Limyaael

I don't think we need regenerating ground. If the community as a whole decides that the Arkship area's starting to look like a mined out crater, the community needs to get together to create a city (just like CSYN's plans for Emberstone). Keep it player generated. I don't want it to be 2019 and then NQ decides we're not keeping Alioth pretty enough so they regenerate the whole planet or create their own artificial city - not that they seem like they would. If we want the environment for new players a few years after game launch to be a welcoming and interesting city, we need to build it ourselves.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

But they don't. I'm not privy to the internal goings on at McDonalds because I'm not a board member nor an investor in the company. People who aren't currently involved in CSYN don't "deserve" to know anything about the organisation - anything they do release is just marketing stuff to get people on board. Yes, people in the organisation probably deserve a voice there (although I don't know how it's actually being run as of yet, and one could argue that subordinates don't need to know absolutely everything). So this "journalism" is a waste of your time and only serves as something to chuckle over for a little bit before moving on. Forum drama is unneeded so early into development.

I voted other only because you don't have a "None" option.
 
No sentient alien races. The game is about rebuilding humanity. The only aliens should be dumb animals and beasts.

It's now entering its sixth year of development and what little has been delivered to backers is a buggy mess. The technology to make the game as of the current vision is either impossible or simply won't exist for a very long time. They're using a modified version of Cryengine 3 (why you would use a high fidelity graphics FPS engine for an MMO is beyond my knowledge) and the current modules can't even handle limited multiplayer as of yet, let alone proper MMO numbers. Squadron 42 sounds like it's a "failed Hollywood developer makes a video game" kind of thing ala The Order 1886. They've collected literally hundreds of times the originally asked for budget, yet are still raising money (via the selling of images of ships that don't yet exist in the game, no less) for a game that's now two whole years late. They've made dodgy changes to the ToS. Feature creep has been impacting the game since 2012. They are rumoured to be spending 3 million per month (aka six times more than they originally asked for, which would have lasted two years) through their four different studios in LA, Texas, Manchester and Frankfurt. Why does an indie game need so many studios?
 
Basically there are a ton of problems that would have gotten the game canned, or they would have been reined in heavily, had they a proper team of producers and a publishing company above them.

Option 1: Ensure your ship has multiple guns. This is probably going a little too far from the ideals of making the game hard and easily approaches frustration territory.
 
Option 2: Players disappear at log out. What happens if your single player ship (that you've programmed a clever autopilot AI that can travel to a planet without needing input) gets hijacked by pirates? Do you just pop up in the middle of the ship that they've had locked up in their warehouse for ten hours now? If you want to do that stuff, stow yourself in some hidden area on the ship before logging off.
 
Option 3: Push the gunner out of the seat. Just allow an option so that if a player has logged out and they're sitting in something (surely chairs will be either an element or a part of a gun or something), people from the same organisation (or who have the permission through the RDMS) can push you out and take your place.

Gravitational waves still propogate at c, a ship coming towards you can't be detected.
 
FTL sensors will need to be a completely scifi explanation as in science it seems like there isn't anything to detect them.

It's just your fear of the unknown showing through.
 
Even Kerbal Space Program which is a pretty dang accurate Rocket Physics simulator doesn't require any math when building or flying.  It's Rocket Legos.  Just snap the pieces together and see what happens.  You quickly develop an eye for what engines and fuel tanks work the best in a given situation without any calculation needed on your part.  But the option is there ... the info is available... if you do want to do the calculations yourself.  If you do you can make rockets that are more efficient...
 
 
DU will not have anything like Kerbal Space Programs level of detail.  DU won't even have Planets moving on their orbits.  They'll be locked in place.  Probably the same for any asteroids and space stations.  Hopefully they'll get the planets to rotate at least...  

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't NQ already said that player made bubble zones will already exist? Unlike the Arkship, they require a power investment and thus can be destroyed (overwhelm the shield with more energy and it collapses - whether this is like taking down a boss by whittling away at its health or a case of all or nothing, I don't remember). No requirements to own anything, you just have to have the energy resources to set it up and a large enough army will be able to destroy it if you don't fight back.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't NQ already said that player made bubble zones will already exist? Unlike the Arkship, they require a power investment and thus can be destroyed (overwhelm the shield with more energy and it collapses - whether this is like taking down a boss by whittling away at its health or a case of all or nothing, I don't remember). No requirements to own anything, you just have to have the energy resources to set it up and a large enough army will be able to destroy it if you don't fight back.

Stardates were nonsense numbers that constantly jumped around, just like warp speeds before TNG (where warp 10 was defined as infinite speed, which also messed with time and thus people's evolution, and was the subject of a Voyager episode). In the alternate movie timeline, it's Earth dates. 2135.32 is the year 2135, February 1 (the 32nd day of the year). I don't remember how/if it accommodates leap years.
 
I don't understand everyone saying that SI units would change. Six of the seven are currently based on universally demonstrable processes. The oscillations of a caesium atom (the definition of a second) doesn't change just because we spent 9000 years in cryosleep. The only unit currently dependent upon some prototype is the kilogram, and that will be redefined next year to a universal constant.

If you have a company IRL, and you don't want to hire criminals, what's the magical device developed by Alien Overlord Games, who have created this Earth 2.3 simulation? Nothing? Oh yeah, because in real life you have to actually perform background checks yourself by consulting police databases and such.
 

^I think it should work like this. Modify the community page so that it's easy to search by member, and look for their affiliations. Possibly you can check past groups they've been a part of, and if they very recently abandoned all their connections, maybe they're a spy or just a conman. Maybe they've discovered the light and will plead to let them join despite their shady resume. Should be integrated straight into the game UI. But nothing automatic. It forces you to think about all aspects of running an organisation.
 
 
Then vet them, as I keep saying.
 

I answered it in a roundabout manner. There are things that would increase the momentary enjoyment for me, but I recognise that overcoming the difficulties the game throws at you makes the game ultimately more fun and as such I don't advocate for it - not to mention it puts all sides of society (hackers, pirates, criminals, CEOs, truckers, traders, etc.) on a fairly even playing ground. You are advocating making running an organisation simpler when I think that allowing complexity means that organisations will be more rewarding when you can get them working accurately, and it will produce more entertaining stories when it's indeed possible for spies to enter large organisations with poor HR sectors, or for poor hires to be let in.

If you have a company IRL, and you don't want to hire criminals, what's the magical device developed by Alien Overlord Games, who have created this Earth 2.3 simulation? Nothing? Oh yeah, because in real life you have to actually perform background checks yourself by consulting police databases and such.
 

^I think it should work like this. Modify the community page so that it's easy to search by member, and look for their affiliations. Possibly you can check past groups they've been a part of, and if they very recently abandoned all their connections, maybe they're a spy or just a conman. Maybe they've discovered the light and will plead to let them join despite their shady resume. Should be integrated straight into the game UI. But nothing automatic. It forces you to think about all aspects of running an organisation.
 
 
Then vet them, as I keep saying.
 

I answered it in a roundabout manner. There are things that would increase the momentary enjoyment for me, but I recognise that overcoming the difficulties the game throws at you makes the game ultimately more fun and as such I don't advocate for it - not to mention it puts all sides of society (hackers, pirates, criminals, CEOs, truckers, traders, etc.) on a fairly even playing ground. You are advocating making running an organisation simpler when I think that allowing complexity means that organisations will be more rewarding when you can get them working accurately, and it will produce more entertaining stories when it's indeed possible for spies to enter large organisations with poor HR sectors, or for poor hires to be let in.

But you already have the option.
 
1. Anyone who is a member of another organisation can be refused access to any sensitive documents via the RDMS. Have them as basic lackeys who follow orders and that's all.
 
2. If that's still to sensitive to spying for you, refuse their membership. Spell it out in rainbow coloured, bolded letters that you will not accept any members who are members of another organisation. In the final game I'm sure that NQ will leave legates in charge of membership applications. Instead of relying on an automated system to prevent you from allowing multiorg members, be vigilant yourself, like people in the real world have to be if they wish to be restrictive.

Just hit em with a few links for Do You Remember Love and you'll win the war. 
Only if we decide to have it. Such rules of war may not exist in DU, as I doubt there will be an equivalent of the UN to enforce anything on a nation that refuses to comply.

Death is already bad:
1) loss of ship
2) loss of some maybe all items and equipment
3) locational disadvantage: it will take time to return to the location the death occurred at which may be many systems away. To get back a player would need to first get a replacement ship, and equipment and then spend the time traveling. Time is money. So this alone is a large setback.
 
Why the above are a good design is that they can be mitigated in some way e.g. Insurance on a ship, or a large org that sponsors your ships. Same for equipment. Or your good equipment is stowed while entering dangerous territory.
The location setback is potentially the largest penalty. If you need to go from A to B, getting killed before reaching B means the journey needs to start all over again. A large org could have closer rez nodes but they will be expensive so not everyone can afford it. But this is also not always a setback since if you are returning from B to A, being killed teleports you to were you want to be.
 
There is nothing situational or interesting about skill loss. Since everything is only slightly less efficient with lower skills, large orgs will recruit hordes of new players that have nothing to lose, equip them and ship them to war zones. Pirates will have to do the same. Gone are the ace pilots. There is no incentive to be an ace since the horde can get the job done better. Any that try will find their skills resetting to that of the horde.
 
Let there be ace pilots, say no to skill loss on death.

Your own guns, or those of a mercenary company you hire, or those of others in your organisation who are there to protect the build site. And potentially, depending on how they work, Territory Units, which are used to claim land. It's unknown whether they will prevent disallowed people from entering the territory or if it's simply an alarm that goes off. You can also build protective bubbles similar to the safe zone around the Arkship; however this will require extensive resources.
 

One mode, one single shard universe. Solo play is not a separate gamemode, just a lifestyle within the universe of the game.

Realistically, you could just overwhelm the crust with so much energy that the stresses smash it into pieces. Stripping the planet of its crust will make it pretty worthless for a few hundred million years.
 
A Star Wars style complete destruction is probably the realm of fiction, or at least a Type III civilisation.
 

 
Having it in game is a little over the top. I mean, do you want millions of voices to cry out in terror, and then be suddenly silenced? It's too potentially devastating to completely wipe out a whole planet (and potentially destroy an organisation - what if the only other resurrection nodes are the Arkship, halfway across the universe where they own nothing?). There aren't even nuclear weapons in the game (apparently). I do hope we have high-powered weaponry to bombard cities from orbit though.

Kickstarter doesn't allow backers to withdraw from a project that's gotten over 100% funding if your withdrawal will put it below. It's guaranteed by Kickstarter's rules to be funded the €500,000 at a minimum now.

That's not why they're bad. They're bad because they are notorius for being risk averse and uninventive. EA are especially infamous for making bland and terrible games.

That's not why they're bad. They're bad because they are notorius for being risk averse and uninventive. EA are especially infamous for making bland and terrible games.