Read by Council Hinder design theft

[Lukwan]

This is what I've come up with so far. let me know what you think.

(and so on...)

Yes. In a nut-shell, concise and comprehensive. This mechanic would get my support.

 

[JinM]

Currently:
PlayerA sells a ship to PlayerB. At any time PlayerB could create blueprint of the ship purchased from PlayerA, and duplicate, and sell to PlayerC, PlayerD, etc... This undercuts PlayerA's time & energy, providing PlayerA with a reduced incentive to invest into designing/building/selling/repairing ships.

I am against this idea. Everyone wants his praises for his ultimative design he made, and in the end its just a ship. Taking away freedom and creativity in my opinion so some small minded guys can say "hey that mega ship was made from ME and I AM the greatest". If this ship is good just let other have it too. Does make me remember this kindergarden allegory where one kids does not want to share his great toy with anyone else.

I mean comeon, then every second ship I download from the community content has the "do not copy"flag? Why should I then still download this. I know as admin I should being able to change that flag - but as this is not 100% that it gets implemented this way its too much of a risk for me! If the variable is not in the blueprint but only on the server and temporary its cool for me, but this is not requested from the OP.But everthing else just cuts away too much freedom and the ability to learn from others, for some guys who are just too proud of themself.

I mean if you said that it is ok to save the blueprint and spawn the ship in your own survival world it would be ok for me too. But you want to add a system that takes away too much for gaining just a little bit of being proud (and rp does not count because most of people joining rp servers obey the rules freely and behave mature enough for not needing such hand-holding).

edit: Ok to clearify myself: I just think its a too complicated system that can go wrong in too many ways. If its not implemented totally correct and with 500000 side rules it would take away too much for me, and that's why I am against this. As I stated: if its temporary variable only present on a server it would be cool for me, but in no other way that includes saving the variable into the ship core or blueprint.

 

[KillaKrazy]

I am against this idea. Everyone wants his praises for his ultimative design he made, and in the end its just a ship. Taking away freedom and creativity in my opinion so some small minded guys can say "hey that mega ship was made from ME and I AM the greatest". If this ship is good just let other have it too. Does make me remember this kindergarden allegory where one kids does not want to share his great toy with anyone else.

I mean comeon, then every second ship I download from the community content has the "do not copy"flag? Why should I then still download this. If the variable is not in the blueprint but only on the server and temporary its cool for me, but this is not requested from the OP. But everthing else just cuts away too much freedom and the ability to learn from others, for some guys who are just too proud of themself.

I mean if you said that it is ok to save the blueprint and spawn the ship in your own survival world it would be ok for me too. But you want to add a system that takes away too much for gaining just a little bit of being proud (and rp does not count because most of people joining rp servers obey the rules freely and behave mature enough for not needing such hand-holding).

You do realize that everything you just posted has no bearing with the original post? Right? The suggestion said nothing about restricting ships downloaded from the CC.

It very clearly stated that it was setting a flag from ships spawned from a BP. I.e. if you spawned a ship from a BP you could select whether or not you wanted someone else be able to make a BP from that specific ship that was spawned. No where was anything stated about making ships from the CC defaulted to uncopyable. That doesn't even make any sense as it would destroy the reason of having the CC in the first place. Re-read the original post and not all of the trash that came after and you may realize your original thought was wrong.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

I am against this idea. Everyone wants his praises for his ultimative design he made, and in the end its just a ship. Taking away freedom and creativity in my opinion so some small minded guys can say "hey that mega ship was made from ME and I AM the greatest". If this ship is good just let other have it too. Does make me remember this kindergarden allegory where one kids does not want to share his great toy with anyone else.

I mean comeon, then every second ship I download from the community content has the "do not copy"flag? Why should I then still download this. If the variable is not in the blueprint but only on the server and temporary its cool for me, but this is not requested from the OP. But everthing else just cuts away too much freedom and the ability to learn from others, for some guys who are just too proud of themself.

I mean if you said that it is ok to save the blueprint and spawn the ship in your own survival world it would be ok for me too. But you want to add a system that takes away too much for gaining just a little bit of being proud (and rp does not count because most of people joining rp servers obey the rules freely and behave mature enough for not needing such hand-holding).

You kinda missed the point.

This protection would not apply to CC builds. That stuff is public domain. It places no restrictions on the original creator to place designs on CC. If they don't want a design to be unavailable to the public, they just don't upload it. It's no different that what we have right now.

Everything we're talking about is server-side stuff. If you're playing survival on a PVP-heavy multi-player server, you probably don't want the whole server (enemies included) to have access to your designs. That's what this idea is about.
[doublepost=1475351285,1475351139][/doublepost]Also, you might like to get credited as the original designer in case someone passes off one of your designs as their own. I know I would.

 

[JinM]

Ok to clearify myself: I just think its a too complicated system that can go wrong in too many ways. If its not implemented totally correct and with 500000 side rules it would take away too much for me, and that's why I am against this. As I stated: if its temporary variable only present on a server it would be cool for me, but in no other way that includes saving the variable into the ship core or blueprint.

 

[KillaKrazy]

Ok to clearify myself: I just think its a too complicated system that can go wrong in too many ways. If its not implemented totally correct and with 500000 side rules it would take away too much for me, and that's why I am against this. As I stated: if its temporary variable only present on a server it would be cool for me, but in no other way that includes saving the variable into the ship core or blueprint.

How exactly is it too complicated? You spawn a ship and set a condition to disallow copying or saving to blueprint. The buyer is now unable to save your ship design.

The whole point of this was if I wanted to be strictly a shipbuilding faction then I could be. This setting would make it so other facions would have to keep coming back to me to buy my ships.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Ok to clearify myself: I just think its a too complicated system that can go wrong in too many ways. If its not implemented totally correct and with 500000 side rules it would take away too much for me, and that's why I am against this. As I stated: if its temporary variable only present on a server it would be cool for me, but in no other way that includes saving the variable into the ship core or blueprint.

You need to read the previous parts of the discussion then.

We clearly stated that this is server side; for the propose of in-game security, possible shipwrights' markets and to stop plagiarism. Where in all of our discussion are we taking anything from you that you would not already be without?

Please explain your point of view rationally. Don't let a knee jerk emotional reaction get the better of you.

 

[Erth Paradine]

...
edit: Ok to clearify myself: I just think its a too complicated system that can go wrong in too many ways. If its not implemented totally correct and with 500000 side rules it would take away too much for me, and that's why I am against this. As I stated: if its temporary variable only present on a server it would be cool for me, but in no other way that includes saving the variable into the ship core or blueprint.

Too complicated? Hmm, maybe if we re-frame this a bit then:

1. The game engine already has a means of disabling blueprint saving all-together. That seems too draconian: as nobody could save anything...way too hardcore for my taste.
2. This request seeks to delegate control to each and every player: at the time of ship spawn, the player spawning their entity would be able to decide if they wanted to permit blueprint saving, or not.

Does that help clarify? Still too complicated?

 

[wanzer]

I am against this idea. Everyone wants his praises for his ultimative design he made, and in the end its just a ship. Taking away freedom and creativity in my opinion so some small minded guys can say "hey that mega ship was made from ME and I AM the greatest". If this ship is good just let other have it too. Does make me remember this kindergarden allegory where one kids does not want to share his great toy with anyone else.

I mean comeon, then every second ship I download from the community content has the "do not copy"flag? Why should I then still download this. I know as admin I should being able to change that flag - but as this is not 100% that it gets implemented this way its too much of a risk for me! If the variable is not in the blueprint but only on the server and temporary its cool for me, but this is not requested from the OP.But everthing else just cuts away too much freedom and the ability to learn from others, for some guys who are just too proud of themself.

I mean if you said that it is ok to save the blueprint and spawn the ship in your own survival world it would be ok for me too. But you want to add a system that takes away too much for gaining just a little bit of being proud (and rp does not count because most of people joining rp servers obey the rules freely and behave mature enough for not needing such hand-holding).

edit: Ok to clearify myself: I just think its a too complicated system that can go wrong in too many ways. If its not implemented totally correct and with 500000 side rules it would take away too much for me, and that's why I am against this. As I stated: if its temporary variable only present on a server it would be cool for me, but in no other way that includes saving the variable into the ship core or blueprint.

If a builder likes to share his or her constructed items with the rest of the world copy free it be still an option.
It doesn't take away freedom or creativity
we still have the freedom to build anything we like
and people that are creative wont be limited by this

even more

people that where not keen on sharing their design might reconsider now that the design wont be blindly copy pasted.

and this

If this ship is good just let other have it too. Does make me remember this kindergarden allegory where one kids does not want to share his great toy with anyone else.

silly question but for the lolz
when you copy lets say a product like Microsoft windows (yea i know rly bad example)
and Microsoft drags you into court ... will you be giving that exact same quote ?
i mean that be epic !!

(edited) keep in mind, its more then a great toy, its intellectual property, a art work someone didn't just get from the teacher to toy around with, hours, days even weeks might have gone into it.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

It's also important to remember that regardless of whether or not this suggestion is implemented, the choice to share (or not share) will always be made by the original designer.

This idea will entice the more secretive designers to share more freely (for an in-game price), while leaving the existing community content untouched. Meanwhile, you can learn new build tricks from the ships you buy in-game without merely copying and respawning them.

In the end, it will only add to the game; not subtract.

 

[Lukwan]

I mean comeon, then every second ship I download from the community content has the "do not copy"flag? Why should I then still download this.

Good question. It brings up a point I have wanted to make, so I will answer.

I can think of a logical reason why you would indeed want to post a Licenced BP on the dock and its the very same reason for wanting protection on a server. A builder wants to share a build with everyone but keep it 'pristine' and original. As a player downloading that protected ship this is what you get: the use of and repair-rights to a cool build that is full of design ideas that you want to see first hand (and otherwise would never have seen at all). You can pour over the ship test-drive it, fly it into combat, race it and all the while see what makes it tick. This applies to beauty-builds especially because they are standing in for fine art.

Be grateful for what you have. Someone spent a lot of time making that ship and they may want to share it with you. They may not, however, feel comfortable with you modifying it or mass producing it. Under the current system that builder will be less likely to share those types of builds so it is likely those ships will never see the light of day (or the dock).

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Good question. It brings up a point I have wanted to make, so I will answer.

I can think of a logical reason why you would indeed want to post a Licenced BP on the dock and its the very same reason for wanting protection on a server. A builder wants to share a build with everyone but keep it 'pristine' and original. As a player downloading that protected ship this is what you get: the use of and repair-rights to a cool build that is full of design ideas that you want to see first hand (and otherwise would never have seen at all). You can pour over the ship test-drive it, fly it into combat, race it and all the while see what makes it tick. This applies to beauty-builds especially because they are standing in for fine art.

Be grateful for what you have. Someone spent a lot of time making that ship and they may want to share it with you. They may not, however, feel comfortable with you modifying it or mass producing it. Under the current system that builder will be less likely to share those types of builds so it is likely those ships will never see the light of day (or the dock).

Thus, The "Whammy Effect"...

 

[Lukwan]

The "Whammy Effect"

"It's a Thing!" :D (your theme music here)

 

[Jojomo]

Actually, Jojomo, in order to truly know every inch of a vessel, enough to duplicate it, you have to tear it down to the structure. You have to track individual rivets to be perfectly accurate. You have to rip out the walls to get at wiring, pipes, you name it, the ship has it.

That level of "truly knowing" is beyond what's needed for reverse engineering. All you need is for a copy to be functionally indistinguishable by anyone using/observing them.

I believe in your previous post you said being given the manual by the owner would be good enough for reverse engineering - nothing like "truly knowing" a vessel. (Not that ship manuals actually exist)

Rivets haven't been used in ship building for a long time (I don't know how long), welding is far superior. For wiring/pipes all you need to know is that X is connected to Y and the wires/pipes run along here. In a ship's hulls the pipes and wires are not hidden (except owner areas of yachts, passenger areas of cruise liners etc).

You are working from a design you already have, tracing a few modifications. What I'm trying to prevent is the large-scale copying of sections of a ship, that effectively makes innovation worthless.

Sometimes, but in others we have to do it for an entire ship that wasn't designed by us, for an owner who's hiring us for a replacement design.
By advocating preventing copy/pasting you're going above and beyond this suggestion.

In real life the owner of a ship doesn't need the designer's permission to do anything with the ship, ever.

And it's just FINE if we slow down "arms races"! Especially since they should not be "Oh, they've got something better. Quick, let's go steal one using a spy in the faction!" Instead, they should take time and effort, and make it so that, instead of having a metaphorical Germany just make a copy of a stolen (Good luck) Iron Duke-class battleship, Germany takes what it has learned from indirect means, and applies it to produce a Baden-class with a few improvements compared to the original.

That's your opinion. I disagree, it isn't fine.
Stealing designs can be prevented with care. Arms races are still responsible for creating huge numbers of designs, and in each case the designers learn something. It increases the store of knowledge in SM.
[doublepost=1475360531,1475360318][/doublepost]

You build a ship/station/structure, and when saving the bluprint, at which time you select one of these three options.

- Create "original blueprint" which allows full repair, copy, editing, CC upload etc. Basically full ownership of the design.

- Create "blueprint copy"; used for spawning a single entity but does not allow copying, CC upload or repair. You have to go to the manufacturer for service.

- Create "licensed blueprint" used for spawning a single entity and allowing other shipyards to repair it. Copying and CC upload are not permitted.

Preventing copy/pasting will harm ship design innovation in the game as a whole.

You don't even have an option there that prevents BP saving but allows copy/pasting i.e, the actual suggestion that this thread is for.

 

[JinM]

You need to read the previous parts of the discussion then.

We clearly stated that this is server side; for the propose of in-game security, possible shipwrights' markets and to stop plagiarism. Where in all of our discussion are we taking anything from you that you would not already be without?

Please explain your point of view rationally. Don't let a knee jerk emotional reaction get the better of you.

I find it totally rational to not read 10 sites of discussion and expect OP to update his request if the discussion changed it.

What is taken from me is obvious: I want the freedom of design and copying designs from others, I want not to have some bit in any blueprint or ship core meta data changed so I get restricted in building even with others guys stuff. It would destroy the purpose of downloading or locking at other peoples ships if every 2nd guy flags it as non-copy. And dont come with this "its plagiarism and all of that its my creation stuff" - this is a common misconception: if you create something it should not be copied in games, but you actually want this no-laws given environment in games, because its the only place you are free within our society. - Why do you play a game? Because you can do things you can't do in real life. Starting to cut everyones freedom with this blueprint saving rules, does exactly what you don't want: you want freedom more than every risk of having regulations to fear of using some copyrighted material. Trust me, if you would experience the blueprint-save regulation once implemented, the next guy come with the next regulation. And then everything gets regulated. Better don't take this risk at all and life with some guys who just copy stuff from time to time in my opinion.

Ah and to question your motives:
Why does it hurt you if some1 copies your blueprint on a server? Does it take away money? Does he insult you? (actually he honors you but you just want to see the negative side...) Does it cut your rp experience? (I think if I see a house in real life I can take a screenshot too and rebuild it - if you want to deepen rp then introduce a court into the server and suddenly you would notice: oh man for 10 block design copied its not worth the fuzz to bring a man to court just let him have his fun; or if he copies all the ships: then the owner might just ban him from the server - i see no real threat to rp because owners and users can very nice cope even in character with copying designs). And whats all that fuzz for a drm function about, if a player just can take a screenshot and still rebuild it? I think the only thing that is hurt is the following: some1 else does need less time to copy a design he likes and you made. But is any design in Starmade so incredible original, that implementing a DRM-function is neccessary? Is this cry for regulation justified? And why is it so bad for you in person if someone else copies your stuff? How does it hurt you in person? The only thing thats hurt is your ego, because you don't want some1 else having an easier game than you. But if this guy copies your stuff he admits that you are better than him - why feel bad about it? If he cant come up with a nice design man, have some mercy. Not everyone is as talented or has so much time. You want just all the flowers and clapping hands for yourself, and that I can't stand, because there is no money or creativity at stacke. Its just your ego that cries for DRM. Thanks man.

If its server side its fine, but because the thing is too complicated and many side rules must be taken into account, I am totally against it. And OP did not state this in his starting post and until he does not learn to use the edit function I have a right of my opinion. Also I would still be against it, because the devs might implement it in a "not server side way" and that is risk I don't want to take.

And don't get me wrong: I am writing emotional, because I can't believe the majority thinks even taking one step into this road of regulation and cutting away freedom for security is good, because they care so much about their little ships they don't want to share with others. Guys it's only about ships in Starmade, be proud if some1 else likes the design instead of being so selfish and cry for drm functions.

Also I think the argument about "having a drm function gives us more creativity" is absolute nonsense. In germany so many youtubers experience less freedom in creativity because all the songs and some games are within copyright-laws. And in Starmade it just helps people to use other guys designs. Actually the opposite of cutting away creativity would happen: they would take an existing design and make something new out of it. That would happen. And this happens right now in Starmade. And I dont want that to change because you guys can't see whats up. Do you really think some1 gets less creative, if he can copy your stuff? He learns from it. I learn from other guys design. I copy designs every day and with that I get more creative every day because from the copied desgins I engineer my own design and my own style.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

I find it totally rational to not read 10 sites of discussion and expect OP to update his request if the discussion changed it.

What is taken from me is obvious: I want the freedom of design and copying designs from others, I want not to have some bit in any blueprint or ship core meta data changed so I get restricted in building even with others guys stuff. It would destroy the purpose of downloading or locking at other peoples ships if every 2nd guy flags it as non-copy. And dont come with this "its plagiarism and all of that its my creation stuff" - this is a common misconception: if you create something it should not be copied in games, but you actually want this no-laws given environment in games, because its the only place you are free within our society. - Why do you play a game? Because you can do things you can't do in real life. Starting to cut everyones freedom with this blueprint saving rules, does exactly what you don't want: you want freedom more than every risk of having regulations to fear of using some copyrighted material. Trust me, if you would experience the blueprint-save regulation once implemented, the next guy come with the next regulation. And then everything gets regulated. Better don't take this risk at all and life with some guys who just copy stuff from time to time in my opinion.

We are not obligated to share JinM. We may choose to share but that is our choice; not your right. With that said, you are more than welcome to continue to use community content. That's what it's there for. Other than naming the original artist, we are not proposing a change to CC. Just like before; if a designer doesn't want to share, their builds won't be on CC. So you lose nothing by this idea. You will however gain access to builds that won't ever be on CC. The only catch is that you can't take them off the server you got them on. The knowledge you get is yours to keep though.

Ah ja and to question your motives:
Why does it hurt you if some1 copies your blueprint on a server? Does it take away money? Does he insult you? (actually he honors you but you just want to see the negative side...) Does it cut your rp experience?

Since you asked; Yes. It does negatively impact my gaming experience.

I am a one-man faction. As such, I do not have the brute force capability that is characteristic of larger factions. Due to time constraints, I don't build big so I build well. It puts me at a massive disadvantage when someone (especially an enemy) learns how my builds work. Also, I have a certain proprietary style for my faction and I pride myself on being unique in that regard. Most of my faction's designs predate StarMade (and possibly even you) so they are very special to me. They are my signature and I will not simply give them away just because someone else lacks my level of creativity. In contrast, I am more than willing to share the basics behind my methods but for others to actually fly around in Star Axis ships pretty much kills any RP value I was trying to create.

In short; I find it fun to be the commander of a small, elite unit that only I know the ins and outs of. Losing my rare/unique/elite status will kill any fun that this game offers me. Now do you understand?

If its server side its fine, but because the thing is too complicated and many side rules must be taken into account, I am totally against it. If it was only server side its fine, but OP did not state this in his starting post and until he does not learn to use the edit function I have a right of my opinion. Also I would still be against it, because the devs might implement it in a "not server side way" and that is risk I don't want to take.

And don't get me wrong: I am writing emotional, because I can't believe the majority thinks even taking one step into this road of regulation and cutting away freedom for security is good, because they care so much about their little ships they don't want to share with others. Guys it's only about ships in Starmade, be proud if some1 else likes the design instead of being so selfish and cry for drm functions.

Your inability to understand our intentions does not make them bad intentions. Read my update to the suggestion; it will be the one with 3 blueprint types. Read the whole thing, understand how it works, then get back to us. I will be more than happy to break it down into simpler terms for you, should you need that.

 

[JinM]

You are totally ignoring my fears Dr. Whammy.

And if OP can't update its post just stop complaining about me not actually understanding. This DRM stuff is bad. And not the easy kind of bad, the kind of bad that actually does the opposite of improving Starmade as a whole.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

You are totally ignoring my fears Dr. Whammy.

And if OP can't update its post just stop complaining about me not actually understanding. This DRM stuff is bad. And not the easy kind of bad, the kind of bad that actually does the opposite of improving Starmade as a whole.

Sooo. What you're saying is; you don't fully understand what we're suggesting and that scares you?

[doublepost=1475363107,1475362963][/doublepost]Alright, I can sense that you aren't trolling. You're obviously bothered by this so why don't you give us a list of what this idea is supposedly going to take from you.

We'll go over each concern one by one so you can understand what this is all about.

Will you do that for us?

 

[Lukwan]

Reverse engineering a ship (ocean) in real life doesn't require disassembly. They're large enough that you can move through them and measure and record any data needed. We sometimes reverse-engineer parts of a ship (because a shipyard may actually have built something slightly different to the design we gave them and we need to update our files to match, or an owner may ask us to make sure a new design has the same or better structural characteristics than the ship being replaced) purely from photos and notes taken inside the ship by one of our engineers.

Words from your own mouth Jo. You say it yourself; touring a ship with a tape-measure and a practiced eye is all you need to glean the desired information. So why do you suppose this is not good enough in SM? You don't need to copy my BP, you can just take some notes and a selfie. :p
[doublepost=1475364234,1475364100][/doublepost]

You are totally ignoring my fears Dr. Whammy.

Don't give in to your fears, this way leads to the dark side.

 

[JinM]

We are not obligated to share JinM. We may choose to share but that is our choice; not your right. With that said, you are more than welcome to continue to use community content. That's what it's there for. Other than naming the original artist, we are not proposing a change to CC. Just like before; if a designer doesn't want to share, their builds won't be on CC. So you lose nothing by this idea. You will however gain access to builds that won't ever be on CC. The only catch is that you can't take them off the server you got them on. The knowledge you get is yours to keep though.

Read my update to the suggestion; it will be the one with 3 blueprint types.

Man I really tried to explain it. And I am tired, maybe some other day I might be more comprehensible.

Ok again: 3 blueprint types, and you can't take designs off the server if configured right. Thats what you propose.

And that is exactly what I fear would happen: A variable inside a blueprint, that actually prevents copying ingame. I tell you what will happen and what I fear: Too much people will use this option, some dude even will sell his blueprints. And no one will bother to even look again on CC because he must tediously search what blueprints don't have this flag so it is actually worth the time downloading the ship.

Also this is not supporting my idea of having many ships for beginners that they just can spawn in. So a list of ships everyone can download and use for survival with a good description for what stage of gameplay they are usefull. Those lists and downloads would not happen anymore, because 40% would have the non copy flag.

And what ships exactly do you have, that you in person don't want to share with others? Take a screenshot, show me please, and tell me: hey this one no one else EVER shall use for himself. Its MINE. Say it to me exactly like that, so I believe you that you don't want this exact creative work showing on the screenshot EVER used by others. Do it please. Because I don't think you can come up with an example thats worth implementing a DRM function.

We are not obligated to share JinM. We may choose to share but that is our choice; not your right. With that said, you are more than welcome to continue to use community content. That's what it's there for. Other than naming the original artist, we are not proposing a change to CC. Just like before; if a designer doesn't want to share, their builds won't be on CC. So you lose nothing by this idea. You will however gain access to builds that won't ever be on CC. The only catch is that you can't take them off the server you got them on. The knowledge you get is yours to keep though.

Whats right and wrong inside a game is nothing you or me can objectively justify about. In a game the rules are the rules we as players are dictating. Even for creative content. There is no actual rule about how your content is objectively handled, there are only the rules you think are right, and the rules I think are right. And then there are the rules the government makes and don't apply to games, because you certainly would not go to court just because I copied your Starmadedesign.

This is a common misconception: Rules for creative ownership in the real world are taken for granted in a discussion about implemting DRM functions for some ship designs in Starmade. You act like your opinion is based on rules and knowledge that actually don't apply to Starmade at all.

I understand that you don't want your ships copied if you are in a solo faction on a server. But...is this solo faction on a server worth the DRM?

And are the guys copying your ships really impacting your game? I mean if they use your ship and you see them flying by, can't you be happy about constructed something so good, they don't use their own stuf?

I am a one-man faction. As such, I do not have the brute force capability that is characteristic of larger factions. Due to time constraints, I don't build big so I build well. It puts me at a massive disadvantage when someone (especially an enemy) learns how my builds work. Also, I have a certain proprietary style for my faction and I pride myself on being unique in that regard. Most of my faction's designs predate StarMade (and possibly even you) so they are very special to me. They are my signature and I will not simply give them away just because someone else lacks my level of creativity. In contrast, I am more than willing to share the basics behind my methods but for others to actually fly around in Star Axis ships pretty much kills any RP value I was trying to create.

1. If the server you are on does not support the rp style and everyone actually copies your stuff you might be as well good to choose another server? I mean why rp on a server where everyone is a dick and the rp style does not save one man factions? Why can't you ask an admin to actually help and let the admin just handle this guys who obviously destroy the atmosphere for another player? Why play on a server where you are the most creative guy? Why play with people who are all not as good as you? 2. What is so special about any starmade build, that it needs to be DRM protected? Yes buidling in Starmade is complicated, but it is not DRM worthy. 3. If people really copying your stuff on a server like hell, you are really good to go on a server where such dicks don't impact your game this hard. And now think about it vice versa: I mean if you are on a server, there must be players you play with. And if you find to only play with people that use your stuff very often on a server I would be very surprised. Nono, the people you actually play with don't use your stuff. And then some distant guys that you don't even need to think about on the other edge of the map have the same ships as you have. I mean I can't imagine how those guys impact your game on that server. Its just that you don't like it, but it's not actually impacting the gameplay mechanic. 5. PVP: So you have small ships and are solo - If there happens a fight and someone uses your own ship against you, its really rare. And even then you could see this guy as an equal opponent. And if the guy is actually outnumbering you, then it does not matter if he does outnumber you with your own ship or any other doombrick. Having the most efficient ship in Starmade gives like 30% advantage, but outnumbered is outnumbered. Sorry but in a real war a sinlge 50% better equiped soldier can't take out 2 normal equiped soldiers in most of the cases neither. Ofcourse technology counts, but you can not engineer in Starmade up the point, that you can take on normal engineered ships in real high numbers (normal does not equal some beginner ships, ofc you can roflstomp those with some pro-knowledge).