Ship Dealers

[MilitantCollective]

Having permissions to your design does not limit game progression. There is no reason not to have the system.

 

[JinM]

Having permissions to your design does not limit game progression. There is no reason not to have the system.

Yes there are some real reasons, mate:

It's really hard to implement a working protection system. What if people enter build mode and then use the copy paste tool? Disable the copy paste tool? But what if people want to alter the ship and rebuild it? Or if they have to repair it?

There is not just the problem, that this protection is hard to code - touching alot of different mechanics within the build system and build mode. There is also the problem on how to implement such a blueprint protection system. Allow repairs? Only via shipyards? Only at the owners shipyard? Permitt build mode? Permitt the player to place own schematics onto a protected ship, but disable copying schematics?

So the first argument against the protection system is, that the benefit of having it, is very small in comparission to the effort that goes into it. The same amount of ressources are way better spent into other gameplay additions.

The second argument is on how to implement it. Have a lot of customisation options for that protection system? Have it generally turned off? Have it only server side in an additional list that classifies blueprints, or as setting inside the blueprint file itself? And the other points I scratched in my second paragraph.

There are some more reasons but I don't want to annoy you with too much text. I touched them briefly in my list 2 posts ago.

 

[Alphajim]

And what if you just sell them a copyright blueprint item, which make them pay each time they build a ship with it ? You can even add an option to allow a player to modify a copyrighted design, using the said blueprint item.
Or even some kind of dematerialized copyright ?
This, with a way to physically buy a ship when you don't need to mass produce it.

Anyway there's no reason to be against an option, JinM .

 

[Sachys]

Only via shipyards

With blueprints supposedly going to be phased out at some point, this makes perfect sense.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Show of hands.

How many of you would be willing to give another player a design when asked or post it on community content AFTER you've made your in-game profit and newer ships made by others have come out?

1st vote: I would and I have.

 

[Sachys]

Show of hands.

Depends on the player, design and their intentions, but broadly, YES

Edit: in hindsight I suppose I have done so too.

 

[MacThule]

This is probably WHY we don't have ship sales.

I think it very much puts the cart before the horse to demand a cascade of complex conditions be coded into the game to protect their rights to virtual intellectual property.

Before we indulge in fantasies of being filthy rich virtual design rock gods, we need a game with a player base.

Basic ship sales would be a serious quality of life improvement for noobs who don't yet have years of experience engineering in SM. The learning curve is getting steeper. People check the game out and then recoil in horror at how it takes them hours just to figure out how to build a basic ship so they can move around the game.

I have and do sell and give away ships to new players all the time, because it encourages them to stay and play and sometimes a few of them stay long enough to learn a little.

I just want a convenient way to vend ships.

So people can have ships.

The functions already exist. Can we please just have ship vending first... THEN spend years debating the details of virtual DRM so the toons of VERY experienced players can profit (more) in-game by selling leet whips, and how that should be implemented and what features are right and wrong (and then how to actually code all of that)?

 

[Sachys]

virtual DRM

thats something we dont need for this to work though.

if the basic idea of making payments for a ship is added to the shop block, you can immediately limit who gets it (should you want) by only selling to trusted sources.

if the basic idea of making payments for a ship is added to the shop block, then mixing that with trade networks and shipyards for remote delivery (as mentioned earlier in the thread) becomes feasible.

trade networks and shipyards for remote delivery of ship sales becomes feasible, and BPs are phased out (as supposedly planned), then Im sure Schine will add some kind of permissions layer like with current BPs, and along with careful use, design theft would be limited.

fact is, if you're selling ships you dont want others to have the designs to, then you're a bit of a numpty in the first place.

* * * * *
that said (and going offtopic), I think it would be great if the dock provided a back end "stash" of your CC uploads, where you can decide to have them public or not (perhaps to publish at a later date), but also so that the dock itself maintains a record of designs and their creators should issues arise at a later date (such as somebody stealing a lot of peoples BPs and taking credit for them on the CC section).

 

[Dr. Whammy]

+1.

The bottom line is vendors need a way to sell the same ship more than once. Otherwise; there is no incentive to be a ship vendor. An optional "no copy" flagging system governed by server settings is all it takes to create a working vendor system.

DRM is an unnecessarily heavy handed approach. Besides, most sold ships won't make it off the server they're bought on until some time after initial "sales release".

 

[Spartan-228]

I suggested the protection system as a possible add on and not as something required for this idea to work. Also I feel a few people have missed the boat on this idea. I was not suggesting doing anything to the blueprint itself, I was suggesting locking the physical ship so those that did not create it could not make a blueprint of it and then make endless copies. I was not suggesting the buyer could not edit the ship, and if you want there could be a server config that dictates after a certain amount of modification has been made the ship can then be saved as a new blueprint, might be complicated but I would bet that could be done. I also was sure to include that the buyer of the ship could still make repairs to it in a shipyard. I was also not suggesting disabling any other build function concerning the ship. If some one wants to go through the pain in the ass process of copy and pasting the ship back together bit by bit (depending on the server max brush size and ship size) fine. But the idea was to give the seller at lest a limited method of protecting their product, I was not suggesting a 100% foolproof method. I think it should be possible for some one to steel some one else's dinginess (I think this will encourage ship designers to continually improve on their work), but those steeling should have to at lest work for it in some way.

Edit: Others may feel it should be 100% protection, that is fine these are just my ideas on the subject and I encourage constructive discussion on the topic.

Now wile I think a protection system in game (but up to the server owner if they want to use it or not) would be useful, I also understand it would likely be complicated to implement. However I think having a mechanic to sell fully constructed ships in game is far more useful (possibly even necessary) and I would be quite happy to see this feature come out on its own, without a protection mechanic included.

As to some of the ideas that have come up I have to agree that having this work with the shop block may be better than my idea as it means no new blocks have to be added. I also like the idea of the ship being bought on the galactic market and then delivered to the buyer. It seams a little more dangerous doing that, as there could be the possibility of your ship being intercepted wile in rout by another player. But hay those are the chances you take, and if I remember correctly Schema wanted to implement something like that for the regular things you would buy on the galactic market anyway.

 

[MacThule]

+1.

The bottom line is vendors need a way to sell the same ship more than once. Otherwise; there is no incentive to be a ship vendor. An optional "no copy" flagging system governed by server settings is all it takes to create a working vendor system.

Doesn't this still go down a rabbit hole of "what if"s?

What if I just modify a block of the ship and then copy it? What if it's damaged in battle and I repair it, then can I copy it? What if it's docked to another ship I copy? Is there a way to fork versions? What about people like me who want to "OpenSource" develop ships, how can I allow copying - I need an opt-out feature, right? I don't even want to ask these questions, but I don't know that a "no copy" is actually a simple issue at all because every case where it doesn't prevent replication will then become a "bug" and cause additional work for the devs.



IRL copyrights are already absurd enough; they were first created by the "Statute of Monopolies" - literally a document for preventing fair work & fair trade. A massive, arbitrary system for preventing the replication of something that is BY NATURE inherently easy to reproduce is absurd, IMO.

It's also the reason culture suffers under so-called 'Americanization' (a deepening problem worldwide):

Traditionally if someone made an amazing song, everyone would copy it and it would quickly become part of the folk repertoire of songs, i.e. part of the culture. Over time cultures became rich with traditional music and songs and art styles. Then some genius figured out how make a fortune as a middleman between artists and the people by making it illegal to do what came naturally to humans to do with art.

If you prevent free ship reproduction, I seriously fear that the effect would be similar - a stifling of general creative flow within the community.

So actually, while it's not a big deal to me either way, I'm somewhat opposed to the basic notion of preventing ship copying. I think it could facilitate fun gameplay options, yeah, but it has a cost. That combined with the fact that it's a constant anchor around the community's desire for ship sales in general keeps me from being very supportive of the idea.

 

[Spartan-228]

the ability for the origanal creator or spawner of a ship, to disallow the ship being saved as a normal blueprint, thus preventing some one from taking your design after buying a ship from you

Doesn't this still go down a rabbit hole of "what if"s?

What if I just modify a block of the ship and then copy it? What if it's damaged in battle and I repair it, then can I copy it? What if it's docked to another ship I copy? Is there a way to fork versions? What about people like me who want to "OpenSource" develop ships, how can I allow copying - I need an opt-out feature, right? I don't even want to ask these questions, but I don't know that a "no copy" is actually a simple issue at all because every case where it doesn't prevent replication will then become a "bug" and cause additional work for the devs.



IRL copyrights are already absurd enough; they were first created by the "Statute of Monopolies" - literally a document for preventing fair work & fair trade. A massive, arbitrary system for preventing the replication of something that is BY NATURE inherently easy to reproduce is absurd, IMO.

It's also the reason culture suffers under so-called 'Americanization' (a deepening problem worldwide):

Traditionally if someone made an amazing song, everyone would copy it and it would quickly become part of the folk repertoire of songs, i.e. part of the culture. Over time cultures became rich with traditional music and songs and art styles. Then some genius figured out how make a fortune as a middleman between artists and the people by making it illegal to do what came naturally to humans to do with art.

If you prevent free ship reproduction, I seriously fear that the effect would be similar - a stifling of general creative flow within the community.

So actually, while it's not a big deal to me either way, I'm somewhat opposed to the basic notion of preventing ship copying. I think it could facilitate fun gameplay options, yeah, but it has a cost. That combined with the fact that it's a constant anchor around the community's desire for ship sales in general keeps me from being very supportive of the idea.

Of course it would be optional I never envisioned it otherwise. I also feel it should be up to the server admin if the protection system were used on the server or not.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Doesn't this still go down a rabbit hole of "what if"s?

What if I just modify a block of the ship and then copy it? What if it's damaged in battle and I repair it, then can I copy it? What if it's docked to another ship I copy? Is there a way to fork versions? What about people like me who want to "OpenSource" develop ships, how can I allow copying - I need an opt-out feature, right? I don't even want to ask these questions, but I don't know that a "no copy" is actually a simple issue at all because every case where it doesn't prevent replication will then become a "bug" and cause additional work for the devs.

I don't think it's quite that complex an issue. If you block a buyer from being able to make a copy of the blueprint, they will have to either manually copy/paste it or wait until you release it on CC or give them the full blueprint. No one here has suggested preventing repairs or modifications. As for exceptions and multi-tiered permissions; the point of this thread is to create something we can all agree on.

IRL copyrights are already absurd enough; they were first created by the "Statute of Monopolies" - literally a document for preventing fair work & fair trade. A massive, arbitrary system for preventing the replication of something that is BY NATURE inherently easy to reproduce is absurd, IMO.

It's also the reason culture suffers under so-called 'Americanization' (a deepening problem worldwide):

Traditionally if someone made an amazing song, everyone would copy it and it would quickly become part of the folk repertoire of songs, i.e. part of the culture. Over time cultures became rich with traditional music and songs and art styles. Then some genius figured out how make a fortune as a middleman between artists and the people by making it illegal to do what came naturally to humans to do with art.

If you prevent free ship reproduction, I seriously fear that the effect would be similar - a stifling of general creative flow within the community.

So actually, while it's not a big deal to me either way, I'm somewhat opposed to the basic notion of preventing ship copying. I think it could facilitate fun gameplay options, yeah, but it has a cost. That combined with the fact that it's a constant anchor around the community's desire for ship sales in general keeps me from being very supportive of the idea.

I can understand your concern. However, we aren't business tycoons and we aren't like that guy who bought the patent for those cancer medications then jacked the price up by over 300%. We are artists and engineers playing a game for fun in a multi-player community. If we abuse this proposed system, it WILL come back to bite us in the ass.

The idea is to allow vendors to sell a product repeatedly. We aren't messing with CC or preventing gifts. We aren't even trying to block copy/paste. When new designs from competing vendors come out, it is in our collective best interest to innovate via new designs and share the old stuff to make it common knowledge.

A real life example of what I'm hoping to emulate would be the U.S. military design contractors (Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, McDonnell Douglas, etc.). The M1 Abrams tank and the F-16 fighter were designed by and originally for the U.S. Now, dozens of countries have M1 tanks and several countries not only have but now manufacture and support their own variants of the F-16.

Edit: Also, I agree with Spartan-228. This feature should be entirely optional and determined by server settings.

 

[MacThule]

Fair enough!

So long as the focus is on getting support for ship sales into the game so our economy can include finished products!
[doublepost=1548708056,1548707836][/doublepost]It may be worth asking - while we are all here - what about station sales? Blueprints are tagged for obsolescence, but what about sales of whole stations? Planets? Should that be a thing - that we can sell basically anything factioned?

 

[Dr. Whammy]

Fair enough!

So long as the focus is on getting support for ship sales into the game so our economy can include finished products!
[doublepost=1548708056,1548707836][/doublepost]It may be worth asking - while we are all here - what about station sales? Blueprints are tagged for obsolescence, but what about sales of whole stations? Planets? Should that be a thing - that we can sell basically anything factioned?

Being (primarily) a planetary base and "space station" designer, I definitely support this.

Schine never specified how stations/planetary bases would be handled when blueprints go bye-bye so we need an alternative. Here's what popped into my head.

Option 1 (what I currently do): Show up at the requesting player's location and start construction via templates and manual building. The player either supplies me the materials or pays a negotiated fee. It's slow, tedious and inefficient but effective and realistic.

Option 2: We use the shipyard as a construction frame for stations. Your shipyard must be large enough to build the station, have adequate power to function and enough resources to complete the build. When you start the build, the station constructs in a manner similar to a ship, after which, the shipyard de-constructs and empties into your finished station's storage. ...or a loot cloud if you don't have any storage.
Buyers pay you through the shop for a one-time use station design which is consumed upon successful construction at their build site.

Option 3: We change station blueprint spawning to a process where a filled blueprint would initiate the station construction but you have to wait for the build to finish like at a shipyard. Once again, buyers pay you through the shop for a one-time use station design which is consumed upon successful construction at their build site.

 

[Sachys]

Traditionally if someone made an amazing song, everyone would copy it and it would quickly become part of the folk repertoire of songs, i.e. part of the culture. Over time cultures became rich with traditional music and songs and art styles. Then some genius figured out how make a fortune as a middleman between artists and the people by making it illegal to do what came naturally to humans to do with art.

...and in the modern age (at least outside the US and in nations that abide by international copyright law), you no longer need a middleman - it is the creators RIGHT by creating, and you need no lawyers, or publishers to publicise that IP (intellectual property).

So it has nothing to do with "Amercianization"
Its has nothing to do with "A massive, arbitrary system for preventing the replication of something that is BY NATURE inherently easy to reproduce is absurd" as it doesnt apply internationally.

This is why i made my post ast night to Neon to clarify how the game in fact DOES come under copyright, but Schine needs to reflect that in the ToS and EULA of both the dock, the game and make it clear to server owners abuse of things will be bad.

Of course, just like last night , things have again gone completely offtopic - but Dr.Whammy's post sums it up nicely for me.

Im now only posting this because i took the time to write it, as everything has been said... several times since the OP posted.

\O_____o/

Now... which way to the bar again?
[doublepost=1548709405,1548709277][/doublepost]

Option 3: We change station blueprint spawning to a process where a filled blueprint would initiate the station construction but you have to wait for the build to finish like at a shipyard. Once again, buyers pay you through the shop for a one-time use station design which is consumed upon successful construction at their build site.

This is probably the best all round immersive, player practical and sensible sounding option.

Though... being able to save a "station" design through a shipyard could also be a great MP addition to the game.

 

[Dr. Whammy]

...and in the modern age (at least outside the US and in nations that abide by international copyright law), you no longer need a middleman - it is the creators RIGHT by creating, and you need no lawyers, or publishers to publicise that IP (intellectual property).

So it has nothing to do with "Amercianization"
Its has nothing to do with "A massive, arbitrary system for preventing the replication of something that is BY NATURE inherently easy to reproduce is absurd" as it doesnt apply internationally.

This is why i made my post ast night to Neon to clarify how the game in fact DOES come under copyright, but Schine needs to reflect that in the ToS and EULA of both the dock, the game and make it clear to server owners abuse of things will be bad.

Of course, just like last night , things have again gone completely offtopic - but Dr.Whammy's post sums it up nicely for me.

Im now only posting this because i took the time to write it, as everything has been said... several times since the OP posted.

\O_____o/

Now... which way to the bar again?
[doublepost=1548709405,1548709277][/doublepost]

This is probably the best all round immersive, player practical and sensible sounding option.

Though... being able to save a "station" design through a shipyard could also be a great MP addition to the game.

IMMERSION INTENSIFIES

How do you guys feel about making the build site vulnerable to attack while under construction?
You know; attack the Death Star before it's operational...

Edit: via server setting so that new players don't get hammered.

 

[MacThule]

IMMERSION INTENSIFIES

How do you guys feel about making the build site vulnerable to attack while under construction?
You know; attack the Death Star before it's operational...

Edit: via server setting so that new players don't get hammered.

I think it's ideal. Players should station a defense fleet around important builds to prevent attack.

 

[Sachys]

IMMERSION INTENSIFIES

How do you guys feel about making the build site vulnerable to attack while under construction?
You know; attack the Death Star before it's operational...

Edit: via server setting so that new players don't get hammered.

If it was an OPT-IN "hardcore" setting, then yeah, I think thats good.
Additionally, if it were the standard setting for secondary stations, then also good (though as other recent threads have pointed out, we need a reason to have vunerable stations - like my idea of limited undeathinator use).

We are now offtopic again though.

...and nobody has told me where the blummin bar is yet! o____O

Edit: though if it were a standard setting, then there should be something preventing / or warning players from spawning in already controlled space / within x distance of it

 

[Spartan-228]

...and nobody has told me where the blummin bar is yet! o____O

I think it is down the hall to your left