The hierarchy is actually rather logical but at the same time it is explained very badly because a dev, who would understand the mechanic, designed the UI. Generally in such a case, the dev would take knowledge for granted and/or believe that all this detail is needed. And while it makes perfect sense to him/her, they fail to realize it may not be so obvious to "your average user"
Right now, the element you are looking at would have rights applied to it which are set on an element (or the construct itself) it a child of and the hierarchy you see shows you how these rights work their way down to the element you look at. You can choose to remove this element from that dependency so it no longer has the (parent's) rights applied to it by using "uncheck all".
What makes this bad UI/UX design is that there is too much information there which is really not relevant to the player. A single checkbox "Exclude this element from applied parent's rights" would do the exact same thing as the entire section, be all the information the player needs, take up way less space and be much more obvious in it's function.
This ain't eve you don't buy a ship and go pvp like it's nothing people spend hours and days making a ship for some scrub kid to come blow them up in a exploited cube these tpes are the ones that get beat up in school and gotta get there payback in a game lol
Why are "PVP oriented players" so focused on being able to target those who have no counter/recourse? Are you looking for kills more than fight maybe?
Why is it that on a good number of occasions, a ship approaching me on an intercept course would turn tail and run as soon as I start moving in their general direction instead of staying on my intended heading? Are you afraid to actually encounter a fight maybe?
It's been well established by now that, while they may be the loudest, The player base looking for pewpew is in fact the minority. Not meant in a bad way but it is.
It appears to me that based on what many of these complain about, if the creatives and non combatant players would leave, there is nothing left for these players to do or shoot at.
The notion of fleets and escorts in game is not viable as there is n way for a fleet to move as a unit. Also If there were to be escorts, this would in effect do the same as using warp as you would not be interested in engaging due to the fact you may actually lose a fight and you are more interested in the kill.
Non combatant players right now choose the expensive route of Warp drives because there are no counters in the game to avoid being shot at. There is no deflection, jamming, stealth, decoys, flares, chaff. Saying "just bring friend and load guns" is not a viable options as this means losing room for cargo and generally being less cost effective than adding a Warp Drive in the first place. And again, many "PVP players" would actually not engage if they find they may actually draw the short straw in a fight.
DU is not, and was never designed to be, a combat centric game. It plays a role in the game for sure, and is important as a pillar of the game, but it is not what the game is all about and anyone who has the expectation is is, should be or will be choose the wrong game to play.
Territory Warfare will favor the defenders versus the attackers, yes. I have no doubt NQ will implement EVE style mechanics which will prevent offline base raiding and allow for time zone co-ordination when getting into fights.
All that said, and while I personally have no interest in combat at all, I do agree that the choice to now let the existing Alioth/Madis/Thades safezone triangle in place is not good for the game and effectively creates a game within a game. It creates a whole set of new problems which I fear NQ has not considered yet and is a massive surrender of their initial vision for the game towards the creative part of the community, I think because they do not really know how to otherwise safeguard this group remaining in game. What may play into this is that NQ knows that this group is both bigger, gives them more exposure and may well be inclined to spend more money in the coming cosmetics cash shop than the PVP oriented player base which from a business POV does make sense.
Sorry to break it to you all, but DU is fundamentally made to be a building game more then it is a PvP game.
And the problem with building vs destroying is that when it takes 5 minutes to destroy months of work, builders leave the game.
In the interview with Spreeezy today Entropy certainly left the option of a reset on the table, especially in the talk about how exploits and early mistakes by NQ may have left the economy "ruined" and gameplay balance unrepairable without a reset/wipe.
That was a game designer talking who seems to understand, and is not afraid to put the notion out there, that there may be a situation where you just can't get around it and I can appreciate that.
