Warden
-
Posts
823 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Warden
-
-
And not just security - law enforcement, too.
Thanks to the board decision, spearheading a metro-police force just became more likely. Due to the lack of city or force names yet, we will internally refer to it as (Project) V-POL or likewise until a further change is required.
Over time we will attempt to:
▚ design specific vehicles and gear with law enforcement specifics and demands in mind
▚ recruit or encourage recruitment and find volunteers, work out a basic training schedule
▚ find or create a reasonable legal basis to operate on
▚ brainstorm about different units such as riot response if applicable
▚ potentially create a dedicated portal (website) for said force
The primary focus for now will be to create or support one major city based police force, fit to safeguard one of the potentially many upcoming larger settlements or cities. Due to the nature and alignments of this project and assuming that many player nations will try to resort to or rely on their own security or police forces, this is best suited for joint city projects or those player nations willing to bolster their forces with 'externals'.
Let us know if you are interested in either joining or potentially requesting and obtaining said support services in the far future.
Side note: Due to the current focus and contacts, we may favor non-imperial entities for now.
-
So, in essence an "alliance" of sorts or perhaps a multi-tier-system allowing organizations, alliances and federations or similar?
Sounds useful. Better than just having one organization entity you somehow have to deal with.
-
I still think it would be funny to have one - but I'm not really willing to spearhead or manage one in addition to the existing commitments.
As semi-roleplayer or dynamic one, I think it would be interesting to not just have some German only group (they will surely appear over time just like French or X-focused groups), but to have some dedicated group(s) that try to mirror or recreate countries in an authentic fashion as part of emergent gameplay and perhaps as consequence of the story.
That, in turn, I could assist.
-
From what I gathered so far there should be around less than half a dozen, at least if we go by who implied or proclaimed it.
Make that a hand full. It would actually be "funny" if one tried to recreate nations or cultural landmasses. Space-(country here) in essence. An interesting (social) experiment, too.
-
The bank is nice.
I'm also fond of this design:
-
Who said anything about underestimating an entity with superior numbers? Underestimating any enemy could always be fatal. But the same goes for underestimating an entity with inferior numbers.
Sometimes things or aspects do not have to be specifically mentioned; they could be implied indirectly however. Perhaps they were never meant to be expressed or implied, but through wording or different perceptions, others could think of these things regardless.
For those I found it useful to mention that specific part.
-
-
Regardless of betting on asymmetrical warfare, I would not underestimate a vastly superior entity in numbers, as that at one point usually also brings a vastly superior fire power and other means to fight you to the table.
My point being: You can of course try to apply these tactics. But I don't think it helps if you at any time have at least a few dozen, if not hundreds of players actively or indirectly looking for you and your next foothold and in turn always try to disrupt your operations.
In the end, action-reaction or natural selection will determine the outcome of such conflicts - you either withstand or perish.
-
Easiest way to balance both the future date and easy reference to our real tjme without too much calculation:
Use our real time and date; add xxx years, ideally an even number to the current year however. Example: 3017 instead 2017.
This could also serve as galactic standard time while you can experiment with (or apply) planetary timezones.
-
I was joking .... I hope there are no biological weapons or those would be OP
A major immediate orbital strike that is often immediate isn't OP in comparison?
I'd rather have bio weapons you can also fight.
-
I'm not sure about others, but from the perspective of the consumer I consider 15$ to be manageable, should the game be 'great' in essence and result in many hours of playtime per month.
I realize some have to watch their financial output. But I could even manage to save up the average MMORPG fee as pupil last decade through pocket money. I am really not sure if that argument, whether openly said or indirectly expressed, should be a valid thing to risk long-term stability.
The 'keeps potential players away' one, too. While abstactly true, in times of reviews and let's plays anyone truly interested can relatively easily determine whether spending 15 / whether taking the plunge is worth it.
-
You mention Black Mesa, aka places from games.
While that would surely be "cool", I like to think it is often problematic - depending on the game or plot, you often just see snippets of some area. Black Mesa is large and quite covered in the core game and two major addons (or let's say one major and one moderate addon) but even larger if you look at what's hinted at - major areas outside or at least installations and buildings dottet all over, a giant underground area (a lot is blocked or closed) and more. Meaning that if you really tried to build a copy you'd have to fill in many many blanks.
One can of course question how logical the design may seem afterwards. Then again I think it's a giant project in itself.
Having some kind of reference is helpful. I personally favor games where you can actually design areas or bases. "Prison architect" or "Rimworld" are good examples and somewhat tile-based, meaning that you can actually use those to design "blueprints" for bases or structures to some extend.
-
Why (or even how) would you create a magical definition of what is "acceptable gameplay behaviour"? In a game like this it would (and should) be up to the players to enforce any ingame laws. If you dont like pink ships ban them in your territory, if you demand that any station in your territory must have 7 discoballs then enforce it.
If you want to mine and build "in peace" find a group of players that would let you. You could mine and build in peace, and supply the other players with means to defend you and others (or wage a war on the pink ships)
Offensive I have no issues with, as long as it steers clear of the normal derogatory terms that are outlined in most EULA's these days. If people offend you, block them, or go blow their stuff up (or both)
. Pretty much the best approach to "emergent gameplay" is to let the players police as much as possible.
This approach is not good or useful for all games - but for this type, I personally think it is. Of course someone could come up horrible scenarios and hypothetical situations, but on average, to quote a certain someone, "It just works."
I like to think "safe spaces" will eventually be established and policed by players - plenty of different gameplay preferences and already existing projects already hint strongly at this. If you are unhappy, you could also complain or stay away from the game - or you can plunge right into it and support players who try to create said orderly or policed areas, aka do something about it rather than wait. When in doubt, do something about it. My advice anyway.
-
Without having the lore in my blood right now, figuratively spoken, I wonder why they went so far or long when habitable planets are relatively close. Then again not sure what range a star like that can cover without looking it up right now. Probably plot reasons or range reasons, possibly making close areas unsafe or not viable for other reasons.
-
I don't think it's so much what is shown (even a quick edit or original image from elsewhere), but at what frequency it is pumped into the system. In that sense I would agree.
You could argue in favor of it, but I personally am not fond of the whole "visibility at any cost" approach that surely exists (I saw a lot of this already in Star Citizen and believe me, Star Citizen is worse in terms of "visibility competition" due to the sheer size of players and orgs there - compared to it we're yet at "Blissful Island"). Can't help it but subconsciously assign negative attributes or traits to that approach.
But then again we'd have to argue about where the tipping point to "spam" or some inappropriate level or approach is, in fact. That is likely open for debate, just as the idea of a certain rule about this would be open for debate.
Are we thinking about a hard limit per day or else mod action could be a response? What level would be reasonable? What alternatives are present? What about technical measures, perhaps a script or similar can dynamically compensate a higher input my trying to mind "diversity" in what is shown? A "smart solution" so to speak? Unless that is already in place somehow.
-
Star wars is going to be a very famous theme when the game gets more orgs and probably a lot of people will want to make their own empire, the idea that all the people who want their empire should merge is I think a silly one (ps: no offense), the game offers freedom on an entirely different scale and every other guy has a different idea on how they want to play the game. While many people will want to make an empire, how they make one, what they do will differ from people to people and the idea of them merging together will only cause havoc. You have to think of it from a people's point of view, everybody wants their own gameplay, merging together just because of a name is a very silly idea atleast in my view.
You are right. Unless the same group with the same concept exists more than once, basically like a copy or divided. Then a merge would be beneficial for all involved, mostly.
Example: Three groups portraying the Galactic Empire from Star Wars with little to no difference. May as well make one larger group out of it.
-
Raptor rapture.
Rapture raptor?
-
That's one of the potential downsides (next to a few possible advantages) of using an existing theme or faction concept or copy basically - having more than one would just seem weirder unless they were playing individual branches or units of said faction rather than trying to cover the whole one.
In fact, since you are basically the same, do indeed consider merging (to those it concerns, of course).
-
I have the impression (don't get me wrong or correct me if I'm wrong) that an abstract fear may be a driving factor for you at this time - despite a lot of gameplay or technical terms not set in stone yet and for some time.
If you have your doubts, continue to monitor the game as more is developed and decide later on, I guess. Griefing is relative, I guess, given the single shard. I'd rather speak about "potential PVP encounters" or similar - again, you can lower the risks or avoid problems. Or find shelter with the right people or in the right places.
I'd say this certain potential or abstract risk is what drives people here - creating something with some challenges, something that will possibly last for quite a time physically or in the minds of people - rather than having a building simulator with no obstacles whatsoever. To give an abstract counter-example anyway.
-
This will be a relatively open game, it seems.
Meaning that once you venture out to certain places, there is always an abstract risk - like being run over as you try to cross the street somewhere. Chance is low, but can happen.
I think players should actually be aware of the potential risk - whether it is hostile flora, fauna or players attacking, plan for this occasion. And also realize that you are not always at risk for being attacked. People will settle down somewhere, perhaps create actual pacified zones or generally not always shoot at each other as they meet somewhere.
My point being: If you want your "bubble", create it somewhere. You should not be bothered that much - if you do, you move elsewhere or come back later.
-
People seem to make a big fuss about or out of drama. While it may often not be pretty for the involved parties, I think some may overblow it.
After all to a conflict, all involved parties can do their part to end or prolong one. Social problems or other occur all the time - how (fast) you deal with them is often still up to you, however, even if you are not the initiating party.
-
I think you are mistaken - Vultures ARE Raptors : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_of_prey , and birds should be free!
Also, the term "raptor" is derived from the Latin word rapere (meaning to seize or take by force)
I specifically meant this:
-
Vulture Corporation's spokesperson quit all the bureaucracy and serious business to become a Raptor
Clearly must have been abducted and forced to say this - would never wear an XBOX shirt.
Keep in mind: Raptors are extinct, however. Vultures are not
-
But I'm Han Solo and you'll fall in luv wid mah swagz.
Deleted
in Org Updates & Announcements
Posted
I can't help but admire the thoughts (and to some or equal extent, the work) put into this. It's just a bit or puzzle, but often that can say a lot for many other things.
Whether it is or rather will be practical I don't know and surely changes will come over time. But the core structure in place should be, I suppose. Regardless of the details, I think it is a good approach.