Meumera

We agree, when we fled Earth 2027, we didn't have FTL or Warp Drives. We also agree that the Arkships that traveled for over 10,000 years embarked an AI to initiate colonization. An AI... for 10,000 years... just kept busy with low-level operations to monitor and maintain the ship's integrity. I think this is a huge waste of time. Here's the idea: At the beginning, we implemented a directive to the AI for which theorizes and thus potentially discovers a viable FTL technology (and 2-3 other new technologies in the process). And if the AI couldn't work at full power, it got 10,000 years old. Even at 10%, this leaves a good margin for development. (Here we go. We have a RP excuse)

I'M BE BACK

NQ has released the NovaWrimo compilations of 2016 and 2016 https://dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/07/05/novawrimo-collections/ Thank for this o/ However...

Your welcome among us o/

[fr] Cela existe déja : Lua script dans un "Programing board" Les exemples dans cette vidéo ne sont qu'une petite parti des possibilité offerte. Un altimètre est prévue, si il n'est pas déjà implémenté. [en] This already exists: Lua script in a "Programing board" The examples in this video are only a small part of the possibilities offered. A altimeter is expected, if it is not already implemented.

Probably never. For the same reason that normal collision will not be implemented : 1) The calculation of voxel's collision and destruction would be truly atronomic and would explode the servers 2) For the gameplay and for avoiding the creation of missiles: You make 100 small vessels sacrificable and you destroy the target vessel without risk

Um, I'm surprised no one is talking of the FTL OST by Ben Prunty https://benprunty.bandcamp.com/album/ftl

In the Lore, there is a logical explanation to the position of the Arkships. In "crashing" on the surface of Alioth, it sinks into the ground, the Arkships can then creates electricity by geothermal energy. I find this all equally realistic and well thought out.

The Organizations system in DU is extremely simple and flexible but full of possibility. All political forms are possible, from absolute dictatorship to total democracy. All the rest is only a question of internal organization, of how and what one wants to do. DU is an authentic sandbox (very big, the box), with sands more or less interesting. Novaquark just wants to do big it as much as possible and provide us with a maximum of tools An article on how Org works in DU An article on how Org works in DU https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2015/03/20/organizations-build-your-corporation-faction-nation-or-empire/ Another article on the management of rights in an Org https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2017/03/31/organizations-purpose-management/ To return to this idea of in-game chanel voice, the question has already been raised (I do not know where) and there has been no answer from Novaquark. In expect, Discord is an excellent software that perfectly fulfills this function (a lot of Org have one). But if he had to make an in-game voice chanel, it will be like all the rest, simple and flexible but full of possibility, that each one can customize according to his needs. And if you wanted to make a round table system, well, you can do it. (or "you can du it" ; )

Thank you for making me discover this site \o/ Now, I can die in peace.

No, is not a furry Org, actually juste a french Org "Projet N.O.M.A.D.E" https://community.dualthegame.com/organization/projet-nomade-nomade-exploration-tech-french-franc A alliance, hum, not now (waiting for more about DU) and I can't speak for my Org. But thank, it's noticed

The proud black dragon white-eyed that I am would have loved to join you, but I have already committed myself to another organization. I wish you good luck ?

A simple way to counter this possibility is to do as the Beam in Minecraft: The TCU must in the open air for work. But as Lethys says, NQ will ensure that the TCU can not become invulnerable.

Perhaps in winning this contest you will get one free

I love this topic/question. Simple yet complex. Not useful and full of meaning. I am nothing added except Novus, Diplós, Venturis & Solus Venturis are good ideas.

I do not want to be the one who will break this perfect balance

Agree with you, Devu There is also this detail :

I just saw the different Input currently scheduled https://support.dualthegame.com/hc/en-us/articles/115002024353-Inputs The third image is interesting Especially : ESC for leave ship Oula Euh I suggest politely, but insistently, to change this key. Otherwise we have not finished counting the accidental ejections of his ship.

O_o Okay, I leave you the place.

Then it will be me!

In-game Ad made by players. Is a so good idea, its will make the game more immersive.

The law of prohibition of AI dates from the Old Earth, it no longer runs on Novak, so from a point of view purely technical, you do not infringe the Law (since it no longer exists) Seriously 1) It is unlikely that you have connected LUA scripts to Aphelia, since it does not have the right to connect to anything outside the Arkship. 2) The LUA script will most certainly have a limiting scope. This seems already planned in a certain way with the operation of the Core Units. 3) Unless genius absolute programming genius, I think the LUA scripts are too weak to create an AI. Advanced automation without problems, but not Artificial Intelligence. 3.5) The creation of an AI, even basic is already hard enough like that. Did you have the level for? 4) Harvesting information by means outside the game is already on the table "3rd Party Interface Extensions". Currently there has been no formal communication on this issue. About "something worse than humanity" and AI in general. JC Baillie, founder of NQ, created a robotics company and has a PhD in Artificial Intelligence. Assumption entirely personal, but I think he has already thought about it. The "proof", the Lore Bible speaks of AI and it was not anecdotal. After what form will it take, no idea, they will probably surprise us. The possibility of this found with de Reaper-like is not to exclude.

I have nothing against the control of a Gate, on the contrary, I understand perfectly the tactical and economic stakes (if I ever have the opportunity, I would benefit (although, I'm too nice for that) . What I find unbalanced is how to control the Doors. The system RDMS right system is Passive. Those who create the door are won, they have all the powers and it is impossible to remove them (except by destroying the Gate and rebuilding one behind). This will create a first come, first served system. Once they are wearing them, they just take out their deck chair, drink a coca while the tax is automatically collected. They can even take a nap, since are denied access to their enemies (Tactics and Strategy 0). While a patrol that monitors the Gate, has an Active system. We have to organize patrols, volunteers and a sufficient fleet. This can even lead to the creation of a class of special "Guardian" ships, too big for this moved efficiently, but with sufficient firepower to "encouraged" to pay the fee. Otherwise they will also pay for it, from their own ships (KABOUM). And we are not safe from a surprise attack. In destroying the gatekeepers, attack them will take control. And if they want to keep it, they will have to organize. Is much more interesting from a point of view tactical and gameplay.

An idea I have not seen: What do you think of a system with Routers? Like the WEB and its routers. We have a Gate A within range of B, and a Gate C within range of B Gate but not an A. Since the Gateways would serve as a Router, it would be possible to go from A to C directly (without going out to B), the journey would be just a little longer than if we had just done A to B (example 75% of A>B + B>C) For me, it is the most intelligent solution (from a technological point of view). For the RDMS rights on the Doors, I too think that there should not be any. That too unbalanced. If an organization wants to control a Gate, it will have to post a patrol, nothing prohibits it, it gives a little more depth to the gameplay. And if RDMS there should be, they will not disallow the Router function.