CousinSal
-
Posts
143 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by CousinSal
-
-
Just a good reminder that in most of DU aspects, it has gotten progressively worse. We now have 3 iterations of a sky box in DU and the first one was BY FAR the best. Its not cartoony, and it works. And it looks like space. You immediately get the immersion. Not talking about realism, but just pure immersion and this one just makes feel right at home in a space game to log in and see this wonderful sky. I know since they recently just released the new one its about 0 chance to change it again, but god dammitt who is in charge at NQ. Amazing how they just go backwards on so many things.
-
1 minute ago, Distinct Mint said:
Our backer DACs are not in our accounts yet, so don't worry about that. What you can see is 1 "Summer DAC" which NQ created to test the DAC system (you can gift it to a new account for 1 month play before launch only). So everything is still ok there, and we expect the backer DACs to appear on launch day.
ok that works then, as i looked up my package and am owed 7 more DACs. obv doesnt matter as long as they are there for release.
-
43 minutes ago, Distinct Mint said:
I'm not sure why anyone seriously believes this. We will receive the number of DAC in the packs that we purchased rather than via any notional adjustment due to value. Yes JC made some vague hand-wavy comment once about "compensation" but really, we all know that's not going to happen.
i paid the $120 on one of my alpha accounds back in alpha 1. but when i log in the website it says i only get 1 DAC, but im sure it was promised more. because in alpha 1 the min to even log in and play under NDA was the 120 package. Are we getting screwed on our DACS owed?
-
2 hours ago, Crash said:
IS this the same for the Sponsor, Contributor and Patron Packs?
This needs to be answered. What about the people who paid in during alpha, that were promised DAC? Are we getting ours too?
-
19 minutes ago, Wyndle said:
Either way it sounds like weapon damage needs better balancing and variety. The honeycomb changes may be related but something isn't adding up to hear this conversation.
I think it would be interesting if weapon types did different base damage against shields then voxels. So for instance lasers would do amazing dmg against shields. But then do piss poor vs voxels and elements. You could still core a ship with only lasers but if they had any decent or even minimal voxel protection it would take a lot to kill. Maybe even a ship could get a vent off. Same thing reverse with cannons. Very low shield dps, but crazy insane voxel dps. Once shields go down if someone puts cannons on you in range you might be toast, even with decent voxel protection. Stuff of that nature would mean rounding out your fleets more. And how you focus targets would matter, etc.
-
Stasis weapons needs to be redone too. 1 stasis per gunner seat. Take out the calculation based on mass of your target. It's completely ass backwards. It's easier to hit bigger target but that target is already going slow or even at min speed of 20km. So make It hit anything the same, with some cross section calculation for hit chance. Make the cone really small and range small like 15km. But if it hits the effect lasts 20 seconds, and you Fire it every 10. Lets reduce server calculations where they aren't needed. This makes them effective, but you also loose a whole gunner seat of dps. But it could also add lots of DPS allowing M and L to apply dmg to smaller cores. Gives way more options to form fleets.
-
I wish cross section wasn't the be all end all of hit probabilities. That would also make stasis weapons more important and we could keep things how they are with S cores using L shields even if they want. And would create more diversity. Like railguns and such would also factor in faster you going, more miss chances. But if you have L rail and that S core is slowing down to reverse burn, BAM he gets hit hard. Stuff like that. And missiles are pretty weak now, so maybe since missiles can be seen as "computer guided" they aren't really effected by speed. This tweaks of how hit chance is calculated and how different guns effect that could add greater diversity and planning. A few L cores could be viable if proper use of stasis webs or timing.
-
49 minutes ago, SirJohn85 said:
How many of them are left? We now have what we have. Will that be enough?
Exactly, that's a good point. I was around the whole alpha and there was so many more big orgs ready for the game that was promised, pvp and only sanc as safe zone. Sure the game can fluctuate as it develops, but it can fluctuate in the wrong direction.
-
2 hours ago, Atmosph3rik said:
Most civilizations immediately begin to work towards ending the violence too. And the people who lose the early conflicts are dead and don't get to play anymore.
If you want hyper realism, you can't just go halfway with it. If the cost of playing the game, is that i have to PVP. Then the cost of PVP should be just as harsh and realistic. Otherwise, you just get to keep attacking me over and over until i eventually just go play something else.
It's a game, it's not a simulation.
This is a game not a simulation. I'm talking gameplay. And if you want a building civilization you need pvp gameplay. And don't act like I'm talking nonsense, the kickstarter literally said only Sanctuary was safe zone and that would be severely limited on what you can do. So if you wanted to progress you had to go out in the world where pvp was. The gameplay was people grouping up for "temp" safe zones and protection bubbles. Similar to how EvE does. You've been around long enough here you should know better, and know I'm not talking about some hyper simulation. But the reality is, if we can't attack and defend other people's tile, the game will be stale as [filtered] and boring, not to mention that also means NQ lied about what features they were putting in to build a civilization building game.
-
1 hour ago, Aaron Cain said:
was DU intended as only a building sandbox or was the intention bigger in kickstarter, like uhm, Building civilization.
To be honest, to build civilization alot more is needed then just building or npc missions. what we currently have on earth is a civilization, the new player entry tels us to rebuild civilization after earth is destroyed, that means All pillars, not only building and sadly most pillars are still broken or not in the game at release, or broken, partially there.
We are also still waiting on the promised community page since the previous one was cancelled and destroyed what in fact had a huge impact on the community at that point.
Also, every civilization has been forged by violence, and the threat of violence. That means if this is a civilization building game you need to remove all the safe zones. People group up for protection and convenience.
-
5 hours ago, Niemand said:
all these other games have one big advantage and that is no sub required and thats the main reason why DU will not survive for long.
I disagree. Game will not survive long because it's not in a good state at all. It's bare bones. People will sub if the game is good, and has content.
- Heidenherz and Celestis
-
2
-
2 minutes ago, J0hnnyB said:
Nice ty for that! Cant wait to take 6 weeks of work and grind 18h a day to build basic pvp ship
Don't worry most of that 6 weeks will be AFK gameplay.
-
54 minutes ago, Wyndle said:
add active game play mechanics, and probably be fun for PvE and PvP
thats the issue. It needs to be active, and could add to exploration. Miners need to actively go explore, and find random types of asteroids, PVPers need to go actively fly and hunt.
-
1 hour ago, Wolfram said:
The fact DU makes it so easy for anyone to track someone else is why so many don't go out and risk out in PVP zone. NQ doesn't seem to understand that, they keep trying to make encounters an easy thing to see if players get involved in PVP without realizing this will only end up with the PVP space being a place exclusive to PVP players, with nobody else wanting to get into there with risk of being camped/scanned/whatever.
I'm not even bothered if some PVP org decides to claim one asteroid as theirs or camp it waiting for players to come there and gank them, that should be valid gameplay, same as if someone wants to patrol the areas around asteroids or hunt down someone carrying good cargo, but like everything else PVP and piracy should need active work from players and not only consist of someone looking at the DSAT middle column and saying "ok boys, let's go to this asteroid because someone just landed there". Why should I, as a miner, be forced to spend 40 minutes slow boating to some asteroid plus a extra minutes trying to pin-point its location and even more extracting its contents, which takes some time for T3+, while on the other side some random kid can just automatically know I set foot there and come directly at me to take my stuff, without barely any work on his part other than camping the DSAT screen?
DU needs more PVP interactions? Definitely. But pushing players into it hoping they will start participating more will just end up with the opposite effect.
100% they just dont understand basic game design. they could put ALL the asteroids in pvp zone, but make them relatively safe with proper game mechanics, yet still knowing danger could be lurking.
-
EvE and Star Citizen have ALL their asteroids in a pvp zone. DU needs to be the same. Otherwise they will never compete with those games in terms of population. NQ can't grow their game with a terrible population.
Also those games don't broadcast where someone is. That's the dumbest f*cking thing I've seen. It actually does the opposite to promote pvp. SC and EvE whether you are the hunter or miner, you have to actually go out and look/explore. It's more balanced. The miner should expect to survive 95% of its pvp mining ops. This in turn adds way more people to do it, enough so the pvper still occasionally finds someone and emergent gameplay happens.
-
Surface mine rocks
-
2 hours ago, Vilhelm said:
Without downsizing current safezones I am not interested in comming back to the game.
This game was supposed to have varied pvp/territory warefare gameplay but it has just become another PVE coop ship builder.
This right here. We were promised only Sanc and 20km of safe zone around ark ship. Until that is deliverd dont see how I can give them any money. I dont want some PVE builder game, if I do id play space engineers or another game. Voxels suck for the most part its not like they support anything, shit just magically floats in the air no physics. StarBase at least actually have to plan to hold proper weight and build for function. The selling point of DU was single shard where the players make the content and choose. You cant have that if everything is in the safe zone.
- Squidrew_ and Knight-Sevy
-
2
-
45 minutes ago, Noddles said:
Why dont we just remove the planets forever? We don't need all of them, they spread the player base out too much, and they have almost zero purpose right now. Then just shrink the safe zone back to the alioth market region and smoon/haven.
100% this. its way better to stick with only 5 planets, and Haven, and i guess alioth a safe zone. then you can do a new solar system expansion. that could add to some exploration. Only increase as needed 12 planets, 30+ moons and 1mil tiles....for maybe 10k players (if your lucky) is just wasted space. This is an MMO you want to encourage player interaction.
-
1 minute ago, Honvik said:
They dont need SZ everywhere. You can warp from one to another. For a Civ/Conflict game its a huge shame. Star Citizen does it well its risky and good reward (yea it lacks building in SC tho) it was their one opportunity to resolve it.
The interdiction mechanic in SC is amazing too. Allows people to pull people from warp, pirate, create conflict. But it's not OP and smart people can get around it at times, it's very balanced atm on SC.
-
The wipe has no bearing on me leaving or staying. I left a long time ago, and by the looks of how the game is going won't be returning. But I keep an eye on it out of curiosity to see how far they can stray from what was pitched during alpha. It's damn near a bait and switch at this point. Almost as bad as telling people you are making a FPS ww2 game, but then when it's time to deliver you give people a go-kart racing game.....almost.
-
23 minutes ago, Noddles said:
Eh, theyd literally never go for that.
Ya and you gotta take chances when you are a small indie studio with a niche game if you want to be seen.
-
5 minutes ago, Noddles said:
Id say anything that requires t4+ should require you to entire pvp. If you want high amounts of t3 that should also be pvp.
Or you know, everything should be in a pvp zone like other successful space games. EvE and Star Citizen. SC if you mine, you can be shot. In EvE if you mine you can be shot. Funny how those games have such a strong backing, and one has been alive for decades. Surely that cant have anything to do with it right?
-
Honestly, as the game stands I dont really see why the game should be a "single shard". It makes more sense for DU financially to go the route of Space Engineers and Minecraft. Make the players pay for servers, mod them, and dictate how they want them to be. In no way shape or form does it show that NQ is utilizing their only strength, having everyone on 1 server shard.
-
9 minutes ago, Deadrank said:
The PvE in Dual Universe presents no risk of loss in really any form. Without that risk, I fear the game will get very stale after the initial rush. I am really rooting for DU though, I think it can be a really good game!
this right here. IF there was actually good and challenging PVE then ok, like other games like WoW or other such games. But it doesn't. It was always billed as player driven. This game needs PVP pretty much everywhere, at least the threat of it, and it desperately needs some more survival aspects and an Avatar that can die, ya know, from falling. Maybe throw in some hostile enviroments, oxygen needed, whatever. Make it a game. There is a reason that EvE online and Star Citizen has soooo much more money, way way way more money being given to them by players than DU does. Its because for 1, it has pve. But even more importantly, that PVE is in a pvp zone. There are tools for player interactions. DU wants to enable everyone to play a single player game in their own corner of alioth, and push pvpers to the outer reaches of space. That hardly sounds like a cool single shard MMO to me. It sounds like desperation from a game company that knows it cant scale and must push people away from each other,
New mass:max speed/rotation curve is perfect.
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by CousinSal
i understand what you saying, but that would also need complete rework of element HP. Its out of whack compared to L guns and stuff. Taking some voxel dmg to tank is all fine in theory, if i also dont lose 90% of my guns, a large portion of adjusters, and 3 engines after 10 seconds of being shot. Not to mention radars on the outside? 1 bullet and BAM im flying blind now. Kinda ruins the gameplay. So there is a ton of work that would need to be prepped before you begin to think about making shields tied to their size and core.