be the averse factor, the thing that bugs you there?
    I'd generalize and say: (Almost) No matter what group you join, you (are expected to) integrate somehow and contribute in some way or form. I think "taking orders" is simply a measure of sharing duties or contributions or managing them. It boils down to the same: You do certain things in the organization or contribute somehow, in whatever pace, in whatever form. My point is, it's likely just "how" the group is organized, but in the end it's still a very much social or collective approach.
    Less abstract and out of curiosity: What bugs you more? That you are expected to contribute in general or that someone gives you an order or task (with emphasis on how)?
  8. Like
    satoshi reacted to Lethys in Concerns About PVP   
    Hey there,
    It's pretty well explained there. Exploring, going to new places, finding a new home among the stars,.... Should be hard and dangerous. PvP is an essential part there because it's a "civilization" game.
    If you just want to be safe 100% at all times then there is already a possibility. Live in the ASA around the ark. You can be there all the time and even mine all basic resources. So you can build all the basic stuff right there, 100% safe. 
    But rare resources and the "good stuff" will be ofc far away from the safezones to force ppl to Go outside. It doesn't make any sense to give players everything without risk. 
    So when you want those rare resources you have to Go there. 
    And yes, that's a PvP zone. That makes sure ppl band together, collaborate and help each other. 
    Or, If you don't want to Go there, then wait for ppl until they trade those resources with you. Might be more expensive, but will happen
  • Create New...