Jump to content

DoxieDoc

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    8
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DoxieDoc

  • Rank
    Newbie

Profile Information

  • backer_title
    Patron
  • Alpha
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I sincerely hope you are all right, but I don't think you are. I also don't think I can convince you otherwise, so I will simply disagree and move on! I wish we could all go to lunch and talk about stuff like this. It'd be an interesting discussion.
  2. Even in your own example you "once" stood at a subway checkpoint and it was already terrible enough to cause an impression. I think you overestimate people's willingness to do menial labor in a game. The best example is Grand theft auto. Every person has at some point said "I'm going to obey all the traffic laws and play like an upstanding citizen." Flash forward 10 minutes and you have a rocket launcher and 100s of cops after you.
  3. Also how cities are formed is that people live in them, and pay taxes so that militaries and police forces can be formed, and then those forces are active 24 hours a day. Do you really expect someone to work a job, come home, and log in to a second job where they watch a border or walk around on patrol for another 8 hours? It isn't real life it's a game and it needs systems to compensate.
  4. Yes I'm suggesting that the center zones would have layers of defense. If there are no automated defenses, NPC guards, or shields which last for multiple days then the game will likely devolve into a wasteland outside of safe zones. The scenario I'm more worried about is that we go out and build anything impressive which gets destroyed overnight by organized troll raids which launch surprise attacks. This doesn't happen in real life because people sleeping in the city would wake up and fight, but I'm not waking up at 3 AM on a worknight to fight (and I'm sure many others wont as well). Maybe in frontier zones an NPC guard is spawned for every 5 logged out players, but a metropolis zone gets one for every individual player. Maybe we get scripts which function offline for automated weapons. I'm not exactly sure what protections each layer should add. That can be decided by NQ, I just hope they do add buildable defenses for non-safe areas. PS - Yes, it should take weeks to destroy something that took weeks to build.
  5. I think you are absolutely right for incentive, and glad we agree on protection. Mainly it's things like organized overnight raids which can cause problems. Nothing sends a chill up my spine more than imagining some summer vacationers staying up late to destroy something when nobody is around to defend it. Hopefully build-able automated defenses become a thing as well!
  6. The safe areas that are being generated by Novaquark are a great idea, but I feel they may lead to some problematic game elements. Players will likely build in safe areas and only journey outside of them to mine. Players in safe areas will likely be neighbors with bitter enemies. Trolls could interrupt multi-hex building projects by claiming hexes in the path of development. There is less of a reason for people to band together to form protection if it is inherent to the game. I am a huge believer in emergent gameplay, and this game relies almost entirely on it. Emergent gameplay is the idea that rules and systems are established which sort of "Make sense," and then players find ways to extract value, power, and fun from them in ways that the devs may not have initially intended. An example is movement patterns in Starcraft 1, Wormhole pirate guilds in EVE online, and metagame strategies in almost every game. I propose a system which in a simple manner mimics the way real cities were formed. When a new hex territory is claimed grant it "Frontier" status which offers little or no protection. Once it is surrounded by other claimed hex tiles grant the center tile an upgraded protection status and a new name like Rural area. When all the frontier hexes bordering this rural area are surrounded by frontier hexes, they become rural and the center hex becomes suburban. Continue in this pattern for a number of layers, a progression such as: Frontier Rural Suburban Urban Metropolis Adding and removing layers, changing costs of territories, and modifying levels of protection at each status would give devs control over game balance while still feeling fair for pvp. In addition, this gives groups an incentive to build together as a troll or bad neighbor building near the city would only have frontier status and likely be soon destroyed. There may also need to be other controls like a minimum of a couple of days at each status level (so that a level 5 protected zone cant be sprung up instantly) This would be a simple system which mimics the way cities start small and grow. I also don't think this should replace safe zones, but be in addition to safe zones.
  7. Novaquark has mentioned before that they would like to encourage cities. Why not solve two problems with one system. An example system Safe zone territory markers take a large amount of resources (medium to large organization), and are not impervious to damage but very VERY hard to kill (weeks of sustained successful attacking) Once constructed, a safe zone territory marker would be surrounded by 6 frontier hex tiles. Frontier hex tiles have some protection (one day of sustained attacking) and are automatically reconstructed by the safe zone territory marker after a week of being destroyed. Frontier markers can be purchased by individual players as a large expense, or several per week by a medium organization. Once a frontier marker is surrounded by other frontier markers(or above) it becomes a suburban marker with more protection than a frontier marker. Once a suburban marker is surrounded by suburban (or above) it becomes an urban marker with nearly as much protection as the safe zone marker. Once an urban marker is surrounded by urban markers (or above) it becomes a metropolis marker with the same protection as a safe zone marker. Once a safe zone marker is fully surrounded by metropolis markers, it is truly invincible. In such a system you could add, remove, and adjust levels of zones to fit balance. It would also make incentives for city building, and giving organizations control over ordinances etc (pay your taxes) would add some depth to organizations. It also makes sense thematically (frontier more dangerous than interior). It's also (vaguely) similar to how cities actually get built. The Imgur Link https://imgur.com/a/WfhX5 is an example of a city built using such principles. Dark blue is city safe zone Light blue is metropolis Dark Green is urban Light Green is suburban Light Orange is frontier Another possibility is that zones must get downgraded and the only outright destroyable zones are "Frontier" zones, so that attackers can either choose to pick at the fringes of a city (small pirates, thieves etc) or strike towards the heart of the city on longer campaigns (war, inter corporation fighting etc)
×
×
  • Create New...