Deacon

Same.
 
But if this is sort of the "base" design, and if we only go off what the character customization is currently... then it has the potential to be kick-ass.
 
I also wonder about the pet levels and if it changes appearance (additional legs, eyes, etc...) or if it will only be a cosmetic thing like rusty v shiny.
 
 
 
Personally, I would love to see a sort of Halo ODST inspired helmet and visor set up in game.  I'll model and script it myself if I have to!

current character creation is woefully inadequate and the "advanced" character creator stretch goal isn't much better... and certainly not advanced.
 
 
I just hope they continue to work on the character customization options as we go forward and let us change our characters looks as new things become available. 

I thought the Alpha Team member outfit was in RL...
 
SOMEONE FIND IT FOR ME, plzzzzzzzz!
 
 
I found it...

For the love of god, please tell me that we wont have to wear those droopy wraps around our right forearms, and left boot as seen in the character creation video from kickstarter update # 18. That just looks stupid on a space uniform ... it's something some fashion nut has put on it ...please let us remove it.  These are "Space Uniforms" , not some new fall fashion review.
 
Thanks
 
 
Oh, and no, I'm not gonna threaten to pull my kickstarter pledge if I don't get my way   LOL

I'm considering  Osiris

Everything will be okay, not so drammatic : )
 
Devs can regulate cash flow by monitoring of statistics and editing bot-vendor buying prices. When its too much money - they lower prices (and by so - emission) and players will be more motivated to trade with other players. If money supply is low - they just up the vendor prices and by that pump up some cash in hands and balance situtation.
 
I doubt there will be some kind of full stop of money-generation, its will rise problems with new players. Just some sort of regulation and balancing. Money will leave system with players who quit. If contolled territory will be taxed (and its very viable solution) - money be leaving economy like river. And, after all, its nothing too bad with little inflation over time. It is realistic.
 
About hoarding organizations - some infuence is possible (this is by the way is idea of game), but is not likely they will be so powerful as in their todays dreams and adverts. "Corporate conspiracies" will take time and devs always can react with some soft countermeasures.
 
So many of this twerk guy in every thread. I think its called narcissistic personality disorder.

Archonious and Lord_Void, good posts. Thanks for bringing some reality back into this discussion.

Troll is back... ok... bb... nothing to talk with you again...

Very good points. In my opinion, I would add that in terms of a videogame inflation is much favorable to deflation. Inflation can be fairly easily dealt with (even in game) as short term increases in total purchasing power (of all money) can prompt increases in resource production which helps to balance out the inflation. Deflation, on the other hand, does the opposite. The more people harvest resources to try and get some of the dwindling cash, the more "valuable" the individual units of currency become relative to the total economy, to the point where they are no longer effective means of trade.

Economy require permament money supply. Yes, it must not be so huge as in WoW, it can be balanced very easy. As exampe, NQ has counter of active money, as soon circulation of money drops down (average on total players amount), NPCs get limited amount of money to fill up the gap.
 
WoW's issue is that, they do not have enough money remove from game (repair and tax on auction mainly). But income from farming is HUGE. This is massive disbalance, but they need it to force some players go forward in updates.
 
If DU economy will be closed and won't have any money remove, it will make pain in ass for DevTeam.
1. Amount of players (more players, more money need)
2. Amount of players who left the game (more leaver with money, more money need)
3. Amount of money in treasures (not 1 org, but all players) (more money in hold, more money need)
4. Long time play, demand grows only (as bigger projects and research level, as more money economy need).
 
That is only 4 factors which require money emission. If it won't happens:
1. Every player won't have enough money (100 players with 100g = 1:1, 10'000 with 100g = 1:0,01)
2. Total amount of money going down. (If every leaver has 1g in pocket, 10 leavers remove 10g, 1'000 leavers removè 1'000g)
3. Similar as No3. But it can grow more and more.
4. If my demand in early game is 100g, in late game it could be 100'000g (bigger ships as simple example).
 
So with fixed amount of money (NOC removed, no emissions) economy would have troubles very soon, but hopefully it will be easy tested in Alpha.
 
Game require money remove.
Why? That is balance process. If Dev can see average money use and make emissions, there must be process which will stop:
1. Treasures unlock (massive money increase, need to stop emissions)
2. Reduction of player rotation (less leavers, less new players)
 
So it would looks like:
-Total amount of money (active money) goes down (taxes, some parts could be bought from NPCs only)
-NQ add amount of gold to NPCs
-Something happened, orgs open treasures, more money on market
-NQ do not make emissions, money start go out from game (tax, components, other)
-Progress going forward (overall prices going up, NQ need to have counter), demand is growing
-NQ add amount of gold to NPCs
 
Overall, prices display inflation and deflation, both are bad for economy. So NQ need to have regulator. As in real life, healthy economy has ~1% of inflation, that is progress demand increase (in basic words).
 
Players can not balance economy without emissions and non-stopable money remove from the game. I hope NQ has somebody who understand economy very well. Otherwise we will learn it all together =)))
 
Thanks,
Archonious

So once that certain threshold is reached, no more currency will be generated by the game? Won't  that be ruff on an expanding player base ? Can't an organization decide to start hoarding currency, making it harder and harder for others to sell items/obtain currency? Is this another "Emergent" gameplay option, or am I just not seeing the big picture?

So once that certain threshold is reached, no more currency will be generated by the game? Won't  that be ruff on an expanding player base ? Can't an organization decide to start hoarding currency, making it harder and harder for others to sell items/obtain currency? Is this another "Emergent" gameplay option, or am I just not seeing the big picture?

As long as we have Zinc! I'm happy 

What's to keep one or more organizations from power grinding to get as much as possible, therefore bringing that set point closer to being reached, and having an unfair amount of currency compared to other organizations? Twerker, your signature is a prime example of what I speak of.
 
 
 
I guess I need to ask, is there any currency sinks, where game takes currency out?  I'm going to guess no at this time.  

So once that certain threshold is reached, no more currency will be generated by the game? Won't  that be ruff on an expanding player base ? Can't an organization decide to start hoarding currency, making it harder and harder for others to sell items/obtain currency? Is this another "Emergent" gameplay option, or am I just not seeing the big picture?

I'm curious, where will the very first game money come from?  Do we start with a certain amount? If not, how is the economy going to be jumpstarted? How will more be produced, so everyone is just recirculating the same money over and over, just shifting who currently has it?
 
Thanks

Also, a great deal of these market manipulation aruments are under the assumption that players with DAC will simply try to play the market with them, or will trade DAC for in-game currency as a middle man to get some other service with in-game currency.
 
Anyone that works in business understands that since each trader is attempting to profit, the more steps involved in trading for your material, the less profitable it will be unless you intend to travel (which will be risky as soon as the DAC's will be offloaded in a DAC unlootable economy).
 
The smartest players will create contracts to trade DAC's for either finished goods, refined materials, or whatever service they actually want. Players that need subscriptions to keep playing will produce what is needed to fulfill the contract, and the DAC's will be in and out of the system free of price manipulation. Orgs do this internally to keep their lower rank players playing in their org: a highschooler spending 3 hours mining iron for a DAC is a fantastic deal for them, since they get another month to do whatever. Someone who works full time trading a DAC for 3 hours of in game work that they don't enjoy is a steal, since they make more at their job than that DAC is worth.
 
The only people who should be actually worried about unlooyable DAC's are people who want the satesfaction of literally robbing players. Be it a roleplay choice not to work for an org, or because the player just wants another way to be a jerk on the internet, that is what it boils down to.

Why to buy DAC and have a risk to lose it, when you can buy gold on black market. Cheaper and safer.
 
Do not support game! - slogan of steal supporters =)
Shame on you!

Couldn't you make a small square and program it to move up or down with LUA ? Make a box structure with square as floor. Have set of doors at top range to open, with doors at lower range as well. Have call buttons outside door edges and up/down buttons on inside of box?

This basically one person arguing against the many. Maybe time to end the thread? Twerker keeps making same point over and over.... How about some new perspectives from others? What makes having DAC lootable so much more emergent than looting regular items. Then why stop at DAC? Why not game money...master blueprints....literally everything? Turn this game into the disasters like DayZ and the like where the few hardcore players remain and the rest move on to "Carebear" games where they don't feel like they're being robbed by Gankers and hackers. Because we know, it's proven time and time again,these are the same mentality that do anything to win.

well, I'm concerned about it as well. I not sure it'll even reach it's goal, let alone stretch goals. the two stretch goals I've seen should be part of the initial game.
 
 
Might help if some folks go to the MMORPG.com  site and up the hype meter on this game. Go to game list, find dual universe, and click it, then click the hype tab

Perhaps this could be a cash shop item ?  With possibly 3 sizes available for different prices. Then submit it to cash shop. When NQs people review it, they accept charge, and place in your inventory the blueprint for making it, so you can make them and place them anywhere on items you have ingame permissions for, or trade/sell if it's a popular design.
 
on a side note. Archeage has personal images in game. You make a pic and replace a game file with it. You can then craft it with right items and place it on capes, sails, signs etc.

I am against having Loot able DACs in game. for the following reasons.
 
1)  It is assumed that once you use it to add to your game time, its a timer, so if you know you are going to be off line for an extended time, you should have the ability to buy them when they are cheap, and hold onto them for when you need to use them.
2)  It is not IMHO emergent game play to loot these, as they have no real game world purpose so why should a character even want them?  Resources on the other hand, yes a character would desire that.
3)  This whole market crashing BS can still be done safely using the safe zones or other methods as described by GrandMasterApex.
4)  If Credits are non loot able, which has a real presence in the game, why should DACs not also be safe?  It is more emergent game play to demand the ability to loot credits.
5)  IMHO it is a better plan to resolve these complaints of hoarding, by making these items only able to be sold or traded ONCE.  This solves almost all of the legitimate complaints against keeping them non-loot able, but also lets players hold in game purchased ones till they need to use them safely.  This will also stop scams and griefing people buy luring them out to remote PVP areas with extremely low prices, to only be pounced on after they are purchased.
 
I also think it is ridiculous to be taking so much of the community's time and NQ's time discussing this now when the release of the game is 2 years out.  I would much rather have the NQ team focusing on building a great stable Alpha, and construct vs. construct combat, you know the important EMERGENT game play.
 
 Also I thought since most of the PRO loot able arguments were coming from EVE players and supporting how great it works in eve I would share the following link.
 
https://community.ev...ges-on-the-way/
 
In particular this part of it.  "The PLEX Vault will allow you to move PLEX safely throughout the universe rather than having to move it in a ship."
 
So i personally consider all "this is how it works in EVE " ETC. arguments invalid since it no longer is the way EVE works.  Also I would like to add that if it was working so well why did CCP change it and should we also then consider the why and the route they went.