Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'mission'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Starting Zone (EN)
    • Rules & Announcements
    • General Discussions
    • Off Topic Discussions
  • Starting Zone (DE)
    • Regeln und Ankündigungen
    • Novark's Registratur
    • Allgemeine Diskussionen
  • Starting Zone (FR)
    • Règles et Annonces
    • Registres du Novark
    • Discussions générales
  • Beta Discussion
    • Beta Updates & Announcements
    • Idea Box
    • DevBlog Feedback
    • The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
    • Streamer's Corner
    • The Builder's Corner
    • Innovation Station
  • Organizations
    • Org Updates & Announcements
    • Novark's Registry
  • Fan Art, Fan-Fic & Roleplay
    • Novark Agora
    • Novark Story Time
    • Novark Art Gallery

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location:


Interests


backer_title


Alpha


community_id

Found 4 results

  1. In order to build trust between actors, NQ intends to add a 5-star rating system, but a rating system like this can be abused as well. I can give a player a poor rating and impact their ability to play the game regardless of their performance with respect to the mission itself. However, there are ways to formally rate a player's mission performance. NQ should have the ability to track when or whether certain mission-related events occur. (I am focusing on hauling missions here, but the principle of formal performance metrics is not limited to this scope) A few possible metrics for mission performance: Was the mission completed successfully? How quickly was the mission completed? (Could be elapsed time or presented as a percentage of the total time allotted) If the mission failed, why? Package was destroyed Package was opened by the player <-- MOST IMPORTANT The mission timed out The destination container was destroyed Any mission system should have some sort of indication of whether or not a mission failed because the hauler opened the package before delivery. The most important information to the player writing a hauling mission is whether or not the hauler will just steal the freight. Formal detail can be included in the rating system fairly easily, and it allows for a greater degree of trust between actors than would otherwise be possible, increasing the proportion of players who are willing to create missions and lowering the necessary collateral. Addendum: There are two major purposes to a rating system: To establish trust / penalize/disqualify untrustworthy players (e.g. did the player steal the payload) To distinguish performance between trustworthy players (e.g. how quickly a haul was delivered) Ideally, the rating system would segregate these two objectives. There is a problem when a player is rated poorly because they took a long time to respond to messages or perhaps they were rude in communications, but when another mission writer sees this bad review, he wrongly presumes the hauler is not trustworthy.
  2. So we know that with the next patch that NQ is going to add in the mission system. However, after giving it some thought NQ, I feel, needs to understand the environment the game is currently in. With the onset of the .23 patch they've added in more sinks and almost no faucets. So in the end, the economy is in the crapper and no one is able to make much money unless you're a market guru and know how to capitalize. However, even then barely anyone will be interested in engaging in the game because they all feel they have to mine in order to do anything. Or Join a large org to get anywhere. When adding in the mission system, the way you can help the community is to add a balance to it by having Bots auto-gen missions for people to engage in. The current status of the community, barely anyone is in a realistic position to generate meaningful missions and honestly it's on NQ to create a solid foundation of plentiful missions that the community can at least start off at. Then eventually make their own when the community is thriving again. Adding in this new feature without a foundation for the community to start off at will only lead to the mission system being identified as another sync and barely a faucet for anyone else. These missions need to be plentiful in number so EVERYONE has a chance to at least grow individually or as an org. So as far as turning this ship around that's a SOLID way NQ can do it. PLEASE DON'T LET THIS POST FALL ON DEAF EARS!!!
  3. I have a mission for you, it is available at each market near disctricts or at the Station VR: Mission Artifacts.
  4. In the podcast, NQ talked about player-created missions and the dynamic play with allowing newer players to earn some income to start off. A possible suggestion was NPC sponsored missions aimed at the newest of the players. Another suggestion is creating an option for restrictions by 'player age'. I don't know if this will be sufficiently addressed by the RDMS or solely handled by the planned Mission System. Under this suggestion, entities can restrict mission access by the age of the player; perhaps by months or weeks. I think it plays to NQ's goal of enhancing contact between older and newer players quite nicely. Quests created under such system could provide the newer players with something to do, earn an income, and be introduced to an organisation, while excluding mature players from farming those quests. It might indirectly affect competition between organisations too. Larger organisations may be able to spare more resources/rewards to lure newer players to them or decide not to bother on that front altogether - letting word-of-mouth marketing do the job instead.
×
×
  • Create New...