Kongou

When you die I believe you'll have an option to select from Resurrection Nodes within range. It would clearly and easily be abused by people if you were forced to use the same one that's closest to you over and over again.
 
Being an item, yes well be able to tag them in various ways. Party only, organisation only, public, etc.
 
Not known if the Novark resurrection node is special. I would assume it probably is and has infinite range. So if you die somewhere far off in the edge of nowhere youll always have one place to re-spawn at.
 
Don't let anyone fool you, NQ has not explicitly stated the operational mechanics of the RN's. Even if they've said vaguely that they take a lot of power or have recharge timers, the context of what they mean by that isn't well understood.
 
Does it mean that if you die repeatedly that you have a longer death cooldown. or can the node only spawn 1 person per minute. because obviously at times more than 1 person will die within a short period of time and people arent going to wait around a half an hour to rez.
 
NQ arent fools and they arent going to intentionally implement broken game mechanics that allow people to be captured and forced into slavery, good luck trying, If I notice its broken like that in alpha Ill be submitting long well planned solutions to make the game playable.

Or you know, you could read what Cinderfall is about.

And learn that were more than an org, more than your standard old organisation led by a cult of personality.
 
If you want the game to be more than the lowest common denominator, check us out, come talk with us.
 
We are effectively establishing a method for all the orderly nations which sign on to this type of playstyle, to decide what the "normal" rules of engagement are. Some things require laws some don't.
 
Well I'll be more than happy to talk with you about it further if you would like.

Nice work Astro it will be alot of fun.
 
Not to mention some of the goals I have in mind...
 
Emberstone, a big city on alioth for embassies, recruitment, markets, noobie pvp, gambling, and so much more.
A shuttle system from Emberstone to several key locations throughout the syndicate at large.
 
Building a ringworld, either a true Huygen style orbital around a planet or possible just some more modest ringworlds, well have to see whats both better looking and practical.
 
Operating and overseeing competetive and organized pvp in various fields. Ground based "battlegrounds", team fights, Team space fights and so forth.
 
Looking forward to meeting new faces, and helping organisations achieve their goals, even if thats to fight each other, but remain friends at the end of the day.

Hello friends of the community.

Looking for more friends!! We would love to spend time with you~

If you want to be a loner and have some protection in our monitored areas, please at least come stop by and talk with us.

If you are a small organisation looking for a mutual defense network to leverage many small orgs into a larger power, again please come have a talk with us just to discuss options and we can help give you information on various organisations.

Of course, large groups are powers into their own, if you are interested in some of the benefits we provide but would like to remain your own authority thats not a problem. Syndication comes on many levels and we arent out to threaten your autonomy.

the Syndicate provides many paths to cooperation and mutually beneficial progress you dont have anything to lose by coming and talking with us.
 
Here is a link to the introductory area of our discord. https://discord.gg/fcz33G9

The cinderfall Syndicate is by and large a defensive entity and a non standard alliance.
In short to provide ways for organisations and singular players to interact and cooperate yet still remain free to make their own decisions.

we could use volunteers for the Joint Syndicate Defense Force, if protecting other players assets while they are offline, for the goodwill of our community, is something that interests you were here to discuss.

Thank you, good luck out there gamers.

Hello friends of the community.

Looking for more friends!! We would love to spend time with you~

If you want to be a loner and have some protection in our monitored areas, please at least come stop by and talk with us.

If you are a small organisation looking for a mutual defense network to leverage many small orgs into a larger power, again please come have a talk with us just to discuss options and we can help give you information on various organisations.

Of course, large groups are powers into their own, if you are interested in some of the benefits we provide but would like to remain your own authority thats not a problem. Syndication comes on many levels and we arent out to threaten your autonomy.

the Syndicate provides many paths to cooperation and mutually beneficial progress you dont have anything to lose by coming and talking with us.
 
Here is a link to the introductory area of our discord. https://discord.gg/fcz33G9

The cinderfall Syndicate is by and large a defensive entity and a non standard alliance.
In short to provide ways for organisations and singular players to interact and cooperate yet still remain free to make their own decisions.

we could use volunteers for the Joint Syndicate Defense Force, if protecting other players assets while they are offline, for the goodwill of our community, is something that interests you were here to discuss.

Thank you, good luck out there gamers.

The problem is how will they be useful. Cooking recipes for buffs or something, sure.
 
But people will only eat so much food. The price of crops will plummet day one from over supply and little demand.
 
You could make the recipes crazy like, 500 potatoes = 1 thing of french fries. Even if you take a wild approach like that there isn't much demand. It is not as if we will have NPC's that need to eat regularly and keep a baseline price.
 
Growing crops would end up being only for your own amusement and bring minimal overall value. Not that the act of planting seeds and waiting for the finished crop isn't entertaining in some kind of low risk achievement thing. The act of farming just doesn't bring a whole lot to the game of building your own ships and destroying them.
 
I would imagine by this time that synthetic meats are produce-able. the need for grain would go down further if we don't have to funnel it into livestock. Also, it might just be possible to synthesize whatever food from energy.

Words that make me look smart.

Expressions about my deep understanding of the game.

Defensive statements about my views on liberty and freedom.

Mockery of almost completely unrelated knowledge pertaining to dual universe.

Exiting statement about Freedom and making Dual Universe great again!!!

Words that make me look smart.

Expressions about my deep understanding of the game.

Defensive statements about my views on liberty and freedom.

Mockery of almost completely unrelated knowledge pertaining to dual universe.

Exiting statement about Freedom and making Dual Universe great again!!!

So far, no one has joined the Blue Moon Crew, so I have been searching the organizations in the community portal to see if anyone else has created a similar organization, so I could join them.
 
By now, I would have expected there to be hundreds of organizations representing crews of all kinds, but that is not the way it is.  I could have missed some, but I only found a couple that might have been single ship crews.  (Those were either too mercenary for me or not accepting members.)  Most were things like corporations or empires.   Of course, there need to be those kinds of organizations, too, but it seems a little odd that more people are not forming crews. 

Allowing a means for players to create and interpret data from a standings system with their own definitions of what gives or takes standings points.
 
Allowing player orgs to decide what gives or takes standings with their respective entity.
Perhaps you have it set so that attacking a ship with a specific standing or lower, a point decided by the legate authority of that org, gives a positive standings increase.
 
Conversely setting it to attacking a friendly might decrease or do nothing. although perhaps they have it set so that even attacking allies gives a standings increase.
 
Perhaps completing missions through their terminals, donating money or resources, going on a patrol run for their armed forces, and so forth as is possible to define with in game tools.
 
Allowing the org to decide on a per organisational level what increases or decreases standings in relation to that organisation would allow the organisations to specifically define themselves.
 
Allowing the orgs to define their parameter and the level of gains or decreases. for instance -1000 to +1000 with +1 2 or 3 gains or losses or a more familiar -10 to +10 with .01 .02 .03 gains and losses as described by individually tagged actions.
 
 
 
In conjunction to standings a reputation system which runs independent from standings so that orgs could further interpret peoples data with an equally expansive table to define what increases or decreases reputation based on player actions as decided by that organisation.
 
For instance you might have +100 standings but -100 reputation, achievable if the org hands out positive standings for stealing goods, but negative reputation for the act.
The org by means of the hierarchy of power and application of tags to said roles of power in the hierarchy can cutoff a players usage of certain stargates, yet not acknowledge them as a red kill on sight enemy.
 
 
Perhaps you could allow further creation or desruction of these standings / reputations to allow for players to interpret many different types of behaviors or actions. This would allow organisations to create automatic means for players to complete tasks missions or activity and gain access to other areas that players have created. such as harder missions, access to specific stargates, or so forth.
 
In fact this kind of application would let players by their own powers create and apply the sense of security ratings to systems, by means of requiring specific standings or reputation levels to use a certain stargate.
 
Thank you reader.

Hello, for organisations It would be nice if the legates could create an option for players to either engage their affiliation with an organisation into ON-Duty mode or OFF-Duty mode.
 
Something similar to how faction loyalty in star wars galaxies worked.
In this idea, players could switch to ON duty, and be recognized as a participating member of an organization. Including any reputation they have or other benefits or downsides.
 
In OFF duty mode players would no longer be represented by that organisation. They would become recognized by their personal reputation. When switching from on duty to off duty it could take ten to fifteen minutes for the effect to take place in order to prevent rapid abuse or switching between modes.
 
Organisations can decide how this will affect them or their certain roles with additional tags and parameters. It would be nice that for player made ranks we have a sufficiently powerful tool or range of options for deciding how different types of things affect each rank.

Possibly and org would decide that ranks higher up ones or even all ranks would require that players be in on duty mode all the time.
Have to pay to go from on to off duty.

Of course these are more things that can be achieved by applying certain tag's or conditions to ranks .. maybe I'm not entirely sure how the system is setup...

Thank you reader.
 

Indeed there are limitations to this, it was just a request for the option for on duty and off duty. the total implications are in the follow up organisation specific created standings and reputations created in a dynamic way.

The on duty mode and off duty mode are just a piece of the tools, but im limited by the forum rules of one idea per post.

As always, sharp on the possibilities you all are, keep up the good work with those brain tools.

Hello, for organisations It would be nice if the legates could create an option for players to either engage their affiliation with an organisation into ON-Duty mode or OFF-Duty mode.
 
Something similar to how faction loyalty in star wars galaxies worked.
In this idea, players could switch to ON duty, and be recognized as a participating member of an organization. Including any reputation they have or other benefits or downsides.
 
In OFF duty mode players would no longer be represented by that organisation. They would become recognized by their personal reputation. When switching from on duty to off duty it could take ten to fifteen minutes for the effect to take place in order to prevent rapid abuse or switching between modes.
 
Organisations can decide how this will affect them or their certain roles with additional tags and parameters. It would be nice that for player made ranks we have a sufficiently powerful tool or range of options for deciding how different types of things affect each rank.

Possibly and org would decide that ranks higher up ones or even all ranks would require that players be in on duty mode all the time.
Have to pay to go from on to off duty.

Of course these are more things that can be achieved by applying certain tag's or conditions to ranks .. maybe I'm not entirely sure how the system is setup...

Thank you reader.
 

Hello, for organisations It would be nice if the legates could create an option for players to either engage their affiliation with an organisation into ON-Duty mode or OFF-Duty mode.
 
Something similar to how faction loyalty in star wars galaxies worked.
In this idea, players could switch to ON duty, and be recognized as a participating member of an organization. Including any reputation they have or other benefits or downsides.
 
In OFF duty mode players would no longer be represented by that organisation. They would become recognized by their personal reputation. When switching from on duty to off duty it could take ten to fifteen minutes for the effect to take place in order to prevent rapid abuse or switching between modes.
 
Organisations can decide how this will affect them or their certain roles with additional tags and parameters. It would be nice that for player made ranks we have a sufficiently powerful tool or range of options for deciding how different types of things affect each rank.

Possibly and org would decide that ranks higher up ones or even all ranks would require that players be in on duty mode all the time.
Have to pay to go from on to off duty.

Of course these are more things that can be achieved by applying certain tag's or conditions to ranks .. maybe I'm not entirely sure how the system is setup...

Thank you reader.
 

I'm all in for this but...

[initiating Constructive Criticism Protocols]

That creates a whole window of exploitation, not to mention, you can't quantify reputation when the reputation you gain is towards a person that actually thinks. I may be the most likeable son of a gun out there, that contributes 30% to the alliance's effort -- any effort that is -- but I am collectively hated because I am THAT good. See? You can't quantify reputation that way, by flipping a switch. 

Loyalty points, sure, they can work like a DKP system would from any game out there. You contribute to a job your org issued, then you got people issuing DKP / Loyalty Points towards those people, with a person having to act as the accountant for those points on the whole org, or department of the org.

[End Constructive Criticism Protocols]

[initiate Suggestion and Addition to the Original Post]

Alternatively, organisations can issue Loyalty Points as "rewards" for any job they issue under the org's name, that people can redeem later on to get gear from the org, adding a dynamic "quest" system.

A job may be for a player or group of players that undertake the contract, to go after the controversial figure of Captain Twerkmotor, with a Loyalty Point reward that would make newbies take said oddjobs on a bounty hunter's crew that goes after said controversial, but generally loved figure, as the Loyalty Points rewards could be used to get items from a faction (maybe a full gear made of Badassium-34, or instead, one gun that costs as much as all the gear combined for the same Loyalty Points).

Now, the observation may be made that Loyalty Points could be used as an "alternative currency", but it can't be used in the market, as machines do not understand loyatties, but only cold hard cash. 

And on top of that, it's either NQ doing it, or other people doing it, then all of the community using it, and then NQ having to introduce it down the line for everyone who's not using it. It's gonna happen. Just saying. We might as well create a precedence for it already so people have something to "grind towards". 

[End Suggestion and Addition to the Original Post]

I don't know about you, but that sounds a lot more emergent, than flipping "tags" on and off or having a reputation bar, which in the context of DU, it doesn't even work, as people are not NPCs. 

[Cybrex Alt #12843312343126 Shutting Down]
 

Hello, for organisations It would be nice if the legates could create an option for players to either engage their affiliation with an organisation into ON-Duty mode or OFF-Duty mode.
 
Something similar to how faction loyalty in star wars galaxies worked.
In this idea, players could switch to ON duty, and be recognized as a participating member of an organization. Including any reputation they have or other benefits or downsides.
 
In OFF duty mode players would no longer be represented by that organisation. They would become recognized by their personal reputation. When switching from on duty to off duty it could take ten to fifteen minutes for the effect to take place in order to prevent rapid abuse or switching between modes.
 
Organisations can decide how this will affect them or their certain roles with additional tags and parameters. It would be nice that for player made ranks we have a sufficiently powerful tool or range of options for deciding how different types of things affect each rank.

Possibly and org would decide that ranks higher up ones or even all ranks would require that players be in on duty mode all the time.
Have to pay to go from on to off duty.

Of course these are more things that can be achieved by applying certain tag's or conditions to ranks .. maybe I'm not entirely sure how the system is setup...

Thank you reader.
 

I'm their Master, they just don't know it yet.

Rights and Duties Management System (RDMS) will be one of the very powerful customization systems in DU. Read the DevBlog here if you have not already. Effectively tags can be used to give access to assets etc etc. I assume that in the current RDMS system, a player will know what tags he/she has.  Effectively these are like keys to a spaceship or passcard for a door.
 
The suggestion of this topic is that a tag can be placed on a person without their knowledge. These invisible tags would not be able have duties connected to them because this could lead to a player losing money without knowing about it.  
 
The uses for this are also quite broad.  For example: it could be used to not only tag intruders but to keep track of the intruder long after they have left.  This has an additional effect that invaders would need a hacker to look at their hidden tags and clean out any unwanted ones. 
 
What would you use invisible tags for?

No, DAC's should be a permanently immune item from theft. But I propose a counter argument(s) to all of this. Pick and choose pieces of each argument if that suits the outcome better NQ.
 
Make it so that the DAC item is only potent, or usable, on Alioth. Create a NPC on the arkship, that has a inventory for every player, and that is where they can store DAC's for free. Even if theyre potent in the entire universe, at least having a safe storage NPC should be doable? even with the current technical limitations?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep the emphasis of emergent gameplay on the game itself, not on the RMT deterrent, or else we may as well attatch real life value to all the game currency and create a direct money market exchange. Where people can pour real life money in, or withdrawal real life money out, by proxy of the game currency.
 
Well, I propose finding a means to make the Ark Tokens, that are already to be found out in the public, a greater emphasis to turn peoples attention away from DAC's
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On a second move I propose that we can make any variation of limits on the game currency market wallets. Either limits in transferring large quantities of funds, or actual limits on how much money you can hold in the market wallet.
 
By imposing a limit on the wallet, you would force people to convert some of their money into "physical" game goods. Raw ores / refined ores / valuable components. OR we could have an item as suggested by many, gold bars, or any various thing. Let us attach some tags to them, and there we go a viable alternative to the DAC's.
 
I can understand the concern of people having these DAC's out and about in circulation but they're not the magical, end all be all, item a small group of people want them to be. The emergent gameplay is actually just a code word for. I want to be able to steal DACs for game time.
Why cant you steal valuable things, and resell them and buy the DAC's with game currency like everyone else? Not everyone's gameplay styles can be favored over some others?
 
Do people think that because DAC's exist that Ark Tokens, 500,000 tons of raw iron, sneaking into an enemy hanger and hijacking a valuable ship, do they think that DAC's make irrelevant all the other possible emergent gameplay styles? In fact I almost go so far as to think that wrapping the whole game around these DAC's is counter progressive.
It hinders NQ's freedom to develop other interesting features into the game. This is why im opposed to them being a lootable item in play in the game field. Keep them restricted, and keep them just for their intended purpose of anti RMT, account security, and the viable choice for the free to play crowd.
 
We have Ark Tokens, a very valuable item, that must be found by exploring. And we could have other high value items to enable the sort of emergent game play people want. Let us not turn it into a war of real money economics with the DAC's.
 
Keeping the DAC's clean, and creating in game items with greater value than DAC's, will prevent the root fear that many have which is that DAC's can be used by some means to destabilize gameplay.
 
------
And above all, I ask of you everyone to let NQ devlop the game in a clean environment. This ruckus that exploded over this is pretty shameful on the community.

The epic adventure continues!
 
Very nice. I really like the personal AI-always helpful.
 
A couple of questions:
 
1. Will Lia be customizable? Maybe you could add script options to change appearance, voice, behavior? And will Lia have a physical form or a virtual manisfestation? I would say to have your own personalized AI would give a player's experience some uniqueness.
 
2. The morpher cannon: How will the player interface with that? Is it simply selecting a construct from a menu and having it built, or will a player need to go through gestures with the morpher to build constructs?
 
Can't wait for part 5!
 
~Astro

I'd like to enlist in SilverLight Industries in the resource department.
I'll be available to begin work in the alpha stage

Purge the non believers !! A soft kitten or puppy for every man woman and child!

-Political promises-
-Inflated Ego's-
-Impossible objectives to accomplish-

Come, come, make dual universe greater than it never was, better than the yesterday of tomorrow.

Or you know, you could read what Cinderfall is about.

And learn that were more than an org, more than your standard old organisation led by a cult of personality.
 
If you want the game to be more than the lowest common denominator, check us out, come talk with us.
 
We are effectively establishing a method for all the orderly nations which sign on to this type of playstyle, to decide what the "normal" rules of engagement are. Some things require laws some don't.
 
Well I'll be more than happy to talk with you about it further if you would like.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

This one is almost getting as good as the BOO thread. 
 
I love everyone of you.