Player Bases: Item Decay, Persistence and Security

Eschatos

Posts: 12434

Posted:
Edited: by Eschatos
Posted: -
When planetside bases (eventually) get implemented it seems logical that they'll be subject to the same wear and tear that affects other items in the game.

Wurm Online has a very realistic system that sees structures, buildings etc. visibly decay over time if they're not maintained. You will often see overgrown plots of land with scattered broken items, walls in ruins and so on as they very slowly disappear from the persistent world.

This helps avoid the eventuality of ghost towns sitting empty in pristine condition for years on end, as you've seen if you ever played SWG. There's also a big negative in that it can be very discouraging to create anything when you know it will all be destroyed if you take a break from the game.

How would you like to see item decay implemented for player bases/homesteads?
Should player bases be invulnerable to attack and theft, like hangars?

___

Examples of outposts

1TsWRuL.png
wOjjW0n.png
RW5xwpC.png
fw12YVq.png

___

For reference - related mechanics

Repair mechanic - choosing the right materials
Material.png

Subcomponents
Subcomponents_v2.jpg

Pipes System
X7dk39f.png

Node Structure
5UgVaOU.jpg


___

Some relevant quotes...

on items disappearing:

We will also have missions and points of interests that are not so big like a crashed ship in a desert. That is a ship that you find today. Tomorrow, the sand might come over it again. So we’re okay with that disappearing and being phased out.
source

on player bases:

...there’s a lot of stuff being worked on right now about these planetary locations, especially smaller planetary location and modular bases and modular camps. We're looking into first starting them on the NPC side. It’s not a city or a town, we’re talking like the moisture farm in Star Wars or like small clusters of building that someone just dropped from space and they put together to create a small little base of operation where they’re harvesting something or they’re doing some research or have a drug lab... ideally we want to open that at some point to you guys so you can build your own and try the stuff.
source

on HP vs Condition:

You can always repair up to full hp on a part, but the condition will slowly deteriorate after a time to simulate normal wear and tear. Condition can be recovered by taking the part to certain repair shops that specialize in restoring items to their 'like new' state.

The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
PLEASE VOTE >>
  • JRCrichton

    Posts: 2585

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I'd like some degradation of buildings. It should be reflected by the environment the structure is in of course. However even in the harsher conditions I'd have it occur slowly. I don't think anyone wants to be running all over the verse slapping a new coat of paint on bases every other week. Especially if you end up building a few of them.

    That being said if you leave a base unattended for months on a planet that's frequently hit by storms expect to repair and replace some parts when you return.
    bvcsorF.pngaBIG3k3.png
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Assuming things work like you anticipate I'd add some degree of randomness as well (outside of a known reasonable minimum amount of time). If not there will be gamey things like flocks of people standing over a building about to expire so they can drop their own.

    Also strong enforcement by developers on rules to things in line with the scope of the game. No bases that look like penises or spell profanities for example.

    I'm not sure how I feel about giving this level of control to players but I'll keep an open mind.I never got my castle in Ultima Online so I'm overdue anyway.
  • CycloneWrangler

    Posts: 124

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I'd like some degradation of buildings. It should be reflected by the environment the structure is in of course. However even in the harsher conditions I'd have it occur slowly. I don't think anyone wants to be running all over the verse slapping a new coat of paint on bases every other week. Especially if you end up building a few of them.

    That being said if you leave a base unattended for months on a planet that's frequently hit by storms expect to repair and replace some parts when you return.

    Also should depend on the quality of the stuff you use to build your bases. If you're just starting out (or if you're a cheap prick) and buy sub-standard non-UEEUL (UEE Underwriters Laboratory) plastic instead of grade-A plasteel, the construct should wear, decay and break down faster.

    vRR4bMN.jpg
  • RavageStorm

    Posts: 2702

    Posted:
    Posted:
    You ahve to be careful with that. I mean, am I expected to go to the 'base" and clean things up? Am I expected to mow the grass, pull vines off the b;uildings, paint, trim, and repair? What would be the mechanic of "keeping up" on your "base?"

    Personally, I actually want it to work a lot like SWG. I absolutely...100%.. do NOT want the bases (houses) to be able to be attacked, ransacked, or anyway be accessible to anyone outside the permitted list. I do NOT want this to be where I would have to "defend" my base...or worry if I'm offline. That would be a terrible...TERRRIBLE... concept.

    So it HAS to be so that only me and anyone I put on a list can have access. No defense. It's a home. But when it comes to "up keep"... then there lies a lot of problems.
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12434

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Assuming things work like you anticipate I'd add some degree of randomness as well (outside of a known reasonable minimum amount of time). If not there will be gamey things like flocks of people standing over a building about to expire so they can drop their own.

    Also strong enforcement by developers on rules to things in line with the scope of the game. No bases that look like penises or spell profanities for example.

    I'm not sure how I feel about giving this level of control to players but I'll keep an open mind.I never got my castle in Ultima Online so I'm overdue anyway.

    A couple of comments...

    The first point is an excellent one. To reference Wurm again, they use a deed system with a recurring fee to maintain ownership of a plot of land. Doing anything on a spot depends on whether it's currently owned, and the permissions assigned by the owner, regardless of whether there are structures there. This is far better than the situation you describe. That happens often in Archeage, I think the way they handle it is a bit of a joke.

    However, this also means if you take a break you might come back to a stranger living on your land. I prefer EVE's system where it automatically deducts rent payments for offices etc. from your account every month even if you haven't logged in. So you can take a break as long as you can cover the bills.

    One the second point, bases are currently planned to be modular (unlike Wurm where you can build whatever you can imagine). So CIG would have a lot of control over how they look.
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    PLEASE VOTE >>
  • RKDN

    Posts: 325

    Posted:
    Posted:
    Off the top of my head ...

    A little wear & tear on structures -- OK. Breakdown and required repair or replacement of component items -- terrific.

    I'm tending to the idea of semi-permanent structures. That way our copious landscapes can be built up. Opportunities for pillaged by barbarians, defense by gentry, or shelter may be sought if required. Nothing short of an expensive orbital blast to get rid of a building as an asset.

    Would need taxes on structures to prevent infinite growth and to get abandoned properties on the market. And, now that I think about it a bit, a limit of structures per Citizen and per Organization.

    Buildings can be bought and sold; like real estate. A buyer can contact an owner for selling. And/or an owner can place a structure 'on the market.' Maybe a private sale, too.
    Loner and individualist engaged in the practice of quiet nonconformity.
  • JRCrichton

    Posts: 2585

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    I'd like some degradation of buildings. It should be reflected by the environment the structure is in of course. However even in the harsher conditions I'd have it occur slowly. I don't think anyone wants to be running all over the verse slapping a new coat of paint on bases every other week. Especially if you end up building a few of them.

    That being said if you leave a base unattended for months on a planet that's frequently hit by storms expect to repair and replace some parts when you return.

    Also should depend on the quality of the stuff you use to build your bases. If you're just starting out (or if you're a cheap prick) and buy sub-standard non-UEEUL (UEE Underwriters Laboratory) plastic instead of grade-A plasteel, the construct should wear, decay and break down faster.

    Nonsense! I expect my base constructed of popsicle sticks and rubber bands to hold up at the same level as titanium.
    bvcsorF.pngaBIG3k3.png
  • JRCrichton

    Posts: 2585

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    You ahve to be careful with that. I mean, am I expected to go to the 'base" and clean things up? Am I expected to mow the grass, pull vines off the b;uildings, paint, trim, and repair? What would be the mechanic of "keeping up" on your "base?"

    Personally, I actually want it to work a lot like SWG. I absolutely...100%.. do NOT want the bases (houses) to be able to be attacked, ransacked, or anyway be accessible to anyone outside the permitted list. I do NOT want this to be where I would have to "defend" my base...or worry if I'm offline. That would be a terrible...TERRRIBLE... concept.

    So it HAS to be so that only me and anyone I put on a list can have access. No defense. It's a home. But when it comes to "up keep"... then there lies a lot of problems.

    You haven't lived until you've played the Star Citizen weeding mini game.
    bvcsorF.pngaBIG3k3.png
  • Oim31c

    Posts: 163

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I'll be hiring a Banu Property Management company to maintain my estates ;-)
    Carrack, Vanguard Warden/Sentinel/Harbinger, Sabre Comet, Caterpillar Pirate, Freelancer DUR, Dragonfly Black, Super Hornet
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12434

    Posted:
    Edited: by Eschatos
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    You ahve to be careful with that. I mean, am I expected to go to the 'base" and clean things up? Am I expected to mow the grass, pull vines off the b;uildings, paint, trim, and repair? What would be the mechanic of "keeping up" on your "base?"

    Personally, I actually want it to work a lot like SWG. I absolutely...100%.. do NOT want the bases (houses) to be able to be attacked, ransacked, or anyway be accessible to anyone outside the permitted list. I do NOT want this to be where I would have to "defend" my base...or worry if I'm offline. That would be a terrible...TERRRIBLE... concept.

    So it HAS to be so that only me and anyone I put on a list can have access. No defense. It's a home. But when it comes to "up keep"... then there lies a lot of problems.

    This is an interesting point. I've updated the title to include discussion on theft and destruction of bases (by NPCs and/or players).

    I was initially thinking that any upkeep or maintenance would mirror whatever mechanics exist elsewhere in the PU. That is, condition that deteriorates over time and needs to be occasionally repaired if you want to maintain that condition. However, that also implies destructibility though, which is an important question when it comes to a base.

    For example, we've been told that hangars are invulnerable to attack and theft. Should it be the same for player bases, since it's basically a hangar?
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    PLEASE VOTE >>
  • Thylbana

    Posts: 15432

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I hope that there is some sort of game mechanic that will allow those who don't want to delve too deeply into this, to do so easily. For example, if my hangar, or home gets dirty, there should be a maid service, or robots to buy to clean them up. Something that will allow for the casuals to play without facing some level of apathetic penalty. Basically an ease of use function.

    I'm not saying that I'm going casual, but that casuals will be a facet that will help this game grow. It is an MMO. People attract people.
    yJUkDEb.jpg
  • RKDN

    Posts: 325

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I'm thinking of the homestead video. Is it being implied that the Sand People shack is impenetrable to wanderers? I think in the video it wasn't.

    Maybe there can be temporary structures that wear away after a week or so, and also do not require deeds or taxation.
    Loner and individualist engaged in the practice of quiet nonconformity.
  • RKDN

    Posts: 325

    Posted:
    Posted:
    And structures which may be dismantled and carried away ... by whomever.
    Loner and individualist engaged in the practice of quiet nonconformity.
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12434

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Maybe there can be temporary structures that wear away after a week or so, and also do not require deeds or taxation.

    Yeah, it was pretty much confirmed by Dan Trufin in his recent interview... for NPC structures, which I suppose we could 'move into' temporarily, these might not be there if you left and came back a month later. According to previous dev statements, as long as there are players there, an item will persist.
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    PLEASE VOTE >>
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    Assuming things work like you anticipate I'd add some degree of randomness as well (outside of a known reasonable minimum amount of time). If not there will be gamey things like flocks of people standing over a building about to expire so they can drop their own.

    Also strong enforcement by developers on rules to things in line with the scope of the game. No bases that look like penises or spell profanities for example.

    I'm not sure how I feel about giving this level of control to players but I'll keep an open mind.I never got my castle in Ultima Online so I'm overdue anyway.

    A couple of comments...

    The first point is an excellent one. To reference Wurm again, they use a deed system with a recurring fee to maintain ownership of a plot of land. Doing anything on a spot depends on whether it's currently owned, and the permissions assigned by the owner, regardless of whether there are structures there. This is far better than the situation you describe. That happens often in Archeage, I think the way they handle it is a bit of a joke.

    However, this also means if you take a break you might come back to a stranger living on your land. I prefer EVE's system where it automatically deducts rent payments for offices etc. from your account every month even if you haven't logged in. So you can take a break as long as you can cover the bills.

    One the second point, bases are currently planned to be modular (unlike Wurm where you can build whatever you can imagine). So CIG would have a lot of control over how they look.
    A recurring fee may not work in the context of this game. Just to talk this through Star Citizen is supposed to be balanced for solo and small group play. Eve is aimed at Org play. Our Orgs are supposed to be fighting for specific stations and persistent Bengals not dominating planets. If bases are truly permanent then it's likely that Orgs will eventually pick up all the good spots and will eventually use that for territorial control which are things the developers were trying to avoid. I don't want to talk for Tony Z but I'm pretty sure he's going to be looking at ways these bases don't become truly permanent. I think this is the root of his comment about how the Universe is vast and if you want to set up a farm somewhere remote you'll probably be ok but there's always the chance someone will come along and find you. If it was permanent and indestructible I don't think he would have bothered with the clarification.

    My best interpretation with the limited info we have is that bases will serve some role in the game, usually harvesting/farming/resource gathering of some sort and won't be bases that serve as permanent locations. I imagine it is even possible the node a base sits on could dry up. What makes it interesting is that you can trick everything out and do so much but at the end of the day I think these things will come and go. Either by being attacked or just picked up and moved by the player to a better spot.

    I can't wait to find out more.
  • popinfresh

    Posts: 87

    Posted:
    Posted:
    for me I believe player bases should exist but can be taken over no matter where it is at and fully destructible to be used for scrap material. That way all players can set up a base anywhere in which the game will allow and if the spot you want is taken you can fight for it. No safe haven for anyone, even in the UEE space like terra or earth. Hangers I agree should be indestructible because basically everyone has one so its basically like a home location.
  • Dranor-Zylander

    Posts: 1074

    Posted:
    Posted:



    Parody of thiefing starships of a parody of thiefing cars.

    Now all thats needed is a parody of a parody about stealing cars that are actually starships in disguise.
    33f3i1w.png
  • Saint_Cosmo

    Posts: 83

    Posted:
    Edited: by Saint_Cosmo
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Realistically speaking, much spoken and even promised may never be seen in this game. I said may,, LOLOLOL
  • Dranor-Zylander

    Posts: 1074

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    Realistically speaking, much spoken and even promised may never be seen in this game. I said may,, LOLOLOL

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha............... yeah

    I require sleep, sometime. Passes out.
    33f3i1w.png
  • Saint_Cosmo

    Posts: 83

    Posted:
    Edited: by Saint_Cosmo
    Posted:
    Edited:
    Dranor, who needs sleep. I just require occasional coddle time . ;)
  • Hippias

    Posts: 10195

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    How would you like to see item decay implemented for player bases/homesteads?

    I remember dev talk from way back about using the ship damage / worn out effect on planetside buildings, sharing the tech. So I'd guess if that were the case it would also apply to personal hangars, org bases, warehouse rentals, etc.

    Perhaps certain weathering effects happen to buildings depending on the particular planet's environment and / or local star?




    [hide]

    Should player bases be invulnerable to attack and theft, like hangars?

    Some base types I made up a while back, ordered by weapons restriction / invites. This also assumes org hangar upgrades like an airport customs security checkpoint at the org hangars front area (like the planetside customs areas). Also assumes any gun fights in hangars might damage ships, equipment, etc.

    https://forums.robertsspaceindustries.com/discussion/116074/idea-players-designating-their-own-wepons-restrictions-within-hangars-apartments
    [hide]

    Type 1 - All Hangars Planetside or Space - Completely Safe Hangars

    What we have now. Hangars & proposed Org Hangars. Visitors allowed (invite only) but no fighting.




    Type 2a - Planetside Org Hangar - No Weapons Restrictions

    Visitors allowed (invite only). No weapons restrictions. Because this hangar is "invite only" it cannot be attacked or accessed from the outside. Probably located in a UEE secured zone.

    Even though it cannot be attacked from the outside, invited vistor(s) turned hostile do have a chance to kill everyone and steal everything.




    Type 2b - Planetside Org Hangar - No Weapons Restrictions & Persistent

    This type of base is usually located on a barren or sparsely populated world (think of the Mass Effect 1 bases). It can be attacked and accessed from the outside. It's a futuristic castle run by an org. You might need to drive with a Rover to reach it, could be far away from the public planetside spaceship port. Or possibly some Redeemer / Retaliator infantry drops a few km away from the base like a marshaling area for would-be attackers.

    This spawn area changes so the castle's forward scouts need to patrol the castle's outer perimeter with Drake space bike land variants and rovers.




    Type 3 - Persistent Space Bases

    Bengals, Space Stations, hidden smuggler's asteroids, etc.

  • RKDN

    Posts: 325

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    Assuming things work like you anticipate I'd add some degree of randomness as well (outside of a known reasonable minimum amount of time). If not there will be gamey things like flocks of people standing over a building about to expire so they can drop their own.

    Also strong enforcement by developers on rules to things in line with the scope of the game. No bases that look like penises or spell profanities for example.

    I'm not sure how I feel about giving this level of control to players but I'll keep an open mind.I never got my castle in Ultima Online so I'm overdue anyway.

    A couple of comments...

    The first point is an excellent one. To reference Wurm again, they use a deed system with a recurring fee to maintain ownership of a plot of land. Doing anything on a spot depends on whether it's currently owned, and the permissions assigned by the owner, regardless of whether there are structures there. This is far better than the situation you describe. That happens often in Archeage, I think the way they handle it is a bit of a joke.

    However, this also means if you take a break you might come back to a stranger living on your land. I prefer EVE's system where it automatically deducts rent payments for offices etc. from your account every month even if you haven't logged in. So you can take a break as long as you can cover the bills.

    One the second point, bases are currently planned to be modular (unlike Wurm where you can build whatever you can imagine). So CIG would have a lot of control over how they look.
    A recurring fee may not work in the context of this game. Just to talk this through Star Citizen is supposed to be balanced for solo and small group play. Eve is aimed at Org play. Our Orgs are supposed to be fighting for specific stations and persistent Bengals not dominating planets. If bases are truly permanent then it's likely that Orgs will eventually pick up all the good spots and will eventually use that for territorial control which are things the developers were trying to avoid. I don't want to talk for Tony Z but I'm pretty sure he's going to be looking at ways these bases don't become truly permanent. I think this is the root of his comment about how the Universe is vast and if you want to set up a farm somewhere remote you'll probably be ok but there's always the chance someone will come along and find you. If it was permanent and indestructible I don't think he would have bothered with the clarification.

    My best interpretation with the limited info we have is that bases will serve some role in the game, usually harvesting/farming/resource gathering of some sort and won't be bases that serve as permanent locations. I imagine it is even possible the node a base sits on could dry up. What makes it interesting is that you can trick everything out and do so much but at the end of the day I think these things will come and go. Either by being attacked or just picked up and moved by the player to a better spot.

    I can't wait to find out more.
    A little presumptuous in your statement of what orgs are supposed to do.

    The trouble with Eve is that there are no limits to growth at all. They expanded almost infinitely and destroyed the game. Hence the need for a max-count on structures (and hangars). Credits (money) alone is not an impediment to large orgs.

    Loner and individualist engaged in the practice of quiet nonconformity.
  • Miggins

    Posts: 6721

    Posted:
    Edited: by Miggins
    Posted:
    Edited:
    The most simple answer would be that, provided the owner was around the location of the planetary base or homestead, the decay timer gets reset provided the player is at that location, only if the owner abandons the location and stops visiting the location would the decay really begin, maybe after a month of "abandonment".

    We know about the player being able to manually repair ships and ship systems, and this same mechanic could be ported over for use on a homestead or base, and repairing an abandonned (and decayed) location transfers ownership to the player (or organisation) that founf it in a state of decay and repaired it.

    Find a decayed outpost and repair it to full then that outpost becomes "yours" and it's you being around that resets the decay timer until you decide to go someplace else.

    In game lore the characters would be doing lots of small maintenance jobs on the ground base whilst the player was offline or AFK, or maybe even employing a caretaker NPC for the location, and that's why the location does not seem to decay when the player might not actually do any "repair actions" to keep it in repair (providing they were "the owner" and visited regularly or employed a caretaker), and the locations only really begin to decay again when that new owner is not there using the place.
    i7/860 @ 2.8Ghz - 20G RAM - MSI GTX670 PE (driver 378.66) - W7/64 Pro.
  • DaleChristopher

    Posts: 2177

    Posted:
    Edited: by DaleChristopher
    Posted:
    Edited:
    There may be some more quotes of interest in.... I think it was the ATV or RTV where they made the crashed SF. I think the Dev who wears the Alien (Wayland-Yutani?) hat was talking about how ships etc on planets would wear over time.

    I'll have a quick look, if I find it I'll put a timestamp...

    (edit* couldn't find it... it lost to the ages.)
    AVENGER PILOT...It was a decent ship once... thanks a lot Obama...
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12434

    Posted:
    Edited: by Eschatos
    Posted:
    Edited:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    [hide]

    Assuming things work like you anticipate I'd add some degree of randomness as well (outside of a known reasonable minimum amount of time). If not there will be gamey things like flocks of people standing over a building about to expire so they can drop their own.

    Also strong enforcement by developers on rules to things in line with the scope of the game. No bases that look like penises or spell profanities for example.

    I'm not sure how I feel about giving this level of control to players but I'll keep an open mind.I never got my castle in Ultima Online so I'm overdue anyway.

    A couple of comments...

    The first point is an excellent one. To reference Wurm again, they use a deed system with a recurring fee to maintain ownership of a plot of land. Doing anything on a spot depends on whether it's currently owned, and the permissions assigned by the owner, regardless of whether there are structures there. This is far better than the situation you describe. That happens often in Archeage, I think the way they handle it is a bit of a joke.

    However, this also means if you take a break you might come back to a stranger living on your land. I prefer EVE's system where it automatically deducts rent payments for offices etc. from your account every month even if you haven't logged in. So you can take a break as long as you can cover the bills.

    One the second point, bases are currently planned to be modular (unlike Wurm where you can build whatever you can imagine). So CIG would have a lot of control over how they look.
    A recurring fee may not work in the context of this game. Just to talk this through Star Citizen is supposed to be balanced for solo and small group play. Eve is aimed at Org play. Our Orgs are supposed to be fighting for specific stations and persistent Bengals not dominating planets. If bases are truly permanent then it's likely that Orgs will eventually pick up all the good spots and will eventually use that for territorial control which are things the developers were trying to avoid. I don't want to talk for Tony Z but I'm pretty sure he's going to be looking at ways these bases don't become truly permanent. I think this is the root of his comment about how the Universe is vast and if you want to set up a farm somewhere remote you'll probably be ok but there's always the chance someone will come along and find you. If it was permanent and indestructible I don't think he would have bothered with the clarification.

    My best interpretation with the limited info we have is that bases will serve some role in the game, usually harvesting/farming/resource gathering of some sort and won't be bases that serve as permanent locations. I imagine it is even possible the node a base sits on could dry up. What makes it interesting is that you can trick everything out and do so much but at the end of the day I think these things will come and go. Either by being attacked or just picked up and moved by the player to a better spot.

    I can't wait to find out more.
    On resources drying up, yes I believe that's already confirmed. Finding new resource deposits will be one of the key services that explorers provide.

    And I think that (semi-finite resources) goes a long way towards discouraging EVE-style strongholds - at least in any way that adversely affects the rest of the player population. What I'm not clear on is how making bases require maintenance would prevent orgs from holding on to them, since all they'd have to do is... maintain them.

    If the goal is to prevent one group from dominating an area, a much better approach, in my opinion, would be to have rules around where bases can be and how far apart from each other. As well as cleverly placed NPC structures, NPC faction borders, areas of economic control/influence and so on.
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    PLEASE VOTE >>
  • Ibly1

    Posts: 3346

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    The most simple answer would be that, provided the owner was around the location of the planetary base or homestead, the decay timer gets reset provided the player is at that location, only if the owner abandons the location and stops visiting the location would the decay really begin, maybe after a month of "abandonment".

    We know about the player being able to manually repair ships and ship systems, and this same mechanic could be ported over for use on a homestead or base, and repairing an abandonned (and decayed) location transfers ownership to the player (or organisation) that founf it in a state of decay and repaired it.

    Find a decayed outpost and repair it to full then that outpost becomes "yours" and it's you being around that resets the decay timer until you decide to go someplace else.

    In game lore the characters would be doing lots of small maintenance jobs on the ground base whilst the player was offline or AFK, or maybe even employing a caretaker NPC for the location, and that's why the location does not seem to decay when the player might not actually do any "repair actions" to keep it in repair (providing they were "the owner" and visited regularly or employed a caretaker), and the locations only really begin to decay again when that new owner is not there using the place.

    The more I think about it the more I think the solution is actually in understanding what bases actually do. Why do we have them? What are they for? If they are for harvesting then the node is going to dry up eventually.

    Let's theorycraft a bit about how they actually fit into Star Citizen's gameplay with the real mechanics we know so far.

    1. An explorer finds a hyper valuable gold mine and sells the info to you the player.
    2. The prospector was great starting out but this was an expensive purchase so you want to deploy a mining base so you can get the valuable ore out of the ground as fast as possible.
    3. Because this was an expensive purchase you opt to build the base on the node and then spend the extra money and time to add modules for defense and facilities for npcs to guard and operate and a few other upgrades. The Verse is huge but you know there's always the chance you'll be found.
    4. Either the base is attacked and taken by someone else or you stay there until the node is depleted.
    5. In either case when the node is depleted either you or the pirate would disassemble the base and ship it off. Subject to whatever rules and consequences we end up with for piracy if applicable.

    That's what's missing in our conversation. We are trying to establish the rules before we even know the purpose. There may be no need for all these complications if bases serve a purpose.
  • Mazive

    Posts: 4063

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I hope that there is some sort of game mechanic that will allow those who don't want to delve too deeply into this, to do so easily. For example, if my hangar, or home gets dirty, there should be a maid service, or robots to buy to clean them up. Something that will allow for the casuals to play without facing some level of apathetic penalty. Basically an ease of use function.

    I'm not saying that I'm going casual, but that casuals will be a facet that will help this game grow. It is an MMO. People attract people.

    This ^^
    I'm more than a casual player, but less than Hard Core.
    4 hours a day about.

    But there are some things that I just don't want to fool with.
    Eating, pooping, maintenance, loading/unloading, and every other mundane task that rears its head.

    Hopefully there will be a form of mechanic to either automatically deal with the issue, or at least something that will take care of it with a click of a button.
    [EXAMPLE]
    The hangar is starting to get a little rusty... pull out your Mobi-Glass, hit a drop down menu, and click 'Paint Hangar: 150 UEC' and bam....it's done.

    It's ok that some of us want to min/max or role play to the point of putting fork to food, or having to sit on the toilet, take a shower, remove cargo from the hold one box at a time, go to the bank to get their paycheck, paint the walls, sweep and mop the floor, whatever; But it's wrong to force that type of game play on everyone.


    chris update _zpssq4hgwgb.gif
  • Royalkin

    Posts: 1175

    Posted:
    Posted:
    I'm of the opinion that bases and outposts shouldn't be impervious. They should be susceptible to the environment just as ships and characters would be, and anything left abandoned for a long period of time should show visible signs of age and decay. I would surmise as well that after a certain period of time, it would no longer be repairable and only salvageable for scrap.

    In terms of defense, I seem to remember Chris or maybe Tony mentioned defenses. In particular, they mentioned that players would be able to "hide" the presence of the base from scans, but I assume there would be a way around that. I assume that would comprise the first layer of defense, and the second would include countermeasures. These things could include auto-turrets, booby traps, and false scanner data. Then perhaps, the third layer might include regular security. Things such as magnetic/electrical locks, biometrics, and etc., all of which I assume could be hacked with the proper skill and equipment.

    With everything they've talked about in the videos and articles, it sounds very exciting, though. Even if it is very early along.
    HDN3bkj.gif
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12434

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    [hide]

    The most simple answer would be that, provided the owner was around the location of the planetary base or homestead, the decay timer gets reset provided the player is at that location, only if the owner abandons the location and stops visiting the location would the decay really begin, maybe after a month of "abandonment".

    We know about the player being able to manually repair ships and ship systems, and this same mechanic could be ported over for use on a homestead or base, and repairing an abandonned (and decayed) location transfers ownership to the player (or organisation) that founf it in a state of decay and repaired it.

    Find a decayed outpost and repair it to full then that outpost becomes "yours" and it's you being around that resets the decay timer until you decide to go someplace else.

    In game lore the characters would be doing lots of small maintenance jobs on the ground base whilst the player was offline or AFK, or maybe even employing a caretaker NPC for the location, and that's why the location does not seem to decay when the player might not actually do any "repair actions" to keep it in repair (providing they were "the owner" and visited regularly or employed a caretaker), and the locations only really begin to decay again when that new owner is not there using the place.

    The more I think about it the more I think the solution is actually in understanding what bases actually do. Why do we have them? What are they for? If they are for harvesting then the node is going to dry up eventually.

    Let's theorycraft a bit about how they actually fit into Star Citizen's gameplay with the real mechanics we know so far.

    1. An explorer finds a hyper valuable gold mine and sells the info to you the player.
    2. The prospector was great starting out but this was an expensive purchase so you want to deploy a mining base so you can get the valuable ore out of the ground as fast as possible.
    3. Because this was an expensive purchase you opt to build the base on the node and then spend the extra money and time to add modules for defense and facilities for npcs to guard and operate and a few other upgrades. The Verse is huge but you know there's always the chance you'll be found.
    4. Either the base is attacked and taken by someone else or you stay there until the node is depleted.
    5. In either case when the node is depleted either you or the pirate would disassemble the base and ship it off. Subject to whatever rules and consequences we end up with for piracy if applicable.

    That's what's missing in our conversation. We are trying to establish the rules before we even know the purpose. There may be no need for all these complications if bases serve a purpose.
    Good post. While I agree with the above, for my part I think a player base, for some people, often serves a much less tangible purpose. That of having a home base, an area you can customize and call your own that gives you a feeling of place and permanence in the PU. Simply put, I wouldn't necessarily abandon a base just because the local resources are depleted, although that might play a part in the decision to move.
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    PLEASE VOTE >>
  • Eschatos

    Posts: 12434

    Posted:
    Posted:
    [hide]

    I'm of the opinion that bases and outposts shouldn't be impervious. They should be susceptible to the environment just as ships and characters would be, and anything left abandoned for a long period of time should show visible signs of age and decay. I would surmise as well that after a certain period of time, it would no longer be repairable and only salvageable for scrap.

    In terms of defense, I seem to remember Chris or maybe Tony mentioned defenses. In particular, they mentioned that players would be able to "hide" the presence of the base from scans, but I assume there would be a way around that. I assume that would comprise the first layer of defense, and the second would include countermeasures. These things could include auto-turrets, booby traps, and false scanner data. Then perhaps, the third layer might include regular security. Things such as magnetic/electrical locks, biometrics, and etc., all of which I assume could be hacked with the proper skill and equipment.

    With everything they've talked about in the videos and articles, it sounds very exciting, though. Even if it is very early along.

    That pretty much sums up my interpretation, Dan T's interview seems to back a lot of that up, as well as Tony Z's comments about trying to stay off the grid.
    The Convoy™7Txqb5L.png est. 2943
    PLEASE VOTE >>
Sign In or Register to comment.