Metsys

And then you remember how terrible the pvp was. I'd 100% rather have ugly ships over this, because looking "good" is subjective and provides zero value.  Yes let's go back to the time when only L core was viable and 13 ships would engage each other for 1 hour and no one dies and everyone flies back into the safe zone. Absolutely trash game and pvp it use to be. That's why it was changed.

So, there was something who came up with an idea in the DU Discord about something called "mass lock". Essentially, the mass of the ship and the playing field, in combat, will reduce the max speed of a ship. Otherwise, max speed isn't affected. Only in combat does it change. So if you have a massive fleet battle with 40 ships, the effective max speed is heavily reduced for high mass ships and less so for smaller ships. The actual impact of such a massive change would be very difficult to judge. It could go really badly, go really well or have no or little change to PVP overall.

Just wanted to jot this down.

It really wasnt that great. You pointed at something and left click.  It was monkey brain dead activity.  Second, we must not forget, a big reason for these changes were to help the server.  Gun cycles were increased for that reason, and shields were added too.  Server literally shit itself when you have to download the damage.  I really don envision any scenario where the old style of pvp comes back.  And to that I say good riddance.  Flying your ship is way more fun, and having speed differences alone will add fleet comps and variation.  We need to thoroughly test those new changes first so we can give accurate feedback and go from there. 

Have you done any calculations on this topic?
Currently if you are using tier 5 alloy, they have more than x5 multiplier on CCS per HP, you would need at least 120mil of voxels HP to even have a chance to hit your CCS limit and not die by the core explosion. That is around 30,000m^3 of voxels. How is that limiting your creativeness?

 
 
Elements HP are negligible compared to voxels if you have at least 20-30 mils of HP, and with current curve and multipliers you will have much more CCS than that HP amount, so I don't really get your point here, why would you want to increase your CCS if it's hardly noticable before 120-150+ mil of HP, and that's what it's main reason, to make invicible ships not possible to make.

 
 
There are already counterplays and fleet compositions, if you don't see a counter to your ship, that doesn't mean that there is none.
If you have low cross-section L laser ship, it will die to low cross-section M rail ship.
If you have low cross-section M rail ship, it will die to 50mil+ CCS L laser/Cannon ship.
3Lasers+2Missiles+M radar are viable too (will have 4 types of damage and very hight DPS, but not very long range),
And there is more, that's just an on-surface example.

 
 
 
Weapon percs depending only on size? I strongly agains this. Addition of other percs in current `heavy`, `precision` etc.. I'm ok with.

 
 
This is a good one, but not based on weapon type, or size.
Just make it 80% shield, 20% to ship, this will return the mid-fight repairing gameplay

Wiping will solve nothing. It will not magically improve the game in any way, and there will be even less content since all user made stuff will now also be gone.

Like seriously ?
So, are you really complaining about getting killed by a single XS cannon?
Do you think about putting a shield on your ship on day maybe ?

It has been clear from the very start that combat would be the way it is right now. Elite Dangerous, Star Wars or Star Citizen space combat is not at all feasible with the game's infrastructure, with voxel technology already devouring most processing and server performance.

The pvp ad videos of NQ are scripted little things that wont realistically happen in ordinary happenstance. Carriers deploying fighters that dogfight around the big battleships that slug it out, Star Wars style, does look intriguing and is an eye catcher, but simply not a thing that happens outside of dedicated community events.

The best comparison you should draw your PvP expectations from is The Expanse franchise. Combat there happens through 3 (or 4 if you count flinging asteroids) weapons:
-railguns for long distance, but they are dodgable the further away the target is,
-torpedoes with practically unlimited distance, and
-PDC (point-defense cannons) which are for close quarter battle (CQB) or to actively take out torpedoes.
There you have 3 modes of range: torpedoes for far up to unlimited range, railgun for effective middle range upon moving targets and PDC as close range.
And most every single fight is decided in the long ranges by torpedoes and railguns. We are talking hundreds of kilometers. PDCs take out the torpedo threats but otherwise chances that ships even get close enough to riddle eachother with bullet holes of PDCs instead of already blowing up from the other 2 weapon types is very small.

In DU you have a similar concept, but 4 weapon types:
-Railguns for max range, high damage per shot but low dps
-laser for medium to long range, higher rate of fire and dps
-missiles for medium range, high damage per salvo, kinda like a "shotgun" to quote NQ themselves
-cannons for close to medium range, low damage per shot but high rate of fire for strong dps

Currently, and for the foreseeable future, PvP combat engagements will happen at rather large ranges, taking out targets at hundreds of kilometers before you would even be able make out a target with your eyes alone. Chances a ship with XS or S weaponry (being an XS or S core) getting close enough to an L ship to effectively use something like cannons is very slim. With ships all maxing out at 30.000 km/h they wouldn't be able to close the distance anyway, unless the approached L core wills it so.

I like the idea of long-range combat like this and am comfortable with it. IMHO we'd need small core vessels to be able to slot L or M weaponry to their S gunner seats (even if 1 L weapon completely maxes out the capacity of the chair) to make smaller core ships fill a niche and make them viable as being near impossible to hit by L cores while being able to meaningfully engage them at THEIR ranges. Then they could in return be countered by dedicated gun platforms with smaller caliber weapons to take out these niche S ships due to hit probs. Lots of balancing and math involved with that concept idea, but worth thinking about.

Otherwise pvp could maybe benefit some visual improvements. If you shoot something and go into third person you should see a little light flicker in the distance from the impact of your shot, not just having a hole appear on the enemy ship in the telescope.

PS: damn, look at me monologuing

It has been clear from the very start that combat would be the way it is right now. Elite Dangerous, Star Wars or Star Citizen space combat is not at all feasible with the game's infrastructure, with voxel technology already devouring most processing and server performance.

The pvp ad videos of NQ are scripted little things that wont realistically happen in ordinary happenstance. Carriers deploying fighters that dogfight around the big battleships that slug it out, Star Wars style, does look intriguing and is an eye catcher, but simply not a thing that happens outside of dedicated community events.

The best comparison you should draw your PvP expectations from is The Expanse franchise. Combat there happens through 3 (or 4 if you count flinging asteroids) weapons:
-railguns for long distance, but they are dodgable the further away the target is,
-torpedoes with practically unlimited distance, and
-PDC (point-defense cannons) which are for close quarter battle (CQB) or to actively take out torpedoes.
There you have 3 modes of range: torpedoes for far up to unlimited range, railgun for effective middle range upon moving targets and PDC as close range.
And most every single fight is decided in the long ranges by torpedoes and railguns. We are talking hundreds of kilometers. PDCs take out the torpedo threats but otherwise chances that ships even get close enough to riddle eachother with bullet holes of PDCs instead of already blowing up from the other 2 weapon types is very small.

In DU you have a similar concept, but 4 weapon types:
-Railguns for max range, high damage per shot but low dps
-laser for medium to long range, higher rate of fire and dps
-missiles for medium range, high damage per salvo, kinda like a "shotgun" to quote NQ themselves
-cannons for close to medium range, low damage per shot but high rate of fire for strong dps

Currently, and for the foreseeable future, PvP combat engagements will happen at rather large ranges, taking out targets at hundreds of kilometers before you would even be able make out a target with your eyes alone. Chances a ship with XS or S weaponry (being an XS or S core) getting close enough to an L ship to effectively use something like cannons is very slim. With ships all maxing out at 30.000 km/h they wouldn't be able to close the distance anyway, unless the approached L core wills it so.

I like the idea of long-range combat like this and am comfortable with it. IMHO we'd need small core vessels to be able to slot L or M weaponry to their S gunner seats (even if 1 L weapon completely maxes out the capacity of the chair) to make smaller core ships fill a niche and make them viable as being near impossible to hit by L cores while being able to meaningfully engage them at THEIR ranges. Then they could in return be countered by dedicated gun platforms with smaller caliber weapons to take out these niche S ships due to hit probs. Lots of balancing and math involved with that concept idea, but worth thinking about.

Otherwise pvp could maybe benefit some visual improvements. If you shoot something and go into third person you should see a little light flicker in the distance from the impact of your shot, not just having a hole appear on the enemy ship in the telescope.

PS: damn, look at me monologuing

It has been clear from the very start that combat would be the way it is right now. Elite Dangerous, Star Wars or Star Citizen space combat is not at all feasible with the game's infrastructure, with voxel technology already devouring most processing and server performance.

The pvp ad videos of NQ are scripted little things that wont realistically happen in ordinary happenstance. Carriers deploying fighters that dogfight around the big battleships that slug it out, Star Wars style, does look intriguing and is an eye catcher, but simply not a thing that happens outside of dedicated community events.

The best comparison you should draw your PvP expectations from is The Expanse franchise. Combat there happens through 3 (or 4 if you count flinging asteroids) weapons:
-railguns for long distance, but they are dodgable the further away the target is,
-torpedoes with practically unlimited distance, and
-PDC (point-defense cannons) which are for close quarter battle (CQB) or to actively take out torpedoes.
There you have 3 modes of range: torpedoes for far up to unlimited range, railgun for effective middle range upon moving targets and PDC as close range.
And most every single fight is decided in the long ranges by torpedoes and railguns. We are talking hundreds of kilometers. PDCs take out the torpedo threats but otherwise chances that ships even get close enough to riddle eachother with bullet holes of PDCs instead of already blowing up from the other 2 weapon types is very small.

In DU you have a similar concept, but 4 weapon types:
-Railguns for max range, high damage per shot but low dps
-laser for medium to long range, higher rate of fire and dps
-missiles for medium range, high damage per salvo, kinda like a "shotgun" to quote NQ themselves
-cannons for close to medium range, low damage per shot but high rate of fire for strong dps

Currently, and for the foreseeable future, PvP combat engagements will happen at rather large ranges, taking out targets at hundreds of kilometers before you would even be able make out a target with your eyes alone. Chances a ship with XS or S weaponry (being an XS or S core) getting close enough to an L ship to effectively use something like cannons is very slim. With ships all maxing out at 30.000 km/h they wouldn't be able to close the distance anyway, unless the approached L core wills it so.

I like the idea of long-range combat like this and am comfortable with it. IMHO we'd need small core vessels to be able to slot L or M weaponry to their S gunner seats (even if 1 L weapon completely maxes out the capacity of the chair) to make smaller core ships fill a niche and make them viable as being near impossible to hit by L cores while being able to meaningfully engage them at THEIR ranges. Then they could in return be countered by dedicated gun platforms with smaller caliber weapons to take out these niche S ships due to hit probs. Lots of balancing and math involved with that concept idea, but worth thinking about.

Otherwise pvp could maybe benefit some visual improvements. If you shoot something and go into third person you should see a little light flicker in the distance from the impact of your shot, not just having a hole appear on the enemy ship in the telescope.

PS: damn, look at me monologuing

I think the problem is them using the skybox as their main lighting source, but would like to hear Deckard or someone comment on this.  The old skybox just looked so damn good, sucks to constantly see this game go backwards In so many areas. 

Just another reminder of how beautiful the game looked pre-nebula and before glow rocks were on every surface of the game.  Looks quite stunning to me.

100% its demeaning. Especially since we are also mainly talking about the old sky box that worked just fine in alpha.  Their problems were the other lighting from elements and other things that needed tweaks development.   They are deflecting and making it seem like all or nothing.  Its quite rude to say because we enjoyed the immersion of the old skybox and not the crappy nebula, that we want some pitch black like turning off your monitor.  Honestly their attitude about legitimate feedback of their game is really really shitty. 
 
Not to mention, its kind of like a compliment when we say we want the old skybox back. We are saying you guys NAILED it the first time, and only minor tweaks might be needed for the dark areas or tweaks with how element lighting works.  

Why is "Deckard" writing this in Discord and not here? ...
And, btw, that is a RED HERRING what he is doing.
And to answer his question: Yes, I have looked into space without light pollution - I am an astronomer and an astrophotographer. And space is dark, really really dark - in fact, mostly pitch black.
He KNOWS we are not talking about having a completely black space as in: no stars and so .... but he is playing dumb, and that is, quite frankly, demeaning.

Space looking like space.  Game use to look so good.

I believe that the nebula skybox should be replaced with a realistic, dark and starry skybox, akin to the old one prior to Alpha 3. Here are my arguments,
 
The nebula was originally introduced as an immersive way to increase ambient lighting in Dual Universe, making it easier to see at night. This is mentioned in NQ's Dev Diary on YouTube. However, this was nullified in 0.24 with the reduction of ambient light brightness.
 
This is personal preference however I believe many will agree; the ambient light level does not have to match the skybox's brightness. For example, take this image of Pre-Alpha Thades. Its dark side is heavily illuminated, as I'm sure it would look on the surface as well. You'd be able to see. Compared to current Thades, I think most of us can agree that it still looks far better, and it could be taken down a notch if it's too bright. Additionally, with the introduction of the nebula, the atmospheres were changed to the same blue color we're all used to. I'm guessing this was done as a result of a technical limitation relating to the new skybox. So, think; If I'm right about this, we could have a Thades that looks like this, for example:

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Current Thades, for comparison:

 
You see where I'm coming from?
 
The way I see it, removing the nebula would provide so much in the way of fidelity, immersion and polish. It wouldn't affect gameplay either. Furthermore, I believe this change would solve many, many of DU's lighting glitches and "rough spots," at the very least making them look far better, and would provide much more polished lighting, both on ground and on a planetary scale. I simply don't see what the nebula adds other than style, but it sacrifices fidelity in a lot of key areas. Unfortunately I don't have any screenshots to back up that claim, so you're gonna have to take my word for it as an Alpha 1 player who knows how lighting used to interact with the old skybox.
 
The nebula may be beautiful to some, but honestly, changing it would add so much in the way of polish — which I believe is far more important and is what this game needs right now. Not to mention, many people were dismayed at the release of this nebula, and I'm taking a wild guess by saying that most players would like this change. I know my friends and I would.
 
Please consider this, Novaquark.
 
Similar post by Mjrlun

NQ, please take a look at this.
 
This is how seat DPS would look after Demeter update.
All wepon types are pretty balanced except rails, they are totally useless

This is how it would look if there will be 4 rails in one chair, which would make much more sense

The only realistic way to make XS and S core ships viable for PVP  is to give them specialized weapons. IE: Torpedoes and Bombs. They should have to carry them as a heavy payload. They should be limited to small numbers of ammunition. This does 2 things. It gives the smaller core ships SOME value in PVP Combat. It forces larger core ships to equip some smaller weapons more capable of hitting the smaller ships.

Not every person interested in PVP wants a battleship.