Changes are needed for making claims at new outposts

[Zador]

Looking at it from the other perspective, how do you know that other person didn't also have the target system in mind, and was going to chain there just like you, but you "stole" the chain system from them, so they waited until you'd finished so that they could take the target system they were also aiming for?
If someone else had claimed that chain system would you have given up all hope of the target system or would you have taken it when it became available?

 

[Jmanis]

So, the suggestion seems to be "architect gets first claim from the system".
Here's my questions:

- Context is someone doing the effort to slap out a daisy chain a long way out for a specific system. If Architect gets the first claim... then what if someone camps out to the penultimate system, and rushes that last hop to cover the same system and gets it under someone's nose again. Is that unfair too? Do we continue hopping out more and more until it's just "only the system architect can claim from their systems"?... if N is bad, then surely N+1 is too, but that feels very unsustainable.

- What if the system is a gateway to another smaller pocket, and the architect simply never stakes their first claim?

- What if a coordinated group did similar to the above, but to box out a whole section of space

There's other things too, but my point is, these things cut both ways.... I'm not saying the current way is "the best", but alternatives have their problems too which, imo, don't make it any better.

 

[winchester1188]

Nothing got stolen, as you didn't own the system in the first place. So once available it is available for anyone who wants to claim it, for whatever reasons their heart desires.

I have seen a few thread claiming that they should have first dibs because <insert reason here>. My question is how long should everyone else in the game have to wait whilst you procrastinate on what you want to do next, a day, a month or even a year. I am not there for you on this one.

First in, first serve is the fair way imo, even if it doesn't fit into your personal head cannon.

Did you read the entire thread? I feel like the reasons mentioned as to why it isn't fair were valid. The two biggest ones being: some CMDRs are finishing other people's systems while they're offline and sniping their claims. That's not very fair to the lone architect who can't complete an outpost in a single sitting. What are your thoughts on people camping out waiting for the outpost? They have a head start on the architect who are dropping off their last load, and possibly in a ship for a large landing pad. The architect doesn't have as easy of a job getting to the outpost. Do you think it would be more fair to mitigate these issues by letting the architect commission the station within a reasonable amount of time? I saw the server tick suggested in this thread as one possibility that seemed reasonable. What if once the architect triggered the deployment of the outpost, there was a countdown visible to everyone in the system so they stand a chance against campers? Or do you think the current system is more fair?

 

[winchester1188]

Looking at it from the other perspective, how do you know that other person didn't also have the target system in mind, and was going to chain there just like you, but you "stole" the chain system from them, so they waited until you'd finished so that they could take the target system they were also aiming for?
If someone else had claimed that chain system would you have given up all hope of the target system or would you have taken it when it became available?

That's a very fair point. All I'll say is it would have to be a crazy coincidence that I saw a system was available, flew a few hundred light years to get there, and it was still available, and then snatched it up a split second before they did. It was sitting available for at least 20 to 30 minutes that I'm aware of before I claimed it. If someone else was going to claim it, they weren't in a hurry. But that's a valid point, for sure.

 

[winchester1188]

So, the suggestion seems to be "architect gets first claim from the system".
Here's my questions:

- Context is someone doing the effort to slap out a daisy chain a long way out for a specific system. If Architect gets the first claim... then what if someone camps out to the penultimate system, and rushes that last hop to cover the same system and gets it under someone's nose again. Is that unfair too? Do we continue hopping out more and more until it's just "only the system architect can claim from their systems"?... if N is bad, then surely N+1 is too, but that feels very unsustainable.

- What if the system is a gateway to another smaller pocket, and the architect simply never stakes their first claim?

- What if a coordinated group did similar to the above, but to box out a whole section of space

There's other things too, but my point is, these things cut both ways.... I'm not saying the current way is "the best", but alternatives have their problems too which, imo, don't make it any better.

Yeah, that's fair. Like I mentioned above, maybe the solution is once you've completed the outpost, the deployment is delayed with a timer in the system to give the architect an equal chance at the outpost.

 

[Zador]

I actually experienced the opposite of the "architect gets first dibs" with my station, which seems to be a bug quite a few people have hit. I logged out after completing the port, and when logged back in again I could not access the colonisation contact. All construction points were grey and I still had the mission to complete the initial port. For 24 hours I was not able to use the colonisation contact to create a new colony, but others were able to.

 

[AngryAntz]

Yes I read it. You start by accusing a cmdr of stealling a system you wanted, because it has an easy to remember name. Others would have noticed the same thing.

Then you go on to state your idea about not completing until you tell it to, with the caveat of completing automatically at the next tick. So what happens if construction completes 1 minute before the tick and the cmdr is off line. Should they miss out on the "benefits" you suggest your idea brings because of unfortunate timing?

What happens when claim expiry comes into play. The cmdr does their last delivery, construction completes and your suggested game play mechanic kicks in so it waits and their claim expires before the next tick. Under the current system, they will be the "owners" of the system. Under your system, because they forgot (or for RL reasons) to come back for 5 seconds to press the go button, they have lost their claim and all their resources.

Why do you want this. Because you believe it will give you the best chance for you to claim dibs on a system that you only are entitled to, in your head cannon.

There should never be a mechanic in game that allows any player (or squadron) to claim dibs on a system under any curcumstances imo. Granted your suggestion is only asking for the best chance for you to claim dibs, but others in this thread (and similar threads) have made suggestions that out and out block other players whilst they procrastinate on what they want to do next.

Does "first come, first serve" have it's issue... yes. Every "solution" will have issues, including yours. No game, an MMO especially, can be designed to stop every action that people may take.

 

[Brieus]

Nothing got stolen, as you didn't own the system in the first place. So once available it is available for anyone who wants to claim it, for whatever reasons their heart desires.

I have seen a few thread claiming that they should have first dibs because <insert reason here>. My question is how long should everyone else in the game have to wait whilst you procrastinate on what you want to do next, a day, a month or even a year. I am not there for you on this one.

First in, first serve is the fair way imo, even if it doesn't fit into your personal head cannon.

Yeah! And all those people stupid enough to haul freight in Open deserve to be shown the error of their ways too!

 

[AngryAntz]

Yeah! And all those people stupid enough to haul freight in Open deserve to be shown the error of their ways too!

I haul freight in open, it's my favourite thing to do (according to my cmdr stats).

I did put weapons on my T9 for the first time a couple days ago. Don't worry gankers, you're safe, they were my first attempt at engineering when I started the game a few years ago and I am a terrible shot anyway.

 

[DemiserofD]

It does seem to be somewhat problematic that people can steal a good system after a gateway system. That could create situations where nobody wants to build because everyone wants to wait.

I'd be fine with only the system architect getting first rights on adjacent systems for a bit. Wouldn't need to be long. Seems fair.

 

[winchester1188]

Yes I read it. You start by accusing a cmdr of stealling a system you wanted, because it has an easy to remember name. Others would have noticed the same thing.

Then you go on to state your idea about not completing until you tell it to, with the caveat of completing automatically at the next tick. So what happens if construction completes 1 minute before the tick and the cmdr is off line. Should they miss out on the "benefits" you suggest your idea brings because of unfortunate timing?

What happens when claim expiry comes into play. The cmdr does their last delivery, construction completes and your suggested game play mechanic kicks in so it waits and their claim expires before the next tick. Under the current system, they will be the "owners" of the system. Under your system, because they forgot (or for RL reasons) to come back for 5 seconds to press the go button, they have lost their claim and all their resources.

Why do you want this. Because you believe it will give you the best chance for you to claim dibs on a system that you only are entitled to, in your head cannon.

There should never be a mechanic in game that allows any player (or squadron) to claim dibs on a system under any curcumstances imo. Granted your suggestion is only asking for the best chance for you to claim dibs, but others in this thread (and similar threads) have made suggestions that out and out block other players whilst they procrastinate on what they want to do next.

Does "first come, first serve" have it's issue... yes. Every "solution" will have issues, including yours. No game, an MMO especially, can be designed to stop every action that people may take.

That's a wild take to accuse me of being self serving. There's a balance issue with the gameplay and beta testing is the time to bring that up. It doesn't mean I have the answer. I'm just throwing out ideas as others have as well. A solution would help all architects who put in the work, not to specifically help me call dibs. Right now, the architect is inherently at a disadvantage. And also your concern is that the commander might "forget" to press the go button sounds like a non issue to me. Receiving notifications of time sensitive missions is already a core mechanic of the game. I think we'd be fine. You're critical of the ideas and made some baseless accusations about entitlement and "head cannon" instead of answering my questions regarding whether or not you think the current gameplay is actually fair considering the concerns that I and others already brought up.

 

[AngryAntz]

That's a wild take to accuse me of being self serving. There's a balance issue with the gameplay and beta testing is the time to bring that up. It doesn't mean I have the answer. I'm just throwing out ideas as others have as well. A solution would help all architects who put in the work, not to specifically help me call dibs. Right now, the architect is inherently at a disadvantage. And also your concern is that the commander might "forget" to press the go button sounds like a non issue to me. Receiving notifications of time sensitive missions is already a core mechanic of the game. I think we'd be fine. You're critical of the ideas and made some baseless accusations about entitlement and "head cannon" instead of answering my questions regarding whether or not you think the current gameplay is actually fair considering the concerns that I and others already brought up.

Sorry for not making myself clear. The answer to your question on the current gameplay - No system is going to be "fair" to everyone, but I believe the current system is as fair as can me expected in an MMO. You are welcome to agree or disagree with my opinion as you see fit.

Have a nice day mate.

 

[DemiserofD]

Sorry for not making myself clear. The answer to your question on the current gameplay - No system is going to be "fair" to everyone, but I believe the current system is as fair as can me expected in an MMO. You are welcome to agree or disagree with my opinion as you see fit.

Have a nice day mate.

I prefer to approach things like this from a utilitarian perspective.

Imagine, for example, that there is a system multiple players want, and it's 25ly from the closest inhabited system. You know that whoever builds THAT station will put in a large amount of effort and likely will not get to make the actual claim themselves, because the time required to finish the station will slow them down enough to give the advantage to other players.

This creates a classic prisoner's dilemma.

If you build and nobody steals, you get 10, they lose 1 in opportunity cost, and everyone averages about 4.5. By contrast, if you build and they steal, they win, and you lose all your effort, so on average everyone loses 0.5. Of course, nobody wants do do this, since the consequences of loss are so severe. It's far better to wait for the other person to build and then steal.

So nobody builds anything, and EVERYONE loses 1. It's a classic prisoner's dilemma, where if everyone cooperates and works together everyone wins overall, but because it's personally more beneficial to exploit the system, everyone attempts to cheat and everyone loses.

Especially in games, it's best if systems are fair and ultimately encourage cooperation, not exploitation.

 

[photomankc]

So, the suggestion seems to be "architect gets first claim from the system".
Here's my questions:

- Context is someone doing the effort to slap out a daisy chain a long way out for a specific system. If Architect gets the first claim... then what if someone camps out to the penultimate system, and rushes that last hop to cover the same system and gets it under someone's nose again. Is that unfair too? Do we continue hopping out more and more until it's just "only the system architect can claim from their systems"?... if N is bad, then surely N+1 is too, but that feels very unsustainable.

- What if the system is a gateway to another smaller pocket, and the architect simply never stakes their first claim?

- What if a coordinated group did similar to the above, but to box out a whole section of space

There's other things too, but my point is, these things cut both ways.... I'm not saying the current way is "the best", but alternatives have their problems too which, imo, don't make it any better.

Hmmm. It's late here and I read this a few times and I think maybe I know what you are getting at but I think it is a non-issue unless I misunderstand. The system at least I think makes sense is that a star system colonization is completed and there is a cool-down period. In that cooldown nobody except perhaps the architect can use the new station's contact to claim any new system. This is true for all N along the trail. So if:

A -> B -> C -> D (with D being the goal)

At the point that B is built, it is not possible for the non-architect camping player to then colonize ANY system using B for some time period. After the cooldown of course any player can then expand off of B to other systems but the player that built B will likely have already made the claim on C. So there is not way to snipe the next to the next to the last system to cut off the architect trying to reach D. At least not to my 1AM brain.


Your second question I don't really understand. If they don't stake a claim how would there be any conflict? Someone else will.


Last question, since the cooldown is time based there is no way to really box out much space that I can think of. There might be an intial advantage to that group, which I see as prefectly reasonable, but once the cooldown ends then their systems can not block others from using the colonzation contact.


It seems like your view of the request is to have all others blocked indefinately until the architect has made his selection and only then open up to others. That would be something I think would not be an acceptable way to handle things.

If I were King of FDev my implentation would not allow expansion from a system for anyone until the system has the requiste 'points' to support an expansion. I'd do something else other than 15LY limit. Something more along the lines of very fast colonization within 20LY as it is now but ramping up dramatically in cost and time to deployment for greater distances up to say 200LY and allow arbitrary distance claims to be made to first discovered systems but with a limit of 1 or 2. This would wildly reduce the amount of stupid derelict outposts that are going to litter the gallaxy very soon. You can reserve your perfect system out there and work your way to it in a somewhat reasonable fashion. I'm sure there are some flaws in my thinking but I'm not looking forward to a sky full of outposts orbiting empty stars trying to get out 5KLY to something in the black.

 

[St0rmFury]

At least this cmdr is nice enough to ask

 

[photomankc]

LOL... Has this guy never actually met another gamer? I predict sorrow.

 

[Danieros]

Colonisation's motto has been "first come, first serve". There isn't even a grace period to who first discovered a system and long dreamed to become its architect.

I'm not a fan of the architect getting priority to first using its colonisation contact, as anyone can help the system.

It makes sense in my opinion if there's a minimum tonnage assistance requirement (except for the architect), just like some MMOs protect kill/loot stealing if the other player doesn't deal enough damage. But even then, it'd be just for a period.

 

[Jmanis]

Hmmm. It's late here and I read this a few times and I think maybe I know what you are getting at but I think it is a non-issue unless I misunderstand. The system at least I think makes sense is that a star system colonization is completed and there is a cool-down period. In that cooldown nobody except perhaps the architect can use the new station's contact to claim any new system. This is true for all N along the trail. So if:
<snip>

To be blunt, I find any sort of convoluted mechanics which provide arbitrary time gates to limit the activity of others just plain bad design.

My first point about "sniping" is one like this:
Just say there was a system, 1500 LY away, so requiring at least 100 intermediate colonies... let's call it 110 colonies, so that there's no assurance that the penultimate system is the only system that can reach it. And let's represent this as 1->2->3->4....->108->109->110.

Issue seems to be the op build 109, and then old mate took 110. So the OP wants first dibs on 110.

But 109, in most cases, isn't the only system in range of 110. So OP finishes 108, and starts 109. So me and my crew, from 108, having waited with lots of prep time for the OP to bridge this gap. Cooldown is now gone, so from 108 we then drop 109a, a different system that can still reach 110. And we've been waiting for this... and finish it in, like, 30 minutes. We've now finished, and so we grab 110, and then we've got the same conversation we're having here.... but about this tactic... it's just an unwinnable arms race.

More broadly, I have problems with these mechanics which "protect" players through somewhat arbitrary time gates and such like this, because it creates a false sense of entitlement and a more toxic play environment as players grow the expectation that any arbitrary system that they've decided they want to colonise that's going to be difficult to get to, presume it's their right and nobody elses to get it.

Such mechanics also foster groups to coordinate and control areas they set their minds to... and so when a single player trots over and plonks down one colony that they don't realise is "disruptive" to some group's plans, the bullying starts.

"No rules" means for better or worse, first in, best dressed, too bad, so sad. They might be seen as a troll, but there's nothing to back that.
"Limited rules" means an expectation for the spirit of those rules to be enforced, and so anyone doing something that gets them around that even if it's enitirely plausible like simply building an alternate pathway faster, will inherently be seen as a troll or griefer (and unfairly so) at that. It fosters more toxic behaviours than simply having no rules, imo.

So, I prefer "no rules" here for better or worse, because any rules would get gamed in a way that promotes toxic gatekeeping behaviours.

If I were King of FDev my implentation would not allow expansion from a system for anyone until the system has the requiste 'points' to support an expansion. I'd do something else other than 15LY limit. Something more along the lines of very fast colonization within 20LY as it is now but ramping up dramatically in cost and time to deployment for greater distances up to say 200LY and allow arbitrary distance claims to be made to first discovered systems but with a limit of 1 or 2. This would wildly reduce the amount of stupid derelict outposts that are going to litter the gallaxy very soon. You can reserve your perfect system out there and work your way to it in a somewhat reasonable fashion. I'm sure there are some flaws in my thinking but I'm not looking forward to a sky full of outposts orbiting empty stars trying to get out 5KLY to something in the black.

I did a post in the feedback thread that got lost among the "Colonisation is disabled" rush which actually spoke a bit to the reverse of things like this... right now Colonisation feels horribly weighted in favour of expanding out rather than building up. I don't think it helps the OP's case, in fact it could even work against it. There's no impetus to build up because you can always come back to it another day... but rest a while on expanding out, and you could lose opportunity to grab systems to build up.

I think that's what's in need of change the most tbh.

 

[Astrometer]

Just make the claim system an auction. 24Hrs without being outbid and the claim is yours.

 

[Bigmaec]

Or give a first discoverer the option to reserve a claim. Maybe even for Arx, although I would prefer for ingame currency. That would also reward exploration. Question ist what to do with older first discoveries.