Lethys
-
Posts
5686 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Lethys
-
-
Welcome to the forum!
-
It sounds like you're saying they should make building harder as part of some sort of gameplay mechanic.
I definitely don't think that is a good idea at all.
Anything that can be done to help take the vision in someone's heads and put it in the game, should be done. Obviously there needs to be resource costs and other stuff like that. Creative mode is about free resources. They've made it very clear we won't have that.
But the act of building should be made as easy and as enjoyable as possible.
They can limit how much you can build with resources. No need to artificially slow down building.
edit: Just to clarify when i say "building" i mean design, NOT creation. I don't think it should be easy for someone to create a fleet of ships. I just don't think it shouldn't be artificially or intentionally tedious to design them. The challenge in building should be the creative process. Not in the actual placing of the voxels.
I kind of disagree - surprise, surprise
Yes it should be made....easy is the wrong term....let's say convenient. Mirror mode, creating beams of certain lengths (as proposed but not as long as you want), maybe even a copy/paste thing - all good if done right. What I'm against is a kind of creative mode (not as you thought I mean no resource cost) in the sense of: instantly create the whole (even rough) shape of the ship. This should be actual work. The hard part about building a ship is not the sketch, the hard part is actually really placing the voxels in the right position in order to get a wonderful design. Just look at those awesome SE designs: each one of them is special because of carefully placed elements which work together perfectly. THAT'S the hard part.
Everyone can sketch a ship which looks more or less great with all necessary stuff in it, but only true masters (those who know how to exactly place those voxels) can construct a ship which is in perfect balance of volume, intelligent design and usefulness
-
As always: +1 and keep the good work going.
Happy holidays, you deserve it
-
As mentioned over there https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10592-so-any-updates/
NQ has plenty to do with the kickstarter aftermath, no need to worry if your pledge level isn't yet linked with your forum account
-
Must. Comment. Everywhere. +1
Must. get. that. postcount. up
-
The specific wavelength the Comms tower uses to create both a local chat and a radar are nullified by the waves the shield uses to maintain an effective energy barrier. Comm Arrays in a shield have their range reduced by 50%, and the effective mass required for Radar detection increased by 25%. The shield's effective energy (health) is reduced by 20%.
Maybe? You could still put one in a shield, but it would decrease the effectiveness of both units. It would still be harder to destroy the Array, but it's offest by some negatives.
That could be a work-around, but as Twerk pointed out this still increases the overall hp of the array by many orders of magnitude.
I particular like your idea of increasing mass detection by 25%:
you can make your antenna more durable to attacks, but risk a battlecruiser going unnoticed.
Problem with this though: we don't know yet how shields work. (for reference: https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10496-timer-on-shields/ )
If all shields have that 48h timer, you can only operate in that space in some small ships, which go unnoticed. You can't attack the antennas to make them blind, you have to use hackers to shut them down.
So a large invading or attacking force would have a very hard time. Don't get me wrong here: I'm not talking about the attack itself (a large attacking force SHOULD be hard to hide and SHOULD be detected with ease!). I'm talking about the aftermath:
- Will the shields drop automatically once the defender loses?
- If yes, that would just suck because all assets of the defender are rendered vulnerable and killable - blob wins and takes all
- If no, that would suck too because then the attacker has to bring down ALL shields (which is fine for bases and stuff - that's why you're building shields at all isn't it?) - even the ones protecting the antennas. Imagine a big system with 3 planets in 4 years with 40 antennas. That's just grinding HP down and this is no fun at all - but then again you're right when you say something like "But a well developed system with a large nation there has the right of being a fortress"-
This is a very delicate topic and should be discussed in another thread.
The line of sight rule would fit well with technology
Overall I think this idea has potential in it and enforces great gameplay mechanics
-
totally forgot to write here too
good stuff, +1
-
I don't care about wealth and money (I happily burn through my funds just because shits and giggles)
I don't care about fame (Those who really matter in the game know what I can do)
I don't care about my stuff ingame (sometimes you lose a fight, sometimes you win it - noone cares)
I just do what seems hilarious to me
Well, I'm founder and leader of the 3rd biggest company (VMS), so that should explain it.
Who are you? What org? Never even heard of you lol
-
Soo....why start a thread on it?
But, to humor those who may be wondering why it won't happen, the main reason is that fully- or even mostly-automated drones of any kind kill gameplay.
If automation can be accomplished with a mining drone, there is no way of limiting it to just mining. Even if you couldn't put "weapons" on it, (and there is no way of limiting that as far as I know,) it still has a mining laser or some other mining device it could hurt people with. Voila, combat drone.
Self-replication is a bad idea for a similar reason; all you need to build is one, and with a little patience you will have a drone army!
Even if you only used this drone army to mine, it is simply an unfair advantage to the owner, since new players wouldn't stand a chance to either find resources or sell them at the price you could. (Plus, did I mention it kills gameplay? That owner doesn't have to work / pay for materials beyond what it took to make / buy the first drone!)
Some will say that under those circumstances, new players should just join an organization that has territory they can mine.
2 problems with that:
#1. New players shouldn't HAVE to join an organization just to get started in the game. There will be plenty of lone wolves in DU, and a lot of them will do just fine.
#2.It will be difficult for even organizations to defend against a drone army, both physically and economically. Just because they own battleships or tons of land doesn't mean they can cope long-term. Battleships take money and resources to operate, and no matter how much land you own; if John Drone is selling his stuff for $30 less than you, you won't ever turn a profit!
So as the original poster pointed out: this will more than likely NEVER happen.
This "idea" was posted in general, not the idea subforum. I think he just wants to talk about such self-replicating robots in general.
Short answer: Van-Neumann machines have to be killed on sight and have to be exterminated ASAP - Your turn to figure out why
-
I am checking the website, forums, YouTube and everything everyday in the hope there will be some update, some new video maybe, anything .... Would be good to post Videos and updates frequently so as to keep the Game on the radar, me thinks.
I had a conversation with Nyzaltar / Nomad a week ago and they both (as they too stated several times on the forums) said they are working hard on the kickstarter surveys atm (people got wrong email adresses filled in, incorrect name reservations, forum problems and so on) and their workload was unexpected high.
I know it's hard but you just can't expect them to update the community with a new video or something every week like in the Kickstarter campaign. They do a recap every month by mail and newsletter, they're active on the forum to certain topics.
I'd rather have them work on the game then making senseless videos....
Plus: It's christmas time, let them have their holidays too
-
-
All professions in DU need time to develop (infiltrators, commanders, tactician, guners, pilots). And builders need time to build their vast crafts. They need dozens of people to craft it, overseer who look after the right positioning of elements and a few who know the sketches. And they need lots of time. That's emergent gameplay.
You kill that if you would just allowm a lone wolf to build the skeleton of that ship in a matter of seconds. Yes it's tedious and it takes a lot of time - that's the whole point of it. This is not SE creative mode. It's a mmo where things can even go badly for your long built vessel.
-
Technology can fix it.
Why do you often hear combat sounds in large space battles in sci-fi movies? Viewer enjoyment, it would be different any other way.
Smart technology could in theory simulate relatively fitting sounds, thus explaining all of that stuff. It would help because we're used to audio feedback and in turn it would actually be helpful with the peripherals and whatnot. Something "explodes" nearby? You'd hear it and be aware.
no need for a lore for that imho in a game....
As CCP puts it: "Because space would be utterly boring without sound"
-
Line of Sight requirements could fix the building said array within a mmon, or could not be placed witthi na shield for any scientific reason
And as of the last point, yeah, but on the bright side, it means people can have "daily" quests to ear some cash I mean, in EVE we got missions for silly things that NPC give us that don't really affect the universe, in DU, not paying much for an Array maintenance job may be your faction's ndoing
Emergent Politics O_o
I know how those mentioned problems could work out but I want to educate people to use their brain and think for themselves for pros/cons
-
I like the idea. It creates good gameplay
- engineers setting those antennas up
- repairing them
- planning the locations
- giving thought of the actual usefulness of antennas for your faction (as pirates you maybe don't want a local chat and anyone to know that you're here or you want to make them feel perfectly safe because there is a local chat but you use small ships yourself to go under the radar)
- building a network for perhaps better/more boni
- as intruder you would have to gather intel carefully, hack or kill some antennas and then send the fleet
- antennas should come in different sizes/variations. Size = radius, variation = basic,mediocore,advanced. Basic=only radar for example, medium= radar+local chat, advanced= radar+local chat + how many player per ship for example.
Problems i see with this:
- could be too op (you just build fail-safe grid or at very hard to attack positions like inside a moon with a TCU so noone can dig there) but then again - just put more effort to attack it.... difficult call
- depending how it's implemented it could be annoying to run those things
-
-
good stuff, +1 ! Liked reading it
-
Posted Yesterday, 11:50 AM
Well, in fact it's over. He won
-
I just do whatever I want as long as it's within the EULA - I don't really care about labels this community will give me. If my victims feel like I'm a griefer - well, so be it.
Let's say the object is to steal something, and in this case, it can be done easily without killing the targeted player or destroying something of his. If the "pirate" then proceeds to level the target's base, he has crossed the line between piracy (stealing something) and grieving (causing undue harm).
lol. Can't say more about this
-
Again a little advice:
Watch the videos, read the devblogs and read the AMA section here on the forums.
Don't start a thread every time you have a question unless you really can't find anything.
Teleportation wasn't mentioned. Perhaps it's possible but imho it would be op
- Novark, Limyaael and Atmosph3rik
-
3
-
Pretty much the general gist of what's being said in this thread - it makes absolute sense to have more efficiency from more crew on larger ships. In pretty much what #4 said regarding roles and what was later said regarding NQ's statement on efficiency of larger ships.
The statements that I really disagree with, and what I really don't want to see happen, is the obsession of "balance", that has existed in, and completely crippled several games in the past. Life is unfair. Sure, there would always be advantages and disadvantages in everything and anything, but I don't want to have a "fair fight" against a capital ship when I'm flying a little single seat fighter - or even a bunch of em. If I take my mitsubishi pajero onto a a race track up against a Ferrari, I expect to lose in a race, badly, beyond any recognition. Likewise, I would like to see specific roles when it comes to ship designs, and sizes - so using that same comparison with cars, my Pajero climbs 40 degree hills in the mud on the farm - something which a Ferrari wouldn't be able to do.
Basically, what I would really hate to see, is the whining of "whine, that capital ship gun melted my single seat fighter - it's too OP, balance it" - in the regard of EVE online, something which I didn't quite like (though I understood why they had to do it in the span of EVEs gameplay), was the fact that smaller ships were literally invulnerable to larger ones, as the guns were unable to hit them. Yes, you want a mixture of ships in fleets - but that mixture needs to be achieved through each ship earning it's specific role in that fleet through it's own strengths, rather than forcing a rock paper scissor scenario, with the ability to evade turret fire of small maneuverable craft lying with the pilot, against the aim of a gunner, or the quality of the design and location of hardpoints of the ship - rather than simply saying "gun size X cannot hit targets smaller than size Y".
Would this result in certain ships and builds that would be significantly better than the others - of course - but isn't that the entire point of a game such as DU, part of which is building and improving blueprints and ships? And it would also bring in the mechanic of correctly identifying your target based on it's threat level meaning the difference between victory and defeat. I feel, that 'unbalance' in this sense, is a GOOD thing, since it will push players to try and build better, more efficient, more advanced ships throughout the 'evolution' of DU, rather than stifling this with balance.
good point too, +1
-
Hi there,
if you want to participate in bug testing: gold (that gives you alpha access)
If you want to go for beta: take the silver
welcome to the forum
-
That is a great sticky resource...funny I missed it as it was in the pub section...
I've watched many of the youtube videos showing DU content, posted by DU, bluedrake42, XPS gamers, w4stedspace. I find the videos more persuasive and even exciting than the words saying we will or do have it. In fact as soon as "I saw it" I had to crowdfund this.
ps - another forum level "alpha team member"
you know who will be in alpha when you look at the pledges, so no need for that
-
Welcome to the forum
Yes it depends on different aspects, dunno how many and what kind of, but certainly post-count.
Your pledge level is separate
Recruit: orionbeta
in Org Updates & Announcements
Posted
Read -> think -> reread -> post
Look around a bit on the community portal, there you will find some orgs for yourself if the pms sent to you don't appeal