Lethys

So true. All these little mechanics are missing in DU but made eve so SO much better at Exploration. We were 15 ppl in a c5 and always scannen the whole chain, we got around the whole verse in less than 15 jumps. And it was very exciting because you always had a risk involved of getting caught. But these ppl don't get that, and never will, because they want their playstyle to be 100% safe and they want to do everything with no risk. "But those griefers never build anything and and risk does not involve pvp" - pretty wacky statement for a single shard MMO 

So true. All these little mechanics are missing in DU but made eve so SO much better at Exploration. We were 15 ppl in a c5 and always scannen the whole chain, we got around the whole verse in less than 15 jumps. And it was very exciting because you always had a risk involved of getting caught. But these ppl don't get that, and never will, because they want their playstyle to be 100% safe and they want to do everything with no risk. "But those griefers never build anything and and risk does not involve pvp" - pretty wacky statement for a single shard MMO 

Please name the MMO games you know that do not have loss of inventory. Or let's makes it easy, give me three  ..
 
  
 
As Lethys mentioned, you lose your ship in EVE, you lose everything in or on that ship and that may also include trained skills. You lose your pod and you respawn, losing any implants yo may have used in the pod.
 
Now you might try and get back to where you were killed and if you're lucky be able to recover some of your stuff, but it will mostly be gone unless you got killed by NPCs and no one else came around to find and loot the wreck. And we know that NQ intends to implement a similar mechanic eventually, a loot container will spawn with your inventory which can be looted or recovered.
 
 
  
 
You do not lose real money in game. As is the case in EVE, I would expect that the eventual Cash shop items will be permanent and bound to the character. If you fly around with DAC in your cargo (if that will even be possible) then that is a risk you choose to take as there should not be any reason why you'd do that.
 
Now if NQ does not implement DAC in a way that enable you to use it in game while not putting it at risk then sure. But I doubt they will be that daft.

So true. All these little mechanics are missing in DU but made eve so SO much better at Exploration. We were 15 ppl in a c5 and always scannen the whole chain, we got around the whole verse in less than 15 jumps. And it was very exciting because you always had a risk involved of getting caught. But these ppl don't get that, and never will, because they want their playstyle to be 100% safe and they want to do everything with no risk. "But those griefers never build anything and and risk does not involve pvp" - pretty wacky statement for a single shard MMO 

That is not unlucky though, that is taking a risk you should not take. Most camping spots are well known and there are tools that will tell you whether there is a camp up in the usual places well before you get there. Also.. wormholes are your friend in EVE as an explorer, exploration based corps keep very accurate trackers on wormholes for good reason, they are the easiest and best way to get around quickly and relatively safely if you know how to use them. Oh and it's intricate mechanics like that which make EVE the success for all sorts of playstyles. The many seemingly "basic " features have some many potential side effects and uses that it drives gameplay much further than probably intended, something NQ will need to learn to understand if they want to succeed.. 
 
Oddly, when CCP turned off local in NullSec last year, it was us explorers who benefitted the most as many campers and "casual" PVP players stayed away as they were afraid of getting caught. It was quite glorious .. and profitable

If DU ever get exploration it will need to be in PVP space for the same reasons the good stuff is in Nullsec and Wormholes in EVE. Expecting everything to be accessible without risk is simply not reasonable or realistic. If you want to get/find high value goods, you'll need to take risks. And to be honest, I think the "threat level" in DU is and will be much lower than some PVP players would like you to believe or they would possibly like to see. Pretty much in the same order as venturing into Nullsec in EVE, which is not even close to the level of risk many (new) players think it is. I can honestly say I have never been caught in Nullsec due to surprise or smart opponents, it was always because I was careless, took unneeded risks or made mistakes/wrong choices. And I expect it will be much the same in DU eventually.

First off, I never said any of the above and I know exactly where my mind is.. 
 
I never said that DU is/was or will be advertised as a PVP intensive game, I said that DU has always been advertised as a game with PVP being an integral part of the game. PVP is one of the main pillars of the game and always has been.
 
 

 
 
 
The suggestion no one would be here if NQ said as much is factually incorrect, there is many here, like myself, who do not care for PVP at all but understand it is a part of the game and are perfectly willing to deal with it if and when it is encounter on our own terms, that may mean that I'll just surrender whatever I fly and respawn as worst case.. The potential loss to PVP would be a calculated risk for me.
 
 
I also never said, and will actually disagree, that DU is first and foremost a PVP centric game. That does not mean that PVP has no place or function in the game, it means that PVP is not a goal in itself in the structure around which DU is (or better, will eventually be) designed.
 
 
If you want to argue that too many who prefer a PVP playstyle seem to think that the game is all about PVP and that hey seem to want to make the point that without a massive shift towards PVP the game is doomed then you get no argument from me that this idea is based on nothing but mistaken assumptions by others and NQ not clearly correcting set expectations because of that.
 
PVP is very clearly a part of the game structure and design. It's all over the forums and in the many videos as well as the kickstart pages and yes, it is certainly mentioned in the introduction as well.
 
You can play DU without ever encountering combat PVP by staying in the safe zone or by staying within a well defended and set up territory outside of that zone once TW comes into play. I entirely expect NQ will eventually implement Territory warfare in a way that is very much skewed towards  the "defender" by making it very hard and costly for any attacker to even try a basic takeover. They will have to effectively disable the ability for the individual rogue element or small pirate group to take over territory, restricting that activity to big/"state" organisations which as a side effect will allow small independent pockets to mostly go about their business without much risk at all.
 
My expectation will be that NQ will drive "space" TW towards heavily fortified and defended space stations as endpoints for warp jumps and entry points for safe corridors on planets into the populated areas which can also be safeguarded fairly easily (but at cost).
 
NQ will keep PVP out of the populated areas, wherever they are by using mechanics that favour defence seriously. PVP will be in the "wild west" outside of these areas. If they don't all the creative and non PVP population will remain in the current Alioth/Thades/Madis safezone and the rest of the game world will be pretty much empty as the risk would simply not be worth the effort and cost  to build there.
 
PVP will come to planets sure, but the main focus for combat PVP will remain in space is what I expect. At least for the foreseeable future as I do think that AVA will not come in until some time after official release.
 

Just to note for a moment:
I never blamed the player. The final authority on a decision or course of action has always been NQ and will always be NQ. I also don't want to argue with players because they only end up consuming a product, just as I do. The grievance should not be sought from the playerbase. Every type of player is valid and not wrong. The only question is how the company and the game deals with it.

1. It was advertised during the KS Campaign in 2016 that it will have a 20km SZ and everything else is PvP
2. There was a pvp Trailer in June 2020 that literally advertised the pvp part.
 
Sources with timestamp:
 
 

And here is where I do not agree. PVE content in a game like DU should be designed to carry enough reward to be worth the risk of engaging with the content while at the same time, it provides enough of a challenge and opportunity for PVP players to engage the PVE players in those situations. That is how these mechanics IMO should be balanced. As a PVE player you know you can and will encounter PVP and will lose ships but overall the rewards are worth the risk or the loss.
 
If you want to not be bothered, stay in the safe zone, choose a single player game or a game with a PVE only mode to play, not a game which is clearly and openly advertised as a game with PVP components you may encounter any time you step outside of a safe zone.

You do not lose inventory through teleports as the inventory stays behind on the point or origin.
A respawn is not a teleport, it is suicide so you lose your stuff.
 
Most MMO games will see you lose your inventory when your character gets killed of you respawn, most co-op games will too..
Eventually you should drop your inventory (possibly with a chance of a percentage being lost) on being killed and possibly on respawning where others can loot that drop, for now inventory just evaporates.
 
None of this has ever not been known or clear so if this is such a concern/issue for you I'm not sure why you choose to play this game. It's like you buy a banana bread slice from Starbucks and then complain that you really should be able to not have banana in the bread.

Makes sense to me. 
 
All good games require conflict to work. Hell, even Stardew Valley has conflict. 
 
Wanting PvP doesn't mean wanting more combat in its current state. NQ needs to understand that they can't design for a hardcore audience as if it were still 2003.
 
There needs to zero "do-nothing" roles like gunners and a lot less asymmetry in ship balance (like Lethys suggests, better defenses for non-combat ships).  
 
When people around here say that DU needs PvP to work, IMO they really mean that the game needs conflict to work...and PvP is the most obvious driver of this conflict. It isn't like they're going to add NPCs, hah! 
 
There's a billion ways to balance against ganking, which seems to be the main concern with PvP.
 
Getting ganked is never fun, especially if the cost of death is super high as it can be with DU.
 
Again, this can't be the hardcore of 2003, this isn't Eve, and DU won't survive without more scale, which means more mass-appeal, which means combat itself needs overhauls...

Exactly - not much use in any of this because nothing really has a purpose or value except "uhhhhh shiny!"

Don't want to sound salty/nothing personal (+ I kinda semi-retired for summer)...

But. Thats almost intolerable to read how misguided some of you, guys, are.
 
Whole idea of single-shard-player-driven-whatnot-game is literaly self defeated if you start to divide "pvp" and "pve" players for matters of "mental peace and conviniece", especialy -- economicly (something NQ methodicly doing for some time, and this is grave mistake). Because this degrades whole experience to pretty much isolated, instanced gameplay, where nothing beyond your own bubble affects you. Sure people can visit each other, show off their stuff, but thats it. You can do it in every not even true multiplayer, but just coop game.
 
Moment players get enviroment with no risk or barriers to get stuff, they naturaly disperse for solo/small group play. Orgs just can't offer real benefits beyond being some loose "interest clubs" and die as meningful entities. 
 
Ofcourse, SZ must exist on level of "building museum" or "reserve storage base", space to learn how to fly in safety, fool around, socialize. Yet ast same time SZ must allow only minimal economic activity (idealy -- nothing beyond some basics that important for true noobs).
 
New -- have your time.
Come just for building decorative stuff in peace -- welcome.
Want to be at least somewhat rich and impornant, produce stuff en-masse? Go and actualy risk your fat ass.
 
Currently this fundamental princple that makes keystone sense for true player driven sandbox is absolutly broken, to level of mockery. 

This comes back to (for me) one of the glaring issues with DU in general. 
 
Elements placed together does the same job as a beautifully voxel designed ship. The driving force to have a nice ship is purely personal preference. 
 
This goes the same for building bases and ports and cities. There needs to be functional uses tied with beautiful designs and I think building a system that pairs these two things together is a key piece in ANY successful voxel based multiplayer game. (personal opinion)

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.

^ This. Its even very easy to trace with objective evidence of NQs (JCs) blablabla if you dig in old stuff.
 
Initialy DU was promised as very PvP-centered game (it was main/only reason why some people particiapated in KS). Then its U-turned to some lame Landmark-2 with elements of PvP (and even then most of them heavly downgraded in importance and postponed to somewhere in future).

So it's about T4 & T5 resources now?
 
This game has ALWAYS been advertised as an open PvP game.
 
It was supposed to have one small safe zone on Alioth around the markets.
PvErs complained.
 
Then they added a safe moon.
PvErs complained.
 
Then they expanded it to three whole planets and all the space in between.
PvErs complained.
 
Then they added the surrogate thing so you didn't even have to travel in space at all!
PvErs complained.
 
Now you're complaining about not bein able to mine ore that is basically only useful for people who play PvP?
Call me shocked. 
 
No amount of concession or compromise is good enough for players like you.
 
No worries, you'll get your wish. but I estimate 6 months to a year before you lose ALL of your builds in one fell swoop with no option, whatsoever, to rebuild when the game gets shut down for being so damned boring.
 
Mark my words.

I'm so tired of this discussion.  You all see the state of the game right now, right?  It's because of a lack of decent PvP.  Carebear builders don't want to actually PLAY this game with us.  They just want our adoration  - of their empty, useless buildings.
 
See, I'm not a PvP player.  I am a builder.  And a pretty darn good one (if I say so myself). However, I am NOT satisfied building an empty city no one will ever use, let alone visit. I don't care how many "likes" I get on Twitter for my skills.  That is the ONLY end-goal in a building game without PvP;  Likes, adoration, popularity and logging in every day to see how awesome people think you are.  You don't want an actual game, you just want to showcase your building skills somewhere.  And then you call people like ME toxic because you don't like it when I defend the vision this game is built upon.
 
If you want an economy, politics, civilization, you have to have PvP.  If you want your builds to MEAN something and have purpose, you need PvP. Period.  That is exactly what builders like me came to this game for.  Please, for the love of God, please just go find one of the many building games without PvP in them and go play those.  Quit trying to ruin a game that is already on its last leg.  Many of us builders came here specifically so our builds can have purpose.  I want to see if I can build beautiful buildings that can actually protect my belongings, my org and my city.  I WANT people to attack them to see if my designs are just fluff or if they can stand up to the challenge. 
 
This is why this game is so f'd up right now.  The more NQ listens to people who signed for this game only to try to change the vision, the faster this game will end up in the tank.  Seen it happen.  Every damn time.  No one wants to EVER let builders who LIKE PvP actually have a game where you can build AND have PvP.  I'm so sick of trying to play games with these people who are so afraid of digital bullets running their digital buildings that don't mean anything at all except something to look at.  What a waste of my time to even think that carebear pve players would let us alone and let us have a game built for just us for a change. 
 
Well I'm sure you're going to get your wish because game devs fall for carebear threats of leaving every damn time.  I predict that very soon the only threat to your builds will be the game being shut down due to lack of players.  And when it that happens, please remember that YOU had a hand in its demise.
 

I guess @rothbardian is a JC alt.. I see no other possibility here as the disability to actually take another POV on board are similar. Both hear the words others speak but refuse to listen to understand their meaning and both of them seem to think their personal reality bubble is the absolute truth. 
 
Talk about hijacking and derailing a thread.. sjees.

Someone's had a bit too much of the Kool-Aid. Sure, sure, the world has gone haywire since last year, but boy, whatever you take, take less or share at least.
 
But to make a quick bridge to the original post: o7
 
 
 
 

Back when Eve was being developed gaming was very different in terms of players and especially gaming industry. People were happy to play any shitty mmo. Now? ... there are many analogs of voxel builders being developed today, there are huge mmos being developed and or are already in ea or beta, it's a different world. You need to do much, much more than a mining and voxel building simulator in order to attract enough concurrent players to recuperate costs. And by more I don't necessary mean more mechanics, I mean quality.

An EVE clone with missing features, poor performance and with cool building possibilities in its current state. 
 
Fixed that for you.

Smh, the next guy with a ready player one syndrome ?‍♂️

The market lag is just the tip of the iceberg so to speak, for a much larger problem. Market 6 and 7 are just the early warning signs for a much larger problem that will also affect player controlled based tiles and large gatherings, if and when the games gets a larger player base. Anyone who experienced 'lag city' know what I am talking about.
 
So despite what has been said by NQ, D6&7 shows that this game will not able to handle community driven large scale cities, space stations etc. And while the long-term solution of course is to make the entire game faster and more efficient, there will also always be need for 'crowd control' functionality to manage community based long-term gatherings.
 
So many of us fail to see why NQ has ignored this for so long, when there are simple and effective solutions that can be applied that will mostly fix the short term problem of D6&7 (while waiting for the long-term solution that may not even be possible) and also be useful long-term for player driven markets etc in the future.