Stig92

There is difference between people to fool around and 10 000 people spawning on same spot/room so its hard to see where you are going or find out who you are talking to. I feel that that kind of crowd was the point Cybercrunch was making. Spreading that out a bit would seem a decent idea even if servers and player's computers could handle it. It wouldn't even have to be spread to the edges of safe zone but maybe within a kilometer radius. Having "shuttles" (just lore/visual element, nothing you can actually fly) would be decent way to fit this to lore. They would of course be inside the safe zone so you cant simply spawnkil people who come after you. 
 
Alternatively you could just have a really big Arkship with several points where people spawn. If the ship is 1 kilometer long and all exits would be on sides (because back end would be engines etc.) you could have 20 points where people spawn and these would be 100  meters away from each other. At that point you could hold quite large amount of people in small enough area to find your friends in reasonable time, without overcrowding one spot. If there are less people than expected then maybe the ship only wakes up colonists from some sections of the ship and players spawn only on those areas. 
 
Danger's suggestion is also great. I don't like the idea of queue, but if there is likely to be one anyway, it should be integrated with single player tutorial/some other content. The idea of letting people in at different times based so kickstarting or other reasons I don't like. Even though you could say that people who supported early or a lot deserve it I think it is better to give everyone as equal opportunities as possible an have every achievement in game because people played more/better for those. Supporters already get dacs, alpha, beta and other things.
 
I will make the taxi mrJacobean. Its like early game version of my idea for stargate organisation. That would be a kind of intersystem transport org but sounds like we might have similar ideas. I have post in "how are you going to play the game" thread on my thoughts of this org if you want to compare ideas. 
 
Considering the earlier discussion/argument about server tech, those interested should probably make a separate thread to discus the matter. 
 
Large arkship with multiple exits would also make it hard for any individual or group to wall of everyone else even if there are no large no build areas.

Hopefully destroyed ships etc. remain as husks in space, because that could be quite nice option and possibly something that even fairly new player could do to get valuable stuff as soon as they get their first ship with some room for cargo. 
 
It would also be interesting to see if there are going to be battles or wreck fields of previous battles (since the resources from remains of fully completed ships could easily be very valuable, especially if they have elements that require rare resources/already built elements can be detached and used as such rather than just pile of minerals). Reminds me of supreme commander games where people fight each other to get mass from destroyed units/keep enemy from getting it. 

It would be great if there were some kind of soundblocks and people could upload sounds they want if there wasn't a preset one. That way you could do different alarms, announcements and ambient noises, even elevator music if the game ever gets what is needed for elevator. Some easy way to share those sounds between players would be good too. 
 
As for the main topic it seems so oblivious to have ships in ships that I never even considered it at something that needs to be talked about. I just hope that there are enough tools to make doors for different sized hangars, not just few options for relatively small force fields. I want a major station or ground base that can dock whole capital ships in them with some kind of door/force field that can cover the needed entrance. 

It kinda looks like an ironing board.

All hail the Random Number God.
 
"God does not play dice" Albert Einstein.

I think we might have heard about DU the same way. Though I also got bit w4sted with the same video too.  

Skimming over the thread, I can safely say that I would be pulling my pledge and boycotting the game if it turns into a censored SJW shithole to "protect the feelings" of degenerates whose sole purpose in life is to try and find things to be offended by.
 
That said, I can completely understand and support reasonable rules that ruin the gameplay on an immersive level for majority of the people, because one person decided to be a troll. An example of this would be naming policies in older MMOs back in the 1990s / 2000s, where names like "qwertyuio1234" or "Aragorn513" were not allowed for the sake of creating a living, realistic and immersive world for the playerbase. In context of DU, I can completely understand and support them not wanting planets that consist fully of dick pics drawn all over them as an example.
 
But to go back to the point, in game conflict is part of the game - regardless of whether that conflict originated from in game politics of one organisation to another, or a group of players encroaching on someone else's in-game property. RL politics and censorship that has zero relation to the gameplay or immersion value of the game, has no place in it whatsoever.
 
As for people who cannot differentiate between reality and an online MMO, or who try to bring their personal real world issues into the development and structure of an online game, need to piss off and crawl back to under whatever rock they feel "oppresses" them.
 
EDIT: Fixed a typo and split a paragraph.

I like the idea of this one but it would have to be much deeper with several blast doors for protection and elevator that lifts the ship from the bottom to the surface (at least after game gets pistons which might not be at launch). The hangar itself should be surrounded with defensive perimeter of gun turrets hidden underground until they are needed, and everything visible on the surface should be painted/otherwise camouflaged to match the surroundings.

1. Its fact that as creators of the game NQ has the unfortunate legal right to police anything that is put in their game, and even more unfortunately they may be forced to in some cases by French law. (I'm not familiar with it but some commented that it isn't the best on freedom of speech)
 
2. Just because NQ is private organisation and can do what they mean doesn't matter at all to whether it is best for the community, business or players, or right in any way so if someone tries to dismiss this conversation with "NQ has right to do what they want", please don't (I wouldn't want to censor you if you did, but I think it shows... whats a good word... stupidity?) 
 
3. If NQ ends up censoring I at least hope they are consistent, because people often aren't. For example if you say "all black people + something negative" or "all women + something negative" people are all over it, but replace those with white people or men...
 
4. Offensive/disturbing/etc are extremely vague and subjective matters + if you think something should be censored because it offends someone (no matter how many are offended) you are saying someone has right to not (subjectively) be offended above someone's right to free speech etc. Some people get offended if you call woman or female looking person she or dress in costume that describes another culture, muslims get offended if you draw human character and call it Mohammed, some Christians get offended because some other people are allowed to marry in a way they personally don't support.
 
I would like to ask how many people have to find something offensive to make censoring it "right" 99% 90% 80% 51% 25% or one crybaby. 
 
If someone makes Nazi moonbase in DU http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/reviews/274/full/1349386589_2.jpg , one person flies past and ignores it, other has a good laugh and flies past it. Third thinks it would be good idea to arrange raid against it with friends and stream their attack on moon Nazis for people to enjoy, but after all the preparations gets disappointed because fourth had his/her/it's/zis' etc. (have to be careful not to accidentally offend someone) feelings hurt and went crying to NQ to remove the station. Let alone these fun moments 1:00-1:07 
That (which harms no one) wouldn't happen if people just censored like some here want to. 
5. Let me make an another example on same topic (swastika). This thread has people who think that specific set of lines (and I don't care about intent, it's still set of 6 lines that aren't going to hurt you) or even people who make them should be banned because they TAKE offense on it based on what it was used for at one point in history. Even ignoring that you still shouldn't censor people, that position shows great ignorance of reality. Swastika wasn't invented by Hitler. in india its past goes back at least 11 000 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika with apparent religious meaning. In some contexts I have also heard it referred as symbol of luck of something like that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz8gE92lVDY Finnish airforce used it as their symbol after Swedish donor of the first plane painted it on the plane to bring luck and remains on flag of Karellian air command https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/83/Karjalan_Lennoston_lippu.svg/200px-Karjalan_Lennoston_lippu.svg.png (what if some Finnish former conscripts wants to found org with that name in the game, uses the flag and gets censored because easily offended ignorant people don't care about facts or basic freedoms.). FYI the swastika it also exists in our most important medal http://koulut.kontiolahti.fi/lukio/ilpo/pm_risti.jpg and there are lot of people who are likely to take offence if someone decides to censor that, it identifies the greatest heroes of a nation after all. 
 
Last two texts were to prove the subjectivity of offence and stupidity of people who are eager to censor.
 
6. I have heard "free speech" "freedom from consequence" argument before as excuse for censorship. Only consequence for free speech should be that which other people can cause within limits of their free speech, which does not include censorship. 
 
7. If you get easily offended by words people say in chats, then sufficient solution is to have personal filter where individual person can "censor" messages he sees, or block messages to him, but does not affect other people beyond being harder to reach for them. Maybe NQ could extend something like that to screens and such that exist in the game world. 
 
8. To make my stance clear, I do actually recognize exceptions to freedom of speech that should have not just in game-, but also legal consequences, but they aren't some vague bs like "hate speech" "racist" or "offensive" There are three main exceptions:
A) threat/direct incitement of violence or crime. 
Spreading false (especially harmful) lies about another person as fact (here I might tolerate, even support some burden of proof on person doing the spreading as proving negative could prove unreasonably hard for the other person)
C) Spreading true but private or secret/confidential information without permit (note I do not recognize secrecy on evidence of a crime, especially by governments, so I do support right of people like Snowden, Assagne and Manning to do what they did.). In games and anonymous social media names, addresses etc. would count as private information. 
 
Hell, I was just about to vote in elections couple of days ago during last pre-election day, for a guy that seemed quite decent and transparent, then I though about asking about free speech, first half a dozen words in his answer were good, then came the word hate speech, and I decided to wait till actual election day and reconsider who to vote. 
 
Well it seems, this discussion pushed my buttons. I think I end this novel here, for now at least.

1. Its fact that as creators of the game NQ has the unfortunate legal right to police anything that is put in their game, and even more unfortunately they may be forced to in some cases by French law. (I'm not familiar with it but some commented that it isn't the best on freedom of speech)
 
2. Just because NQ is private organisation and can do what they mean doesn't matter at all to whether it is best for the community, business or players, or right in any way so if someone tries to dismiss this conversation with "NQ has right to do what they want", please don't (I wouldn't want to censor you if you did, but I think it shows... whats a good word... stupidity?) 
 
3. If NQ ends up censoring I at least hope they are consistent, because people often aren't. For example if you say "all black people + something negative" or "all women + something negative" people are all over it, but replace those with white people or men...
 
4. Offensive/disturbing/etc are extremely vague and subjective matters + if you think something should be censored because it offends someone (no matter how many are offended) you are saying someone has right to not (subjectively) be offended above someone's right to free speech etc. Some people get offended if you call woman or female looking person she or dress in costume that describes another culture, muslims get offended if you draw human character and call it Mohammed, some Christians get offended because some other people are allowed to marry in a way they personally don't support.
 
I would like to ask how many people have to find something offensive to make censoring it "right" 99% 90% 80% 51% 25% or one crybaby. 
 
If someone makes Nazi moonbase in DU http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/reviews/274/full/1349386589_2.jpg , one person flies past and ignores it, other has a good laugh and flies past it. Third thinks it would be good idea to arrange raid against it with friends and stream their attack on moon Nazis for people to enjoy, but after all the preparations gets disappointed because fourth had his/her/it's/zis' etc. (have to be careful not to accidentally offend someone) feelings hurt and went crying to NQ to remove the station. Let alone these fun moments 1:00-1:07 
That (which harms no one) wouldn't happen if people just censored like some here want to. 
5. Let me make an another example on same topic (swastika). This thread has people who think that specific set of lines (and I don't care about intent, it's still set of 6 lines that aren't going to hurt you) or even people who make them should be banned because they TAKE offense on it based on what it was used for at one point in history. Even ignoring that you still shouldn't censor people, that position shows great ignorance of reality. Swastika wasn't invented by Hitler. in india its past goes back at least 11 000 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika with apparent religious meaning. In some contexts I have also heard it referred as symbol of luck of something like that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz8gE92lVDY Finnish airforce used it as their symbol after Swedish donor of the first plane painted it on the plane to bring luck and remains on flag of Karellian air command https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/83/Karjalan_Lennoston_lippu.svg/200px-Karjalan_Lennoston_lippu.svg.png (what if some Finnish former conscripts wants to found org with that name in the game, uses the flag and gets censored because easily offended ignorant people don't care about facts or basic freedoms.). FYI the swastika it also exists in our most important medal http://koulut.kontiolahti.fi/lukio/ilpo/pm_risti.jpg and there are lot of people who are likely to take offence if someone decides to censor that, it identifies the greatest heroes of a nation after all. 
 
Last two texts were to prove the subjectivity of offence and stupidity of people who are eager to censor.
 
6. I have heard "free speech" "freedom from consequence" argument before as excuse for censorship. Only consequence for free speech should be that which other people can cause within limits of their free speech, which does not include censorship. 
 
7. If you get easily offended by words people say in chats, then sufficient solution is to have personal filter where individual person can "censor" messages he sees, or block messages to him, but does not affect other people beyond being harder to reach for them. Maybe NQ could extend something like that to screens and such that exist in the game world. 
 
8. To make my stance clear, I do actually recognize exceptions to freedom of speech that should have not just in game-, but also legal consequences, but they aren't some vague bs like "hate speech" "racist" or "offensive" There are three main exceptions:
A) threat/direct incitement of violence or crime. 
Spreading false (especially harmful) lies about another person as fact (here I might tolerate, even support some burden of proof on person doing the spreading as proving negative could prove unreasonably hard for the other person)
C) Spreading true but private or secret/confidential information without permit (note I do not recognize secrecy on evidence of a crime, especially by governments, so I do support right of people like Snowden, Assagne and Manning to do what they did.). In games and anonymous social media names, addresses etc. would count as private information. 
 
Hell, I was just about to vote in elections couple of days ago during last pre-election day, for a guy that seemed quite decent and transparent, then I though about asking about free speech, first half a dozen words in his answer were good, then came the word hate speech, and I decided to wait till actual election day and reconsider who to vote. 
 
Well it seems, this discussion pushed my buttons. I think I end this novel here, for now at least.

Good Points. Also, Twerk has pointed out to me the difficulties in coordinating between peers with different units.
 
"They're 100 behind you!"
 
"100 what?"
 
"Yards!"
 
"...What's that in meters?"
 
"...No Idea."

First thing I noted from your post was idea of modular weapons (or other systems). I think That would be a great element in the game. Either slam couple of basic beam gun at the front of a ship or stack up modules still the weapon extends through whole length of your ship that needs to convert most of remaining space into power reactors meaning you have a big ass gun to wipe out opposing capital ship... but thats about all you can do since there isn't space for anything more without bulking up the ship to completely different class. 

It could sure look good, although my first example would be Star Wars. 

I don't remember seeing any material on how higher level technology is researched/unlocked, if there is any research process beyond having right resources and production facilities. 
 
If there is a research process to discover new tech (which should then be possible to sell, maybe to license, to others.) I would suggest that research shouldn't be something that you can do simply sitting somewhere running research on fixed tech tree. Many technologies after all depend on our understanding of universe beyond what you can imagine from armchair.
 
Einstein came up with theory of relativity partially in that way, but to prove it people needed to observe solar eclipse and make measurements of starts. Nowadays for example GPS system relies on Einsteins work to operate properly. 
 
Similarly the process of gaining more advanced technology in Dual Universe should at least include the need to go out at explore things to do research or open new lines of research. Perhaps scanning a certain type of star long/often enough reveals some process that opens research line that leads to more efficient fusion reactor, or flat bonus in existing elements. 
 
This type of game play element would open a new aspect of a game where people could go out to explore not just to find new planets but also to do research. It could make dedicated research ships or -stations possible. Running enough of these to research anything valuable would need quite a bit of time and effort, especially after most basic tech, so there would be new incentive to work together in organisations. Sufficient challenge on researching anything would also be necessary if it is to be long term element on the game since eventually people will research everything in the game if more tech isn't added in expansions faster than players research it. That is the largest problem i see with technological advancement in MMO game. 
 
The discovery of technology could also have random, or at least unknown element to it like the game Stellaris seems to have. 

I don't remember seeing any material on how higher level technology is researched/unlocked, if there is any research process beyond having right resources and production facilities. 
 
If there is a research process to discover new tech (which should then be possible to sell, maybe to license, to others.) I would suggest that research shouldn't be something that you can do simply sitting somewhere running research on fixed tech tree. Many technologies after all depend on our understanding of universe beyond what you can imagine from armchair.
 
Einstein came up with theory of relativity partially in that way, but to prove it people needed to observe solar eclipse and make measurements of starts. Nowadays for example GPS system relies on Einsteins work to operate properly. 
 
Similarly the process of gaining more advanced technology in Dual Universe should at least include the need to go out at explore things to do research or open new lines of research. Perhaps scanning a certain type of star long/often enough reveals some process that opens research line that leads to more efficient fusion reactor, or flat bonus in existing elements. 
 
This type of game play element would open a new aspect of a game where people could go out to explore not just to find new planets but also to do research. It could make dedicated research ships or -stations possible. Running enough of these to research anything valuable would need quite a bit of time and effort, especially after most basic tech, so there would be new incentive to work together in organisations. Sufficient challenge on researching anything would also be necessary if it is to be long term element on the game since eventually people will research everything in the game if more tech isn't added in expansions faster than players research it. That is the largest problem i see with technological advancement in MMO game. 
 
The discovery of technology could also have random, or at least unknown element to it like the game Stellaris seems to have. 

I just started discussion about research through exploration and discovery. Although that idea has lot of potential problems/challenges it would fit with black holes. Extreme unusual condition due to ridiculous gravity etc. could mean some research could only be done close enough to black hole (better research = closer to event horizon) which would be risky with potential reward. Otherwise they would mostly mean area you want to stay away from. Any large moving objects like comets could be hard on server and it might be considered annoying if you ship gets destroyed by random event from game rather than combat with other real players for example. 
 
For wormholes, maybe instead of having random wormhole send you to random place they could be strategic locations where you could build a special star-/jumpgate to stabilize it that could send ships to locations within certain range without need for gate on the other end, or just work as normal gate with longer range. In either case they could be important strategic locations that spark either diplomacy and cooperation or wars for control of the wormhole. What military organisation wouldn't love the ability to drop a fleet in any system on some region of space without caring about gates on that system. 

Price by mass is great idea if the game has some automatic ship weighting and payment system that works in real time. If the gates are managed by some use permission/key then hopefully its possible to set weight limits on different permits. You could do that as prepaid/time based system, tied to either person or ship. For example: Pay me this now and you can use all my gates with ships up to x kilos for y times/duration of 1 month.
 
Of course it would be nice to have restricted zones or traffic control. Only one gate to a system? Good no other organisation is allowed to bring military ships through and cargo will go through our trade port. (until someone with enough resources, and military power, sees opportunity and build another gate nearby). 
 
Hello again Lord_Void. Have you had any new evil business ideas since we last talked?

If I understood correctly how travel between star systems is supposed to work (player built jump gates or something like that). I would aim for an organization that seeks to build those jump gates between systems (perhaps explore to find some of those systems) and then charging people to use the gates (cheaper for them than building their own). 
 
Additionally, and especially with those systems/planets that the organisation would hopefully find before others/before there are major groups on them, we could set up trading hubs in addition to the gates to properly control the economy and logistics. I think I considered something interesting to this end in space elevator thread. Since the organisation would be spread around with the gates we could have members in each area keep their eyes open and set up an in game news agency (to control information in addition to the economy)
 
Late game having complete control of some planet/system as HQ for the organisation that is only reachable through our controlled gate would also be nice. 
 
Defending scattered gates and trade hubs would be one of the biggest things to worry about but those fees could be used to fund that. Alternatively some more militaristic organisation might be willing to offer either regional or general defense in exchange for free use of the gate for their own mobility. 
 
Anyone interested?
 
Also super star destroyer, have to have super star destroyer.

Simply put I like idea of building underground (bunkers, hidden bases etc.) but it can be very difficult to keep track of the caves, what's the shape of the cavern and especially to not accidentally dig into another room unintentionally. I learned this could be challenging in Space engineers except with free cam, which probably won't be possible in MMO.
 
My suggestion is to have some kind of scanner that lets builder to kind of see through the voxels, not necessarily details of what is going on in another cavern, but at least where all of the caverns are.This could have a limited range that would depend on how advanced tool you have. This could also be used to make maps of tunnels that could be useful. A deep mining tunnel could have signs shoving people what to except/where to go.