[Afk raiding protection]

 

I feel this discussion isn't going anywhere. The matter of hard timers or miracle shields and how necessary they are can hardly be discussed in isolation, as so many other aspects of PvP are hinging on it. For example:

• How easy is it to destroy voxels in foreign controlled territory? How big of a hole can I make with a bunch of rockets and bombs? How expensive is the ammo? Can I even damage voxels at all, or only constructs? How easy is it for the defenders to repair the damage? Does the game memorize the blueprint so I can just bring the materials and the holes get filled up more or less automatically?
• How easy is it to locate the Territory Unit? Does it show up on my HUD when I'm nearby? Do I need special scanners to help me locate it? Or do I need to find it manually, eyes only? This can be a considerable effort on a 1 km² stretch of land.
• Can territories change owner immediately or is there a timer during which only the defenders / last owners can reclaim it?

These things make a big difference to base planning, sieges and general PvP.

 

Imagine for example if it was fairly difficult to destroy voxels in enemy territory. Even as a solo player I could deter most random griefers quite easily by digging a deep hole in a mountain, filling it up with thick doors and bulkheads, and plopping my Territory Unit at the very end. An attacker would need time and maybe explosives to get in there and take the territory from me.

 

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

 

In such a scenario a magical bubble of immunity wouldn't really be necessary, imo. Instead, just a spontaneous idea, maybe instead my stuff could always be vulnerable, but broken elements could have a timer during which I can repair them at reduced cost, including the Territory Unit. Let's call this timer survivability. The amount of time granted for this could be determined by the local infrastructure.

 

Imagine if you could juice up this survivability of your elements with special elements that use up a lot of energy, say for a maximum of 24 hours (if you have a lot of them and supply them all with energy). An attacker could go straight for the Territory Unit, break and besiege it while the survivability timer is ticking, and considerably reduce the time by either breaking power plants or directly breaking our magical survivability elements (say the timer goes down to half an hour when all the supporting infrastructure is gone). When the timer runs out for each broken element, it explodes and is gone; when the Territory Unit is gone, the attackers can plop down their own, thusly claiming the territory as their own.

 

This way war would be costly: You need some manpower, you need to destroy and rebuild some valuable infrastructure (and not just the Territory Unit). Battles between equals can be long and fierce, yet powerful organizations can steamroll the little man in an hour or two (a good amount of time imo: It's long enough that they are unlikely to just gank someone's home while passing by, but short enough that there is little to no arbitrarily waiting around during an actual siege). If your neighbour doesn't play the game anymore and doesn't bother to log in, you may just break his Territory Unit and wait for the next day to claim his land.

 

If your organization is limited in its global reach (and thus in its time of the day where anyone is online) you can invest in massive infrastructure that will effectively make it impossible to take the territory without your rivals either pulling an all-nighter, or by outgunning you to a degree where you probably wouldn't have had a fighting chance anyway. Or you can try and take it back next day, or take one of their territories. Your enemies have to sleep, too.

 

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

 

Yes, this still leaves the problem where certain timezones have an advantage over others. But I agree with HelloKitty that formally declaring war and then twiddling thumbs for a day is also a bit lame. I'd much rather have a system where you can spontaneously get into the action at any time, but random passers-bys can't just take over my homestead without at least a bit of time and effort (they can still cause damage and grief on the go if they want). That's the kind of balance I'd like to see.

 

The game probably needs a notification system telling you the names of everyone that attacked your constructs (or even just cratered the terrain in your territory), so you can repay them in kind or hire mercenaries.

 

With some tweaks this might be a viable solution 

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

I believe the Kickstarter DAC protection suggestion + The mechanics of PLEX from Eve Online for DAC's purchased after launch == A Good Compromise

Since I've spent all my likes today, I at least verbally agree with this very much

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

instead of going on DU website and get it for cheaper, instantly and safe?

I used € for ingame currency, not for real money. Sorry for the confusion

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

I would agree that a community could break a game, especially if they beg for a feature that will be detrimental to it.

I'm no expert on those things, but in my opinion, making the DACs just an additional premium currency is more harmful than what we propose

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

People are debating almost as if the dev's haven't already decided.

This reminds me of the debate that emerged when Gaia Online had released details of the RPG, and people lost their minds when the RPG would have nothing to do with their avatar items. There was a debate, however the devs were already mostly done with the game.

 

So what's the goal here, is there some plan to mass-withdraw unless they change this? Because I'm not seeing that either

Well, NQ have been really awesome with the community so far, so we hope that they keep listening to us, because the community is what in the end will make or break this game

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

 

 

one fair solution, following your opinion would be to make physical the DAC only after beeing traded once

 

 

Well, or shortly before trading. Increased risk = increased reward. For example: I'd pay 500€ for a DAC in a Safe Zone. But I'm an explorer and often days of travel time away from the trader. So, I pay three times the price to have it delivered to me.

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

Alright, lets say we stick with the idea that DACs should not be lootable, because some people think its unfair. What comes after that? I think it is unfair that people can destroy my stuff while I'm offline. Solution: AFK protection. I don't like people with better equipment killing me. Solution: Remove PVP altogether. It might seem a little abstract and farfetched at first, but if you think about it, you'll realise that this is something that might happen.

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

beeing able to loot a whole fleet you just defeated, disassembling the constructs, gathering elements, looting corps for matters and blueprints, isnt enough?

 

you little greedy

What does it matter if they can come back within a few hours, completely raze your base and take it all back? Just because they can afford to instantly buy all the resources and rent enough assembly lines by investing into hundreds of DACs

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

What's the advantage to moving a DAC?

 

Why wouldn't everyone just keep them on the Arkship?

 

There's no reason to move them. 

Yeah. So why make them unlootable? If someone feels the need to risk their DACs, let them

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

Well, I would sure like the normal money to be physical though... even if it means getting robbed. I don't mind that all too much, as long as real money stays unaffected

[Poll : DACs are not physical objects and cannot be stolen or dropped upon death.]

Since it'd include Drop on Death, I can not like this. Imagine you're out exploring, maybe got a few DACs with you that you plan on using later. YOu have them with you because you don't trust your base protection enough to leave the next months of playtime in there, because if they get stolen, you lost the tons of time you invested in them plus the money for an actual sub, if you want to continue playing. Now, through whatever environmental circumstance you die, days away from the next RN. Your DACs will be gone, so will be a potential long-time user. Sure, for all the raider-types out there it would be a nice feature, as they wouldn't have to put much effort into staying in the game then, but for more peaceful players, I see no upside to DACs being stealable

[Let Us Take Credit For Our Work]

Even if it's not in the initial release, NQ will continue to add stuff to the game and with us as a community, they will have content ideas for decades to come, so this might be one of them.

[DU and the Power Stuggle.]

Too much greed will eventually be a downfall in most cases.

True. That's why I limit my greed, or rather have a very based Assistant that limits my greed

[DU and the Power Stuggle.]

Well, of course there is going to be a power struggle, since every group of players wants to be the best, even if not everyone admits it. There are going to be fights over finite resources like safe space and minerals, as well as propaganda wars for members. But this can also be a lot fun, as it adds a nice layer of realism.

[Afk raiding protection]

I personally like the thought of a power-dependent shield

[Joining More than One Organization?]

I don't think DAC fees are a good option at all... since an org with lots of money (real and in-game) would have quite an advantage, while smaller orgs that rely on in-game money only would be disadvantaged, effectively being a P2W feature

[CO2 recycling vs in-ship biodome]

I'm not even sure they'll implement an oxygen-system for the same reason they'll only implement locally dynamic water (if I remember this correctly). 

But on the assumption that you could have at least an ship-wide oxygen level, opposed to section a ship and have several, biomodules could be a thing. 

I'm thinking maybe whole decks for larger ships (if we even get to build something with more than one deck. Gathering resources might become rather tedious)

and additionally the CO2 scrubbers. Maybe have the scrubbers draw more power, but less space consuming

[What crazy contraption will you build?]

Because it'll probably be someone's lifelong goal to blow it up.

True, true. These nihilistic players, who only seek destruction are what really bothers me... I mean, I want battles and destruction and all, but only between willing parties, not forced upon everyone. Sure, all of this is sandbox and free and stuff, but it would still be nice if people would consider how much time and effort (and money probably) someone invested in something before blowing it to shreds

[Ship Copyright Infringement?]

Having worked in and around repair industries - the correct mechanic would be more, anyone can repair / dismantle but Right to Repair gives you access to the "repair manual" inc. Morpher spare part catalogues.

 

That way you get a nice mix of backyard running repair ships/gear at the lower end, and regularily maintained, serviced and repaired by an "authorised dealership" type model.

Sounds like a very nice, but also complicated to implement feature... maybe anyone can repair up to a certain percentage of module/voxel damage, but only those with rights/authorised blueprints can fully restore a ship. That could also lead to some very cool looking, run-down pirate ships, some parts already replaced, maybe some weapons crudely added... so many thoughts, so little time...

[Arkship Vicinity]

Well, my dream scenario would be, that flourishing city emerges around the Arkship, with towers almost as high as the Ark, well polished and financed by the big organisations, but also crude huts, 3 walls and a roof small markets and dark alleys made by whoever happened to pass by...

[Limits on editing the environment]

1. The planets are rather huge 

2. There will be lots of planets

So, even if some parts become messed up, in theory the Community can just move. Like in reality, when a territory becomes uninhabitable, the population moves. 

[Mega-scale Mining]

One way or another, there should be the possibility to mine on a larger scale than by hand. I mean, if the resource depots are really several kilometers large, you'll need either a mining ship or (my preferred solution) ground vehicles like drills, diggers and such. (I know, they said no wheels, but nothing is set in stone yet)

[What crazy contraption will you build?]

I will, hopefully not alone, build a Corporate tower (the aptly named Volcanov Tower) which includes hangar bays, living quarters, automated and manual defenses, as well as huge underground storages. It will be the base of my Mining/Producing/Trading empire (might also include shipping and protection services, depending on the size of the organisation)

[Arkship Vicinity]

That is, if the direct vicinity of the Ark ship is even mineable. I mean, they could have a 1km zone around the Ark that belongs to the NPC "Arkship" where no one can mine or build, just to preserve that first impression. The other 19km of the initial safezone can be used for whatever then

[Penalty for death]

I think Nodes will be either player or organisation bound, as otherwise attackers could be respawned inside someones base.