Jump to content

NanoDot

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Content Count

    1024
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by NanoDot

  1. After years of playing DU (started Day 1 of pre-alpha), crash-on-login is the "new normal" for me, lol After 4-6 crashes on login, it stabilises and runs fine for the rest of my session...
  2. Sounds similar to the early description of Titans in EVE, lol Except as time passed, Titans became a dime a dozen, relatively speaking. NQ have said they're not planning "super-weapons" at all.
  3. It seems that there are people enthusiastically promoting the use of crypto currencies in every in-development game that I follow. There has been no compelling reason presented for this crypto suggestion, so I can only imagine that some people are hoping to make some RL profit from diving into a "new" crypto scheme with a somewhat captive market (i.e. the game population).
  4. The way DU's safezones and Sanctuary moon system has been explained so far, it sounds like non-PVP'ers will have "safety" in less than 10% of the game world (if that much). So they can "play" in complete safety, but in a shoe-box... I'm not sure how appealing that will be.
  5. We have no idea whether a newly created character will get "free quanta". It's obviously something that's wide open to possible exploits and abuse, which will be extremely hard to counter. The more difficult it is for players to get quanta in a game, the more likely it will be that players will try to "game the system".
  6. People who "leave the game on Day 1" will have no effect on the economy, because they'll have no quanta. People that stop playing (or take a break) after playing for a few months will affect things though, because all their accumulated quanta goes out of circulation. NQ will probably monitor the money supply, and reactivate their buy-orders whenever the "active quanta" falls below a certain threshold.
  7. Unless NQ says otherwise, we have to assume that design concepts (even those in old blogs) remain valid for implementation. Automated defense systems for bases have been suggested by NQ on several occasions, but little to no details were ever given. Until NQ says more, we have to assume that they will be in the game in some form...
  8. The idea in DU is that new money will only be created by selling ore to NQ's buy orders on the market. Once NQ feels there's "enough" money in circulation, the buy orders will be temporarily withdrawn, until the point is reached where they are needed again. Having a single faucet that can be shut down at will, removes the need for "money sinks". The faucet is also independent of game play, no need to remove or suspend missions or loot tables, etc. Instead of things like paying rents or taxes to NPC's to drain excess money from the system, those payments in DU are made t
  9. If they REALLY preferred playing grouped, they would CHOOSE grouped play, lol None of the "convenience" features you listed prevent group play...
  10. I'm prepared to bet that the vast majority of MMO players actually spend more time playing "solo" than they spend in group activities ! If it was the other way around, MMO design would not have evolved in the way that it did from the days of EQ and UO. When the majority is "doing it wrong", it's only a matter of time before "wrong" becomes the new "right"...
  11. How would "Toughness" help a new player survive ? The attribute is increased by taking damage in combat, so a "vet" will have many times the toughness rating of a newbro, which will make them that much harder to kill. It may well result in a worse outcome for the newbro overall... It works in Kenshi, because your units become more effective over time as their Toughness increases, but the NPC's don't get the same resistance boost. So your units get better, but the NPC's you're fighting don't evolve in parallel (as other players would in a PVP-based MMO).
  12. There's no need for sophisticated rules to remove "abandoned structures" outside the safezone. DU already has the most effective structure-removing mechanic in gaming: FFA-PVP ! Inside the safezone, things get more complicated. NQ have raised the possibility of having "activity timers" to determine whether a structure in a safezone should be removed. If the owner of the structure does not login for a specified amount of time, the structure is removed. This is particularly important for hexes claimed on the sanctuary moons. The idea was that everything in that claimed hex would
  13. There have been several discussions around this topic over the years, and the feedback from NQ was basically "no tree planting in the environment". Apparently, trees and plants have the potential to massively stress the servers if we're allowed to plant them anywhere at will. Someone will go out and plant a forest of 50K trees, because they can... In the short term, the best we can hope for would be "plant elements" that can be deployed in the build space of a static core. There already are a few of those ingame, hopefully more will be added later.
  14. discordauth:fDr8-T-OnuPQ9OmDOumO66EzT702LLXPoLv4p-wqh5A=

  15. I haven't played EVE in a very long time, I didn't realise that high-sec ore belts had become so insignificant. I stand corrected !
  16. No, it's not the same thing. In EVE, the asteroid belts start regrowing after the next maintenance cycle. The resources always respawn, and always in the same place. Whether you collect them or someone else doesn't matter, it's a steady and endless supply of resources with a relatively short respawn timer. EVE's high-sec space doesn't have any ores of great value, but it has thousands of asteroid belts. None of them ever get very fat... To keep things balanced, that high rate of ore supply must be countered with a high rate of asset destruction, otherwise the bottom wil
  17. Yup, the implementation of PVP will be a "watershed moment" for DU, because that's when everyone will find out how viable their intended play style will be. Hard decisions will have to be made, either adapt or find a new game to play...
  18. Tbh, the whole "bumping" thing may be a storm in a teacup. Antigrav's are not intended to be the only propulsion for a ship. They are a temporary "high altitude hover engine", expensive to operate, but still cheaper and easier than getting the same effect via vertical atmo engines. So dropping below 1000m will at most be an irritant for the average dreadnought using antigrav's, because the ship's main engines will kick-in once the antigrav switches off.
  19. Once PVP implementation starts, we''ll see what NQ's ultimate aim is for DU, i.e. how viable they want to make life for small groups and solo operators. The easier it is to find "hidden bases", the fewer the game play options will be...
  20. Sure, but no amount of "alignment bumping" will damage the target. You still need to bring tacklers and enough firepower to do the job. "Bumping" an antigrav platform to below 1000m altitude will have the potential to make it crash, without the "attackers" needing to fire a single shot. So the whole intended design of combat (knocking out the Pulsors) will be circumvented. The solution is as simple and cheesy as the "bumping" tactic: make antigrav platforms immune to bumping !
  21. I did not miss your point at all. If the intention is to prevent damage (direct or indirect) resulting from ramming, then repeated "bumping" to force an antigrav platform below 1000m is just a workaround to circumvent the intended design. There's a fine line between "emergent gameplay" and "exploit"... If you're employing repeated "bumping", then you're exploiting the fact that ramming causes no direct damage to either vehicle. It's also my contention that "bumping" should have almost zero effect unless the mass of the two objects is fairly equal
  22. Given that NQ have already stated that "ramming" will not be a viable option to cause damage, I doubt that "ramming" will be a way to bring antigrav platforms down. It would invalidate NQ's policy.
  23. Well, we can only hope so, lol
  24. DU is billed as "The Civilisation Building Game" on the promotional material put out by NQ. Should we add nukes and change that to "The Civilisation Destroying Game" ?
  25. I think this is a great idea, but it would require so much "heavy lifting" in terms of development time that it's probably a whole expansion's worth of content. Something like EVE's expansion that added the modular T3 ships the first time...
×
×
  • Create New...