wizardoftrash

Official or not, if the city is built near the edge, nothing prevents players from building near Emberstone outside the safezone. That would be pretty slick

Hence there would have to be some limitations. Perhaps stuff simply can't be pushed out of the save zone from inside the safe zone. Perhaps the boost pads and repulsion guns are considered "weapons" and simply don't work inside the safe zones (this prevents them from being useful for towing). There is still a potential problem of pushing or dragging a ship out of the jurisdiction of a TU. *Shrugs* this is probably too complex already lol

There are currently no plans for any digging elements. This means mining will be an activity that players will have to do by-hand. Mining and exploration is intended to be a social and engaging activity in this game, and as such the devs have opted to make digging machines not an option (atleast at release, this may change with later expansions).

Potential area for abuse: repulsing a ship or player out of the safe zone that was previously there. As long as a save zone holds ships in that were parked there, then the "repulse" panels would be a fine way to tow ships without damaging them. While we are on that topic, a repulsion gun that just pushes stuff? nonlethal self defense to just keep shoving them out of combat distance, or hilarious combat tactic to shove a non-atmospheric ship into the gravity well of a planet. And again, these elements would require power to work, probably would be less effective against constructs that have more mass. There would need to be SOME limitations on something like this,

Here is a thought, mounting two in a wedge shape on the front of a ship to apply a force to anything in-front of it either to the left or right, not unlike a SNOW PLOW for a ship! A similar mechanism could be used to repel a ship that is built for boarding action.

Someone could fly into a loop that just directs them in a circle, or fly into a zone that just pulls from all directions into its center (and traps ships). Neat idea, but a ship with enough thrust should be able to overcome these. Also this would allow for ships that are in space to deploy atmosphere-only craft by hurling them into a planet, or would allow for a craft to rapidly deploy what might otherwise be a very slow fighter or bomber.

Considering space elevators have a lot of challenges that will make them not feasible in this game, I got to thinking why not have an electromagnetic launch pad style element, that propels mobile constructs in a specific direction when powered. This will allow for hover trains, boost pads for hover racing, and a Launch ramp that could allow a ship whout atmospheric flight elements to be launched ino space. In space these could also be used to allow for long-ish distance AFK travel by having a series of space stations that each propell you to the next, so you can AFK for a couple hours while your ship frictonlessly hurdles through the void to your destination.

I've got a potential alternative: a space slingshot. If there was a block type that propelled vehicles in a specific direction (like a gravity generator, powerful magnets, or a boost pad from mario kart) a player could attach them in-series to make a sort-of ramp into space that would allow ships withou atmospherc capabilities to get into space using a structure's power grid instead of it's own. Just think of it like a cannon for launching ships into space.

I disagree. Players spring and jump around like maniacs stamina bar or not. Plenty of traditional mmo's use "run" as a default speed, and have a walking speed you can switch to, and yes in high pop areas players are often running and jumping around. This ALSO happens in Minecraft (despite the stamina system) and the effect is usually MORE jarring not less because when the default speed is walk, sprinting is generally much faster. If the run speed is slow enough, it won't be very jarring and will encourage players to use hover vehicles to get around on a planet surfaxe.

We will probably see youtube channels shoot up to demonstrate how different ship designs perform, possibly even with standardized obstacle courses or ways to test a ship's characteristics. There are youtubers that do this for Space Engineers creations, and they usually have their own rating scales for different aspects of each ship. If you can't find a good review of a ship, then it'll be a gable as to whether or not to buy it. If you are a ship builder and you want your ship to sell, you'll want a youtuber to review it. Heck, it might be worth it for someone to create an org that exists to create reviews of ships. If each ship builder needs to send a copy of the ship to the Bureau of Space Vehicles to get their official ratings, that is the kind of emergent gameplay people would like to see.

An org should be able to use the space station method without Territory Units simply by setting permissions on the Core Units for the superstructure of the station to just key members of the org, and set permission on the smaller (size limited) Core units in the "honeycomb" sections to individual players. It might be a bit tricky to make the corridors big enough for ships, but there could be corridor sections intended for players, larger corridors intended for personal transport (small spaceships), and outer hangar bays for larger ships to simply dock. I might sit down and do a few sketches of what I'm imagining for this.

I've formed a group of orgs, 3 of which represent different aspects of play that I plan on participating in, and the goal of them is really to form loose groups of people who I can play with that each will assist each others. The 3 really represent the main building blocks of a civilization (creative, combat, exploration), and the goal is a loose co-op without much infrastructure to provide a reprieve from solo play. I have no intention of any of my orgs getting really large, and even if they do, there won't be a complex command structure. These are "Profession" orgs, sort of like trade guilds, where I don't expect any exclusivity or sovereignty. My 4th org exists as a sort-of charity, and represents a play relationship that I'm hoping others will use as an example and further (Squires). Trading a DAC to a player that can't afford a subscription in exchange for a bunch of materials is the kind of transaction that will make the game better for players who have money and little time, and players who have time and little money. I would even consider it a Profession level org for mining and refining. Oddly enough, there is an unspoken core of each of my orgs, which is just not encouraging players to rip each other off. They will each rely really heavily on the contract system to work, and teamwork is a given any time players form an org (since solo players don't really need orgs). None of the orgs I made are really ideological groups or built to be governmental orgs (hence why I refer to them as Profession orgs). However I have already joined some orgs that would qualify as govornmental: Cinderfall and Terran Union. I like the existence of these kinds of orgs, and I'll definitely be a part of them and encourage my org members to do the same. They would provide a great infrastructure in which my orgs could thrive by having a safe space to conduct business, and reliable trade and collaboration partners. Since I was able to create some small orgs, I wouldn't be looking for more small orgs to be a part of, however a large org will have a lot to offer me and my org members.

I could also imagine a sprawling Space Station style city with a Scaffolding style pattern of "hallways" that connect to large empty areas with core units that can be sold or rented out. It would have a modular repeatable design, but each component would be built by different players resulting in a sort-of spazzy borg-cube of different architecture styles, or a death star of shopping malls.

I'm thinking Cinderfall will be a very safe place to settle. Large cities who's mission is to create a relatively save area for beginners will be good places to start. The Terran Union would also be a good org for a passive playstyle, and big orgs in general will probably have the most capacity to protect players who don't want their stuff wrecked. On the flip side, we don't really know how this will end up playing out. We might just find that the big orgs and these peaceful cities are too tempting for pirate/anarchy orgs and trolls. It was this way in Rust, every time a "bucket town" would get built, inevitably the players who would rather see the world burn would throw it into chaos. Rust is built that way however, to be very easy for players to kill other players. I'm willing to bet that Dual Universe will have some pretty safe cities, since the game's motto is to rebuild civilization.

I'm guessing 600,015

I've got a thought for this, and I am pretty sure they mentioned it on a dev blog at one point with regards to Resurrection Nodes. -Resurrection Nodes have to re-charge before you can re-spawn there again, that respawn time depends on the quality of reactor/fuel tank attached to it and its construct. There is effectively a timer system for re-spawning. If your base's resurrection not is not fully charged when you die again, that is where it isn't fully clear. I remember there being potentially two ways this works out: your character loses some EXP when they re-spawn at a partially-charged Resurrection Node, and only when it is at a certain minimum charge amount. You re-spawn at the nearest fully charged Resurrection node if no partially charged nodes are charged enough (and this means the Arkship if you just have the one node placed). The wiki mentions charged Resurrection nodes, but not EXP loss, so I'm fairly certain the dev's haven't made a decision on this one yet. Here is my two cents. Excessive character deaths in a short time should lead to loss of EXP, and there should be ways to prevent it. A player should be able to "wait" to respawn to prevent loss of EXP, and this shouldn't kick in until after already Re-spawning at a node once in a play session. This prevents players from stashing some weapons somewhere, and without a ship, attacking players nonstop as just their character over and over again. How annoying would it be to have to stay logged on to prevent your new home from being grieved by a player who is fine with getting killed repeatedly until you log off? If the aggressor just equips a throw-away weapon and just enough ammo to be a nuisance, they won't drop anything of consequence, and if their Res node is well supplied with energy, they can simply zerg rush a station repeatedly until either its automated weapons run out of ammo, or until the actual players defending it have to go to bed. Some substantial penalty should exist to prevent this kind of play, and an EXP penalty for excessive deaths would be the way to go. Assuming there is a way for a player to avoid that penalty (for example, if an aggressor is in their base trying to spawn-kill them) by waiting for the penalty timer to wear off, or if the timer is related to the charge rate of the Res node, but still has a pretty decent minimum-time that gets longer with each death within a 24 hour period, that should be enough to make that kind of tactic impractical.

Plus for all we know, there could very well be a hidden element tied to skills. Different skill levels may have perks associated with them that either aren't clearly visible once you reach that level, or that don't manifest until several skills reach key levels. This could be especially true of expansion material.

I had played EVE on and off for a while, and I've gotta say it is a fun and very visually appealing game. The main reasons I'm not currently playing it are... 1: I've not a ton of time to play a new game for the next few weeks, prepping for major life events 2: I'm afraid it will consume my life 3: no one I know currently plays - MMO's don't hold my attention long unless I have friends there 4: not creatively stimulating until high levels of play My main social group tends to follow whatever games my Fiancee and I play, and my Fiancee doesn't play Eve for reasons #2 and #4. Dual Universe is a whole other beast however because it will be VERY creatively stimulating. The games that have the most staying power for me are either fun party games, "lose 48 hours" deep strategy games (talking about you Civ 4 and 5), or games in the sandbox genre. So DU is slated to have every feature I liked about Eve and Space Engineers without any of the features that make those games unattractive to me or hard to play. It won't be as punishing as a proper survival game with collision physics and horrendous bugs, it will be a more active play experience than Eve. The way I see this game is that it is attracting the attention of players who have played similar games for the same reasons I find it attractive, it borrows from games that we like, while tempting us with the opportunity to shape this into our idea of a perfect scifi game. I've seen a great deal of Space Engineers players, Minecraft Players, Starwars Players, Landmark refugees, and even some WOW players check it out.

I've added a pair of posts to the Alchemists community page explaining more or less the rules of the org and how it will work in practice. In summary, the main advantages of the Alchemists will be to be able to build in org-owned workshops, store constructs safely there, and use the org to form contracts with other orgs for constructs and tech. Alchemists can also use org-owned blueprints and resources in projects, however when a player uses org-owned materials and blueprints as primary components of their construct, the org should end up owning in the resulting blueprint and construct. Org owned blueprints and constructs can be sold to expand the resources that org members have access to. More or less an organized shared workspace.

A user or org that sets up a TU will be able to control building plivlages. I've got a guess on how "lot management" will work. We already know that Core Unit elements are what makes somehing a construct, and also restricts the size of that construct. I'm willing to bet the owner of a TU can effectively create lots by placing Core Units spaced out from each other (allowing room for roads) of various sizes. The owner of the TU can sell the Construct (consisting of just the Core Unit for the lot) along with the rights to modify that construct, without surrendering general build privlages within the TU. This would allow a player to purchase a lot within the territory that would restrict how large their structure can be. I could buy a lot and build a shop there, maybe even a parking garage if I had enough space. The same permissions that prevent a player from building in-between lots could also prevent players from building additional cores in their lot to increase its size (though a clever TU owner could build vertical lots that have multiple cores linked together hidden in a centeal column for a skyscraper lot). On the flip side, the owner of the TU might ALSO have blanked building rights for the city as a whole, and can modify the structures (despite being owned by other players) through the TU's permissions to connect roads and sidewalks to people's structures, and to endforce the rules of the city.

I really dig this suggestion, especially if these can be incrypted in some way where only players who have permission (or sufficient hacking skill) can access locked elements.

There are no plans to add NPC's really to the game apart from the initial trade bots that will circulate the first round of in-game currency. There will however be discoverable safe-zones on other planets, possibly from other ark ships. Not sure if we will find them empty, or if there were just no survivors, or if other safe zones are created by non-ark ship entities. In future expansions we might have some PVE content, possibly in the form of arkships with hostile AI's or robots, but we probably wont' see hostile NPC humans or anything of the sort, as the humans in the game are exclusively going to be other players.

I'll probably continue offering ships to KLANG in Space Engineers until alpha is out

I wouldn't mind some kind of temporary energy-hogging AFK shield for a structure to protect a construct. That way you can safely park a ship at your garage unless someone rolls up with enough firepower to destroy your base.

Looks like I'm back to Space Engineers then lol, for now atleast.