wizardoftrash

They might be better off holding until Alpha. If everyone can play with the unfinished builds, the hype might wear off

Not sure if we will see something like Merge Blocks for SE in DU. It MIGHT be possible, since they discussed the possibility of the Core Units (which determine the max size of the construct) being linked together (which theoretically allows for something with no size limit). The advantage of modular pieces is that it can separate. The disadvantage is that it is very inefficient. You'll have a lot of mass dedicated to redundancies that will be necessary for the individual pieces to work as ships, but that would not be necessary if they didn't need to be separated. A large nomad ship might be very very hard to move. There is a chance that there will be a "minimum thruster output" to move a structure based on mass, beyond the impact that mass has on acceleration. If not, a "nomad" ship could take a whole play session to accellerate to a fairly slow pace, and it could be sort-of "flung" into a particular direction by a script designed to slow it down at the right time to have the whole ship stop at the correct destination.

Blueprint copies perhaps (that have a limited number of runs) but not blueprints Masers (which won't even clear during wipes from Alpha>beta>release)

There are plenty of games where crime and fraud are a big part of the genre. This is no one of those games. Like we have to prove to you why an off-genre feature that isn't planned shouldn't be included? There will be plenty of "crime" as it is, since it is a sandbox game. Players will have plenty of chances to attempt to scam other players, you have the "just-like" method that I described, plus nothing will stop a player from placing something dirt cheap on the market, and ambushing any player that tries to travel to claim it. This isn't a crime simulator, the focus is on building. We don't need the devs to go out of the way to create tools for players to use to counterfeit blueprints.

However, pistols, shotguns, or sumachine guns would make excellent close range weapons for a scifi game. no need for a sword if you've got a scatter lazer (unless you wanna relive Star Wars or Xenogears)

We've got to be careful with assumptions about server load, a change that will double the number of calculations per-shot could turn a battle that causes a bit of lag into a battle that brings the server to it's knees. Since the server won't be actually tracking projectiles, the only weapons I see time to reach target mattering here is missiles and torpedoes, since they would be slow enough for countermeasures. Rather than making it as complex as the server needing to decide on time to reach target, I might propose the following. non-missile/torpedo weapons - no time to reach target, all calculations made at start, distance between shooter and target affects accuracy. missile/torpedo weapons - Delay based on distance between shooter and target, no calculations made at start, all calculations made on impact (if hit). As far as non-missile and torpedo countermeasures and reactions, it might be fair to assume you would deploy said countermeasures after the first impact or impacts, and the countermeasure would take effect on subsequent impacts. The bulkier the combat system is, the longer it will take to be added, and the more strain large space battles will cause. Eve Online suffers tremendous strain when it has large space battles, and it's combat mechanics are less complex than the ones you are suggesting, and will probably still be less complex than a very very simple system because of voxel destruction and deformation (which should be pretty taxing).

Seconded. Perhaps a construct element like a Market Unit where a character could have this done? or perhaps it could be part of being resurrected at a node? I'd also like to see more options get added during expansions/updates

We don't collectively have time to shoot down every little thing you decide is true. http://www.slideshare.net/ziobrando/bulshit-asymmetry-principle-lightning-talk

I agree, the unrelated discussion should be moved. Jazzed about character customization though! It's the kind of thing I really do care about in a game. The fact that female character is an option right out of the gate is a big plus, I hate seeing devs push it to an "add later" zone

Real small, a simple version of it perhaps. It would make for a great expansion however!

JC's "zoom" may have simply been rapildy changing his position (position in the pre-alpha may be nothing more than viewpoint). If a feature like that makes it into the game (I doubt it), and it is implemented by changing your client's position (like I think it was) you are going to have some very strange situations. If I'm zoomed far in somewhere, and try to have my ship fire from it's position, my ship won't be loaded because I'm no longer there. But again, I'm not pretending to know how this is going to work, and its a little early for you to pretend to know.

It works by subdividing large spaces into smaller spaces, which works fine if the opposing ships are in clusters of mixed Force A and Force B by subdividing the battle into chunks. It would not work well if long range weapons pushed the limits of what could be loaded, you have a large cluster of Force A, a large cluster of Force B, and each cluster is far away using long-range weapons on each other. The game would see a volume of players on each end, and restrict their areas of influence putting each force too far away for their areas of influence despite being within weapons range. This should be just fine for big space battles provided "long range" weapons are only long compared to other weapon ranges. "long" might be "I can still see that ship" instead of "at x20 zoom I can see the ship". Alternatively, manipulating area splitting could just be a mechanic of space battles. If i were to make the long-range cannons on your battleship less effective by harrassing it with fighters and restricting your area of influence with player density, it could be kinda fun!

Digging probably falls under the category of "editing". Since TU's will be able to restrict edits, this will include subtracting voxels from the terrain (digging).

It will be possible, but it won't be easy. You'll need to see what the thing your trying to copy looks like, possibly even own one. Then you'll need to build something that looks enough like it to fool people, and name it the same. (or a similar and misleading name if construct names are uniquely enforced). Then hope people can't tell the difference.

If their base is walled off, the people that own it wouldn't be able to get in or out. If they used ships to get in or out, in theory an attacker could do the same. The real trick would be whether or not they could Bury or Wall-off just their TU. If the org needed to have access to the TU on a regular basis (for upkeep or to adjust permissions) then they would need to not wall it off or bury it, but if they maintained build permissions, they could simply remove the panel that protects it, do their needed upkeep, and replace the panel. We are on the same page that Avatars damaging constructs is kind of a must.

I don't think our disagreement on the DAC's issue is relevant here If there is a technical limitation to how far you can engage a target, I think it will come from the way the server technology distributes it's resources. <-- I'm sure you've seen this video before, the part I'll be using starts at 0:48 You see how it is split up into boxes, and those boxes get smaller based on player density? Those boxes will determine what elements and assets will be updated in/near real time for your character. What do you think will happen if you are trying to shoot at something beyond your box? What will your target look like? will you even be able to lock onto it? Your idea that zooming in will load assets further away is interesting, however neither of us know if we can zoom with the way this server technology is configured. My guess is that lock on distances will be longer when player density in your are is lower, but probably not long enough to shoot at something on the surface from orbit. That box will probably determine the limits of what we can interact with, like a sphere of influence. To be able to zoom we would have to be able to be in two boxes at once, or stretch the box in a given direction. We don't know what kind of load that would put on a server, so I just wouldn't count on being able to attack from long range.

Heck, i think it would be OK to allow players to "buy" test tokens to test expansions, but that kind of defeats the idea of "each expansion is free for subscribed players" if certain players get to access it before everyone else. This is definitely a wait-and-see kind of thing.

If a hacking system is implemented prior to Avatars damaging Constructs, then it would be possible to take over a territory. You would need an assault force and at least one player with a high hacking skill, and this would be under the assumption that a player wouldn't be able to literally bury their TU. If the TU was located in a secure building, the player with a high hacking skill would be needed to open "locked" doors. The assault team would have to defend the hacker during the process of breaking into the secure building, room-by-room, until the hacker reaches the TU. At that point, the hacker would need to effectively need to change the TU ownership, and bingo territory taken. The more likely scenario is that Avatar weapon damage on constructs will happen first, in which case the doors can be destroyed, the TU can be destroyed, and the attacking faction would simply need to deploy their own.

They specified in a DEV interview that objects will not render at long distances, and for performance reasons sniping will not be possible. I'm not making an argument, just stating the intention of the devs. -> it is entirely possible that I am misunderstanding what I'm referencing, since the "long distance sniping" was in reference to not having FPS elements. The devs were however clear that causing massive damage from a distant location (orbit) would not be possible, as it would be unfair to builders to lose their structures to an attacker they could not see. This was in reference to the possibility of WMD's and deathstar cannons.

There will still be Avatar vs Avatar combat, and there is a strong likelihood that avatar weapons will be able to damage constructs. Combat is going to be very STRANGE, but there will be combat. The biggest implication this has for me, is that as a builder we won't be able to really develop fighters until after the game has already been released. If avatar weapons can damage constructs, we may be able to build ships and structures that allow players to shoot from them at other constructs. For example, a fighter with a machine gun nest built in, where a 2nd player fires through gaps in the fighter's armor at other ships, or a bunker with firing slits. If avatar weapons can damage constructs, than a ship could have its weapons disabled, and be subject to a boarding action if it is a large enough construct for it to have a control center. But when proper CVC gets implemented, there will be a development frenzy of builders retrofitting existing constructs to allow for weapons. It will prevent alpha and beta players from having an advantage in holding military blueprints through wipe, and will dramatically alter player behavior at launch. There won't be an arms race (apart from avatar weapons), instead each org will be racing to get infrastructure in-place for producing military constructs, stockpiling resources, TU's, etc. That notion is kind of exciting and could be used to build hype for release. Everyone will have an opportunity to get "set up" before it all hits the fan. But again, they might raise enough funds through paypal to hit that goal post-kickstarter regardless.

It might be possible to have "test zones" within the server, where it captures data on your ship, inventory, and location before you enter, and can revert you to that state and location if something goes wrong or if they have to re-set the test zone.

You'll find that it goes without saying, that you won't be able to attack things on the surface from orbit reliably. Because the game wont' be tracking projectiles, you will only be able to damage assets that are loaded in your area, which will become smaller based on server load (as demonstrated in their server tech demo). For that reason, the devs already stated that sniping someone from a long distance won't be possible. Besides, orbital bombardments fall under that "weapons of mass destruction" category where a player on the surface would be killed and their constructs destroyed without seeing their attacker, which the devs consider unfair. You'll find that what makes CvC combat hard to implement is the sheer volume of things that will have to be balanced and developed. Some of the mechanics from Avatar vs Avatar combat will carry over, but there is some complexity that CvC will have that will not be present in AvA. The size of a construct will probably have a bearing on how easy it is to hit, in addition to the characteristics of the ship, the flying skills of both pilots, the stats of the ship's weapon, possibly the presence of a targeting system on the ship itself eventually. The dev's described that the first iteration of CvC combat would be a 1-1 player per weapon mount situation, possibly with an exception for a forward mount weapon/pilot relationship. This compromise is what will make CvC so similar to AvA, since it'll have almost the same variables from the attacker's perspective, and in theory the same variables from the defender's perspective if avatar weapons can damage constructs during launch. But this is all under the assumption that they really will make avatar weapons and ship weapons almost the same. That would make sense, but I don't know if we have enough info to make that kind of assumption. Ship weapons will probably have their own limitations, mainly mount location, range of movement, how much power the ship has to spend on said weapon, how fast the weapon can rotate/aim, how the ship it is attached to is moving, etc. There could be much more going on there than we are considering.

So we've got to wait a while for mankind to reinvent ship weapons sounds fine to me! This does mean that there will be effectively a construct golden age when everyone is retrofitting existing constructs with weapons when the expansion drops. In the mean time, we'll be building ships intended to either repel boarding parties, or to launch them!

Willing to bet he just adjusted his pledge last minute to get the desired result. It would have had to be a narrow margin to begin with. Good tactic!

Star Wars Battle Pod style anyone?