Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mitharus

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    USA, Illinois
  • backer_title
    Ruby Founder
  • Alpha

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. What I was mostly, badly, trying to talk of was abandonment. If it's possible to stock energy, and that's done, but a player stops playing... then that structure/whatever is left till the energy runs out. However long that may take (or until broken into, etc...). The decay, I was speaking of was not structure decay, but "protection" decay... so, you can stock pile energy, but if you don't log in then the shields go down after 30 days, or something else similar, etc... Hence the "vacation" mode, or way to reset this timer remotely for times when you need to be away extended. This type of decay is totally dependent on there being a way to create batteries, reactors, etc... as power sources. So, not likely early on, but something that could be feasible. This may make more sense for structures than ships (if there's a difference in the code between them). Or make it much easier to take over... I've played some games where you would find ton's of small structures around the landscape until they implemented a similar decay where anyone could destroy them if the owner hadn't logged in after X amount of time. -M
  2. IMO, this is probably the best way to handle it. If the "owner" doesn't log in within 2 weeks, or whatever, then the item is marked as salvageable. If something is salvageable, but they log in... the timer is reset. If something is set to a group (organization/federation/guild/whatever you want to call it) ownership, then if anyone in that group logs in, the timer doesn't kick in. There _could_ be a fluctuation on the timer based on the material used in construction... weaker material could modify it by -1 -> -5 days, where stronger material could by +5 -> +10, etc... But when constructed, the object as a whole has a salvage date based on the materials used in construction. There should be some way to mark that you'll be away... vacation mode, etc... but even that should have a hard cut off date of a month or two where the salvage calculation will start in. Maybe a way to set it from the account page for the really extended times. Those are always fun when they happen... :/ -M
  3. I don't see how it would be artificial... it's mostly guess work at the moment since we don't know the exact mechanics that will exist. But, even organically growing, depending on population density, there will be a residential area that is constructed eventually. Even within an organizations area, they will probably have a shared residence hall, with private chests (if they exists), that is in close proximity to the industrial/market areas (i.e. work areas), etc... It just makes sense to have an area to keep your "personal" collection that is separate from the organization. So, I see residences as an inevitability in some form. Not everyone will be part of an organization, and if they don't want to spend their resources on building a place (i.e. they're more market focused, or focused on a different aspect), then the ability to *rent* some place to call their own is a added bonus. And hopefully they don't end up looking like Kowloon City. :/ -M
  4. Land "owner" and an Eminent Domain policy? -M
  5. Well, if things go as planned, it will probably take a month+ to get the infrastructure in place, just to start on getting everything needed to make the parts for ships (Totally dependent on how much time is able to be spent). So, if you look at it as we're starting without even the infrastructure to create a ship yet, and building from scratch the entire infrastructure needed to begin the construction... not having space combat (or even CvC at all) at the beginning doesn't break the game. Plus, with what was pledged on Kickstarter, if they mark the extra for CvC as it was the first stretch goal, then it could be out in an earlier patch than if they hit the minimum funding amount. -M
  6. I don't think we start with one... From the DM21 interview with JC, when he was asked what his (JC) starting play would be, his response included: "Try to claim a Territory in the safe zone so I could build things in relative peace." ... that was around, uhh... *goes to poke at the video* ... around 33:15 in. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVkbdfxiKxM&t=33m15s -M
  7. I believe it was said that TU's were 1K^2 and that's it. There may be tools to subdivide it once you own it... but that I don't know. But it was said that it was going to be difficult to claim a TU. -M
  8. Why wouldn't they be functional? I mean, if you assume the cities are multiple TU's, so you have multiple Organizations, or a large enough Organization that they actually collected multiple TU's, then... you would want functional buildings for your members right? And assuming that there's a way to make locks, or some other way to give/restrict access to certain areas, you _could_ setup an apartment complex, or hotel, or similar to rent out safe places. -M
  9. They may do something like Ark, where when you put up a structure, someone else cannot build anything within a small footprint around you. That doesn't keep you from being trapped (i.e. In Ark, large groups surrounding a structure with Behemoth gates where they can build), but it does give you a bit of breathing room. As for things not being destroyed... no. As others mentioned, if you want a "safe" area, then you'll want to get a territory unit. But even then, I don't think that makes it 100% safe, just safer than without. Shielding, and other possible defense mechanisms are in the plans to IIRC. -M
  10. Err... In the US at least, names cannot Copyrighted. Trademarked yes, but not copyrighted. http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ34.pdf I mean, in the US if names could be copyrighted, and you have automatic copyright (no need to register... brilliant idea!), who gets the copyright on your name when you have multiple people with the same name? You? The guy 5 years older? Or the guy that died 50 years ago, but the copyright term is life + 70 years and it's applied retroactivaly? -M
  11. mitharus


    Cool. That would make it easier then. And yeah, I know the processing cost would be outrageous, but they've already said their doing some of it with the higher LOD levels for when terrain is modified so large changes are visible further out. As I said, it's going to boil down to the specifics on implementation. If voxels are independent, then it'll probably just boil down to a cave generation algorithm that they're happy with. -M
  12. mitharus


    It really depends on how they're doing the terrain generation on if they'll be able to get "usable" caves. Here's hoping. I'm thinking one of the big issues they're going to run into, is that from what I gathered (though I could be wrong), there's going to be physics on the voxel objects. If that's the case, then each voxel is going to need to know about what's around it, and that could cause issues with collapsing when caves are dug out during generation. i.e. Here's the terrain, now carve out caves... and gravity pulls the ceiling down -M
  13. I guess I don't see this as an issue for a couple reasons... 1) I already write code that's released under a modified 3-clause BSD license.[1] So, as long as the copyright notice is kept in place, you can do with it as you will. 2) Restricting what someone can do after the purchase an item from you limits their ability. Are they not supposed to be able to tweak it to suit their needs? It would depend on how the blueprint/object system is implemented, but if a history is kept on the items (which I don't know why there wouldn't be), a timeline could be proven. It may not *prove* copyright infringement with how the current API looks, but it would give a definitive timeline of what existed when. Besides, everything so far looks functional, and there's probably only a few ways certain things can be written to accomplish a goal, so there's going to be lots of similarities between different peoples lua code. I, personally, would see it as a derivative work of NQ's anyway. Unless they go all out on the scripting ability, and not just allowing custom event code with the DPU.[2] -M [1] - To give a couple organizations a perpetual license to the code, spelled out in the license itself. [2] - ?? Can't find the exact term right now, but I think this was it.
  14. I would propose similar... but, this would take a major agreement on all parties involved, which probably wouldn't happen... The starter planet should almost be a player designated safe zone itself. Yes, there will be mining, and eventual resource depletion, but if everyone is careful, then it keeps an area that is a "Neutral Zone." Maybe a shared mining operation that all organizations are part of to have a shared pool for newcomers on the initial planet. So, growth is very carefully monitored only on the starter planet (or the hemisphere, even just the quadrant, the Ark ship is in). This would give new players down the road a way to get off the starter planet, by either purchasing the resources "cheap,"[1] or digging them out of that shared mining location(s) themselves, or having a common area to find work under any of the organizations. Once you're out of the area players have fenced off, you're on your own, and good luck. But, it would give late comers a way to start building up their resources without needing to worry about who's toes their stepping on, or if the resources are depleted, etc... because the people who have been around longer are trying to keep that area usable for the newer folks that show up. If there isn't a way implemented in game by NQ, then players purposefully keeping it useful is the only way I see it staying sustainable. I'm not saying it should be completely safe, or that there couldn't be any political maneuvering for better standing, etc... just that it's a player designated neutral area for the express purpose as a launching point for the future. Even if attempting to keep the area sustainable fell through, having an area that has emerged where all organizations can meet in relative safety, have a large market area, a "safe" area for new arrivals, etc... could be worth the attempt for most organizations to see it through. -M [1] - I say "cheap," as if there's multiple organizations all adding to the same pool, the overall cost would be lowered dramatically.
  15. Well... I wouldn't expect it to be in the _initial_ release, but say you have an in game DB object. The players/organizations that want access to more than a pittance of storage space, could pay a bit extra every month to cover the storage cost of the object. NQ would have a lua script library for access to these DB objects. They'd let you store data using an "SQL" like type connector... so you point your script at the connector object, and authenticate... then you can access what data is held in that object. Remote access would be feasible with this, but... I wouldn't want to be the one designing the security safeguards for doing the remote access. But in game, this would give you an object you could share data across multiple other objects with. -M
  • Create New...