Jump to content

NanoDot

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Posts

    1025
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by NanoDot

  1. I'll most likely gravitate towards industry/logistics, with PVP in security and recon areas. It's impossible to tell at this point where I'll spend more time, it all depends on how the eventual game play is implemented. I imagine that the gathering of intel and analysis of that intel will be an important factor in DU's huge game world. My focus will be on the strategic side rather than the tactical.
  2. Ultimately, it's NQ who will decide what constitutes "griefing" behaviour. If they feel that the actions of a small group are negatively impacting the game as a whole, they will act. I don't believe NQ will just sit back and watch the world burn, I think JC's plans are a bit more ambitious than that...
  3. I'm already prepared... NQ are also preparing, which is why they are implementing things like safezones. Nobody wants to see DU limping along with a tiny player base because a handful of players have dedicated themselves to make the game as unpleasant as possible...
  4. They usually are, actually. Most examples of senseless destruction are just that, senseless. There's no intricate scheme behind it all, it's just done to irritate and cause maximum inconvenience. Most PVP'ers are not griefers, it takes a special kind of mindset to be a griefer, lol
  5. Call it what you like, but in my book destruction for the sole purpose of making others angry will always be griefing. A thief that takes all he can carry is legit, but one who only breaks in to destroy "because he can" is not. It's like vandalism in RL.
  6. There most certainly will be "griefers", lol Those are the ones that break into your base, not to steal, but to delete everything they can find. The ones who'll deface the land all along the edge of your hex claim, because they want to harvest your tears. The ones who'll destroy your TCU not because they want to claim the land, but because they know it will make you angry...
  7. I don't think you can block anyone from accessing the items listed on your terminal, because the blog states that items for sale will be visible remotely. That makes it sound like EVE's market tab, where buy and sell offers within a certain physical distance can be viewed from anywhere, because the "market window" is part of the player's UI. But perhaps it will be possible to maintain a "remote access blacklist" on your terminals, who knows ? In EVE, the items you purchased are collected from NPC stations. Nobody can stop you from collecting goods, as long as you can get into that station. As long as your NPC rep is good, the station will always welcome you. Train the right skills, and you can even remotely setup sell orders, which will automatically transfer the items from your hangar to the "market". In DU the goods for sale on a terminal are stored in a container owned by the market operator, which is also attached/linked to that terminal. If goods are collected from a "dispenser unit" (also owned by the market operator), you can certainly control access to the area where that dispenser is placed... That opens up an opportunity for a whole new level of scamming, lol
  8. The biggest problem I see with aliens in DU is that it changes NQ's focus. Currently, NQ provides players with "tools" to create their own content. Introducing NPC's means NQ has to start generating game "content" for consumption by players, which will inevitably divert resources away from building new and innovative game systems for us to use...
  9. That is the logical reason for something like "Project Tortuga" ! A place where nobody is excluded from trading (provided they can survive the shopping trip !
  10. I was agreeing with you and expanding on the idea... My understanding of that blog is that the arkship terminals will only sell "basic goods". They will in all likelihood not accept player sell orders, because if they do, the arkship will become DU's "Jita" very quickly. And once that happens, it's very hard to change. Plus the goods offered for sale by players would have to be stored in arkship-controlled containers, etc. There are more questions than answers at this point.
  11. There are many subtleties in DU that are easy to miss, and therefore get lost in the noise of recycled arguments that have been valid in "other games" for decades. Unless I'm mistaken, ALL market terminals in DU will be player-owned, unless NQ build "arkship market terminals" to compete with players... which would surprise me. That would mean that DU will be the first game I know of with no "Auction House" provided by the game itself, which would be outside of player control. That has profound implications, because it means players will decide who gets access to the markets ! So be careful who you offend... or else make sure your alts cannot be identified in the slightest...
  12. I took your suggestion as an attempt to not allow "criminal" characters to enjoy the protection mechanisms and market access afforded by the "safezone". I must have misunderstood. If you're only trying to prevent "pop-out... kill... pop back in" tactics, then I think NQ are already wrestling with that scenario.
  13. NanoDot

    Cloaking Tech

    How would 2 cloaked fleets find each other to do battle ?
  14. There's no need to apologise. But, if you're going to apologise, then I should apologise for my "griefers are everywhere" joke. The incidents I listed were not examples of "senseless destruction". Both those groups were acting on their own moral codes, and what they did was completely justified in their world view. Probably a very different world view from yours or mine, but perfectly valid and logical in its own context. They didn't do it for the lulz. But when cultures are so dramatically different, something has to give, else violence is the inevitable outcome. One or the other has to be destroyed or forcibly modified, they cannot co-exist in the same world without constantly crashing into each other. Much like the "PVE vs PVP" camps in MMO's...
  15. You might not, but your moral code or sense of aesthetics is not universally shared, unfortunately. In 2001, the Taliban blew up the "Buddhas of Bamiyan", which were giant statues built in the 5th and 6th century. ISIS destroyed large parts of the ancient city of Palmyra, a valuable archaeological site. The list goes on... It seems that griefers are not only found in MMO's ! It's best not to use RL references to motivate game design on the basis of "people wouldn't do this in RL". Sooner or later, humans will do anything they are capable of doing...
  16. And that's why a set of "laws" defined in software always fails. They cannot deal with the myriad complexities of context, which means human ingenuity exploits them to the full. That's why we have human judges in RL, to interpret the context of events and apply the laws accordingly.
  17. NanoDot

    Cloaking Tech

    In MMO's, "cloaking" is usually managed by limiting its function via game design restrictions. For example, only ship class X can fit a cloak, but that class can only mount "small" weapons and doesn't have any "armour slots", etc.. In DU, that management becomes very tricky, because there are no pre-defined ship hulls or "weapon slot" mechanics that can be manipulated to limit the effectiveness of cloaks. DU will have to balance cloaks by using the attributes of the ship elements themselves. Cost can be a contributing factor, but it's not effective by itself. "Expensive" is relative to the wealth of players at any given moment, but that's a moving target in any MMO, as players have more and more money as the years go by. And DAC can always be used to boost ship construction funds...
  18. In a game where each player controls 3 characters, how do you deny "pirates, bandits and murderers" access to the safe zone via game mechanics ? If the player controlling that pirate has a squeaky-clean alt, he has 100% safe access to safezones regardless, and that's the usual work-around that "reds" use in games where "reputation" or "killrights" make it difficult for one of the player's alts to enter certain areas. So denying "criminals" access or protection in safezones is largely symbolic, their alts will do the resupplying in complete safety anyway. The player that owns a territory does not need "killrights" to ban someone from his territory, he allows access and actions at his own discretion. He can ban player characters merely because he suspects them of having criminal connections, but a game system administering a "safezone" cannot do that.
  19. NanoDot

    Cloaking Tech

    That's a vital point though. If you can change elements instantly anytime anywhere, then the whole premise of different detection types (and damage types) basically falls flat on its face. There's no point in building a ship that's "invisible" to certain scanners if the people searching for you can instantly switch scanner types "on-the-fly". And what's the point of different damage types if the target can just swap out defensive elements to best counter whichever damage your weapons are delivering ? The whole point of having fixed loadouts on ships is to introduce uncertainty. It means there's value in gaining intel on how an enemy's ships are built and what their preferred fits may be. It means that there's an opportunity to catch a badly-fitted enemy and destroy them easily. It provides a strong incentive to experiment with different loadouts and tactics that depend on those configurations. We all want advantages in combat, but if everyone has access to the same advantages, then nobody has any advantage...
  20. In truth, these debates have been raging since the dawn of MMO's, lol And they will continue endlessly for as long as there are games that try to combine fundamentally different play styles in one game world ! UO realised the futility of it all decades ago, and just split the playerbase into their respective preferred play styles...
  21. So you're suggesting that "killrights" are only awarded when you actually blow up someone's ship ? Lol, sounds very "simplistic" to me... Just go out in some cheap hunk of scrap that's already at 10% hull, and fire a popgun at the newb, he'll return fire and instantly blow you up. Now you can kill him anytime in the safezone ! So you can randomly fire on anyone and take them down to 10% hull, as long as you don't kill them they'll get no "killrights", so you'll still have 100% protection in the safezone ? That's why "killrights" inevitably become ever more complex systems, in attempts to plug the loopholes. But all "killrights" systems have one fundamental flaw: they cannot cover all aspects of the context of engagements, and that's why they're always exploitable.
  22. Essentially, yes ! The moment you start chipping away at the "safezone" protections by implementing elaborate rulesets to govern its function, is the moment you open the door to exploitation, and that exploitation is easiest to achieve against those who don't fully understand the rules (i.e. new players). If DU gets "killrights", it won't be long before some creative individual devises a way to trick new players into losing their safezone protections. That I don't doubt for a single moment. The current implimentation of the safezone is simple and straightforward: there's nothing remotely complex that new players need to grasp. There's no exceptions or special circumstances or arcane rituals needed to make it do what it does flawlessly.
  23. I've never seen a system where things like "killrights" couldn't be exploited in some way...
  24. Then the "safezone" will become meaningless, unless there's a whole slew of artificial game rules to regulate the placing of bounties. If bounties can be placed freely and then be pursued in the safezone, people will be placing bounties on random n00bs just for the fun of harvesting tears.
  25. I'm not trying to "change the game", all I'm trying to do is to make sure that prospective DU players understand what they're getting into. DU is a FFA-PVP game with loss of all items on death. If you're not comfortable with that, don't play. NQ seem to have some idyllic notion that DU can support all playstyles, but that is a pipe-dream at this point. And it will remain a dream unless they have some highly original game design ideas that have yet to be revealed... If you give players guns and buckets as tools, those that pick up the guns first will also eventually own all the buckets.
×
×
  • Create New...