Jump to content

Thokan

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    77
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Thokan

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Ă–land, Sweden
  • backer_title
    Patron

Recent Profile Visitors

622 profile views
  1. Nah, m8, you explained it perfectly; and it is a good intention. I would like to add that NQ, in their game design and vision, always somewhere where beaten players can retreat. The beginning zone, the safe moons and the shield bubble for your claimed territory. Either you like PvP, or you don't. Being good or bad at PvP really doesn't say anything about how willing people are to PvP or their usefulness. If a player gets "beaten" to the extent of not wanting to partake in PvP anymore, that player can always fall back to the relative safety of his/her supposed protected base, or the absolute safety of the safe zones. The mechanics, resources and ordeal needed to take down other peoples territory claims and bases therein is a deterrent from knocking people out of the game too abruptly.
  2. I found playing The Repopulation very refreshing in contrast to run-of-the-mill crafting systems in regular MMORPGs. That shit was intense
  3. discordauth:9wci8zGQdeljyYMA-9cjKVqMn5K7YW_AxLieWM_CUZg=

  4. Then the question is, where would this money come from?
  5. People have such exorbitant fantasies of complex mechanics. I just wanna blast people and take over territory. Custom parts would flood the markets with unintelligible crap. Also: Balance.
  6. That's exactly why you need to not be overly bureaucratic and authoritative. I am not making the argument of having no enforcement and judicial process, I am making the argument of having simple and effective enforcement and judicial process. How is a bureaucratic set of fines and multiple punishments adaptive, bending and diverse contra dialog leading up to kicking individuals out of the guild? A player breaks the rules once - set them straight. A player continuously breaks the rules and try to cause conflict - kick 'em. It's really that simple.
  7. Viewing distance, then. Wouldn't really see the point of any such mechanic otherwise.
  8. Normally, a directed "hail" would, in terms of sci-fi tropes, indicate close proximity. Though, I certainly wouldn't mind a simple system of messaging, or whispering rather, constructs - automatically reaching the crew rather than to having figure out who's on and then messaging them. Indeed. I don't know if there are any plans for VoIP or anything of the sort. And video-feed would surely be out of the question, technically speaking.
  9. Yes, I do believe there will be chat in-game
  10. I think, naturally, it would be a world of hurt and grief to allow people to buy and sell ownership of organizations.
  11. The point is simple, though. It will have negative consequences to create an unnecessarily bureaucratic and authoritative organization. It's all I'm saying.
  12. Stocks and bonds of what?
  13. A few points to be made. There are several problems and inefficiencies with using punishments, fines, blocking, imprisonments and such. First off, how is it in any way an incentive to remain in the Organization if you aim to segregate individuals from the community? Secondly, are you gonna appoint people to track down your own members, give them fines, obstruct them and such? Waste of time and effort. Why would I continue to support an organization that wants to force me to give up my own stuff? Also, I don't really understand what several of you mean by meta. Sounds like regular gameplay to me, in contrast to semi-roleplaying. Yet another reason why its inefficient and off-putting with minor punishments. Moreover, a problem is how are you gonna monitor people? A hierarchal, authoritative system, in the terms of handing out punishments to lower members, and also the other way around of handing out privileges and handouts to certain individuals; alienates people and will obstruct you from even detecting transgressions of rules. You see, the more you differentiate between members, the harder it will be to notice when a couple of them are out on their own causing mischief. The more you are all equal, enjoy all the benefits of the organization, and are organized the principles of need and effectiveness instead of titles and privileges, the easier it will be to notice when your fellow members break the rules or just don't simply belong in your organization or the idea of it. The best method to police your own organization, is imo, simply: 1. Set a simple set of rules. A general rule set, a RoE, et cetera. 2. Appoint an officer with the task to investigate complaints of individuals and actions, coming from inside the guild, but also most importantly, from outside. (How are you ever gonna be even notified about the lurkers who keep to themselves, grief and only want access to your organization infrastructure/buffs/benefits, otherwise?) 3. If people can't follow the rules, kick 'em out. Simple. All in all, it's a game, not a simulator for organizations to roleplay Big Bad Governments. Unlike real life late-stage-capitalism, there is little incentive to put up with stuff like that in-game.
  14. As stated above several times - it adds nothing to the game. Only a certain few, a minority, get some roleplaying, immersion kicks out of it. The only reason this is a debate is because, generally, the people looking for immersion and roleplay aspects are overrepresented in indie, crowdfunded, pre-launch game forums. It won't be the case when the game launches later on.
  15. Thokan

    Mobile Bases?

    The question is not wether you will be able to build big things, the question is if it would be worth it and how easy it is to just blow up in a few min. Is it worth dozens of people building and maintaining a huge floating station "for the heck of it" only to see it blown up by a handful of people with resourceful and effective ships? In the end of the day the game mechanics dictate the meta, not only your creativeness.
×
×
  • Create New...