Msoul

For anyone who did not recieve the email, you can also view the newsletter on the main webpage via this link. 
https://www.dualuniverse.game/news/newsletter-december-2021
 
If you are an existing player and are not recieving these email updates. Double check your notification settings by logging into the forums and clicking the planet icon to the right of your name.  
 

Here's my peace to add to this. Comrad's post brings up issues, but this is his final post.
 
He's been here since the beginning and this is his end. So, instead of a legacy of his final post being about issues, let me recount some of what he did.
 
He was there at the early start of the game. He was active on the forums, paving the way of discussion in the community. Comrad was invited to be apart of ATV, to be apart of this social game and the social aspects of this community. He made an org, a notch to call home for some time, before stepping up into greater aspects of the community. To be present in the time of memes(CSYN undoubtedly) and to be there at the end of others.
 
Comradmoco has helped this community greatly. He helped out and along with yamamushi helped make the Discord a community unlike any other in its hayday.
 
I must tell you all, Comradmoco has spent a great many numbers of hours helping out this community. The official discord, of which he has invested probably thousands of hours, is only the tip of the iceberg.
 
So, with all this in mind, I bid you farewell Comrad! May you find a greater project than this one to jump to o7

These devs put their heart into this game and do not deserve to be ridiculed like this. Please reconsider how you frame your argument. Its fine to be critical of NQ itself, but these are people that deserve our respect. I have seen countless examples where they have gone above and beyond to advocate for the playerbase and fix issues on their own time.

Hate the game all you want, hate the company all you want, but please give the individual devs your support. They need it now more than ever.

These devs put their heart into this game and do not deserve to be ridiculed like this. Please reconsider how you frame your argument. Its fine to be critical of NQ itself, but these are people that deserve our respect. I have seen countless examples where they have gone above and beyond to advocate for the playerbase and fix issues on their own time.

Hate the game all you want, hate the company all you want, but please give the individual devs your support. They need it now more than ever.

These devs put their heart into this game and do not deserve to be ridiculed like this. Please reconsider how you frame your argument. Its fine to be critical of NQ itself, but these are people that deserve our respect. I have seen countless examples where they have gone above and beyond to advocate for the playerbase and fix issues on their own time.

Hate the game all you want, hate the company all you want, but please give the individual devs your support. They need it now more than ever.

I am working on developing guide and resources to help new players... more to come on this in the future. 
 
I hope you stick around while this all gets worked up, it is tough for you guys no doubt!

It why I always say NQ tries to impliment schematics, sinks, or taxes at the large orgs and it basically is nothing but a speed bump and since they dont impliment sinks based on how much you have vs arbitrary sinks across the board it only ends up hurting most players and even more so new players.
 
Take scematics for example we were able to make whatever we wanted and had a good sized industry and had all the talents to make what we wanted from that and pivot to making parts we needed at the time. suddenly to even think about using our industry we built we had to turn around and pony up 200mil in ransom to get it out of m0th balls. For a new player upfront that probably does not know you can right click any element in a core and apply talents they likely will replace schematics over and over again as they go through their talents.
 
and if NQ isnt always trying to cut your brakes or knee cap you all the time they add sinks like Destructible Elements at a time when their system was buggy and would break parts even if you had a soft landing. Honestly with new players not having PDs at their disposal let alone skills and less braking power with the finacky placement system they no longer have the time to sit around and teach themselves how to fly or build a proper ship with the PD bonuses, fuel saving, or stats to properly fly. Combine that with a limited amount of ore coming in and insufficient talents to make scrap you could easily wipe out a daily supply of ore turning it into scrap.
 
Personally I think new players should get a system that gives them T5 talents the first week they player T4 talents the second week they play, T3 Talents the third week they play, T2 the fourth week they player, and T1 Talents the fifth week they play since you basically get 1mil exp per week you want to give new players a fighting chance that goes away to give them a sense of what max skills can be like but to get things done in a way that helps them learn while they get their talents going as well as 1mil h per day starting out for the first week and lowering with the exp bonus. It would also be helpful if there were missions that gave out ship parts, industry parts, elements, or voxels as their payout along with cash to also help get them going.
 
With this current system it also needs to be based on what is in your tile per 100l/h in the cost of the taxes. If you can only produce 500;/h of T1 ore as a new player with all other ores being rare and sparse you would think it should only cost a new player or anyone stuck with non prime tiles 500k-h per week and not a mil per tile per week. Anything higher per T1 and it should add 25-50k in tax by 100l/h. It makes sense to charge people with prime tiles more since they are getting better returns. The fact that NQ said you get more then you pay in taxes just means you can buy up every tile on a planet and cover takes and make money which makes no sense if you dont try to stem it in any way if you own an obscene amount of tiles.

Hello, it has been a long time for me, yet I still follow news of this game and communities progress.

I want to say thank you to the developers that work tediously at their stations to create the very medium by which so many stories and tales will be told.

Thank you to the supporting staff that help us with our issues on the forums, responding to tickets of all sorts of issues, be you paid or a volunteer.
 
Thank you to the guild leaders that have carried on through the years you've done a great job keeping people interested in the game as well as constructing mini communities that keep people active.
 
Thanks to all you independent contributors who endlessly pick at flaws in the rules, scratch your brains to conjure up new ideas to suggest, and keep the world of ideas turning.
 
Thanks to the artist's that have drawn and rendered great art works.
 
Even thanks to those I have clashed with in the distant past when I was active here, you've gone on to keeping people active and make it a better place when I could no longer do so. I hope all you old friends and frenemies are still doing ok regardless of who you were or are now.
 
 
Really, good job to everyone, working on the team or just a fan of the game. You should be proud.
Thank you very much for the efforts, contributions, and trying so hard.
 
 
I want to say to you all, that even though there are many heated conversations, debates, arguments even, that you are still apart of the community which is Dual Universe. You are all connected in a great web of activity and even the guy that just tricked your group into a bad deal, the guy you just argued with for 6 hours about your' org's policies, the people you just dusted in pvp; you're all brothers and sisters in the Dual Universe. I tried to think of a less corny way of saying all this, but really all that matters is I'd like to see everyone smile more, and be a little less hard on each other. Have a nice day.

I understand this was not really the point of the discussion but I just wanted to  clarify that the cost for TCU deployment is actually quadratic and appears to follow  Cost = (120E3)*x^2-(240E3)*x +120E3 where x is the total number of TCUs you have deployed including the one you are about to deploy.  In theory that would lead to an overall cost of $1,944,720,000 for 37 active TCUs. 
 
With regards to the actual topic I think its fine to make an inquiry about it, but be aware that the developers might not be able to comment right away since it is a weekend. Try to keep the speculation to a minimum for now everyone.

You pass the minimum 8GB RAM requirement for pre-alpha as described here https://support.dualthegame.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002021534-Dual-Universe-system-requirements . I don't think you will have any issues with your current setup. Also I can't say for sure that the requirements will be lower upon release but I think that it is very likely. Hope that helps.

We’re all sure it’s going to be a big part of gameplay, so how do we make it fun? Simply being ‘emergent’ or freeform isn’t enough to make a mechanic fulfilling in and of itself, of course. So what can we do to keep the player engaged with this aspect of the game, or at least make it feel rewarding for its own sake. Or, if nothing else, make dealing with it not a chore.
 
I’m going to be touching on a few subjects as we go here.
~Construct Inventories
~Market Inventory Mechanics
~Storing and Deploying Constructs
~Shipment Jobs and Contracts
~EDIT: Tactile Containers
 
Part of the “Durendal has highly vocal opinions about game design” series.
~ Construct Mining and Balance: https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/13238-mining-constructs-balance-and-you/
~ Logistics and Cargo Management
You’re already here.
 
Part Zero: What’s an Inventory Anyway?
This should probably be established early on. What is an inventory? The obvious answer is that it’s where the player stores their stuff, but the form it takes can vary. The most popular form of inventory is a simple screen with a list, or a grid into which representations of items are slotted.
 
So let’s take a moment to look at a few examples of how games have handled inventories.

From Left to Right, we have Minecraft, Astroneer, Hellion, and EVE Online.
In minecraft we can see a very simplistic and effective grid based system. EVE takes a similar approach, displaying items in a list as icons, much like a windowed computer interface.
 
Astroneer and Hellion take a vastly different approach. We can see in Astroneer that the player's items are stored directly on their characters backpack, or carried around ‘by hand’ with the mouse cursor. Whereas in hellion, anything the player wants to set down, needs to be racked onto a shelf or container in the world physically.
 
These represent various takes on two approaches, which we’ll call “Listed” and “Tactile” inventories. One represents the inventory as an abstract space, the other as a physical part of the game world.
 
So, which approach does DU appear to be going for?

“Listed” for sure. And given the scope of the game, one can see why. Having all the items players create physically represented in the game world would be impossible in a game like DU. That said, of the two styles, a tactile inventory is the more engaging and rewarding to actually interact with as a user experience. So is there some way we can implement aspects of it while still keeping within the technical and usability limitations placed on DU’s gameplay? I’m going to venture a ‘yes’ and present some theoretical mechanics and use cases.
 
Part 1: Construct Inventories
We can see in the screenshot above, pulled from the Pre-alpha tutorial videos, that the player’s personal inventory consists of a branching,sortable list of items. As an extension, we can assume the inventory of a construct would be similar. Perhaps taking the form of minecraft-like ‘chests’ into which items are simply dragged and dropped. This is absolutely a functional system, but it’s not a very satisfying one. It doesn't leave a lot for the player to interact with. So how can we take some elements of a tactile inventory system and apply them to DU’s listed system?
 
Before we get into the meat of that, first of all we should establish how the player is going to interact with the contents of a construct. The most obvious answer is ‘they walk up to cargo elements and press the interact button’ but this has the potential to become more tedious than immersive.
 
The most straightforward way would be some means of inventory pairing. With this, a character could set a current construct as their ‘active inventory’ and have the things within in available to them as if they were in their personal inventory. So long as they remain within a certain range of the construct. This allows the player to move things from one construct to another without tedium. Simply by moving from the construct that contains their active inventory to another, and interacting with it normally.
 
With that out of the way, let’s discuss a constructs inventory in and of itself. NQ has stated that a construct will have access to ‘storage elements’ which are required to contain items. These may be specific to certain item types, such as solids, liquids, elements, constructs, etc.
 
One way to make this a bit more engaging is to implement a two-stage inventory for constructs. In this, there are two primary types of inventory elements: Containers (previously ‘storage elements,’) and Racks.

 
When a storage element is installed on a construct, it contributes to that constructs capacity to hold items. Interacting with it, or opening one’s player inventory when paired to the construct, will allow the player to drag items between any appropriate spaces. Be it their inventory or the Containers of a linked construct.
 
A Rack, on the other hand, allows Containers to be installed in it directly. This allows them to be used in the manner described above. In addition, however, when interacting with a rack or other construct, a player can drag an entire Container from one Rack to another. Allowing the movement of physical containers from one consruct to another. (The Rack element here will display the container it contains, but that container won’t be a separate element. Though it may affect the characteristics of the Rack as if it were.)
 

 
This should allow a great deal of flexibility in cargo handling and inventory management. As well as giving a pseudo-tactile to feel to the process. Giving the player the possibility to see their cargo hold actually ‘fill up’ with goods in some way should add at least some small aspect to making the task fulfilling. It also has some knock-on effects to other mechanics, taht will be discussed in following sections
 
Part 1b: Secondary Conjectures
This is stuff outside the scope of the above, and is more conjecture than solid suggestion or opinion.
 
~ Containers could be allowed to be dropped freely as physics objects? This could be problematic. But having either an ‘ejection’ rack or mechanism for detaching containers rapidly could allow for some interesting interactions. It also ventures the possibility of placing containers in a ship without a rack, or piling them by some method in a warehouse without racks. This is beyond the scope of the proposal, though, and probably incurs too much overhead for what it achieves.
 
~It might be possible to store multiple smaller containers in a larger rack. This incurs the problem of designing a UI element to display how this is being accomplished, in the case of odd fits. While it’s perhaps possible to clearly communicate how much space is remaining in a give rack for containers, this may also be more headache than is necessary.
 
~Possibility the distance an inventory transfer can take place it is related to ‘nano beamformer’ elements? This may be an unnecessary complication. But the elements themselves would provide a jumping off point to script the automatic transfer of containers and cargo.
 
Part 2: Storing and Deploying Constructs
 
Dev blogs have stated it will be possible to store entire constructs inside of a storage element. So how do you get them out? And how does that play with our new Container and Rack system?
 
In addition to container types for different resources or items, one can assume there will also be one specifically for constructs. In fluff terms, we can consider this as a complex device that stores a complex object deconstructed by nanoformers as its component parts, along with all the information to reconstruct it.
 
The capability to store constructs in this way is vital for a number of reasons. Both to facilitate mass production and to reduce server load. (While the image of a lot of ships for sale is delightful, it may be hard to handle for multiple reasons, including interaction with market mechanics.)
 
So first of all, how do we store a construct? We can posit that a construct becomes any other item and is placed into a container suitable to it. Issue arises with constructs that take up more volume than a single container holds. How does one put battleship soup in a can? Here, we can assume that a construct could be ‘partitioned’ across multiple Containers, that become a linked item, or at least a cross-referenced one.
 
Next, we need to get Constructs both into and out of containers. An issue that arises here is that we don’t want this to happen instantly. While time has already been invested into making the construct, we also don’t want units being deconstructed in combat to save them, or freighters instantly spitting out fighters from their holds. So this process should take some time.
 
To facilitate it, we have two elements. We’ll call them a “Garage Array” and a “Construction Array” for brevity's sake. A Garage Array deploys or undeploys dynamic constructs. It’s either linked to secondary elements defining an enclosed space, or has some sort of volume set on its deployment. A Construction Array deploys and undeploys static constructs wherever the operator points it.
 
The size of the array elements themselves determines the maximum size of the construct they can work on, and how quickly they do so. (Possibly in conjunction with player skill.)
 
Thus, storing or deploying a capital ship or large station should take a fair bit of time, while fighters and houses should be quick affairs.
 
The Container that an undeployed construct should be placed in would be selected via GUI upon beginning the process. While deploying one could use existing UI elements. (The item sidebar specifically.)
 
Part 2b: Secondary Conjecture, The Second.
~It may be a Good Idea to factor the deployment time into the time needed to manufacture a construct in the first place.
 
~If a container for part of a construct is lost, a Factory Unit should be able to replace it by being provided with the other containers. To prevent IP theft by copying. (Splitting something into five containers and ‘replacing’ the other four off each.) When the process is initiated, remaining containers should become inert. Though if they’ve been stolen or simply misplaced, the construct soup in them should be reclaimable for raw materials as a consolation prize.
 
Part 3: Market Inventory Mechanics
So now that we have containers, how do they interact with markets? It’s been stated that a market will need storage for goods waiting to be sold, so we can facilitate that in the following ways.
 
1: A container attached with no rack to the market construct and linked to the market unit provides loose item storage to it.
2: A rack attached to the market unit allows for containers within it to be sold, including their contents. (And potentially bought, but this has some issues, as a market order for ‘a size 3 Container with exactly 30k iron ore.’ raises UI questions.)
 
Alternatively, we could also allow containers in racks to be flagged to contribute to the total loose storage. Or to only do so until they’re empty, or any other number of possibilities.
 
The major takeaway of this part though is that racks and containers facilitate bulk sales for allowing entire containers of goods to be sold and delivered as a unit through the market terminal.
 
Part 3b: Secondary Conjecture; third time’s the charm.
~If market terminals also facilitate delivery or transfer contracts, this neatly sidesteps the problem of ‘placing buy orders for containers of goods.’

~That said, providing an empty container to a market terminal along with buy orders that are collectively tied to its capacity is a Good Idea.
 
~Buy orders that are tied to a target containers capacity are a Good Idea in general, because they allow factory owners flexibility in receiving deliveries from freelancers. But that’s probably out of scope for the cargo post.
 
Part 4: Shipment Jobs and Contracts
 
Containers should allow for shipment jobs to be generated easily. Instead of specifying specific items, a client can now simply say they need a container shipped from A to B. Unfortunately, a simple contract like this fails to allow for some use cases.
 
If an efficient trip means transporting a crate from a market terminal near the client’s business, to the spaceport, to an orbital transfer, then via freighter to another transfer and down to another planet, orchestrating all of this could be problematic. So it may be ideal to allow the client to specify the legs of the journey and the payout for them.
 
Alternatively, allowing potential contractors to establish routes from one freight terminal to another, simply with a fee for transit of a Container, may be a better solution. Here, the customer would select a destination in the market terminal, deposit their Container, and the contractor is paid upon its arrival. This allows a shipping company/org to worry about all the interim stages without involving the customer, but still allows such jobs to be established without require a clerk and notation on the player’s part.
 
4b: Secondary Conjectures One last time
~Yeah, just kidding. This whole part was mostly conjecture.
 
And there you have it. Ways to handle logistics and the potential benefits thereof. There could be ways to make these mechanics even more hands-on and engaging, but they’re likely outside the scope of development NQ has set. The above seems, to me, like a fair compromise.
 
I ran out of steam on the graphics to accompany this. I might go back and add some more later.
 
EDIT EDIT EDIT
Part 5: Tactile Containers
I forgot this one before I posted last night.
 
Tactile Containers would be things like lockers, shelves, weapon racks, armor stands, etc. Things players could use to display personal items such as weapons, tools, spacesuits, and various small decorative items that aren't worth making 'elements' in and of themselves. These would be placeable or retrievable just by holding the item (or nothing to retrieve) and interacting with a 'slot' on the container. These would be specifically not linked to a constructs overall inventory, and might as well includes safes or the like. (Normal containers that are not visible to the outside inventory system by anyone.)
 
The items on these would just not display to people not suitably close to them. And mostly are a way for players to facilitate showing off their personal Stuff, which is something one imagines they'll probably want to do.
 
As a wild conjecture, I'd approve of globes of planets and models of player constructs, generated somehow from in-game data, as ideal decorative items to slot into such elements.
 

 

As an avid Linux user myself I figured I should chime in with my two cents on the topic. While it would be amazing to see Dual Universe have native Linux support I do agree that it should not be a top priority at the moment. I want DU to succeed and to me that is more important than getting all the features that I want implemented right away. There are core features that must be in the game for it to become the smash hit we want and Linux support is not one of those features its a bonus. Although you raise the argument that lack of this feature locks out part of the demographic I do not feel that is the case. Most Linux/Mac users acknowledge that their OS selection is limiting when it comes to playing games (slowly changing but still a long ways to go) and so many compromise with various alternative solutions like dual booting or emulation. I also fall into this category, personally I dislike windows but I simply liked DU much more so now its running on a dedicated windows SSD with nothing but dual universe and discord installed. Sure some might have extreme views and condemn the game for a lack of Linux support but this is a small number of people and I am willing to bet most will bend their ideals in order to play the game. I do hope that NQ tries their best to incorporate additional OS support in the future but I feel their target should be a quality working release first and then add in features afterwards. I like your idea of showing our desire for additional OS support financially but I still feel that all funds should go towards a strong foundation first. The main reason I feel this way is because history has shown that when devs delay their release to cram in more features it just makes the players unhappy and gives room for the competition to walk in with some other amazing game and steal the show. For now I think we should focus our efforts towards assisting alternative OS users with the conversion as much as possible. Speaking of which I keep hearing these rumors of players successfully getting DU to work with wine, if anyone happens to know where these geniuses are please get them to contact me, perhaps together we could create a guide or better yet a convenient package for running DU on Linux.

As an avid Linux user myself I figured I should chime in with my two cents on the topic. While it would be amazing to see Dual Universe have native Linux support I do agree that it should not be a top priority at the moment. I want DU to succeed and to me that is more important than getting all the features that I want implemented right away. There are core features that must be in the game for it to become the smash hit we want and Linux support is not one of those features its a bonus. Although you raise the argument that lack of this feature locks out part of the demographic I do not feel that is the case. Most Linux/Mac users acknowledge that their OS selection is limiting when it comes to playing games (slowly changing but still a long ways to go) and so many compromise with various alternative solutions like dual booting or emulation. I also fall into this category, personally I dislike windows but I simply liked DU much more so now its running on a dedicated windows SSD with nothing but dual universe and discord installed. Sure some might have extreme views and condemn the game for a lack of Linux support but this is a small number of people and I am willing to bet most will bend their ideals in order to play the game. I do hope that NQ tries their best to incorporate additional OS support in the future but I feel their target should be a quality working release first and then add in features afterwards. I like your idea of showing our desire for additional OS support financially but I still feel that all funds should go towards a strong foundation first. The main reason I feel this way is because history has shown that when devs delay their release to cram in more features it just makes the players unhappy and gives room for the competition to walk in with some other amazing game and steal the show. For now I think we should focus our efforts towards assisting alternative OS users with the conversion as much as possible. Speaking of which I keep hearing these rumors of players successfully getting DU to work with wine, if anyone happens to know where these geniuses are please get them to contact me, perhaps together we could create a guide or better yet a convenient package for running DU on Linux.

I am not 100% sure what you mean by "reflection on virtual realities and communities which grow online", it certainly sounds off-topic so you are in the right place but could you clarify what exactly it is you wish to discuss? Are you looking to talk about things that influence online communities? How to keep online communities happy and health?
 
In regards to this forum, you are probably already aware but just in case you can find the rules in this thread https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/8-forum-rules which goes over what content is considered unacceptable (ie: real life politics, ideology and religion) be sure to give it a good read if you haven't already. If you are still unsure whether or not the topic you wish to discuss is allowed or not just pm one of the forum moderators, I am sure they can help you figure it out.
 
 
 
 

As an avid Linux user myself I figured I should chime in with my two cents on the topic. While it would be amazing to see Dual Universe have native Linux support I do agree that it should not be a top priority at the moment. I want DU to succeed and to me that is more important than getting all the features that I want implemented right away. There are core features that must be in the game for it to become the smash hit we want and Linux support is not one of those features its a bonus. Although you raise the argument that lack of this feature locks out part of the demographic I do not feel that is the case. Most Linux/Mac users acknowledge that their OS selection is limiting when it comes to playing games (slowly changing but still a long ways to go) and so many compromise with various alternative solutions like dual booting or emulation. I also fall into this category, personally I dislike windows but I simply liked DU much more so now its running on a dedicated windows SSD with nothing but dual universe and discord installed. Sure some might have extreme views and condemn the game for a lack of Linux support but this is a small number of people and I am willing to bet most will bend their ideals in order to play the game. I do hope that NQ tries their best to incorporate additional OS support in the future but I feel their target should be a quality working release first and then add in features afterwards. I like your idea of showing our desire for additional OS support financially but I still feel that all funds should go towards a strong foundation first. The main reason I feel this way is because history has shown that when devs delay their release to cram in more features it just makes the players unhappy and gives room for the competition to walk in with some other amazing game and steal the show. For now I think we should focus our efforts towards assisting alternative OS users with the conversion as much as possible. Speaking of which I keep hearing these rumors of players successfully getting DU to work with wine, if anyone happens to know where these geniuses are please get them to contact me, perhaps together we could create a guide or better yet a convenient package for running DU on Linux.

As an avid Linux user myself I figured I should chime in with my two cents on the topic. While it would be amazing to see Dual Universe have native Linux support I do agree that it should not be a top priority at the moment. I want DU to succeed and to me that is more important than getting all the features that I want implemented right away. There are core features that must be in the game for it to become the smash hit we want and Linux support is not one of those features its a bonus. Although you raise the argument that lack of this feature locks out part of the demographic I do not feel that is the case. Most Linux/Mac users acknowledge that their OS selection is limiting when it comes to playing games (slowly changing but still a long ways to go) and so many compromise with various alternative solutions like dual booting or emulation. I also fall into this category, personally I dislike windows but I simply liked DU much more so now its running on a dedicated windows SSD with nothing but dual universe and discord installed. Sure some might have extreme views and condemn the game for a lack of Linux support but this is a small number of people and I am willing to bet most will bend their ideals in order to play the game. I do hope that NQ tries their best to incorporate additional OS support in the future but I feel their target should be a quality working release first and then add in features afterwards. I like your idea of showing our desire for additional OS support financially but I still feel that all funds should go towards a strong foundation first. The main reason I feel this way is because history has shown that when devs delay their release to cram in more features it just makes the players unhappy and gives room for the competition to walk in with some other amazing game and steal the show. For now I think we should focus our efforts towards assisting alternative OS users with the conversion as much as possible. Speaking of which I keep hearing these rumors of players successfully getting DU to work with wine, if anyone happens to know where these geniuses are please get them to contact me, perhaps together we could create a guide or better yet a convenient package for running DU on Linux.

As an avid Linux user myself I figured I should chime in with my two cents on the topic. While it would be amazing to see Dual Universe have native Linux support I do agree that it should not be a top priority at the moment. I want DU to succeed and to me that is more important than getting all the features that I want implemented right away. There are core features that must be in the game for it to become the smash hit we want and Linux support is not one of those features its a bonus. Although you raise the argument that lack of this feature locks out part of the demographic I do not feel that is the case. Most Linux/Mac users acknowledge that their OS selection is limiting when it comes to playing games (slowly changing but still a long ways to go) and so many compromise with various alternative solutions like dual booting or emulation. I also fall into this category, personally I dislike windows but I simply liked DU much more so now its running on a dedicated windows SSD with nothing but dual universe and discord installed. Sure some might have extreme views and condemn the game for a lack of Linux support but this is a small number of people and I am willing to bet most will bend their ideals in order to play the game. I do hope that NQ tries their best to incorporate additional OS support in the future but I feel their target should be a quality working release first and then add in features afterwards. I like your idea of showing our desire for additional OS support financially but I still feel that all funds should go towards a strong foundation first. The main reason I feel this way is because history has shown that when devs delay their release to cram in more features it just makes the players unhappy and gives room for the competition to walk in with some other amazing game and steal the show. For now I think we should focus our efforts towards assisting alternative OS users with the conversion as much as possible. Speaking of which I keep hearing these rumors of players successfully getting DU to work with wine, if anyone happens to know where these geniuses are please get them to contact me, perhaps together we could create a guide or better yet a convenient package for running DU on Linux.

I) About Dual Universe (and/or a DU Organization) Advertisement
 
(a) It's fine to advertise the game and/or your DU Organization(s) to players you already know or with whom you have already played with in other games without harassing them. If they aren't interested, do not insist.
 
(b) It's absolutely not acceptable to enter other gaming communities with the only intent being to randomly advertise Dual Universe or your DU Organization to players you don't know. Being polite isn't enough. Participating in said group with the intention to legitimize your advertisement is not enough either. You won't fool many people with this method. While one player may be convinced to join your Organization, it will most likely antagonize significantly more players, making them hostile toward you and Dual Universe due to these cheap and inappropriate practices. 
 
If you don't understand why this is wrong, just imagine players coming from 10 different game communities and invading your Discord, subReddit, or Steam group, falsely pretending to be interested in the game you’re playing while instead being there to make advertisements for the game he plays in your channels. Any person would quickly be tired of this behavior and ban them all, as well as form a negative image of the game that has been advertised. Please don’t do this.  Not only is this rude, this can be considered harassment in addition to brand damage, which could result in a ban from Dual Universe for such behavior.
 
(c) While it didn’t seem clear for everyone so far (despite being in our EULA and in our forum chart here), here is a strong reminder: impersonating Novaquark staff is a serious offense. This will result in a permanent ban without further notice or discussion. There is also no limitation period for this offense (meaning: if we got proof of Novaquark staff impersonation several months or even years later, the sanction will still be applied).
 
(d) While this has been some kind of grey area until now, there won’t be sanctions applied to involved Organizations for the past actions. However, from now on, Organizations that will benefit from the aforementioned bad practices could see their member list reset at Novaquark’s sole discretion. We wish to make it clear that there is nothing to gain from such advertisement and recruitment practices as well as inform other gaming communities that the Novaquark staff will not tolerate these methods of advertisement and recruitment.

II) About Gifting Practices as a Recruitment Incentive
 
Novaquark has not enforced any strict rules regarding gifting practices so you are free to gift DACs or Supporter Packs as you see fit. However, we don’t encourage use of this freedom as a recruitment incentive unless you are perfectly fine with the definition of "gifting" (giving something for free to someone else without expecting anything in return for this gift). 
 
Before gifting a DAC or a Supporter Pack, you should carefully consider that a player could leave your Organization or simply never join it at all. In this situation, this will be your responsibility and we will not refund nor reverse the gift you made to another player. The Novaquark team will not step in to oblige the receiver to fulfill his part of the bargain either (if there was any).
 
So choose and gift wisely.
 
If you have any further questions on the topic, please let us know.
 
Best Regards,
The Community team.

Hello Noveans,
 
Are you interested in talking about Dual Universe or just hanging out with Dual Universe members without necessarily being part of an organization? If so. Come join us in the Official Dual Universe Discord.

What is it?
The Official Community Discord (Now Official) was set-up by enthusiast members of the community to be the place to talk all things Dual Universe in real time and a place to hang out and get to know each other.
 
Why Unofficial?
It is unofficial because currently it is lead by community members like you who are excited to be part of Dual Universe. We also recently have had NQ guest join it to hang out and chat with everyone. 
 
https://www.dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/09/10/dual-universe-official-discord-server/
 
How do I join?
Simple head over to one of the following links to join the 1000+ Noveans already part of it. 
 
https://dualuniverse.chat
https://discord.gg/FRDShpt
 
So if you'd like to be part of this, we welcome you to join us in there any time. We look forward to seeing you in the DUniverse and in Discord.
 
 
Cheers,
Comrademoco
 
p.s. We sometimes hold game giveaways 
 
 
About Discord
Discord is a free multi-platform application built by gamers for gamers. Chat in real time in text, voice or video calls. https://discordapp.com
 
 
 

Twelve pages ... I know this is a controversial topic but the actual discussion part is starting to degrade a bit. How about we take a minute look at the facts and approach this from a more constructive angle.
 
This discussion seems to revolve mostly around freedom vs safety and how to balance the two. Right now DU is planning to operate under the risk vs reward concept where you can choose to live in safety if you wish, or go out and live wildly. Living wildly is going to be incentivized in DU just as it was in eve. This concept is what NQ advertised and what drew 95% of us to this game. The ability to play in a sandbox with the freedom to do what we want, and I don't think that is going to change. If however if you believe otherwise and think the devs have seriously missed their mark then I encourage you to start a poll on the topic, after all this community can speak for itself on what it wants.
 
Now assuming I am correct and this is the kind of game we want to play then perhaps the point to be discussing is how much risk for how much reward? The details of the game are still a mystery. It is quite possible that NQ may implement a "standings/reputation" system to discourage senseless killing or incentivise it by flipping it around and granting bonuses to the best killers. It might be you lose everything on death or maybe you only have to suffer some minor losses and a respawn delay. You might need to take risky trips between safezones or maybe NQ will provide a safer means of doing so.
 
Rather than voicing concerns over what you think DU will become, talk about what you want DU to be. What level of risk vs reward is right for you? What do you think they should or should not allow? How do you suggest they go about accomplishing this? Keep in mind that we want DU to appeal to as many people as possible so try to come up with solutions that includes both extreme ends of the spectrum (at least as much as you can).

@Felonu We seem to be on the same page, I wish more people were as understanding about this issue as you. I think part of the problem is all this text based communication going on nowadays, its impossible to discern the tone of a conversation anymore. Anyways, we are all used to living on our own side of the fence so of course some of our ideologies are going to clash. However as you said at the end of the day NQ will have to make the tough decisions, all we can do is offer our advice and suggestions.
 
I have stated my position on topic but unfortunately I don't have any great revolutionary ideas to offer on how to solve the actual dilemma. Eve tried to handle things by offering layers of security in the form of high sec, low sec, and null sec. It was somewhat of an effective approach but it had its share of problems too. Perhaps we need a more modern implementation. Maybe integrating it with your idea of manipulating the attack and defend ratio somehow. I don't know, its very hard to give everyone what they want. I'm just going to leave it to the experts to figure it out, besides I think my perspective already has plenty of representation.
 
@CaptainTwerkmotor You can be very blunt and rude at times but I do agree with your stance, appreciate what your trying to do and I especially like your persistence. I don't really have the right to complain especially considering you are going around doing the work of 10 men, but could you try to be a little more patient with people? Not everyone is blessed with as much experience in pvp as you have and we don't want to scare away new blood.

@Felonu I understand you concern, in the past eve did had a reputation of being a bit rough at the start. In fact I remember it being portrayed exactly as the image twerk linked. This was kind of a double edged sword, it both attracted and repelled people from the game. Many including myself wanted the high skill level, deep combat mechanics and freedom but others wanted a simpler game where things were more forgiving and got discouraged because of the abrupt difficulty spike. Nowadays I think things have gotten a bit better, CCP itself and a number of player made corporations have acted to help ease the problem by introducing a better tutorial system and guiding players a bit better in their early days. They maintained the high level of difficulty but helped new players overcome it by educating them better (exactly as Lethys has pointed out).
 
I would like to see DU take a similar path because I want to experience the thrill of overcoming impossible odds and fighting in crazy and unpredictable scenarios. For me eve scratched that difficulty itch where if you knew what you were doing and were good at it then you were often rewarded and I loved it for that. I am all for making that graph a little more linear for the new guys but I still want to experience the top of it and I think a lot of people feel the same.
 
Putting a shield on things might be a good solution for protecting the new guys and that's fine with me but I am a little worried that if implemented poorly it could also lower the top and take away from that experience. Your idea that their should be a price for attacking is not a bad one, but keep in mind that attacking already caries with it significant risks and consequences. We need to be careful not to make it prohibitively difficult to engage in pvp. I think in the long run, I prefer a 1:1 approach to the cost of attacking vs defending. I know its not very appealing to those that want to avoid pvp but NQ has promised a safezone, if you want petition to have it bigger or ask that they have more of them but please we need to find solutions that still allow those of us who want the dangerous chaotic environment to still have it.

@Felonu I understand you concern, in the past eve did had a reputation of being a bit rough at the start. In fact I remember it being portrayed exactly as the image twerk linked. This was kind of a double edged sword, it both attracted and repelled people from the game. Many including myself wanted the high skill level, deep combat mechanics and freedom but others wanted a simpler game where things were more forgiving and got discouraged because of the abrupt difficulty spike. Nowadays I think things have gotten a bit better, CCP itself and a number of player made corporations have acted to help ease the problem by introducing a better tutorial system and guiding players a bit better in their early days. They maintained the high level of difficulty but helped new players overcome it by educating them better (exactly as Lethys has pointed out).
 
I would like to see DU take a similar path because I want to experience the thrill of overcoming impossible odds and fighting in crazy and unpredictable scenarios. For me eve scratched that difficulty itch where if you knew what you were doing and were good at it then you were often rewarded and I loved it for that. I am all for making that graph a little more linear for the new guys but I still want to experience the top of it and I think a lot of people feel the same.
 
Putting a shield on things might be a good solution for protecting the new guys and that's fine with me but I am a little worried that if implemented poorly it could also lower the top and take away from that experience. Your idea that their should be a price for attacking is not a bad one, but keep in mind that attacking already caries with it significant risks and consequences. We need to be careful not to make it prohibitively difficult to engage in pvp. I think in the long run, I prefer a 1:1 approach to the cost of attacking vs defending. I know its not very appealing to those that want to avoid pvp but NQ has promised a safezone, if you want petition to have it bigger or ask that they have more of them but please we need to find solutions that still allow those of us who want the dangerous chaotic environment to still have it.

Twelve pages ... I know this is a controversial topic but the actual discussion part is starting to degrade a bit. How about we take a minute look at the facts and approach this from a more constructive angle.
 
This discussion seems to revolve mostly around freedom vs safety and how to balance the two. Right now DU is planning to operate under the risk vs reward concept where you can choose to live in safety if you wish, or go out and live wildly. Living wildly is going to be incentivized in DU just as it was in eve. This concept is what NQ advertised and what drew 95% of us to this game. The ability to play in a sandbox with the freedom to do what we want, and I don't think that is going to change. If however if you believe otherwise and think the devs have seriously missed their mark then I encourage you to start a poll on the topic, after all this community can speak for itself on what it wants.
 
Now assuming I am correct and this is the kind of game we want to play then perhaps the point to be discussing is how much risk for how much reward? The details of the game are still a mystery. It is quite possible that NQ may implement a "standings/reputation" system to discourage senseless killing or incentivise it by flipping it around and granting bonuses to the best killers. It might be you lose everything on death or maybe you only have to suffer some minor losses and a respawn delay. You might need to take risky trips between safezones or maybe NQ will provide a safer means of doing so.
 
Rather than voicing concerns over what you think DU will become, talk about what you want DU to be. What level of risk vs reward is right for you? What do you think they should or should not allow? How do you suggest they go about accomplishing this? Keep in mind that we want DU to appeal to as many people as possible so try to come up with solutions that includes both extreme ends of the spectrum (at least as much as you can).

Twelve pages ... I know this is a controversial topic but the actual discussion part is starting to degrade a bit. How about we take a minute look at the facts and approach this from a more constructive angle.
 
This discussion seems to revolve mostly around freedom vs safety and how to balance the two. Right now DU is planning to operate under the risk vs reward concept where you can choose to live in safety if you wish, or go out and live wildly. Living wildly is going to be incentivized in DU just as it was in eve. This concept is what NQ advertised and what drew 95% of us to this game. The ability to play in a sandbox with the freedom to do what we want, and I don't think that is going to change. If however if you believe otherwise and think the devs have seriously missed their mark then I encourage you to start a poll on the topic, after all this community can speak for itself on what it wants.
 
Now assuming I am correct and this is the kind of game we want to play then perhaps the point to be discussing is how much risk for how much reward? The details of the game are still a mystery. It is quite possible that NQ may implement a "standings/reputation" system to discourage senseless killing or incentivise it by flipping it around and granting bonuses to the best killers. It might be you lose everything on death or maybe you only have to suffer some minor losses and a respawn delay. You might need to take risky trips between safezones or maybe NQ will provide a safer means of doing so.
 
Rather than voicing concerns over what you think DU will become, talk about what you want DU to be. What level of risk vs reward is right for you? What do you think they should or should not allow? How do you suggest they go about accomplishing this? Keep in mind that we want DU to appeal to as many people as possible so try to come up with solutions that includes both extreme ends of the spectrum (at least as much as you can).