Player-centric Game Features

• Player owned real-estate. I think there is nothing better at hooking a player into a lifelong commitment to playing a game, than if they have their own little piece of property. Other players should be able to see it. But not interfere with it.

DWM Not sure about real estate per se -- this is space, after all -- but I could definitely see property, such as ships, and leased space on stations. And eventually, stations themselves (or large ships serving as such). Planting a ship or station in a random spot in space might make you an effective squatter, but I doubt there'd be any need for a deed! Space is BIG. DWM (much later...) Perhaps registering "real estate" that you've discovered, e.g. asteroids, would give you official ownership and perhaps some right to some degree of protection from the government (if that fits the rest of the game). OTOH, you might have the option of just keeping it quiet and hoping nobody else stumbles on it. Adding (expensive) automated defenses should be an option in any case. Istvan I'm very much in favor of "claims" on things like asteroids or salvageable debris. Backstory could cover planetary surface claims (or the prevention of such) as needed. DWM Proposal: First person to scan a body over a certain size and characterize its motion (or first person to explore the interior of an unnamed solar system) can register that information and a name with a cartographic organization. After (human) approval of the name, it sticks. Not sure what the criteria should be for establishing ownership claim; a simple fly-by doesn't seem like it merits such a privilege. Istvan Addendum - characterization of mineral content is a reasonable criterion for claim on all or part of an asteroid body. Equipment to perform such characterization would be the logical tools of the trade for a professional prospector, who would then sell the claim or mineral rights to a corporation to exploit the rock should the prospector not be interested in changing profession to finance and perform the exploitation himself. Here's fun: separate mineral rights from construction rights. You'd need construction rights to build a habitat... creating a problem of "illegal" construction within the game environment. You'd track legality by checking a database to see if Corp X is registered with Government A to build on Asteroid Fred. This sounds convoluted at this early design stage, but mechanisms like this will be important for player and backstory-driven conflict generation.

• A "rap sheet" used to track a player's "alignment" and reputation. Each encounter with other ships would record information like who fired first, comparable ship/fleet sizes, and so on. It would also accept non-combat data. This info would be added to the system and gradually create the player's reputation among NPCs. Other players could access some of this information should other ships file reports. Again, not all reports will be complaints - some will be very dry and boring. Non-combat ideas: Did this guy give me a good deal on a trade? (purchasing agent, trader) Did he pay a decent salary? (crewmember) Did he strand me at another station because he found someone for less pay? (crewmember) Man, we better make good NP AI. :-)

Istvan Yah, ref comment above on AI - escalation of data storage to support this feature is probable. Istvan (much later) Addendum - a player chooses what government is the "registry" source for his ship. Registry and transponder ID (and this ID may be the key ID in the game's ID system - linked to player account) will link to the "rap sheet" - reputation and prestige system. The registry of a ship hull would tie actions attributable to that ship (missions, combats) into the Sociopolitics system, while its ownership by a player ties into the player's personal reputations with governments and corps. Repeated criminal actions might cause a ship's registry to be revoked, in which case the ship hull must be registered with another governemnt (but records would follow). We'll want to consider repercussions if a ship hull, due to history or plan of the owner, is and remains Unregistered - this should force all observers to consider the vessel and its pilot a potential hazard (always inspected, potentially fired upon with little legal repercussion, treated with extreme prejudice by military units if detected in a war zone, etc.). Istvan(much, much later) A pilot's rap sheet should definitely list the corporations and governments for whom he has performed jobs - unless the jobs were specifically "covert" and unrecorded. You'd be able to check a fellow pilot's public dossier and note that he has done work for Yoyodyne, Trilon Corp, and MarsGov....

• A broad licensure system. This system would in part conceptually substitute for some of the "level" function common in other games, by providing a varied structure of limited goals for players. Licenses or permits grant privileges to the holding party (which might be either an individual or organization), which open gameplay opportunities. Generally, licenses open an opportunity, while permits provide access. For example, one might be required to have a specific permit to enter a specific war zone as a civilian, or to deliver cargo to the research station in low orbit over Europa, while on the other hand one would be required to possess a general "independent teamster" license to accept a cargo-hauling mission from EarthGov. Licenses might be issued by corporations as well as governments. For example, Yoyodyne Corp. might issue its own cargo hauling license to pilots (distinct from corporation members/employees) who have demonstrated trustworthiness (meaning good reputation with Yoyodyne would be a requirement), which provides access to more choice hauling jobs on the boards. Licenses might require other licenses as prerequisites (Yoyodyne might only license pilots already licensed by EarthGov). Construction permits might simply cost money (and involve a check against reputation) - if you used an EarthGov construction permit to begin building a facility on an asteroid, and someone comes and blows up your facility, it's EarthGov who is going to be upset with the destroyer (besides you). Licenses might require payment of fees to maintain, and/or have a specific duration. In addition to licenses for roles (prospector licenses cause a particular government to acknowledge and maybe even enforce your claims), construction permits (allowing you to build stuff), and access permits (allowing you to dock at or pass through places), special types of licenses might include Letters of Marque (say, issued by EarthGov and actually giving you a rep bonus with Earthgov for blowing up MarsGov-registered ships! - note that's a non-military function, but usually only issued in time of hostilities at or approaching a state of war (EarthGov might not yet be willing to commit military forces)). Note that a licensure system ties to the prospects of a criminality and registry system - it might well be possible to perform actions without the right licenses, in which case your cargo might be contraband, or your facility on that asteroid might be unregistered. This risky behavior would automatically have benefits such as increased profit potential or reduced costs, but there would be a commensurate hazard in the form of fines if you are caught with contraband by a customs cutter or by lack of recourse to a government if your facility is unregistered. Creation of these systems, with ties into the player "rap sheets" and sociopolitical systems, opens new avenues for gameplay by creating all sorts of "grey market" and "black market" game potential.

DWM Ruminating on licensing and trading a bit: An entity that hires you to move their goods would probably require some form of licensing that attests to your skills (and/or other qualifications, such as carrying adequate insurance). A pilot operating in this mode is selling transport services, and is not really a trader -- this requires less capital investment and carries less risk (probably -- depending on liability and insurance structure). A true trader would be buying and selling goods, moving what they own, and neither end-point of the trades would give a hoot about pilot licensing. Higher profits to be found here, and due to less regulation, this is how most contraband would want to travel.

I like the idea of companies issuing their own licenses, either instead of or in addition to government-issued licenses - probably they would have their own training or testing prerequisites, which could be fun for players (and fun for us to design).

Istvan Yah, Dan. This distinction between traders and transporters, for momentary want of a better term (technically, I think the right historical term is teamsters), fits right in with some thoughts I had early this week (which motivated me to work on the Wiki, but I got busy with all the mess I made on Tuesday and didn't actually type them up - Doh!) about salaries and jobs. It occurred to me that Elite, and JumpGate, based the general plan of gameplay on the idea that players were going to have to make money to get by. One problem was that in order to give players lots of opportunity to make money, the game system pretty much throws money at players for everything they can do. Bad for economy. More important to what I'm trying to articulate, though, is that the games generally assume that their trading component is the chief and critical method all players must use to make money. JumpGate's mission system began to depart from this, but even so, it's weaker than the trade component. I am thinking that we may want to consider allowing not just short-term contract jobs (which will pretty much be no different from "missions"), but also longer-term "employment"-like relationships to form among players, and among combinations of players and Organizations. There have been times in other games where I've seen opportunities where player ability to hire another player would have been very beneficial for both sides, but where the game mechanics actually made it difficult.

Now, in order to prevent abuse of any employee-payment system, I'm sure we can't pay per absolute unit of time (hourly/daily, etc.). However, JumpGate actually tracked "duty hours", so I think this obstacle is quite surmountable. My first thought is to pay on a diminishing returns daycycle. Your first online duty hour in a given day pays your full rate, each subsequent hour less so, probably in a diminishing geometric progression, preventing people sitting online idly from making scads of cash.

Provision for employment and salary in this manner would make a substantial change in the civilian side of the game. Casual players might find it very beneficial to be a corporate employee, as their two-hour daily windows of activity would allow their pay to provide fairly high returns. Intensive players might be able to maximize their incomes by being fully independent, because they have the time to make lots of money trading or doing contracts/missions repeatedly.

Dwelling on this further, we'd distinguish between "members" of a corporate Organization, and "employees". A corp might want its long-term employees to have a certain decal or paint job on their ships, for ID purposes, of course. Vessel registry and transponder information might even show corp ownership, if that's appropriate. Market modules is stations owned by the corp might have particualr settings for Corp employees - or might only be accessible by said employees - allowing employees to simply pick up and move goods from one point to another without cash transactions.... mumbling randomly now. I'll reorganize these remarks when I have time.