Jump to content

GalloInfligo

Alpha Team Vanguard
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    358

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by GalloInfligo

    Public Resurrection Nodes

    in Idea Box

    Posted

     

     

    This is an interesting idea. We would have to think about the gameplay consequences (like the fact that mutualized RN would be a single-point of failure for all who rely on them), but we are open to discussion about it, yes.
     

     

     

    I dont know what happened, I typed up everything and when I hit post only the above showed up :(

     

     

    Self Destruct & Booby Traps

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted


     


     


    Self destruct capability might seem like a good idea but it could actually make the job of pirates close to impossible. Quickly, people will understand that a self destruct system is a must to avoid pirates trying to loot them for profit, and that would kill the pirating gameplay. One possibility would be to provide pirates with a self-destruct scrambler that they should use prior to any attack. We would like to have your feedback on this! In any case, this would be a post-release feature that we could introduce in an expansion.


     

     

    I started this topic since this was one of my questions asked.

     

    Ideas on how this would work:

     

    1:  Put explosives on/in a container, as a trap, exploding the container and damaging/killing the person who sets it off

    2:  Trapped container's explosion does, or does not destroy what was in the container.

    3:  Trapping your "ship" to either explode when button is pushed, or have explosives set to explode when ship is destroyed (like corbomite from Tradewars 2002)

    4:  Trapped "ships" explosion does, or does not destroy cargo, an/or the attacker.

    5:  Has traps/mines that explode with tripwire, remote, or pressure.

     

    I understand your concern with killing the pirate game play, but some possible solutions to this would be:

     

    1:  Scanners/scramblers that detect the explosives.

    2:  As a pirate do not completely destroying the ship to pirate, but merely disable it to board.

    3:  Make the explosive/corbomite expensive to add.

     

    Also in defense of doing this, if a player can suicide, why shouldn't a player be able to destroy his own object/resources?  Traps/mines are a common offensive/defensive mechanic used in a lot of military actions.  I guess for me it goes against everything I know to allow someone the ability to damage and put holes in my stuff, but then not allow me to also rig my stuff to explode ;)  Also as the Tradewars 2002 connection, there was a lot of pirating in that game, a lot of people didn't use corbomite because of the cost, but the smart pirates still always attacked to capture instead of destroy just in case.  So even though there was the possibility of not only losing the loot, but also blowing yourself up, it was rarely seen in game.

    How hard (or easy) will it be to earn DAC?

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    I am against having Loot able DACs in game. for the following reasons.

     

    1)  It is assumed that once you use it to add to your game time, its a timer, so if you know you are going to be off line for an extended time, you should have the ability to buy them when they are cheap, and hold onto them for when you need to use them.

    2)  It is not IMHO emergent game play to loot these, as they have no real game world purpose so why should a character even want them?  Resources on the other hand, yes a character would desire that.

    3)  This whole market crashing BS can still be done safely using the safe zones or other methods as described by GrandMasterApex.

    4)  If Credits are non loot able, which has a real presence in the game, why should DACs not also be safe?  It is more emergent game play to demand the ability to loot credits.

    5)  IMHO it is a better plan to resolve these complaints of hoarding, by making these items only able to be sold or traded ONCE.  This solves almost all of the legitimate complaints against keeping them non-loot able, but also lets players hold in game purchased ones till they need to use them safely.  This will also stop scams and griefing people buy luring them out to remote PVP areas with extremely low prices, to only be pounced on after they are purchased.

     

    I also think it is ridiculous to be taking so much of the community's time and NQ's time discussing this now when the release of the game is 2 years out.  I would much rather have the NQ team focusing on building a great stable Alpha, and construct vs. construct combat, you know the important EMERGENT game play.

     

     Also I thought since most of the PRO loot able arguments were coming from EVE players and supporting how great it works in eve I would share the following link.

     

    https://community.ev...ges-on-the-way/

     

    In particular this part of it.  "The PLEX Vault will allow you to move PLEX safely throughout the universe rather than having to move it in a ship."

     

    So i personally consider all "this is how it works in EVE " ETC. arguments invalid since it no longer is the way EVE works.  Also I would like to add that if it was working so well why did CCP change it and should we also then consider the why and the route they went.

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

    Were you thrown off a staircase when you were young?

     

     

    Don't you know how to read? I did explain the hoarding part. Hoarding DACs when lootable = risk. I can be robbed at any point, or be betrayed or anything that made EVE's "player-driven lore" what it was.

     

     

    Having DACs being unlootable, makes it impossible to even remotely hinder my conomy-crashing plan.

     

     

    I did also say that, with DACs being lootable, PEOPLE TAKE A RISK HOARDING THEM. Physical DACS = lootable = they need to be hauled, they carry risk of being stolen.

     

     

    And before you say "Why be haued?", shall I remind you you wanna play the smuggler? It's like saying :

     

     

    "HEY GUYS, Our organisation the Outfit is pointless!"

     

     

    Oh, did you think a guy will take a 2 hours trip from system to system just to take the DAC they want? They will ask a space-trucker to go and pick up the cargo.

     

     

     

    Look Galio, I know you want to believe we are here to make your cats' or family's life miserable, but the reality is, DACs being lootable, gives YOU a chance to fight against my plan :)

     

     

     

    And if you want to know how I will mess up the economy, let's just say that when the demand exceeds the supply, oil-prices skyrocket. :)

     

     

    And you won't stop that. You are in it for the explosions, I am in it for the market-crashing. You got expenses, I got spreadsheets.

     

     

    And like in real life, spreadsheets win.

     

     

    Are you that special kind of stupid or do you think trying to insult people will win your argument when it was pointed out to you exactly where your argument failed?

     

    Let me make it more clear for you since you are obviously an idiot.

     

    Players can hoard DACs with no danger under your precious option C, and still crash the market!

     

    So Your argument is what?  Exactly a BS excuse to try and loot them from the dumb players, or possibly scam them, since you are obviously a bully and a troll.  

     

    this will be my last post on this matter, as you obviously don't care about other views, and fail to see the error in your own logic. 

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

    Now, let's say the buyer is not one of those who need the DAC because they can just fine afford their subscription. They plan on hoarding the DAC and resell it at a later date to CRASH THE ECONOMY (totally not my plan, I swear).

     

     

    Those people, run the liability of keeping the DAC. It's a physical item, thus, they need a safe place to hide it and wait the opportune moment that they can sell the DAC at 10 times the price you sold it to them. 

     

    That's what option C or B prevents. People who want to haord DACs and run no risk on their business. You know, "real economy driven by the players". When a good like a DAC cannot be stolen, that DAC becomes a pay-to-win it

    Here is the error in your argument.  you are assuming that I cannot horde them safely to perform this market crash plan.  I can do this exact plan now in game even if the DAC are loot able.  So therefore there is another reason for you to want them to be loot able.

     

    So now that we have cleared up the fact that your entire argument relies on scare tactics and fantasy, care to tell us why you really want them as loot able?

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

    I probably understood wrong but isn't that what the options C or B offer? If the DAC is used to pay the subscription it's unlootable but as soon as the player turns it into a physical item to trade for something else, enemies could steal it. Being it in DAC format or just material bough from the market is ultimately the same thing in the situation i described! Someone correct me if i'm wrong pls...

     

    the problem with this is, Player X buys the DAC from NQ, and puts it on the market to make in game credits.  Player Y buys it off the market and can use it to add a month of game time to their account.

     

    The problem with allowing it to be looted is, if you force them to make it an object, then they have to travel to the market to retrieve it.  where they could possibly be attacked as soon as they do so, therefore loosing their month of game time.  There will be players that try to sucker in players to their area to do this exact thing.

    Also, what if Player Y wants to hold onto it, cause he bought it so cheap (under market value) and has 3 weeks of game time left on his current account.  Now he has to worry about losing the DAC if he holds onto it till his time is up (maybe he is in the Military, and is about to go on a 6 month deployment, so it would be a waste to use it NOW)

     

    No one is going to go buy a DAC from NQ to then use for game time, when its cheaper to have a subscription.  

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

    i had a funny feeling i would regret involvement with this topic.  it really does bring out some very strong opinions and emotions which is understandable but I don't recall anyone being attacked.  I think I'm the newest person here and I certainly don't know how things should work, but I do enjoy reading (and sometimes taking part in the discussions) regarding the early evolution of this project.  There's a lot of knowledgeable and experienced ppl in here (much more than myself) and its interesting to see all the different viewpoints.

     

    i'll elaborate on a couple things then i'll excuse myself from this topic forever more.  How do you justify DAC's existence if you want full emergent gameplay?  You don't.  We are discussing how we deal with DAC's being in the game (as a done deal) and how it should be handled.  That is a decision by NQ, for better or worse.  I would like to think that no one associated with this forum would be using the DAC shortcomings for stealing.  Maybe there are scumbags among us but personally I have had a very positive experience with everyone I've met in here so far, but here was the point regarding a lootable DAC:  No one wants to take anyone's lunch money so they cannot play DU next month.  Jeez, at least I hope not.

     

    Buy your DAC, put it safely away (NQ needs to ensure this is possible), and use the dam thing to cover your monthly fee.  End of Story right?   However....  if you are going to use the DAC for another purpose (actually I can think of many) such as transporting a bunch of it somewhere so you can make a huge profit with another corporation or player... then yes, imo it's fair game.  

     

    I hope that no one gets too stressed or assumes the worst regarding gameplay ideas and opinions.  If so, then I will bet that was not the intent.  Have a good evening everyone.   :)

     

    Hunter I am glad you were one of the members to not be attacked.  I have however seen it time and again.  I look at defending the non loot able DAC system the same way the majority of us have defended the Pay to Play method in all of the Free to Play posts.  Nobody wants to hear it, nobody cares about that persons views.  I get it, NQ laid down the law on what pay method they are using and we get tired of hearing it.  This is the 2nd thread already dealing with DAC's being non loot able.

     

    The DACs are not emergent, that is my point in saying wanting emergent gameplay to loot them is meaningless.  They are there for 2 very good reason.  They let the broke players continue to play, and they put a serious hurting on the Chinese gold farming spam sites. we all know, you either have DAC's or Gold farmers, spaming us all the time.

     

    If you can't loot my credits, why should you be able to loot my DACs?  Credits are digital so hey that at least makes game play sense.....well so are DACs!

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

     

     

    In defence of @GalloInfligo - I read his use of the word "scum bags" not as muck slinging in the debate, but rather, a term referring to real life, out of play people who are seeking to literally steal what is effectively real money.

     

    As you were.

    Yes, I am referring to the ones, that will attempt to scam those that need the DACs to continue playing.  sell it cheap in a remote area, than pounce as soon as its bought, to loot it right back again.  More than likely some dumb kid that doesnt realize, what might be going on.

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

    Is this really what we've come to? Slinging insults back and forth at one another?

     

    We're trying to have an open discussion about this to find a way that makes both sides happy, because there are passionate people on both sides of the issue (you wouldn't be calling people scumbags for disagreeing with you otherwise). 

     

    Regardless of if you agree with their playstyle or not, those "scumbags" are going to be in the game one way or another, and they are just as much paying customers as the rest of us. Trying to exclude things that appeal to that style of gameplay simply because they make us uncomfortable thinking about isn't the right way to go about it. 

     

    It's not like I don't have anything riding on this if they were lootable items, I'm getting 80 DAC's with my pledge and if I lost them all in-game that would be on me.

     

    I mean really, look at at my posts here, do I really seem like the kind of person that's going to be a pirate? I'm interested in much deeper gameplay than that. Though I understand that it's an important element and style of gameplay that needs to exist. 

     

    there was an open discussion on DAC's, with a poll already.  starting another thread on the matter was not needed.  The point is NQ stated they were not and a group of players IMHO appear to be trying to sway that to the style of play they want, even going as far as stating they might take back their pledge if they don't get their way....So I call someone who wants to steal little timmy's DAC a scumbag, others threaten to pull their support if they dont get to steal it....

     

    From the model above, your 80 DAC are safe if option C is the new method correct???  which is the whole point of this new thread to give yet another option but hey lets steal little timmy's DAC but you better make mine from KS safe mentality.  I have a problem with this, either they are all loot able or non are.  Why should the KS ones be protected but not all future one bought?  The ones in the future are going to cost those members more than the amount you get for your pledge, that is some reverse logic thinking to protect the cheaper dollar ones.

     

    The entire point of the DAC system is so that people (mostly kids) that can't afford to pay to play, have an option.  now making that option a loot able item IMHO damages the entire DAC system.  The other problem is its the dumb young kids that are going to fall prey to this time and again.  Now I don't know about you, but I try and take young players under my wing and help them out.  

     

    There will be enough loot for the looters, in fully emergent style or crafted items, blueprints, and raw materials.  We all want this game to succeed, but there are a few toxic personalities in these forums, that have attacked time and again different view points from theirs, this being the newest one.  

     

    Let me ask you Yamamushi, a few months back when you first seen this project, and thought to yourself, damn! I cant wait to support this, did you really think to yourself, OH, but not is DAC's are not loot able!

    The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]

    in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly

    Posted

    Im tired of hearing about emergent gameplay concerning DACs, if you want emergent gameplay, how do you justify DACs existance in the game world? Its a real thing to sell,trade that gives you game time to play. Your emergent play should only care about real game items that you use. All of your arguments to promote the stealing of someone elses game play time are completely ridiculous.

     

    I honestly hope they do not go to this play style, and if you guys drop over i wish ypu well in eve where you can do this.

     

    I am sick of seeing this community attack the new members, and i am also sick of you all thinking that your idea is the only way this game should work. Guess what, a lot of people dont want to steal a 12 year olds month of game play, and we think it should be protected from scum bags trying to steal it.

×
×
  • Create New...