Obikawa

There's currently no plan to create a voxel editor to develop character weapons.
At the moment, character weapons are planned to be mesh-based, and defined by developers.
The Dev team has already a lot on her plate with our current goals. Maybe far in the future, but we can't promise anything for now.
 
Best regards,
Nyzaltar.

Valid concerns, but I think you're missing some pieces of the puzzle.
 
I think your real concern is that small bases of operations for solo players and small organisations will be repeatedly destroyed by raiders, thieves, pirates, privateers, and other, larger groups of settlers.  Let me just say first of all that I don't think your solution would help in that regard, first because it is not losing inventory that is the problem, it is losing buildings, and second because solo players and small groups are much less likely to claim territory, partly because TU's are rare and expensive, partly because there will be little need to.
 
So the answer to the problem of small groups getting bullied back into safe territory is to give them the tools to protect themselves.  "Protection" can come in many forms and a lot of it is built in to the game world.  For example, the game universe is massive and varied.  Small groups can travel far into the unknown and set up camp at a location where others are unlikely to find them.  They can choose a location that is hidden away such that passers by could come close without even noticing there is a settlement there.  Or choose a location that has great natural defenses and set up automated weaponry and shielding that fires at anyone who comes within range and doesn't have the correct tags (see the rights and duties blog for more on this).  But there are other options too.  You could ally yourself with other small groups and form a defensive pact.  Or just ally yourselves with a military organisation who do nothing but PvP, but fight for "good", protecting the weak, etc.  Or, hire mercenaries on a case by case basis, whenever trouble comes along.  Or use diplomacy and come to an agreement with the local bullies (read: protection money).  Or you can use some combination of two or more of all of those ideas.  The possibilities go on, and there are far more than I can think of here.
 
However, even with all of that there will be great losses in the game.  Without great losses there can be no great victories, no great stories; no cycle of creation/construction/destruction/reconstruction.
 
Check out this devblog that discusses PvP, it gives a good indication of where NQ are coming from.  https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2014/09/13/arkship-security-or-where-does-pvp-starts/
 

That's an interesting idea. I like the concept of naming planets by the first explorer. I also has the advantage for developers to easily name things as they don't do it themselves (especially in procedurately generated universe, that usually becomes a headhacke).
 
But in the other hand, it removes the feeling of exploration and finding "new" planets. If someone just fly by a planet and name it, it's still not explored and there are a lot to discover on the surface. If that planet is named by another player, you lose a bit of the feeling: "Oh! Look at the planet. Someone already found it and name it... but let's check if there is something valuable.".
 
All in all, I guess that you can still build an obelisk or something with your name on the planet or in orbit if you really want to leave your mark. 
 
Regards,
Shadow

If that's a concern, there are ways to "store" data on the browser cache in order to keep bandwidth to an acceptable level.
 
I think that the consensus here is "Why not ? But keep it simple and opt-in".
I guess that NQ could integrate a SoundCloud player quite easily with a play button (and, by the way, it means that music will be loaded from SoundCloud).
 
But it's clearly not a priority.
Maybe once NQ will start some kind of publicity for the game, it'll be a good idea.
 
Regards,
Shadow

No, they wouldn't slip through each other, as nora said, that drive, (which is btw. only mathematically possible if you ignore physics), works influencing the space surrounding the spaceship, anything that enters its sphere of influence would still interact with the ship inside.
 
I also don't get how your "quantum-multi-world" drive is supposed to function. Derived from your description its continous small teleportations, which in itself might be ok, but has nothing to do with (what i suppose you mean with "quantum-multi-world") the additional dimensions if you postulate a multiverse, but that just wouldn't work because you either are at the same location in space if you switch dimensions or at a completely different location, in both cases you would not archieve "small teleportations" while jumping between dimensions.
 
"The engine works by "enforcing reality" in a radius around it."
honestly, i'd rather have reasonable ftl-drives for dual universe, somethinq that you could find in hard-scifi, not some random things you would rather find in fantasy-scifi. the alcubierre is really close to the limit for that, but something like a reality overwriting drive definitely crossed that border^^

Thank you for pointing the zero momentum aspect of that engine. You are correct. I overlooked that fact.

Energy is the laser's "bullet". Anyway, the previous post was meant to say that I do not see swords happening in this game.

Not that i'm picking at your ideas or anything, but wouldn't your engines give zero momentum as it's jumping the object not moving it?... it would just jump inside another object rather than crash into it traditionally?...
 
Could be an interesting weapon style that actually... 
 
But then again would it crash into it.. your SoC would mean you'd just pick up more and more items at the edge of the SoC and they would never hit you because you'd jump them along with your ship.... basically just forming a tunnel through another object....
 
I like this as a weapon type now more than a FTL method...

The current idea of FTL engines being different from classical thrusters but also different from stargates is causing a number of theoretical issues.
For example, the Alcubierre engines. How do those interact with space? What would happen during a hostile interception or crash with a space debris?
There is another kind of problem to consider here. Right know DU is known to simplify a lot of the Universe and break exactly one Law. Classical FTL engine ideas would need to break more of the Laws. When I thought about FTL travel from this perspective I had en epiphany. What if we could apply the quantum multi-world theory on which the ressurection nodes are based to other elements of the game? The answer is "yes! we can".
It was surprisingly simple for me to devise a quantum engine that has many desirable traits:
It is not jumping. It simply moves forward faster than light.
It can be intercepted by hostiles during transit in a convincing and engaging way.
It has no theoretical limit on top speed.
It is only limited by the ships energy supplies.
Finally, this engine can solve the problem of size versus speed tradeoff very elegantly, without involving mass!
The idea is as follows.
The main difference from stargates and ressurection nodes would be range. The gates and nodes seem to work over infinite distances and as such are the ultimate destination of the game's research and development. As such they require the ultimate cost and effort which will make them very rare, so FTL engines become a real necessity to a point where it could take less time to travel FTL to close-by systems than wait in a queue to a stargate for the instant warp. The first change to the lore I made here is that stargates actually employ the same principle of overwriting the reality through the multi-world quantum theory.
And the FTL engine I write about here is actually employing the same theory as well, but with local range instead. It is able to modify a sphere of space around it to enforce movement of objects inside. Through quantum manipulation it constantly makes the ship be "in front of itself". While in microscopic scale the ship effectively jumps in a series of tiny steps, macroscopically it moves fluidly and really fast. It obviously needs lots of energy to keep moving like this.
The engine actually has two spheres of influence. The inner one - the Sphere of Containment which defines what is moved. The outer one - the Sphere of Displacement which defines how far the Sphere of Containment can be moved in a unit of time or with a unit of energy. Basically you could equate the Sphere of Displacement to range in some contexts.
The fun part here is that both spheres are strongly related. A better engine can influence more space. It is up to the designer to distribute the energy between containment and displacement. The ratio here is obvious. The total energy output defines a volume of a sphere which in turn is the sum of volumes of the two spheres of influence. In result, big advances in ship's size or speed require big advances in energy density and ultimately the tradeoff for speed becomes a very real and pressing issue.
My choice of the mathematical formula gives a very simple calculation programming-wise which is very important factor when most of space travel will use the FTL mechanics. It is also elegant as it is compliant with the Laws of the Universe. This basically means that to achieve two times faster speed limit on a space craft you would need less than eight times stronger energy output. The reverse works as well. There is even an interesting side effect of this theory. You always will have to devote significantly more energy for the speed factor of the engine as Sphere of Displacement which is smaller than Sphere of Containment has no practical sense.