Cheith
-
Posts
182 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Cheith
-
-
33 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
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 even they would possibly like to seen Pretty much in the same order as venturing into Nullsec in EVE 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.
Hmm ... not sure explorations has to equal good stuff - it could be just that, going places you have never been before. Still exploring. If you remove the opportunities for camping locations maybe - but that was where you would get caught if you were unlucky in EVE - at a camping spot. Once you were in nullsec a different story but getting in could be interesting if you were unlucky.
-
5 hours ago, blazemonger said:
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 think this is important - PvP is a part of the game but it is not PvP centric. It is one part of the game. Indeed you could argue that if it is too big a part of the game some of the other components will fall flat - especially exploration and likely building. I don't think the safe zones are the answer either as that certain locks exploration out for non-PvP players.
-
You know what folks it doesn't matter how the game was originally advertised or what a five year old Kickstarter campaign said you have a game with a lot of people building stuff in it. Generally creative folks who build nice and interesting things do not do much PvP (not none but not much) and don't expect to intersect much with destructive folks who mainly PvP and don't build much.
Frankly I seriously doubt you can build a seamless game for both creative and FFA PvP - so this game either has building in it and the ability to wander round as see what folks have built - or it has good old FFA PvP. You can likely get away with it if you corral the PvP somehow into an appropriate box but without that you just end up with all the creative folks heading off into the distance to play something else.
There is either going to be a compromise somewhere or I would imagine one 'faction' is going to largely bail.
There is a lot of talk of civilizations but civilizations have rules and like order and predictability. PvP outside of wars sanctioned by the civilizations is generally frowned on and the perpetrators permanently removed from society. That all though sounds like a second job not a game - so I doubt that will fly either and again while it could accommodate FFA PvP the downsides are pretty high.
-
6 hours ago, Lethys said:
Again - that's what a single shard server entails with FFA pvp. Deal with it. That's why there needs to be very good and balanced mechanics for ppl to live there and to protect themselves. This whole Civ builder thingy won't happen if ppl can lose ALL their stuff within 24h. I once was a proponent of some kind of invulnerability-shield-eve-ish-POS/Citadel mechanic for DU years ago, but this won't work here that well for 2 reasons:
1 - ppl invest hundreds and thousands of hours to build something
2 - even if 1 doesnt matter because you have a blueprint of everything, it's still a considerable amount of quanta. And currently, you can't earn billions of quanta with 1 evening of farming (like in eve for example).
So the thing is: PVP space has to be profitable and there needs to be a REASON why I should go or build there but at the same time it shouldn't punish you for some days of inactivity (RL and such)
yup - but I don't impose anything on anyone. This is, again, how the game works. You go in a FFA PVP zone on a single shard server - you have to deal with consequences.
And yes, I STRONGLY disagree that you should be able to do that without preparation or with some kind of PVP switch on/off.
Fair enough - I am pretty sure we are never going to agree on this, but let's face it this is not the game you think it is (at least not at present).
Civilizations have rules and breaking the rules usually have consequences. In principle civilization mechanics would allow me to declare you as an enemy of the state and when caught do what most civilizations do - either put you in jail for a long time or execute you. Unfortunately neither would be palatable in a game (obviously being in jail until freed pretty much kills your character) and there aren't many PvPers up for perma death for their characters.
Sadly I really don't believe civilizations is what is really wanted here. It is just a fluffy premise with no substance behind it. The usual 'well the players can enforce it' cop out.
Finally (honest) in a universe of civilizations PvP would not be profitable - it would be a lifestyle choice - outside of organized wars between civilizations and then of course it would only be profitable for one side! For PvP to be profitable you need easy, soft targets otherwise you burn too much ammo and spent too much time with too much risk. Sad fact.
-
4 hours ago, Lethys said:
Well, make fun and engaging mechanics first - and DU lacks all of those basics, so this will not happen for a long time.
Give miners a special voxel to be detected less by radar, cloaking, smaller crosssection, heat signatures,... something so that they have means to defend themselves.
Yes there will be always ppl who just want to kill easy targets but that can be avoided easily with some mechanics for the pve types so they can run if they watch their back. Or you know, go mining with more ppl (civ builder, remember) to watch over each other
But thats exactly what a single shard server with 24/7 access entails. If you want your little territory to be safe in a pvp zone, work for it. If proper mechanics would be in place this would greatly improve the game. Civ builder and all - defend your turf. But I guess you just want instant gratification and everything accessible without risks, which is pretty bollocks to me. (See I can also lay words in your mouth)
Don't be an ass - I never said I wanted instant gratification. I just don't consider being shot at by someone part of the necessary work for someone who builds/mines and sometimes explores in a GAME. Sorry 24/7 != game it equals work. If I wanted that I would still be playing EVE and still living in 0.0. I am hoping this does a better job.
As far as I can tell the big difference between us (as neither of us minds PvP being there) is that you want your playstyle to be imposed on everyone whether they wish to participate or not and I have the opposite view that I should be able to go wherever I like and choose whether or not I wish to PvP. You know like in most successful games.
-
7 hours ago, Lethys said:
So no rewards for ppl who take risks then too. Great, boring game where nothing ever happens and noone ever does anything because everything is accessible anyway. Only prearranged fights. Wooooooooooooooow, that is sooooooooooooooo coooool
What risks, pray tell? If you are shooting up an unarmed mining ship it is zero risk for you. Frankly this is the usual PvP bullsh1t. As always you want to force your playstyle on others. Surely the whole point of PvP is to fight other skilled players and win those battles is it not? In which case you are likely not randomly fighting unarmed ships.
7 hours ago, Lethys said:Then work for it and do it. Enforce rules. Get ppl together and build that civ. But don't expect everyone to salute you. It is really pretty simple
What bollocks - it is a game - I actually have a job and a real life so I don't play these things to work excessively. The game would need to support that with appropriate content and it currently doesn't. To be honest I have no interest in doing something like 'building a civilization' against a bunch of barbarians - really not interested in a 24 x 7 job thanks.
- Sabretooth and Supermega
-
2
-
1 hour ago, Splatinum said:
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.
Well some certainly are after 'if it moves I want to shoot it', but I am mostly in agreement with your points. I think though, that it is one thing adding risk it is another thing having something camped by a whole bunch of PvP players - which is what happens in reality. It goes from risk to certain death.
As to whether or not we get any game content that provides risk we shall see - to be honest I have no idea whether or not that will happen or not. I know for certain that there will be zero meaningful content from the PvP crowd. Being ganged up on and shot at is not meaningful content.
-
37 minutes ago, Lethys said:
tell me moar about what I want please - you obviously know way better!
again, nope. Never said I want anarchy. Maybe stop interpreting my posts and actually start reading them?
RL != a game
In a game you have to have some kind of reward for ppl who take risks - Just the way it is
Now that is funny. There doesn't have to be any rewards for randomly shooting at people. It is most certainly not the way it is and doesn't have to be. You get your little adrenaline rush for the PvP itself and that is your reward.
On the anarchy front, it is what you described. Didn't need much interpretation. Civilization implies order and rules and enforcement of the rules. It is really pretty simple.
-
31 minutes ago, Habitant said:
.....
PVP is essential in the game because there has to be a sinkhole of quantas of course but in the other hand there has to be a kind of bank also (safe place) . So we must take PVP where it has to be at the exact spot on top of high end materials .That is what is going to happen . Thats the meeting point ... And thats fine !!!
SEE YOU THERE !!!
Habitant
Habitants Organization
There is no meeting point - it is still a case of EVE all over again. The big corporations will control the high end ore deposits and sure they will fight over it but that is the way it will be.
-
2 hours ago, Splatinum said:
.....
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.
I am not saying you can't shoot each other - I am just saying you can't shoot anyone just because you decide you should. I am also saying don't lock up content behind a PvP wall. Of course if there is no content I guess this is a moot point and if the PvP crowd have their way there will be very little content - especially out in the areas they wish to control.
-
2 hours ago, Lethys said:
nope. we want what was promised. we want meaning. we want incentives.
noone forces you to go into the pvp zone. you can always hire someone to do that for you (you know, civilization....trading...stuff like that)
again, nope. It's all about incentives. Meaning to what we do
If everything is accessible to everyone without any risk then there is nothing to do in those zones and noone will ever settle there - because...why would they?
BS - meaning my ass. You want excuses is what you want.
Again with the civilization stuff - if there is civilization there is no random PvP. There are armies, police forces, etc. They create safe places where there is economic activity. You want anarchy because there is no significant PvP without anarchy.
People settle places for many reasons. Most people don't usually settle in unsafe places. Just the way it is.
-
10 hours ago, Dhara said:
People like you = people who choose to play PvP games and then complain about the PvP.
That's what you're doing right? But then you already knew that because that's what we're talking about.
It is not a PvP game - it is a game that has PvP in it not the same thing. You don't have half the things you have in this game if it is a 'PvP' game and, for the most part, you don't get creative people playing PvP games.
-
2 hours ago, SpacePirate said:
Thats the thing with polls, they dont accomodate all the ins and outs. Which would make the poll so fragmented. Its just for a general feel. Judging by current votes, the vast majority of voters wish for pvp, even under the current game mechanics. Lets see what the final results are after 7 days, but atm the pvp'rs have it in the bag.
Use Your vote and make Your voice heard.
But there is the issue - I am not against PvP but I am against some of what is wished for in terms of the scope allowed for PvP. So, for me, it is a pointless poll with a false choice.
-
Too simplistic based on the variety of views on what is acceptable PvP.
-
32 minutes ago, Dhara said:
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.
Like me - funny - you don't even know what like me is. But I digress - I want you to not lock content based on PvP, You want to force people to PvP because, well, because yeah whatever. Just because you do. It would appear fighting other people who want to PvP is not enough - you want to fight those that don't want to PvP. Basically you want easy targets.
As far as I can tell there are not too many games that got shut down for a lack of PvP. Lack of content, yes. Broken mechanics, yes. Boring mechanics, yes. Too many bugs, yes.
Frankly if I lose all of my builds, or whatever, because the game doesn't make it then so be it. My world really doesn't revolve around the games I play. I play for entertainment recognizing that, at some point down the road, I will move on. It might be 6 months, 2 years or 5 years who knows - but eventually I will have done all I want to do and seen all I want to see and built all I want to build. It is all temporary and all virtual. Currently my longest spell playing something was EVE and that (on and off) was 7 years and in the end I gave everything away and trashed the characters as I knew I was not coming back.
So, yeah, wipe it - frankly it could do with a wipe in 6 months anyway to get rid of the plots of those who are not subscribed.
-
40 minutes ago, Dhara said:
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.
Um, sorry, what - you don't need PvP that revolves around shooting people who are mining and you certainly don't need PvP to build a civilization - indeed civilizations are the opposite of PvP. When you get to be a civilization and a civilized people you have squashed the pirates, etc. you have police forces that site on the troublemakers as much as possible, etc. In short those who haul and mine don't need to care when there is civilization. At least get the analogies right.
Nothing to stop PvP happening in the game, the question is what style you have and what is possible. Is it EVE style where the PvP players get to control large parts of the universe? Is it a full open world PvP like say Mortal Online? Is it controlled and consensual like most of the large successful MMOs out there (some have dedicated areas others dedicated servers but it is still controlled).
So, stop the misrepresentation. It is more how and not if there is PvP. No one cares if there are PvP zones as long as it doesn't lock up resources and content for the majority. Everyone can then play at being a badass for a while if and when they wish. It is all about have choices - not implementation decisions being forced on you. You get to pick if you want the chance to be blown up - doesn't mean you have to try and force others down the same path.
The big issue, though, is it appears too many who want PvP seem to need to force others into being shot at. Seems to be part of the mindset for many. If you can blow up a defenseless ship every so often and shout smack in chat at folks it just doesn't count. Ah well.
-
3 hours ago, Lethys said:
Eve != du.
Cartels in eve Revolved around moons and such, not ore per se. So it's a useless comparison.
In DU, space and planets are massive. So chances are that one org won't and can't hold any amount of high value territory to form a cartel on it's own. And even IF they could and even IF mechanics are just like in eve where ppl even could build cartels.....so what? Even in eve (which again, is a bad comparison) it worked nonetheless and ppl could build anything they wanted in high sec (yeah yeah, supers, caps and titans and shit cant be built there).
So yeah, having an actual incentive to go there and having a reason to defend all that stuff out there so you can earn mir money by selling it to ppl in the safezone actually helps the game.
But if you can't figure that out by yourself then yes, it was just a blanket statement
It helps certainly play styles in the game - as to whether that helps the whole game and how important those playstyles are is a matter of opinion.
-
7 hours ago, Lethys said:
Nope, no need to go there. And nope, if done right there wouldn't be any sort of cartel, as in eve.
Great blanket statement wit no evidence or game mechanics to back it up. We shall see.
-
9 hours ago, Anomaly said:
A balance has to be struck between the risk of the PVP area and the reward for venturing there. Individuals and groups will suffer losses fighting each other so there must be something worth fighting over that cannot be had in safe space.
It is the primarily the materials sink of PVP that will drive the economy of this game so giving players an incentive to fight each other will benefit even those who want nothing to do with PVP.
This is coming from someone who was most interested in industry in his Eve days. Players in DU's safe space would not be any more cut off from high end materials than they were in Eve. Should DU survive to launch, there will be players who shuttle goods between PVP and non PVP areas.
Right - so you agree - essentially a paywall to get the resources that some other group of people set up. That is the EVE system when you boil it down.
You also make an assumption that this all about money for the builders. For some it will be, but in a game where you can build anything and everything that is just not true - it is about time. If I can mine the resources and you don't put the blueprints in a PvP zone then I can build and I don't need the income.
There are other perfectly reasonable ways of generating decay other than PvP such as 'rusting', 'weathering' or proper crash damages rather than what we have now. PvP is not the be all and end all of an economy if you 'do it right'. The problem for many players is if 'dong it right' doesn't involve shooting other players who don't want to be shot at it seems to be an issue.
-
33 minutes ago, jdalto said:
They should do monthly wipes soo new players never feel disadvantaged. If they don’t do regular wipes the long time players will get too much stuff and it won’t be fair
Might be a little on the extreme side - just make sure you set the expectation that everything is impermanent. However you do need enough 'stuff' to test the scaling. The thing many people get upset about are losing their creations - just make sure there is a way of saving the designs and restoring them when the character is advanced enough. Would solve a good number of issues.
-
4 hours ago, Physics said:
I’m trying to understand how people will be forced to go to pvp zone? Safe zone triangle has up too T3 resources. If you don’t want to take the risk of going for the T4 / T5 resources then buy them off someone who is? I thought a major part of playing the PVE focused side of DU is the economy?
Why? There is nothing magic about T4/T5 other than they are rarer. No reason they should be locked behind a PvP paywall. The key is forced - you want people to be forced into PvP. Kind of selfish really. PvP with those who wish to PvP, no reason to try and force us who don't care to do so. Anyway, if one learned anything from EVE, it is not the individual PvP players who benefit but those who organize large corporations that can camp on and monopolize these rare resources that benefit.
-
1 hour ago, IvanGrozniy said:
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.
100% agree. One of the dangers with 'early' beta release and crowd funding in general is exposing early and potentially short-lived mechanics that players decide they like but that cannot be implemented at scale. Danger of the funding mechanism and not managing the expectations.
The other big issue is making players think that their individual feedback is going to shape the game. It is the collective feedback that is important and the 'noisemakers' tend not to think about that. To be fair companies tend to do a bad job of publishing the collective feedback to keep such expectations under control, but also to be fair the vast, vast, vast majority of players have absolutely no idea of what is involved in building a game like this. Not even a clue. This was clear reading about the screen change discussions.
Now, this has nothing overly much to do with the PvP discussion - other than tangentially - but is important all the same!
-
55 minutes ago, Fembot68 said:
This post serves to demonstrate a point. You and most of the others that want wipes, have never played an MMO before. There is always those people who have more than you do just like the real world.
Yes they need to come up with a mechanic to deal with the land grab people but this does not require taking everything from everyone. This is like those stupid participation awards they give out in schools now. "your all winners"One thing the wipe crowd are missing is the mission system. Established players can make a bunch of missions for new players. I Know I will be doing this as there is not enough time in a game day to get everything done.
Ahhhhahhhhahhh - sorry been playing them since 2001. Betas, alphas, successful ones, failed ones, some that hung on by their teeth for a while. Different genres, different playstyles. The big difference between now and the past is the length of the beta periods - in the past they were relatively short - now they can easily be 2-3 years. Totally different.
Should you get some advantage for helping test the game, maybe, though probably not more than a week or so - certainly not two flipping years. You signed up to essentially scale test the game mechanics after all (as have I). If you want the game to get more subscribers and succeed you likely will have to suck up the wipe otherwise you will get to have all the old vets that are left playing by themselves until the plug is pulled.
Just my opinion, and we'll see what happens. I am not against time based skill training but when experienced players can dominate the markets from day one due to their beta time for skill training it is going to be an issue (and I will be one by then). A lot of folks who might have played will think 'why bother' and you can guarantee the potential player base is way higher than the number of people who will be upset by a wipe. If it is not then frankly it doesn't matter anyway as the game will die. -
3 hours ago, SirJohn85 said:
An EVE clone with missing features, poor performance and with cool building possibilities in its current state.
Fixed that for you.
True - but then if you go back a while (when EVE was young) there were many, many whines. It is what it is with new evolving games of any level of complexity and scale. Some figure it out, some don't. It will be nice if they do but we will see.
Vegetation Tools!
in Idea Box
Posted
Can we please get some tools to add some vegetation back once we have built a base! Generally you end up flattening or deforming a large area which extends past the perimeter and it would be nice to be able to terraform it to a soil of choice and add back grass, trees, etc!