Ben Fargo

I did not vote, because I am not sure whether my response would be considered a yes or a no.
 
This idea is based on my understanding of why cores exist, so it may not be valid if I am wrong about that.  As I understand it, a core creates a grid in which voxels are placed.  Dynamic constructs obviously need their own grid, so they can move, but why do we have static cores?  The planets are also made of voxels, so it seems we should be able to build there without a core, but I believe they use a grid that is spaced much more widely than the one for constructs.  A denser grid allows constructs to be more detailed, but means the voxel data will require more space, since it must allow larger numbers.  Making the grid extend farther also requires larger numbers.  To build outside the current limits of cores, the grid would need to be extended, so technically it would have the same effect as using a larger core.
 
My suggestion would be to continue to limit construct by core size, but provide better tools for manipulating the planet voxels.  With the right tools, I believe adequate for most of these really large projects.  As an example, for roads there could be a paving tool.  With this tool, we could select two points on the ground and they would be connected with a surface that was relatively smooth but still generally followed the contours of the land.  There could be options to control how closely if followed the contours and how wide the surface was.  It could also replace the surface with a different material.  A tool like this would make it easier to build roads, but the result would still use the current data structures.
 
While the paving tool would be suited specifically for roads, there could also be general purpose tools.  These could be like the ones we use for building constructs, but outside cores they would only manipulate planet voxels with their current resolution.
 
 

@Rom35700
 
1) I have 16G, so I can not say how it runs on anything less.
2) The language is Lua.  You do not need to code to play.  It is an option that makes more things possible, but not essential.
3) There is an NDA.  Players can not post videos or screenshots anywhere.  We can not discuss our experiences during the test sessions outside of private forums for those who have access.
4) The basic pack does not give you immediate access.  Only the patron pack gives access now.  The contributor and sponsor packs give access to later stages of testing.  We do not yet know when those stages will start.
5) Because of the NDA, I can not describe what the sessions are like now.  The purpose of the current sessions is testing the game, not providing a fun experience.  That does not mean they are not enjoyable, but the game still is in an early stage of development.  Anyone who expected a complete game they could start playing right now would be disappointed.
6) The time needed will depend on what you want to accomplish.  It is still too early to know how time will be needed for what a typical player wants to do.

Dear community,
 
We’re expanding! Novaquark opens a new studio in Montreal to accelerate the development of Dual Universe!
With the hiring of Stéphane D’Astous as General Manager and 50 positions open, if you think you have the skills required (and/or know people who have them), don't hesitate to apply to join the first true Metaverse!
 

 
You can find the complete news here.
You can find the job opportunities on this page of the official website.
 
Best Regards,
The Novaquark Team.
 

If you rob another player, you are a pirate.  There is nothing wrong with that playstyle, but do not claim to be something you are not.  A trading organization earns it money by trading, not stealing.

Since the beginning of the year, we have witnessed unhealthy behavior from several members in the Community.
As many are relatively new and some older members seem to lose focus of Novaquark's vision for Dual Universe, here is a strong reminder.
 
Dual Universe is a game where there will be wars, power struggles, conflicts, plots, spying, information warfare and betrayals. It's all fine... as long as it stays within the framework of the game.
 
We are aware that a fair amount of people have a hard time to differentiate in-game behavior and real life behavior. While someone can be infamous, merciless and twisted in-game, that doesn't give him/her the right to forget elementary good manners outside of the game. Following the concept "the end justifies the means" will never be a valid reason here.
 
Novaquark expects from each community member to:
1) respect the EULA and forum/Official Discord code of conduct
2) be respectful toward any other member or at least neutral toward the members you don't like outside of the game, whether they are newcomers or veterans.
(neutral means: no free provocation, no real life insults or real life threats, as already mentioned in forum and Discord chart)
3) avoid using any real-life conflict, unhealthy real-life behavior or drama (made on purpose or not) as part of the game (because it's not) as this can escalate in very toxic and unnecessary situations.
4) avoid using any underhanded real life "tricks" to gain an advantage in-game. This includes:
- real life threats or real life harassment with anonymous accounts outside of the game (on Discord or any other online means).
- doxxing, doxxing attempts, or any behavior like gathering real-life information that could lead to doxxing.
- leaking publicly private discussions about real-life topics (especially when showing only carefully selected pieces with the deliberate intention of biasing the facts) without the agreement of all people involved. This also includes Novaquark’s investigations that haven’t been publicly announced and about which you may have been informed through a private channel/room or a private discussion.
- making false accusations, creating NDA leaks or false NDA leaks to accuse someone else with the goal of making them punished or banned from the game.
 
As a company, we want to provide a fun and welcoming experience to our fans and can’t tolerate inappropriate real life behaviors that potentially ruin the gaming experience or worse, lead to real life consequences.
 
If the Novaquark staff gets enough evidence on any of those behaviors, the team may give any sanctions deemed appropriate without further notice.
If you see some community members having inappropriate behavior, please point them toward this forum thread.

Best Regards,
The Novaquark Team.

Dear DUdes and DUdettes,
 
Today, we have an announcement that should make our Alpha testers happy! Due to our internal development process and by popular demand, we decided to bring some modifications to our Alpha test schedule.
 
So, from now on, next Alpha tests will happen as follows: three times a month, a 96 hours test session will occur, spanning from Thursday, 14h00 UTC to Monday, 14h00 UTC.
 
That means there won't be any test session once a month. This way, it will be easier for us to better plan production. We'll continue to analyze your feedback and the data produced by your crazy adorable in-game behavior It will allow us to better refine things along the way on our road to Alpha 2.
 
Overall, we think it's an improvement: longer test sessions covering weekends every time. This should be more comfortable for many of you!
 
Our Server status page remains the best way to get informed on when tests happen. It's up to date for next month and still here for you to visit (if it's not a bookmark in your web browser already): https://www.dualthegame.com/en/server-status/
 
Cheers, 
The Novaquark Team

I think you make a lot of interesting points above. But with respect to so-called "pve and pvp", remember a couple of things:-
 
1. DU Single Shard is F king E normous. There's MORE than enough space for both Safe Zones (what I'd prefer to refer to as Dense Civilization Hot Spots), namely: Highly developed and time-invested and then creating content for players to interact with as end-users eg even ambience of a sci-fi cityscape (blade runner with neon Kanji, Kana, Hiragana, Katakana etc) or some sort of Egyptian Star Gate-like theme or whatever. Amenities might be various screens and markets, faux retail stores, parks and urban planning, racing courses, you could even have an army village training compound for ad hoc avatar shooting battles and so on... each world is enormous. People might well enjoy cruising around.
2. The so-called PvE is not Mob AI Combat, but Voxel Editing. In turn the materials needed for this need to be supplied. Thus you have a big link to the types of players who enjoy domination, logistics, economics and the like fuelling and feeding each other. Eg even "safe passage ferrying avatars" between safe zones while the player is off-line and can log back in in 8hrs or something in a new place if they book passage etc... As to PvP it seems to me that structures will merely be functional: Why create a city that is destroyed easily? It's a waste of materials and time. An underground Dr. No complex is more defensible or a large fleet and some space stations creating a network of control across space and deployment to control material supplies.
 
With respect to hex claims, it seems that the option for settlers/wildcats/rimworld types can have that middle option - just striking out taking their chances too.

Yes, but there's all the difference in the world between "should" and "could".
 
That's how it should be. But when players are hearing about DU, in MMO sites, there's a huge amount of negative attraction aka repulsion word of mouth from PvP especially if you make something that takes "hours" and players can destroy it too easily, like a Tsunami rolling into town.
 
Not only the "reports" of what is DU? That the journalists invariably write; laced with hype-excitement-disappointment 'spice mix' to gee readers up into giddy heights of reaction, but also there will be players who end up playing and wanting to do "landmark" things only and invite RP'ers and other such "sharing & caring" types to the party so they can frolick to their heart's content without fear of being bullied by hyper-aggressive types. These people want the sandbox, the pure creation in a world with a community of ready-made amenities to soak-up. Take photos and the like.
 
And I suspect the voxel gameplay is very very interactive and engaging and rewarding all by itself. It is possible that this plus mmo persistence and multiplayer is possibly very fun and popular within the above conditions.
 
NQ have talked about finding "tokens" in the past, and creating more new safe zones. It suggests to me that if there's  a large number of players who want this then this could happen.
 
Outside of safe zones as you say but more and bigger safe zones seem likely if numbers are positive.
 
It's a bit like with how some MMOs come out with Sub and say no Pw2. Then they introduce a cash shop. Just cosmetics. Then they add time exclusives or time buffs then full on p2W, just buy this stupid space whale for 12,000$.
 
In the end, I don't see the safe zones as a problem if they attract a lot more players willing to pay an honest sub and avoid the bs above with respect to salami-slicing the game into monetary units or bits of bytes or seconds or virtual object price tag sales-room/hotline. Ugh. I would like the game world to be player behaviour not another commercial commodity speculation and pricing retail virtual wallmart.
 
Most of the gigantic space in DU will be outside these zones still, even if there's more or larger of them.
 
The other angle here is of course that DU is impressive with respect to such a huge game that potentially DOES SUCCEED at offering gameplay to some very very different types of people or types of game that incompatible people usually seek in different games as opposed to one shared game (the single shard). That's one thing that is not incompatible with a lot of what is said by EVE players here. They co-exist. I know there's a always a desire to see one's preferred vision of the game and a political fight ensues to support that cause. But the bigger the population to feed with supply the more ferocious the EVE-like gameplay will end up being I would guess?

Flipmaze
 
A Flipmaze playfield is a surface divided into eighty one squares, arranged in nine rows and nine columns.  On the ground between each square is a force field emitter, which can be activated to prevent movement between two adjacent squares.  This means each square (except those on the outer edge) is surrounded by four emitters.  The squares in the corners have two emitters and are open on the other two sides.  These serve as the entrances to the playfield.  The other squares on the outside have three emitters and a wall on the fourth side.
 
Each square is in either an open or a closed state.  If an emitter is between two closed squares or between one open and one closed square, it is activated.  If both squares are open, the emitter goes off and players can move between the squares.  Changing a square from either open to closed or from closed to open is called flipping it.
 
There are two teams of three players.  Two of the players on each team are mazerunners.  The mazerunners start at the corners and try to reach the square in the middle.  The third player is the flipper.  The flippers operate a control panel overlooking the playfield.  They push buttons to flip squares, to let their mazerunners reach the middle and to block the mazerunners on the other team.
 
The control panel has eighteen switches, one for each row and one for each column.  When the flipper hits a switch, it flips all of the squares in the corresponding row or column.  Note that it is the squares that flip, not the emitters.  If an emitter is between an open and a closed square and both flip, the emitter will remain activated.
 
The game starts with all of the squares closed.  As the flippers hit the switches, some of the squares will flip.  The mazerunners move through open squares, trying to reach the center square.  The center square contains a button.  The first team to push this button wins the game.
 
A nine by nine playfield seems like a good size, big enough to be interesting but not overwhelming.  However, when the game is actually played, we may find a different size is better.

stripping players does not make you neutral it makes you a pirate or a thief and on my radar a target. And with the CATS and InA systems inplace you will be a target to all. You simple keep your hands off off peoples properties if you say your a nice and neutral business. Else your a thief, pirate, privateer, goverment official tax collector

If you rob another player, you are a pirate.  There is nothing wrong with that playstyle, but do not claim to be something you are not.  A trading organization earns it money by trading, not stealing.

If you rob another player, you are a pirate.  There is nothing wrong with that playstyle, but do not claim to be something you are not.  A trading organization earns it money by trading, not stealing.

If you rob another player, you are a pirate.  There is nothing wrong with that playstyle, but do not claim to be something you are not.  A trading organization earns it money by trading, not stealing.

Maybe animals, maybe space beasts or big mythical worldly beasts. But AI as humans, or as ships or alien ships would really detract from the fact it's a single shard mmo that is ran by the players. I don't want to be running around seeing ships and people and being like "is that a person or an AI?" I always want to be like, oh... enemy ship approaching it's definitely a real person. Oh there's a guy walking alone in the desert, it's a real person! Not some random side quest npc or something dumb.

Sorry to anyone who likes the idea of NPC's but they could only detract from this games ideas of single shard mmo.

The problem with your recommendations is that you are comparing DU to a typical MMO.
 
NQ has created a brand new, unique, technology that nobody else has. This fact alone means that whatever is needed to run it, is needed to run it.
 
If we are lucky that may mean that DU might be able to run on low level hardware, however, I wouldn't bet money on that.
 
Cheers
 
CoreVamore
 
 
 
 
 
 

Hi everyone,
 
As an exceptional case, we are replying this topic, even if it’s closed, to avoid any misunderstanding. As an exceptional case, as the involved user has explicitly asked for public explanation and the customer support agrees with it, we are in a situation where both parties agree to make it public, so it doesn't break the confidentiality policy. We also want to share this as an example that things don't happen for no reason (and in the case of an error, we are ready to fix it).
 
Just to put things in perspective:
- Emtec3PL account wasn't suspended regarding the game (the account has never lost his rights to play the game when the time will come).
- Emtec3PL account wasn't suspended on the forum and was still able to contact Community Managers in private.
- Emtec3PL account was suspended on Customer Support side.
 
The situation:
- Emtec3PL pledged 1 euro as a symbolic donation during Kickstarter campaign (in which case it was clear it was a donation, with no rewards attached to it).
- Emtec3PL pledged then an Iron Founder Pack after the Kickstarter campaign, which has been upgraded as a Silver Pack shortly after.
- As explained in the news on our website here the access time, depending on the founder level, was pretty clear and self explanatory: 
All Kickstarter Founder Backers get access at Alpha 1.  Post-Kickstarter Founder Backers get access at the earliest at Alpha 2. Emtec3PL becomes a Founder Backer after the Kickstarter campaign, first as an Iron Founder, than as a Silver Founder, so he's rightfully considered as a Post-Kickstarter Backer and will get access Alpha 2. Emtec3PL contested that fact and asked repeatedly to Customer Support for an access to Alpha 1. Novaquark Customer Support denied the request and explained why. The last answer from Emtec3PL to the Customer Support was the following:
 
Emtec3PL sent this reply because he will have access to Alpha 2 (as planned), and not immediately (as he wanted). Obviously there was no possible discussion anymore, and as part of the process for harassment prevention, the account has been suspended on the customer support side. If Emtec3PL is willing to come back to a more constructive discussion, the account can be unsuspended.
 
This example might be useful to put in light how we manage customer service here at Novaquark. Globally there are two schools of customer service:
 
The old school: "Customer is king."
This vision implies that no matter how the customer behaves, the customer service agent needs to endure and gives satisfaction to the customer. In our eyes, this way of doing things is relevant as long as customers and customer service agents behave with mutual respect.
 
However, with internet promoting anonymity and online interaction, a growing number of customers started to consider mutual respect as being optional and/or lost focus that the customer service agent at the other end of the line is a human being, not a machine, and he/she is there to help, not to endure someone else's anger or frustration. Having daily customers being rude or threatening can damage a team morale, especially when rudeness or threat is undeserved. 
 
Customer Support is not an outlet for customers to let their frustration run wild.
It's a place to answer customer questions and help them when they have a technical issue.
Some people would easily throw there: "Hey it's part of the job. If they can't handle it, they can find another job" or the famous “HTFU” (which is perfectly fine in a game where a part of the fun is to compete to see who is the toughest guy. It’s less fine when it applies to your real life where you can’t log out) Our answer to this is "No, it's not part of the job, unless it has been decided that way by the company. It's not up to the customer to decide this part." 
 
At Novaquark we value Customer satisfaction as much as Employee well-being. 
The reasons? We don't want the job of anyone becoming a chore because we aren’t interested in burnouts and high turnovers, and also because we are convinced that, having people less stressed and less harassed than the average in the industry will benefit indirectly to the Customers themselves. So we won't encourage negative behavior from some customers, quite the contrary, by applying consequences to this kind of behavior.
 
To put it simply, we are following the other school: 
"Customer is king... but even a king has its limits."
We will always do our best to satisfy a customer as long as:
- the request/demand is reasonable and motivated by common sense.
- the request/demand is made in a respectful manner.
 
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

Bringing it back a notch
 
Everyone has a right to desire a type of game play. That said it’s exceedingly difficult to create a game that appeals to everyone. This game is not ment to be 100% pvp nor is it 100% creative mode. It’ll be a bit of both and if you choose to partake you’ll have to adjust. Dual Universe is doing it right.
 
There will be safe zones where the creative folk will hang out. Creativity in a worry free area is beneficial in that it’ll drive individual styles and help build a diverse civilization.
 
There will be VAST areas in between these safe areas that you can pvp your evil little hearts out. The space we have to work with is ridiculously big. Like DUMB big. In perspective don’t be upset that you can’t PvP over all of the entire lower 48 US states because New Hampsire is a safe area.
 
This is a civilization building game. There will be big orgs, there will be wee little orgs and there will be people trying to go it alone. As a builder I do not expect that I have a right to venture into contested space and not have to deal with pirates or greifers. That being said the fore mentioned pirates and griefers should not expect to be able to attack anyone at anytime at any location.
 
I want this in a bad way to be a huge game where everyone can do what they want. Believe that there’s room for all. I really mean that. There is really room for all. 
 
If people cant build pretty things then this verse will all look like cookie cutter rushed constructs. If we don’t have PvP then the constructs will not be practical and would end up over extravagant.
 
DU not try to make this your game. Think about how to make it everyone’s game.
 
That’s my few quanta.. 
 
ps. @Geo sucks 

Yes, that is how this works and guess what..
 
You decide to build a nice little shed off of the highway for easy access to work without buying a deed to the land and without permission from local authorities, then someone comes along who wants to build a mall there.. Guess what happens..
 
I really do not understand how someone can think what you describe is strange, unwanted or anything but how mechanics work.

I would never consider claiming land which was not claimed before grieving.  If some builds on a territory that has not been claimed, they should accept the risk of losing their constructs.  If someone is prudent, they would only build either on land they already own or where they have permission to build from the owner.  Letting players effectively claim land by building on it would defeat the purpose of the territory units.

So according to the views I am reading here. The general consensus is, if person A. finds a lovely place to build a home or a rare mineral location and decides to build a large, expensive, and none movable construct there, before having the funds to purchase a TU. Then person B. who already owns a TU, can decide to claim the land from person A. because person B. will own all rights to build or evict whomever is within their claimed territory. Leaving person A. with a construct they can no longer build and possibly now with a giant energy shield around their construct.  This would be considered "fair" game and intended game mechanics from what I am reading.

Players should know the risks of building in unsecure areas.
 
I doubt placing a TU would change anything about the permissions on existing constructs, perhaps just prevent digging and the placement of new constructs. So they could disassemble and move out of there at least. The person claiming the territory should be responsible for removing other players by force also, not just by claiming the territory. And they should also be at risk of the player just destroying their territory unit.
 
The only other issue I see in that situation:
- Person claiming the territory finds the entrances to existing underground base and closes them off. Perhaps weapons could damage terrain enough to make a tunnel out, but should probably be much slower than normal digging tool.

Yes that's fair game. It's a gamble really imho. Risk it, or go safe and build a TCU first. With 50k+ tiles on a planet it's really unlikely though

I consider placing a territory unit the equivalent of registering a deed in real life, so knowing which tiles are owned should be public knowledge that anyone can just  by see by looking at the map.  I do know know about the rest of the world, but in Wisconsin, the government has an online map where someone can click on any parcel of land and see who owns it.   It would be unrealistic if the DU map did not show which territories were owned.
 
Having the territory marked on the map will make hiding ineffective, but I think discouraging that will benefit the game.   I would prefer to have most structures out where everyone can see them, not buried underground.  If territory units are expensive, that will encourage players to join together to buy one, which is also good.

Why do people call this behaviour griefing when it's not?
 
If you choose to build on a territory and not claim it that is your choice for starters. If another player/org chooses to then claim that territory it could potentially be griefing if they would choose to do so purely harass you as a player which obviously could be a reason but only one of many reasons to claim the territory. I'm really puzzled why I keep seeing these posts on people basically trying to ignore and/or vilifying basic game mechanics in favour of them not having to take any chances/run any risk while grossly overthinking the possible negative effects to them in the process.
 
DU as a game will be all about cause and effect; you build without claiming territory and you take the chance of someone else claiming and thus hindering your progress or you claim territory which could potentially open you up to attack when someone else wants the same territory. There is no such thing as free in DU, everything will have consequence and honestly, if that is something you are not willing to accept then this game may not be for you.