Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
NanoDot

System for purely commercial contracts

Recommended Posts

In DU, we have a very sophisticated RDMS system, but I think the rules defined in it only apply to members of the org that defined it. That implies that to formally rent land from org X (via a RDMS-governed agreement), you'd have to join org X. If that is not the case, then this suggestion is not needed.

 

In EVE, your "career history" shows a complete list of which organisations you were a member of, and for how long. It is frequently used as an initial "background check" to see who you associated with previously, and can have significant political implications. I don't know if DU will have a similar "career history" feature, but even if it doesn't, some people will informally track org memberships anyway (i.e. "know your enemy").


Ideally, I would like to see something like a "commercial org" entity in DU (or a contracts system), which has no formal political function, and exists purely to allow contracts to be defined and enforced via RDMS rules. That would allow a formal rental system to exist for land or accommodation units, for instance, without the political implications of being associated with a political player org.

 

I hope there will be cities that would offer solo and small group players land to rent, while affording them a measure of security in exchange, without requiring them to become active members of the org that controls that city and land. By using a commercial contract, all the flexibility of the RDMS can be used, without involving the tenant in the political machinations of the landlord.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

English (Translator used)

 

Hello NanoDot,

The purpose of the DAC-Bank is to create a nonpolitical service that is similar to your performance. Without being a member of the DAC-Bank, however, the security concept is not possible. This ensures that members' transactions are protected by the legal system (RDMS). I can not see another option at the moment.

 

 

German (orginal)

 

Hallo NanoDot,

Mit der DAC-Bank soll eine unpolitsche Servicedienstleistung entstehen, die etwa deiner Vorstellung entspricht. Ohne Mitglied bei der DAC-Bank zu sein ist aber das Sicherheitskonzept nicht möglich. Damit sind Geschäfte der Mitglieder untereinander durch das Rechtesystem (RDMS) abgesichert. Ich sehe momentan keine andere Möglichkeit.

 

 

mfG Die Waldfee

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, NanoDot said:

In DU, we have a very sophisticated RDMS system, but I think the rules defined in it only apply to members of the org that defined it. That implies that to formally rent land from org X (via a RDMS-governed agreement), you'd have to join org X. If that is not the case, then this suggestion is not needed.

 

In EVE, your "career history" shows a complete list of which organisations you were a member of, and for how long. It is frequently used as an initial "background check" to see who you associated with previously, and can have significant political implications. I don't know if DU will have a similar "career history" feature, but even if it doesn't, some people will informally track org memberships anyway (i.e. "know your enemy").


Ideally, I would like to see something like a "commercial org" entity in DU (or a contracts system), which has no formal political function, and exists purely to allow contracts to be defined and enforced via RDMS rules. That would allow a formal rental system to exist for land or accommodation units, for instance, without the political implications of being associated with a political player org.

 

I hope there will be cities that would offer solo and small group players land to rent, while affording them a measure of security in exchange, without requiring them to become active members of the org that controls that city and land. By using a commercial contract, all the flexibility of the RDMS can be used, without involving the tenant in the political machinations of the landlord.

 

 

 

That's not the case -

 

If you want to start such a "neutral commercial org" - feel free to do so. But you'll have a hard time with people trusting you ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lethys said:

 

 

If you want to start such a "neutral commercial org" - feel free to do so. But you'll have a hard time with people trusting you ;)

 

 

That's exactly the problem at the moment.

 

Let's say you want to let a room in your hotel to a random player X.

You can define a time-limited RDMS rule, like "Player X can enter this door for a period of 30 days". Once saved, that rule cannot be altered until the 30 days have passed. The game will enforce that part of the "contract". But the payment of the "rent" for the room is not automatically deducted from the player, because that's outside the scope of the current RDMS (as it should be). You cannot "sell" that deal in the market, you have to trust the player to hand over the cash, and they have to trust that you've given them 30 days' access.

 

The ideal solution is a contracts system which uses elements of the RDMS mechanism, but where the contract details are visible to all parties before payment is made. EVE's contract system is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

 

Such a system would allow you to offer a 30-day rental contract to player X via the contract market, at a price of Q100. As soon as player X "buys" the contract for Q100, the contract rules are enforced by the RDMS system, which would mean the terms of the contract cannot be changed by anyone for the full duration of the contract. You get your money, and player X gets the room for 30 days, no trust required on either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

English (Translator used)

 

in my system you can deposit a deposit of 30 days rental period and then settle the actual days when the guest leaves.

 

 

German (orginal)

 

in meinem System kann man eine Kaution von 30 Tagen Mietzeit hinterlegen und dann die tatsächlichen Tage abrechnen, wenn der Gast geht.

 

 

mfG Die Waldfee

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NanoDot said:

 

That's exactly the problem at the moment.

 

Let's say you want to let a room in your hotel to a random player X.

You can define a time-limited RDMS rule, like "Player X can enter this door for a period of 30 days". Once saved, that rule cannot be altered until the 30 days have passed. The game will enforce that part of the "contract". But the payment of the "rent" for the room is not automatically deducted from the player, because that's outside the scope of the current RDMS (as it should be). You cannot "sell" that deal in the market, you have to trust the player to hand over the cash, and they have to trust that you've given them 30 days' access.

 

The ideal solution is a contracts system which uses elements of the RDMS mechanism, but where the contract details are visible to all parties before payment is made. EVE's contract system is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

 

Such a system would allow you to offer a 30-day rental contract to player X via the contract market, at a price of Q100. As soon as player X "buys" the contract for Q100, the contract rules are enforced by the RDMS system, which would mean the terms of the contract cannot be changed by anyone for the full duration of the contract. You get your money, and player X gets the room for 30 days, no trust required on either side.

And who said this won't be in the final rdms? The devblog about it is only a pre-alpha version AND they only write essentials there. They just can't cover every single detail of every mechanic in every devblog because it's not even implemented yet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, we don't really know exactly what's included in the RDMS at this point. Heck, it could already be in there, this functionality. But if it isn't, yeah, eventually we'll need this. I can see that happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess of the RDMS system was that it wasn't tied directly to an org but tied to territory control units and ship control units.

 

I'm sure an org will have their own simpler RDMS system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Mazillus said:

My guess of the RDMS system was that it wasn't tied directly to an org but tied to territory control units and ship control units.

 

I'm sure an org will have their own simpler RDMS system.

No you have the same, described there in the blog. You can chose to take a predefined one with predefined roles (president, quartermaster, financial guy, ...) to get you started quickly or you can dig deep and configure everything for yourself

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two thoughts:

 

First, you're assuming that a scam-proof system for managing contracts is a good thing for the game, which I disagree with in this case, for philosophical and psychological reasons that I won't get into right now because it would take an essay to truly explain. Suffice it to say that NQ is specifically seeking to create a civilization simulator in a game, and one of the key tenants of civilization is that every single interaction is built on trust. One of the craziest things about real life is that there are no guarantees or hard-blocks against being mistreated ever, and if DU wants to be as "real" as possible, it needs to adhere to that philosophy as closely as possible.

 

But, more importantly, there's a perfectly legitimate way to make this happen. Let's take a look at your hotel example.

 

As the owner of a hotel, all you'd have to do is create an organization specifically for that hotel (let's call it "Hotel Inc"), and put it under the organization that owns the land the building is on. Then you can go into the RDMS menu for Hotel Inc, remove all default permissions from basic members, and set new roles that grant the individual access to specific doors, containers, and elements. Then, anyone who wants to stay in your hotel can simply join your organization, and once they've paid the appropriate fee you can give them rights to a specific room. Voila! You have a hotel business. The same thing could be done with individual constructs to make a ship rental service, or with individual plots of land to make a property leasing company.  

 

Since anyone can join any number of organizations, there's no problem or hassle. You'd still have to take those rights away at a later date on your own, but that's a minor inconvenience. Asking for full automation is too much. Also, while it's true that there's still some trust required in this agreement, that's unavoidable. The requirement of trust is one of the things that makes open-world games open-world, and to subtract that from DU would do it a disservice. 

 

Finally, try to stop thinking about DU's systems from the perspective of an EVE player. The EVE corporation system is important to making the game work, but in many cases it seriously restricts the freedom of the players, and that would be very bad for DU. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vorengard said:

... Suffice it to say that NQ is specifically seeking to create a civilization simulator in a game, and one of the key tenants of civilization is that every single interaction is built on trust. One of the craziest things about real life is that there are no guarantees or hard-blocks against being mistreated ever, and if DU wants to be as "real" as possible, it needs to adhere to that philosophy as closely as possible.

 

... 

 

Hopelessly flawed argument, I'm afraid.

 

RL works on trust, because the consequences of a major breach of trust are severe (i.e. lifelong bans or permadeath).

 

In any first-world country, the vast majority live to a ripe old age without once being scammed, robbed or murdered. Most people go about their business without looking over their shoulder constantly to see where the next attack may come from. Residential housing is not covered in gun turrets. The pizza delivery guy doesn't have an armed escort. People trust the system, because it allows the vast majority to live without the constant fear of violence or death (damn, those carebears).

 

You are selectively picking aspects (everything is built on trust), while ignoring the conditions that make it possible for that trust to exist in the first place.

 

The things that make "civilised society" work in RL can never be duplicated in an online game. In RL, severely antisocial individuals are removed from society. In a MMO, they just respawn and continue causing mayhem.

 

The highest level of social evolution that a FFA-PVP game can aspire to is well-organised tribalism. Or perhaps a version of Syria or Somalia...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord_Void said:

If I recall properly, you don't have to join an org to be given rdms tags from it. 

 

I re-read the RDMS blog, and you may be correct.

 

It all depends on where and how the "tags" are defined and linked to players.

If it's possible to define a tag and link that tag to any player in the game, then asset management can indeed be done independently of the org and it's members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NanoDot said:

 

Hopelessly flawed argument, I'm afraid.

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize we were being condescending pricks to each other. But if that's how you want it to be...

 

Quote

In any first-world country, the vast majority live to a ripe old age without once being scammed, robbed or murdered. Most people go about their business without looking over their shoulder constantly to see where the next attack may come from. Residential housing is not covered in gun turrets. The pizza delivery guy doesn't have an armed escort. People trust the system, because it allows the vast majority to live without the constant fear of violence or death (damn, those carebears).

 

 

You're technically correct, but in doing so you completely ignore the real issue in order to make a pointless, childish, and near-sighted argument that's easily refutable by anyone who's thought about the issue for more than two seconds.

 

How, my dear, did society get to be the way it is? Through millennia of pain and anger and distrust and chaos. We had to learn how to make society worth living in by experiencing misery for thousands of years before finally realizing how to work together enough to make it bearable. Of course that's not what we want for DU, but that's not the point. The point is that the real world does not have unbreakable rules that make us civilized, and yet we still manage to get by without killing each other all the time. These "consequences" you talk about aren't enforced by a magic system that mandates punishment, it's carried out by thousands of hard working people, and it only functions because nearly everyone complies with its rules and assists in making it happen. Civilizations can be formed in a system with no rules and limited punishments, and the fact that we're having this conversation is proof of the success of that concept. 

 

THAT is what makes a real civilization work, and that is exactly what DU is going to need, because 99.999% of the game world is going to be a PvP zone with no real rules, teams, judges, or police (unless we make them, which we should!). These people can be punished by killing them, destroying everything they've built, and driving them from the game because no one will work with them. That is precisely how we enforce our own rules on society, and the process of working those differences out is going to be interesting and fun and unique in the gaming world.

 

Quote

You are selectively picking aspects (everything is built on trust), while ignoring the conditions that make it possible for that trust to exist in the first place.

 

This is an incredibly ignorant statement. Are you so dense that you don't realize that these conditions that allow for a safe society are manufactured by the people of that society? This is exactly what we need to do in DU: Manufacture a society that's worth enjoying by punishing the negative aspects of society (griefers). It will be hard, just like it is in the real world, but it can be done, and in a properly structured game advancing that process will be fun and rewarding. But if you're too spoiled to put any real effort into making it work, then by all means, go play something else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Vorengard said:

 

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize we were being condescending pricks to each other. But if that's how you want it to be...

 

 

You're technically correct, but in doing so you completely ignore the real issue in order to make a pointless, childish, and near-sighted argument that's easily refutable by anyone who's thought about the issue for more than two seconds.

 

How, my dear, did society get to be the way it is? Through millennia of pain and anger and distrust and chaos. We had to learn how to make society worth living in by experiencing misery for thousands of years before finally realizing how to work together enough to make it bearable. Of course that's not what we want for DU, but that's not the point. The point is that the real world does not have unbreakable rules that make us civilized, and yet we still manage to get by without killing each other all the time. These "consequences" you talk about aren't enforced by a magic system that mandates punishment, it's carried out by thousands of hard working people, and it only functions because nearly everyone complies with its rules and assists in making it happen. Civilizations can be formed in a system with no rules and limited punishments, and the fact that we're having this conversation is proof of the success of that concept. 

 

THAT is what makes a real civilization work, and that is exactly what DU is going to need, because 99.999% of the game world is going to be a PvP zone with no real rules, teams, judges, or police (unless we make them, which we should!). These people can be punished by killing them, destroying everything they've built, and driving them from the game because no one will work with them. That is precisely how we enforce our own rules on society, and the process of working those differences out is going to be interesting and fun and unique in the gaming world.

 

 

This is an incredibly ignorant statement statement. Are you so dense that you don't realize that these conditions that allow for a safe society are manufactured by the people of that society? This is exactly what we need to do in DU: Manufacture a society that's worth enjoying by punishing the negative aspects of society (griefers). It will be hard, just like it is in the real world, but it can be done, and in a properly structured game advancing that process will be fun and rewarding. But if you're too spoiled to put any real effort into making it work, then by all means, go play something else. 

 

I attacked your argument, you decided to attack my argument and ad a few ad hominems for good measure, I see. Let's keep it "civilized", shall we ?

 

Modern society evolved to it's current state because threats to that society were severely reduced or removed. The status quo is now well established and maintained by a large and effective police force whose sole function is to protect that society. In first world countries, the police response to calls for help is sufficiently quick that citizens don't have to spend large chunks of their time and income on defending themselves. In RL, the system is designed to make it as hard as possible for criminals to exist. Consequences for being caught are significant (jail time, life imprisonment or even death).

 

In an MMO, there is no parallel to a RL police force, and there never will be. There is no body of players that will sit around waiting for 911 calls and respond immediately. Because it's utterly boring game play. The best an MMO "citizen" can hope for is that their death will be avenged at some point. Having their stolen goods returned is a rare event. In an MMO, the system is designed to allow criminals to exist, because it's considered part of the game play. Consequences for being caught constitute a minor setback, not removal from the game.

 

In RL the low level of risk for the average citizen allows the insurance industry to exist and thrive. That low level of risk underpins the "trust" you speak of.

In a FFA-PVP game, insurance premiums would be unaffordable (even if there was a way to avoid widespread insurance fraud).

 

In RL, people try to avoid conflict, because it's disrupts society and normal life, and can kill you.

In a game, people seek conflict, because it's fun and exciting game play.

 

That's why FFA-PVP games cannot evolve past tribalism and constant warfare. The players don't want it to be any other way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In terms of certain things being considered boring such as police jobs:

 

You underestimate that there are whole communities and interest groups out there (more popular or known example: Arma III RPG) that enjoy this with a bit or a lot of RP even. I played cops and, more recently, an EMT myself. Spending a lot of time speeding around in an ambulance while talking in somewhat realistic short radio codes. To project that on security roles as I also played that job in A 3: there is demand.

 

I mean there are already DU police groups, either integrated in player nations or standalone, to cover that stuff in the future. 

 

Just saying, someone might actually take your 911 call in DU in the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Warden said:

In terms of certain things being considered boring such as police jobs:

 

You underestimate that there are whole communities and interest groups out there (more popular or known example: Arma III RPG) that enjoy this with a bit or a lot of RP even. I played cops and, more recently, an EMT myself. Spending a lot of time speeding around in an ambulance while talking in somewhat realistic short radio codes. To project that on security roles as I also played that job in A 3: there is demand.

 

I mean there are already DU police groups, either integrated in player nations or standalone, to cover that stuff in the future. 

 

Just saying, someone might actually take your 911 call in DU in the future. 

 

I have often seen players perform "police" jobs in MMO's... for an hour or two, and more often than not in response to a few ganks that already took place.

 

I have never seen anyone do it permanently though.

 

In an MMO, a successful policing exercise means the people involved will have nothing to do 90% of the time, because the area they're responsible for will have been secured. They'll be patrolling and waiting for something to happen, just like neighbourhood police do in RL. And eating doughnuts...

 

If "community policing" is viable, why do we need a safe zone around the arkship ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People do that in eve all the time. I did that with my org, it made up for like 60% of my daily playtime

 

An arkzone is needed as a truly safe haven, fdor monuments and cities which shouldn't and can't be destroyed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What MMOs were these?

 

Because I think it heavily depends not just on the (technical) genre but the game setting. If you mean an average themepark MMORPG: Player policing is usually too tricky or would hardly work.

 

Arma III where players are in control of their dedicated servers and thus can freely assign definite powers and authority? Different cup of tea.

 

Likewise, games such as EvE (I'm guessing, didn't play it much) and DU allow more customization due to the sandbox nature and player power. Player nations here will likely require some sort of police force, whether that is a formal police force, some military defense force or just people literally called "moderators" or "administrators" that deal with problems or disputes is secondary, I think. Or simply corporate-like security forces with similar roles in the end.

 

Whether this is viable or aimed for depends on the individual organization or alliance, of course.

 

But I can see it happen formally (dedicated police forces) here already just for the heck of it and for immersion purposes. Depending on how people move about later on, it would probably make sense to have full-time security or police forces (who may have additional roles such as assigning temp rights or revoking them for other non-emergency situations).

 

"Nothing happening" is part of the job or a potential side-effect or "risk", just like other roles may have these aspects. In reality you actually hope nothing bad (or at least terribly bad) happens in these roles, I'd say.

 

But I feel we might speed away from the other original topics in here :P

 

If there's more discussion demand, either of us should perhaps make a dedicated thread about it and continue there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NanoDot said:

Let's keep it "civilized", shall we ?

 

Certainly. 

 

10 hours ago, NanoDot said:

In an MMO, there is no parallel to a RL police force, and there never will be. There is no body of players that will sit around waiting for 911 calls and respond immediately. Because it's utterly boring game play.

 

Your underlying theory, that people would never act as a police force because it's boring, is fundamentally wrong, and there are multiple games currently on the market with significant populations of players that prove it.

 

The first and most relevant is EVE, where thousands of payers routinely sit for hours in station ship-spinning and shooting the breeze while they wait for someone to spot targets in their vicinity. Then they form up a fleet and go kill them. I used to do this for days at a time. It's one of the fundamental activities of pirates and small-gang pvpers. I ran a small pirate alliance in Derelik a few years back, and we couldn't get two jumps into Providence on a roam without being spotted by CVA, who would form a defense fleet to come kill us. Then there's the people who gatecamp for hours and hours, just killing non-blues who jump in, and the people who used to sit on Titans for hours and hours waiting for their hunters to bridge them in on people. The point is that these people are effectively a police force for their group and its allies, and DU can easily create an atmosphere that rewards and encourages similar behavior. 

 

There's also games like Foxhole, where players spend hours and hours just driving trucks filled with supplies back and forth between bases without ever once getting into a fight or even seeing an enemy player. They aren't given any money or rank or status for that effort, but they do it because they like feeling like a part of something larger and more important than themselves, even in a video game. The assumption that people will refuse to do something you personally find to be boring is completely false. 

 

10 hours ago, NanoDot said:

That's why FFA-PVP games cannot evolve past tribalism and constant warfare. The players don't want it to be any other way.

 

I would agree that we can't have a video game society that's as stable and complex as modern-day real life for a variety of reasons, but setting the bar at tribalism is being too pessimistic. We can easily reach the status of an effective feudal kingdom, and perhaps even a renaissance nation-state level society in a game, and the activities of players in EVE Online proves this. EVE players already willingly constrain themselves to arbitrary (and often harsh) rule sets in order to exist within a given group. They even sacrifice huge portions of their free time to performing otherwise unpleasant and un-fun tasks for those groups (anyone who's ever had to put up a dozen staging towers knows what I'm talking about). These groups often include thousands, or even tens of thousands of players with diverse backgrounds and cultures (in real life and in game) that nevertheless manage to work together for each group's mutual benefit and safety. The old CFC is a perfect example of a coalition of otherwise distinct entities that banded together to rule a huge portion of the EVE universe for a significant amount of time, and people in DU will have even more incentive to perform this type of behavior than people in EVE.

 

I think you need to have more faith in people and their willingness to put up with crap to do something cool. DU can and will develop unique and complex societies that rise above killing everyone who's not in your org "because reasons." Though it might take us a few years to get around to that point lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Vorengard said:

 

...

Your underlying theory, that people would never act as a police force because it's boring, is fundamentally wrong, and there are multiple games currently on the market with significant populations of players that prove it.

 

The first and most relevant is EVE, where thousands of payers routinely sit for hours in station ship-spinning and shooting the breeze while they wait for someone to spot targets in their vicinity. Then they form up a fleet and go kill them. I used to do this for days at a time.

...

 

I think you need to have more faith in people and their willingness to put up with crap to do something cool. DU can and will develop unique and complex societies that rise above killing everyone who's not in your org "because reasons." Though it might take us a few years to get around to that point lol

 

I'll concede that my experiences in games like Mortal Online and Darkfall colour my view of things, because there was no room for non-pvper's there. They all left in the first month or two, and never returned. Those games had small game worlds (just like DU will have in year 1). It simply wasn't possible to evolve past tribalism, and in the absence of non-pvp'ers, nobody wanted to anyway. The "border" was never defensible, no part of your territory was ever more than a few minutes travel from danger.

 

I'll also concede that it does work in EVE. It works because the mayhem CAN effectively be stopped in the border systems. EVE's massive game world facilitates that, because large numbers of systems are often only accessible via a few specific routes, which can be patrolled. It doesn't matter if there's constant conflict in those gateways, because it seldom penetrates deeper. Let's face it, the inner systems of a nullsec empire are probably the safest places in EVE, lol. Getting there was a hair-raising trip, but the rest was tranquility itself. Well, mostly... ;)

 

The border guard strike teams are not what I'd call a domestic police force, but in EVE they serve the purpose and remove the need for such a force anyway. You don't need bored neighbourhood cops when you have effective border guards.

 

 

But we agree that it will take a year or two before DU is a "multi-system" game world. And probably several years before it gets anywhere near EVE's 4000+ normal-space systems.

 

My focus was on the first year, when the starter system will be a giant pressure cooker, and I lost sight of the longer term in the process. How we'll keep the "builders" in the game through that first year in DU is anyone's guess. The general perception of DU will be formed in that first year, unfortunately, and that will be very hard to change later.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, NanoDot said:

My focus was on the first year, when the starter system will be a giant pressure cooker, and I lost sight of the longer term in the process. How we'll keep the "builders" in the game through that first year in DU is anyone's guess. The general perception of DU will be formed in that first year, unfortunately, and that will be very hard to change later.

 

Definitely agree with you here. There will be a lot of tribalism in the beginning, and the limited space of Alioth will contribute to that some. However, we shouldn't underestimate the size of the safe zone and Alioth. A 20km in diameter circle is a really big area, and that's only a fraction of the size of the planet, and then there's the three moons to consider.

 

Overall, while I am concerned about it, I'm not overly worried. NQ has over a year of development to figure things out before launch, and we'll all be here to offer our feedback the entire time. Furthermore, I don't think people judge MMOs "once and forever" as they do with other types of games. EVE showed that it's possible to grow year by year in a market that's stereotypically about spikes in growth that slowly trickle away, and since DU is a similar game, I think it's possible to replicate that success.

 

DU is going to change radically in the months and years after launch, just like EVE did, and that change will bring in plenty of new people, and persuade old hands to give the game another try. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alioth is yuuuuuuuge. I'm not even talking about taking them and defending such a tile - that'll need a lot of time.

But everyone will find a nice little spot for himself where he can hide - or live off the arkzone to venture outside to mine.

After some months we unlock techs to get into space and from there on everyone will spread to all those nearby planets/moons/asteroids in the alioth system. It may be difficult in the first few months until we claim space but once we do this, you have to have bad luck (or a dedicated player) to even run into another guy. ~20 planets which are approximately the same size as alioth plus moons/asteroids will offer people enough space to build and do their carebear thing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...