Captain Jack

First, I appreciate your interpretation of the statements, but I don't necessarily agree with your conclusion. 
Second, I don't have a problem with the game being hard, and I don't think anybody is asking for all risk to be removed.  All the OP asked for was the ability to walk through a forest (most likely when noone knows you) and not have every ship that flies over try to kill you just because you're there.  Personally all I would really want is for there to be a cost to attacking someone that will make it not worth it to kill every single person you come across.  If attacking others doesn't cost much, then people won't need any reason to attack others than that they can.  They won't care if they loose sometimes, or they might anger some big org.  That is what is fun to some people.  
 

The gist of this whole thing seems to be that a game with PvP, has to be played like a hard core PvP game, regardless of other content. There are dedicated non PvP games and dedicated PvP games, but a game with both is decidedly PvP.

so the guy with the burned house should have played differently BECAUSE the guy next door was a psycho? Your side of the argument is that one person gets to play however they want, and other people don't. Seems about right.

WOW! Good discussion here, so far...
 
What gives ones player the right to take whatever they want from another player?
 
It's not PvP that is the issue, it's the attitude on display that gives PvP a bad name, and for very good reason.
 
Exactly. A PvP player out ganking and griefing infringes upon those players that aren't into ganking and griefing. Two different styles of play yes, but one directly interferes with the other. It's not a two way street. The gankers and greifers think it is, and they are wrong.
 
yes, that ^
and back to this. Two people build houses. One person burns the other person's house down and laughs hahaha, welcome to the neighborhood. In order to prevent that, the other person should have become an asshole first?

PvP doesn't have to be all about getting more kills than the other guy.

WOW! Good discussion here, so far...
 
What gives ones player the right to take whatever they want from another player?
 
It's not PvP that is the issue, it's the attitude on display that gives PvP a bad name, and for very good reason.
 
Exactly. A PvP player out ganking and griefing infringes upon those players that aren't into ganking and griefing. Two different styles of play yes, but one directly interferes with the other. It's not a two way street. The gankers and greifers think it is, and they are wrong.
 
yes, that ^
and back to this. Two people build houses. One person burns the other person's house down and laughs hahaha, welcome to the neighborhood. In order to prevent that, the other person should have become an asshole first?

PvP doesn't have to be all about getting more kills than the other guy.

@HadesGood point re defences first, think that is second nature to anyone who has played games like this by now Just I do not thing we will be building literally houses made of straw to be burnt down either. The example was just a good way of describing the issue via the metaphor of the house.

@Forodrim Your right that this is a minefield, always has been always will be. People often, so I am told, have trouble seeing things from multiple perspectives and thus can not "see the other point of view". PvP needs to be a fun activity that is accessible to all and not restricted (too much?) while at the same time not putting off those who do not choose to engage in pvp unless forced to. The issue tends to the those attitudes of those are often contrary to each other. Thus a minefield.

Yes, once you have established that "baseline" (or starting point) you then have the "human elements" that change the outcome.

Being a sharpshooter (technically would have no affect if the shield was equally spread over the body) is a skill so would be a human element.
Other non-human elements would include things like the environmental surroundings.
Hence in a previous comment I used the term "lowest common denominator" (might not have been here, getting confuddled), which in a game things boils down to simply because the are no real world consequences of actions (or so many players believe, that is another whole, off topic, debate). So people get to do what ever they want.

 

Actually, and what is really scary, is the "method of play" that Zamarus is talking about often causes the player who lost his house to "rage quit", after spending dozens, or hundreds of hours, building his beloved house, after checking with his neighbours they were okay to do it, or often doing it when the were no neighbours.
 
Then the person burns down his house, with everything inside it and is told "build a better house", "hire mercenaries", "forgive him" (& start again), "fight back" (with what, it was in his house remember), "move somewhere else" (can do that, just also the same as "start again").

So one player spent minimal time undoing another players entire enjoyment in the game, leading the game to lose a player, NQ to lose a subscriber, while "psycho" goes on and does this to 20 more houses. Not all will leave, but say 2 or 3.

Now scale it up. To a universe size.

I am not saying it should not be possible, just it should not be easy either.

so the guy with the burned house should have played differently BECAUSE the guy next door was a psycho? Your side of the argument is that one person gets to play however they want, and other people don't. Seems about right.

This statement is inherently missing the point; if you have players who are not PvP pro (or PvP shy to put it another way) your forcing them to do something they do not like to do (go on the offensive) and with so many other games to choose from it will put off a number of players simply because they are being forced to engage in a behaviour that is not in keeping with their nature.

While you may reply "they can go play another game then" that will also miss the point that you need the numbers of resource gatherers to fuel the PvP battles. If those resource gatherers are not there then other people have to fill that space, who do not necessarily want to do it, thus lowering their enjoyment of the game, and further driving players away.

As @Forodrim points out above, you have to have a balance between the two opposing natures of players in these sorts of games. Without either one the game loses its point.

When it comes to time invested; you have to not use singular examples;~

As a PvP player will generally not just be targetting one target (targets of opportunity and all), so it takes a PvP player 2 weeks to get their ship ready, with that ship they can target multiple non-pvp players.

Should it take 2 weeks for EACH non-pvp player to be in the same posistion as the PvP player? In the singular case yes, in the multiple case no.

As you go from one PvP player being able to attack multiple "defenders" (might be best term to use?) who each have put 2 weeks in to building their defences the time balance shifts heavily in favour of the PvP player.

Conversely you do not want the PvP player to feel like they have to spend all this time to get in a position ready to attack, to be left at the end of it being in no "better" position than a singular "defender" player. The PvP player has assumed the risk factor so should be slightly better off (the margin of how much better would be the crux of balance) than the "defender" assuming they can overcome the defences.

This game will be all about working together, so switch out "player "for "groups" if you would like, it does not change the example.

 

But exactly because of this, PVP is a touchy topic. All Sandboxes I have played so far are torn between the two player bases. The non-PVP people (miners,crafters etc, often dismissivly called "Carebears") and the PVP crowd. If you don't get the balance right, and make both sides welcome, feel like they have a place in the game and their playstyle is viable this can tore the game apart. I think more then one sandbox failed because of this. 
 
but they created the environment which makes this possible and even encourages it. You mentioned killboards before and those are a perfect example of this. There are players who only want to boost their killboard, they do not care if their target is worth it, has good loot etc.. They just want the kill to boost their killboard-ego
 

I've mentioned this before, but it is worth bringing up.  The power of defensive vs offensive tech is of central importance to the type of gameplay in the game.  One example is if it takes 1 month of resources for an agressor to kill someone whos defenses took 1 day to gather the resources to power, then the aggressors have to have a good reason or overwhelming numbers to attack.  This makes PVP functions more tactical, and meaningful.  When an outpost gets overrun it would take something other than just offensive might.  It would still make sense to attack ships if you know that their cargo would more than make up for the difference in losses, but new players and people just exploring wouldn't be worth the resource cost to destroy.  There would still be people attacking and killing people for no reason other than that they had the resources to spare, but it would reduce it.  
 
This simple mechanic is an intrinsic part of PvP balancing, and depending on where NQ puts the fulcrum we'll see how the game plays. 

@Felonu
I couldn't have put it better myself. That's one of the main things that drew me to the game, is that in most interviews JC never really talks much about combat. Even when asked about combat, its more of an after thought, compared to all the other features. Its a stark contrast to the way most space game developers talk. Even on the website, the first thing you see in BOLD letters is "Dual Universe: THE CIVILIZATION BUILDING MMO ". You have to scroll down 7 pages, to the bottom, before it even mentions combat. An even then it doesn't says free for all PVP combat, it says Warfare.
 
I think every player understands that you will have the ability to kill each other. But, I don't think free for all PVP is Novaquark's main focus for DU, based on what they say. Ultimately, it will be the mindset of players who shape this game.
 
@Captain Jack 
The way I see it is, civilizations can only be build if there is stability first. You can't build on unstable ground or in an unstable environment.
 
Scenario 1: If players have no way of securing there build site an resources while working on a project, then what will happen is 90 percent of the player base will stay in the 1 crowded safezone, and the whole Universe beyond the safezone will become a PVP gankfest, with nothing but bases used like combat arena's for PVP. An eventually, gamers may feel DU is no different then other space games, not worth the monthly fee, and move on to another game.
 
Scenario 2: If players have access to good defensive systems (Shield Domes, Ion/EMP cannons, enemy/weapon detection, land/space Mines, etc..) and not just guns, then it should create a good enough balance that players can actually build civilizations outside of the safezone. Grouping up in a Organization doesn't help most of the time, Because you're friends/org mates aren't always online, and if you have to spend most of you're time chasing away griefers, and most of your money paying for protection, then you have less time/money to do anything else.
 
I'm very curious to see what DU becomes, because regardless of all the game mechanics, every MMO is shaped by the mindset of the playerbase.
 
 
 
 
 

I disagree that it has combat at it's heart.  Yes, PVP will be part of the game, but that doesn't make it the games heart.  Building is this games heart.  When JC talks passionately about the game he talks about coming together to build great wonderful things.  He barely mentions PVP most of the time.  It's the community that try to make PVP the most important part of the game.  I understand that necessity drives innovation, and that PVP will be a large part of the economy.  If you think about the real world though, most people don't fight for their lives daily.  There are parts of the world where they might, but most of the world lives in peace most of the time.  That is because for most people the risk of fighting over a thing is not worth the value of the thing.
 

@Aetherios
 
Yes, a lot of people from Eve are looking at this game for how it can be a better Eve, but a lot of people that have hated there experiences or never wanted to play Eve are also into the idea of this game.  
 
This game can and hopefully will appeal to those of us who won't even consider games that are balanced toward PVP because of our experiences with Eve.  If this game has the same player atmosphere of Eve, then a lot of the interested players will move on.  Those of us who don't like Eve want this game to be more than we believe that game could ever be.  We want it to be oriented toward building and growing a society together.  We don't want the entire game to be about war and destruction.  

"Hello.
 
Dual Universe doesn't need to become evil. A game is always what you make it. There will be times when people decide to help an aggressed player because they pity him. There will be times when they decide to deal with the aggressors because there are scores to be settled. And, yet, there will be times when they leave both sides to fight and capitalise on that to finish off the victor. If new members to the game can't see the forest for the trees, it may not be entirely their fault. At the same time, it could be their fault alone. As said in my previous post, when people lose a lot, they often decide to fight back or make others pay. That's called displacement in Psychology. It's completely natural. Others choose to repress, but sooner or later, they quit because they can't keep up with the losses, or become exhausted with constantly feeling threatened. 
 
PvP is not a touchy topic. Please let's not make it one. This game is about more than just fighting, just the same way it is about more than just building. Both are important, both are necessary. There is fun to be had in tactics, excitement in adrenaline...and plenty of spreadsheets in industry to supply the materials for that. No one is a PvPer from the moment he starts a game till the day he logs off for the final time. Believe me, no one - not even in Eve. If you see such a character, it's probably an alt: the main character is doing something else to finance the losses: trading, PvEing...or even mining in the corporation controlled territory. Once the losses become too much to sustain, every sensible player takes a pause to refill the coffers. That's DU. Find what you like doing, and find something to support it. If what you like doing sustains itself, it's win-win for you. Be happy.
 
@Captain Jack 
Like Eve, like Eve, like Eve...Both are MMOs, both have content, and both refrain from forcing a player to follow a linear storyline. I understand if you don't like Eve, or the tactics in Eve: many have left, many are leaving and many more will leave. At the same time: many have joined, many are joining and many will still join. For all the prophecies of doom and declining statistics, the game has survived, even more so as they had 6000 players in a single system two days ago. Of course, time dilation made the battle a horror, but that draws the next topic for you. How DU is not like Eve. 
 
Eve doesn't give you the ability to build whatever you want, however you want. DU doesn't give you a blank slate with a ship and the freedom to turn into a thorn in the side for bigger ships or an exploration frigate. Because DU doesn't give you a ship. DU tells you to create one. People in Eve are interested in DU, and they keep marvelling at the potential for creativity that DU holds. 
 
Eve doesn't give you an infinite universe like DU, and DU doesn't limit your interaction with planets to collecting resources, like Eve. Eve does not provide you with a completely safe environment once you undock. Even in high-sec, you can and will be attacked if there is sufficient reason. DU does, even if it's only one planet. Make no mistake, I do not support glorifying the ego of players in Eve who want CCP to push out all the new players from high sec so that they can populate their killboards. The players who fly the most expensive ships know what activity is involved in building them: mining. 
 
Don't blame DU for having humans play it. Should you want a completely automated environment, DU cannot and will not provide that for you. CCP did not create bumping, or griefing, or killing sprees. These things were there before Eve because there were gamers and people before Eve - even as there were people and gamers before DU. People are not senseless robots. Unlike NPCs, they will not attack without reason once you enter their reaction zone. Find out why they attack you, or why they look for you and take the right measures to protect yourself. Make yourself happy and make the gankers sad. There are ways to do that...and most of the time, you don't even have to do it yourself: someone else is always willing - for the fun or for the right price. Be a human, and unlike an NPC, find that person, if you are incapable of defending yourself against aggressors. Who knows? Your aggressors may just turn out to be friends in disguise.
 
There is so much more, but you have to find it. It won't come to you by itself. 
 
Cheers.
 
"

Congratulation,
for this lesson, Aetherios.
Even DualUniverse will become evil!

I think the OP was suggesting sliders to adjust different elements of the provided engine noises, not custom imported sounds. Assuming the engine sounds have multiple elements, though not sure they do.
 
I really like the idea. I mean, customization is a key element of this game and variations in sound would go a long way in adding variety.

We want this forum to be a place where everyone feels empowered to have an open and friendly discussion with us (the Novaquark team) as well as other community members.  To help make this possible we have created rules we feel will keep things positive and ensure that proper netiquette is observed.

By posting on this forum, either publicly or through private message or other means, you explicitly agree to follow the rules and guidelines posted here. If you do not agree with these rules – in whole or in any part – then do not post. All members will be treated as if they have read and understood these rules and guidelines.
 
(I) Be respectful and courteous.
The Dual Universe forums and community site are provided for Dual Universe players and those interested in discussing topics directly related to Dual Universe. We understand that community members may disagree with each other, and even with us, but we expect opinions to be expressed in a reasonable and polite manner.  It is important to maintain an atmosphere of civility and respect, so that all voices may be heard.
 
(II) Communicate constructively.
All communication, whether between players, moderators or Dual Universe staff, must be constructive. Posts without constructive commentary can distract from the topic at hand, reduce the visibility of valuable communication, and discourage others from participating in the conversation.
 
(III) Following actions are prohibited:
Posting off-topic replies or replies that are likely to drag the discussion off topic. Necroposting on old threads (unpinned threads in which the last reply is older than 2 months). Spamming on a specific topic. This includes creating multiple discussions on the same topic in the same or multiple forums. Cross-posting a specific reply. This is also a form of spamming. Posting an image without a meaningful text. A meme is not a response to a discussion. They are usually disruptive and can be easily misinterpreted. The same is true for animated GIFs. Calling out other players or community members by name to shame them for actions or opinions you may disagree with. Naming and shaming is not tolerated. Posting in any manner that disrupts an official thread. Official threads are topics created by the Novaquark team for the purpose of collecting feedback and opinions. Threatening legal action. Unfortunately, this kills all conversation immediately as we must refer all further discussion to our legal team. To preserve the conversation intact and unaltered these types of responses may be immediately archived. Trolling (provoking) people. Flaming (insulting, attacking) people. Picking fights isn’t a good way to make your point. It usually means you don’t have one and are just trying to cause trouble. Using profanity. Including creative spelling or character substitution to bypass word filters. Using the report system in an abusive manner. This is a form of harassment and a tremendous waste of time for both staff and moderators. Discussions and comments involving real life politics, ideology or religion. These can be incendiary topics and will usually lead to inappropriate behavior and uncomfortable situations. Publicly posting any private discussions, conversations, or other material between a user and a Novaquark employee (confidentiality policy). Refusal to follow the directions of Novaquark staff or representatives.
The use of an alternate account to circumvent a forum suspension is forbidden at all times. Additionally, the use of alternate account(s) to influence or misrepresent opinions is strictly prohibited. All forum accounts must adhere to the forum rules and Code of Conduct. Failure to comply can result in disciplinary actions against all associated accounts.
 
Violating these guidelines may trigger a warning, followed by either a temporary or permanent suspension of forum privileges depending on the severity and frequency of the violations.
 
(IV) The following actions may result in the immediate suspension of forum privileges:
There are some actions severe enough to result in immediate temporary or permanent suspension of posting privileges without prior notification. Serious or sustained offenses may result in suspension of not only the user's forum account but game account as well.
 
Threatening other members or Novaquark staff. No, “just joking’ is not a defense. We take this very seriously. Publicly revealing account or personal information of any person, community member or Novaquark staff. Posting harmful links pointing to viruses, malware, worms or trojans. Posting sexually explicit content. Including posting links to such content. Hate speech is not tolerated in any form. Attacking any ethnic group, religion, gender or sexual preference/identity. Promoting exploits, cheating programs, piracy or any sort of illegal activity. Attempt to impersonate Novaquark staff or another member of the community.  
Violations of these rules may result in further steps taken with outside authorities or agencies. This may include your Internet Service Provider (ISP) and local or national Law Enforcement agencies.
 
(V) Abide by moderators and Novaquark employee’s instructions.
 
If you disagree with a moderator or employee's actions, do not discuss or challenge the matter in forum posts. Send an e-mail to forum@novaquark.com, and be sure to include your forum handle (name displayed on the forum), but NOT your password, and clearly state your concerns.
 
IMPORTANT: Forum content is moderated at Novaquark's sole discretion, and content may be modified, removed, or otherwise restricted by Novaquark employees and/or moderators.
 
Best Regards,
The Novaquark Team.

Not sure what the space craft and other vehicle engines sound like in game, but I thought It would be a cool idea to be able to customize the engine sounds. I know some engines are larger and some smaller. Those changes should effect the sounds it makes. 
 
Almost similar to the customization we should be getting with Space Craft UI with speedometers and altitude we should be able to customize the same with the sounds like adjusting the loudness, rumble, vibration, echo, crackling, and other sound parameters. Maybe have a simple sound editor in the scripts or just be able to pull up a menu when selecting engine types and be able to adjust simple sliders to adjust the sound it produces. Maybe even ship interior sounds like mechanical and electrical beeping.
 
What do you guys think?
 
I think this would be very cool!

Hello,
 
I saw this game in less than a week.
Before, I felt Star Citizen will be great, but Dual Universe ... wow, it has much more to offer in terms of gameplay and what we can do.
 
We can do almost everything. And if we don't want to do something such as building ships, we can directly buy one from an other player.
And we can also program in the game (autopilot, security system, ... maybe another game as usual with this kind of feature)
 
I find it fantastic. It make me want to play it now. But I have to wait.
 
 
I havn't purchased anything yet, but I will surely pledge in a near future (when available).

Hi everyone! Just wanted to stop in and say hello. I have been following this game for a couple months now. I am very excited to see what they do with this game. I currently play Elite Dangerous and No Man's Sky. I also dabble in a little bit of Star Citizen. I super excited to see this game make it.

It looks fantastic! I hope to see more makeovers like this
 
One little nitpick though: I think they should change some of the "everyone"s and "everything"s to 'anyone' and 'anything'. For example: "Everyone can be tomorrow’s greatest innovator and rule the world with their product designs, or production factories." I get they are trying to hype people up and do some marketing and such, but this just sounds ridiculous to me. Anyone could be the the greatest innovator, but not everyone could be the greatest at the same time. Same thing for leadership. Anyone can lead an organization, but not everyone can lead. Some people have to follow or there is no point in leading. 

AFAIK, the combat systems will be the last major game feature to be implemented, so it will be many months yet before there's video's of combat mechanics available.
 
NQ want to implement the "full game loop" in sequence, so first scanning and mining, then refining, then crafting and building. Creation of things will come first, destruction will come last. In a way, I think NQ want to send a message that DU is not intended to be "all about combat"...