Jump to content

Career Poll


Sir_Rat

Which Role Will You Play?  

116 members have voted

  1. 1. Which activity/career/role are you most interested in playing in DU? (Read Post Below First)

    • Researcher/Testing New Ideas
      7
    • Miner/Refining, Scanning, Resource-Locating
      10
    • Entrepreneur
      6
    • Pirate/Griefer/Outlaw
      10
    • Builder (any construct type)
      11
    • Designer (any construct type)
      15
    • Politician/Government/Other Leadership Role
      8
    • Soldier/Mercenary/Spy/Military-Specific
      8
    • Freeloader/Scammer/Nothing Productive
      1
    • Explorer
      9
    • Market Trader/Banker/Economics-Specific
      5
    • Hauler/Transportation
      5
    • Strategist/Second-In-Command/Manager/Administration
      5
    • Bounty Hunter/Slave Trader/Bernarr
      2
    • Other
      6
    • Not Sure Yet
      5
    • Triggered
      3


Recommended Posts

On ‎11‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 8:12 PM, Lau2356 said:

I'm pretty sure the game will grow without safezones on every planet. After all, it is a pvp-oriented game and safezones on every planet would make it too easy in my opinion

I am sure the game will grow too but I am sure it will grow a lot more with some safe zones because not everyone likes constant pvp and ganked fest. This is also why most MMO's have  pvp and pve servers but we will all be playing on one server for DU. Personally I don't see a problem with having a safe zone on each planet and connecting it in to the lore some how as  maybe something like pieces of the ark ship flew off and landed on other planets or finding some strange ruins as a safe zone! NQ is trying to make DU appealing to many types of mmo players and yes its pvp base but don't be so one sided that you cant see the need for safe zones also because that could turn into a griefers dream and you could lose members  which also equals money for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GunDeva said:

because not everyone likes constant pvp and ganked fest

Exactly, and definitely not myself! If I'm not PVP, then it's PVE. What is PVE in this game? It's personal-progress, not just Organization-progress. Most Organizations in this game are so PVP-based, including their policies and implementations. Very few to none have I seen any Organization lay-out a system(a good developed system) for private-economy that is beneficial for PVE-progress. A Republic-system that you will work on building yourself and contribute to society for the sake of working together to achieve common-goals. 

 

EVE is to blame for this! F*** that game that it carried here! 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Eternal said:

Exactly, and definitely not myself! If I'm not PVP, then it's PVE. What is PVE in this game? It's personal-progress, not just Organization-progress. Most Organizations in this game are so PVP-based, including their policies and implementations. Very few to none have I seen any Organization lay-out a system(a good developed system) for private-economy that is beneficial for PVE-progress. A Republic-system that you will work on building yourself and contribute to society for the sake of working together to achieve common-goals. 

 

EVE is to blame for this! F*** that game that it carried here! 

 

 

"

I have seen lots of PvP'ers, lots of PvE'rs...and judging from your wit and words above, I'd place some valuable Quanta on this bet: if you are ever a PvE'r, it's to lure in the fellow PvE'rs to a PvP wake up call.

"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/4/2017 at 10:55 AM, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

I like those guys who selected "politicians", you guys are in for a brutal wake up call.

Well, there will be need for people at the top who will be rulers of the cities/planets/systems/whatever, but those will also be positions requiring huge amounts of player´s time (and will require him to be available at all times, even during the night, to deal with crisis) and most players will not be capable enough to deal with it (simply because it will be second job...no logging in and just building new nice room for your little house, you will have to deal with lots of things). But that will be the case probably for all leading positions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dorlas said:

Well, there will be need for people at the top who will be rulers of the cities/planets/systems/whatever, but those will also be positions requiring huge amounts of player´s time (and will require him to be available at all times, even during the night, to deal with crisis) and most players will not be capable enough to deal with it (simply because it will be second job...no logging in and just building new nice room for your little house, you will have to deal with lots of things). But that will be the case probably for all leading positions.

That's administration. People confuse administration with politics. It's not the same.

Most people want to be "Supreme Galactic Commander" but when the griefing hits them they are like "oh, this game is so bad, so toxic, why are people attacking me"

Why? Cause a guy paid me to drive that person to quitting their position - or the game altogether - cause I am a merc and I just do that for a living. That's the kind of rude awakening I am talking of.

 

Anyone who wants to be "top dog" should accept the fact they'll be griefed a lot. It's how the sandbox goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Eternal said:

Exactly, and definitely not myself! If I'm not PVP, then it's PVE. What is PVE in this game? It's personal-progress, not just Organization-progress. Most Organizations in this game are so PVP-based, including their policies and implementations. Very few to none have I seen any Organization lay-out a system(a good developed system) for private-economy that is beneficial for PVE-progress. A Republic-system that you will work on building yourself and contribute to society for the sake of working together to achieve common-goals. 

 

EVE is to blame for this! F*** that game that it carried here! 

 

 

 

There's a good picture of how the game needs to be balanced out:

 

 

Look at the diagram (flow) between: Builders <-> Combat

 

There's huge scope for organizations with chains of builders removed from Combat. Bigger Orgs seem a good place to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 0something0 said:

You cant be griefed if you don't own anything. :)

 

As for whatever you are administrating over gets griefed, its your job to handle the crisis. If you can't deal with it, you probably shouldn't be a leader.

 

Oh sweet summer child, you've seen no winters yet. You confuse evicting with griefing. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/10/2017 at 3:17 PM, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

Why? Cause a guy paid me to drive that person to quitting their position - or the game altogether - cause I am a merc and I just do that for a living. That's the kind of rude awakening I am talking of.

But how will you grief someone who is always inside huge city owned by his organization? Well, of course, you may be able to get to him...once...then he will inform his organization about you and they will kill you any time you try to get to their territory or even hire someone to murder you again and again and again for killing their leader.

DU is not EVE, PvP is not the main focus of the game. Leaders will not spend their time on the frontlines (well, besides military leaders), but often back inside their territory (just like leaders do in reality, you don´t see Bashar al-Assad running around Idlib, shooting rebels).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dorlas said:

But how will you grief someone who is always inside huge city owned by his organization? Well, of course, you may be able to get to him...once...then he will inform his organization about you and they will kill you any time you try to get to their territory or even hire someone to murder you again and again and again for killing their leader.

DU is not EVE, PvP is not the main focus of the game. Leaders will not spend their time on the frontlines (well, besides military leaders), but often back inside their territory (just like leaders do in reality, you don´t see Bashar al-Assad running around Idlib, shooting rebels).

See, you think of this the wrong way.

Griefing is not limited to killing. It's about causing the other person stress by making them feel under duress. And I can DAC my accounts to achieve the desired outcome, this is called awoxing, it's how EVE mercs work. Sooner or later, the preson you try to stress out, bend under the pressure. Entire sections of alliances' militaries are devoted on that very thing, Black Ops, with the sole intent of causing enemy CEOs stress. That will be part of DU - as long as it doesn't extend to IRL stupidity, keep the actions only in-game.


Killing you? No. DISBANDING your entire alliance and giving away all your assets by setting the RDMS tag to "all", is how awoxing works. This kind of thing took drown an 8000 people alliance in EVE Online, just this september alone. And that was not even mercwork, just a guy who sold his side out cause of a differnece he had with the leader of the alliance over their political direction in the game. This is why LITERALLY Star Citizen has a big following, people from EVE who got rekt like that got into Star Citizen with the hopes of "being top dog" once more.

EVE Online is about PvP as much as DU is very braodly attached to it. And guess what, PvP is not limited to pew pew. Some times, taking away the other person's money and assets is enough for them to ragequit the game. But hey, if you reached the point that a person is willing to sell out Billions of in-game money to make you ragequit, you must have made some serious enemies, you knew what you signed up for the moment you provoked an other big fish.

Just don't think mercs and griefing as "kill the other guy".

 

 

This video from EVE Online, sums up my point - this is a common thing in EVE, revenge sagas :
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, GunDeva said:

In the real world none of the leaders of large organizations or countries really fight or dirty there hands

They won't, and why would they? They are "Politicians", try to look at things at their perspective. They are individuals who also have their own self-interest. But ofcourse, they will not admit to it. They have to maintain their image to the public, so the masses will support their campaign. Do you think doing public-service is in their heart? Very few politicians are like that.

 

Think of Kim Jong Un; do you really think he will or wants to go to war with the US? He is doing it only as a mechanic to gain public-persuasion and to continue to remain in absolute-power and keep that status. Kim Jong Un is the leader of North Korea, he is not North Korea itself and he will not think for the collective-interest of the country, but for himself. 

 

Same with Hitler, I have seen a documentary, and he tried to avoid war with Britain and France at all possible costs. But the Allies will not accept his negotiation after the invasion of Poland and it ended in war. He was very cautious, he doesn't even want to bomb London.

 

If I am the leader, why would I put myself in that position, given that I am a typical-politician? I will do bad-things if necessary, but I will do it for my benefit. Real-Public-Servant are nationalistic(they are rare), typical-politicians are not. It is hard to ignore the fact that we all have self-interest.

Link to comment
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...