Jump to content

PurpleAnt

Member
  • Content Count

    34
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by PurpleAnt

  1. What if there were two kinds of SafeZone generators? One for ConstructSafeZones and one for Construct-PlayerSafeZones. Construct-PlayerSafeZones would be used in cities and industrial buildings. Construct-PlayerSafeZones would be unable to move. Because having Construct-PlayerSafeZones would make pirating impossible. ConstructSafeZones would be used on big ships, these safe zones would be movable, but only protect the construct, not any players. So pirates would be able to infiltrate a ship and fight for it, but not be able to just blow a hole in it. It would make for more tactical piratery and not just "Let's just blow a hole in it and jump in" I think these safe zones would also be used for military bases and such. Because if you used the Player-ConstructSafeZone the enemy could just walk into your base and gain info without you being able to damage him. So yea, let me know what you guys think
  2. Here's something to think about with safe zones. I don't think anyone has talked about this yet, just ignore me if someone already brought this up. No one has really talked about how these Safe Zones work, I'm not talking about how they're powered or anything, I'm talking about what happens when you enter one. So I think there's two things that can happen. When you enter, you can't destroy constructs, but you can however, damage players. This would be my preference and the most realistic thing to do. With this we could have PvP arenas, where players can damage players, but cannot damage the walls and escape. When you enter, you basically can't do anything, no destroying blocks, no damaging players. You just kind of walk around. So yea, the point of this was to say "We should be able to fight within Safe Zones, just not break blocks." And to add some realistic science-y things to make this make sense to people who like to over complicate things... When you activate your "Safe Zone" what it does is basically hold the atoms and stuff of the construct together, as if they were super-glued or something, but at the atomic level. Does that make sense? I'm bad at science
  3. Twerkmotor just thinks everyone works around his logic, even if his logic doesn't make sense.
  4. You really like to blow things up, don't you
  5. PurpleAnt

    Respawning

    So I was thinking, where would we respawn? In the book it says that we would respawn on the Arkship thanks to the Resurrection Node. So if we respawned at the Arkship, we would pretty much have to start over unless your friend can pick you up in a ship. I was thinking, what if there was a Resurrection Node element that you could add to a base? Now, I know what you're thinking fellow forum user. Well, to counter this argument. Building a Resurrection Node should be decently expensive You should have to build one Resurrection Node per person You should have an option on death to either "Respawn at Arkship" or "Respawn at Resurrection Node" You should only be able to have one Resurrection Node in use at a time. Respawning at your Resurrection Node should take time, because I'm pretty sure printing a human takes more than one second, so let's just say 1-2 minutes and respawning on the Arkship would be instant because of the superior technology. You should only be able place a resurrection node on a base, not a small ship. So maybe you can only place it on a construct with over a certain amount of voxels. That's just my idea for respawning, don't be like RandomForumUser26(can we make him into a meme on the forums?).
  6. I like it. I think it will also decrease the amount of people starting wars for no reason(we all know someone is going to start a war for no reason). And in SE, what people would do is store all their materials and fly over to someone's base to scout it out, not caring if they died because they would just respawn on their ship.
  7. CaptainTwerkmotor just went into more detail.
  8. Now you're starting to give valid arguments
  9. That's not what Falstaf said. I think that's just what you want to happen, not what's actually going to be implemented in the game And that's actually a good idea ^
  10. Thanks! This is exactly what I created to thread to know/talk about.
  11. I don't think some of you guys got what the point of this thread is, and maybe that's my fault for not being specific. So here I'm going to be more specific about what I want. So I do actually want hijacking to be a thing in this game. I just don't want it to be as easy as jumping into a cockpit and flying away. And like I've said before mrjackobean came up with a system that I think is very nice. So while I do want hijacking in the game, I want it to be somewhat difficult and require a bit of a high skill in hacking. I don't want it to be impossible or semi-impossible to hijack a ship. And obviously hacking would take time. So you wouldn't go into a city and go hijack a ship, because people would see you and probably call someone or hit you(I'm thinking that if you get hit while hacking, even if it does 0 damage, you'll have to completely restart the process. But yea, I didn't want there to be any passwords, motion sensors, or anything that you can't see yourself cracking within a couple minutes. On the other hand, I do want it to be somewhat difficult to a beginner player. And even take time to do for an elite player. I want it to be balanced between being able to hijack, and not being able to hijack/being able to stop a hijack. Can you see yourself guessing the password to even 1 door? No, and also, it would get really annoying to get in and out of your ship. Entering 3 passwords every time. Also by the way, I was talking about cockpits in this thread but I think we should address doors that would be on a ship. I think it would have the same properties as a cockpit. You hack it. It jams open. Then this creates a reason to use turrets and other defences. Basically, I want hijacking to be accessible, but not easy.
  12. I like how you made that reference to the book by mentioning a guy on the roof, also the whole thing is just as good as the book good job. SPOILER ALERT FOR THE BOOK BELOW For a second I thought the guy in this story was the one who killed the main character's friend in the book, maybe he is. Only you know that.
  13. Maybe I should already know this, but is the Aether a cult? If it is, that's cool, it adds something to the universe.
  14. I'm thinking it would destroy the whole ship, and anything near it, or what's the point? That's also why it would require a lot of power like I said in my post above ^
  15. If you read the book about the backstory, it says that the machine you use to suck up resources and place blocks can actually be used as a weapon. I imagine that it would shoot matter at a target, while it would be weak and probably have 0 armor penetration, it would be free and would be available to you from the moment you spawn/respawn. Am I the only one who read the book?
  16. I'm fine with the idea of a self destruct option, we just have to find a way to make it impossible to overuse. So maybe you need a modified core to be able to self destruct because in reality, cores would probably come with an anti-overload feature for safety. Also, you would need LOTS of power. So the only ships that would be able to self destruct would be big ships that have multiple generators and lots of power. Once a self destruct has started, there should be about 1-2 minutes before the actual explosion. During the self destruct sequence, the ship will have no oporations online, so no defenses, no shields(if those are going to be in the game) no nothing. There should also be a way to cancel the self destruct sequence if the player has a high level in hacking. This would also create new jobs for bomb squads. If you have all these features, I don't think it will be overused because it wouldn't just be some tiny little ship they're blowing up, it would be a big ship that they have spent time on. I think that would make people refrain from using the self destruct unless it's their only opinion. I really don't see a point in adding self destruct features to a tiny little ship. It's the big ones that would actually need it. And as I've said before, I think my post here(https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10315-locking-your-ship/) solves the capturing part of this topic, go read what mrjacobean had to say about it, he had the best idea for it.
  17. That's why I'm done responding to him
  18. Ok, I'm done defending myself, you obviously can't understand that not everyone is a pirate out to get you. Also, the CSYN does not support piracy, they just make deals with pirates to leave CSYN alone. The CSYN pretty much controls the universe at this point So by saying that the CSYN supports piracy, you're saying that pretty much all the big organizations support piracy. And lastly, I'm not describing the UDF as the Mafia, I'm describing them as a security service, you pay us, we protect what you want us to protect.
  19. This is still the best idea
  20. Why are you making everyone out to be a pirate? You do understand that some people actually want to help other people and we aren't all out to destroy the universe. The UDF is an organisation that's meant to protect people(as long as they pay us ), not steal their stuff.
  21. If you're talking about how much you'll get paid for a job/hit/mission, it depends on the economy. But 75% of the profits will be split among the team that was on the mission with you. This should encourage people to take the smallest team possible, and will save us men and resources.
  22. PurpleAnt

    Politics

    I think that makes the game a little more realistic and fun. I mean, look back in history, was there democracy at the beginning of civilization? Or if we restarted civilization, I'm sure in real life, there wouldn't be democracy.
  23. I think 7 days is a bit much, especially if we're talking about big organizations which have hundreds of people. So let's just say that the TU has a total of 500 people(I'm sure there'll be more on launch) then it's pretty much guaranteed to have at least 50 people online at all times. So maybe 12-24 hours would be a better time limit. Because 7 days makes it almost impossible for pirates to hold their ground until they can move in. 12-24 hours is still a long time to hold out from the TU or another big org that would be able to make a city. But that's just my opinion I would like to see massive battles to take down a city. But yea, I really like this idea, the the bubbles that were talked about before weren't that realistic.
×
×
  • Create New...