wizardoftrash

Thats a very Rust mentality, and this isn't Rust. Too soon to speculate though, only hopes

Hopefully there will be safe-ish ways to store constructs in a hex with a friendly TU. If the only way to protect a construct is to park it in a safe zone, then AFK raiding is going to be a rampant issue lol. Perhaps something a bit less robust than the Home Base system in Starmade (where up to one station owned by a faction is indestructible, and everything docked to that station is also indestructible), but even if it were equivalent I'd be cool with that.

So now that we know for sure that there won't be any Hello Kitty cosmetics, how about... GREETZ PUPPY?

something something HELLO KITTY COSMETICS something something FURRY CHARACTERS

Sand, all up in my junk – Part 2 “RONALD” The world started to come back into focus around Stier, but the infirmary’s Interface was blaring an unfamiliar name at him. “MCNALDO?” Then it clicked. As far as the Arkship was concerned, that was his name. Before the ships left earth, occupants had to sign themselves into the new database after security checks. The UMF’s official records were on a much older system so the administrators were not able to import it automatically. During the sign-in process, some of the colonists changed their name and Stier wanted to see how far he could push it so he entered a phony one as a joke. He wasn’t able to change it of course, so he was teased mercilessly during the simulations. The infirmary’s interface was designed to look a bit like a smiley face. There is so much voice communication from the AI that having a face to go with the voice was supposed to be comforting. Waking from cryosleep or in the resurrection node was a traumatic affair, but this grim mask of death of an interface made it all worse during the simulations. In the flesh it was much more pleasant now that its entire surface is plastered in Greetz Puppy stickers. EDIT: Sticker now in user signature as reference. *Greetz Puppy was a pop-culture brand originating from the late 21st century. The brand went mega-corp prior to the establishment of the Emporium. As the UMF encountered funding issues with the construction of the ARK Ships, Greetz Puppy was one of the mega-corps that provided the rest of the funds needed for launch. These stickers or “cosmetics” were provided to the colonists as part of a marketing campaign. “WELCOME BACK TO THE ARK SHIP, YOU DIED!” stated the collage of stickers. A brief look around revealed that most of the medical bay was peppered in the things. Death wasn't nearly as painful as he thought it would be, turned out it was a lot like going AFK. A quick check revealed that Stier… Ronald actually, still had his starting balance of U2’s and all of his DAC’s. As predicted thieves only managed to steal some sand, and some now very sandy protein matter. Ronald topped up his personal energy and protein stores and headed down to the landing site. Town wasn’t what he was hoping it would be by now. There were only a couple of polished-looking permanent structures and the earth was littered with pits and scattered shapes matter-formed out of dirt and stone. The MODs (Maturity Office Directors) have been quick to remove the obviously phallic shapes, but the more abstract ones loom around the landing site like a lower-school Stonehenge. The most active Alphas have either already left the safe-zone or are still AFK (away from konsciousness) from the Beta. Shortwave chat data is mostly omegas trying to figure out how to use their Nanoformer, or Betas trying to rob each other. Ronald had an idea that it would end up like this. Transitioning from the Alpha simulations to the Beta revealed a critical design flaw of the Nanoformer. The Nanoformer taps directly into the nervous system for its input, which allows the user to collect, deposit, and form matter with only a little practice. That asset is also its flaw, since much like many of the body’s organic systems, it behaves erratically when that neural connection is violently severed. When you die your bowels tend to… evacuate, and so does your Nanoformer. U2’s and DAC’s were never matter to begin with, and were tied to DNA to prevent violent theft from becoming a problem, but this flaw in the Nanoformer made it possible. Beta was a bloodbath compared to Alpha, and the real deal is turning out to be quite a bit like simulation. Welcome to the Wild West. Previous update here https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10052-sand-all-up-in-my-junk-part-1/#entry32895

Another thing to consider though is that they have a PR voice to protect and maintain. Saying "XYZ is not currently in our design plan" is often a polite way of saying it will never happen. As a content creator it is their goal not to create false hopes, but also not to alienate their player-base.

The unicorn helmates from the HALO series are an example of a serious design choice that had silly/meme consequences as an example. That sort of thing happens to anyone who takes healthy design risks, but I agree its likely to be a non-problem.

You can achieve that kind of gameplay mechanic without making it food or water, and I'd say that it would be more immersive to do so. How would eating a wheel of cheese make your Electronic Matter Displacer mine faster? Wouldn't it be more immersive to add an Overdrive Capaciter? If your space suit allows you to maneuver in higher, lower, or no gravity whatsoever, wouldn't an extended Power Pack for your suit allow you to run for longer? Your matter reformer on your wrist can build a house out of a rock in 5 minutes, why couldn't your suit generate sustenance for you without farming? and these very science-fiction elements could be manufactured at a terminal using minerals and ice that you've harvested. That is a more immersive science fiction experience than planting crops and eating bread in space.

No, I concluded that the devs would not intentionally design "silly" content of any kind. Something could be unintentionally silly, or become silly after its design. For example, if the players have access to a robust color selector for their space suits, there is the risk for sillyness to make it into the game that was not intended. The modelers might design a SWEET armor set, unaware that one of the color sliders mainly colors a chunk of armor in the groin area. Tada! now the player population can be walking phallic humor. A specific helmate in the right color scheme might look like a meme character, or could even become a meme after the fact making it silly. I chose my words with precision.

You sir sound like a sore loser here lol. From NQ regarding a similar discussion... "Hi everyone, There is currently no plan of creating cosmetics related to Hello Kitty, My Little Pony on any related furry stuff. Two reasons for that: - We have so many things to make having a higher priority before that. It couldn't be a priority for years, even after official release. - While we don't plan to restrict the creativity freedom of the players on this topic, we have currently no plan of creating such cosmetics because it simply doesn't fit with Novaquark's vision of the game. We understand that some of you might be disappointed by this news, but as we never promised anything about this in the past and as we don't think this kind of cosmetics is compatible with the immersion we are aiming for (but not enforcing), there's very little chance this decision will be reversed. Regarding symbols like the Swastika: Although origins of this symbol can be found in Hinduism and Buddhism with no evil meaning, as it has been promoted by the Nazis in Europe and used as their emblem, this has been a symbol a lot of people don't want to see anymore in Europe because as it has been now tied to the concept of real life genocid. Letting such kind of symbols propagating in the game would be interpreted as promotion of the Nazism or to the very least a certain complicity with it. That's why we won't create cosmetics for such symbol, and we will take action if a player spots such thing in-game and report it. Best Regards, Nyzaltar."

This all boils down to Game Design as an art, and not just as an economic product. As an art form, it is largely up to the intent of the artist as to what they want their art to look like (in most mediums). The fact that the dev's don't want to intentionally design "silly" content is entirely legitimate. They sold us on a game with a fairly serious aesthetic, it isn't as if they had pepe space suits in any of the trailers, so this kind of decision shouldn't come to us as a surprise. Nothing stops a player from using the voxel tool and brightly colored alloys to create a hello kitty ship, or murals and whatnot. The devs just don't want to burn their own time and resources creating something that they don't like/want (and we can't blame them).

Food/Water need is a genre break and won't be a part of the game. I get why there is still confusion here though. DU is a sandbox game, and MOST sandbox games are also survival games. Survival games require food/water, track stamina, often track heat/cold or radiation. But DU is NOT a survival game, it is an MMO. It is common for some MMO's to have food/drink as a buff of some kind. The Devs have entertained something along those lines as a possible future update, but made it pretty clear that it might not be farm-able or food in the way we are familiar with it. Something we know for sure is that the Devs will not be implementing a food/water requirement system. Its not something the community can ask for and get, its not part of the MMO genre, and not something they want in their game. The goal is for the primary threat to be other players, not the environment. On the flip-side, the Devs did mention that they wanted to make supplies an important part of longer trips, and that players would have to prepare in advance if they wanted to travel greater distances. By supplies they weren't talking about food/water, they were talking about fuel for ships/constructs, and raw materials to use for repairs. Running out of fuel during a flight, or having to abandon your hovercraft during a scouting mission on a planet represents a substantial risk and might scratch that survival itch that people keep alluding to. Power management likely won't be a matter of life or death on its own, but becoming stranded and having to wait for a solar battery to recharge or to need to scan for uranium will leave you vulnerable to attack from other players.

I would say that Empyrion is not the best available approximation for what DU will be like, since it has so many straight-up survival mechanics (food, water, farming). I've been scratching that itch lately with Starmade since the multiplayer experience can be quite stable, and the gameplay is more building/development oriented (where I'll ideally spend most of my time in DU).

The Devs however have unilaterally decided that aliens/furries are not acceptable, because it does not fit their vision for the game. Game Design is as much an art (arguably more so) than it is a commercial product, the intent of the artist can matter more than audience demand here. I believe that we can make some assumptions about what the Devs will find doesn't fit their artistic vision. A player stating that Wizard Robes or Dark-Age Platemail won't make it into the game isn't just a matter of opinion, it is a fair assumption that the devs wouldn't want to include something like that. The pole itself is pretty flawed here though, since there will likely be a key distinction between Craftable Armor (functional) and Cosmetic Skins (nonfunctional) in the game. Polling vaguely about two different game elements as if they are one, and then asking players to choose if they should behave one way or the other way will create confusion, not useful data.

I'm of the standpoint that there ought to be two kinds of armor. -Purely cosmetic, paid for by DAC/Money (but can be sold on the marketplace, or can be bought with DAC's to allow non DAC players access in theory). -Caftable, provides stat buffs/features. And the two should be able to stack, meaning if I've crafted a suit with more advanced armor plating, I should also be able to wear my swanky DAC armor "over" it. Best case scenario would be being able to see a mix of both the functional and cosmetic armor, by having the functional armor cover your whole character and having cosmetic pieces that are more accessories than a full skin. This being an MMO though, there is a good chance there will be armor equip slots and different tiers, all craft-able in-game. Could be wrong there!

Actually I'd say position is the more important than the raw resources offered in an area. Time spent playing the game is a key resource in games like DU. The locations where players have spent the most productive time will end up being the most valuable. By productive time, I mean building shops and infrastructure, mining and refining resources, etc. The only productive time in a region that doesn't improve its value is exporting finished or raw goods in a trade that doesn't return goods. If there is a large concentration of shops in a given territory, it no longer matters if that territory still has any ore. A territory that has already been partially mined is often MORE valuable than one that hasn't (since the ore deposits and dig sites are visible, the time scanning and prospecting has already been spent). And this is indeed first and foremost a multiplayer experience, regions that get more player traffic will be more sought after.

errm well this is not quite the case, because we don't know how much variation there will be in weapon quality. One player in a very advanced/expensive fighter should be able to take on 2,3, even 4 or 5 people in a basic or poorly built frigate. Individual character skill (not just player skill) may also be a key factor here. It might be that a solo player who has nearly maxed out all of their skills relevant to piloting a fighter, while flying an advanced fighter, will be a good match for a crew of 5 newbies. It might also be that the advanced weapons, armor, and thrusters on the fighter would be enough to close that gap. We simply don't know how much of an impact raw metrics will have in these encounters. However if you take a crew of even 3 players, and each is spending time on their own specialization (one on engineering/refining, one on piloting/scanning, one on gunnary) and each player is contributing play time to construct a solid ship, said team should have a colossal advantage over even a theoretically maxed out solo player.

I believe that the balance NQ will try to strike here is the balance between resources/time spent and manpower. We have no metrics to work with yet, so we don't really have any idea as to what the effectiveness "limit" is for a solo player ship, or what the baseline looks like for a mulit-crew ship. An advanced fighter might be able to destroy a less-advanced 2-crew combat ship in a fair fight, but with what NQ has shared so far regarding their intent, solo ships will be severely limited in what they can accomplish at their most advanced level. This is not going to be a re-hash of how Space Engineers works (where you can STACK a huge ship with heavy armor and AI turrets, piloted by a solo player just fine), nor will this be anything like starmade (same deal, except you can add an AI fleet to fly with you). We are likely to see limitations in how much forward-mounted weaponry can be on a ship, and we are likely to find that ONLY forward-mounted weapons can be used by the pilot. NQ has mentioned 1 crew per weapon system on a ship at some point, meaning a 2-crew ship will have potentially twice the firepower of a solo fighter (or more if swivel-mounted turrets are more effective/less limited than forward mounted) and it goes up from there. This means that the ONLY advantage that a solo player can have against multi-crew ships in terms of ship combat is maneuverability (less weapons means less components, and less mass. less mass means more thrust). This is intended to be a cooperative game, a solo player should not be able to operate a titan-class warship.

and I'm hoping not losing money on death will stick, because there is already enough risk in those types of transactions. Luring players to unsafe space for financial transactions will already get enough player energy and attention if the cargo itself is lootable, without currency dropping lol.

Of course money will have an impact on the game with DAC's, however it is hard to compare DU to other games that have P2W mechanics. But the only thing a DAC can really do in this game is save you time. You can't acquire anything with a DAC that you wouldn't be able to get through normal collection and construction. For players who have a steady job but not much free time to grind, mechanics like DAC's are a saving grace. As a professional I consider this a huge plus, since I can't burn a summer vacation harvesting materials for the galactic war. -For one, whatever you spend your DAC spacebucks on, will be expendable. At a minimum you risk losing whatever you spent all that in-game currency on especially if you are dumping it into a ship meant for combat. Those dollars might not really get you all that far. You might also risk losing the in-game currency itself on death if you don't spend it right away (that hasn't been set in stone yet). If you need to travel to make any of these transactions, or if you need to transport the raw goods needed to build the ship that you want, you expose yourself to even more risk. -For two, the devs already discussed in part the theory behind Construct vs Construct combat and how turrets will work. They described that a player will only be able to operate one weapon at a time, meaning a gunship with several armaments will either need to be scripted (and they also stated that automated weapons will be nerfed compared to manually controlled), or you will need pilots to help you out. That means buying a shooty ship-of-doom with DAC's will only really be effective if you already have a crew. -For three, all of the game mechanics described so far rely heavily on manpower. Mining, refining, building, combat, each of these functions will be either impossible to automate for AFK use (Because scripts will be stored and run locally for now), or very ineffective when automated. If I spent DAC on in-game stuff, it doesn't change that I'm still only one player. A more expensive ship will still likely lose to two ships. A territory unit well-defended by one wealthy player will still lose to a raiding party. This means a solo mcmoneybags will be out-classed by players who have time to burn and who are willing to cooperate. The best choice with DAC's is to buy them to give to a friend who wouldn't play (or afford to play) otherwise since crews of players will basically always crush a solo ~this is the idea behind my Squire org. You will see DAC's used most effectively by existing orgs as a liquid currency when the exchange rate is high, or as a recruitment tool for players who cannot afford the monthly subscription. Worst case scenario you have an org maintaining a dominant position by using indentured servant players (who can only play with the DAC's provided by the org), and best case scenario Org players with less time use DAC's to fund big projects, and it encourages mining/refining/construction specialist players by making their services very lucrative and sought after.

There are a few ways you can go about this. For ship docking for example, you could have a priority system that automatically shuts down flight controls for every connected ship or fragment that isn't the mothership of the fleet (for a larger ship and smaller docked ships). In Starmade that is by default how docking works, and in Space Engineers a docked ship can use thrusters to violently un-dock (does not recommend). In the case OP is describing here, the detachable components don't actually appear to be fully functional ships. OP is talking about un-powered connected containers that can be disconnected to reduce the ship's mass (to improve thrust). As long as the containers don't have thrust or any component system, there is no battle for control: only the ship has any claim to control there, so there should be no conflict between the docked parts and the main ship. It'll all come down to a few mechanics as to whether or not it'll be possible. Depending on how they set up landing a ship onto another ship, you might be able to create container "ships" that land onto your barge (if landing gears are magnetic and can lock). The troulbe is without any controls on the container "ships", you can't actually tell them to un-dock from the barge. On the flip side if you can use landing gears on the barge to connect to a container ship or ships, you might be able to tow them. This could be a problem too, as ships that have landed might lose their flight functions, so "landing" onto a cargo unit to tow it might shut down the barge and prevent takeoff. Best case scenario would be the ability to destroy/delete/disconnect ship components mid-flight, even if the only way to restore the disconnected parts would be to "repair/restore" the ship (basically to replace the detached components). A break-away block (like the rotors and connectors in Space Engineers, or docking components in Starmade) that you can control from the barge that would allow you to purge everything connected to it would be the way to go. You could even probably set up a script to automatically disconnect the cargo bay if your shields drop for example. If there is no such block at launch, a clunky but possible solution would be to set up an explosive charge in-between the cargo unit and the barge that would destroy the hull connecting the two, but not damage key systems, thus relieving you of all of the mass of the cargo when detonated. We don't know yet if damaged hull actually disappears, nor do we know if you can "cut" portions of a ship off as a result of damage. The devs mentioned damage to constructs warping/damaging voxels, however we don't know if that can actually cause systems to break off of a ship (of if the whole ship would "explode" before that type of damage would occur). So that might not be possible at all. We can expect AT SOME POINT in the future for there to be some kind of connector block that would make this possible, but if the above two solutions aren't present at launch, you might just have to go down with your ship.

Nope! I've already pledged, and we already have plans for our return, mainly we are getting ready to buy our first house *_*

This should be a non-issue as there will be no other points of reference within the game itself. I don't think we will have a clear idea of what yards or miles really look like and feel like in a video game, so using the metric system shouldn't be a problem.

This is correct. The master blueprint has limitless uses, and by default is not a physical object (can't be dropped, destroyed, or stolen). However the object you are thinking of there is a blueprint Copy. Copies will be physical objects that can be sold and by default will have a limited number of uses. No concrete info yet if they can be dropped, destroyed, or stolen yet.