Jump to content

Warden

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Content Count

    823
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Warden

  1. The Irish pub I referred to is "The Corkonian" by the way, at Heumarkt. Forgot the name, had to look it up again. Use (search engine of your liking here) image search to see some pictures. Should it be too packed or not to someone's interior liking, we can also sit outside in front of it. You better be 20 or something, just for the record. I assume those who'd be interested to meet prior are. I don't know many other locations but I heard there's also some kind of E-Sports or gaming oriented bar called "Meltdown". Never been there but it is also sadly not really within walking distance of the area of the central station and main event so might rather be out of the picture unless you want to use bus or tram. Easy for me as I have a ticket, but additional costs for those who have none. Is still mentioned if anyone ever wants to check it out.
  2. We'll, if people don't mind beer, there's an Irish pub I recently visited nearby. You can sit inside or if you prefer, in front of it. It is a few minutes away on foot whether from the train station, dome or main event location as they are all next to each other in essence. I'm sure other "locals" have other ideas or suggestions. What i like the most is that you have many areas of interest close by there in general.
  3. Question is, where would such a meeting take place, if not at the same location (probably the easiest measure without additional effort of then moving to the main event, even if it was nearby)? Then again doing it elsewhere but relatively nearby can add a certain sightseeing factor for people who have never been there. Do political or business talks as you climb all the stairs of the Cologne dome to the top! (joke suggestion unless you are into that)
  4. So Shiny technically broke the forum rules now, uh oh! To be honest, for a while I've been thinking about the topic on occasion. In my view, it's okay in some cases and not okay in others. I've created a topic in the idea forums about this, let's see what NQ and the community thinks about that. On topic: What you basically see sooner or later in all sandbox / voxel / etc games with no dynamic block physics. Ah well, suspension of disbelief I guess!
  5. A little foreword Hello there, The following is likely rather nitpicky. Since people can (mis?)judge purely written communication in different ways I'd also like to add this isn't a huge concern for me. It's simply something I noticed and that could be potentially be improved sooner than later. I also thought about mentioning it via PM to NQ first but on the other hand I think there can be sufficient public interest and input to this, while NQ is of course free to set the rules as they deem necessary. But if public input can perhaps improve or clarify, then why not? Last but not least, since rules are mentioned it is not only something we have to keep in mind and follow as community members; it would also be some kind of "procedure book" for moderators that have to enforce the rules after all. So while there might be bigger problems and more interesting (game related) suggestions to consider, it's something perhaps not completely trivial either. But I let you decide now. »Short summary of suggestion and solution 1) Recap Change / reword a current forum rule to allow what is now technically considered "necroposting" in some situations that would be deemed widely acceptable however. Further info and reasoning below. 2) Suggested solution/s Reword or add a clause that allows this in specific situations or exclude situations where it would not be necroposting. Here's suggestions, highlighted in blue: (III) Following actionsa re prohibited: [...] Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months) with the exception of player organization and on-going idea threads. Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months). Moderation can see to exceptions or enforcement on a case-by-case basis depending on the topic. Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months). An old thread can be considered as an exhausted or completed topic. Posting in old exhausted threads that have not seen activity in 2 months; exceptions can apply to certain threads including player organizations or projects and game suggestions [...] Other suggestions from the community for an "improved wording" (None at this time) Further explanation or reasoning aka: "Okay, what the heck are you talking about now?" Rule snippet as of 11th August 2018 - mostly referring to bulletin point 2 and 3 The recent posting in the "DU real life" thread referred to a not so old rule addition regarding necro posts. Granted, it makes sense. But in some situations it could ironically conflict with the rule following afterwards, specifically sentence nr. 2. Long story short, it's this: Sometimes necro'ing old threads doesn't make sense and should not be done or forbidden or rewarded with a lock. But sometimes it should be formally and practically okay. Ironically following that particular rule could in a wider sense sometimes conflict with "creating multiple discussions on the same topic [...]" - if you cannot strictly necropost because 2 months have passed, then you have to kinda recreate threads, which clutter the forums however and is generally frowned upon anyway, when the alternative could just be posting even after 2 months since the last reply have passed. So we either have gaps exceeding 2 months between some posts or we have multiple threads on a subject if 2 months have passed between replies at one point. Or we let a topic die indeed, but some topics are on-going, and especially in an early game stage may not see regular posts all the time not exceeding 2 month gaps. Again, it is likely trivial or obvious when it is okay and not to some but let's put it this way: With a mild edit in rewording it could, for the far future, set things formally or technically right and perhaps not confuse some people who read the forum rules and take them at face value, as you kinda or often have to anyway. A mild change or elaboration would also prevent rather nitpicky players possibly reporting others for technical rule violations that are completely tolerated or accepted things however. In short, with a very mild amount of work now in rephrasing or elaborating, you can probably save yourself a bit of more work in the long run while making it apparent when moderators (or players) have to act or not. The community and mods might be at ease (or have clarity). Win/win. To keep it short and to get to a closing note, here's an example of what might be technically a necro posting but should be widely accepted - or is likely widely accepted, but technically breaking rules: Posting in your organization or player project thread (after 2 months) Posting in an idea thread or similar that revolves around a specific aspect (after 2 months; instead of creating a new thread then) Off-topic threads regarding other specific games, tv shows, technology and other topics (health, preferences, etc, comedy such as DU centered 'memes', etc.) Likely other scenarios On a last note I also understand there is a certain disclaimer that says: "IMPORTANT: Forum content is moderated at Novaquark's sole discretion, and content may be modified, removed, or otherwise restricted by Novaquark employees and/or moderators." meaning it allows exceptions or actions at the discretion already, but in this case I think it's good to mention it in the specific rule to have that rule be more clear. I also understand you could now start various discussion or suggestion threads about all kinds of other rules and ask for elaboration. But for me that is kind of stretching the goal here. So for now this is all about necro posting. I guess that sums it up. If I oversaw any flaws or aspects or if you want to rant about it being (insert whatever here), I guess you can do so here Thanks for consideration
  6. A very interesting issue that covers universal things going beyond the games and being relevant in reality.
  7. While I tend to be very realistic in that regard (for DU), I just have to say I miss that certain ability to freely decide the course of action in private communities in offering things you would rarely see in other games on public or official servers. And in the context of this topic, I miss the possibility of forced prison (in this framework, limited of course). Thinking about limited, it's kind of funny when the legit argument is put on the table that imprisonment robs you of (paid) game time when a few private examples with prison mechanics from "Space Station 13" and "Armed Assault" (any of those with online RPG/life mods) had limited prison sentences to begin with. You'd be put in jail for mere minutes, sentences were often capped at about 10 to 15 minutes often making me wonder if it was worth it. A stark counter-example would be a certain Minecraft community or network: the civilizations servers with their according plug-ins. There, players could "pearl" you and imprison you to the Netherworld or twilight world. The grey, not hellish one. Relatively indefinitely. Granted, it was a huge "cell" in that sense and its own dimension sense and not a small room, leaving you more game play options. But you were locked out from any activities and assets on the surface world while the pearl was physically stored in the surface world. In short, to free you as third party, you'd have to obtain the pearl that was often locked in secure doom fort vaults, prisons themselves. Your captors basically had great leeway and I think you could only ask for server or community admin intervention after a long time, maybe months. It was widely accepted however, as it was seen as part of emergent gameplay with certain risks. It also didn't happen that often and random as bound pearls consumed fuel over time. But it was a possibility and happened to one of my friends for a time. Long story short I'd welcome time capped prison mechanics working in player controlled areas but it likely won't happen or NQ would have to serve as potential dispute entity where private server admin or mods would do this job in private communities. Despite me being in favor of such mechanics I basically wonder if enforced ones can truly work. With compromises of course. But no one can tell me that minute-sentences would be a true issue if it were to be possible. Most would probably shrug off quarter or half hour sentences, alt tab, ponder life, do something else. If it can't be done repeatedly to you and has 'cooldown' I see bigger issues. I still think voluntary imprisonment, redemption, is the most effective but severely depends on the motivation or will of the rule breaking or offending party. If there is no incentive to do this in their eyes, you're stuck with whatever the game has left to offer in that regard. But alas, time will tell. I think with or without prisons or imprisonment, biggest deterrents will likely be reputation loss on a large scale if you f... up and people being angry at you and sending bounty hunters and more after you, creating an obstacle or multiple that impact your goals or safety negatively. On another note, does any civcraft player remember Gezo? Also typing on mobile is annoying.
  8. @supermega If you look at the context earlier, it fits well to the general topic in my book. If we ask how we can punish players, then debating alts and circumvention of punishments are related aspects because it could then allow you to question effectiveness of punishments you come up with in the first place. On that note: How could organizations detect alts (eventually), what do you think? I'll coax it out of you eventually! --- As for the "first step", I find most things people could come up with so far to be questionable. I tried to come up with some ideas myself when it became a potentially pressing matter for the future due to a police related side project. But unless the game mechanics end up like in first person shooters (which is relatively ruled out by now), classic mechanics like "stop, frisk, confiscate" are out of the picture. So is potential "imprisonment" unless the game, in its own frame, allows such mechanics to be forced on other players. If not, all I think you can hope for is "voluntary imprisonment" or "(voluntary) forced labor" - next to just excluding people from services, of course - or as a way to let them redeem access or reputation. In a nutshell, for me it's this for now, more or less: - Measures of punishment are relatively uncertain yet - Intrusive measures seen in other games or mods are likely out of the question until proven otherwise - Toughest punishments players could expect is being banned from membership or services as far as I know - Regaining access might be accompanied by fines or certain actions you have to go through, in which the incentive to do so would be regaining certain privileges or access to services, but forcing such measures may not be guaranteed Less abstract, someone f...s up in a city and you make it so that they perhaps can still run around in the city, but cannot use most services that are vital. Maybe you can also ban them from entry into the zone altogether via the right construction methods (needing to get through the right doors whitelisted or not blacklisted) or in general as it is a gameplay feature that bans entry automatically as soon as you try to step into the area in question, like an invisible shield. And that could be it in most situations. That would perhaps be already punishment (enough). And if some want to regain access, they have to do certain things, in which the incentive to do labor or sit in prison comes from the own players, which to me is like a "voluntary sentence". The question is, can you force this through other measures as there likely won't be any active gameplay mechanics for this? That would be up to how you do it as player (faction). You can also try doing the same by threatening bounties and making their life miserable if they don't go through with whatever you have in mind for them, like prison or manual labor. If that works just as well, I don't know. Probably not as well or often as when you, as banned person, develop the own incentive to basically get yourself unbanned.
  9. By all means, do so - if you want. It's part of a debate. Sometimes counter-arguments can clarify misunderstandings or create room for more debate. Maybe I missed things prior, in turn. Overlooked them or "did not get them". I'd still like to know how "orgs can always eventually track them all down if they chose", if you know how, that is.
  10. I realize you probably had specific scenarios and situations in mind as you wrote it, but on the other hand I just sat there and thought: "It's not like organizations can really do much in that regard if you keep quiet." Of course, it again depends on many aspects, factors and the specific situation in the end but, say, if our friend Lethys here gets banned (on his known 'main') from, say, the markets of a trading outpost or even a big city where a number of people always come by, then he can just circumvent that by making a new character. If bans can only be applied to characters and not user accounts (encompassing all their characters), he can literally run up there and interact again. If he doesn't give it away himself and if the managers of that place do not demand each one to whitelist with specific criteria including a voice sample (even that can be faked), then how will they 'track him down'? I do not speak about what would be illegal measures here in reality, on that note. "Tracking down" only really becomes possible in my eyes if enough hints are dropped and / or if there was an integrated mechanic to identify what character belongs to what forum or account user. And even then it kinda stops there if you use a different account altogether. Unless you have specific things in mind in how orgs "can always eventually track them all down if they chose", I think it's really easy to circumvent such restrictions with new alts. But... ... I would agree that this is indeed a deep dark hole. At times.
  11. Weapon system restrictions or mechanics are - at least to me - far future talk. Uncertain. Shaky. Speculation? Being able to ban / outlaw weapon systems (or insert space weed here) and manually enforcing that only becomes viable if players have the possibility of stopping or checking the inventory of other players, or potentially even access it under specific circumstances (on their territory, etc). I just don't see this happen like in the game Armed Assault 3 where various online communities have "life mods" simulating life with civilians, police, criminals, etc. There, police can actually stop you, taze you (or shoot you), access your car trunk, access your inventory by searching you, and remove objects. There, all the various smuggling and crime becomes viable. It does not in an MMORPG-like game with restricted possibility in that regard. How will it later really look like? I think we all don't know and can only assume. I find this vital to mention so that perhaps some players or groups don't start wildly creating laws and protocols on how to enforce X when it might not even become possible, resulting in moderate or a lot of work for nothing. It's more likely that certain things can just be banned or restricted via the territory control system. Most notably, usage of weapons. Could mean that players still are able to enter your territory with weapons but they just can't use them. They might also have a bunch of certain substances on them but you could never tell or really do much about it. But then again that is also speculation on my part. In short, best not to hold your breath. Time will tell.
  12. I mostly think that unless "drugs" or certain chemical substances really bring downsides that could endanger other players, there won't be rigorous banning of said things. Most player factions and states likely won't ban a damn thing. My prediction is you'll see more rigid enforcement or banning of certain actions players can or cannot do - aka how to behave - than objects being banned. Most who opt for bans will likely do so for "fluff" reasons. For RP, immersive or ideological reasons. You could think it could attract players to "outlaws", but would there even be a need for "outlaws" if you can just go to another (player) state and freely obtain those things in malls, shopping areas, etc? Where their security or police forces might stop you for a vehicle check to see if it adheres to certain requirements, where they might look in the trunk or storage and not give any damn about "space weed"? You could probably stand in the streets (or corridors) and consume that visibly (assuming there is animations for this, whether short or longer) like eating a snack or smoking a cigar (inb4 "Non-smoking area"). In short, anything is possible in that regard, the rest would depend on the people / player factions, their stance on it and how exactly such narcotics would work. People going for that "smuggler vibe" wanting to be a "criminal" who sells or smuggles that just for the heck of it might see huge disappointment if it doesn't end up banned or outlawed in many areas. But then again you could look for this in exactly those areas where the people in power decide to outlaw it. I'd only ever consider doing that if for some reason this is outlawed in some other area or faction, but retains a certain demand, implying increased prices. Then it's a risk and profit calculation. But ironically you could have your production plans visibly in other areas where it's not outlawed. Heck you could plaster big signs on your 'factory' while you can sell it there and sell it at a higher price in outlawed areas, if people 'living' or working there do not or cannot get into territories where usage is allowed or not restricted much. I, for one, was never fond of the whole vibe around (space) drugs and the usage or selling of those in many games, and I don't take any 'potentially questionable' in reality. You could say I'm generally not really interested in gameplay going into that direction and ironically I am organizing a police project for a notable community city project. While you could now think I'm opposed, on the other hand I say that I understand economic aspects behind it (and it's only a game) and in addition, if said city project management doesn't outlaw any substances, then I say: Less work for the 'cops' involved! You have to consider another aspect: Any player nation outlawing this and really declaring a 'war on (space) drugs' has a higher pressure to keep their areas clean. A certain black market could grow. You'll open up a certain "homefront" in a way, potentially, if it becomes a big issue. That can be fun and part of emergent gameplay, but at the same time you need to spend resources on enforcing that. Other player nations who do not outlaw this or that do not get to have that problem and can spend resources and time on other things. Heck they could probably benefit from the taxes, if they can be applied, if it's really a sought-out substance. But before I write more for now, I guess we'll have to wait and see. Time will tell. I'd generally find such 'mechanics' interesting to have potentially questionable substances that players just have to deal with somehow.
  13. You mention cartels, indicating that being illegal (to me anyway). I wonder if many "player factions" (specifically player states and comparable ones) will even outlaw or forbid such things if they end up in-game. Some will outlaw it due to ideology or mentality, some will not care and be indifferent, others will actively market it. "Can't get X there? Well you can get it here!"
  14. Are there deeper or detailed criteria about what Star is to be selected for this? In turn, what are the criteria for mass-mining, location wise?
  15. I never mind them as it adds a layer of logistics and makes at least one industry branch remotely feasible, while potentially empowering shop owners in cities who'd sell those goods. But debating this turns into a "pizza vs spaghetti?" kind of debate given that it is purely speculation for the (far) future and a preference thing. While reading pros and cons is nice it can also be useless. What we write here in this case won't change much as the stance is now clear - for now. Not that I want to discourage anyone here though. It's just that I've also seen this debate a few times before here which is likely why not many will post in here (again) all aspects considered. I'd revisit the topic with late beta or something. But that's just me.
  16. It is always a question of "is it worth it?" in the end. If people HAVE to fear backlash for attacking you because you are well established, they will think twice or refrain completely. For that you don't even have to be "formally neutral", it can work universally. Although being seen as such can help.
  17. It's one of the things I consider nice in theory but useless or too impractical in practice. I can still see a ring world work even though that itself would cost many resources and then people to maintain and defend since it would be in space around a star ? You have to claim and manage that somehow. I don't want to stop anyone for going for even more, I just think the crazy amount of resources could be put to better use in smaller projects or war efforts since the project might turn into a barrel bust given the large amounts of people you'd have to manage. Again, do and try as you like. Perhaps it just works in the end but so far I'd have too many worries about abstract and real risks.
  18. Let's be honest here: That (real examples) is because they're a lot more crucial and / or vulnerable. It's not like "political leaders" (in comparable form, position or rank) in-game need it out of survival reasons in their own areas if those are safe zones where random violence cannot occur easily or only when contested. It would (in those areas, that is!) simply be for fluff - RP or 'realism' - or 'coolness'. But technically you can be that leader figure on the bus or sidewalk without a big convoy or escort. My general point being that we can often point to reality or find inspirations in it, but should not always try to copy it fully. That's my own view anyway. Run whatever player organizations or states / empires how you see fit with all potential benefits and flaws, many subjective, some not much.
  19. We'll will never see such "different planes of existence" (physically) in the game, you get the universe, space, planets, systems and that will be all. The rest, the players have to deal with. But it will always stay relatively "material focused". But there us something more, beyond the game. It is universal, it can be applied to other settings, both in reality and games, or rather, both in a non-game related and also game related context. I won't spill it out here and encourage all to... make up their minds themselves. It is, however, both very simple and yet very complex.
  20. But... does it blend? (See what I did there? Hue Hue Hue.)
  21. The general question I ask myself with such no fly zones is practicality: Someone comes from far away with a ship that is not large. Lands at the designated parking spots likely not in the inner city. Then what? I mean, a vehicle doesn't just pop up out of nowhere unless you bring one, but not all can bring one with them and whether those would fit the technical requirements is another question. It's not necessarily a "problem" for this city or faction only but one in general. So what solutions are there besides "have fun walking"? Do you intend businesses to have car shops or leasing programs or does the state (Alpha fed) intend to run potential car rentals or shops directly? Furthermore, will cabs (run privately) be a thing at this time? Other public transportation from those landing zones such as trains? Assuming you can safely lock down weapons, as in either deactivate them by the user or via some forced zoning area in controlled areas, do you plan in relying on this and fine or punish only in cases of misuse... or would weapons need to be physically dismounted and absent? This might be relevant for those who come from afar and bring their own car. Huh, nice rhyme. Anyway, I think those are potentially interesting or vital questions. If not now, then at the latest when you build the city in a final version for release without further wipes on the horizon.
  22. PS2? Darn, I might need to play some PS2 again, been ages. Just internal rounds or open for allies / loosely related contacts / anyone?
  23. Prediction So recent news indicate the game is actually further away than some might've expected. I remember a news article or rumor from March this year - thus, before all the E6 reveals and information offensive - indicating it could be done within a year, say, about June 2019. Given recent quotes and statements, this would seem too optimistic if the demo snippet shown behind closed doors is but a fraction of the game, even if a solid and working one. Recent rumors or snippets I've seen also indicate that the upcoming Gamescom in Cologne in a month might not show notably new things for the public and could still be for certain eyes behind closed doors only. We might generally get to see new content and promotional material, but any actual (playable) content or demos might not be for the public. One can only wonder when it might be released in the end. I think one year from now on is too optimistic or in other words unlikely. Would it take 3 or more? Maybe, but maybe unlikely. So far, I aim for about 2 years, give or take. Might be 2020. Might actually be a good date given that the prior title or influence is from "Cyberpunk 2020". I'm no coding expert and whatnot but I'd also assume you can do a lot in 2 years, assuming the team is relatively complete and that you have a solid road map and no major obstacles along the way. Meaning we'd see very substantial or at least notable information with next year's E6 and Gamescom, and then maybe an eventual release date in 2020 or 2021 at the latest. I'm very eager to play and can't wait, but at the same time it's no use getting nuts about it. Time is just flying by and is relative. To give put things into relative perspective: Think back about 3 games you eagerly waited for, maybe years in advance since their announcements. That day eventually came and you play(ed) those games. Maybe already forgot about them. That day X always eventually comes. Once it happens you'll look back and wonder how the time went by since the new announcements in 2018. And then you'll happily play it, I suppose. I for one really hope for good modding support or capabilities. It's that level of modding support that brings me back to games like Skyrim, Fallout 4 (or NV) all the time, with each having seen multiple playthroughs or still on-going ones. I never saw the same in other games that were not sandbox-like and very moddable. And I still hope to get to see a possible Judge Dredd-like experience or "career option" in CP2077.
  24. Greetings. You're probably among the few "cliché Empires" (no offence of course, but aggressive Empires are likely some tvtrope or similar by now :P) I find likeable - to explain, I'm usually more fond of other organization types and regarding "classic Empires" I can basically just think of 2-4, yours included, that stand out in my view or I can find likeable. It helps that you also pick up the Helghast / Helghan style in multimedia and likely mental approach, which is a plus for me. I'm generally a fan of those - maybe not individual actions, but the general faction. I'd say the Half-Life 2 cops also fit the bill of "gas mask antagonists" and I played their roles in some RP setting for years on end. Call me biased therefore, maybe. I think it's the advertising and marketing and the relative success so far. Honestly, keep it up and you'll do great things. Can't see you fail any time soon, at least. Reach for the stars and you shall obtain them.
×
×
  • Create New...