Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Kuritho said:

Paying a 15-20 dollar membership for a game that is meant to be fun to be in... prison?

This is a pretty bad idea and the best option is to just not do prisons.

Wouldnt worry, I dont think its a thing anyone can enforce, its just an idea dreamed up by people with empires in their heads yet have empty hands...... for now anyway lol

Kuritho likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, CoreVamore said:

Pretty sure all planets will have a safe zone of some sort, which will have markets outside of the enforcers influence, so yes it would be an inconvenience for the the bad guy, but not as severe as people think it will be.

 

 

Most planets will not have a safe zone.   Currently, the only ones planned are around the Arkship and on the Sanctuary Moon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ben Fargo said:

Most planets will not have a safe zone.   Currently, the only ones planned are around the Arkship and on the Sanctuary Moon.

HI Ben, I removed that comment 45 min ago as I read the new info (and I dont have access to pre-alpha either).

 

Cheers :)

Ben Fargo likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I tend to be very realistic in that regard (for DU), I just have to say I miss that certain ability to freely decide the course of action in private communities in offering things you would rarely see in other games on public or official servers.

 

And in the context of this topic, I miss the possibility of forced prison (in this framework, limited of course).

 

Thinking about limited, it's kind of funny when the legit argument is put on the table that imprisonment robs you of (paid) game time when a few private examples with prison mechanics from "Space Station 13" and "Armed Assault" (any of those with online RPG/life mods) had limited prison sentences to begin with. You'd be put in jail for mere minutes, sentences were often capped at about 10 to 15 minutes often making me wonder if it was worth it.

 

A stark counter-example would be a certain Minecraft community or network: the civilizations servers with their according plug-ins.

 

There, players could "pearl" you and imprison you to the Netherworld or twilight world. The grey, not hellish one.

Relatively indefinitely. Granted, it was a huge "cell" in that sense and its own dimension sense and not a small room, leaving you more game play options. But you were locked out from any activities and assets on the surface world while the pearl was physically stored in the surface world.

 

In short, to free you as third party, you'd have to obtain the pearl that was often locked in secure doom fort vaults, prisons themselves. Your captors basically had great leeway and I think you could only ask for server or community admin intervention after a long time, maybe months. It was widely accepted however, as it was seen as part of emergent gameplay with certain risks. It also didn't happen that often and random as bound pearls consumed fuel over time. But it was a possibility and happened to one of my friends for a time.

 

Long story short I'd welcome time capped prison mechanics working in player controlled areas but it likely won't happen or NQ would have to serve as potential dispute entity where private server admin or mods would do this job in private communities.

 

Despite me being in favor of such mechanics I basically wonder if enforced ones can truly work. With compromises of course.

 

But no one can tell me that minute-sentences would be a true issue if it were to be possible. Most would probably shrug off quarter or half hour sentences, alt tab, ponder life, do something else. If it can't be done repeatedly to you and has 'cooldown' I see bigger issues.

 

I still think voluntary imprisonment, redemption, is the most effective but severely depends on the motivation or will of the rule breaking or offending party. If there is no incentive to do this in their eyes, you're stuck with whatever the game has left to offer in that regard.

 

But alas, time will tell. I think with or without prisons or imprisonment, biggest deterrents will likely be reputation loss on a large scale if you f... up and people being angry at you and sending bounty hunters and more after you, creating an obstacle or multiple that impact your goals or safety negatively.

 

 

On another note, does any civcraft player remember Gezo? Also typing on mobile is annoying.

Share this post


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

Paying a 15-20 dollar membership for a game that is meant to be fun to be in... prison?

This is a pretty bad idea and the best option is to just not do prisons.

It pretty fun .... to make some PRISON BREAK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few points to be made.

 

There are several problems and inefficiencies with using punishments, fines, blocking, imprisonments and such. First off, how is it in any way an incentive to remain in the Organization if you aim to segregate individuals from the community? Secondly, are you gonna appoint people to track down your own members, give them fines, obstruct them and such? Waste of time and effort. Why would I continue to support an organization that wants to force me to give up my own stuff?

 

Also, I don't really understand what several of you mean by meta. Sounds like regular gameplay to me, in contrast to semi-roleplaying. Yet another reason why its inefficient and off-putting with minor punishments.

 

Moreover, a problem is how are you gonna monitor people? A hierarchal, authoritative system, in the terms of handing out punishments to lower members, and also the other way around of handing out privileges and handouts to certain individuals; alienates people and will obstruct you from even detecting transgressions of rules. You see, the more you differentiate between members, the harder it will be to notice when a couple of them are out on their own causing mischief. The more you are all equal, enjoy all the benefits of  the organization, and are organized the principles of need and effectiveness instead of titles and privileges, the easier it will be to notice when your fellow members break the rules or just don't simply belong in your organization or the idea of it.

The best method to police your own organization, is imo, simply:
1. Set a simple set of rules. A general rule set, a RoE, et cetera.
2. Appoint an officer with the task to investigate complaints of individuals and actions, coming from inside the guild, but also most importantly, from outside. (How are you ever gonna be even notified about the lurkers who keep to themselves, grief and only want access to your organization infrastructure/buffs/benefits, otherwise?)

3. If people can't follow the rules, kick 'em out.

 

Simple.

All in all, it's a game, not a simulator for organizations to roleplay Big Bad Governments. Unlike real life late-stage-capitalism, there is little incentive to put up with stuff like that in-game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Thokan said:

All in all, it's a game, not a simulator for organizations to roleplay Big Bad Governments.

That is you opinion.  To me, a simulator for organizations to roleplay governments is a perfect description of DU, although the governments would not necessarily be big or bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ben Fargo said:

That is you opinion.  To me, a simulator for organizations to roleplay governments is a perfect description of DU, although the governments would not necessarily be big or bad.

 

The point is simple, though. It will have negative consequences to create an unnecessarily bureaucratic and authoritative organization. It's all I'm saying.

 

Kuritho likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2018 at 12:03 PM, Thokan said:

 

The point is simple, though. It will have negative consequences to create an unnecessarily bureaucratic and authoritative organization. It's all I'm saying.

 

The thing is, the Terran Union has almost a thousand players. We're in a very unique circumstance where we're going to have a lot of players in our organization. So we do need some sort of enforcement and judicial processes to make sure that players do not go 'willy-nilly.' 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2018 at 11:54 AM, Ben Fargo said:

That is you opinion.  To me, a simulator for organizations to roleplay governments is a perfect description of DU, although the governments would not necessarily be big or bad.

Aye, role playing in an actual governmental body is amazing! It'll be amazing to see how each branch functions and ticks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/8/2018 at 11:29 AM, Thokan said:

A few points to be made.

 

There are several problems and inefficiencies with using punishments, fines, blocking, imprisonments and such. First off, how is it in any way an incentive to remain in the Organization if you aim to segregate individuals from the community? Secondly, are you gonna appoint people to track down your own members, give them fines, obstruct them and such? Waste of time and effort. Why would I continue to support an organization that wants to force me to give up my own stuff?

 

Also, I don't really understand what several of you mean by meta. Sounds like regular gameplay to me, in contrast to semi-roleplaying. Yet another reason why its inefficient and off-putting with minor punishments.

 

Moreover, a problem is how are you gonna monitor people? A hierarchal, authoritative system, in the terms of handing out punishments to lower members, and also the other way around of handing out privileges and handouts to certain individuals; alienates people and will obstruct you from even detecting transgressions of rules. You see, the more you differentiate between members, the harder it will be to notice when a couple of them are out on their own causing mischief. The more you are all equal, enjoy all the benefits of  the organization, and are organized the principles of need and effectiveness instead of titles and privileges, the easier it will be to notice when your fellow members break the rules or just don't simply belong in your organization or the idea of it.

The best method to police your own organization, is imo, simply:
1. Set a simple set of rules. A general rule set, a RoE, et cetera.
2. Appoint an officer with the task to investigate complaints of individuals and actions, coming from inside the guild, but also most importantly, from outside. (How are you ever gonna be even notified about the lurkers who keep to themselves, grief and only want access to your organization infrastructure/buffs/benefits, otherwise?)

3. If people can't follow the rules, kick 'em out.

 

Simple.

All in all, it's a game, not a simulator for organizations to roleplay Big Bad Governments. Unlike real life late-stage-capitalism, there is little incentive to put up with stuff like that in-game.

The problem with this is that some crimes warrant more than just a fine while others warrant less than a parking ticket. It is better to have a diverse system than having a non-bending system. AKA one that can adapt to the situation it is given.

Also, alienating people is wrong yes, but they're alienated because they did something to harm the TU or it's citizens. It's warranted to punish the player if they try or do cause conflict.

Share this post


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

The thing is, the Terran Union has almost a thousand players. We're in a very unique circumstance where we're going to have a lot of players in our organization. So we do need some sort of enforcement and judicial processes to make sure that players do not go 'willy-nilly.' 

 

That's exactly why you need to not be overly bureaucratic and authoritative. I am not making the argument of having no enforcement and judicial process, I am making the argument of having simple and effective enforcement and judicial process. 

 

14 hours ago, ShaylixLinx said:

The problem with this is that some crimes warrant more than just a fine while others warrant less than a parking ticket. It is better to have a diverse system than having a non-bending system. AKA one that can adapt to the situation it is given.

Also, alienating people is wrong yes, but they're alienated because they did something to harm the TU or it's citizens. It's warranted to punish the player if they try or do cause conflict.

 

How is a bureaucratic set of fines and multiple punishments adaptive, bending and diverse contra dialog leading up to kicking individuals out of the guild?

 

A player breaks the rules once - set them straight. A player continuously breaks the rules and try to cause conflict - kick 'em. It's really that simple.

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

×