Warden

While the assumption is correct that many will aim for their own separate infrastructure to some extend, cities will be a thing for a number of reasons regardless. Time will tell.

In all seriousness (I chuckled at the joke by the way ... that was a joke right ... right?), when in doubt wait and see how it later plays out. We have some experience in fighting "very bad people" in a roughly comparable Minecraft environment with faction politics and some sort of economy to create some sort of stability in the region. One organization actually managed to create some sort of "city" but it sadly fell apart quickly and was looted once they left or became inactive. Meanwhile, the actual main city in that server community was protected by hard code. I don't see the same "luxury" (or in a weaker form at best) for player made cities so I suppose they require some sort of policing or defense. If we look at a bustling city hub for all kinds of people, expect it to be at danger in some abstract or real form. I'm sure even or especially COPS should appreciate a bustling city with a notable trade hub where they can get their wares to or from. But that place needs some kind of protection. If the place was made or if it's run by an alliance, in theory they could dedicate a part of their security forces to that. But I like to think a joint police force (perhaps consisting of alliance members and so on) may be kind of interesting or possibly better. In the end, time will tell. We're ready to do our part to the extend possible.

Greetings. The board informed me about the following [DU] changes that I share with you here now: ▶ A "pact entity" may be created to aid in mission goals and long-term stability ▶ Given the outlook on the future, "Vulture Corp Central" (this very entity) is permitted to create a police force or assign its security force personnel to any existing police force temporarily or for a prolonged time - in turn, contract work or outsourcing via the existing security force is also possible ▶ Specifications are to be handled by the Central entity itself. The Board reserves the right to revoke any rights associated with this update or demand changes at a later date. Why this change? Perception. While protection duties can in theory also be covered by private security forces, aiming for a professional and dedicated unit or entity seems preferable and the terms can help in how such a force is perceived, outfitted, trained or generally governed - and by whom exactly. These changes now basically allow us to either create our own police force sub-unit or entity for our own public settlements or cities, should we ever create or maintain any, or outsource said units to willing groups, organizations or more specifically nations or alliances. In turn, another possibility is that we "lend" our security (or police) units to these groups and formally integrate them into their own public security forces. In this scenario, as they remain part of Vulture Corporation (unless they quit) they will be subject to the laws, protocols and rights of any existing force they join to prevent any unintended influence or conflict of interest. This can be worked out in greater detail for any interested party. This step on paper basically allows us to either spearhead some kind of joint police force for specific areas or assist any existing (or to come) by adding / lending members to it that would, at that point, already have some kind of combat capability from other scenarios. Details on how to accomplish or govern this in the future may be released over time. For public inquiry or criticism, feel free to reply here or send a private message. If you generally consider creating or assisting a major player made public city, consider this offered support for it. CSYN I'm blinking at you here to some extend, too.

In the end, while many factors will play into this until then and with the start of the project (and the game) and of course the time after it started and went public, I still like to think: If people want it to happen and make it happen, it will work. At least for a time. From what we can glimpse at already, the game design will make it likely to work in the first place. The rest is human interaction and willpower to initiate something like this. The rest is action-reaction or open. It can work well, it can fail. If you are curious and interested, do not worry too much about how it could fail. Worry about how you can kick this off and make it happen. Does anyone remember RTCW (the old game, but not the first)? The MP part has a classic team deathmatch component. Comparable to any other old or modern game with said component. On one map we were once able to enact a ceasefire for the heck of it. In a game or mode where the purpose is to combat the other team, we somehow enacted a ceasefire, met up in some place and "hung around" for the duration of the round. Perhaps that is a little example for motivation in tackling things that seem "exotic" or similar.

If the game will allow it, a lot will be possible. I see a lot of talk about specifics and the hardships. A lot of questions about detail. And these are vital and to be considered. But in the end, one has to try and see how it goes. If people want some order or stability, they have to create it out of a potential chaos. In the end I believe you can create such a zone or policed area, no matter the name or who runs it. I also like to think some kind of Alioth police force (or at least one for some kind of main city there) is possible. You can try to create a dedicated organization or group for it when the time is right and if there is ideally a notable city made by players for all. Alternatively you have some alliance try to manage some kind of loose police force. Can be part of emergent gameplay, so it's possible. How easy or hard in turn? Depends. But not impossible. If you want it done, tackle it. There will be enough volunteers at least.

I'm for this - means that you can eventually see scarred landscapes like in MC or similar games. It also means that if you want to use some area or larger section (or planet), you eventually have to clean up or restore the area to some extend, if the damage is too large and visible long-term.

Kind of. At times it seemed like a server network, as there were at least two servers who had similar game modes. I cannot remember if they were connected somehow or different variants by the same community. But in short, yes.

Clearly someone from PR, I think.

If it can be comparable to Minecraft, where "Civcraft" had a large map and encouraged player organizations or civilizations, then yes. Then again while the map was large there, it was used over many years and a lot was constructed or changed in the landscape. Many things were explored over time. If we consider a single shard and a lot more, then the galaxy or universe would have to be vastly bigger in comparison to spread out the potentially large playerbase. In short, if it will be big enough yes. Then again if there's ever some end or rim, expect others to go for those too. You will eventually encounter others.

I think it is too early to really or safely make commitments in that direction. But then again, a lot could be. But if nothing prevents us from doing so when the time is right, then we are interested in assisting with one of the aspects mentioned above. We've had some experience and one contract in creating public infrastructure, most notably in the area of public transportation. Ironically, we even had a Swiss employee who was in charge of the project. You know, tunnel builders and all that. Of course, adding some area to the commercial district (you have to fill it somehow over time after all) would also be nice.

The nerves surely also need a lot of energy.

I'd blush. But Vultures don't blush. I think. In all seriousness, I consider that a positive statement again and it shows us that we can't be that bad with multimedia. I should actually be happy we get any notable public feedback at all - Star Citizen is a stark contrast, as you are just a sand grain by the sheer numbers. But alas, it is not everything. I like to think or note that you (not the literal you) have certain positive aspects in an organization that others don't have. Others may have things you don't have (yet?). I think it's vital to note what good things you have and what you may lack and then work on it. If it's even perceived as a problem. Let me tell you that we didn't have as fancy multimedia back in our first campaign - in the end it was not needed, a mere small bonus at best. The real experience is the one we saw in the game. If you have that or think you will have it at release, then you are all set in my opinion. Perhaps it is even the most vital thing. The rest is superficial or a bonus. A good team is the primary component I like to think. As for SC, I currently do not consider gameplay a priority. I keep new developments in mind but think that the more relevant parts will come way later, perhaps in half a year or a year. I'm rather forum than game based there at the moment.

It becomes rather useless if it turns into a back and forth where the same arguments are expressed over and over again, perhaps by the same people, like a "yes - no - yes - no - yes - no - yes - no" etc, however. Debate is good, but it should not turn into a "circle jerk" or a repeating one as that can exhaust a topic. Or perhaps that is just me and how I imagine certain debates in a more ideal useful fashion, where others may prefer something different.

I must say, I've never been a fan of trailer-like player org promotion videos. Most of the time at least, I see game trailer footage that is "rehashed" and some music or a few text pieces are added. While one could say that's better than nothing, I am not really sure. But here comes the great but(t). That doesn't mean I dislike the whole idea, don't get me wrong. Even using game trailer footage is fine if "done right". Perhaps I'm simply "overfed" from seeing above-average use from remixed game trailer footage in another game (SC). And while this org trailer has the general "movie trailer theme" I must say it is very well done. I guess in the end the footage you used is simply fitting and right while the additional editing is good, too. Perhaps I can also relate a bit because I tried a similar thing once, but prefer more "minimalistic approaches". To summarize: I think people can do a lot wrong with the format you have chosen - you have done a lot if not everything right however. I also like the "symbolic footage approach" that I can relate to - it seems like a movie trailer now and that is a big plus for a player org to build some world around it via believable or symbolic footage.

I would start before this: First pick the right alliance if you are not already in one. When in doubt, wait or filter more rather than going for the next best alliance you see, as picking one can define a long time. It better is a good or relatively good and sound choice then. Afterwards, there isn't really magic advice or a recipe for guaranteed success, as too many factors come into play including dynamic social human interaction. In the end it just has to "fit" or work somehow. It helps if people within this alliance have a general identity or similar ideas. If interaction is higher among the individual members, chances are people will be more motivated or effective rather than loose alliances where you only really start to call when you need cannon fodder. "Luck" also plays a large role. In the end you can plan all you want - while that may increase your chances or lower risks, in the end anything can still happen.

If you let people rip you off or scam you when it could have been avoided, the joke is on you. I also hope there is not just some trading window to exchange things for practical purposes. Being able to just drop items is better at times.

Thanks for the feedback. But as I like to say: Multimedia isn't everything. As the first of us, many years ago, were roleplayers or influenced by it somehow, we eventually started putting the focus on certain videos, news reports etc. to add immersion. Or I did, rather. This included rather basic ads that I should actually throw in here later so you can compare with "back then <-> today". It also included basic briefing videos showing the AI. The tools were quite basic (movie maker...) but back then people liked it. The idea was to not just play a game in your limited or ample free time but to immerse yourself in it a bit more, and frankly, multimedia is probably one of the better options, if not the best. But to get back to my initial statement, multimedia isn't everything and we make sure to highlight where we currently stand to potential applicants, what they sign up for (now and later) and that multimedia isn't everything. This means that in the end, you can put on the nicest looking suit but your behaviour and input matters more than this beyond first impression. This should also allow for a more natural healthy growth. I'm no friend of simply trying to amass numbers no matter what. It boils down to the "quantity or quality" question to some extend. But regardless in the end we will just be one of many organizations and in turn concepts. We are in Star Citizen and if this game gets more interest and attracts more people, then it will be the same here. The main thing is that we have the right people by then to work on our goals as intended - and of course all who join us for this ride have fun along the way and experience something unique. We had one successful campaign in a modded Minecraft community already years ago. It had PvP but also an economy, player faction politics and more. And I can tell you it was one hell of a ride. I usually do not exaggerate like this but I really mean it. Perhaps the feeling of nostalgia and looking back amplifies the positive emotion, but there were really very notable and fun events in that time. This included a ten hour war against a major raider group where we had fierce ranged combat and it also included fighting a major uprising within just 26 hours or a day in essence. So to summarize everything said, in the end it's about going a little extra mile to try to deliver a fun experience to not just members but allies and partners as well ... and perhaps the occasional enemy, depending on how they take certain things. That raider group we fought for ten straight hours (5AM to 3 PM in my time with our alliance, in shifts basically) were fierce enemies then but after this we actually patted our shoulders. We agreed that no one wanted to have another massive ten hour war and became allies. We started making announcements or related videos about these events to further highlight how special they were. All who had this feeling know it's worth pursuing again and that's basically our motivation.

I found two, actually, and sent one of them (by the time I did, two members max in that group) even a PM asking what they were thinking. Glancing over the rules it's obvious these groups would not persist long.

First off, thank you for written feedback. It always helps judge whether the direction we move in is "spot on" or relatively good or whether we should apply a course correction. Of course what some like, others dislike but we can only go by the feedback that reaches us; just like yours in this case. --- --- --- --- We are always open and in fact require some more backup. However one should take it (us) for what it is so far: Despite having quite a few assets and contacts (here and elsewhere) already, as we're still building assets and creating and writing our content, we rather look for those who don't mind lending an active helping hand or even those with a bit of RP experience or focus on immersion. Given the yet small number all in all, that also means that certain elevated positions can be obtained more easily if one is interested in this and deemed valid. All in all this seems lucrative - for the right people. Others favor to join an already active and moderate to large group. Given both the size and that the two official games we wait for (Dual Universe and Star Citizen) are and will be in development for quite some time, there will rather be more focus on web or forum based work rather than gameplay. So if potential applicants don't mind this - and if you don't mind this: Send me a PM and we can discuss it with greater detail. I roughly like to compare to "Early Access" - be the first among us and benefit early on. If you have any questions, also add them in the PM. --- --- --- --- As for the theme, it was more of a "test" and playing around a bit. It's less of a general organization theme and rather specific to a certain entity within. There will be another "general" theme soon that may be more representative while trying to keep a "future vibe" in mind.

If you know (or were / are into) roleplaying, perhaps you know the idea behind or popularity of "character themes". For some it is a measure of giving their characters ... well, more character. Or to underline a certain mood, as music (often) makes mood and evokes certain emotions. Or, some like certain underlying messages or lyrics within songs or music. But it is also relative. Here is an attempt at a "theme" with the lyrics rather than the music hinting at a potential backstory. I personally consider the music to be powerful regardless, but perhaps some dislike the genre or presentation. So to help us or in this case more specifically me assess whether we should proceed with themes in general and then perhaps the choice of music, let us know what you think. Your input helps. And perhaps this post encourages or motivates other users and organizations to come up with character or organization themes. Most organizations find a visual definition (via logos for example) - but do they find an audio one, too? Not so much. You be the judge.

For these precise reasons I'm against this. There's an easy fix that won't net you the materials that were once there, however: players have to fix it up themselves or at least make it look nice on the surface if they dislike it. But this in turn provides gameplay and concept opportunities for player groups. Think of "Greenpeace in Space" or just some state or private restoration project. I saw the same in Minecraft once already. In the particular server community, there was only one safe space: the city all new players spawned in. Beyond the walls you were either in no man's land or faction territory. The immediate area around the city looked like a mess so we had a private restoration project to make it a bit more green and look less like a (used up) minefield.

The effect would be less noticeable (and "prolonged") the bigger the planets and playable universe are. If you look at Minecraft and the Civilization Server (Civcraft), I bet the same map or build I briefly played on many years ago is still in use and it doesn't look ugly. Then again that had a map size of about 15 x 15 km I think. In MC terms that is quite large and you have to resort to public transportation to get across the regions in a timely manner. Of course in DU there may be more "void" than usable or transformable hard material, but if the numbers above are correct for planets, it could become a non-issue. You can still think of something if this turns bad after years. An option would be "recycling" or ways to obtain certain materials in a more "green fashion" so you do not have to dig up the ground as much. Another option would be randomly generated asteroids that fly around space so you could resort to utilizing space rocks rather than planetary materials.

The lore or setting itself already hints at relative freedom. Earth with existing structures is no more or generally out of touch. You have various ark ships that start anew with various (player) factions and they all more or less start again at the same time. This means they all have to develop on their own. The rest is natural selection and luck. So unless the devs make one, it's all player dictated more or less.

You cannot expect to deploy these weapons like candy just for "trolling"; as loner anyway. Or it would be rare. So you require a group. But then it would mean war or other nasty retaliation. I like to think that deploying these weapons against others shouldn't be taken lightly.

My bad, in fact. I did not clarify. I wasn't referring to ingame mechanics or occurrences with my last post and rather thinking about assets that exist beyond the game. And while gameplay matters, these out of game assets are usually both substantial for an organization(forums, voice comms, etc) and yet often out of touch for potential "ursurpers". Like a hard barrier you often cannot (easily) overcome. Meaning that you have do branch out there at the latest. Better example: you suffer internal org struggles. Someone or some faction tries to "coup". While you can take over assets or sabotage them ingame, how can you fully do the same on a forum, etc, if someone can shut down access or close the money sink keeping the sites afloat? To summarize, my point is that these scenarios usually require some sort of asset replacement beyond the game if you want to "take over". Usually someone holds a tight grip on out of game assets so you may as well branch out and do you own thing.