[QUOTE=cevebed;46221261]Still think its a bad idea all together. New server u start from scratch and earn ur place. Nothing should travel cross server.
If the market place items are going to be the standard they should be effective only on the official servers.[/QUOTE]
But they are only blueprints. You still need to build your way up to building things.
Ultilitron, are the blueprint requirements and stats all going to be just again skin/models on top of standard objects-period? While most of TF2 marketplace does this, you can still find/trade new unique weaponry as well that can give someone an advantage. Also unlike TF2 we have an armor rating for clothing type.
The way I am understanding it... You will have multiple blueprints for the AK:
[IMG]https://trello-attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/52dd0fb645357d6f614646d1/53b18535f5177d4e86f34a41/827x600/9ea811cd2d7fe5afb6ba0535893efe63/Rustak47paulbradley.jpg[/IMG]
You can either find a blue print, find some's AK and [URL="https://trello.com/c/0uKYbycD/169-modify-researching-to-extend-gameplay"]research it[/URL]
[QUOTE]
- Researching destroys existing item
- Researching creates a partial blueprint (20-30%) or tries to add to an existing partial blueprint of the same item[/QUOTE]
Or trade for it.
This will allow you to create this item on any server, but you first have to obtain the [URL="http://www.reddit.com/r/playrust/comments/1u5kqp/i_am_garry_newman_ama/ceeqdh8"]components[/URL].
[QUOTE=garry]One of our ideas was to make military grade weapons craftable.. but have it involve a lot of work.. so it would take a lot of steps and a few hours to make one weapon. Eventually leading
to people creating weapons factories etc.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Or perhaps manufacturing individual components of the weapons themselves, then putting them together as the final steps?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=garry]Yep![/QUOTE]
This actually make the AK way more modular. If you break each weapon down to 5 smaller components that need to be made with 2 options each, you are actually looking at 5^2 permutations of the AK. So fixing a broken AK will require you to then find replacements.
I think if they have micro it should be for clothes , stuff like that, no weapons or anything.
I admit I'm still a little stunned this has actually progressed this far.
Why, if Rust is all about emergent gaming, is it anything but a complete reversal to ask for a click-to-trade instant-teleport-delivery system. Particularly after a year of players successfully trading goods and research in tense, armed encounters at the back of the Hangar... the way we thought we were supposed to?
Why, if Rust is all about building your server from scratch, would we want to allow anything material (and yes, avatar knowledge IS material) to cross servers? What's to stop grinding on megaloot servers and passing it over a la ISS?
If the items are in the game code, what's to stop server owners from unlocking them with mods? Why can't these special variation blueprints just be made rare drops on every server and traded normally? Because they have to be accessible from loot drops somewhere. Because the only alternative to get them onto the magical marketplace to begin with is ... a micro-transaction.
[QUOTE=utilitron;46222394]But they are only blueprints. You still need to build your way up to building things.[/QUOTE]
Blueprints should not cross server. This would create an unfair advantage. It has been said before u could easily go on a different server that allows u to aquire things easier or faster and get everything. As soon as u were to get on another server and u have all the blueprints from the last server u played on u would no dought have andvantage over other players. There is no way around that fact. no matter how hard the mats are to get u still have an advanage.
Now its completely different if we are talking about different skins or appearance. that wouldnt effect gameplay.
I really think Rust has no need for any tradeable items. No matter how much people hate it. Earning everything as u settle and create a home from scratch on a server is a huge aspect of the game and the risk of lossing everything on death or raid thats what keeps me coming back.
Immersion is a huge part of playing a game for me. There's a big difference between seeing an in-game item and thinking "I can get that if I collect enough metal and am lucky enough to find this jewel" and "I can get that if I log into paypal."
Obviously the balance matters—but to give somewhat of an extreme situation (so that people who currently don't, might find it easier to empathize with the sentiment):
Consider a survival game where everything a person pays real money for is purely aesthetic. People running around decked out with a bunch of stuff that [i]you can't get[/i] unless you pay more money than you already have makes the game feel cheap.
It's like going to a movie, and every time there's a CGI scene—something pops up and says "Would you like to purchase low-quality ($1), medium-quality ($2), or high-quality ($3) CGI for the next scene?"
[QUOTE=Zipper Bear;46212272]There is absolutely nothing wrong with paying for an item that's already obtainable via in-game methods. All you're doing is getting it faster than normal. The only kind of micro transaction that is bad is the kind that gives unfair advantages over people who don't pay. As long as garry stays away from that and keeps any and all micro transactions to a purely cosmetic or convenience type level, there shouldn't be anything to worry about.
It really is the best system for everyone; it gives players with extra spending cash a way to further support the developers of the games they love so much. It doesn't penalize the players who only wanted to play the base game without any further investment. And most interestingly, it could provide a sort of deterrent for cheaters. People are far less likely to give in to the urge to cheat if they run the risk of losing an extra 50-80 dollars on top of that 20 dollar base fee [/QUOTE]
Agree with your pov, but my worry here is they aren't just talking about 'cosmetic items'. And if they charge for weapons etc I really think it depends on how difficult it is to advance in game without paying cash... and unfortunately it is natural that the devs make it difficult to advance without paying cash... or why would anyone pay?
Using Planetside 2 as another example, anyone who plays will realise it takes hours and hours of gameplay to afford one or 2 gun upgrades. So whilst technically the cash payers are only paying for something that can be got for free, realistically if you don't pay you cannot achieve anywhere near the full experience.
In other words- the existence of micro transactions drastically affects the pace of the game for non-payers as it would otherwise be if those transactions didn't exist.
However... if you are only talking about non-game affecting items e.g. silly hats or penis-cammo... then I can't see the harm in taking cash off kids for pointless crap if it reduces the cost of my gaming ;)
Who here has had trouble telling people apart during a big battle, when everyone has kev and M4's? How about during a raid, when people are jumping in and out of rooms? Ever (almost) shoot a teammate because their name didn't pop up until the last second? Ever hesitate to shoot someone running towards you because you thought it was a teammate, but found out at the last minute it wasn't? Imagine if your whole team could be wearing mottled white while in the snow biome, or gravelly tan while in the desert, and what that would do for a firefight or ambush?
Silly cosmetic items or skins would probably have the least impact on gameplay, but let's not pretend they won't have some.
i find it fascinating how defensive people are about this. i'm hearing "unfair" and "gamebreaking" being thrown around a lot about special weopon blueprints, but it sounds more like scaremongering than actual rationale.
for example, if a player goes onto a x10 resource server with the "musket" blueprint that he bought, he will be able to build it exactly as fast as other players, exactly the same as he would be able to build the weopon on a server with normal resource collection. its not like he can bring the item he has built on the x10 back to the normal server. on each server his item stocks are seperately earned; its just that he has an extra default blueprint.
in addition, he can be killed and the weapon looted. the item he can make by default now becomes a potential commodity to any other player, especially if research kits exist in some form. and once researched, the item can be made by the new player whilst on that server round.
also, there is no reason servers can't restrict blueprints to vanilla items, or even purchase licenses to give everyone a "musket" blueprint as default on their server.
as for the balance of the items, it comes down to the auditing process. yes, the more items, the harder to ensure balance; but think about the weopon sets in legacy. who here uses a 9mm over a p250? anyone rush bases with a bolty? or try and snipe from their base with an mp5? it's a matter of ensuring the pros, cons and ingame costs balance out compared to vanilla gear.
[QUOTE=mrknifey;46230454]i find it fascinating how defensive people are about this. i'm hearing "unfair" and "gamebreaking" being thrown around a lot about special weopon blueprints, but it sounds more like scaremongering than actual rationale.
for example, if a player goes onto a x10 resource server with the "musket" blueprint that he bought, he will be able to build it exactly as fast as other players, exactly the same as he would be able to build the weopon on a server with normal resource collection. its not like he can bring the item he has built on the x10 back to the normal server. on each server his item stocks are seperately earned; its just that he has an extra default blueprint.
in addition, he can be killed and the weapon looted. the item he can make by default now becomes a potential commodity to any other player, especially if research kits exist in some form. and once researched, the item can be made by the new player whilst on that server round.
also, there is no reason servers can't restrict blueprints to vanilla items, or even purchase licenses to give everyone a "musket" blueprint as default on their server.
as for the balance of the items, it comes down to the auditing process. yes, the more items, the harder to ensure balance; but think about the weopon sets in legacy. who here uses a 9mm over a p250? anyone rush bases with a bolty? or try and snipe from their base with an mp5? it's a matter of ensuring the pros, cons and ingame costs balance out compared to vanilla gear.[/QUOTE]
***********Weapon**************** pls man you wrote weopon at least 3 times it hurts my brain
[QUOTE=Ram;46230689]***********Weapon**************** pls man you wrote weopon at least 3 times it hurts my brain[/QUOTE]
and you just wrote pls. this isn't a grammar and spelling competition mate, if you quote me i expect you to have a point to make beyond correcting my spelling.
Knifey, as someone already explained, the issue is if someone enters a server with blueprints already for a powerful weapon/armor, they do have an advantage. The other players will have to scavenge for blueprints, while this player can soley work on gathering the supplies to create this.
The 9mm vs p250 was a bad example. They were unbalanced. No one I played with or watched would even bother with a 9mm.
Someone in another thread mentioned the idea of blueprints instead being manuals that are books you can loose. If even purchased blueprints can be lost, and only effective per server, that might balance out. If blueprints are global and the player always gets them, and they arent just reskins of existing stock items, yes, you have entered the realm of pay 2 win.
If you want a fearmongering statement, here is one (more a question). If Garry finds no other choice (remember he said he wanted to avoid only), what would separate this from h1z1? I mean other than the nakeds and unsaid monsters vs zombies. H1z1 being built from the ground up as a micro transaction f2p model would seemingly have the advantage to get players. Why pay for a game and then pay more inside it when you can get it free and then pay more inside.
I was really on the fence about this subject, really don't like the Pay for content idea and every way i look at it it is pay to advance quicker, but here's the thing with dedicated server could you not just spawn in the needed blueprints/items as an admin then learn them, move to a populated server without the hard work anyway. so the trade value of any blueprints are gonna be uses less, if payed items are lootable what about admin abuse just hunting players using admin tools to take items to sell on the market.
i just see so many problems, i want to see the light at the end of the tunnel but can't
my point remains though oxy. it's a matter of balancing the "pay" blueprint so it is equivalent to "vanilla" gear in costs and benefits. provided that it is nothing more than a "flavor" of a currently present tool in the game (such as musket = short range spread weapon, balanced against the shotgun by higher metal cost, more spread, slower reload etc) it won't give an unfair advantage, just a different style/type of weapon to use. you still have to craft it, and you still can have it stolen.
its only when you start adding weapons like flamethrowers that A) are not appropriately costed in terms of resources [I]and/or[/I] B) are purchase only and not equivalent to anything in the game, that you will find people "need" to buy gear to "win". personally, if some guy pulls out a flamethrower, i'l intentionally hunt him to get one of my own; no need to buy it at all:)
the 9mm vs p250 argument did exactly what i intended; it pointed out that legacy had (and potentially experimental may have) issues with imbalanced weapons. regardless of whether or not micro-transactions come into play, the more important thing here is maintaining the balance with anything you introduce.
*edit*
@kulan, i would only consider bought blueprints to be interchangeable between servers. learnt ones would remain only applied to the server they were learnt on, until that server were reset. also i would consider them to be a bit like a license, in that you can use them anywhere you are permitted, but if you trade/sell the license, you lose the ability to use it.
oh and "weopon" :P
[QUOTE] he will be able to build it exactly as fast as other players, exactly the same as he would be able to build the weopon on a server with normal resource collection.[/QUOTE]
But when's the last time anyone really cared about the 1-3 minutes it takes to craft a weapon? Compared to having the BP for something others might spend 6-8 hours grinding for and still not find?
[QUOTE]there is no reason servers can't restrict blueprints to vanilla items, or even purchase licenses to give everyone a "musket" blueprint as default on their server.[/QUOTE]
Server owners won't pay extra money for licenses so they can add rare gear to kits. If the items are in the code, there will be a mod that makes them accessible. Then this will all become moot.
I still haven't heard any reasonable explanation why all this stuff that may be coming down the pipe (modular blueprints, crafting customization, staged reverse-engineering) can't be implemented on each server individually, so that the game-world microcosm can be preserved.
And this isn't directed at mrknifey, but I'm a little confused as to why I've seen a few people who were members of the anti-whine squad when it came to requests to add code to improve the new key system, people who adamantly insisted you should solve in-server problems with in-game emergent solutions... now happily noddling along at the idea of a marketplace that telepathically transfers knowledge across an ocean and teleports items to your inventory... in place of actually putting yourself at risk to trade someone in-person. How does that compute?
[QUOTE=Murdo;46231327]But when's the last time anyone really cared about the 1-3 minutes it takes to craft a weapon? Compared to having the BP for something others might spend 6-8 hours grinding for and still not find?
Server owners won't pay extra money for licenses so they can add rare gear to kits. If the items are in the code, there will be a mod that makes them accessible. Then this will all become moot.
I still haven't heard any reasonable explanation why all this stuff that may be coming down the pipe (modular blueprints, crafting customization, staged reverse-engineering) can't be implemented on each server individually, so that the game-world microcosm can be preserved.
And this isn't directed at mrknifey, but I'm a little confused as to why I've seen a few people who were members of the anti-whine squad when it came to requests to add code to improve the new key system, people who adamantly insisted you should solve in-server problems with in-game emergent solutions... now happily noddling along at the idea of a marketplace that telepathically transfers knowledge across an ocean and teleports items to your inventory... in place of actually putting yourself at risk to trade someone in-person. How does that compute?[/QUOTE]
For the record, my idea of a perfect balance would be to keep everything ingame as much as possible. I really like the TF2 model which let's players create the content they'd like to see and let it get voted on for implementation. I think it would be nice to see something similar for rust. I want there to be lots of unique styles for players to equip themselves how they like, and if putting up a marketplace is the only way to accomplish that, I'm ok with it. From garry's replies to this thread though, it leads me to believe we won't really have to worry so much about this.
I have noticed a few tweets from Facepunch update about the marketplace i hope that they are going to implement this system soon. not because i am in favor of it, but i still have an open mind, and would like to see how and if it will work,
negative points
1 I still see a lot of way this could be abused especially by rouge admins killing players for guns to create blueprints (if the reverse engineering research kits are going back in as mentioned before)
2 With this idea there is that feeling of loss of immersion like you are ordering a how to guide from amazon.
3 The loss of trading in game which was sometime the most nervous and exhilarating aspects of game play, taking that bolt action to meet someone to trade. is it an ambush?.
Positive points
1 If you move home you keep your knowledge, sometimes you have to move home/servers all that hard work needs some reward, but have the ability to start a fresh Newman if you want.
2 lone wolf players need not struggle as much trying to get a full sets of blueprints they could just be bought.
3 I think it will create a bigger community following.
4 all those duplicate blueprints you find will have worth if only a couple of pence.
Couldn't this in theory bog down the characters crafting menu if there is nothing like having only X implemented at any one time. Say you're a kid with lots of moms money to spend that goes and buys like 50 items to craft, or another that gets every free version (pre shout out for anyone who will offer their item for free) in the market. Your crafting menu tab is clogged with items.
Also, the voting system in TF2 has suffered what democracies have (and Greenlight for that matter), favoritism. Its not necessarily the best ideas or implementation that have always gotten through.
I do have one albeit flawed idea to this that could lead to more inspiration. What if anyone joining a server with these special blueprints, would automatically allow anyone else in the server the chance to discover these blueprints when scavenging. I know it seems backwards, but Extra Credits was mentioning a F2P Korean game where you could buy gift bombs that would explode goodies for all around the purchaser (though the purchaser couldnt pick up any of it). It turned out to be very popular.
if u ask me microtransactions are generally a bad idea in a game like that. i`m not even concerned about balancing issues because i don`t think it will ever go in a pay2win direction. but even things like clothes n stuff shouldn`t be available with a few clicks and bucks. for me it just ruins the motivation to find stuff ingame. they are just not special anymore because you can get them in a shop. RUST has/had the potencial to become one of the greatest games in the next years but with a marketplace? nope, not for me...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
