Jump to content
Tactician

My biggest worry about this game

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, 0something0 said:

Yeah, but in EVE your assets are quite well protected compared to DU where somebody can destroy all your assets not in a TCU or safe zone(and TCU might not even protect property fully, just five an alert). I mean, just look at the 2b2t spawn.

latest?cb=20161117094543


TCUs, as explained on the latest tutorials, are organisation goals and NQ has explained in the past that TCUs got shields protecting anythighn within them - shields can be sieged. And organisations are stronger due to pooled resources and logistics.

Protection Bubbles are immunity on a timer, so PvP can happen on a fair ground. You can't just herp derp siege" a city or an outpost, you gotta give the other side time to react., which in turn gives birth to BlackOps actions - utlra mega secret groups in an alliance that can mobilise in a moment's notice.

So, no, you don't have to worry about your stuff, not if you are smart and build within an organisation's territory, paying a tax for protection is far better than having NO protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 0something0 said:

So, to not get griefed, join a big org or be a griefer yourself?

Or hide your base.

It is possible to make many paralells between our real world and DU and one of them is the fact that if you choose to live in lawless part of society, you can easily lose everything (including your life, of course, in the game you can respawn). But most of us humans (including everyone on this forum) choose a life in an organization: our country. There is nothing preventing me from killing everyone around me or steal huge amount of money, but if I do it, I will have to face consequences (in first case, decades in jail, in second, winning election fourth time in a row *sob*).

It will be the same in the game. The reason why it won´t turn into hobostabfest is because those huge organizations will be able to enforce laws in their areas of influence. But outside those areas, it´s free for all. You may find friends, you may just pass other players, or you may end up being ganked and griefed. If you are afraid, then the solution is simple: become part of one of those big nation-organizations. There is no shame in that, I personally plan to do that and I have no doubts that most players will do the same.

Share this post


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

Or hide your base.

It is possible to make many paralells between our real world and DU and one of them is the fact that if you choose to live in lawless part of society, you can easily lose everything (including your life, of course, in the game you can respawn). But most of us humans (including everyone on this forum) choose a life in an organization: our country. There is nothing preventing me from killing everyone around me or steal huge amount of money, but if I do it, I will have to face consequences (in first case, decades in jail, in second, winning election fourth time in a row *sob*).

It will be the same in the game. The reason why it won´t turn into hobostabfest is because those huge organizations will be able to enforce laws in their areas of influence. But outside those areas, it´s free for all. You may find friends, you may just pass other players, or you may end up being ganked and griefed. If you are afraid, then the solution is simple: become part of one of those big nation-organizations. There is no shame in that, I personally plan to do that and I have no doubts that most players will do the same.

Shhhh, don't speak sense. They'll figure out that EVE players are not homicidal maniacs at that rate man.

And also, fun fact, some EVE alliances have pretty thick set of laws.

Where I lived in EVE, it was simpler, more like "respect others' claimed  mining spots" ,"don't start a fight you can't finish on your own" and "don't scam fellow alliance members". Pretty solid rules. Break them, and you'll be terminated as a member, which, incidentally, is what the Band Of Outlaws has as its ruleset as well - plus a honeybadger fetish. We don't extend said courtesy to other organisations not affiliated with BOO. For more information, contact one of our stuffers in our public Discord. 

#shameless_promotion #honeybadger_don't_care #cybrex_alt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 0something0 said:

There is that small group that ruins the fun for everyone(that homicidal group of EVE players, the griefers on 2b2t, etc)

I think one should not overly exaggerate and have a bleak outlook, which is implied by messages like them between the lines on a soft level at least.

 

Just by looking at the make up you provided, it seems rather unlikely to me to happen, as I doubt a "small group" can terrorize "everyone", thus a larger majority, and if they try or do, it would be a question of time until severe repercussions begin.

 

While some like to think of themselves as superior wolves ready to slaughter all lambs, don't underestimate pissed off people who may eventually "have had enough of their shit" - unless you actually consider yourself a defenseless lamb. If you already give up before the (real) fighting started...

 

If you perceive a threat and suffer due to it, do something about it. Fight back. Rally others around you, find a common cause, at the same time (or alternatively), lower the damage you get and try to evade, yadda yadda. I will never forget (and often, continue to tell others) my experience on a Minecraft server with certain plugins to simulate an economy, factions, emergent gameplay. Countless random people came by trying to attack us, I guess you could potentially label them "homicidal" or "griefers". Sure, it ma not be nice, you can not always immediately fight back or win. But you can either be sullen about it or fight. Maybe you can't take them down but I think having the right mentality from the start is vital to preserve your "fun". In a defeatist mood it surely won't be fun. If you consider it as interesting challenge where you view setbacks you may endure as part of the game, then you will likely get by better. Mentally and otherwise.

 

Spreading possible optimism aka storytime - in spoilers so I keep this post shorter. Wall of text n' all.

 

 

 

How your mindset can dictate conflicts - or "kicking ass if people annoy you"

We, back in the day, were lucky and smart enough. Luck always plays a role even if you do your best, as you have to hope your opponent, in the end, is simply not better all in all or vastly superior in numbers, if not both. So we happened to kick their asses in about 99% of the time. It was a diverse enemy makeup, from a bunch of kids you could easily beat or demoralize to moderate threats and even tough nuts you had to crack with carefully organized campaigns and operations, where you had to go through several fights to win the war.

While each story is unique, some of them would surely fit the bill of "griefers" or "maniacs" as they attacked others who were not with them, on their team. No matter the reason they might have had, you didn't attack them first, I guess that is what matters. But all of them are people, even if they have an aggressive playstyle, they also look for something and if you eventually stand up and say "no more", they'll think twice of bugging you at least.
 
To give an example, one of the events I can remember from that blocky game a response to an increasingly aggressive group of raiders that also attacked our base randomly, but didn't do any notable damage. We talked them down, they moved on. Yet, they continued to raid other people who didn't have a secure installation or "doom fort" - and what does the best fortress help if you are beyond its walls, running around outside, right? They built up some reputation and were eventually known in the region. By then we had created a defensive league, pact, alliance, call it whatever you want, as together we were able to act better and could project more power, and it paid out.

We had a bit of experience with it before, so we organized an operation that was intended to break them. The event became known as the "Ten Hour War" on our server community, which consisted of scouting out their base and then applying tiered strikes against their outer districts or areas, then their core base. You could already tell it was going to be fun as you entered their valley, as they put up burning crosses all over, as far as they eye could see. The gist of it is: We would've never been able to do this as just one small group - others helping us, our alliance, those pissed off at the same people, yeah, those, we all together, managed to pull off placing their base on siege mode for 10 consecutive hours.

We didn't even destroy their main installation. Mission failure? Nope, still a success. This show of force was enough to seriously make them consider attacking us (the alliance as a whole and any member of it, at least) again. We jokingly agreed to never have a ten hour war again as it was a bit of a strain for both sides. Jokingly? Yes, it turns out we both laughed when certain things happened because some actions had comedic value. For example, after a few hours we eventually began to shoot at their core module where they were holed up later as we controlled the other sectors, it was their only safe space left. We set up makeshift trenches and walls, a bit like sandbags, from where we exchanged shots. Artillery wasn't available that far into their area or would've been useless due to superior shielding.

So as we have a fierce ranged fight, one of them inside starts to turn on a music box. Given MC's limited audio playing capabilities for their music boxes, you had random tones play. It was so odd and out-of-the-world, I could only grin in reality. We all laughed at it. We both had fun at one point. I'm sure we went in at least slightly pissed for their actions, but at one point had fun together.

 
How is this vital? Your mood can dictate how conflicts end, by and large.

 


If we were to go in totally bitter and angry, perhaps mistakes on our end may not have made it a ten hour war at all. The reason I mention emotions now is because that is how it influenced our war with them: we became friends.

"What? They raided you, your friends, everyone and their mother, you organize a large fight going on for hours and then you become friends?"

Why not? Best case scenario: A tough nut becomes your ally and kinda joins your alliance. This was only possible because we both realized we had fun at one point. If we were to remain bitter and angry, this may not have happened because there would not have been any motivation on our part to pursue friendlier relations. We ended the conflict with them and then also had them as friends.

Because we fought back or did something about a problem with others instead of accepting it and letting them win - over us.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I realize not all situations may end like that. In retrospect, I think we were darn lucky. So many factors to consider, one action done just at a slightly different time or done in another fashion could've changed everything, like actions at the right or wrong time can change a lot in reality. Causality, yadda yadda. In short, not everyone may be as lucky as we were, but it is the attempt that counts. If you do nothing or not much you lose, so if you do your best, can it get worse compared to that? I don't think so.

But my main point is the mood you apply or have. If you take some things as interesting challenge, you'll have a better time in the game. At the end of the day, this is all part of such games with competition. Who was to complain in our example? The guys we fought back and even destroyed? They took the risk of severe repercussions by attacking another unknown faction. Would we have to complain if some faction overcomes us instead? About them perhaps, but not the game itself because we decided to move beyond the only safe zone and build up a base with what could be compared to a TCU, but not a permanent safe zone like the Arkship would be. So it's not like anyone could run up to your base and just "mine" or build themselves in, but at the same time you had to be ready to defend your property. Artillery could rain down on it, etc.

Again, the mood and morale is a vital aspect, even if you do not like anything PVP related a lot. If you just want to design, build, create, you will also find your place, I am certain. TCUs and safe zones allow this. But accept that in between those areas you could be shot down, no matter the reason an attacker might have. At the same time, due to emergent gameplay, you can do something about it once some entity, player or faction alike, starts to actively annoy or target you. You can organize to fight back, directly or indirectly, try to come to a more diplomatic or business oriented solution where you come to terms with them or you evade them, move away.

I could go on now but would likely repeat myself and this post has to end eventually. I wonder who read all of this, as longer texts are usually not so well perceived in this day and age it seems.

 

 

In short, morale, point of view, expectation and mood. Try to think less of problems but challenges.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We tend to use our past experiences in other games as the basis for forming our ideas of what game play will be like in DU.

 

But based on what we know of DU's intended design at this stage, many of the lessons learned in other games will quite possibly not apply in DU. It certainly looks like DU's game play will be "slower" than most other games with similar features. Travel takes significant time in DU. Scanning for minerals will take time. Mining is not done on industrial scale. Expansion to other systems will be slow. Constructs remain in the game world when the player logs out. EVERYTHING is player-built.

 

All those features may not seem very important when considered individually, but all together they may well produce game play unlike any other game.

 

For instance, EVE players may vastly underestimate the effects of the long travel times in DU, because that's simply not a significant factor in EVE. If your fleet in DU ends up in the wrong place, it make take several hours to get it to the right place...

Simple things like scouting ahead become far more tricky in DU. You can't just login an alt, scout an area and then warp to a safespot and logout the alt AND their ship. In DU, the ship stays in the game world, which means it can be scanned down and destroyed. Replacing the ship may be trivial, but the 2 hours flying required to put that alt scout in place won't be...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, the problem with fighting annoying people for me (on anarchy minecraft servers) was that there is no way I can catch people that didndamage. So it would be nice if there was some sort of device that logged all the players that enter a certaim area, especially without having to get a TCU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, 0something0 said:

Of course, the problem with fighting annoying people for me (on anarchy minecraft servers) was that there is no way I can catch people that didndamage. So it would be nice if there was some sort of device that logged all the players that enter a certaim area, especially without having to get a TCU.

 

I suppose this wouldn't be terribly hard to implement in a fair or cool fashion, with gameplay in mind.

 

Technology-wise cameras or some similar automated detection system are things we can expect in that day and age.

 

1) As first step, I'd be happy to have cameras you can set up and link to monitors with a live feed depending on how you set it up

This does not include further automated features and the like, but simply giving one (or more) people the option to enhance awareness and having different perspectives as long as the monitor or station is manned - better than nothing, kinda

 

2) Additionally with or without human input or presence, automated cameras that can turn or remain on a fixed angle that can generate system logs or trigger such logs upon certain basic conditions, like a construct or player going into the covered area

 

3) More detailed features such as conditions of whether the construct or player is registered, unknown, hostile (at war status or simply manually marked as such or as POI) and then maybe conditions such as whether the construct has a certain size, cargo, if construct or player is visibly armed, etc Additionally, trigger other connected functions via scripting or so such as opening doors for authorized personnel or blocking normally open doors for blacklisted or hostile folks.

 

------------------

 

Okay, that might be better suited for the relevant suggestion thread regarding cameras, but it's just an example on how you could "keep track". Additionally, the log doesn't necessarily have to show the player name but only a snapshot of the individual without the name or the name has random letters removed and replaced with * or so to not make it immediately apparent. Or you get rid of the whole camera mechanic (that you could further try to sabotage) and just generate a system log at some console once someone attacks or damages. The aforementioned compromises such as making it harder with identifying the culprits outright is simply keeping gameplay and the attacking perspective in mind to make it more interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, 0something0 said:

There is that small group that ruins the fun for everyone(that homicidal group of EVE players, the griefers on 2b2t, etc)

I don´t know much about EVE´s gameplay or the way community works, but I know a lot about 2b2t and it is extremely wrong to compare it to DU.

 

First, 2b2t is basically pure Minecraft, which at its core is singleplayer game. If I came there, travelled tens of thousands of blocks away from spawn (and survived), I would be able to get everything myself. There would be no need for interaction with other players.

This type of setting in a game means I can do whatever I want, because I do not require other players to achieve anything. Therefore I can grief and kill with no repercusions. What will that random guy do to me? I will be able to return to mining/crafting as if nothing happened.

 

Compare it to DU. People will have to work together to achieve things. You won´t be able to fly a big ship with multiple weapon systems alone, you won´t be able to even build that ship in a reasonable time by yourself, because mining, researching and actually designing it may take too much time and effort and you may end up with ship that is inferior to even ordinary interstellar transport ship because of bad design choices or superior scripting for that transport ship.

This already creates game where it may not be beneficial for you to be known as griefer and someone who steals from others, because you will become outcast of the community. Of course, you may find other players with similar mindset, but here is the basic problem of people who love griefing and destroying stuff: They do not really work that well as a group. Because, you know, their whole purpose in the game is to harm others for fun, so how are they supposed to form an organized group where every member is there solely because he wants to destroy things. On top of that, you have to build things first in DU, so griefers are naturally discouraged, because they don´t really like building something.

Overall, DU in its basic setting is unfriendly for griefers. It is friendly towards smugglers, pirates and similar players, but those are not griefers. Even pirates can form a community (not sure now about Band Of Outlaws, do you guys allow piracy in your ranks, or is it more about smugglers, mercenaries, bounty hunters and so on?) and be partially trustworthy (look at privateers, they were basically pirates who were allowed to attack ships of the enemy country, I am certain something like that will also arise in DU), so they will not be banished from the community (even if they will, somebody will certainly secretly make trade with pirates...black market FTW).

 

Now, second point: Ability to ruin the game for others. Once again, 2b2t is completely different from DU. In 2b2t, you have communities of few players who build a base together. Once that base is found, it is over, because those few players cannot possibly defend it against every griefer on server. Even if they were powerful enough to do so, how can 5 players be online 24/7?

Now let´s look at DU. There will be organizations with thousands of players (there are already few big ones over 200 and Terran Union has over 500) which will act as nations. Their "bases" will be known to everybody, but unlike those small groups in 2b2t, they will be able to defend them 24/7. Those griefers in their small ship armed by 2 weapons will not stand a chance when squardon of fighters flies from that organization´s capital ship and starts shooting at them.

 

Griefers will certainly thrive in some areas of the universe. But they won´t be able to waltz in to areas claimed by large organizations and have free hand, simply because those large organizations will be far more powerful than any group of griefers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, 0something0 said:

There is that small group that ruins the fun for everyone(that homicidal group of EVE players, the griefers on 2b2t, etc)

Well, that small group is the reason why EVE is such a community driven game. Those people I don't see as a problem in EVE, I see them as the motivators for people to build communities and keeping each other safe. If there's no "bad guys" then there's no incentive to help each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dorlas we're a cartel. Pirates are among us too, but also mercs, ship builders, miners, programmers,... 

 

It's the old debate again....griefers. As you put it: killing others for fun is EXACTLY what I want to do, and I don't consider myself a griefer. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

If there's no "bad guys" then there's no incentive to help peach other.

I can think of one major reason to work with others in the absence of "bad guys": Time !

 

On my own, do I want to derp around for 6 months waiting for my avatar to train all the skills needed so I can spend the next 3 months building a stargate ?

Working with others will get me to that next system in a fraction of the time...

 

Groups and co-operation get things done MUCH faster than solo players, and certain features can be designed in such a way that only groups can achieve them in any reasonable time frame.

 

Who'll be the first to slap down a TCU on that tile containing the big gold deposit ? A group or a solo player ?

Who'll be the first to build an impressive city ?

Who'll be the first to build a network of refuelling stations throughout the system ?

 

Non-combat games are quite possible, I played "A Tale in the Desert" with great enjoyment...

Share this post


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

I can think of one major reason to work with others in the absence of "bad guys": Time !

 

On my own, do I want to derp around for 6 months waiting for my avatar to train all the skills needed so I can spend the next 3 months building a stargate ?

Working with others will get me to that next system in a fraction of the time...

 

Groups and co-operation get things done MUCH faster than solo players, and certain features can be designed in such a way that only groups can achieve them in any reasonable time frame.

 

Who'll be the first to slap down a TCU on that tile containing the big gold deposit ? A group or a solo player ?

Who'll be the first to build an impressive city ?

Who'll be the first to build a network of refuelling stations throughout the system ?

 

Non-combat games are quite possible, I played "A Tale in the Desert" with great enjoyment...

 

The collaborative effort is basically always superior, I think. If you try hard you might come up with examples, but in terms of building or sharing tasks and the workload, you are at a disadvantage as loner or small group compared to the people with more manpower ... and planning.

Share this post


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

I can think of one major reason to work with others in the absence of "bad guys": Time !

 

On my own, do I want to derp around for 6 months waiting for my avatar to train all the skills needed so I can spend the next 3 months building a stargate ?

Working with others will get me to that next system in a fraction of the time...

 

Groups and co-operation get things done MUCH faster than solo players, and certain features can be designed in such a way that only groups can achieve them in any reasonable time frame.

 

Who'll be the first to slap down a TCU on that tile containing the big gold deposit ? A group or a solo player ?

Who'll be the first to build an impressive city ?

Who'll be the first to build a network of refuelling stations throughout the system ?

 

Non-combat games are quite possible, I played "A Tale in the Desert" with great enjoyment...

And then? You have stargates, a city, refueling stations.... cool. You won the game, there's nothing more to do.

 

Bad guys are content creators for the community, they keep the economy moving and people on their toes to watch carefully and don't act stupid.

 

I always drop a game after 3months max because I either won it and there's literally nothing left to do or it's so boring because nothing ever happens. I want DU to be around for years so I'm for balanced gameplay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Lethys said:

I always drop a game after 3months max because I either won it and there's literally nothing left to do or it's so boring because nothing ever happens.

Different strokes for different folks...

 

I played SWG for 3 years without engaging in armed conflict with other players. PVP was not the driving factor there, but it had a thriving player-driven economy nevertheless.

I played a full 2-year cycle of "A tale in the Desert", which required extensive co-operation between players, but the game had no combat whatsoever.

 

PVP is not the only possible motivating factor in MMO's, it's simply the easiest.

Share this post


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

PVP is not the only possible motivating factor in MMO's, it's simply the easiest.

There is difference between games like WoW and games like DU. In WoW (and similar MMOs), I can do lots of things completely without PvP. I actually play on PvE server and I never turn PvP on, so even players of opposite faction can´t attack me (or I them). Yet I do not feel I lost anything by doing so. That´s because WoW at its core is PvE game where you interract with environment (quests, dungeons, raids, world quests, pet battles, reputations, professions...) and PvP is only added feature (fun fact, the only PvP that was at the beginning of WoW was world PvP...so basically no content for PvP players and they had to create it themselves for the first few months).

DU is completely opposite. Player interraction is driving force behind its universe. That does not only mean friendly (after all, that is also major part of WoW, as you need others to do instanced content), but also unfriendly. Lethys made an amazing point by simply asking: "What then?". And please, ask yourself what would you do once you built your base, got your amazing spaceship and got skills to max. There are no PvE options, no dungeons to clear, monsters to kill, daily quests to repeat. What would you do once you basically complete the game?

 

Also, PvP is what makes games like this alive. How can huge organizations like Terran Union or Empire further their goals if they cannot fight anyone? How can Band Of Outlaws even exist if nobody can be pirate, bounty hunter or mercenary? What even is the point of joining huge organization, if you never require protection? And so on.

Funny thing is, PvP does not even have to occur, it just needs to be possible for all of these things to exist. Tensions between nations can rise, because there is actually a way to deal with an enemy if they become your enemy. Pirates can raid others, thus allowing creation of bounty hunters who may be hired to hunt them or mercenaries to protect transport ships. People will be banding together, because that way, they can defend themselves and be safe. All of this is possible only if there can be PvP. Without it, the game loses so much of its soul, it basically becomes Space Engineers copy.

Share this post


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

I can think of one major reason to work with others in the absence of "bad guys": Time !

 

On my own, do I want to derp around for 6 months waiting for my avatar to train all the skills needed so I can spend the next 3 months building a stargate ?

Working with others will get me to that next system in a fraction of the time...

 

Groups and co-operation get things done MUCH faster than solo players, and certain features can be designed in such a way that only groups can achieve them in any reasonable time frame.

 

Who'll be the first to slap down a TCU on that tile containing the big gold deposit ? A group or a solo player ?

Who'll be the first to build an impressive city ?

Who'll be the first to build a network of refuelling stations throughout the system ?

 

Non-combat games are quite possible, I played "A Tale in the Desert" with great enjoyment...


Right, and setbacks AKA loss of time and effort, are caused by griefers, gankers and general asshats. What prevents those setbacks? Grouping together You are just adding to my point. It's the same concept in a different context what you describe. "Grouping together makes things happen faster" aka "no setbacks from asshats ganking us"..

There's a saying in EVE when a newbro asks "can I buy all the PLEX and buy a Titan?", and the answer is a variation of "yes, but Titan class ships, need Titan class logistics". You HAVE to rely on other people to fly a Titan in EVE, you won't see a Titan being alone in any circumstance.

Same thing with DU. If your haulers got scouts and escort ships, they will deliver cargo back to your base a steady rate, if not, you'll be starved to death 
And that's the main reason to group up, strength in numbers. The hauler does the same amount of contribution to  the survival of an organisation as much as the PvPer does when they keep logging in, going out and quite possibly having to face a respawn screen after they get killed to protect the hauler, time and time again.

Share this post


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

Different strokes for different folks...

 

I played SWG for 3 years without engaging in armed conflict with other players. PVP was not the driving factor there, but it had a thriving player-driven economy nevertheless.

I played a full 2-year cycle of "A tale in the Desert", which required extensive co-operation between players, but the game had no combat whatsoever.

 

PVP is not the only possible motivating factor in MMO's, it's simply the easiest.

Good on you, I played EVE as a thief mostly - I stole from the Space Unicorn Heretics, and let's leave it at that, those who understand can understand.

I personally get bored by bang bang and pew pew, sure, I understand the need for it, but I don't actually go after it.

Problem is, SWG was not a single-shard game. It was sandbox at its finest (NGE was cancer, let's move on), but it was about an already existing universe, not building one up from scratch.

In DU, people will eventually get to the point of being the Empire, shit, EVE Online had its version of the Empire in the form of the Goons and Imperium. And the people who fought against them was Pandemic Legion - amongst many many others which is not the point of discussion - and Pandemic Legion is not what you'd call "lawful neutral", they are the guys who troll people for sports, hotdrop Titans to blow up one silly little Orca mining barge and people who wil ltell you "good fight" after swarming you with 500 ships... on your hauler out of all things. Amongst PL's temporary allies, Darkness, led by the guy who betrayed the Coalition that was fighting the Imperium in an older war. Check up the story of World War Bee to see what went down, someone on Youtube has a video about it probably.

Yes, go figure, video games are art and art should immitate real life. And in the real world, there's no "good and bad", there's a lot of culture behind two people and those cultures eventually come to a strife.

What is the motivating factor in DU? As NQ stated "rebuilding civilisation" and "player culture". You CAN be the bartender on a bar in-game and just play the game as a social platform. I know people who do far less intrigueing jobs in EVE... like mentoring newbros in a division.

Combat is just ONE part of the game, nobody said it IS the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/1/2017 at 4:10 PM, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Good on you, I played EVE as a thief mostly - I stole from the Space Unicorn Heretics, and let's leave it at that, those who understand can understand.

I personally get bored by bang bang and pew pew, sure, I understand the need for it, but I don't actually go after it.

Problem is, SWG was not a single-shard game. It was sandbox at its finest (NGE was cancer, let's move on), but it was about an already existing universe, not building one up from scratch.

In DU, people will eventually get to the point of being the Empire, shit, EVE Online had its version of the Empire in the form of the Goons and Imperium. And the people who fought against them was Pandemic Legion - amongst many many others which is not the point of discussion - and Pandemic Legion is not what you'd call "lawful neutral", they are the guys who troll people for sports, hotdrop Titans to blow up one silly little Orca mining barge and people who wil ltell you "good fight" after swarming you with 500 ships... on your hauler out of all things. Amongst PL's temporary allies, Darkness, led by the guy who betrayed the Coalition that was fighting the Imperium in an older war. Check up the story of World War Bee to see what went down, someone on Youtube has a video about it probably.

Yes, go figure, video games are art and art should immitate real life. And in the real world, there's no "good and bad", there's a lot of culture behind two people and those cultures eventually come to a strife.

What is the motivating factor in DU? As NQ stated "rebuilding civilisation" and "player culture". You CAN be the bartender on a bar in-game and just play the game as a social platform. I know people who do far less intrigueing jobs in EVE... like mentoring newbros in a division.

Combat is just ONE part of the game, nobody said it IS the game.

My greatest fears about joining this game are 1) I will lose myself as I did in the early SWG and 2) that DU will have the same ridiculous problems seemingly embraced as canonical law by Eve Online.

 

Once the door is opened for grief loving "players" it usually turns into a flood and inevitable decline.

 

Yes, companies have to be able to compete with each other but as happens in the real world the MAJORITY of said competition must be done under national and international law.  Granted that industrial espionage, sabotage and outright theft does happen but there are also agencies working, again with a some nation/state exceptions, to give recourse to the injured parties.

 

If DU evolves/devolves into the same type of null sec barbarity found on Eve then in my personal opinion it will end up with the same problem:  old players and new players who find out far too soon that far too much of the game will be denied to them.

 

Please don't bother to reply if your only wish is to troll or flame as having survived some rather humid areas far away for a few years, 40+ years of marriage, three children and now grandchildren there are few things that can produce anything more than amusement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/12/2017 at 11:04 PM, Natarthos said:

My greatest fears about joining this game are 1) I will lose myself as I did in the early SWG and 2) that DU will have the same ridiculous problems seemingly embraced as canonical law by Eve Online.

 

Once the door is opened for grief loving "players" it usually turns into a flood and inevitable decline.

 

Yes, companies have to be able to compete with each other but as happens in the real world the MAJORITY of said competition must be done under national and international law.  Granted that industrial espionage, sabotage and outright theft does happen but there are also agencies working, again with a some nation/state exceptions, to give recourse to the injured parties.

 

If DU evolves/devolves into the same type of null sec barbarity found on Eve then in my personal opinion it will end up with the same problem:  old players and new players who find out far too soon that far too much of the game will be denied to them.

 

Please don't bother to reply if your only wish is to troll or flame as having survived some rather humid areas far away for a few years, 40+ years of marriage, three children and now grandchildren there are few things that can produce anything more than amusement.

You view feudal behavior in null sec as a problem, I don't. It breeds the perfect territory for some really immersive behavior, like being a scout and patrolling the border,  so the carebears PVErs who suck at PvP can dock up safely and avoid an incoming roaming gang. Yes, it's not EVE's problem if you play the game as a singleplayer. It's an MMO, learn to live with other people and depend on your Alliance / Coalitoon / Corp / Intelligence Chats. They are there to make your experience far better/

You view Mercs doing their thing (griefing on demand) as a problem, I don't. I have been in the receiving end of some mercs in EVE, I don't find it at all a problem. I made a monopoly, their employers wanted me to stop my monopoly in the region (logistics drones, really profitable in war-time), I said no, they sought to push me out the region via force - which eventually they did, but I got my investment a hundredfold by then, so it was okay, I lost nothing - which is how you measure defeat in EVE, in money spent vs gained. It's funny though,  later I found out you can gain immunity to Mercs if you were to join one of their groups, since all of them have a NAP between them. See, even Greifers don't grief each other.

In fact, you should just ask for absence of "Scoreboards" like EVE's killboards, so to not incentivise random ganking - like in eVE - to maintain a "positive" score, like the Kill/Death ratio of some shooter games. That's a problem in EVE, that people gankg Skiffs for their money's worth - like a mining barge shoiws yo uare good in PvP or something.

EVE's problem is not on its sandbox really, it's on its - for lack of a better word - professional appearence.  EVE feels like an Excel Feature Pack, as the joke goes, and it's sadly very true. It feels like a second job at times, with deadlines to meet - especially for haulers - retention on a project and a bunch of know-how and the jargon to go along with it on top of the "you need to be Isk-Positive" mentality for PvP, that drives bad ganking behavior. That's EVE's main problem, it throws too much on your face, too soon. "Here's an Ibis, go flak yourself* was EVE when I started. I asked aropu8nd - you know, like you do in MMOs, you talk to people, it's not Skyrim, it's an MMO. I spoke to people and they explaiend to me what to do and what not to do, like fitting autocannons on a railgun ship, or how tracking works, or how to gage distances, or how to warp properly so I don't get intedicted like an idiot.

Laws an Alliance / Coalition has in EVE, are enforced by appointed LEOs of said coalition / alliance. Those people act as moderators and will kick or send people after a person who started a fight or didn't respect the laws set forth by said coalition - that includes bickering over mining spots. I don't know what part of EVE you palyed in, it clearly didn't involve those LEOs obviously. It's not total anarchy in Nullsec man, in fact, Nullsec is far safer than High Sec in EVE.

This "barbarity" you speak off, is what's the passion behind EVE's nullsec wars and why the game keeps going - unlike all other MMOs since EVE's launch ,which died. Remember SWG? It died, it had a multibillion dollars franchise, and it died. Why? Cause they made the game more WoW and less Sandbox. 

If you like games with no consequences or bad guys, you can play WoW. I heard player agency is taken really seriously in WoW, this is why everyone is "the Chosen Zero of Destiny".

Cheers.

P.S. : God bless even though I didn't ask for you to tell me - or cared for that matter to know of - but regardless, have a nice holidays for you and your whole extended family. Peace. o7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2017 at 4:04 PM, Natarthos said:

If DU evolves/devolves into the same type of null sec barbarity found on Eve then in my personal opinion it will end up with the same problem:  old players and new players who find out far too soon that far too much of the game will be denied to them.

I think the problem with the idea of having parts of the game denied to players is that in a game like DU without any npcs or PvE in general, there's nothing rewarding without conflict. If you build a massive space station that's great, but if you're one of 30 people building one around the starting planet you're not going to get anything lasting out of it. You can be proud of it and show it off to people, but you have no way of making it important. Now let's say the same scenario occurs but this time there's a group of griefers trying to take out every one of those 30 space stations. Now you've got a lasting goal, make your station the last one standing and continue to protect it so that people come visit it and trade at it, maybe even try and take out the station of another group so you are the only trade market in the area. You see it in the null sec politics of Eve: People get bored without conflict. People specialize and work on what they like to do, but eventually they accomplish their goals if no one is trying to stop them. Lack of war in Eve often results in lack of consistent players, but when war breaks out people feel like they have something to work for or enjoy and you see player count and community interaction skyrocket.

 

Basically my take on it is that there are ways to get to any goal in DU, even as a solo player. You may never own your own stargate but you could be one of the people who help build it, or help defend it. Maybe part of the group that tries to take it over after it's been built. But when you finally overcome the people trying to stop you from your goal, even something as small as reaching a new planet could feel more rewarding than if you were to build a stargate without anyone making it difficult. But again, all of this is my personal opinion and I think it helps create a lasting type of game, rather than a game that could be admittedly very fun, but have a limited life span.

 

Edit: A word

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 22/12/2017 at 9:04 PM, Natarthos said:

My greatest fears about joining this game are 1) I will lose myself as I did in the early SWG and 2) that DU will have the same ridiculous problems seemingly embraced as canonical law by Eve Online.

 

Once the door is opened for grief loving "players" it usually turns into a flood and inevitable decline.

 

Yes, companies have to be able to compete with each other but as happens in the real world the MAJORITY of said competition must be done under national and international law.  Granted that industrial espionage, sabotage and outright theft does happen but there are also agencies working, again with a some nation/state exceptions, to give recourse to the injured parties.

 

If DU evolves/devolves into the same type of null sec barbarity found on Eve then in my personal opinion it will end up with the same problem:  old players and new players who find out far too soon that far too much of the game will be denied to them.

 

Please don't bother to reply if your only wish is to troll or flame as having survived some rather humid areas far away for a few years, 40+ years of marriage, three children and now grandchildren there are few things that can produce anything more than amusement.

Excessively aggressive players over time in an evolutionary system would reduce in frequency, simply because of violent death rates and pressures on social groups to out-compete other groups via greater social success.

 

Obviously with "immortality" this reduces the reduction of such behaviour in populations in persistent games for comparison.

 

I would not be surprised to see building become very important gameplay in DU and the combat pvp gradually developed over a long period of time.

 

Why not introduce a/c privileges and restrictions? Players in the game >2yrs can PvP along with other metrics: Community voting, social complexity produced? etc... spit-balling ideas here.

 

Btw, I very much will enjoy combat, but I think large war decs along formal diplomatic lines and outcomes might be better in large sections of space with the "outer ringworlds /equivalents" and such like more lawless...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, MookMcMook said:

Excessively aggressive players over time in an evolutionary system would reduce in frequency, simply because of violent death rates and pressures on social groups to out-compete other groups via greater social success.

 

Obviously with "immortality" this reduces the reduction of such behaviour in populations in persistent games for comparison.

 

I would not be surprised to see building become very important gameplay in DU and the combat pvp gradually developed over a long period of time.

 

Why not introduce a/c privileges and restrictions? Players in the game >2yrs can PvP along with other metrics: Community voting, social complexity produced? etc... spit-balling ideas here.

 

Btw, I very much will enjoy combat, but I think large war decs along formal diplomatic lines and outcomes might be better in large sections of space with the "outer ringworlds /equivalents" and such like more lawless...

The issue when adding KDR or Killboards like in EVE, is you encourage PvP in the whole game. That involves attacking miners, for no other reason than "stat padding".

EVE has an official means of measuring how good a pilot is, and it's in the form of killmarks. A ship gets a "notch" on its hull as a decoration, for every kill it makes, on a base 10 system. That's an actually cool way of keeping track of how many kills a ship has, since those ships have a reputation and are sold for a lot of in-game money. And no, you can't just "grind" the killmarks by farming cheap ships, no enthusiast who will pay the equivalent of 1000 USD of in-game money for a 200 killmark ship, will be dumb enough to not check if the person selling it is an actually known PvPer. If you got a 200 killmark ship and you are a nobody, it screams "scam". And no, Killmarks do not add any stat boost to the ship, it's purely a cosmetic thing you can only earn through PvP.

The innate problem with "KDR" or any stat based "proof of not sucking" does not take into account Economic Warfare. Tell me how do you gage how good a trader is on his endeavors and how good a smuggler is at ruining a cartel's monopoly? It can't, hence "if you play trader, you play the game wrong" or "if you play miner, you are just farm" as many "High Isk Efficiency" apes in EVE would have you believe.

The moment KDR is added into the game, the game becomes all about "kill anything on sight, or you suck". Most toxic communities revolve around games with KDR. And if DU adds KDR, kiss the Medic, Engineer and all other support roles goodbye.

The current day 20-30 years old player, is a person who was raised in League of Cancer. I played Support role in League of Clamydia for 4 years, going Diamond along the way. I have seen the mentality of ADCs who "I play only Carry, cause support is for [Insert Homophobic Slur here] ". And the same goes down in EVE Online with its Killboard. NOBODY wants to play logistics (healer). They are like the most pampered players on a whole coalition, since they are so rare. 

Do we really want DU to have the same problem with only "top guns" and "super soldiers" and "I only fly Battleships, kthnxbai" people?

 

Just saying. There are far better ways to measure people's worth than a Scoreboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...