Splatinum

I don't think that "you should just be able to shoot anyone you want without repercussions ever" is a feature that folks have really been clamoring for. It's strange that this is such a common response to anything even vaguely supporting the implementation of some form of open PvP in the game. To be clear I like EVE's security system making it extremely costly to even consider fighting someone where NPCs can sniff it out, but it doesn't have to be that extreme to be engaging. I don't want to post 600 more words about this game, but suffice it to say there are many proposals (both NQ and otherwise) for how to make combat an option without opening it up to pure chaos. It'd be cool if maybe some of them were to be implemented some day. Content doesn't necessarily need to be locked behind PvP per se, but some amount of content should be locked behind high risk activity. And given that NQ seems violently opposed to even considering the addition of non-player threats of some sort, that risk is most likely going to be from other players.

If you want a civilization building game you have to give players a way to resolve conflicts beyond just shitposting at one another in and outside of the game. Since conflict is what makes any story interesting, you want to encourage players to get into situations where they come into conflict with something, and hopefully numerous ways to resolve them. That could be conflict with other players, or the environment, or themselves, whatever. Resolving any of these conflicts doesn't necessarily require combat, but let's be honest it's one of the more fun ways especially when you're in a sci-fi setting and get lasers and missiles and shit. Games exist that are fun without resorting to combat, but there's absolutely no hint that NQ is cooking up some sort of amazing and fun new nonviolent systems to blow our minds. I expect we're going to end up fighting a lot of the time. The particulars of how you fight can evolve over time but if fighting is a way you want players to be able to resolve things. The first step is letting them do it. Ultimately though, I'm of the opinion that combat in DU is likely to primarily be a means to an end. It's possible they could come up with a better, more interesting system and maybe they actually pull it off, but there are a lot of rather tedious games out there that prove you don't really need something especially complex or revolutionary if the experience is in service of a larger goal. It doesn't really have to be a seismic shift in how we view space-fighting; in fact, it could remain fairly simple so long as there's actually something people are able to fight over. (Early on, anyway, it would hopefully improve over time.) A surprising number of people already put up with the grinding tedium for almost no reward other than the experience...imagine if they were able to feel like they were achieving something more by getting into those fights. It's interesting to see how many different ideas people have for ways to shoehorn engaging combat into Dual Universe, but I think its future is more likely to lie in providing a scaffolding for peoples' interactions to generate a larger story that people are as interested in reading about as they are in being part of (if not more). TL;DR The game needs conflicts and ways to resolve them, and that'll probably be by fighting cuz NQ doesn't look like it's coming up with anything else.

Forget about any complex designs you might have for automated miners, the clear solution is to just make Rock Roombas that vacuum up all the infinitely respawning ores on the surface. Mechanically identical to whatever you were planning, but much more entertaining than some bog-standard drill on a tripod.

A separate, distinctive tech tree for organizations sounds like a swell idea. Something that players cannot directly invest into unless they're of the appropriate rank in a sufficiently advanced organization, providing a distinct incentive to form and progress those organizations or join existing orgs that are doing the appropriate work. Serves as a great place to put the vaunted "endgame content" that people speak of in hushed tones when talking about sandbox mmos. You could brainstorm forever about the particulars of such a tree, but I think the concept is a good one.

I hope we'll be seeing a set of skills to train into that extend the lifespan of elements influenced by them, or reduce the impact against repair limits, etc... What I'd love to see with regard to element size limits on the various cores is to have it done via a capacity limit, similar to how chairs currently have a fixed amount of PVP capacity which is taken up by radars and weapons and such. Do the same thing for element limitations. Each core size has a particular element capacity, balanced such that using lots of appropriately sized elements remains possible (perhaps XS cores get unlimited XS elements and so on, or else just number tweaks until it feels right) but using larger elements will quickly consume that capacity. Like, maybe the numbers work out in a way where an XS core could technically accommodate a single Laser L, but it wouldn't then it wouldn't have any remaining capacity for other parts making it functionally pointless. In this scenario it would make sense to have a set of passive skills affecting both the core capacities and the capacity cost of various elements, so perhaps someone who put in the weeks of time necessary for a level 5 skill could squeeze that big gun in there. This would allow clever ship builders or those with higher skill levels to produce more effective ships within the core size. Someone with more experience and a higher level would be able to shove just a little bit more onto the XS core fighter, making it more lethal than someone without those skills can produce. Or engines, or containers, you name it. Further, this whole concept would allow for specialty cores, or even unique cores. That is, cores that you can craft with high level stuff or find out in the world that selectively ignore certain core capacity limitations. Perhaps you find a special rare gem while mining that can be used in the production process of a core that can mount engines one size larger with the same capacity cost, or cores that reduce the mass of anything attached to them, or cores with more health or more repair capacity, etc etc etc. There are more ways to iterate this than I can possible think of here. (even if you don't like my capacity idea, pleeeeease consider specialty cores separately I think they'd be super neat) I really think this would be superior to just setting arbitrary limits based on size alone. Something like this stands only to widen ship building horizons while adding an important set of constraints to the build process. Constraints that don't feel forced upon us but are a natural outgrowth of the building system. Whatever changes are made, the game should (in my opinion) absolutely be avoiding arbitrary rules like the ones being proposed. Certainly there will be places where they're just going to be the only realistic solution, but limiting what goes on core sizes at least can be done far more elegantly than just saying "no big thing on small thing cuz we say so." Thanks for reading.