Forums » Suggestions
Suggested before, I know, but they could really enhance the whole RPG thing as the game progresses into 4.x or something. Rich traders could have their own home-bases... with the funds to reinforce it to such a level that they would take entire fleets of capital ships to destroy. Or pirates could set up outposts accessible to only a few in remote sectors, to give them the edge over unsuspecting travellers.
Actually putting this idea into practice would be tricky... Lemming came up with some decent stat figures in some post, i forget where, but they dont leave much scope for awesomeness. 5 levels may be too few for the people that want to really develop a name for themselves... just imagine a player-owned station that can accommodate the largest of ships, stock whatever it pleased, and defend itself with dozens of automated turrets and guided rocket launchers as well as an ECM and point-defence lasers. Im talking HUGE. Really truly massively humongous.
But the problem that poses is that sectors arent just empty space... most areas simply wouldnt have room for the behemoths Im talking about. So first, you need a surveyor who you hire to tell you which is the maximum size of station that can fit in a sector- ie. level 2 (standard small station) or maybe level 7 (very large station with many docking bays and will allow all classes of ship to dock except for cruiser and battleship class) or ultimately, level 10 (think Borg cube). The surveyor would also provide information on the native materials of an area, which you can then extract at a steady rate and sell as trade goods if you like the value of what he says is available in the sector.
Unlike other major stations, though, supplies would have to be in some way finite or otherwise limited. For each level of station there would be technicians on board who would steadily produce goods over time. The level of the station would also dictate the technology of the products- ie. you cant buy a frigate in a level 1 station, or sell any item that just wouldnt fit in the damn thing. There would be limits. Plus, you would be able to purchase small mining drones to extract the natural resources of the area... in a dynamic economy, these resources would be plentiful at first, but the extraction rate would slowly decrease as more and more minerals were extracted from the area.
You *could* set the prices manually... but that would be only after weeks of experimentation. The base values for each item (as determined by the convention at the time) would be standard, and you would receive a 25% profit from all sales. The rest would go on maintenance, wages, etc.
For a station to grow in size and level, it would either have had to have a certain value of goods sold, or have money stumped up by the owner for expansion. Then, after 24 hours of the target value needed to upgrade, *poof* the new improved station appears. After the station reaches its limit in size due to space restrictions, the profit from sales would go up to 50%, since there is no need for an expansion fund.
All sales profit goes straight to your shipboard account, topped up every hour.
The possible problems that I can see would be the Set Home Station. So if you set home in a destructible station, and that station ceases to exist for some reason, youd be transported to your nearest government-owned base and given a more severe penalty than usual for dying. Your inventory in the player-owned station would be wiped. This makes life very risky indeed if you choose to set up home in a far-flung outpost in the middle of nowhere... and would discourage a random popping-up of stations all over the universe for those that would build so on a whim, since the penalties for losing such a station would be severe.
But if there are such massive penalties for losing stations, there should be adequate defences, again in relation to the level of station. Anything from AI fighters to swarm pods to ECM to point-defense to turrets. All costing money, with the station having limits on the actual defenses available. All being auto-repaired at a constant rate (from the 50-75% cash that you dont get from sales) but not so quickly as to negate any/all attacks on them. If a turret is destroyed or a fighter etc. then it would be rebought after popping up a query box when you next dock.
Wow these ideas sound good. They may not work in practice, but the sheer depth of it would be so amazingly cool that it has to be considered, even if it would take a year to implement :)
This is the bit where you lot pick holes in my masterpiece of a developed idea :P
Actually putting this idea into practice would be tricky... Lemming came up with some decent stat figures in some post, i forget where, but they dont leave much scope for awesomeness. 5 levels may be too few for the people that want to really develop a name for themselves... just imagine a player-owned station that can accommodate the largest of ships, stock whatever it pleased, and defend itself with dozens of automated turrets and guided rocket launchers as well as an ECM and point-defence lasers. Im talking HUGE. Really truly massively humongous.
But the problem that poses is that sectors arent just empty space... most areas simply wouldnt have room for the behemoths Im talking about. So first, you need a surveyor who you hire to tell you which is the maximum size of station that can fit in a sector- ie. level 2 (standard small station) or maybe level 7 (very large station with many docking bays and will allow all classes of ship to dock except for cruiser and battleship class) or ultimately, level 10 (think Borg cube). The surveyor would also provide information on the native materials of an area, which you can then extract at a steady rate and sell as trade goods if you like the value of what he says is available in the sector.
Unlike other major stations, though, supplies would have to be in some way finite or otherwise limited. For each level of station there would be technicians on board who would steadily produce goods over time. The level of the station would also dictate the technology of the products- ie. you cant buy a frigate in a level 1 station, or sell any item that just wouldnt fit in the damn thing. There would be limits. Plus, you would be able to purchase small mining drones to extract the natural resources of the area... in a dynamic economy, these resources would be plentiful at first, but the extraction rate would slowly decrease as more and more minerals were extracted from the area.
You *could* set the prices manually... but that would be only after weeks of experimentation. The base values for each item (as determined by the convention at the time) would be standard, and you would receive a 25% profit from all sales. The rest would go on maintenance, wages, etc.
For a station to grow in size and level, it would either have had to have a certain value of goods sold, or have money stumped up by the owner for expansion. Then, after 24 hours of the target value needed to upgrade, *poof* the new improved station appears. After the station reaches its limit in size due to space restrictions, the profit from sales would go up to 50%, since there is no need for an expansion fund.
All sales profit goes straight to your shipboard account, topped up every hour.
The possible problems that I can see would be the Set Home Station. So if you set home in a destructible station, and that station ceases to exist for some reason, youd be transported to your nearest government-owned base and given a more severe penalty than usual for dying. Your inventory in the player-owned station would be wiped. This makes life very risky indeed if you choose to set up home in a far-flung outpost in the middle of nowhere... and would discourage a random popping-up of stations all over the universe for those that would build so on a whim, since the penalties for losing such a station would be severe.
But if there are such massive penalties for losing stations, there should be adequate defences, again in relation to the level of station. Anything from AI fighters to swarm pods to ECM to point-defense to turrets. All costing money, with the station having limits on the actual defenses available. All being auto-repaired at a constant rate (from the 50-75% cash that you dont get from sales) but not so quickly as to negate any/all attacks on them. If a turret is destroyed or a fighter etc. then it would be rebought after popping up a query box when you next dock.
Wow these ideas sound good. They may not work in practice, but the sheer depth of it would be so amazingly cool that it has to be considered, even if it would take a year to implement :)
This is the bit where you lot pick holes in my masterpiece of a developed idea :P
Whoa. That's a great idea.
I have a line on station defenses.......
The only weapon suitable for taking down such a station is the avalon torpedo. Many people have cried for the ability to target and destroy it. I think the rail gun would be the perfect weapon to use for such a goal. It's slow fire will prevent spamming an avalon to death, as well as require coordinated teamwork between one or more players to stop a nuke attack (4 - 8 nukes for each enemy ship).
Instead of just appearing, players should be able to see the construction of a base go on, a la Death Star.
Neat idea overall, Dave.
The only weapon suitable for taking down such a station is the avalon torpedo. Many people have cried for the ability to target and destroy it. I think the rail gun would be the perfect weapon to use for such a goal. It's slow fire will prevent spamming an avalon to death, as well as require coordinated teamwork between one or more players to stop a nuke attack (4 - 8 nukes for each enemy ship).
Instead of just appearing, players should be able to see the construction of a base go on, a la Death Star.
Neat idea overall, Dave.
Toghether with co-owner/co-commander the station could be maned more time of the day. If you like, to share the proffits of the station and of corse lower the the risk of owning the station also.
One big problem is for the AI to select friend from foe. If anyone attacks the station they are foe, but the AI whould then be lat to defend it self, and many foe would attack at the same time the AI might not have a chance to defend the sation :/
But then agin if you have several co-owner and several persons that have the sation as home this might be a less of a problem and for those how like to take a risk living on the edge they could be a reward the get interest on there savings, that they have at the station. Also people living at the staion, if thay attack a foe the AI could follow and a id in the defence...
/me whould like a staion, where can I buy one :)
One big problem is for the AI to select friend from foe. If anyone attacks the station they are foe, but the AI whould then be lat to defend it self, and many foe would attack at the same time the AI might not have a chance to defend the sation :/
But then agin if you have several co-owner and several persons that have the sation as home this might be a less of a problem and for those how like to take a risk living on the edge they could be a reward the get interest on there savings, that they have at the station. Also people living at the staion, if thay attack a foe the AI could follow and a id in the defence...
/me whould like a staion, where can I buy one :)
Awesome idea Dave! This would totally open up a whole new dimension in gameplay.
The only thing I would disagree with is causing a player to die if they "logged out" in a station that is then destroyed. I agree the penalty for losing such a station should be severe, but only for those that own the station. Is it really fair to dock in a station, quit the game, and when you come back all of a sudden your character is declared "dead" due to a sequence of events that you had no bearing on? More players would just leave the station and log out rather than risk staying inside the station.
How about this as a solution: If you are physically docked in a station when it is destroyed then yes, your character is killed and appropriate penalties inflicted. After all it would have been your own dang fault for not helping defend the station or at least bugging the heck out of there when it came under attack.
However, if you dock in a station then quit the game your character no longer "exists" in the game world. Therefore if the station you were docked at was destroyed, when you log back in it would put you in your ship in space where the station used to be.
To prevent players from quitting the game when docked just before the station is destroyed there would be a five minute period from when the station is last attacked in which you could not log out in that station. If you wanted to escape destruction, you would have to either help defend the station or run to a different station.
The only thing I would disagree with is causing a player to die if they "logged out" in a station that is then destroyed. I agree the penalty for losing such a station should be severe, but only for those that own the station. Is it really fair to dock in a station, quit the game, and when you come back all of a sudden your character is declared "dead" due to a sequence of events that you had no bearing on? More players would just leave the station and log out rather than risk staying inside the station.
How about this as a solution: If you are physically docked in a station when it is destroyed then yes, your character is killed and appropriate penalties inflicted. After all it would have been your own dang fault for not helping defend the station or at least bugging the heck out of there when it came under attack.
However, if you dock in a station then quit the game your character no longer "exists" in the game world. Therefore if the station you were docked at was destroyed, when you log back in it would put you in your ship in space where the station used to be.
To prevent players from quitting the game when docked just before the station is destroyed there would be a five minute period from when the station is last attacked in which you could not log out in that station. If you wanted to escape destruction, you would have to either help defend the station or run to a different station.
This idea is totally 1337! Dave, you have now replaced Celebrim as the best vocal idea maker person of today. w00t! But let us CAPTURE them! That would be cool! If, say, gold made a station in sector 8, then, say, itani came in and killed all the defenses and golds there, they should be able to capture it for themselves!
Player owned stations present huge difficulties.
Generally speaking, a station ought to be so expensive that no single player can afford one. Rather it is something that 20 or 30 players chip in to purchase together.
A station ought to be indestructible until a moderator removes its indestructible bit. This should only be done _after_ the station owner is informed. For instance, you recieve an email which says, "Asimov Station will be eligible for destruction on Sat. 6/12/2004 at 15:00 GMT. If you wish to move this time you must notify the moderator by sending an email to PC_plot_admin@vendetta.guildsoftware.com within 48 hours, and the new time must be within 2 weeks of the current date. Please suggest at least 3 different times in order of preference so that we can be sure of getting a time agreeable to all parties."
I agree that everything docked at a station at the time of its destruction should be destroyed (whether online or not) but that the above rule should prevent abuse.
Without the above rule, no station will survive. It's too easy too ambush them at 3:00 in the morning when noone is logged in to defend them. Not only that, while taking away the element of surprise might sound unfun, its absolutely more fun to actually have your plan resisted. I speak from experience here.
Likewise, the 'surveyor' you speak of needs to be an actual moderator. The admins need to be able to overrule any petition to create a station in a particular area.
The real difficulty with player owned stations is in creating an interface for managing them. You need a political interface - who is allowed to dock, what fees you charge them, etc. You need an inventory interface - what is for sale, what am I buying, what will I charge, what will I pay. You need a government interface to resolve disputes among the owners. And you need the same combat interface a capital ship has.
Generally speaking, a station ought to be so expensive that no single player can afford one. Rather it is something that 20 or 30 players chip in to purchase together.
A station ought to be indestructible until a moderator removes its indestructible bit. This should only be done _after_ the station owner is informed. For instance, you recieve an email which says, "Asimov Station will be eligible for destruction on Sat. 6/12/2004 at 15:00 GMT. If you wish to move this time you must notify the moderator by sending an email to PC_plot_admin@vendetta.guildsoftware.com within 48 hours, and the new time must be within 2 weeks of the current date. Please suggest at least 3 different times in order of preference so that we can be sure of getting a time agreeable to all parties."
I agree that everything docked at a station at the time of its destruction should be destroyed (whether online or not) but that the above rule should prevent abuse.
Without the above rule, no station will survive. It's too easy too ambush them at 3:00 in the morning when noone is logged in to defend them. Not only that, while taking away the element of surprise might sound unfun, its absolutely more fun to actually have your plan resisted. I speak from experience here.
Likewise, the 'surveyor' you speak of needs to be an actual moderator. The admins need to be able to overrule any petition to create a station in a particular area.
The real difficulty with player owned stations is in creating an interface for managing them. You need a political interface - who is allowed to dock, what fees you charge them, etc. You need an inventory interface - what is for sale, what am I buying, what will I charge, what will I pay. You need a government interface to resolve disputes among the owners. And you need the same combat interface a capital ship has.
I thought the national governments were suppposed to have those types of power over their national stations eventually.
Also, I think any attempt to build a station must be okay'ed by your nation's trading guild. But why build a station if you can have a frigate people can dock in? wouldn't it amount to the same thing?
Also, I think any attempt to build a station must be okay'ed by your nation's trading guild. But why build a station if you can have a frigate people can dock in? wouldn't it amount to the same thing?
Not if stations have the ability to CREATE widgets, ships and etc. My understanding is that the [cap ship] can transport widgets and sell them to its occupants and to other stations, but a station could create/mine local widgets and sell them at very high profit to the owner[s]. Also, you might not be able to buy ships at [cap ships], ie, the cap ship owner can buy, say, 100 vults and sell them to occupants, but the station can sell the ships without having to purchase them.
"I thought the national governments were suppposed to have those types of power over their national stations eventually."
Well, I would hope so but I don't think the devs have said anything regarding that particular aspect of thier long term plans. I don't consider it to be the most critical aspect of game play, but it would certainly be cool.
"But why build a station if you can have a frigate people can dock in? wouldn't it amount to the same thing?"
That's a good question. Would it ammount to the same thing?
Some possible differences:
1) A station can accept virtually infinite inventory. A capital ship might have a limit to the number of ships that can be docked with it and to the ammount of cargo that can be stored within it.
2) A capital ship might never have an invunerability period. Those people docked with a capital ship would always be at the mercy of the ship's pilot, whereas those people docked with a station under the above system recieve an online or optional offline warning to disembark - whether to flee or to defend the station.
3) A station is persitant, while a capital ship might disappear if its captain is logged out for more than 10 minutes.
But of course, those are all options and there is no reason why you couldn't run capital ships and stations exactly alike.
4) One thing that is assumed is that stations are immobile. That means that the station owner doesn't have to spend X gagillion credits on capital ship engines and capital ship batteries. That means that a given sized station is cheaper than a capital ship of the same size. Of course, the current stations are all pretty tiny but I don't imagine that they have to stay that way.
UPDATE: rougelazer, that is another assumption about the differences, not necessarily a given. It might well be possible to convert large ships into mobile industrial complexes as well by buying manufacturing section gizmos, refinary gizmos, etc. Of course, if stations do have cargo advantages compared to ships (ei option #1 above) a well placed station would serve as a better production center than a ship. But, all of this is getting really theoretical and we are adding additional interfaces to the feature set yet again.
Well, I would hope so but I don't think the devs have said anything regarding that particular aspect of thier long term plans. I don't consider it to be the most critical aspect of game play, but it would certainly be cool.
"But why build a station if you can have a frigate people can dock in? wouldn't it amount to the same thing?"
That's a good question. Would it ammount to the same thing?
Some possible differences:
1) A station can accept virtually infinite inventory. A capital ship might have a limit to the number of ships that can be docked with it and to the ammount of cargo that can be stored within it.
2) A capital ship might never have an invunerability period. Those people docked with a capital ship would always be at the mercy of the ship's pilot, whereas those people docked with a station under the above system recieve an online or optional offline warning to disembark - whether to flee or to defend the station.
3) A station is persitant, while a capital ship might disappear if its captain is logged out for more than 10 minutes.
But of course, those are all options and there is no reason why you couldn't run capital ships and stations exactly alike.
4) One thing that is assumed is that stations are immobile. That means that the station owner doesn't have to spend X gagillion credits on capital ship engines and capital ship batteries. That means that a given sized station is cheaper than a capital ship of the same size. Of course, the current stations are all pretty tiny but I don't imagine that they have to stay that way.
UPDATE: rougelazer, that is another assumption about the differences, not necessarily a given. It might well be possible to convert large ships into mobile industrial complexes as well by buying manufacturing section gizmos, refinary gizmos, etc. Of course, if stations do have cargo advantages compared to ships (ei option #1 above) a well placed station would serve as a better production center than a ship. But, all of this is getting really theoretical and we are adding additional interfaces to the feature set yet again.
That's true, we shouldn't add interfaces to our currently temporary interface system... After all, one of the items in 3.2 release was that the Interface was "temporary" and would be replaced "soon". Maybe 3.3?
Basicly we are talking about houseing in a multiplayer rpg game. Everyone will want one, and that takes a LOT of room. Destructable houses just dont work. Mods cannot be involved in teh process at all, it has to be automated. Remember that guildsoft is trying to produce a game for many people, they cannot afford to have gms get bogged down in houseing issues. Veterens of ultima online will know what I am talking about.
-HSR
-HSR
Lemming wants player owned neutral stations, say, i, being blue, could make a station right next to the s4 wormhole in s7. This would provide golds with instant access to the wormhole when they undock, but what i would like to have information of is, players homed at this station, # of items sold in the past (specified time, say 5 minutes), a tab to change the cost of items, this tab would show the item, how much it costs to make, how much it is selling for, how popular it is. EX:
Tachyon blaster--2000--3000--20 sold
Graviton blaster--7000--8000--23 sold
Sunflare rocket launcher--2000--3000--40 sold
Sunflare ammo--40--50--125 sold
I don't know the prices of the guns by heart so don't kill me for not having them around the current prices.
Tachyon blaster--2000--3000--20 sold
Graviton blaster--7000--8000--23 sold
Sunflare rocket launcher--2000--3000--40 sold
Sunflare ammo--40--50--125 sold
I don't know the prices of the guns by heart so don't kill me for not having them around the current prices.
They would have to make space a very very big thing for everyone one wants their own to be able to have a station, and what about all the hidden stations for the piratey types? I could imagine a small group of pirates setting up station in a hidden sector having to wait until noone else was in the linked sector before jumping to keep their relatively lightly defended base safe.
NPC capital ships could patrol from sector to sector and assist any station of the same nation in defense when under attack, the station could even broadcast a help message automatically if it was attacked by large enough a force to any friendlies online who were but a handful of sectors away.
- and, and_but_red!, and_only_gold!
NPC capital ships could patrol from sector to sector and assist any station of the same nation in defense when under attack, the station could even broadcast a help message automatically if it was attacked by large enough a force to any friendlies online who were but a handful of sectors away.
- and, and_but_red!, and_only_gold!
Ooh, just realized that player owned stations could foster an arms trade. Nice. If only there was a way to create a black market trade in ships as well. I suppose a frigate could carry ships from station to station.
Make it so ridiculously expensive that only a nation as a whole will be able to afford one. In today's credits, make it one billion credits at least. By the time the final game rolls around, a credit will be worth more and the price of a station can probably go down a lot.
As for distructiveness, why not just make it so that when you create a station, you set a schedule? Set it so, say, at 4PM on the first Tuesday of the month, the station is destructible. Then the devs can just write a program to e-mail people before the station is destructible and there ya go.
And make the capturable then too!
As for distructiveness, why not just make it so that when you create a station, you set a schedule? Set it so, say, at 4PM on the first Tuesday of the month, the station is destructible. Then the devs can just write a program to e-mail people before the station is destructible and there ya go.
And make the capturable then too!
cembandit: Well, an automated system would be of someworth, but unlike the housing issue in UO, I'm thinking more along the lines of the corporation structure in EVE. I really think that the 'housing' should be so expensive that only 30+ veteren players can afford one. It won't be the sort of thing that everyone can afford even if they want one, and belonging to a group that owns a station will be nearly as a good as owning the station itself since you would have full access to it. Stations would be more like a mark of stature of a clan or subfaction than a place to hang your hat. I don't want to get bogged down in UO's possession acquisition issues. Stations wouldn't be places to hang your rare flower pot, since there would be no rare flower pots (and you could inventory them anywhere even if there were). The only difference between buying your own station and being able to use someone's station is that you wouldn't get to set up the government structure of the station - which isn't to say that if the station belonged to a group and was purchased via corporate funds that you couldn't end up being elected CEO and given access to the control interface.
It might be possible to pre-plot out all the station locations that are acceptable in each sector and pre-approve those 'lots' sort of like UO, but I would hope that in a player community of 10,000 players requesting new stations to be built would be less than once a week (obviously more in a brief period after the game opened at the point when players first begin acquiring sufficient funds to consider it) and be a relatively minor burden. Still, you are right in that it would be safer to pre-approve all the sites and automate it.
Capturable NPC stations are fine, and would be a cool means of measuring global faction power. Capturable PC stations are right out. No no no no no. You can maybe allow blowing one up, but pirating a station is just going to lead to far too many attempts to do so and will be utterly unfun for all station owners.
It might be possible to pre-plot out all the station locations that are acceptable in each sector and pre-approve those 'lots' sort of like UO, but I would hope that in a player community of 10,000 players requesting new stations to be built would be less than once a week (obviously more in a brief period after the game opened at the point when players first begin acquiring sufficient funds to consider it) and be a relatively minor burden. Still, you are right in that it would be safer to pre-approve all the sites and automate it.
Capturable NPC stations are fine, and would be a cool means of measuring global faction power. Capturable PC stations are right out. No no no no no. You can maybe allow blowing one up, but pirating a station is just going to lead to far too many attempts to do so and will be utterly unfun for all station owners.
Regarding destruction of PC bases, I think that a base should always be subject to potential damage, but that bases should also be very defensible. Putting weapons on a base, maybe NPCs could be hired to help defend, make the bigger ones take days of onslaught to kill.
One issue that's bound to come up is space. The UO house problem is indicative of this tendency for buildings to consume all the available space. One potential way to handle this, at the risk of making the universe too large, is to have user creatable jumpgates (at a fair bit of cost, I might add, such a thing would have to be a major project undertaken by a nation, and there might be some failure rate involved) - which would allow a nation to expand into new space. The contents of that new space would be generally random, ranging from good places to set up mining operations, with lots of asteroids, to dust clouds that are difficult to see through, to areas already occupied by rogues, to empty space. There might be some 3-D model of how the big picture was laid out, or there might not. It would be absolutely beautiful if in the end, players had some control over the landscapes of these new places and could work to clean up asteroids, mine them, add stations and bases for guilds, vaporise asteroids to throw up dust to hide in, or vacuum it all up for resources and visibility. It would also add a touch of the mud/mush/moo experience, allowing the players to expand the world they live in. Seems like a monumental task to code, but it might help the game to run itself at some point down the line.
One issue that's bound to come up is space. The UO house problem is indicative of this tendency for buildings to consume all the available space. One potential way to handle this, at the risk of making the universe too large, is to have user creatable jumpgates (at a fair bit of cost, I might add, such a thing would have to be a major project undertaken by a nation, and there might be some failure rate involved) - which would allow a nation to expand into new space. The contents of that new space would be generally random, ranging from good places to set up mining operations, with lots of asteroids, to dust clouds that are difficult to see through, to areas already occupied by rogues, to empty space. There might be some 3-D model of how the big picture was laid out, or there might not. It would be absolutely beautiful if in the end, players had some control over the landscapes of these new places and could work to clean up asteroids, mine them, add stations and bases for guilds, vaporise asteroids to throw up dust to hide in, or vacuum it all up for resources and visibility. It would also add a touch of the mud/mush/moo experience, allowing the players to expand the world they live in. Seems like a monumental task to code, but it might help the game to run itself at some point down the line.
GOod idea vx, and maybe the devs have thought of it. After all, the page does say that the final game might include --INFINITE-- sectors. I hope so. Maybe that's what a1k0n's jumpgate screenshot is about?
With some data structure finesse, that may be plausable.
Castles in UO where ment for only large (100+ members) guilds to afford....players always find a way. I was a part of that process, so long ago, and it would be wise to avoid repeating mistakes.
-HSR
Castles in UO where ment for only large (100+ members) guilds to afford....players always find a way. I was a part of that process, so long ago, and it would be wise to avoid repeating mistakes.
-HSR