Thokan

Automated defenses on STATIC CONSTRUCTS are already planned. Those will be weaker than a Player controlled turret for obvious reasons but it's possible
 
 

There is already an solution (confirmed by NQ) for "how to get someone to mann the guns of your cargo ship without forcing them to sit for hour doing nothing when not needed".  It's called multiple characters per account. You simply leave your friends mining with their mining characters, while their fighting chars sleep on the ship while you pilot. When someone attacks, they simply switch chars and start manning the guns.
No AI needed.
 
That being said, IMO it should be possible to manually give commands to more than one gun per person. The game has planned only lock&fire combat mechanics, thus sitting at your single AA gun and from time to time selecting single opponent seems nothing like interesting combat. It's like being commander with only one subordinate (AI gunner) with only one possible order to give (fire at him). Being able to control multiple guns at least let you choose which one to use, which one shoots where, how to distribute power between modules, even driving your ship at the same time, ect.
Only limit should be players ability to manage all of this, and engineering skill to make it easier.

That's a very promising system. 
 
I should clarify that I didn't mean for my comments to say that it's unfair veterans have an advantage over newbies. I meant that DU could eventually become so daunting that newbies feel very little hope, which I've seen in well-established MMO's. But the system you described there seems to help alleviate that possible issue.
 
I feel that I've also very poorly explained my intention of this post. I threw out an idea, a faulty one, that doesn't discourage newbies from playing when they're constantly getting pummelled. With Kenshi, you welcome the pummelling, the humiliating defeats and the enslaving because it improves your characters stats in the long run. That was the principle, to benefit from defeat. To welcome it. Other than the benefit being learning from mistakes.
 
Realistically, there probably isn't a mechanic that improves your stats the harder you're defeated without being exploited. MMO's just have to rely on there being a wide variety of things to do to cater for as many people as possible and the community to encourage new players to continue playing when things are bleak. As well as the current system whereby there are many different ways to fight and assist in a combat situation.

I think, naturally, it would be a world of hurt and grief to allow people to buy and sell ownership of organizations.

Viewing distance, then. Wouldn't really see the point of any such mechanic otherwise.

If you can just change one small detail of a bought ship/blueprint and resell it as your own: bad gameplay
If you have to manually reverse engineer the whole thing by breaking it down piece by piece, decode lua scripts and figure out the exact working of that ship/blueprint: good gameplay

Tldr
 
1. Jamming ist used in eve. Heavily. And it's a good mechanic there.  But electric warfare ia just a force multiplier. We used it because we were small and to be able to take on bigger orgs. But bigger orgs (Like the ones in the great wars) don't need those multipliers that much - they can just bring more guns
2. No automated Mining. Everything's done by players
3. Markets need to be fed. If you sell on that planet then someone has to get those resources off that planet. And market shenanigans are Normal - Crash the market, buy everything from each resource, do whatever. It's free market PvP
4. Comms like Teamspeak work extremely well for >300 ppl in a fleetbattle (that's why there's something Like Channel commander and stuff Like that). I myself managed 250ppl on a regular basis including scouts, healers, baits, 4 different attack groups (capitals and heavy),.... Works fine

of course viewing distance because if an unidentified ship enters your org. territory you kind of have to know why and what they are doing there
and if it was anywhere that would be a global chat and a global chat is already on the rejected list on the trello

Open combat was always going to be a thing, and what you think is a main pillar for the game has no standing.
 
"Safe Zones will protect you, and avoid Dual Universe to become a free for all PvP game. However, PvP will be possible when you step out of the Safe Zone. Players will be able to fight each other, balancing their equipment and energy between shield and armor, with dedicated weapon type with different types of damage. We will provide a “lock & fire” mechanism to combat, to facilitate very large battles that are made possible in-game by our Continuous Single-Shard Cluster. Players can further specialize into certain weapons through skills and improve their combat prowess with better equipment."
 
Combat had as much screen time in the original campaign as any other "main pillar" of the game.  And the comments by NQ stated that the plan was for CvC no matter what, even if the stretch goal wasn't met.  It just probably wouldn't make it to the initial release.  You don't need CvC for territory control, but it sure is nice.
 
The rest of your comment I agree with.  Combat will be major, and one of the largest driving forces in the game.  It needs to be done right, with deep thought.  Combat is one of the few components that literally touches every aspect of the game in some manner.  You don't have to partake in combat to be influenced drastically by combat.

The point is simple, though. It will have negative consequences to create an unnecessarily bureaucratic and authoritative organization. It's all I'm saying.

 

Paying a 15-20 dollar membership for a game that is meant to be fun to be in... prison?
This is a pretty bad idea and the best option is to just not do prisons.

As stated above several times - it adds nothing to the game. Only a certain few, a minority, get some roleplaying, immersion kicks out of it.
 
The only reason this is a debate is because, generally, the people looking for immersion and roleplay aspects are overrepresented in indie, crowdfunded, pre-launch game forums. It won't be the case when the game launches later on.

meh, this subject again.....
 
I don't want any survival mechanic - life is going to be hard enough as it is in DU, besides, as a human I eat, sleep, etc etc in my real life, the game revolves around these real life demands, I already deal with them, I dont want to deal with them in game as well.

yes pls, force stupid and repetitive but useless mechanics upon me to force me to log in
 
 

All I see is an arrow which marks the spot to shoot

https://dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/02/08/in-game-ama-feb-3rd-2018-transcription/

How about.....just hoverpads? No need to put work in this imho. No revenue, no use, not necessary

considering how much trouble I've head with wheeled vehicles in scifi games I am in no hurry to have them in another game. 

I would argue that the incentive to keep it in one piece should:
- building a (large) new ship is difficult, as in it takes time and resources
- it works as it is
 
modern ship are also not kept in one piece because they get better over time and I think DU should aim for realism. 

Easily exploitable, just kill cheap ships of org mates or (If that's not possible because you don't get XP for it) kill cheap ships of alts to get that bonus. 
 
As there is already a progression system planned for players, I don't see any benefit for turrets....or engines to gain xp (wouldn't make much sense either). Players make a difference on a multicrew ship. Their ingame skills aswell as their expertise as a pilot or creative engineer, not some easily farmed and exploited numbers

Shooting mechanics and time-based skill training aside, Mastering a ship and/or ship XP etc are going to be problematic in DU purely because the ships are voxel constructs and can physically change over time.

What happens if I level an atmospheric interceptor, or master it or whatever, then transform it into a huge destroyer? Does the ship keep it's XP and I effectively get a pre-levelled Capital ship? What happens if I level an interceptor and just stick an extra gun on it? Have I lost the Mastery progress? Is there going to have to be a set of rules that defines how much a ship can change and still be the same ship? Does it become impossible or impractical to modify or repair or even paint a ship once it starts levelling? What if I have two identical ships, does my mastery skill transfer?
 
Ships and Orgs are going to get a reputation, by actually getting a reputation. You know, actual people actually talking about actual events in game.

I'll take "people are genuinely terrified of the famous pirate ship The Black Pearl and it affects the opposing player's decisions in combat" over "the Black Pearl has +10 armour because it's survived ten fights", any day.

Ama:
So yeah, either fly there with your ftl drive or send a probe (which is way faster)
 

Galactic Emporium    =)  Commerce will be the key to everything !   My drawing skills are not this good yet but I'm working on it !                                

That's why i think its good practise to lock ones doors
 

Universal naming standards just won't happen in DU, as you can already guess from this thread. Everyone has a different opinion and some (like me) won't use any common name at all.
 
All that matters (for buying, scouting enemies, ...) Are numbers. How many turrets, engines, acceleration, Mass, turning rate, which weapons, armor and so on. Only numbers will be accurate. Some word can't be, and will never be, accurate enough to describe ships