GrimReaper

My opinion is they should implement animals and such, sure... but when they get to "spider-wolves" as you call it, they need to take their time and do them right. Most games these days, even the ones meant for survival don't take the time to do it right. Once they (NQ) get to the point, if they ever do, they can't simply implement a spider-wolf that attacks players and call it good. They need to implement massive brutes that can destroy constructs, or fast and plentiful mobs that can take down any team traveling where they shouldn't. However, I am also realistic in that this won't be reality for a long, long time... if ever.

*Hands flame retardant screen, to Mr.Jaco.* I have to agree, and I also think there should be components that could add an e-warfare playstyle. Therefore, not only would skills impact the ability to hack and mess around with systems, but the ship setup as well. Perhaps increasing the range in which you can take down a system, or the speed at which it can be accomplished. Same goes for personal goods of course, higher quality terminal devices would increase efficiency as well. If you're hackin' it at the gate E-warfare has been flaunted as being a possibility in Star Citizen. If it's done well in Dual Universe AND Star Citizen... I will be one happy camper. It's just not something that has been considered in space games before, really. At least not in my experience.

1.) It appears alpha access will be available. At least temporarily for phase 1. 2.) The pets will be something new, if I'm reading that correctly. The Kickstarter pets will remain exclusive.

The reason shell shock systems usually don't work: These systems usually have an incremented timer in order to prevent users from just going ballistic everywhere. I mean let's be honest, if we implement this system the first death of a day should not have the same penalties as the 100th. However, this also means that if organization A is the powerhouse of the game, and they target a smaller organization B for whatever reason... then the smaller organization will run into problems with the incremented timer. This is a problem in many of the games I have encountered this system in. You could put a cap on the incremented timer, however, where is that cutoff? Why is that the cutoff? Is it fair that a player in organization B has to wait for the cutoff, purely because they are in an organization that is hunted by a larger organization? Insult to injury when a larger organization is hounding you.

Thanks for the update! I figured something would come out to day... er well, I hoped!

"I was replying to PurpleAnt. You are not PurpleAnt. " Wrong once again, you clearly quoted me ^^ "=Translation= "Oh god, oh god, OH GOD, I will not be able to be a scrubby pirate and I need to make this feature go away, quickly brain, weakest excuse possible!"" It's all good though, I was taking you seriously at first... but it seems like you can only come up with incoherent posts that have nothing to do with what you're quoting.

No disrespect was meant I think the majority of people have this realization. I am personally of the opinion that they should just have some type of component that can be placed on a construct that enables self-destruct. Of course, there should be a cost associated with self destruction. Such as destroying the saved blueprint, or something. Simply losing the ship isn't enough, considering more than likely that was going to happen anyways. Or maybe it should alter the blueprints, randomly. Forcing you to repair the changes done to the blueprint. The destruction brought out by self destruction should be purely based on the size of the core. Nothing more, nothing less... easy to implement into the game. Edit: It just occurred to me, at some point there are going to be jump/warp gates implemented into the game right? So what if having a self destruction system implemented on a construct would mean you cannot have a jump drive of any sort.

Lol, you're funny. I will give you that. You're one of those people who take snippets of a conversation and target that singular facet. If you don't realize that having self destruct pre-loaded onto every single construct is broken, I am glad you aren't the head of development here. The more time they waste on making a complex self destruct system, the less time they spend on actual important aspects of the game. If you don't realize this, I'm glad you're not the head of development. The more I read your posts, the more I see someone who refuses to see how things impact the bigger picture. "I'm right, everyone else is wrong! Because!" As an aside: You constantly call me a pirate, yet I don't have plans to become a pirate? Since when did you rule my life? As another aside: Your point is instantly nullified the minute you start insulting people... which everyone who has a disagreeing viewpoint from you seems to receive that treatment.

This actually makes a lot of sense, why have a designated self destruct mechanism when it would impact the game so detrimentally. If you want to "self destruct" why not find a way to carry a bunch of explosives, that can act as a self destruct mechanism? There would be a tradeoff of course... being that, if you a stray shot punctures the wrong case... Or perhaps it could be possible to create a self destruct system, but it could be expensive in resources and time to create. Such that, it's more hassle than it's worth to implement on any ol' constructs. They would only be used for very important organizational assets that cannot fall into the wrong hands. Furthermore, it would always be in place... there wouldn't be any confirmation before the system goes up in flame. This implies, that if someone were able to hack past the safeguards and infiltrate an area rigged for self destruction... they could indeed cause some serious damages to a rival organization. Basically, if you implement a self destruct system it would be possible for enemies to infiltrate and blow up the asset. This would be done in a situation where the enemy organization could not feasibly steal the assets, but wants to cause as much harm as possible. I see interesting uses for self destruct, as long as it's not wired into every construct that's around. As an aside, this would also play into selling information in game. If a corporation/organization solely deals in information gathering, and determining which assets have a self destruct mechanism in place... they would be able to sell this information to those who would use it for more nefarious reasons This is all assuming that there will be assets that are worth destroying over allowing them to get in the wrong hands. If that isn't the case, there's really no need for a self destruct IMHO. I almost imagine it would rarely be used on ships, I'm thinking important planetary installations and such. Just ramblings and possibilities. If there is one thing you take from this post, realize that we need to consider how implementations of various systems affect the game as a whole, not just how it impacts combat per se. Err, maybe two things you should take from this post... We also need to realize that there needs to be cost/benefit analysis implementation done on many aspects of the game. We can't simply put self destruct everywhere, because that would be game breaking.

Just make sure to leave off the year ;D Then, you will NEVER be disappointed.

What I'm saying is, rather than spending a bunch of time making an overly complex self destruct system... why not spend some time developing actual components that can create actual constructs that act as mines and other traps? I do not disagree though, I think everyone would like to see a big ship overload... and I'm sure we will! I'm also of the personal opinion that there shouldn't be a timer... if you hit the big red button, it should blow up at that instant. Incurring death on yourself, and whatever penalties that are involved in death.

If they want to put the work into it, by all means... Doesn't seem worth it IMHO, lots of work for not much payoff gameplay wise. Besides, if you self destruct... it's pretty hard to bounce back from being spaced I imagine we will end up purely with a system that uses the size of the power core to determine destruction levels. However, I vehemently defend the fact that self destruct should destroy any blueprints you have saved related to that ship ^^ As this is where the discussion is heading, what's to stop someone from just building a bunch of power cores and using them as "mines". Shouldn't there be a specific weapon set to work as mines? Why should we have to use derelict ships and unfinished ships for this emergent gameplay? All of this development you guys are asking for should be directed towards an actual subset of weapons, mines and other sneaky traps.

I think this option would work best: Criteria: You must be alive to destruct your ship. What happens: When you self destruct, your ship obviously incinerates... killing anyone on board including yourself. Your saved blueprint/design for the ship is deleted. End product: 1.) Everyone inside of the ship is dead. 2.) Your blueprint has been destroyed. 3.) You have to recreate the design based on memory alone. No time limits, nothing so arbitrary and limiting. Purely punishing behavior that can be employed based on whether or not it's "worth" it to the user, or not.

Even if it's a "hey, we're alive" it would be more than appreciated A few things to add for forum improvement, may have to create a new thread at some point if they go unnoticed: An off-topic sections is a must have for a gaming forum An organization forum sections, in order to get introductions and organization recruiting into two separate areas.

If it's like any other Kickstarter I backed, you will be able to put this information in on the Kickstarter survey. They won't automatically link your Kickstarter and Dual Universe accounts straight away. There are far too many wonky situations people can be in, for that to be viable.

I'm curious, what did they end up saying? If it's not too personal that is. Was it just a card unsupported by Kickstarter? If that is the case, you could potentially look into a prepaid virtual visa card. Not entirely sure how that would work in your case, but I know people have found success in that area with other websites. I haven't met anyone who had to do that for Kickstarter, but it could be a solution. I think Mastercard also has an equivalent. Something to look into, if you still have time.

Have to agree here. SC is having troubles because they used the CryEngine, and then realized oh wait... we have to make a million different architectures one for how they handle planetary stuff, one for the FPS, one for multiplayer and I imagine there are a bunch more. Getting all of these modified architectures to work together has been a hastle. However, by the looks of things... it looks like they are getting things to work well. I just hope they are making strides on the multiplayer part... I want the game to start looking like a MMO.

Wurm online has always caught my eye, but I never picked it up. I think many of us will have that common thread where WoW, and similar games, don't interest us

That last bit is some code to annihilate all of us, isn't it? I'm going to be watching you Greetings and welcome and all that jazz

I remember having some right good times on Planetside 2, whether it be going against the odds. Or being the odds... and getting creamed You still play Planetside 2? I remember they were supposed to come out with a new continent, did they ever come through on that?

But seeing how there's no off topic section of the forums, figured I'd put it here. I suppose you could see it as an introductory thing. What are some of the games that have most shaped your playstyle, favorite genre, or anything really with gaming? The most impactful games on your life, if you will Mine would be: Dark Ages of Camelot - My first MMO Fury - A combat arena-esque MMO Face of Mankind - quite literally the reason I am still gaming, I think. Dark Ages of Camelot really got me into MMOs, I wasn't really a gamer back then... as I was pretty young. However, I could already tell that I would enjoy PvP Fury, if anyone played Fury... I honestly have to know. I haven't met a single person who has played Fury, other than myself. It was a pretty simplistic game, you had tab target combat in an arena. Face of Mankind - Basically EVE online, but on the ground. Before Legacy occurred and all that jazz, FoM was the best game there ever was. The political strife and wars is still unprecedented. Completely player run, phenomenal game. However, very toxic near the end. One thing you can probably see about me, is that I am into PvP games What about you? What are your all time favorites ?

Have you tried calling your bank/provider?

This just sparked an idea... I have to wonder how in-depth the scripting will end up being. If you will be able to script constructs to attack anything and everything that moves, with the construct itself having randomized movement. If this were possible people would be able to try and populate an area with hostile constructs in order to protect certain resources. Now, these constructs would still be dangerous to those who place them as well... creating an entirely new dynamic of cost/reward. Anywho, would be interesting.

Wait, when you say they are trying to get the planets to rotate... are you saying they are trying to get planets to orbit as well? I was under the impression they weren't going to mess with that kind of stuff, being it's a small team and all. However, if they have changed their plans on this I would love to know!

Lol... now here's someone who thinks before posts. Good point, definitely forgot to think of that lol. With that said, we don't really know how combat will work. It's not FPS, but what precisely does lock and fire look like? It's not supposed to be *tab target, and they have elaborated on the issue... but I would like to see it in action before I come to conclusions. So we wait, I guess *In the sense of a traditional tab target game.