Allow Shop Blocks On Ships

[DrTarDIS]

I can't tell if this is a serious post...?

No-one does anything without a reason, and with fewer reasons to build stations, people will decide for themselves to build stations less often.

Just because YOU think "there needs to be a reason to X." does not make that a good argument. Weather in society or a sandbox-game, Freedom(that doesn't block other people's freedom) is the only moral high ground.

Don't tell me my bucket has to be red and with a hole in it. *I* want my bucket to have TWO holes.

 

[Jojomo]

Just because YOU think "there needs to be a reason to X." does not make that a good argument. Weather in society or a sandbox-game, Freedom(that doesn't block other people's freedom) is the only moral high ground.

Don't tell me my bucket has to be red and with a hole in it. *I* want my bucket to have TWO holes.

I don't know what you're arguing for/against, or even whether it opposes what I said.
If you put two holes in your bucket you had a reason for it (regardless of whether anyone else agrees with it or can even understand it).
It could be as tiny a reason as "I had an idea and don't want to forget it", or "I think it'll make me feel good", or "everyone else is doing it."

In any case, shops on ships would be one less reason (and not just a tiny one - one of the top 10 reasons) to build a station. That would translate to fewer stations being built.

 

[DrTarDIS]

In any case, shops on ships would be one less reason (and not just a tiny one - one of the top 10 reasons) to build a station. That would translate to fewer stations being built.

What you're saing here is "Jojomo wants more stations to be built, so your ship (bucket) can't have a shop block(2 holes)."
That's an inherently tyrannical argument, and an inherently bad one for a sandbox.
Arbitrary limitations need a sound argument: EG WHY does there NEED to be MORE stations in the first place? That's the logic breakdown. Why do you assume that "more stations" is right?

Ed:fomatting

 

[Sachys]

WHY does there NEED to be MORE stations in the first place? That's the logic breakdown.

because there arent enough stations, numpty-pants!

 

[Jojomo]

What you're saing here is "Jojomo wants more stations to be built, so your ship (bucket) can't have a shop block(2 holes)."

No, no-one here has the power to change the number of stations anyone else builds. What we're doing is offering our personal opinions for public viewing.

I think you can probably agree that shop blocks on ships could only reduce the number of stations, not increase them. And yes, my opinion of that is negative. You're of course perfectly free to have a different opinion.

That's an inherently tyrannical argument, and an inherently bad one for a sandbox.

A bit hard for an argument to be tyrannical, especially if it's from someone with zero power.

Yes, SM is a sandbox, but sandboxes have (many) rules too. And don't forget it's a sandbox that the creator has a clear vision for that he's working towards. And sandboxes aren't automatically good: there are sandboxes you/I/we like, and some you/I/we don't.

Arbitrary limitations need a sound argument: EG WHY does there NEED to be MORE stations in the first place? That's the logic breakdown.

I've never said there need to be more. That's an argument you incorrectly attributed to me. I've said I'd be disappointed if there were fewer stations.

And as the status quo is that shop blocks can't go on ships, it isn't arbitrary - in fact changing it would be arbitrary.

Why do you assume that "more stations" is right?

I haven't said "more stations". I haven't said "right".

I'm not assuming anything. I *know* how I feel about stations, and I'd be disappointed if there were less of them.

I'm really struggling to see the point of this conversation, and I think I've stated my position as clearly as I can.

 

[DrTarDIS]

No, no-one here has the power to change the number of stations anyone else builds. What we're doing is offering our personal opinions for public viewing.

I think you can probably agree that shop blocks on ships could only reduce the number of stations, not increase them. And yes, my opinion of that is negative. You're of course perfectly free to have a different opinion.



A bit hard for an argument to be tyrannical, especially if it's from someone with zero power.

Yes, SM is a sandbox, but sandboxes have (many) rules too. And don't forget it's a sandbox that the creator has a clear vision for that he's working towards. And sandboxes aren't automatically good: there are sandboxes you/I/we like, and some you/I/we don't.



I've never said there need to be more. That's an argument you incorrectly attributed to me. I've said I'd be disappointed if there were fewer stations.

And as the status quo is that shop blocks can't go on ships, it isn't arbitrary - in fact changing it would be arbitrary.



I haven't said "more stations". I haven't said "right".

I'm not assuming anything. I *know* how I feel about stations, and I'd be disappointed if there were less of them.

I'm really struggling to see the point of this conversation, and I think I've stated my position as clearly as I can.

potato poh tahtoe. Switching up "more stations" and "less stations" in the way you're doing it is just word games, Probably to deal with cognitive dissonance. I hope you realize that. You're using "people will build less stations" as an argument against shop-ships. I'm pointing out that the number of stations built is not an inherently, objectively, good argument. It "begs the question". Flawed logic.

Agreed on opinions: but just like holes, opinions are something everybody has. It's important that they be based on reason, IMHO.

 

[Jojomo]

potato poh tahtoe. Switching up "more stations" and "less stations" in the way you're doing it is just word games,

Perhaps, but it's a word game you started. You implied that that was what I actually said.

Probably to deal with cognitive dissonance. I hope you realize that.

I'm not even remotely uncomfortable with my position on this.

You're using "people will build less stations" as an argument against shop-ships.

Yes.

I'm pointing out that the number of stations built is not an inherently, objectively, good argument. It "begs the question".

No, I don't claim it is inherently good. I personally think reducing the number of stations built would be a pity, but I fully understand and accept that others may feel differently.

Flawed logic.

If you can point out any logical conclusion I've come to that are wrong, feel free.

That 'fewer stations would be a negative change' isn't something I came to by logical deduction though. It's how I *feel* about stations. I'm not asking you to feel the same way.

Agreed on opinions: but just like holes, opinions are something everybody has. It's important that they be based on reason, IMHO.

And I fully respect your right to have that opinion.

 

[Sachys]

oh ffs!

 

[Deserea]

I really dont see a problem with this, as it is, it wouldnt affect me at all I seldom use station ships anyways because i hate having to go them *and* i prefer mining and crafting my own materials, even for my biggest ships.

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

That 'fewer stations would be a negative change' isn't something I came to by logical deduction though. It's how I *feel* about stations. I'm not asking you to feel the same way.

Yeah, I sort-of agree there. Fewer stations overall is bad, if only because that means there's less stuff to look-at, pillage, and burn.

No, no-one here has the power to change the number of stations anyone else builds. What we're doing is offering our personal opinions for public viewing.

Correct, and correct.

I think you can probably agree that shop blocks on ships could only reduce the number of stations, not increase them.

So, you are (still) arguing that allowing shop-blocks on ships will somehow "magically" de-crease the number of stations being built,(placed into the universe) despite evidence that no-one builds "pure" shop-stations in the first damn place? (except role-players, because such a station happens to fit their role?)

Are there stations out there that don't do much aside from being a shop? Sure.
But tell me this, do those stations do anything else at all?
The vast teeming majority do. Because shop-only stations are a waste of material.
(can't be defended in any manner that results in the station not dying, and will be attacked if only to deny you the possibility of re-purposing it later)

The one shop-only I personally encountered? Wasn't.
It was doing double duty as a claim-station. (had been doing so since it was placed)

Most of the stations I see that even have a shop-module, have factories and/or shipyards attached to them, and the shop is used to "sell off" the leftover crap from breaking down "destroyed" ships they'd been salvaging.
(and the only reason they were salvaging, was due to pirates constantly assaulting an NPC station in the neighboring star-system. basically free-resources.)
Or, it gets used to buy things that the owner doesn't have enough of.

Meanwhile, I see no reason anyone wouldn't continue to build stations exactly as they've been doing.
I can see a reason for change if we were talking about Shipyards on ships.
(that one absolutely would reduce the number of stations being built, as the people who first called for it didn't want to build stations in the first place)

But we aren't. We're talking about the lowly shop-module.


SIDE-NOTE:

(mostly)Ignored in the above discussion are "dedicated role-players", because they will build pure shop-stations. (along with "travelling merchants")
They'll build stations whose only purpose is "the look".
They'll build "claim" stations that no normal PVP faction would ever deploy, because the resource-cost is obscene.
(as in, could build a "normal" claim station and a few cruisers with that material.)
They'll build them even if no-one-else on the server ever visits their territory, because they're role-playing.
(obviously, they have more fun if someone does visit.)

They will build whatever they think their role-play needs, and to hell with what the rest of the server thinks of it.


This change we're advocating? Hell, it'll give them more options for role-play.

 

[DrTarDIS]

Have (re)discovered a way to create a mobile shop(connected to network too!), foundry/factory. warpgate, and am in the process of checking on shipyards.
Just FYI, to all those begging for it.

 

[NeonSturm]

If ships get shops, it's a shoip or shiop …

I only want that for capital ships, ships which have no thrust, only jump.

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

I only want that for capital ships, ships which have no thrust, only jump.

I don't know if this is different in non-English languages, but in English it ain't a ship if it has no thrust of it's own.
It is either a barge or a platform, depending mostly on intended destination. (EX: FLIP, the "flipping" ship, isn't a ship. It's a "research platform")

 

[DrTarDIS]

and yup, shipyards too. all mobile. no jump though, limited to moving "the long way"

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

and yup, shipyards too. all mobile. no jump though, limited to moving "the long way"

Now THAT I'd like to try. I drift along quite a bit as is (nothing better to do whilst charging the jump-drive)

 

[NeonSturm]

I don't know if this is different in non-English languages, but in English it ain't a ship if it has no thrust of it's own.
It is either a barge or a platform, depending mostly on intended destination. (EX: FLIP, the "flipping" ship, isn't a ship. It's a "research platform")

A ship which gets thrust by paddlers is a barge too?

But without thrust =/= without thrust at all.
It just means that your thrust is so small that it doesn't matters for ships around you. Compare atomic drive to ion drive thrust.​

 

[Lord_Greyscale]

A ship which gets thrust by paddlers is a barge too?

Possibly. That would have to come down to, was the vessel designed with accomodation for Rowers and their Oars? If so, then it might be a ship. (does it have that, and lifeboats? then it is a ship. without lifeboats, it's a boat. Yes, that's the hard legal ruling. Back in the Age-of-sail, was it a three-master? then it was a ship.)

But, it is more likely to be a boat.
Canoe, dinghy, row-boat, etc ... All of those are designed to be rowed, or allow for rowing as a secondary means of propulsion.

Heck, even a single-man Sail-Boat has an engine. it just happens to be the wind, and most of the more modern ones are light-enough, with a shallow enough draft that they could be rowed if the sail were to break, or the wind to die out. (but they normally just have an out-board motor for emergencies, instead of oars. because rowing is exhausting.)


By contrast, most proper barges have no accomodation for any form of on-board thrust. (Oars, Sails, an out-board motor, etc ...) they rely entirely on a second ship to propel and maneuver them.
Oh, and they have no Lifeboats either, as most of them aren't designed to have people on-board for anything more than a few minutes.

 

[Zerefette]

I'm ok for nomad shops, even npc ones.