Weapons economy

[Elobomg]

Well, as I understand right now the way to get weapons or ship parts are either buying it or crafting them, am I right?

But what about the weapons were given only to starter factions, so if you need a weapon you must buy to them. Also a blueprint for each weapon so you can make them in your own factory but costing of course a lot more. This could make few interesting roleplay situations in which piracy, black market and convoys are a big thing.

What do you think guys?

 

[TheMarksman]

This could make few interesting roleplay situations in which piracy, black market and convoys are a big thing.

It is already a possibility to do all the above with weaponry. It's also to do all these without the need of weapon blueprints.
Oh also, Jimi isn't exactly free to add more weapons to the list.

 

[Elobomg]

It is already a possibility to do all the above with weaponry. It's also to do all these without the need of weapon blueprints.
Oh also, Jimi isn't exactly free to add more weapons to the list.

Can you develop on that? I have been off the Game and Discord since it passed 8k users so im not sure how thing works right now apart from what's been saw in videos.

 

[Croomar]

I also once read on the Starbase Discord that the Devs have considered each weapon requiring a license or serial number, or rather you needing one to be allowed to manufacture them. Unregistered weapons would be illegal and thus be sold on the black market. That would make for a very interesting feature.
Sadly I can't expand further on it because I can't find the source anymore. Perhaps somebody else has it scrreencapped?

 

[Elobomg]

I also once read on the Starbase Discord that the Devs have considered each weapon requiring a license or serial number, or rather you needing one to be allowed to manufacture them. Unregistered weapons would be illegal and thus be sold on the black market. That would make for a very interesting feature.
Sadly I can't expand further on it because I can't find the source anymore. Perhaps somebody else has it scrreencapped?

Wow! That's quite cool if someone have a screenshot to verify it would be awesome.

That kind of features makes roleplay quite interesting, hope it get to the game in early access versions.

 

[CalenLoki]

Disagree.

The only effect of requiring expensive license is shifting even more capital to zergs and making new players and small factions life even more miserable.

Limiting weapons to starting factions just won't keep up with player-driven expansion outside starting zone.

Black market is moot idea within safe zone.

 

[Stanky]

I also once read on the Starbase Discord that the Devs have considered each weapon requiring a license or serial number, or rather you needing one to be allowed to manufacture them. Unregistered weapons would be illegal and thus be sold on the black market. That would make for a very interesting feature.
Sadly I can't expand further on it because I can't find the source anymore. Perhaps somebody else has it scrreencapped?

I like the sound of the feature, but in reality a system like that would be idiotic and generally not good for the game.

 

[Elobomg]

I like the sound of the feature, but in reality a system like that would be idiotic and generally not good for the game.

I don't think so, it would make roleplay much more interesting. Maybe other way to include the same mechanic

 

[Croomar]

So I found the conversation that led me believe a black market for weapons could exists with licenses. But there's a few issues remaining that Ville is absolutely aware of.

I personally am all for allowing the possibility of black markets. And I think illegal weapon manufacturing would be a prime example for a good feature to allow those to exist at some point.
In my eyes, the license system is a great start for that. If you want to produce weapons legally, you could obtain official licenses from larger factions such as Empire, Kingdom and whoever manages to get on their level later, that make it legal to manufacture, own and use weapons within that territory. If you don't want to or can't invest that money, you would be producing weapons illegaly. Those would be cheap as hell as you have only that raw material, the production and the service cost, thus having that dip in price that Ville mentioned.

So we'd need a feature that makes owning legal weapons more worthwileso illegal weapons don't ruin the weapon market.
Perhaps that next to that license, you're getting official blueprints with it. If you don't manufacture weapons with that official blueprints, they become faulty, may have loading inhibitions, may break after a time - in short, illegally produced weapons are lesser quality than legall produced ones.

Thinking further, that feature alone could possibly also work without any licenses.
Another possibility would also be that blueprints are being "consumed" in the manufacturing process.

 

[Killer_Rabbit]

Personally I think illegal weapons should not be worse than licensed weapons instead if a player is found to be using them they should be arrested by either faction and imprisoned or have their ship impounded or should just be shot. This would hopefully discourage players who for the most part at the early game have regular dealings with the two factions using illegal weapons. Also if licences are sold then weapon prices would still drop as players who sold the cheapest weapons (its a game so they are all the same quality) would get the most money so players would try to make weapons cheaper therefore prices for weapons would plummet leaving only the NPC weapons traders as a bad option

 

[Stanky]

So if we're regulating small arms, wouldn't it make more sense to regulate ship weapons? But oh wait, that kinda hurts the game a bit. This is a key feature that everyone in game should be able to have.

This feature creates the problem that those that follow the rules may not be able to get a gun b/c they can't afford a license. At the same time, the "criminals" don't care about the laws in the first place (they are already going to pirate ships one way or another). A feature like this just prevents the honest player from defending his/herself.

And if you want to counteract this problem by making the licenses extremely cheap, that defeats the purpose of even adding the feature. JUST LET THE PLAYERS BE FREE.

Also, all of you are thinking about this small-time. Why has no one considered the implications features like this have for large factions? Large player factions normally have a military to run. They will want to produce their own weapons and be able to travel through empire and kingdom space without problems.

This feature sound like it would add a different dynamic to the game, but I don't think Starbase is the right kind of game for this feature. The devs themselves have said they want it to be player driven, and they want player factions to be more important than kingdom and empire. Features like this will only limit gameplay.

 

[Verbatos]

I think they should allow weapons to be crafted and sold however the individual player wants. If they ever want to implement a sort of "license" for guns, it should be a roleplay feature rather than a mechanic. What I mean by this is that every player could make a weapon if they so choose, but it is up to the individual faction to regulate laws on weapons. Maybe they could implement a kind of "serial code" system, where each weapon would show both which machine created it, as well as how many that machine made before this weapon, then if you are caught with say, an empire assault rifle on kingdom territory without announcing that you had it beforehand, whatever kind of law enforcement the faction is using could take you in and arrest you.

 

[Amos.37]

I'd suggest a system similar to what exists in real life, owning small arms requires a license and even a permit, even with different license levels depending on the weapon. Sidearms might be fairly easy, but things like shotguns, assault rifles, explosives, etc, need higher licenses or are completely prohibited outside the military/security forces.

Producing small arms, legally, requires permission from the governing bodies of whichever station you are on. So Empire and Kingdom can determine costs for permission, as can large factions when they are implemented. People can still try to produce and own weapons without permission/license/permit/etc, but these become unregistered, unlicensed weapons. Anyone caught in possession of an unlicensed weapon then faces a penalty, whether this is confiscation, a fine, shot at on site, whatever, would be determined by the station.

If possible, make it an option for players in violation of a safe zone's laws to lose their protection. Thus making it possible for security to hunt them down, but they can't fight back. Hence very high risk to carry illegal weapons. Not sure if this loss of protection should be automatic, which could probably be abused (just shoot everyone in customs and the guy who gets hurt is breaking a law) or have it that a station admin could revoke protection. But this could also be abused, so... thoughts?

Actually looking for unlicensed weapons might require a specific item, like a hand held scanner that's linked to a database somewhere on the station. This checks player names with weapons they have a permit for, number of weapons, etc. This way, it would be possible to avoid detection of illegal weapons, but would also be risky.

Also, limit firearms manufacturing to stations. At least the more advanced firearms. Maybe basic things like pistols, assault rifles, shotguns and such could be produced on a ship, but more advanced weapons like energy weapons and explosives can only be made on a station.

Carrying weapons made and registered with one faction into a station owned by another would require treaties between those factions, customs, etc, or it would be illegal.
Also, make it a safe zone requirement to have some sort of firearms law in place.

This means that eventually, lawless stations may well eventually exist that don't enforce any laws for firearms, but these would have to be outside the safe zones, and so would be extremely risky to do business at. This is where black markets would thrive, but reputable merchants and traders would avoid, because of the risk of being jumped, killed, and losing their haul.

While I'm sure this system would take a lot of work, and will still have problems, it will at least allow:
-Enforced gun control within safe zones, where the majority of commerce will probably happen.
-Diplomacy between factions for the transport of goods, especially things like firearms.
-Regulations for producing and owning firearms, with more dangerous firearms requiring harder to obtain permissions.
-The existence of high risk, lawless stations (eventually) where black markets can thrive.
-Customs for arrival at stations belonging to a faction that you are not part of. This would require players to work at, but could eventually be replaced with YOLOL based on inventory or even NPCs if those are added.

 

[Lionard Freezer]

I dont know about licenses and all that stuff. I mean... who really wants to enforce all this?
since there wont be any NPCs in this game and it would ruin the fun quite a bit if the insurence system would just sudenly say that you are a criminal for some reason... sure some people might want to find out if someone uses illegal weapons... but why really? where is the benefit for the ones enforcing all these "laws" ?
I would like the idea of a hand held scanner that just tells you what kind of weapon the person has on their body. Kinda like a better metal detector.
Maybe make a bigger version of it so that you could hook that scanner up to yolol scripts and make a securety system that reacts when someone walks around with a rocket launcher.
This idea would actually make sense (since the other doesnt really do in my eyes. (can someone tell me what the benefits of enforcing these "laws" would be?)) and could be used for a lot of other cool stuff. you want a trading hall? just make a sign to tell people to only enter without any weapons,setup detectors and an automatic termination system (like one player needs to go into a room, needs to go throught the scanner and would be automaticly shot if carrying a weapon, if carrying no weapon he can just walk out the other side, all automated with yolol) and you have a secure trading hall.
Sure it could still be raided, but no gunfights would break out in the middle of the room.
This all wouldnt make all that much sense in a safezone but even then could you deny access to the trading hall throught the scanner.

 

[Amos.37]

As far as who wants to enforce this, that was why I suggested making it a requirement to establish a safe zone.
If a faction want's a stable station, they'd want a safe zone. If they want a safezone, they need to enforce some form of weapons control. This also gives a kind of in universe explanation for the safe zone instead of a sudden immortality field.

Stations don't need to enforce this, but then they would be considered lawless, and so would not have a safezone. This would make dealing there very risky. Potentially very lucrative because you can ignore any limitations on weapon production and sales, but risky in that anyone could attack you and try to steal your stuff. That's not to say a "lawless" station couldn't be safe, but that would be based on the virtue of the players (a laughable idea in my experience) rather than any in-game protection.
This gives limitations, requirements and an in-universe explanation for safezones.

And the point of this isn't so much to limit ownership and use of firearms, it's to give depth to the weapons economy. It's been stated that the material cost of a firearm is fairly low. So much so that making one will pretty much always be cheaper than buying one.

"Material cost of an assault rifle is about 700Cs, but stations sell them for 50000Cs or so." _VilleFB

Adding regulations means that guns don't become so exceedingly common that they become worthless in the economy. Players can still get them, but there's more cost to it. I agree that permits per weapon is probably too complicated, but licenses that say what kind of weapon you're allowed to own at what stations would not be hard to implement, all you need is a list with a players name, and what weapons they are allowed to own at that station, and it would not be too limiting for players, as basic weapons would still be fairly accessible.
It puts a limit on players walking around with rocket launchers, but duh. Players shouldn't be walking around a station with ROCKET LAUNCHERS! Those would require you to be part of a factions military or security force, or black market trading.
This would essentially create 2 classes of firearms: civ allowed and military only. As to which weapons fall into which catagories would be up to the faction controlling the station/enforcing the laws.
That being said, a particular station could decide to allow rocket launchers as a civ weapon and make the license available. But that would only be at that particular station. That station could still qualify for a safezone, and would likely become a popular place for people looking to buy said rocket launcher. But, they would still be illegal elsewhere.

Manufacturers might need a permit, or a sort of tax per unit, to produce firearms. This would encourage a black market economy for firearms, as manufacturers want more profit, and players want weapons that require more expensive or harder to get licenses, or that aren't available to civilians at most stations (ie. Rocket Launchers).

The whole 'safezone requiring a gun control system to be instated' adds to the higher risk of black market dealings. Admittedly, I'm not sure how you'd implement this? Maybe a dev inspector of sorts? They assess to see whether a station meets requirements to have a safezone put in place. Player established safezones haven't been explained fully yet so I'm not sure. Also they won't be implemented at EA launch, but this is looking at the long term so...

How to penalise players for breaking the law is the other part I'm not sure how to implement. A way to remove safezone protection from a certain player would be handy, but could very easily be abused.
Fines and confiscation could work, but again, how do you enforce it? What's to stop a player from just refusing to hand over their stuff while in a safezone? Maybe a blacklist for players that don't comply, making trading difficult for them?

I do like Lionard's idea of a scanner room. Could see this being implemented as a form of customs or security of commercial zones, etc. But I wouldn't want the system to be failsafe. I'd want it to be risky to carry illegal weapons, but not impossible. Again, not certain how exactly to do this in a safezone, but that's what discussion forums are for...

 

[Stanky]

As far as who wants to enforce this, that was why I suggested making it a requirement to establish a safe zone.
If a faction want's a stable station, they'd want a safe zone. If they want a safezone, they need to enforce some form of weapons control. This also gives a kind of in universe explanation for the safe zone instead of a sudden immortality field.

Stations don't need to enforce this, but then they would be considered lawless, and so would not have a safezone. This would make dealing there very risky. Potentially very lucrative because you can ignore any limitations on weapon production and sales, but risky in that anyone could attack you and try to steal your stuff. That's not to say a "lawless" station couldn't be safe, but that would be based on the virtue of the players (a laughable idea in my experience) rather than any in-game protection.
This gives limitations, requirements and an in-universe explanation for safezones.

And the point of this isn't so much to limit ownership and use of firearms, it's to give depth to the weapons economy. It's been stated that the material cost of a firearm is fairly low. So much so that making one will pretty much always be cheaper than buying one.

"Material cost of an assault rifle is about 700Cs, but stations sell them for 50000Cs or so." _VilleFB

Adding regulations means that guns don't become so exceedingly common that they become worthless in the economy. Players can still get them, but there's more cost to it. I agree that permits per weapon is probably too complicated, but licenses that say what kind of weapon you're allowed to own at what stations would not be hard to implement, all you need is a list with a players name, and what weapons they are allowed to own at that station, and it would not be too limiting for players, as basic weapons would still be fairly accessible.
It puts a limit on players walking around with rocket launchers, but duh. Players shouldn't be walking around a station with ROCKET LAUNCHERS! Those would require you to be part of a factions military or security force, or black market trading.
This would essentially create 2 classes of firearms: civ allowed and military only. As to which weapons fall into which catagories would be up to the faction controlling the station/enforcing the laws.
That being said, a particular station could decide to allow rocket launchers as a civ weapon and make the license available. But that would only be at that particular station. That station could still qualify for a safezone, and would likely become a popular place for people looking to buy said rocket launcher. But, they would still be illegal elsewhere.

Manufacturers might need a permit, or a sort of tax per unit, to produce firearms. This would encourage a black market economy for firearms, as manufacturers want more profit, and players want weapons that require more expensive or harder to get licenses, or that aren't available to civilians at most stations (ie. Rocket Launchers).

The whole 'safezone requiring a gun control system to be instated' adds to the higher risk of black market dealings. Admittedly, I'm not sure how you'd implement this? Maybe a dev inspector of sorts? They assess to see whether a station meets requirements to have a safezone put in place. Player established safezones haven't been explained fully yet so I'm not sure. Also they won't be implemented at EA launch, but this is looking at the long term so...

How to penalise players for breaking the law is the other part I'm not sure how to implement. A way to remove safezone protection from a certain player would be handy, but could very easily be abused.
Fines and confiscation could work, but again, how do you enforce it? What's to stop a player from just refusing to hand over their stuff while in a safezone? Maybe a blacklist for players that don't comply, making trading difficult for them?

I do like Lionard's idea of a scanner room. Could see this being implemented as a form of customs or security of commercial zones, etc. But I wouldn't want the system to be failsafe. I'd want it to be risky to carry illegal weapons, but not impossible. Again, not certain how exactly to do this in a safezone, but that's what discussion forums are for...

OH MY GOSH NO. None of this sounds good. I'm cringing at the mere thought of something like this. Players should be able to do as they like. Just let us get the blueprints by some in-game method, and let us have a free market. If the dev's want to increase the prices, then they have to increase the material cost. This game is made by the players, or it isn't a true sandbox. I need freedom to do as I please. Stop infringing on my robotic rights!

 

[Amos.37]

OH MY GOSH NO. None of this sounds good. I'm cringing at the mere thought of something like this. Players should be able to do as they like. Just let us get the blueprints by some in-game method, and let us have a free market. If the dev's want to increase the prices, then they have to increase the material cost. This game is made by the players, or it isn't a true sandbox. I need freedom to do as I please. Stop infringing on my robotic rights!

I'm going to hazard a guess that you're from the USA? Just a hunch...

As far as true sandbox, where you are free to do whatever, isn't that just a 'lawless' station? As in one without any sort of safezone? Isn't a safezone already preventing you from doing as you please?
Either way, the end result would be the same whether you make guns more expensive to make, or add extra costs (regulations) to making them. Just means more expensive guns in the end. My idea is that players take over the production and sale of guns eventually, basically making the default vendors obsolete and adding more gameplay options for players who want to be arms dealers.

Adding regulations means more roleplaying, more gameplay elements in producing and acquiring guns, etc. With the system I suggested, stations could still be established that don't have any of these requirements. Probably even with safezones, depends how they are implemented.
It doesn't prevent you playing how you like, just which stations you can go nuts in. Kind of like laws in society.

All that said, it's very likely that, since the idea is that SB will be a bare-bones sandbox, leaving most things up to players to decide, make, etc, that any laws will just depend on which station you're at and whether anyone is going to try and enforce them. I just like the idea that a society, even an online one, would have rules that prevent it from just being a chaotic murder-fest.

 

[Stanky]

I'm going to hazard a guess that you're from the USA? Just a hunch...

As far as true sandbox, where you are free to do whatever, isn't that just a 'lawless' station? As in one without any sort of safezone? Isn't a safezone already preventing you from doing as you please?
Either way, the end result would be the same whether you make guns more expensive to make, or add extra costs (regulations) to making them. Just means more expensive guns in the end. My idea is that players take over the production and sale of guns eventually, basically making the default vendors obsolete and adding more gameplay options for players who want to be arms dealers.

Adding regulations means more roleplaying, more gameplay elements in producing and acquiring guns, etc. With the system I suggested, stations could still be established that don't have any of these requirements. Probably even with safezones, depends how they are implemented.
It doesn't prevent you playing how you like, just which stations you can go nuts in. Kind of like laws in society.

All that said, it's very likely that, since the idea is that SB will be a bare-bones sandbox, leaving most things up to players to decide, make, etc, that any laws will just depend on which station you're at and whether anyone is going to try and enforce them. I just like the idea that a society, even an online one, would have rules that prevent it from just being a chaotic murder-fest.

I'm perfectly fine with starter safezones. They make sense. They allow new players to dip their toes into the game. But the key point here is that these are SAFE zones. And that means that damage is impossible. So it is completely illogical to have measures of gun control in a safe zone. And well, once you leave the starting safezone, you're going to need a gun. I've noticed this divide in the community between Roleplayers and non-roleplayers. I'm a moderate on this issue. I think game features should be added without RP in mind. This way it is a more streamlined game, but at the same time RPers can still RP while non RPers don't have to RP. The game wasn't intended as an RP game. It has little to no story to speak of. It is entirely player-driven (I like the completely player-driven RP, it feels more real to me). I just don't want features that upset a fairly large portion of the community, nor needless features that make a simple part of the game somewhat complicated. Though my mind is willing to be changed based on how player made safezones work. I feel like this is a key issue that ties into the entire argument.

 

[Amos.37]

I guess if and how any of this gets implemented depends entirely on how safezones work and the availability of weapons.
I guess where I'm coming from is that I want a blackmarket to exist, and I want it to actually be risky, like a real blackmarket. A blackmarket can only exist if there are prohibited commodities, which require rules as to why they are prohibited. If everything is always allowed, well then it's just a market.
Military grade weapons just make the most sense to me for a prohibited commodity. The whole safezone component comes into to it here, how do you enforce something in a safezone where there is no risk?
There's plenty of ways to do this, but personally I like the idea of blackmarkets being something you have to leave the safety of, well, safezones to access.

Adding these laws could also create location based markets. Places where certain items are legal versus more heavily controlled markets.

Of course, these laws would have to be created and maintained by players, coming back to the question, how do you enforce it in a safezone? As I've said previously, I'm sure there are ways to do this, but I like the idea of safezones requiring some level of laws to be in place, at least player made safezones. This also makes more sense in-universe than a magical immortality granting field. I'm not saying you can't use guns in a safezone, or that gun control should replace safezones, but that some level of laws should be required to set up a safezone initially. I get that it could be seen as limiting, preventing players from freely accessing every kind of weapon when in a safezone, but it doesn't prevent them from getting their hands on those weapons in other ways. In my mind, it would add more gameplay elements then it would prevent.

Also, this will almost certainly not be how the starting safezones work, and which weapons, if any, are prohibited on player/faction stations would depend entirely on the players in control. If it was implemented like this (honestly I don't think it will be), there would still most certainly be stations that just allow everything. I'd like these to be 'lawless' stations, that actually involve some risk when going to, but again, I don't actually think that it will be implemented that way, just how I'd like it to be.

My issue with that though, is if you're in a safezone, why would you need to be running around with military grade weapons?
If you just want to test them, go to a firing range (I guarantee players will make testing ranges for different weapons and different ship armours).
If the station is under attack, well under the current proposed system players would have plenty of warning and could organise a defense.
Making it illegal to walk around a station toting military grade weapons doesn't prevent players from owning said weapons, just walking around with them. I'm sure players will find ways to store items they are not currently using that don't fill up their inventories.
This also removes annoying players that run around in games shooting everything even though it does nothing.

It would also add a level of progression. At least for me I like it when I have to earn something rather than a game just handing it to me.

Eg. A player decides they want a military grade gun. Instead of just going and buying one straight out, they need to either find a station that sells them, join the station security force or some other group that has access to said weapons, or go through the black market.

Or, they can buy one from the first vendor they see. Which doesn't make sense to me.

This is why I'd like to see a separation between civilian and military class weapons. I feel this would add more than it takes when it comes to the weapons economy and giving players artificial progression paths.

 

[dusty]

Since the insurance system already exists, and weapons have a high selling price, would it be terrible to tie them into the insurance system? In the same way as an unregistered ship cannot have an insurance claim on it, maybe an unregistered/unlicensed firearm cannot either. Properly built small arms made with some kind of one-time use 'certificate' would allow them to be insured, which gives them a high return on value without needing to adjust its stats - especially given the current price of small arms (though that may change as they become craftable). On the other hand, unregistered/unlicensed small arms built without that certificate would be lost with the death of the endo, and enter either a fixable 'damaged' state, or despawning immediately without being able to be looted (or some other way of preventing insurance duplication - perhaps marking them stolen, like with ships). You'd have the opportunity for a black market commodity (unregistered or 'stolen' weapons), some high value cargo (weapon licenses), and a way to limit the proliferation of those nutty bazookas (insurance vs despawning).