Warden

Sometimes you have to dig deep to uncover things. And some of those might be your own. With a bit of 90's flair. After digging, I found some older things that made me chuckle a bit, as these things are fragments of the past, from around 2011 or before. A good past in which we won the big struggle or fight. I doubt we will ever be able to re-create the success we had back in the day and it isn't even quite necessary. Let's focus on good memories. If you've been following us for a while you might have noticed we started using "themes". But those are nothing 'new'. Here's something quirky that might more or less resemble one of our first or even only division themes so far. Lyrics are included. Sorry for the quality, back in the day that was kind of normal I think. I hope you enjoy, as people enjoyed it 'back in the day'. Its style and the music (reminds me of some old game soundtracks) perfectly conveys how things were back in the day for us: A wild, exotic, freaky game experience full of real or implied wonders and adventures That's the sandbox experience we had and look forward to having again, even if just remotely I welcome all who look for a challenge while not minding to start in a growing organization. If you can bring a mature character and don't mind a challenge in a growing organization, we might be a good fit. >>Discord: https://discord.gg/Dp5xMFZ

Which is a shame, really (meaning the last sentence). I get that smaller or one man groups might be among the least lucrative for "an abstract mass of players" but all orgs have to usually start somewhere. It's a shame that some possibly creative ideas never see the light of day because people are 'risk adverse", not willing to try something in or with smaller orgs, while running ? to the big ones. Those will survive and always find members but the smaller ones struggle. Of course it's not "wrong" wanting to be in big ones. It's a preference thing. And smaller groups can still find people. But I'd say the general trend leans in favor to big groups which does not necessarily help smaller groups that need growth.

I'm inclined to agree, but I think it might take a few more decades for this to become "the norm" or relatively affordable unless you're in special positions to just either be able to pay and / or get it early or under specific conditions. I hope you will have the life time and then the funds to invest once it's ready, assuming it would be a thing in our lifetime. ----------- I really look forward to the game, even if it might be somewhat different than initially imagined, when all we had was the trailer and snippets of information. I also hope modding will see strong support and interest by the playerbase and community. A healthy modding community can propel this game even further. Imagine all the tweaks or even grand additions like DLCs, by modders. A zombie apocalypse mod would be something that could also work with how the world is set up, with some kind of "persistence".

Greetings and welcome. ------------------------------------------- Preliminary notice: Anything below this line, including the the lines can be removed at your request if you wish to keep such discussion out of the thread or think it is too nitpicky - simply send a PM or mention it here. In turn, if you are fine with it, the line and this notice will be removed while the rest below will remain. ------------------------------------------- I also have some questions or would like to chime in. Perhaps I was always a bit nitpicky and I understand organizations have to start somewhere, meaning what you state is likely your end goal, but not the current status, but nevertheless, I find the "definite outcome" in the statement a tad odd. At this time, anyway, with many apparently bigger or influential groups around, while "threaten the balance" is rather abstract. Just a "will be the best ... to destroy all those ....". But alas, perhaps that's simply part of the group vibe, fluff or presentation. Might just be that I prefer a more decent appearance. So what I mention is fine and not "wrong" per sé, I just have a different preference. But I'd basically ask how you intend to do this as at this time as starting group that, even if it grows, has a notable "gap" to bridge compared to organizations that have been around notably longer and were able to grow - unless it's mostly a "fluff statement". Thanks in advance.

I might be a tad out of the loop, chances are likely this was discussed and even officially commented on already but let's think it through: Would it not be a huge effort (alternatively cost hard cash appropriately) for NQ to implement this? With what standards or regulations would this happen? A particular program NQ can work with and where you can do a lot of the work in advance? Or just send them artwork and let them do the creation and most work? How many people or groups would request it in the end? Workload? Another interesting aspect: would it just be a skin or costume slot that shows instead of your game armor or become its own object that could be stored, found, traded in the world? You see, beyond the impulsive "gib!" It's kinda tricky. I am all for it from a consumer or player POV but it doesn't seem feasible unless NQ establishes a particular 'unit' for it that implements such requests either as fake or real object and if they take real money due to the likely effort for custom requests. Gotta ask, are we talking textures or overlays or actual custom meshes? You rather seem to imply meshes, which is more work. I can later see something more feasible work: custom (org) logos or patches or rank signs for armors that are applied to existing armor. There would obviously need to be rules for this but it would be less complicated: a mod or similar could just approve graphics per organization to prevent "unfitting logos". Orgs could submit one or a set of graphics (several) for approval. Once cleared they could apply them in a limited or sufficient built-in editor where you would also color your armors or something. That would be a 'working' compromise. Thnk of the squad XML thing from the Armed Assault series. In general and regardless of this, it would help immensely if NQ generally aims to provide a wide selection of different armor types in modular fashion so you can mix and match further. I realize either path will lead to a notable amount of work, but having too few armor or clothing sets would, in my eyes, not fit with the scope of the game and emergent game play. And thus, an empowered player.

Greetings and welcome. Regarding the above, I think that conflict cannot be avoided though. If a goal is "become the largest (insert state or nation category in here, empire, kingdom, whatever)" while also not trying to cause issues or be at war with others, you'll eventually might find the two goals clash. I think you can't have it all and anyone joining now starts at a somewhat different situation. Major organizations that have been around a while already have a big abstract or real advantage and you could eventually be at odds with one of those if you want to be bigger or better. Eh, just trying to shed further light on that from my view, either way good times lie ahead. Good luck with your organization.

(If you don't want to read through pseudo-law or mild in-universe babbling, just ignore this post, it's intended to comment from a mild "in-character" point of view while giving the project idea below some spark for further debate or to encourage other reactions of any kind by other organizations) A preliminary assessment on the Charter of Alioth »Source thread | Awareness tags: @Rafiki We have noted recent efforts and the first version of the Charter of Alioth (COA). Immediately, efforts have begun to assess the document in its current form, as released recently, in determining whether the document is fit for support from a corporate view. A reason for this response is also the following quote from the preamble of the charter, prompting this response: I'm responsible for the "central branch" of Vulture Corporation and as such will reply in its name; this may not refer to other future branches that may be established, as there will be notable autonomy for each branch in how it conducts business or operations. While we commend such initiatives and grand undertakings, and especially commend projects to revive aspects of the old world, the cradle of humanity, we as sovereign entity come to the following conclusion: Reasoning / assessment Foreword It should be noted that there is no ill-will against the notion of a charter like this; the big rejection graphic is mostly symbolic or visualization. This assessment or comment on it simply intends to state the personal stance of Vulture Corporation (central) as a whole, encompassing its assets and personnel. Additionally, this "format" of public response is, in the end, intended to create further discussion about the idea, which should aid the charter draft or suggestion, generate feedback and thus be helpful to its creators and supporters, but also opponents or rejecters. Corporate stance While the creation is commendable and the underlying intention appears noble, aspects of the charter cannot fully be supported by us, as it may be possible that violations may occur or be deemed necessary regarding specific circumstances and articles. From our perspective, it appears outdated or may not completely be able to incorporate and mind the current situation humanity faces or might be forced into. Due to notable, obvious conflicts with certain articles (or parts of them) of the document that could interfere with corporate sovereignty and the necessary frame to counter specific threats, we also reject the notion to agree or sign the charter for "PR purposes" only to ignore or violate it when it may be deemed suitable. After speaking to assessors, I hereby list some articles that could eventually be deemed problematic. The conflict zones are, however, not necessarily limited to them. It is merely a selection to highlight certain potential problems that make signing of this document un-wise, if not impossible, with our stance in mind: Potentially or likely problematic parts underlined, our comments are highlighted in teal color. ■ Article 2 Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, organizational or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or intergalactic status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Stance / potential conflict area: We reserve the right to distinguish based on a notable amount of factors, partially some of those ruled out in this article, if deemed necessary. As such, "everyone" cannot be granted what is noted in the article. ■ Article 10 Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him. Stance / potential conflict area: We reserve the right to deal with 'criminal charges' in any form deemed necessary. While potential innocence is always taken into account and while evidence and likelihood is carefully compared and assessed, we do not guarantee "public hearing" in all cases, mostly also given our nature as non-state-actor with a sovereign status. In addition, "independent, impartial tribunal" could be provided, but is not guaranteed. ■ Article 13 (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the area claimed by his organisation. Stance / potential conflict area: We reserve the right to restrict movement in any claimed and administrated (managed) area based on various factors, if deemed necessary. The same can apply for our own employees. "Right to freedom of movement" does not list any potential restrictions and thus implies "total freedom of movement", which cannot be guaranteed based and must be distinguished regarding legal status, rank, affiliation and other factors. Less abstract: A service member or new employee may not have the right to enter a restricted internal research area deemed 'sensitive'. Given these areas of conflict between corporate regulations or interests - depending on the situation - and the framework of this charter, it is deemed partially incompatible, even if other aspects are very well aligned or supported by idea. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Simplification of possible critic - in a nutshell In different terms, the COA is deemed static and unflexible with today's practices of organizations and actors, and is based upon an old framework apparently mostly applied to classic nation state actors in such a way to find common grounds between many actors on one world. With this new rebirth of mankind and civilizations and a spread among the starts while minding a diverse set of interactions between many different types of actors, it mostly seems to restrict organizations in certain areas. Perhaps it is also unspecific in certain articles or may need rewording to find wider acceptance. It is assumed that countless organizations would not be willing to fully accept or sign this charter in this stage as it would mildly to notably impact their ability to act in their own interests. While an intergalactic framework that lists or encourages "common ground" may certainly be useful, it can never be assumed that all organizations would support or sign it, just like certain agreements and regulations were not fully supported or signed by state actors of the old world. In addition, it appears that authoritarian states already exist in not just a very limited number, making their support or even interest in the charter questionable. It could also beg the question how signing actors would react or interact with those that might either be anything but interested or even openly opposing the charter or its core values. To lastly resort to a word of the old world, to some it could seem that this charter could mostly end up being a "Lippenbekenntnis" (idiom: 'Talk is cheap'; lip service) for signing actors until it no longer suits their needs or restricts them, in which case they would ignore aspects of it - overtly or covertly. Current corporate main stance regarding support or acceptance - in a nutshell Currently, it is our assessment that we as sovereign corporate actor will be 'better off' minding aspects of the charter, but not following it strictly to the letter, making formal support and signing impossible. We intend to support humanity's revival through innovation, research and service but deem it necessary to ignore aspects of the charter in specific situations in enforcement related cases when this aids the protection of the corporate body or others unaffiliated to it. We also do not think, as at least indirectly implied in the preamble, that not strictly following the charter or signing it would exclude us from being a "reasonable, social and righteous" organization. I thank you for your time and review. We remain open for debate in the specified channels you have provided elsewhere. //If I may add my two cents below this without pseudo-babbling or fluff-talk, you have an interesting idea there. I personally do not think it's very viable or, in other words, it won't be liked by many organizations and players or supported fully at least, but one can tell you put some thought and effort into this, and seem to apply some sense or understanding of real law, whether copied from real charters and whatnot or added through own knowledge and understanding.

In theory it could be like a second job. It surely could replace any primary job time-wise. It is, after all, not a game you play a few rounds and leave it be, as it always resets or something. What's more engaging and time consuming than trying to create civilizations, groups, businesses and the like with other players while trying to expand land or territory-wise in a persistent world? To put it in other words, there really is no time limit or time cap. You could always invest more time, even though healthy breaks are suggested.

@Sofernius In addition in regards to the whole "losing players due to pay gap" (simplified summary) and measures to promote the game, we should not forget something else. Word of mouth. Multimedia. This: ... and of course many more, these are just two prime examples of sharing content. I also used those big pictures on purpose, as those are two big notable platforms that can and will promote DU beyond forum threads, reddit and anything else that could aid in spreading the word. In the end, not everyone will be able to take a look till beta and whatnot. Regardless of whether there is a free / limited trial or not, all those platforms just mentioned will not just allow people to get a look at the game, it will promote it and make it known to some in the first place. I'm not even looking at what I would call pure gameplay videos or videos from the community. There are many known Youtubers (and Streamers) beyond single or few games, channels covering various games. "John Doe" just playing DU and posting videos is doing his part, but there's also big names out there who will cover the game, and due to their followers and fans and their reach, those "influencers" will do their part in promoting the game. I think if people really start to like the idea of the game and - once ready - its technical, social and gameplay possibilities, if they generally could afford a sub they'd take the dip and try it out. Or they can inform themselves about cutting down on hard costs due to DAC and whatnot. Last but not least we should not ignore the slim or perhaps not-so-unlikely chance of news outlets picking up stories of the game, if it will turn into something like a "new EvE Online" for people, whether it intends to do this or not. I mean there are plenty of news articles about the game not solely posted on primarily game related websites and whatnot. There's a friggin Playboy article about the guy who died in the US embassy attack who played EvE Online in his free time and did notable things in there, while I think other stories were mentioned about some players and their "life style" in that game. I can see DU as something like a progression with sandbox elements to this. If all goes well.

I'd like to highlight this again, as I've stated it in similar fashion elsewhere recently. Of course if someone never heard of DU and you start talking about it and then mention subscriptions, and just that, people might think you have to pay monthly to play - and some apparently dislike it or do not want to. But what I find vital as someone believing in the scope of the game, in simple terms, a supporter, is that one should also mention that you theoretically do not have to pay beyond your initial contribution or month(s). In theory, perhaps not counting an initial cost for the game, you might not have to spend one actual buck. This might be a relatively rare scenario, but with the given model I consider it possible. You'd just need someone to get you PLEX DAC. Maybe you have friends that play and they somehow obtained those. Maybe there will be people or organizations who offer them to new players in return for favors or working that off in-game. Maybe there will be random lotteries where DACs are thrown out to participants. Who can really tell yet? It could be possible. What could be more likely or realistic for a lot of players, however, is that some start by initially paying one or a few months and eventually, depending on their efforts and luck, manage to obtain the right contacts or money to buy DAC in the game and use them as game-time. It certainly won't be "piss easy" in either case unless random luck or the right approach plays into this, but it's theoretically possible. In short, if someone speaks about DU or advertises it, they should perhaps highlight that it's not the "classic subscription model" in that sense, with the PLEX-like currency of DAC. I frankly think that this should not keep those away who are interested in the game already. If it's really the money itself, I could argue that you could already save up right now if the game's vision or scope really interests you, allowing you to start with paid months once it's ready or far enough, and then work on getting the necessary in-game money to eventually allow you to trade or utilize DAC. Thinking about saving up, perhaps it's generally best to always save up a bit for something. You never know what might happen or when you need something. Reminds me to save up for an eventual PC overhaul. I best get to it already... many hungry games are looming on the horizon (the next years).

Hello there, Reporting with a little update: 1) Thread Title We replaced "RP" with "Immersion" in the thread title, it might be less confusing to some while being more "spot on" with what it is trying to express. Still, those with (a classic) RP experience should not feel left out, if they are open for an interactive experience not completely focusing on "passive RP" - we want to interweave gameplay, what is happening in the community, with an 'immersive' experience. Too unspecific for you? Just ask and I shall elaborate on our views regarding that. 2) Discord! Perhaps it is a bit late given our age in this community - but you could say better late than never. Now, a dedicated public relations discord server exists that awaits your arrival. Those interested in the corporation can ask related questions, while any other partners, spokespersons or diplomats of other organizations and states can also of course join to establish ties or send inquiries. »Discord server link (click here) Notice: It is new and still needs adjustments, core changes or intended frame will be done this week, including user groups. In other news, some promotional content (website) will soon be updated or changed and discord promotion (ads) in various hubs will begin. Who knows, might even make new promotional videos. ⇣ On a personal closing note - if you look for a group right now or maybe in the near future

It's all about clever marketing or picking the right approach. I mean, countless people also played and play EvE Online which also has monthly cost, as far as I can still assume. It's been almost a decade since I touched it. When getting to that particular topic the key is mentioning the compromise, that you do not necessarily HAVE to pay monthly to play. Someone could gift you DAC, letting you play - although chances are strangers wouldn't just do that for nothing in return, and assuming it's not some lottery where those owning them throw them out like that. But that means you can earn those and use them to obtain game time (1 DAC should equal 1 month). Maybe you pay initially but then obtain sufficient in-game funds to buy DACs in the game and use them for game time. My point being, unlike some other games, you do not have to necessarily pay to play. How (un)likely that becomes is of course dependent on too many factors to list or fantasize about, but it is possible. To give an example, any backer of a certain status gets free DACs, from a few to a lot. Some could hoard them, some could sell them for in-game currency and some could gift or grant them to other players relatively free of charge or under specific conditions.

Greetings and welcome. To perhaps share my own enthusiastic views as I chime in here: If nothing serious gets in the way and if the core goals and ideas can be delivered in working condition, with many being able to run around in one spot, then I see the biggest potential in that genre or in online games in general. And content for years to come. All from other players, most notably. At times I feel actually surprised there isn't notably more activity or interest, it seems (by speaking to some on the net or in reality) many still haven't heard about this game, to which I then usually describe it as an "EvE Online and Minecraft (or Space Engineers) hybrid" to give people a rough understanding. I think in due time we might actually enjoy how relatively quiet or calm it has been, there are surely big aspirations. What gets the most is that it basically tries to apply the EvE idea of that single shard or server people basically play on. A notable part that annoyed me, for example, in other sandbox games that you could loosely compare is that you had to eventually settle on a dedicated server all your progress would be on. What if you found a better server and / or if that server eventually ceased operation? All lost. At the same time, you were always split from a general game community - all you had was your server community. Having all players in one world or, optionally or as other alternative for me, very few mega servers, seems more enticing. It has pros and cons if you think about it, really. Dedicated servers might allow more customization and unique approaches in some games, indeed. But the risk of failure always lingers. In the end I'd like to enjoy a sandbox game in a world shared by all players. Where your choices matter on a vastly larger scale you might not even be able to comprehend at all times. Think of causality. Anything is possible. I can already tell thinking about it is somewhat exciting, but at the same time patience is a virtue. In due time we'll see where the journey goes.

I wouldn't necessarily add it here or make it optional to show. But what you can do is allow you to search for users on the organization hub: https://community.dualthegame.com/

There are (or will be) city projects in the work that will naturally attract many people. I frankly do not see fake or AI growth happen. Players will have to populate or expand settlements and cities. But eventually reaching that point makes success even bigger, makes it all feel more natural. If you, on the other hand, lack people to populate or grow a settlement, it is what it is. Persist or adapt accordingly. I do think that big cities will feel natural or populated later on, if they attract people and serve as vital commercial hub or political center. Might not even need NPC.

I mean if someone on the internet says writes it and seems pretty serious about it, it must be true. May contain sarcasm or similar. Let's be serious: 30 dollars would be unusual for the average sub model and likely rather scare people off. And as it was so far proven to not be true (denied by staff), I guess the old saying goes "Don't believe everything people tell others / you."

I see a potential "thought flaw". It would or could be, in bold: "Best way" is kind of relative if you think about it. "Best way" implies "the only right or fastest way". But how can there be "the best way" (singular) if it heavily depends on both the organizations and the organization seekers? My point is, I find the notion of a "universal super recipe" for recruitment flawed, if that is indeed subconsciously or consciously meant. Of course some people will say X or Y are 'the best ways' and that is fine, but to be nitpicky or precise, it all really varies and depends on what you look for and who you look for. Some groups might try this and get far, others might try the same only to see failure or an inefficient way. Perhaps I change the wording a bit to reply and provide input to the topic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ In short, I don't know what "the best" way would be, but these things would or could likely help in general: A refined thread with structure in both content or information and formatting (Other) Promotional material of any kind that has seen at least some care or 'love' (effort) Being present in a subset of the community if it is huge or the general community, if able to Generally being known or able to approach people and interact with them ...and likely a lot more! I'm guessing you ask this because you aren't just bored or curious, but to see what tips you could apply to your own organization. With that possibility in mind I would add "patience" to the list or as advice. It can be a long tedious task for starting organizations, and growing is one thing, but keeping that growth can be a different cup of tea, as people come and go. You can only really recruit if you can attract people. Think about your ideas, what you intend to cover, your goals and how you promote those. You need to be or appear lucrative to others to attract people. You also likely have to experiment a lot to eventually discover what would be "the best way" for your growth or organization. Just my 2 DAC.

With the recent E3 trailer, it might be a good time to discuss the topic here. And since it might just be a year away or closer. Long story short, who's waiting for it? Or hasn't heard of it at all so far? Who has reservations? Who likes the general style and might want to copy things in DU? What do you want to accomplish or play in the game? I'm personally looking to get involved in the cop or corporate world and see where the journey takes me. And you?

My view or suggestion in regards to releasing something early or refined: It can make or break a group or define a brand when it is revealed at the right time or rather refined. It can have a notable impact on the rest of the community, whether org seekers or others already in groups. I remember when we posted a refined thread, the initial feedback was good, and there wasn't much going on back then. Conversely, posting too early or rather unfinished content might in most cases not grant you any flowers. Of course it depends and you might still attract people, but first impressions count. Maybe I am a bit spoiled, but I see some organization promotion threads with just a few meagre lines and not much info and I immediately find it less than lucrative. You don't have to be a graphic artist or movie maker to create a decent thread with the for tools already at your disposal. In short, the most recent care and maybe structure (and refined content) you add, the more it pays off on an abstract and likely real level. It's a bit like with games. We want them done and refined for a "full release"

Job titles will vary and likely be practical. Services will be somewhat wide, but not too much. We want to do a few things, but not everything. Can't focus on everything with a smaller team anyway. Compensation is considered; for our main project, it is possible. For our police side project, we strongly aim for in-game compensation on a regular basis ("salary") if viable and possible. Might depend on whether we are integrated into city funding and taxes or not. Those working in the main project and beyond will be compensated with real money depending on their position or merit. Marketing is always considered. From feedback obtained over years, it appears we have a unique approach to marketing or at least the possibility to reach many people if we truly must and pour our efforts into it. As for skills I humbly believe the particular skills (and approaches) I obtained over the years will provide an advantage. Not because I like to dream about it but because it has gotten us and me into good positions in the past. So far it seemed to work and I doubt it will change completely. As for the last question, not counting ranks: Both. I was wondering if you, perhaps between the lines, we're looking for inspiration in finding or selecting certain job titles for your own current or future endeavors. Could that be the case? It would, at the very least, be a side effect for readers as soon as people share their "titles".

Notice: This primarily refers to the Tortuga project team - as such, employment or primary focus would be for that particular city project »www.metropolice.agency Hello there, While not much has been going on, we still aim to fulfil our obligations to our partners once the time is right. But we can hardly do it alone. Do you want to play a cop and maintain stability¹ in what will become a large urban environment, a sprawling city? Do you want to take responsibility? Do you want to contribute to a bigger project and society? Do you want to experience a job where you may never truly know what could happen next? Then all you have to do is express your interest here or via PM. A list will collect all willing participants and once more progress is made or when full recruitment or training may begin, you will receive a letter informing you about the next steps. The best thing is that just like the Tortuga city project we intend to support, this idea is open to the public and not player organization exclusive, meaning that you can generally contribute despite having primary membership in another organization - as long as you are willing and able to commit time to the duties that will be expected of you on a weekly basis on average. You can make it a full time job or a part time job. It's up to you. You are in control. Other potential benefits² could later include: Preferred selection (or discounts) in obtaining certain permits for shops, housing, etc. Tax reductions A stable income Diverse career options And more! The future awaits, but it does not wait for you forever ¹ The regulations and range of enforcement options - what you will be permitted to do on duty and what duties we will generally be given - will primarily be permitted and set by Tortuga city management - as such, they will likely be specified later on. How much personnel we can employ and what divisions will be created will depend on this first and foremost. ² Lists possibilities, not guarantees, as integration depth, (financial) expectations and potential benefits will be later decided by city management. If feasible, all employees will receive salary through private efforts of backing Corporations or if city tax funds are granted for paying personnel. For other aspects, see ¹

A good point. A comparable scenario: In DayZ on a private shard with RP elements and player factions (that you prolly don't see as much or distinctive on your average public server), you basically had this overrun or lost province of a nation ravaged by zombies, where various people and factions try to get by, from government / military remnants or loose units to average people, from locals to foreigners, to crime people or outright terrorists, raiders, savages and anything in-between and perhaps not mentioned. In some reports I received some people put on cop uniforms (or soldier uniforms) and held people up or spread terror. That particular group simply did what they wanted within the ruleset: they held random people up if they wanted to, spread chaos or terror, fought other groups, had a "murder boner" for any state remnants and generally were a thorn in the side of many people. They didn't do it often, actually, rarely, but as someone playing a separated cop in that setting and rolling with military remnants, you can imagine how tricky your work or damage control can become if 'the enemy' starts to wear your colors or "flags" and tricks or abuses others with those. Long story short, if it can be done, it will likely happen. In such games where there are in theory no real limits in what players will be able to do, I have to actually ask who really expects people to play along according to their expectations or moral compass with so many players and factions later interacting with each other. There's always the more criminally or chaotic players and player factions in such games and DU would be no difference. It would be foolish to assume no one would potentially try it or actually DU it, but it would be pretty good to expect this and plan along or simply 'accept' the possibility. That's part of emergent gameplay. Maybe it'll happen randomly or rarely. Maybe some group starts to actively or constantly try to do it. Then, you might have several options, including trying to apply pressure on them to change their ways, get them blacklisted in other groups due to such crimes, etc. A living and breathing world - where anything within the technical parameters or social frame of the game could happen or not. But most of that depends on the players, if not all. In short: (Some) people will simply play dirty or try anything to achieve some goal, annoy or trick others. That's just how it is.

An interesting promotional website and of course organization idea, something we seem to relatively lack compared to other things. Of course, a lot is yet uncertain (to me anyway), making me wonder how feasible such ideas might be as standalone version. But time will tell, in the end. We as organization will very likely acknowledge and support such groups if all goes well and if those groups and we make it to and past release, of course. Even if groups can later mostly rely on themselves or may not need such a service, it adds some kind of organizational diversity to the community and caters to a certain interest group I would describe loosely as "EMT players". Basically those who pick doctors, EMTs, maybe firefighters in games where this is possible just like some people like to play as cops. You can see those roles (and players) or game modes in some RPG communities in "Armed Assault (3)" or "Garry's Mod", for example, and those roles usually serve some practical game play purpose or are an integral part and are not just there for fluff or "RP". To advertise this and encourage people who might be uncertain about it: As someone who played firefighters, EMTs and cops in various games with practical game play I can tell you or generally summarize that those jobs or "shifts" are sometimes menial or uneventful, and at other times the most challenging and rewarding. Either way, you never know what might happen next.

Just out of curiosity: So given the size or rather technical limitations, you apply a restriction and only visualize data pertaining organizations with X+ members. Can it be done in reverse to only show or map out groups and connections with organizations that have X- members, e.g. 11 or less, but not more? If so, you could consider having a second version. Not that it would be as potentially interesting as the big one, but data is data.