Jump to content
Mucus

Multi level Residence areas

Recommended Posts

In defined HEX areas could  a  hexagon  be subdivided into smaller areas  like residence areas of say 64 M cubed or whatever makers sense( perhaps selected), these would constitute a layer.  A player would need to have 1 static contruct of the specified size 

Each residence area a player  can build within that area whatever residence they like EG: residence, storage,  landing pad , workshop etc.

Each residence layer could be stacked so that dense living areas could be created ( think high rise city) as a residence zone.

Essentially the residence zone is a skeleton structure for building. As opposed to random stacking of static constructs on top of each other.

Each layer would have some access provided , eg: turbo lift or concourse.

These residence zones would be owned by  either the game or organisations. 

Residence zones could be purchased layer by layer (foundation , floors) as one complete structure.

layers could be pre designed EG: market  , landing area. bunkers, communications , storage, defences (blue prints perhaps)

Organisations could buy the structure and allow members to build in specified zones

Visibility of other players inside the residence could be turned on or off dependant on performance of the game.

lua could be allowed for residence areas and the zone as a whole. Optional either way.

 

This idea assumes technical limitations are overcome or it would operate within known working limitations.

 

this could be also used with dynamic contructs for space stations :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well i think it can be solve with RDM ?. Place a static core and area building of it become a plot. And so if you want to sell that plot you will using RDMs to give the right to the one buy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/8/2018 at 9:38 AM, Mucus said:

In defined HEX areas could  a  hexagon  be subdivided into smaller areas  like residence areas of say 64 M cubed or whatever makers sense( perhaps selected), these would constitute a layer.  A player would need to have 1 static contruct of the specified size 

Each residence area a player  can build within that area whatever residence they like EG: residence, storage,  landing pad , workshop etc.

Each residence layer could be stacked so that dense living areas could be created ( think high rise city) as a residence zone.

Essentially the residence zone is a skeleton structure for building. As opposed to random stacking of static constructs on top of each other.

Each layer would have some access provided , eg: turbo lift or concourse. 

These residence zones would be owned by  either the game or organisations. 

Residence zones could be purchased layer by layer (foundation , floors) as one complete structure.

layers could be pre designed EG: market  , landing area. bunkers, communications , storage, defences (blue prints perhaps)

Organisations could buy the structure and allow members to build in specified zones

Visibility of other players inside the residence could be turned on or off dependant on performance of the game.

lua could be allowed for residence areas and the zone as a whole. Optional either way.

 

This idea assumes technical limitations are overcome or it would operate within known working limitations.

 

this could be also used with dynamic contructs for space stations :)

 

I agree with @ShioriStein. RDMS can be used to sort this out. You can assign special roles/rags for each residence, and only the tenant of said residence would be able to affect the residence itself. This way, you would only need one static core for the entire building while still providing access to the people who pay to live there (and JC already confirmed that there will be the ability to charge people monthly or weekly with RDMS).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎8‎/‎2018 at 3:56 PM, ShioriStein said:

Well i think it can be solve with RDM ?. Place a static core and area building of it become a plot. And so if you want to sell that plot you will using RDMs to give the right to the one buy it.

for those who have not seen RDM

RDM may solve permissions but it does not provide a static structure to attach cores to.  RDM would help manage it but essentially the residence idea is about a skeleton structure that cores could be attached to. Think of  it as a forma for a building shape where players donate a core of a certain size to attach to the structure.

 

The alternative is the placement of a core with rooms created with voxels and use doors with RDM. Cores would then need to be placed above each other to make a tall building. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Mucus said:

for those who have not seen RDM

RDM may solve permissions but it does not provide a static structure to attach cores to.  RDM would help manage it but essentially the residence idea is about a skeleton structure that cores could be attached to. Think of  it as a forma for a building shape where players donate a core of a certain size to attach to the structure.

 

The alternative is the placement of a core with rooms created with voxels and use doors with RDM. Cores would then need to be placed above each other to make a tall building. 

 

A skeleton to attach cores is not very practical. In my opinion, its redundant because any one of those cores could manage the whole building most likely.

 

Why not have one core for the entire building, along with the rooms made with voxels and RDMS control for each room? I don't think that cores will have a limit to the amount of voxels/elements attached to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree I could go the way of cores , but would a resident be able to build their room/area?.  The skeleton structure is  practical for freeform residence building by multiple players of different orgs in the same area. I note my assumption is lua of a sub core would not be able to control the structure as I would expect lua to be hierarchical like elements. Although that's a nice hack if you can do it!! :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Mucus said:

I agree I could go the way of cores , but would a resident be able to build their room/area?.  The skeleton structure is  practical for freeform residence building by multiple players of different orgs in the same area. I note my assumption is lua of a sub core would not be able to control the structure as I would expect lua to be hierarchical like elements. Although that's a nice hack if you can do it!! :)

 

The whole point of RDM is exactly to allow this. However you've missed a key point - the residence - the building - it is technically an organisation.

 

What you would need to do is either set up a body corporate model, or the landlord sets up an org which renters "join" when they rent a property. The rules of the org (which can be a member of another org, such as a company that owns the building, or a city, or a nation etc) are then set to allow members to only build in an area where they have RDM permissions (their room). In that scenario - the use of sub cores, or a core with complex lua etc are all possible.

 

Remember this is the same scenario that one would use to build a hotel - the hotel guests need some "build" permission on some level (like putting their stuff on a bed), as well as RDM permissions around room access etc. So they may have to the temporarily "join an org" - I can see this process actually being semi automated so it is seamless and non intrusive to players - it might be a particular NQ defined type of org though, as to prevent abuse of players (since it is an artificial construct that allows us to mimic a real life experience).

 

So IMO a skeleton building really isn't needed so much as the org is. e.g A construction org builds a building (not a skeleton - just a building with fixtures, not fittings), it has doors and rooms, it is sold to an org as residential or hotel or whatever, they then fit it out, tailor the RDM to suit the intended purpose - selling them as apartments to individuals, renting them, hotel model, etc. The the individuals (now a member of the "building org") get to fit out their own room; and get to give guests RDM permissions for just that room, and so on.

 

An office building or mall is also exactly the same thing - shopkeepers sublet their shops in a mall and get fit out rights.

Share this post


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

The whole point of RDM is exactly to allow this. However you've missed a key point - the residence - the building - it is technically an organisation.

 

What you would need to do is either set up a body corporate model, or the landlord sets up an org which renters "join" when they rent a property. The rules of the org (which can be a member of another org, such as a company that owns the building, or a city, or a nation etc) are then set to allow members to only build in an area where they have RDM permissions (their room). In that scenario - the use of sub cores, or a core with complex lua etc are all possible. 

 

Remember this is the same scenario that one would use to build a hotel - the hotel guests need some "build" permission on some level (like putting their stuff on a bed), as well as RDM permissions around room access etc. So they may have to the temporarily "join an org" - I can see this process actually being semi automated so it is seamless and non intrusive to players - it might be a particular NQ defined type of org though, as to prevent abuse of players (since it is an artificial construct that allows us to mimic a real life experience).

 

So IMO a skeleton building really isn't needed so much as the org is. e.g A construction org builds a building (not a skeleton - just a building with fixtures, not fittings), it has doors and rooms, it is sold to an org as residential or hotel or whatever, they then fit it out, tailor the RDM to suit the intended purpose - selling them as apartments to individuals, renting them, hotel model, etc. The the individuals (now a member of the "building org") get to fit out their own room; and get to give guests RDM permissions for just that room, and so on.

 

An office building or mall is also exactly the same thing - shopkeepers sublet their shops in a mall and get fit out rights.

 

This is an excellent idea. I would think, however, that if RDMS is going to be as extensive as we are being lead to believe, we could probably have the organization for the building, and have those who manage the building as the only actual members (all legates probably). Then, they can give roles to tenants and whoever else they want. This is all assuming that orgs can give temporary roles to people that are not members of the organization.

Share this post


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

 

This is an excellent idea. I would think, however, that if RDMS is going to be as extensive as we are being lead to believe, we could probably have the organization for the building, and have those who manage the building as the only actual members (all legates probably). Then, they can give roles to tenants and whoever else they want. This is all assuming that orgs can give temporary roles to people that are not members of the organization. 

Bingo - " This is all assuming that orgs can give temporary roles to people that are not members of the organization. " <- I wrote with the assumption that this may not be possible - your approach is much better. But yes - that's exactly the model I am thinking. It mimics RL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would definitely like to build some kind of residential skyscraper at some point and then let other people move into it.  I'd definitely like a rent a spot in someone else's building too.

 

It would be pretty cool to see people take over the spaces and personalize them.

 

I don't know if there will be a limit to how many constructs you can connect together.  But if you stacked a bunch of smaller static constructs, then the build rights to different areas of the building could be subdivided.

 

Or closer to real life, it could be done with an honor system.  And people will just have to restrain themselves from cutting a hole in the floor into their downstairs neighbors apartment. ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this would be too much complicated game mechanics.

People should assign properties or whatever to each other by communication with each other. And if there is conflict, they would have to find their own ways of dealing with it.

Share this post


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

I think this would be too much complicated game mechanics.

People should assign properties or whatever to each other by communication with each other. And if there is conflict, they would have to find their own ways of dealing with it.

 

Well, Novaquark is going to implement a way to handle stuff like this in a comprehensive way. So, why not use it? :)
I mean, you could do it just by mutual trust and without using RDMS. However, this would probably only work with real life friends/family, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Oxyorum said:

 

Well, Novaquark is going to implement a way to handle stuff like this in a comprehensive way. So, why not use it? :)
I mean, you could do it just by mutual trust and without using RDMS. However, this would probably only work with real life friends/family, in my opinion.

By "ways of dealing with possible conflicts", I mean maybe finding compromises or kicking someone out.

Altough it's not very common in online games, people could maybe learn to interact and maybe cooperate with each other more. When the game has many mechanics, that make the organization of communities easier, it actually limits the social aspect of the game.

Share this post


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

By "ways of dealing with possible conflicts", I mean maybe finding compromises or kicking someone out.

Altough it's not very common in online games, people could maybe learn to interact and maybe cooperate with each other more. When the game has many mechanics, that make the oranization of communities easier, it actually limits the social aspect of the game.

 

I understand where you are coming from. I would not favor things that affect the social aspect of the game negatively. However, I don't believe that having RDMS in the game will decrease player interaction. It is necessary, especially when handling large organizations with hundreds of members (see the first page on the community portal) of which there could be a number of spies or other bad actors. Trust me, there will be plenty of player/org cooperation, with or without RDMS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I think especially the smaller groups of players will need a way to protect their buildings from being nanoformed, while they are offline?
But there will be energy fields to prevent that I thought.

Share this post


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

Ok, I think especially the smaller groups of players will need a way to protect their buildings from being nanoformed, while they are offline?
But there will be energy fields to prevent that I thought.

Yes there will be Defences and protection and you will have warning and a chance to defend yourself if you build in a non sanctuary area. For us lone players and small groups the trick to stay safe will be to not be worth the trouble of the big organized org/guild/corps if it cost them more than they get it is our best chance to be safe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since it is easier to destroy something, than to build it, there probably will be griefers, aka people, who like to destory your work for the sake of it, no matter the quality of resources they get. I think, that's the reason why NQ implemented the RDMS system?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, MaltoSigma said:

Since it is easier to destroy something, than to build it, there probably will be griefers, aka people, who like to destory your work for the sake of it, no matter the quality of resources they get. I think, that's the reason why NQ implemented the RDMS system?

Rdms doesn't prevent anyone from destroying your stuff. It helps in organizing your org aka getting ppl the right roles to use/manipulate/enter certain constructs/elements. You don't want your basic grunt to be able to get into the command room - that's where rdms comes into play. You can give ppl different rights for different storage containers for example. A grunt might only see it's content but only an officer (whom you trust) can take stuff from there.

 

But you can't use rdms to prevent anyone else from a different org to destroy your stuff with it. Those ppl don't have access anyway to your stuff as they're not in your org

Share this post


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

Why can rdms deny someone access to stuff but can't prevent them from destroying the stuff?

 

Its a permissions system to control who can interact with your things, not a shield.

 

It can't stop someome from destroying your stuff - use a TCU or build in a safezone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, MaltoSigma said:

I think there is a misunderstanding...
Why would someone lock a door element, if it can be deleted with the click of a mouse button anyway.

Because there are safezones where you can't shoot

 

Edit: and because to keep your orgmates out of there

Share this post


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

I think there is a misunderstanding...
Why would someone lock a door element, if it can be deleted with the click of a mouse button anyway.

Because those without permission will not be able to go into build-mode and take down the door (no build permission). Instead, they will have to break the door through some other method, which should take longer and attract attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok yeah, so rdms can also disable the nanoformer.

And you can build multiple static cores and you could also have different rdms on these.

 

The idea in this thread (if I understood this right) is to extend this system with skeletons to attach to the cores to give players more freedom to create systems (like renting), that could basically manage themselves. Which, as I would say, is a bad idea, beacause it would further promote hierarchic social structures and make the game more boring.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, MaltoSigma said:

Ok yeah, so rdms can also disable the nanoformer.

And you can build multiple static cores and you could also have different rdms on these.

 

The idea in this thread (if I understood this right) is to extend this system with skeletons to attach to the cores to give players more freedom to create systems (like renting), that could basically manage themselves. Which, as I would say, is a bad idea, beacause it would further promote hierarchic social structures and make the game more boring.

 

I think the plan is that multiple levels of RDMS can be set up, for example:

1) Full Control (builder/Owner)

2) Manager - can assign rooms and user voxel add/remove rights

3) Renter - can only go into rooms assigned to him/her and can only add/remove their own constructs in that room space.

 

This would enable control of a building by the owners and freedom to express by the renters.

 

I believe NQ envisions that the RDMS can be setup however the corp and/or owner wishes, it can be super pyramid shaped, it could also be flat as a pancake. There is no "One Way" to do it ;)

 

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...

×
×
  • Create New...