Kurosawa

They fall because of
 
Wrong decisions
Bad leadership
Power struggle within the alliance
Scamms/awoxing
Making too many enemies
Making the wrong enemies
 
But the most significant factor why big groups fail is the leadership itself. You need dedicated people to run an alliance, being in command, getting things done. It's a 24/7 job for no-lifers.
You need to be online to get people into fleets, mining, doing stuff. I myself was an fc and more than once per week my mobile rang and I got up to lead a fleet. If you don't have such people, then you won't be able to run a huge alliance

Of course to a specific info about EVE we have CaptainTwerkmotor, and he has already manifested himself but in case of that my experience in other games could be relevant,I played some games in big and/or top factions/alliances/whatever and when they reached their end there were a common point in almost everyone of them: the active guys leading the group lost their interest or their availability to play the game in full time and that evolved into a inability to maintain the group working together.
 
With that i want to say that  large groups needs active people to manage them properly and even if you delegated part of this work, people involved in this kind of management needs to be able to spend some time attending this and be very communicative. When you lost one of these people and you need to replace it its not common to find a ideal candidate, and your community starts to not feeling confortable. If you add to this some questionable decisions from the leaders and some economic stabilty problems (or wars lost) and you probably have lost almost your entire group.
 
But, overall , it really depends of the development of the game. If the game is able to dont let the people loss their interest in the game with a proper risk-benefit ratio and enough things to do (or time spent-benefit ratio), this kind of things happen less.

Risk vs reward makes things exciting.

In my eyes scaffolding add nothing to the process other then taking time and being in the way there will be plenty problem making ships ranging from basic sizing and alignment to problem setting up internal systems.

liked all the post i could in this thread, could not like all, so sad

The theme that the TUAF website is using was paid for, which is probably the same case for empire. You could have given the webmasters a courtesy check before posting this.

The only way the word "piracy" is involved here is if they didn't pay for the wordpress theme:
 
https://themeforest.net/item/godlike-game-theme-for-wordpress/18711623
 
 
 

 

Terran Union's main corporation was made roughly 1 month before Empire.
They also have a higher member count (300+ more) so the chances of them simply stealing from a smaller corporation is minimal as they'd probably at least 1 or 2 web designers in the corporation.
So I doubt Terran Union would actually copy yours due to more potential availability of people who can actually design websites.
That aside, you could contact your Legate and tell him to settle matters. Hopefully he'll shine light on situations before it ever escalated to... this?
I mean Staff already addressed it but I'm just showing what extra information to whoever wants it I guess so they can judge if there was ill-intent.
Also, why are you liking your own comments?

The real question is why can you like your own comments?

They both use a WordPress theme called "Godlike". That's all. And being as they are both fansites using images from the same game it isn't surprising that they look somewhat the same.
 
As for WordPress needing more designs/formats... the vast majority of themes for WordPress are created by independent designers and not by WordPress themselves.

*quickly scrolls back through all posts to like them*

Ugh. Needless drama. You should have at least contacted them first. 
 
In other news, Amazon and Google both have the letter "o". Coincidence!?? 

It's sorta like a personal circlejerk. It's putting yourself on a pedestal and self-electing yourself as King.
 
It's also an undeserved like. Likes are when you like something, and why would you post something you don't like? You have to "reassure" everyone you like what you like?

I like this.

They are both fan sites and if you scroll down they even have a disclaimer.
It would be counter productive to go after them, unless your disney then all must die ...
 
 
As for piracy,to a large extend that is cause by over prices product, refusal to distribute, regional blocks and so on

I my opinion building/designing should be complete free and with out restrictions. You should not have to fight your tools to make them work.
There should also be plenty of options like 3 axis mirroring and copy/paste/replace.

i will bit, stop with your silly childish comments they only serve to subtract from the forum and bring all low.
Your post was good even if people agree or not, until the very end, then you had to foul it up.

OK, I will make it simpler for you. I don't like your idea because goes against the Lore Bible written by NQ. And that's my only guide at the moment. Anything else is ideas and speculations.
 
Is that simple enough for you to understand?
 
My opinion is not and should not be a source of personal attack. If you really want to show you are grown up man just apply this rule in your life. You have no way of telling if any person here has or has not expertise in any subject. So far, you only making assumptions. It's equally silly to do on an abstract subject free for interpretation.
And to be honest I don't give a damn what you think of me or others you throwing so many accusations towards. You should really go back to your own responses, read them again but this time swap a nick name to someone else. Maybe you can see your problems and who presenting condescending attitude here.
 
I think you are some funny guy that looking for attention, that's it. There is no hate mate, calm down, you actually make me lough

Hater? newbie? Hi Twerk. 
 
Not sure how you draw that conclusion. Last time I remember the hate speech came directly from you towards Polish community on any MMO game players in general. So calm down. I'm not looking for a sparing here. I'm sure about one thing, you can talk people to death. Maybe when you calm down a little you will see there are people out there who want to collaborate not only talk over others.
 
I wasn't aware fight system will be so advanced when comes to avatars. I was under impression that construct vs construct is THE main focus here. 
If you read my response once again you may actually understand when I'm coming from. I know is hard when you focused on one direction only, and you know it's the only way because it's your way .
 
All I was about to say here, I like simplicity. If you walking around the city and someone will send a bullet towards your head your are dead. End of story. There should not be any extra skills, systems or whatever to magically make you alive come closer and kill aggressor with super-powers that he will not posses after at least 1000h of game play. In many MMO games the very fact there is such variety of skills armours and weapons is the source of harassment. But don't get me wrong here. What I would love to see instead is the harsh environment.
 
This way in such harsh reality players may actually start to behave. Because behind every trigger there are consequences. In some cities/areas I would imagine people may implement the rule, any weapons are not be allowed. As it is in real world. Some may choose otherwise. The worst you can do is to punch the guy. But in wild, is not the time you play a game should determine you are immune to another person with a gun. But the very fact he was faster to react and better in aiming. And all dynamics you pointed out yourself.
 
Sure we living in 26th century with nano tech, Some armour types may justify certain things, so the weapons. But if we can form a cube out of atoms of matter and create complicated mechanism out of it, I find it hard to believe/justify there will be such disparity in weapon and armour types. 
 
Ability to drain a power, out of your toys, well if I think more about it, kind of make sense. As a general feature, why not.
It could actually help to control weapon use in restricted areas.
 
But idea that people in 26th century that colonised new world, the only activity they looking for is to kill each other, challenge in duels, fight to death on market square to show off the skills and weapons they posses. It almost destroys their own Lore Bible. People went there to survive not to kill each other. Sure there will be disagreement between orgs, politics will start to divide people as always, it may even leads to wars, but If DU will become a game when in the centre of City people showing off their skills and new armours, challenging each other on arena or something... It will destroy what I hoped this game can provide.
 
Speaking of Lore Bible.
I would recommend you to read it again, even veterans of the forum (not only newcomers) must read at time to time to be up-to-date
especially Quantum branching under Science & Technology. 
https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2016/11/16/official-lore-bible/
 
A revival pills or any smaller amount of 'emergency energy' make no sense here.
 
I hope NQ will avoid turning this into DOTA in space or any shit like that. Because so far it looks like what you suggesting here.

oh perhaps someone has mentioned it but it worth saying again.
 
Collisions makes space fun because you have to think about your actions or die and not just ghost true each other or object.

Well, I can see how collision damage would create a problem with people strapping an engine to a bunch of blocks, and yelling "allahu akbar" in the voice service of their choice.
 
BUT having said that, I'm also in full support of 'free' collision model - providing there is no server load and providing it's implemented well.
 
Now what I mean by "implemented well" - is in a way that specifically makes it ridiculously inefficient to attempt and do what the first sentence of this post stated. For instance, having to take out shields prior to "ramming", would mean that the ship that is trying to grief, would require to A: have enough firepower to break through the target's shields, and B: have enough of it's own shields to sustain the enemy firing upon them. That alone would force the later to invest above the bare minimum. Next there would be the mass of the ship - a small ship would make a small hole in a big ship, destroying the small ship and producing some minor damage on the big ship (to put it in the simplest terms). A ship would need to be big enough and going fast enough to do enough damage to it's target - meaning it would need to be more bulky, and have an equally bulky engine - which would likewise cost a bit more to make / fuel etc. Which would then need more power from bigger power cells (which would actively also power the bigger shields that this ship would now need)... well you get the idea - you are basically trying to nullify the cost discrepancy between the two constructs, so the ship trying to kamikaze would need to cost at least close to the amount it's target cost - possibly more, depending on how the damage ends up being calculated.
 
Insurance premiums can also play a big part here. Say you are a griefer who kamikazeed your current ten ships in a short span of time. You claim insurance on those ten ships, and want to build another few and insure them with the money you got from the insurance. Now if you did that in real life, I doubt your insurance company would want to have anything to do with you, and will likely tell you "sorry sir, I'm afraid we cannot do anything for you". In fact, after the third "accident" they will likely double your premiums, look very closely at your records, and possibly take you to court for insurance scam by the fifth one. Now obviously the later may be "too realistic" for a game like DU, but there's nothing stopping in having an algorithm that increases your insurance premiums based on how often you have had to make a "claim", based on certain variables (eg. within a certain amount of time / type of ship / system and area / type of damage - instant death or gradual module failure etc.) There is also nothing stopping an in game insurance "company" outright refusing to insure any further ships for certain people, until some condition(s) are met.
 
Lastly, reward good design. Basically, a ship that has it's critical systems damaged by a light bump from a small fighter, due to the location and proximity of those systems, is not a bad design. A ship that is a massive hunk of metal that floats in space, protecting all it's critical systems in it's centre, is also not a good design - due to the cost / power-weight ratio / maneuverability etc. A ship that is designed in a smart way, that tries to predict what are the most likely angles it may be hit from, what shape of the fuselage could be used to better absorb the shock, and where to put the components to maximise their efficiency even if the hull is breached in several places - is a good design.
 
And that last paragraph, is really why I would like to see such a mechanic in game. I would happily take the immersion that it would provide, over the potential of someone griefing me through ramming. Yes, it would certainly suck, but I would only consider it a problem if the game provided a "cheap" way for someone to destroy someone else's months worth of work, in mere seconds, with minimal effort and at nearly no cost to themselves. If they end up losing as much or more in game wealth as you do through their actions, there is really no reason to try and exclude such a mechanic from the game. Provided, like already mentioned, it doesn't directly impact on things like server performance.
 
EDIT: Also, I'm not a fan of the idea of having only "certain voxels" being able to collide. That makes it messy if anything - like what happens if those voxels hit voxels that are not designed for collision - and why would voxels not designed for collision not take damage when colliding in that sense? Because collision damage is not just about suicide bombing - if done well, that would be the very least of what it's used for. It would be more about things like doing crappy landings, or lading inside another construct in a dangerous (and deadly) manner, or taking risks around asteroids or dogfights etc. Collision is one of those mechanics that I want to see either done well, or not done at all. Not half arse it

well you are exploring uncharted territory...

eve is full of min/maxes and spreadsheet generals, do not let them bring you down.
 
So here is how you do skill
 
1: figure out what you want
2: que skills to the max
3: forget about skills
4: play game
6: win
7: que more skills

Look i really didn't want to get into a debate i just wanted some source about your info.
 
But ill bite:
Your original statement: "Not really, the paint job is just a visual detection hinderance...."
 
http://science.howstuffworks.com/stealth-bomber4.htm
 
The B-2 has two major defenses against radar detection. The first element is the plane's radar-absorbent surface. The radio waves used in radar are electromagnetic energy, just like light waves. In the same way that certain materials absorb light very well (black paint, for example), some materials are particularly good at absorbing radio waves. The B-2's body is mainly composed of composite material -- combinations of various lightweight substances. The composite material used in the B-2 bomber is specifically designed to absorb radio energy with optimum efficiency. Parts of the B-2, such as the leading edge, are also covered in advanced radio-absorbent paint and tape. These materials are very expensive, and the Air Force has to reapply them regularly. After every flight, repair crews have to spend many hours examining the B-2 to make sure it's fit for stealth missions
 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_technology#Materials
Radar-absorbing material
Main article: Radar-absorbent material Radar-absorbent material (RAM), often as paints, are used especially on the edges of metal surfaces. While the material and thickness of RAM coatings can vary, the way they work is the same: absorb radiated energy from a ground or air based radar station into the coating and convert it to heat rather than reflect it back.[33] Current technologies include dielectric composites and metal fibers containing ferrite isotopes. Paint comprises depositing pyramid like colonies on the reflecting superficies with the gaps filled with ferrite-based RAM. The pyramidal structure deflects the incident radar energy in the maze of RAM. A commonly used material is known as "Iron Ball Paint‟.[34] Iron ball paint contains microscopic iron spheres that resonate in tune with incoming radio waves and dissipate the majority of their energy as heat, leaving little to bounce back to detectors. FSS are planar periodic structures that behave like filters to electromagnetic energy. The considered frequency selective surfaces are composed of conducting patch elements pasted on the ferrite layer. FSS are used for filtration and microwave absorption.
 
Im not sure what your heat sink comment is about, i would assume the amount of heat generated by this approach is not easily detectable as it is probably dissipated into the air.  The B-2 is capable of all-altitude attack missions up to 50,000 feet. Air temp at 50k is -70F (http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/standard-atmosphere-d_604.html)
 
Its not the primary source of radar reduction but it is relevant and important enough that they spend a lot of money developing RAM paints and maintaining them on these plans.
 
 
As far as this statement: "If the radar beams hit them on the side, they are going to be visible. It's science, not magic after all"
 
http://science.howstuffworks.com/stealth-bomber4.htm
 
The stealth bomber's peculiar shape deflects radio beams in both ways. The large flat areas on the top and bottom of the plane are just like tilted mirrors. These flat areas will deflect most radio beams away from the station, presuming the station isn't directly beneath the plane.
The plane itself also works like a curved mirror, particularly in the front section. The entire plane has no sharp, angled edges -- every surface is curved in order to deflect radio waves. The curves are designed to bounce almost all radio waves away at an angle.
 
All in all i just asked for where you got this info cause I was mostly curious about it. Maybe my googling is all wrong just asked for source about where you go your info. Doesn't need to turn into a whole debate, just post some links.

Sigh, shouldn't have bothered. Still no sources, guess links were just to hard. Once again doesn't need to be a debate just post links supporting your original posts statements(not the moving the goal post arguments you put forward later) of:
 
-"Not really, the paint job is just a visual detection hinderance....."
-"And surprsie, Stealth Bombers only work on "Approach""
-"If the radar beams hit them on the side, they are going to be visible"
-"Stealth Bombers "stealth" comes from the fact they are able to "glide" their way to a target on approach"
 
That's all i asked for originally, does not matter if I'm wrong or right in anything I said, and all this debating you still have yet to put forward anything of actually proof or source information of any kind to the above statements you made.