plmkoi
-
Posts
70 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by plmkoi
-
-
On 1/5/2020 at 10:25 AM, WilburKit said:
oh ok. damn that's annoying
Yea it is annoying and I apologize, but I forgot to add, don't take my word for it. If you go to Torrent Freak (use google) the articles they post there isn't all about pirating. There are stories that are put up there like Emu Paradise no longer hosting roms because Nintendo sued them, public radio stations were sued because they played a song, and people's Youtube accounts shut down over perceived similarities to copy righted products. I learned a bit of how bad litigation can get if you are taken to court and the costs will easily bankrupt entities that are smaller then a large multi national conglomerate like W.B studios or Disney.
-
On 1/6/2020 at 10:16 PM, Messenger01 said:
why so mad? Armor customization is always an interesting part of a game. Also, it is not exclusive to AvA for the esthetic part at least...
The game would definitely be more complete if we had customizable and craftable armor as well! With in-game properties too, not just looks!!That person is always like that in just about every thread. Claimed to play Eve and so I would assume a bitter vet, as that would fit the attitude and history I guess. Could you do a more thorough explanation? I still don't see the point of just doing it through the cash shop that can take a 1/4 of the day vs inventing all new resources to just give players an opportunity to make accessories.
On 1/7/2020 at 3:32 AM, Aaron Cain said:I would not mind seeing aesthetic accessories and bots in a shop outside the game world. I would also like to add the possibility to see your char outside the gamesetting, like you can in aion and FF14. A possibility to see your character and progress in your profile, maybe even add open or completed duties and achievements.
Well I haven't played either games, but it sounds like something similar to walking in stations? If this is the case, I wouldn't mind of having something instance like a small living quarters that is instanced and the opportunity to hang up npc items as trophies on the walls.
-
On 1/6/2020 at 1:15 AM, BaileyVandenbroek said:
IMVU for example they made their money from player based meshes
Interesting, but what other real mmo's? I suspect that most mmo's hasn't incorporated this feature because the time invested wouldn't pay dividends. I mean a lot of the cash shops already have dev's that can make items themselves and upload it. If you want to make your character unique, I think you should focus on actions and not looks. There are people that bought a $70 monocle and they are still a nobody. Then you have e-famous names like The Mittani, Sir Molle, Shadoo, Chribba, and etc, that either orchestrated large events or their personality in business/industry that you heard on the news in the past.
I can see the need of having your character look more unique, but I think it shouldn't be looked in the lens of a theme park mmo. In theme parks it is already hard to stand out in a world where everyone is special and is a hero, but in sand box mmo's it is not the looks, but the actions that one takes that is going to make you stand out. If you really want to be noticed, you can always fly expensive ships out in null sec for this game.
-
On 1/1/2020 at 6:59 PM, MasteredRed said:
Addressing plmkoi's point
btw, major groups have committed to do that because of course they have. This is a game. People will overall, go ahead and do whatever they feel like. And on that note
With your reference to Lethys, yes he is a major part of the organization, Band of Outlaws. Ya know, the pirate one. I assume you already knew this but just wanted to inform you.
So sounds like someone irrelevant just like like me, cool I guess. I just like poking fun at his posts, in my opinion, half of his posts don't really add anything to most threads and almost the rest it is clear he just types without thinking before hand. He does occasionally a sliver of the posts does have some substance.
On 1/1/2020 at 6:59 PM, MasteredRed said:Addressing plmkoi's point
Now that those two things are out of the way, let me address more in terms of factors that you are missing.
With your reference to ships, manufactured goods, resources, and so on not generally becoming less expensive, you are in some ways correct to a point.
At the start of the game, resources will be rather highly priced, eventually though dropping and stabilizing into their perceived value by the players. This value will only continue to lower though, at least for a considerable amount of time, as players advance their skills, develop more efficient systems in their infrastructure, and acquisition the system needed to survive. Once things have started to become, shall we say more developed and refined in the player space, then ultimately the resources will be put into other less immediately essential projects. Resources and manufactured goods are still less expensive than at the start but they are still not lowering dramatically.Now this agrees with your point so far but why did I say that you were correct to a point?
It is due to the fact my example doesn't even cover us leaving our starting planet. You see, once interplanetary trade, travel, and transport become things, I can't even imagine predicting the markets. Barely at all. With the inherent reality that resources on a solar system scale can not be estimated at this point, the easiest assumption(and I grant you that this is an assumption) is that over a long period of time, baring the greatest of upheavals, the markets will become more saturated and the prices will fall. Of course they can't fall forever. They will stop at some point.
After chewing the cud on your post I would say that there may be some fatal flaws in the argument that needs to be addressed.
Yes, you are right that prices will fall (you see this in the Eve economic report consumer price index not dropping below 100 until after Revelations release), but I think that it is a major assumption that it will fall enough for this game that entities will put resources into vanity projects. Here are factors that I see limiting this and I will address them in order.
- Lack of automation in mining
- PvP being manual
- Significant costs of logistics
Lack of automation in mining
The lack of automation when it comes to mining and the easiest example is Eve. Eve allows you to multi box and there are very strong incentives that had some people maintaining easily 8-10 subscriptions using a combination of plex/gtc's + the credit card. The reward is that you can do industry pretty much by yourself, without another humans input other then buying your goods. For this game the only incentive I see on having a few different accounts is for espionage or specialization, of which the latter it is more efficient to use your social skills to overcome that problem.
The only way I would see this factor removed is if the developers decided to introduce mining drones or in game scripted a.i to assist human players. Where the human player can have the drones mine one area a certain X meters away while the individual is also mining. Or ships that allow you to lock on an asteroid and you hit the F1 key, the result being ore added to your cargo hold. The purpose of such tools is to efficiently collect resources with the minimum amount of people that have the skills and enjoy the activity. Now you can say "our members has to have mining at X level", but this is a major risk.
Another factor these organizations in DU are going to have to maintain is motivation/morale. All these Eve epic betrayals that are sensationalized in the media are 7/10 times dissatisfied/disgruntled players. If they don't try to stick it to the organization they would just end up joining another that won't force them to mine or pay for their own pvp ships. There is a major reason why both small & large organizations have SRP welfare programs and that is people don't play/pay for a video game as a second job. So burning your players out in this game is easier then in Eve and we didn't even come to the difficulties of mining op's.
Pvp requiring more then a F1 monkey
Now we need to consider that the developers has said that it is going to be more efficient to have people man the turrets/modules themselves over just one pilot controlling the entire ships functions. Well with the above point on the costliness of resources being a factor, even if the developers decide to allow all turrets being controllable by one person minus slower tracking/etc, I am skeptical serious people are going to utilize the option. This also puts a major emphasis on player skills depending on how pvp turns out in its final form. The analogy I am thinking of is on the lines of the Battle of Trafalgar, where the crews coordination and experience is going to make a large impact and be a factor in pvp engagements.
Because of the above, groups that are really cohesive is going to be the bane of large organizations compared to Eve. In Eve it is pretty easy to steam roll entities if you attack a large alliances strategic assets and the response is getting blobbed easily 2-3 times your number. A lot of these large organizations also get pretty much perfect information from the Esi that CCP provides, local that shows who is in the system (so perfect intel), and you can utilize a lot of third party services like Dotlan that shows what celestials are in the system. As for as I know, the studio hasn't came out with any tools that allows the above. So imperfect intel means that unless you have a spy in the opponents organization you are pretty much exponentially increasing the complexity of the fleet commander. As losses are probably going to hurt and it may even have certain entities go under if they have no reserves or something to fall back on.
The there is also the traveling time factor which is pretty significant as you can probably drop a mobile depot in the middle of an enemy alliances territory and launch insurgent attacks against soft targets without them knowing. Which can possibly be circumvented if you build structures, but with the above point again that is diverting resources. You are also going to be limited when you get sent back to this titles version of high sec. Example when the newer iteration of an organization of BoB decided to reconquer a region they set up the staging point in Aridia (which is npc space), if you click that map you can see the routes start to multiply on the routes you can take to move war material to the staging point. Well to my knowledge there is only one safe planet and I don't see why an organization wouldn't hire out a "Varys" to see if the defeated entity tries to regroup and intercept them when they try to relaunch. So what is this point? Well if you are defeated, it could mean pretty much that is it and so the most resilient organizations are going to have territory that they can fall back on. Competent leaders are going to not wade into the unknown and I am sure there are more experienced players in Eve then me that can tell you personal stories of "fire sales" as people panic.
Almost forgot, mining op's. This is already going to be a challenge as a defenseless mining op is going to be easy prey for raiders and this also includes the transportation of said material. I won't comment any further as I am unsure how the studio plans on handling resource depletion. I do see a large incentive to control large regions of space as a buffer to give the defending side more warning with the spamming of small outposts.
Significant costs of logistics
There is an old saying, "Amateurs study tactics, armchair generals study strategy, and professionals study logistics". Well from the current info I see this isn't as simple as taking a jump freighter and jumping X amount of systems with a cargo full of supplies. Convoy's are going to be mandatory unless you want to experience the chaos of Viking raids and so organizations are going to decide if it is viable to ship everything in one large loot pinata? Or multiple small loot pinata's? This is assuming the developers don't put anything that makes traveling trivial. In Eve logistics isn't much of a hurdle and so invasions in my view tend to be trivial to some degree. It only takes a small number of people over a certain amount of time and I cede this to someone that has more experience as I am just getting into my first freighter myself. I just know from experience my corp leader was able to transport all kinds of stuff that was requested during the week in the Vale region.
As of right now it seems like something simple as you having one large structure and house all your stuff there, similar to putting all your eggs in one basket. Well if you are going to be a large entity it is going to be beneficial to take large swaths of land to but hardened underground bunkers to store supplies. This is one example of what organizations are going to do to mitigate risk, something they call a continuity plan. There is more, but I wasn't expecting a well thought out response as yours and have to come in an hour or two earlier and I apologize.
As for the rest of your point I only expect to see one market and that is the trading hub at the moon. To expect markets in organization territory is going to be surprising, only because it would either cater to the organization, as you have to get permission to pick up said goods or an organization that operates a NRDS policy. The latter being a very costly endeavor and already difficult to do in Eve if you are holding valuable territory.
As for the ramming of ships, well if the side getting rammed has poor quality ships then of course they would lose. But lets put in the scenario that it is faction quality ships T2 armor and the ramming ships being used is cheap T1. Well the ramming of ships can be problematic if the organization has 15k people, all in one time zone, engaging in that particular battle, and the opposing side didn't bother to intel gather. Because if you figure out where they are supplying from you can knock that out. Remember there is no local, there is distance, and there is a cost of minerals + fuel.
Kamikaze attacks was ineffective in one war because of actual costs, so unless this game decides to go down the route of trivializing the costs, I still fail to see how this is more efficient. I think it is a little smarter to calculate the max amount of damage each turret can do, arm the ships with just enough fuel to orbit said ship, just enough ammo they can fire before getting destroyed, and scavenge whatever ammo they can off their dead buddies if they are still alive. Anyone that tries to run will be shot by our side for desertion (hope you get this reference).
Now maybe I am over thinking this, but I enjoy analyzing things. There are a lot of factors and I try to assume as little as possible, by using other similar examples. A lot of people are assuming that empire building is going to be easy, I see it as an almost impossible endeavor depending on the studios planned expansion releases. I will admit that the only scenario that it is a possibility that the organization can build any vanity project is if people decide to use diplomacy and blue most of conquerable space like they do in Eve. I look forward to your post and I will try to be more detailed as it is extremely late for me.
-
What prevents people from doing this with the current RDMS system they are working on? Can't the person that owns the construct already do this and keep track of everything with excel? If the studio incorporates billboards, I don't see why player can't advertise that contact this individual in game and you make an informal agreement right there.
-
On 1/1/2020 at 9:32 PM, BaileyVandenbroek said:
Well if they make a template we simply make the mesh tadah they can make basic mesh model so people have hair selection i am not saying everyone must be different but offering that feature to people would make the game more interesting and they would respect their promise of everything can be created limit is your imagination.
Well the "feature making the game interesting" is highly debatable, the core features advertised/talked about of the game is the main interest. The things they are putting into the game in one form or another has already been tried and there is evidence that it is successful. Can you point to other examples of mmo's incorporating the hair mesh feature you talked about?
-
Instead of crafting the accessories, why don't they just sell it through the store? I am skeptical on the popularity of cosmetic items and the studio creating all new resources just for the accessories crafting.
-
9 hours ago, BaileyVandenbroek said:
I think we should be able to upload our own hair mesh for money to make our character more unique.
Individuality is important and that is not even complicated to do also NQ should be inspired by EVE character creator it is pretty intuitive for user.
Every aspect of the universe is determined by the players so we should determine how we want to look and not be all the same people or similar people.
This is a universe not a game we need to be different.
Because DU is different from other game because it is a second universe!
I agree, so this time we make the right choice and sell a monocle for $60. I want the chance to be classy when I am robbing you. As for the hair mesh, well they can probably do it themselves as it sounds like a lot of work on their end to make it work for player base. Correct me if I am wrong here, but I don't think it is going to be easy as TF2 hats.
-
Yea, @Supermegayour idea seems too complicated. I think it would just be easier to just have a propulsion module that is no different then a micro jump drive. It uses fuel that varies depending on the distance and it goes in 5km , 10km, 20km, 50km, 75km, and 100km preset distances you can right click on the drop menu > select. Then you have a type in your own weird km distance and I am sure the studio can make their own voodoo magic calculations to determine fuel costs. If people want to explore then they are going to need to design the ship to be more accommodating to fuel storage so they are not stranded in the middle of nowhere with no gas station within 100km (emergent game play: beg someone on the forum with space bux or "favors" to tow your space ship to the nearest gas station). Anything you discover and worth charting you add that crap to your map > go to Jita > sell coordinates like those scalpers on the forums that sells wormhole coordinates > ???? > profit.
Also forgot, add that 50km distance of a planet if you jump in that direction it will stop at that mark for "safety" reasons. That way if you are leading a fleet or convoy, I can send a small wolf pack to take it down as you slow boat it to the planet and you are crapping your pants/palms sweating with the red flashing on your radar. Probably add in fuel refinement so I can sell a kidney and a lung to get high octane gas that can allow me to take multiple 100km jumps. Satisfy the explorers because more exploring yay, the "care bears" because they can make a massive refinery in bliss from the production output charts, and traders that can flip said fuel, which forces me into a life of crime + sec status drops + insert Cage the elephant song on wicked.
- Gives people opportunities to maybe pop a space station at specific locations. I would like the opportunity to be that a**hole that is the only gas station within 100km on a highly traveled route that newbros get stranded on and charge the equivalent of 8 euro per liter to fill their tank up.
- Deep safe's that if I am doing an insurgency or waging campaign I can create a small depot/refueling/refitting station and not have to slow boat to a particular location. Me probably get someone better at maths to calculate the distance to certain points I X on the map with my crayon.
- This creates more opportunities to maneuver fleets to a staging area that has to take effort from the opponent to scout for.
- Allows for locations to house secret construction projects out of public site (someone has to build that death star).
Probably can come up with more stuff, but I am getting tired staying up till morning typing away on this forum.
-
On 11/7/2019 at 12:58 AM, joaocordeiro said:
Ppl have a passion for nukes!
But matter antimatter reations are much more powerfull.
And maybe we could have a black hole gun that would remove entire systems from game.
Now think of an impact of an entire system being destroyed with a single shot.
That would be a valid tactic. For sure would kill the enemy.
But at what cost?
What would happen to the 10000 players living in that system? Rage quit?
What would happen to the planets and its resources?
For what? So 1 single guy would have some fun for 10 secs?
How great the game would be with this in?
Nukes and other WMDs would not take down an entire system but would still create allot of colateral damage and would be the fun of 1 over the sadness of 100.
So i agree that DU should not have any WMD.
Well since you necro'ed this I would love to take a bite on this topic.
First I fight it amusing that 90% of the people in this forum is thinking of cities just because the dev's said you can build it. If we get towns it would be impressive and using logic if you have a city you obviously have the resources to defend it. So it being unfair is laughable as the amount of Eve players on this forum I am sure the power blocs super cap dropping is "unfair" but we deal with it and move on. If you are going to have tactical nukes to nukes in general there are serious factors one has to address:
- What is the cost of developing said nuke? Everyone here acts like it is going to be easy and Eve players they forget that super caps only proliferated thanks to poor ccp game design decisions. Prior to when ever they went of control it was pretty expensive and some of the Eve players can help me as my memory is a bit hazy.
- Is it viable to deploy? If we are using a nuke and investing a ton of resources into developing it, but it requires a capital ship platform to launch it. Well you just screwed your alliance out of a fleet of battleships with the poor resource allocation and in my view this game is going to be even more punishing.
- So we have the resources and it is viable to use, but then we forget about espionage factors. What is preventing an organization launching a small raid on said production facility. What is also preventing the weapon itself being sabotaged? What are the risks of getting awoxed? Or stolen?
- Finally we have the resources to make it, it is viable to deploy as we have the platform, and the people producing this is trustworthy. But then we forget the most important word, "meta". Is it going to be viable to make one nuke over other ships or projects?
I fail to see these large massive space capital fleet battles people keep talking about for DU, when it is going to take at least a 100 players to man a capital ship and you still need support ships. With the current info this game is going to be skewed to quality over quantity in the sense that small gang pvp is the norm and not the outlier (depending on game design decisions that foster this or snuff it out).
-
On 12/30/2019 at 6:18 AM, Atheos said:
I'm a long time EVE Online player but quit after CCP lost their minds during the blackout madness and cyno changes a few months ago (I know most of you reading this will have no idea what that means).
Over the past year, I've put in about 1,700 hours into Space Engineers and also dabbed with No Man's Sky, Elite Dangerous, etc. I guess the purpose of mentioning those things is that I'm a big sci-fi fan and really want to sink my teeth into a MMO with a space setting, and the Voxel-style gaming and building is really fun with Space Engineers, but server stability is almost always awful and the lack of meaning after awhile on a single server really makes playing stale.I'm very skeptical with this title in particular because of all the setbacks and never ending bug fixes, crashes, lag, and general un-playability with Star Citizen that also touted all this new, cool stuff in a "unheard and unmatched vision for a space MMO" but want to remain hopeful because of the obvious potential it has.
When I listen to the podcasts available and updates on YouTube from the Dev's, it is what it clearly is meant to do which is to give updates and answer questions, with a side of up-selling by being positive and enthusiastic which is pretty effective and elaborating maybe on the road-map and current state, but I've stopped giving in to the salesman talk. It still works in some way I guess, because that's why I am here making this post. So I guess the answers here from players will determine my decision if I buy or not and how much I'd be willing to spend.
Straight to the questions if the passage above is tl;dr
Since I think I am limited to certain question because of the existing NDA players agree to, I'll try my best and keep it short. If I ask something you don't think you can answer (idk exactly how NDA's work) juststrike the text.- Has the game already gotten to a point where you have little to no chance of 'making it' with a brand new organization? Should brand-new players start looking immediately for an organization, similar to how you should look for corporations in EVE asap for that illusive fun-per-hour?
Thanks
Well if it is any consolation, they reverted the changes of black out so krabing is back on the menu ?. As for brand new players looking immediately for corps I would advise against this and have patience and network. There are a lot of "Eve" players, their time in Eve + label being thrown around loosely as I sometimes wonder if they spent more then a month so be wary when joining an organization with Eve players.
If there is one major positive aspect of the game I am skeptical it would stagnate pvp wise. My reasoning is that investment of human capital is definitely going to be a must. I wish you luck and fly safe.
-
On 12/11/2019 at 7:55 AM, JeronimoBeyond said:
Hi everyone!
I am strongly considering supporting the dev of DU (pledge) and would like to ask your community a few questions before making that step.
1) For you to know where I'm coming from, I am already backing Star Citizen... I know many people try to oppose DU and SC or are skeptic about SC but in my opinion the industry would be better off if both projects would succeed. I say this because some of my questions are based on my experience and knowledge gained while following the SC development, but I’d like to avoid triggering a debate on which is better or anything like that. I’m in the “AND” mindset, not “OR”.
2) I really love the DU project from what I’ve seen in many respects. So I’m sold 90% already but I still have some doubts on a few aspects of it. So I’d like to seek your view on a few topics:
b. Economy: How will be the DU economy be balanced and fair? As a trained economist, I understand the concept of economic nodes, markets places, and various actors (players, group of players) balancing the demand and offer which naturally leads to equilibrium. However, that’s very theoretical. I wonder how 10k players (and in fact much fewer active players at any point in time) can simulate a fluid economy that is not insanely volatile with many dead areas where demand and offer never meet, and that is not subject to the ruling of a few very large organizations. On that front, I have the impression that the direction of SC (simulating millions of NPCs to create market liquidity, coherence, and avoid that a few groups of players can own the economy) is more likely to generate a realistic and fair experience. I would really appreciate your view on that.
c. Social norms vs. self-regulation: I love the space for creativity that DU is proposing. This is a clear differentiator from SC. But with so many players creating so many things, how will the universe not become a complete mess at some point? How will the game boundaries deal with players imagination which may sometimes also break the immersion (“funny” shapes, etc)…
e. PVP: How will PVP look like? I believe DU value proposition is not focused on PVP but from other MMO experiences I also know that once PVP is on, it’s on. And it becomes a significant part of the game whether you like it or not. So I’d be interested to better understand how DU approaches this? Will there be mitigations for large organizations trying to take control of parts of the universe. What will be the risks for individual players and large organizations when engaging in offensive activities, beyond potential economic losses? Will there be a law system in place? How will such law be enforced? Will there be “safe zones”, reputation systems, etc...
That’s it for now ?! Thanks a mil in advance for your input!
Cheers!
J
Well I am going to be a bit more forthright with my answers.
B. Economy is right now up in the air on top of if they know what they are doing in the initial jump start from my view. They did say at one point that npc ore buy orders were going to be a major source of currency injection which was ludicrous until they put in mission rewards in recently as another option. But then they decided to not rely on npc's at all and make it more player driven and that again put things into question as everyone's opinion of the most sophisticated Eve economy is partially npc run in certain aspects for faucet/sink purposes. For player missions I would say just look into my previous posts and you can see why I wonder.
C. It depends on a matter of perception that would cause immersion breaking. At the end of the day it is a game and not meant to be realistic as they are making a game quoted from one of their recent pod casts. There are other aspects that people don't seem to ponder much on like costs. If you play Eve you are guaranteed to run into people that are big on "isk efficiency". Which is to be as efficient as possible with resources to maximize your fun which is why something as simple as missioning has break downs of isk per hour to ship fittings for pvp. Since DU is not bringing a lot of the industrial automation in Eve, resource costs are going to play a bigger factor in player decisions. So unless pvp shows something different don't expect to see a proliferation of capital sized ships. Look into the super weapon thread I posted in.
E. Well right now to my current knowledge they are implementing a invincibility zone which is disappointing and the size of the safe zone is up in the air. As for economic losses that is going to play the biggest factor as it still does in Eve, even with the industrial automation. If you see me lump industrial automation I lump resource collection in with mass production. As for mitigation's on large organizations conquest like the "blue doughnut"? Well it is going to be dozens of factors that has to be revealed by Novaquark to make that determination. I think the three major ones I am looking for is all in pvp which are force multipliers, logistics, and resource costs.
-
17 hours ago, Mazillus said:
I'd like to see dialing.
I just find it more interesting than having fixed point to point gates.
Gates codes as well which could be leaked.
Just makes for really interesting gameplay.
Also, watching a massive structure powering up and orienting itself towards its destination would look amazing.
While the original probe idea sounds fine. I would like to see players instead having to physically travel to the location where they want to place the stargate.
Well there is a game that had a password to utilize the jump after you have the password to access the star base and so if they don't do something similar it would be surprising.
12 hours ago, Geo said:It should be expensive to activate a gate and more expensive to keep it open for a longer duration.
The same jump bridges also required fuel per jump activation and had to be powered by a star base structure in itself also had to be fueled which was expended by the hour.
-
On 11/4/2019 at 2:59 PM, The Nameless said:
About the invisible bombers, i don't think it would be a huge problem, when people create a strong weapon, people will create strong defenses. again, i take SE for instance, there people created special walls that let almost all weapons bounce off. Sure, it would always depend on your budget, but i think that would be really great. it would force people to join massive alliances and factions. Now, not every of these unions will be an authoritarian regime that gives their people no freedom, until now there isn't a faction that isn't giving their people a lot of opportunities, and it probably won't change because every person would just quit at that point. and i don't think being part of a giant battle fleet make you feel very bad. And there still will be small independent factions, they would just work differently.
I would definitely hold off on the cloaking anything as bomber or "Stuka" fleets is only fun for a minority, but I am a bit biased.
On 11/4/2019 at 6:13 PM, Lethys said:Not having ramming imgame isn't because of weapons of mass destruction but because you can kill large ships with cheap ones with nearly no effort, except manpower.
Not having automated turrets and only a tuned down version (less dmg and less accuracy) isn't because of fast moving ships but because of balancing issues.
If ppl can build bombs. They will do it. And at some point, no matter the initial cost, it'll be cheap so they will just throw them around.
Lol man this is hilarious.
- Ah, so I can just get the same people > put them in cheap attack craft > swarm said large ships > only limiting factor is how good the pilot gunnery skills are vs the quality of their armor? Uh huh and this requires more effort. I got u fam . ?
- Yes, because balancing issues and the threads that talk about it has no coherent reasons other then the smaller picture of how it would affect them in pvp when it is likely they are more likely to fight a larger organization. Lets ignore something called a force multiplier lol.
- If we use that logic then people can build a death star they are definitely do it and throw logic out the window on a host of factors like cost, limitations on resources, points of failure, and just go to the super weapon thread lulz. ?
I hope you aren't the head of a major organization as I get a feeling that DU might have a historical reenactment of Ascendant Frontier and another Steve if you are lulz.
On 11/4/2019 at 7:39 PM, The Nameless said:@Lethys yes, the danger of people building incredibly fast ships could exist, but again, you can somehow limit this. with my idea, the ships with regular motors would be detected fast, maybe the level of being detected could even multiply with the amount of thrusters, and they always could allow ramming to a certain point.
about the turrets, you're absolutely right, i'm sorry i examined that topic, but when i found out about it, it was already to late.
about the thing with bombs, why would they become less expensive? in our modern world, only very few countries have nuclear weapons, and these weapons are easier to build in our world because of such things as uranium, and incredibly complex physics and chemistry. now, in dual universe, which has a fairly simple physique and almost no chemistry, a weapon of mass destruction could be only achieved trough a lot of ressources or some kind of exploit. Again, we both can't be really sure what is possible and what not and we should wait for an reply from an admin.
Well they did the recent podcast of increasing the speeds, but it looks weird and so it sounded more of an aesthetic thing (aware the time posted it is for future readers). I would wait on the turret aspect as they are open to it from what I heard. They wouldn't get less expensive unless there are certain factors that helps make automation in industry easier and that isn't just mass production, but also resource collection. Once this hurdle has been cleared we then move on to the next set of factors which is viability in the current meta and resource allocation justified. See my first counter point of Lethy's post.
On 11/4/2019 at 8:12 PM, JayleBreak said:I think the computation overhead caused by user designed oddly shaped ships, and large number of potential objects (and other contributions to server lag -e.g. internet) makes anything involving collision detection in combat a losing proposition. And as mentioned in one of NQ videos, orbital strikes were rejected because it wouldn't be "fair" - meaning people shouldn't be subject to death without any warning that danger is near or was inescapable.
Well I heard that it was server hardware limitations as physics would eat up a lot of resources and I think missiles was lumped in there and this was before your post it was discussed. The orbital strike was amusing as being labeled unfair. Not the fact that a large capital ship can land nearby and use the arty platform to lob shells into their base behind a large screen of fighters and tanks.
On 11/6/2019 at 12:03 AM, Madrummer said:You can't have ramming or self-made weapons, otherwise anyone with a Large core, a respawn on a nearby ship, 6 or so large engines and a cubic kilometer of dirt or carbon could make massive and remarkably cheap kinetic region busters.
That's just no fun to think that you could blueprint and deploy big chunks of dirt in orbit and drop them at ridiculous speeds to wipe out huge developed cities. It's an invite to grief and in a game of persistent objects that may have taken weeks or months to build it's just really gross to think of it as an option.
Now launching a missile barrage from orbit could be cool if you can lock targets from that range, especially because it takes time, effort, and material cost to enact such a campaign.
I feel like that there is a lot of assumptions that such weapons if allowed in the game would even be cheap to begin with if the dev's decided to put it in the game. I also think that the term city is being thrown around to loosely as I am still in the camp that if we see towns it would be impressive. I have yet to see the fundamental tools that would help with the creation of cities besides the rdms system and some automation in industry.
-
On 12/23/2019 at 7:18 PM, BiGEdge said:
As far as we know, NQ just developing the Game.
We pay them for maintain the servers, making this groundbreaking technology even better every day, free updates, free DLCs and free addons.
Everything what has to be done technically is NQs part.
We the players make the rules, the storys, the quests, the organizations.
Its our part to have Ideas in this Sandbox. NQ just gives us the sand and bucket and the frame around this Sandbox.
Big organizations will establish rules in this sandbox and wage wars to enforce them.But should NQ dev Members be barred from playing DU?
I say no, but... NQ must have insights of what happening and of what the players building and how they do it.
Not only to improve gamemechanics, but to make DU working well.
NQ should not be allowed to get involved competetively. Not even if they dont use theyr admin rights.This happned in EVE Online recently and the guys working there got fired immidiately.
NQ can learn a lot from this. And im sure they got internal rules for that.I think it is very important that at the bare minimum their testers actively participate if no the developers. You example of Eve is a major one. After the T2 mining bpo scandal and barring Eve from developers, only caused the dev team to have a hit or miss expansion features releases on top of being out of touch with the reality of the meta. The result is a stagnation of the game to some degree and a bigger incentive to minimize major losses.
-
On 11/25/2019 at 11:46 PM, Tordan said:
This game is not Eve and it has a very large community of people for whom the 'fun factor' is creating, not destroying. That fact alone stands a very big chance of making this game very different. Nothing I have stated here is buried under the NDA. The backer rewards include information about sanctuary areas, as does the public non-NDA Trello account.
I see people keep posting this "this game is not Eve". Well of course it isn't a carbon copy as you don't want to copy a cesspool at it's current state. But J.D keeps spamming the "civilization building mmo" and for some reason, people keep denying the fact that Eve Online is the progenitor of sandbox/civilization building in mmo's. All others that cam after is either dead or on life support and that is because the studios thought they can make radical changes to Eve's system and failed.
On 12/1/2019 at 8:28 PM, unown said:True this game is not eve but in the context of plmkoi's post there are many similarities
Well J.D has said Eve is the inspiration, but if he has played the game for a extended amount of time in my opinion is debatable.
On 12/9/2019 at 5:32 AM, Wyndle said:IMO, I believe there should be unmanned defense options. I see it as a dangerous form of chess. Can I either outwit or roll over the defense system? That nuance is one of the reasons I PvP other than defending what is mine. Killing for the sake of taking what belongs to others doesn't hold weight for me, but give me a strategic puzzle under fire and I would lend myself to an effort in that vein.
I emphasized this point comrade for others to see the type of attitude that I commend and how I see such things. As for outwit or roll over question, how about sabotage with espionage? See this is why I love Eve as many people either are ignorant or forgotten the exploits of "The Guiding Hand Social Club" (which I hope you enjoy). Eve is many things and patience has a whole new meaning in that game. Hell, they had a thing called whaling where an an outfit hunts super capital class ships by stalking their prey for weeks if not months (think 3 months for one victim supposedly) just for one day to hot drop them and kill them.
On 12/12/2019 at 1:48 AM, Fenrave said:I personally think that automated defenses should be limited to their own subset of turrets. You can only get small, mildly inaccurate PDCs as automated defenses. They would be great for small scale fights, such as fending off a pirate, but when scaled up, you might as well be hitting your opponent with what can be compared to spaghetti. Other things to weaken them would probably be a high ammo usage, though that does mean a high fire rate at the same time. If they ate through ammo really quickly, then it would be mildly impractical to install hundreds of them on a ship, since you would need to dedicate a huge portion of your ship to ammo storage. Assuming ammo is combustible when shot, this would obviously become a priority target for anyone aware of it.
Naturally other variants this could exist, maybe some more scaled up ones or different weapon types, but overall the premise is the same. Though i have to seriously ask, what kind of situation would a small org need to put themselves in that would warrant such a huge force to come down on them? Its likely that if they did something that pissed off an org to the point where this would happen, that they would be able to man their own turrets or escape before such a situation escalates.
Automated defenses should not be the primary damage dealer, it should just be a stop-gap measure. Bigger more powerful turrets should be manned, as to not make everything horribly unbalanced. A small org should not be able to fend off a big org with automated defenses alone. I'd imagine you should always come to expect that a bigger org might want to flex on you, so you should either move out far away or adopt a mobile strategy.I think they shouldn't be limited in anyway and from my mindset from an Eve player/Military historian buff I feel like the thinking behind this is flawed.
- Whether manned turrets or auto it takes resources with the creation of the gun, ammo, power to the gun, and anything else they are going to add to the game. Resources are not free and there is a cost to them.
- Auto turrets being a primary damage dealer? Well who ever is that battle commander should be shot multiple times. Here is a good analogy. I want to put all my available resources (or most of it into auto turrets) is like saying I want my only chess pieces to be no pawns, bishops, queen, or knights and get 2 extra rooks with my king. The key to this point is the variation of tools and relying heavy on automated anything provides a lot of points of failure in my opinion.
- As bad as this may sound Sun Tzu once said "the worst policy is to besiege if it can be possibly avoided". Lets break this down to the fundamentals. Stalingrad at least 20k Russians held off 100k German force and prior to that the Winter War. Using the two points prior for a video game, you want people to not throw their weight around you have to raise the costs of them just steam rolling you. People can make rational decisions and you can with small game design choices give small groups a little leverage against larger entities. The choice they have to make, is it worth the risk expending tons of valuable resources for some territory at the risk of falling prey to another organization. If you want diplomacy to matter you have to make it costly to just invade people.
- As for small org situation? This is why people in DU need to play Eve for a significant amount of time. This is just one of the many examples why you want the cost to mean something as Provi forces at point had maybe over 2k and never surpassed 3.5k players compared to 5k to 15k and take these numbers with a grain of salt. Probably was worse for all I know.
On 12/12/2019 at 7:13 PM, unown said:This is specified as Static defense designed to protect things such as space station's and non movable objects like planet side bases and were not intended to be placed on ships because NQ has ruled against this already. However I disagree that small orgs are not able given the time and reasorce's to defend themselves against a larger threat. I believe they should be able to the defender should always have the atvatage and that only builds with time.Its also a deterrent for large orgs to roll small ones.
As for larger organizations using auto turrets it going to happen, but the difference is that they aren't going to be heavily reliant on them in comparison to small organizations. A larger force if run competently is going to have a more mobile force as it offers flexibility which equals options. A smaller organization is already going to be limited in options and so you can use your human assets at key points to maximize the destruction you inflict with the aid of auto turrets. So you are correct on it being a major deterrent.
On 12/13/2019 at 10:51 PM, unown said:You are correct and I agree the main point that someone else made was that yes Large orgs can slam smaller orgs but automated deffences make it so in doing so they lose (if the smaller org took the time to do it) A substantial amount that it won't be Meta. Also the more time a Org has the less likely they can be (removed) from there home.
And yes Large orgs will have the same Homeland advantages however other Larger Orgs will also be more likely to hit you because you have more to take
Not much homeland advantage as they would only use the bare minimum turrets to defend the base for holding out until a relief force comes in. Smaller organizations won't get a relief force unless they get allies.
On 12/16/2019 at 4:46 PM, Aaron Cain said:To refer to the 300 vs 10 people.
Give me some time to build up and auto defenses and i will hold against 300, heck you can even trow in 1000 and i will hold. The strategic options we probably have in DU will be good enough to hold against large groups Unless the come far better armored and weaponized. But then again, are they willing to take the loss on materials.
Well comrade I commend the boldness, but we have to see as there are many factors we need to see. This pvp drop and what the options are going to make or break the game and I hope this isn't an all air centric approach.
-
On 12/13/2019 at 6:26 PM, Sin117 said:
Super weapons.
This is a debate I have been having back and forth in my head for quite some time.
On one hand some one having a death star like super laser that blows up planets is probably too much power to allow a single group of players to control and far to taxing on the technical side of things.
However on the other hand doesn't someone or some organization that spends that much time, effort, skills, money, and resources into a single construct that could potentially be destroyed deserve to have that kind of power? I mean just think about it really. How much of the things I listed above would they need to give in order to create something like that in the first place? It would be an absolute unreasonably astronomical amount.
Not to mention all the threats out there that would try to stop you from constructing something like that in the first place and even if you managed to finish something like that how many enemy's do you think you would make. Id reckon a lot of them.
Now wouldn't all these factors be massive balancing factors? Not to mention by the same token if the devs did allow super weapons they could easily create counters to them like for example a planetary shield generator. With super weapons could potentially come super defenses.
Now in the end it all comes down to a technical stand point and by that note it probably wouldn't be possible but the fact that there is that slight hope that maybe just one of these day it could happen is a very exciting thought.
So with all that being said do you think super weapons should be a thing or not and if not how far should the power of weapons go?
Please let me know down below I would love to hear your guys opinions on this one as this one probably has a mixed bag of feelings.Well if you are talking about tools they have in Eve, like Titans and Super Carriers, they can add them in and it won't break the game possibly ever. How so? Or am I daft? Well my assumption is the requirement of actual bodies for ship modules, since you need actual ships to man the turrets and crew to do repairs or put out fire etc. The balancing factor is efficiency. Using this as a reference, if you are running a large organization, of lets say 10k players, is it smarter to use your limited resources for 1 titan measuring +13k meters or say 1 super carrier for +5k meters/30 battleships at 1600 meters/few squad of bombers? Or just 60 1600m battleships? If a battle occurs, is it wise to send your only combat asset of a titan measuring +13k meters and hope the turrets kill all 60 battleships moving at the same time before they are destroyed? Or a super carrier with a few squadrons of bombers + 30 battleships?
Another factor that you have to consider is the actual resources required and to build it in secret without info being leaked out. In this example here and here, these are instances of where info of one in the oven led to a formation of multiple people to siege a system and latter the result of sinking your alliance resources into one ship and losing it. Keep in mind that a titan can be completed by a few individuals in Eve compared to Dual Universe, where you have get multiple people to participate. The most powerful ship in our world is a carrier and it has something called a "carrier strike group" and it is undisputed that it only take a lone submarine to sink a $13 billion investment.
The last major point, even if they put in a ship as big as a titan (13k meters) in alpha 3, it is unlikely we will see even capital fight with ships the size of 5k meters for a hot minute. From my view it has to do with automation of industry. In Eve online it is easy to mass produce ships as as your only bottleneck was the human assets (F1 monkey) & ore with some logistical issues. DU on the other hand, not only do you have to hand create the ship (blueprint), mine the ore by hand, build infrastructure that can support the ship, build said ship by hand, have the necessary fuel/ammo + logistical backbone to support said ship, and also have enough resources to actually support & defend the ship (destroyers, cruisers, frigs, and etc). We haven't even gotten into the insane world of espionage that can have major detrimental impact in construction in DU.
I would be surprised if there was a capital ship in pvp within the first year or two, barring any changes in later expansions that help alleviate the critical issues in automation & construction. Military strategy has make the option viable compared to the alternatives and I don't see it in the release state of the game. I also caution people against making one for the foreseeable future unless an expansion makes them viable. Bigger doesn't necessarily translate to something that is better.
-
On 11/26/2019 at 8:04 AM, Lethys said:
That's why rdms is way better. In eve you can't even properly control rights for ppl living in a wh because there are only 4 roles and you don't want a random newb accessing your starbase fuel. DU is NOT eve and we get tools to make it easier. That's why eve sucks so hard and ppl get burn out, bevause the tools there suck
And the following Wall of text. Read up on AMA and MSA zones. That's like 2000000000000% better than any sec status bs. And I always stated that for all I care the AMA/MSA can be a whole system for new ppl to test the game and see if they like it or not.
The rest of your post is only about eve and really has no impact whatsoever on du because you're talking about different things here
Well they explained it and I have added the revision as the explanation was well done and made more sense. The people at Novaquark has a talent on their podcasts to dumb concepts down to someone as simple as me lol. Also the current you are invulnerable in this zone is hilarious and I can't wait for people to realize how some of their actions is going to have zero impact. Nothing is better at gaming the system then having a invulnerable zone over a semi safe zone. Lets make market pvp invalidated compared to the tools of an older mmo on the market.
As for your final comment, this is pretty funny. They constantly repeat "Civ building mmo" and they have claimed Eve as inspiration and so this would mean making better decisions that can foster those player run civilizations. As for your 10k hours in Eve claim, I am calling it out as b.s because if you played 10k hours you would know that sec status is abusable because of those systems which I laid out in the 2nd post and your ignorance of those systems shows. CCP made bad game design choices and with the flood gates of allowing alpha clones they made a lot of actions trivial compared to their previous sub only. (Didn't add killing npc pirates in belts since that is an "Eve" thing) I played just as long as your claim and I can tell easily if someone doesn't know much and I have been out of the game for a hot minute and just came back in.
There is a strong reason why Eve has these big video game news headlines and that is just CCP putting in basic building blocks. A important building block is a large semi safe zone that provides stability for the entire game for people to acquire goods. You can always add more outer region territories, but you can't after a year, retroactively go back and enlarge the high sec zone. At the end of the day I am not going to sweat it as I said my skin is the pre alpha order I am placing. But I would like you to please link me other "successful" titles that incorporates features that is at the scale of Eve their only real competitor. As for this delusional thinking that player run organizations are going to carry out an nrds policy, yea good luck with that. Anyone with any significant Eve background knows only one alliance does it and it is crap, with the rest of the tribes adopting a realistic policy of NBSI. They can only do that because that region is hot trash compared to resources and they are a hollow shell of their former selves.
Now this is just one aspect of a few that I would say is concerning of their vision on player civilizations, which we can discuss in other threads. I still do believe this game has a very good chance of killing Eve, because they literally have a blue print of refining certain systems, trashing the rest, and learning from CCP's bad game design decisions (Incarna? Citadels?). I don't see why you wouldn't take game design ideas that was used in Eve and can be applicable if refined for DU, as I see no shame. Himlar had his chance of getting his head out of his a** and making Eve better by giving tools that wouldn't stagnate the game with this empire building obsession they recently had with some of the expansions.
I also would like to point out to future readers, I am not claiming to know all in game design or Eve and I can only provide anecdotal that is strongly backed up by Eve's success and other sand box mmo's failures. I would also point out I could be wrong and this game can be successful, the new World of Warcraft with the current systems they have alluded to so far. Only time will tell and we will see as there are other mmo's that were kickstarted and doing the same thing as well.
If you actually put a more substantial post I might consider responding and don't take these attacks as personal. The only thing that applied to you was the 10k hours thing and I don't post nor mention my time in game for a reason. If there is anything I learned in Eve, with the possibilities/tools at your disposal is that you can go through 500k hours and still know nothing, as I just boldly posted I mastered market pvp in my status and just had my teeth kicked in from an outplay by a competitor. Eve is a life style/hobby that surpasses anything out right now for a 17 year old game and I leave non Eve players with this at what is possible.
-
On 12/14/2019 at 12:52 AM, Vyz Ejstu said:
During the podcast, NQ said NPCs as a tentative option for new player missions. The podcast is almost a two hour affair on YouTube. I suggest you download a podcast app to do something else while you listen along.
That aside, I believe NQ is well aware of their promise to have a player run economy. This suggestion recognizes that promise and offers a way or at the very least, community suggestions on avoiding NPCs in this regard.
A quanta faucet in the example you gave would rely heavily upon NPCs. As NPC-run, it may provide newer players with a fortune to start out; it might alternatively leave them with slow minutes to a hours of grinding to do. That could in turn, nudge them towards finding an organisation fast or crawl through the game at a snail's pace in defiance of the obvious push. It's unlikely that a large percentage would drop the game within the first two days, given the subscription model of Dual Universe. On the other hand, new player experience is a crucial thing to get right. Rewards, immersion and teamwork are significant parts of that experience.
Cheers.
Eve Online has a player run economy and it is heavily reliant on npc missions for one of it's main faucets of injecting currency into the economy. As for newer players it would give them cash in a manner that isn't going to make them quit compared to the hours of grinding they would do mining garbage on the surface of a planet. Also don't think that just because of the game being a sub it will equal guaranteed player participation. This is why they have a one month free for buying the game, if not at least $15 for the month. I would also point towards predecessors such as Wild Star, Age of Conan, Rift, Darkfall, and etc.
As for the player missions, I can't wait to create player missions of sending them out into full loot pvp to drop off some ore for 1,000 quanta bucks at an outpost. Where me and 5 other buddies wait to give a "warm" welcome and an express trip back to the noob zone. Reminds me of the bs of players creating contracts that has a player carry a token items to a system where they get blapped and because they failed to transport the item they lost out on their isk collateral they accepted when they took the mission.
Seriously the player made missions makes me think more and more that if anyone at Novaquark played Eve longer then 1 month. Player made missions was discussed and this is just a random thread and of course this one someone posted, I can't find the original of someone doing this that they admitted to in the market discussion thread. Also high sec isn't safe so suicide ganking was worth doing when you can split the proceeds with your buddies.
-
On 10/24/2019 at 5:36 AM, DevisDevine said:
Well regardless of faucets a player could earn money in other ways, like designing a ship and selling it. The faucets are the ways the economy as a whole would earn isk.
On 12/1/2019 at 4:49 PM, DevisDevine said:If you try and criticize me please dont quote me out of context. As I specifically said regardless of faucets and sinks in the instance you are quoting from.
As a player, I dont need the isk I make to directly come from a faucet, I can still earn isk from doing things for other player that have it.
This was a direct response to someone stating that if ore buyers are the only faucets the mining would be the only way to make isk.
As for you method of making isk in Eve, I knew a guy who single handed did what you are talking about rose the price of plex from about 250 to 350 mil just to pay for a new station. Ofcouse typically he made his isk by spending thousands a month on the GTC to replace motherships he stupidly lost.
Well this doesn't look like it is out of context (in bold first quote), as the entire thread is about "finite currency". So the part I underlined (2nd quote) is either completely irrelevant to the thread or you really don't know how eve economics work. Your previous 2 posts made me think you did, but then you quoted me saying "players can earn other ways". The money has to come from a source and that would be a faucet, which as of right now, even with the recent podcasts, mainly ore buy orders and possibly npc missions. This sounds like an environment that people who plays the market in Eve can abuse in the deflationary environment to the detriment of the player base and I concur with you abusing it, as I will too. This is what I was referring to with the "fear of finite currency over infinite" as the only people that makes this argument comes from theme park mmo's (which I think you would agree). So I think you might have misunderstood my initial reply out of context when you were quoting me. As I think the the only source of injecting cash into the game via ore buy orders is ludicrous if not retarded to put it bluntly.
Also you were responding to me and yes they said only ore buy orders at the time for a faucet. People aren't going to trade currency if it is hard to come by and the same people on this thread that are complaining about infinite currency, are also going to be the same people complaining about having to mine a freighters worth of gold for 10 Quanta bucks. The previous owner of those 10 Quanta bucks is also going to be the trader that is just flipping all the goods and making that currency easy, if not just use the Nova bucks to buy it.
As for the guy you referenced and depending on the time frame, it came from either mission runners or bounties. Him getting isk for plex/gtc's is just transferring isk from one player to another and you are correct, it was abuse-able until CCP cocked it up by making everything plex. So now you can see everything in a chart and easily tell if there was/is price manipulation. But with that mothership he can make more in comparison to other activities if he wasn't retarded. It was until the Oct or Nov that the bounty faucet was axed by CCP.
On 12/4/2019 at 8:09 AM, Fenrave said:A finite currency sounds wonderful on paper, and for some good reasons:
1. It would have a stable price, no runaway printing of currency that drastically lowers the price and destroys the economy.
Just kidding, that's probably the only good reason that everyone could agree on.
It still has the problem of people accumulating loads of wealth and never spending it, and the value of it would still fluctuate pretty wildly as the market figures out its value, especially since its not backed by anything, and inflation would be non-existent.
Now instead of built in currency, I'd suggest letting players, or bigger factions just print their own currencies instead. Let the players determine the value of the currencies, and punish irresponsible groups for making their own currency worthless Germany style. I'd imagine this would players handle how their own currency works; one group could experiment with the finite currency, another could back the value and quantity of their currency based on a certain resource, or just do a fiat currency. This is truly the only way to figure out which is best, as we could cite examples from other MMOs that handle the early game and resources much more differently from DU all day long, until novaquark just makes a decision on their own.
No, it would never be good on paper as you want inflation so people keeps spending money, as DeviseDevine said it leads to hoarding. The point of currency is that it is a fiat a medium for the exchange of goods/services and if it rarer then the gold or copper, then what is the point of having the currency. In my opinion, I think what everyone misunderstands, is that theme park mmo's it really is irrelevant if you have run away inflation. Every real economy has inflation, but they keep it capped at a certain % and I am sure someone who is much better at economics can explain that as I am no market guru. I am just now finally mastering market pvp, which sadly this game is already snuffing out.
On 12/5/2019 at 9:14 AM, Aaron Cain said:Good point Fenrave.
I do understand the points in the discussions here and most are valit. creating a monitary system with no cash drains and npc to add cash through quests, or mobs who drop it through death is a complex system that could probably be solved by a few creative implementations. Problem in that is that quanta is a term from the arc, so even if you would find an ancient lootbox containing treasure, it would not contain quantas if the game is true to its lore. Technically only old human settlements and old arc ships could hold lootable quantas, with regard to lore
I don't think a lot of the points are worth merit, as it looks like one person before I first posted actually has an idea of how insane it is that the studio is solely relying on "npc buy orders". I believe that in game economics is semi complex as the real economy does require a lot of learning in my opinion. If you know how to read the Eve Economic report you can actually get a detailed blue print on top of the Eve wiki of how they jump started their economy post launch.
I don't think they are going to stick to closely to lore unless they want to have their "civ building game" to fail. As for lore items, I would think that it would provide old tech or cool trinkets that one can sell on the market. It would create n new occupation called "Archaeological theft".
On 12/6/2019 at 7:58 AM, NanoDot said:We have no idea whether a newly created character will get "free quanta".
It's obviously something that's wide open to possible exploits and abuse, which will be extremely hard to counter. The more difficult it is for players to get quanta in a game, the more likely it will be that players will try to "game the system".
Giving players free quanta is not going to be game breaking, as the game requires a sub and I honestly believe if you are going to spend money, it is going to be with their "Nova bucks". As for exploits/abuse it is always going to happen, but the difference is that they aren't taking the "alpha clone" route. Coming back to Eve now it is almost day/night how things are both positive and negative (more on the latter imo).
As for making quanta more difficult I can guarantee you that players won't try and game the system, it is going to happen even if Quanta took only 30 secs of effort. It will only kill the game like other pvp sand box mmo's as people won't be able to replace their losses. If you make the game more difficult to get Quanta, then those same people are going to have to grind more to get the currency to purchase whatever goods/services they want. The chances of them getting that quanta gets closer to impossible when people would rarely spend it as they expect the money to appreciate in value. Why would I spend 1 quanta for 100 ore blocks when I can get maybe 150 if I wait a little longer? Well it is going to suck for that person who can't afford "nova bucks" when it takes 1 hour to mine 20 units of ore.
I am going to add this video link so everyone at least gets on the same page before adding to this thread.
-
2 minutes ago, Tordan said:
no. I mean that there will be sanctuary areas in this game where PvP will not be allowed. It has been stated implicitly. In fact there used to be a 3rd moon in orbit of Alioth called a sanctuary moon. It was "temporarily" removed.
But we both know that the fun factor of the game is going to be outside said safe zones. Well you are the first one that mentioned it is an entire moon and I thank you for that. I been getting mixed messages where it is going to be like a 1-2 km sized city/outside that FFA pvp and that is why I pushed in another thread the inclusion of sec status. No FFA mmo survived for long term and that is why all the kickstarted mmo's are implementing some safe zone controls and contrary to popular belief hardcore pvp players are unsustainable revenue source for an mmo.
4 minutes ago, Tordan said:Just because you would, doesn't mean I would. If I am in an Org with lots of people, and we declare that everyone is safe within our region as long as they act peacefully, then we will likely have a mostly peaceful area. Particularly as we will not be wasting resources on pointless skirmishes, and can apply those resources in keeping the peace.
Well it comes down to a matter of perspective I guess. In Eve people that run stuff outside of empire space (safe zones) tends to be very realistic as resources are usually scarce and so bad decisions or unexpected disasters has serious consequences, aka an eviction if you live out in null. While you might not proceed with such activities, people that are similarly minded to me would have 0 doubt what the obvious choice would be, which is take out the small group and evict them. Now that equation significantly changes if the gain is going to be negligible compared to effort put in, i.e I can lose a lot of equipment and some personnel for just evicting a group of small player for no other purpose then creating a buffer. So what would be the next logical solution? Diplomacy and get them to join a covenant of other groups to give me said buffer. When I started to get into Eve I was surprised how many people read/studied: Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, Machiavelli, and etc. Only in a sandbox like Eve does people go to great lengths to have a competitive advantage against their adversaries.
I will state that for a sandbox mmo the biggest aspect you should consider for ideas or aspects of a game is incentives/disincentives. Example would be that one point there was rampant inflation for a short period in regards to ship insurance. Reason was that circumstances changed to incentivize insurance fraud, or the current issue in Eve of suicide ganking with no consequences. Again, CCP putting their head in the sand to actually put in a system that followed their old philosophy that every action has consequences. You can foresee a lot of the issues with this title just by looking at Eve's development and how bad they f***** up on just about everything for sand box wise after 2013. We have yet to get into other titles like Dark fall and etc.
-
On 9/12/2019 at 10:57 AM, Lethys said:
RDMS is mainly about YOUR org and YOUR roles in your org. Not about managing standings/relations to others
Which you contradict in your other posts when you claimed the RDMS system can do what the current standing system in Eve. Lol I am guessing you are one of those fanatics that I hear about on Star Citizen and see on Ashes of Creation lol. It still doesn't change my mind that it is tedious in my view. Hopefully they will take the time in the future to publish a better video that doesn't just apply to a few people.
-
After some thought on the topic, I will say it is dependent on the dev's if they are going to copy past mmo's or actually be different and try some innovative stuff. I am hoping that developers put in social aspects to the game, like as someone mentioned on another thread trinkets and other items. CCP tried to do that with Incarna and I kind of supported it as making a more immersive social experience is extremely beneficial for an mmo game. Literally every mmo after the forerunners has made the mmo into a single player experience and the only purpose is to maximize the revenue they can get by placing goals to the lowest common denominator.
I do have faith that DU might be able to put in changes that could meet that goal of maximizing revenue half way with certain changes and social items/tools being one of them. Depending on the decisions made I am sure that DU could be the death nail of Eve, which I do look forward too.
-
On 11/4/2019 at 11:03 AM, Nanoman said:
What's the point of upkeep for anything when you're already paying for a sub...?
I would think the sub itself is enough upkeep. Even if you don't log in for months or years, you're paying real money to maintain your stuff.
People who've actually abandoned their account and in-game assets would also have stopped buying game time.
The point of upkeep is to prevent stagnation as this is partly a civ building game with the territory ownership concept. If you don't have up keep of any kind other then a sub, this would then create an incentive to just spam every location with constructs and expand. It takes bodies to refuel stuff and this is a natural disincentive to not drop a ton of constructs that would be a waste of resources.
As for a sub upkeep let me put this insight on you. 2009-2012 I had 12 accounts of which only 2 were yearly, the rest 6 month to 3 month increment renewals. This was typical in Eve and there are others that ran +20 accounts on a sub. So depending on pvp, if we took the citadel (space stations) model from Eve and I was limited to 5 space stations to prevent spam, it would take an entity days to go to each location and sit for a few hours blowing the stations up. Structure bashing can get boring very fast.
On 11/5/2019 at 5:19 PM, Madrummer said:STU should last for up to 2 months after your last sub ended, effectively giving you the ability to take a couple of months off without worrying about losing everything.
I also feel that for people who may be deploying with the military or sent off to work for an extended period of time in remote locations, there should be a "request account freeze" option that safeguards your territories for a given amount of extra time.
Yea and how fair would it be when I have 12 accounts and stagger the construct with ownership changes of said construct? I can just re-sub at a particular time and just need a few minutes to just change ownership. Basically re-sub the account after 2 month cool down and change it to the next toon for another 2 month cool down, rinse and repeat. I would think that making a person put effort to maintaining a construct would prevent a lot of the spam. Plus when you run an actual group it isn't an issue as you just change roles and give the leadership/duty to someone you trust and things continue as normal. Poorly managed groups don't have a continuity plan and so they tend to not last that long.
Dear Novaquark, please reconsider your combat system.
in The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
Posted
Well in my view, I think ramming isn't something to fret about over the studio deciding that by some e-honor or chivalry they are going to stick to a strict schedule and not give this title more time. This game is a bit more complex then Eve and they haven't put out a lot of info that seems relevant to the fundamental building blocks that can sustain anything bigger then a small organization. With the current info in industry I suspect that it is just going to be similar to Rust with small clans running around or just massive blobs that will put treaties in place to not attack each other. The latter killing the hope that you can get free marketing of large events like CCP has.
Well if you ever get a chance to play Eve (shameless plug check my profile) try out the industry side of things. You will see that mining "was"/is easy. Once you have done it, you can easily see how one can just start 10 accounts and mine enough to get a fleet of 30 battleships. Everything in Eve is automated when it comes to industry, but this studio is strict on the manual mining (which is questionable imo). In "Eve" industry you only need one person to have the blue print, resources, and the station to manufacture stuff on. The equation can change a little depending on the goods where it is simple (T1 modules & ships) to challenging (combat boosters, T2, T3, Rigs, and now multi plasmids). If an alliance needs miners for lets say the size of 1k-2k people, 50 people even if that needs to be care bears, the rest being the foot soldiers. In Eve you don't really need even that as you can go through contractors that can sell you stuff on agreed on price from high sec.
While I don't mind mining, I understand that it isn't everyone's cup of tea and I am experiencing this disgust with trading in Eve. I don't find it fun .01 isking people to death as it is a grind due to my time zone limitations, the need to ensure that my orders will beat theirs by at least 30 min after they changed it is tiring. The only rare times the "market pvp" is a little rewarding is when the industrialists say "fuck it" and cash out of the market or just stop updating their orders for the remainder of the 90 days. "Traders" on the other hand will do it regularly and will not be deterred and will chug along.
They would have to in my opinion create tools that allowed it to be easier for people to mine resources at an "industrial scale" which I believe is the term I should have emphasized. It seems to me that the mining aspect for DU is akin to a cottage industry.
"This point, I concede to you fairly easily because you reminded me of experiences that completely confirm this."
I prefer not "concede" but more of "valid point" or some other term. I don't like forum pvp and it does sound from my limited perception to be similar. I look at forums as place of discussion to refine the understanding of view points and ideas. I look at it as a place where people can throw out a point and it can be analyzed, like I go to a major city and decide ass less chaps is the way to go and people can tell me why this is bad idea vs saying it is great idea and I get yelled at for right to stay silent with my face in the dirty street. So I would learn more and also get more experience as everyone has something valuable to say, just maybe not all the time. As someone told me "sometimes one can't smell their own brand and that is why you ask other people". It was a ref to body odor, but I believe it applies to ideas as well.
I do agree that it would make sense for miners trying to get small resources they could get a small mining barge, but doesn't this sound more akin to a cottage industry? I can't say I know the resource costs of ships and the repairs for it in pvp for DU, but ask yourself if this is sustainable for a large organization. Now hopefully DU has "nicer" people that come into the game, but if there is "Eve" like players, instead then you have Code that targets miners in high security space. As for player controlled space, you see this on a daily basis with Rorqual capital industrial ships, where people lose a few every day. To put this into perspective, the avg price is what 5 billion isk? Well if you converted that it with plex, you get roughly $40.00 ships people lose everyday to do industrial level mining to feed those forges. These losses are sustainable only because of the industrial level mining. Here are other examples people post online of killing mining fleets: Bomber Bar, GS locust fleet, and finally GS again (prob NSFW). This is just a handful and the "locust fleet" is what Goons call their Rorqual mining fleets, they strip all resources in a system, not sure how long as I am not affiliated with any of the null blocks. That locust fleet dread bomb costed them probably $143k in losses if that even mattered. Now knowing that alliances lose these expensive ships will hopefully put into perspective the cost of large organizations just in term of resources if you just surf the losses from alliances.
As for battleships & carriers, are you saying that it is economically feasible to make a hybrid industrial combat ship over one that specializes in one or the other? Some factors one has to consider if location on the map, players we have, type of organizations, what we have to get from the main markets, and what is the attrition rate between convoy ops? I am not on DU and so I am unable to give a better answer then this as I don't know the costs of ships and how skill trees will take place, let alone the map. Just remember that if I wanted to attack an organizations "center of gravity" the biggest marks are the resource generation and logistics as this game is fundamentally a attrition based game.
I only know little of the Eve side of logistics as I always try to learn from other people. The only thing I know for sure, is that it burns a lot of people out traveling back and fourth with goods. The activity can take up hours of your time to get to alliance territory and so if you don't enjoy traveling in a ship it can be boring. Larger the organization the more supply runs a person is going to have to make and if the ships are not industrial focused, it can take even more possibly. I will find out later this year once I can fly a freighter around and hauling goods myself.
1) You are correct, alliances aren't going to give up on markets and you can see that in the Delve and Drone region markets in Eve. I don't because I am not allowed access to said region and would be killed on site as I am not affiliated with either organizations. So I can either be a spy or someone that can awox their fleets. The difference is that the alliances themselves usually don't stock the market and relies on enterprising individuals that transports the goods from secured space and sell it for the max margin allowed by alliance policies. People in the alliance benefits from easier access to goods, make passive income for transporting said goods, and the entity from taxes.
Like I said in another thread, people has this weird idea that it is easy to implement a NRDS policy. The entities that are foolish enough to adopt it are also going to be the ones that suffer the dread bombing of the locust fleet video. That day 1 old character just sitting there, is the person just afking? Or is it basically a security cam of what is going on in the area? I see it more rational to just be wary of insider threats over the additional baggage of dealing with randoms that can feed intel to your enemies. I can assure you that the alliances makes their money not from the markets in null, but the markets in empire.
2) Yea they could, but the bigger reason is more likely because of risk aversion.
The only thing I can say for certain in regards to markets is that it is hard to build up one. Molden Heath, Bleak lands, Black Rise, Placid, Great Wildlands, and etc takes a lot of work and that is hauling said items in bulk and all the pieces. All pieces being, if I sell amarr ships I need to not only sell the gun modules that go for said ship, but also propulsion, armor, capacitor modules and this also includes the ammo. Or why would a person bother buying said ship in that region to begin with? These regions are dangerous and so I do it solo, but lets say an organization is what I am under. Are people willing to escort me 8 times a week +25 jumps, every week for free? If I were to get an escort it would have to be 5-10 at least as anything less is pointless as people in those region go in groups at the bare minimum of 3 and usually with combat battle cruisers if not T2/faction ships.
Yes, I could pay them, but in most cases, profit margins are <80%. I could just run npc missions and make more money for the effort as I have to compete with other traders. These markets are under npc control aka empire high/low sec or null in some cases not under player control. Exception being of course the Great Wildlands as you still have to deal with the power brokers in that region of npc space. I am sure people played escort missions in mmo's, I wonder how fun it would be if people had to ferry ships back and forth those long distances that 50% of the time nothing happens. How likely is a player going to want to stick with the organization much less the game if your limited 3-5 hours 75% of that was spent watching a freighter move from point a to b.
I prefer the distances as yes it may suck, but it caps the entities in my opinion to some degree. CCP has removed a lot of the caps that prevented large power blocs from running rampant with industry and logistics. Which is why there is still a lot of people whining on reddit and sometimes the forums.
Yes, meta will play a key role, but I think this discussion has ballooned past ramming to the crux of what I see as major problems that the studio has to somehow address. I think my piece in nothing about ramming at this point, but how is DU going to be a "civilization building mmo" they are advertising themselves to be? As a large organization these are some enormous hurdles just like it is for the smaller ones. I don't see how one is going to open a market for everyone when a small entity of 50 people can take advantage of this weakness and possibly make a devastating attack. In eve it is irrelevant short an insider threat that removes sov or more strategic assets. But here in DU it seems things that are considered tactical assets in Eve with the expectations it will be lost is at the strategic level in DU.
Everyone here is talking about stuff you hear on Eve of large markets, capital ship battles, large organizations that you hear about in Eve. Well how does this game give the fundamental features to achieve that before the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th expansion? I am skeptical it will be in the base game before final launch, which is next year?
Like I said before in other threads. A lot of the stuff DU is trying to do, Eve has already done and each expansion they made a lot of mistakes and some good choices. The only difference between the features DU is advertising short of voxels/ship design etc you can already do it in Eve to some degree.