Jump to content

Aesir

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Aesir

  1. Would be nice to have a way to change a bit the properties of the weapons, but this is indeed very risky.
    There is 2 possibles ways:
     - either you add modules to the weapons in order to improve them. This is "easy" to balance.
     - either you make flexible properties, with rules to fix the edges, and drawback to compensate the bonus.
    for example:

    you increase damage but you reduce range, you increase fire rate but you reduce precision, etc. You can also combine:
    You increase damage by x2, you reduce firerate by 3.5 and increase the size of the module by 4. You need to have consequent drawback. You need a "base module" to modify.

    But this is very heard IMO to correctly balance and will ends up with a "meta" prefering very few type of weapons. Which is the exact opposite of the original goal, ie propose a lot of different weapons.

     

    Anyway, you can still start with normal, stats fixed, prefab weapons, then go latter on customization.

  2. On 9/2/2017 at 4:18 PM, Vorengard said:

    in order to move voxels need to be attached to a Dynamic Core Unit

    This.

     

    I think, whatever the quantity/mass on the asteroids, even 1 "raw" voxel unit of asteroid and you will break on it, whatever the thruster you have. Raw voxel from planet/asteroid/moon cannot be moved, they can later on be in perpetual movement, but they won't be movable by something. Even if you create a ship 3 times bigger than your asteroid and ram on it, your ship will suffer damage and the asteroid will absolutely not react.

  3. 2 hours ago, Zamarus said:

    Where is the "I have alpha access but i don't want to spend time on that project" option?

    here : "No, I have no time for fun, i'm here for sucess"
    If you feel like you just don't want to spend time on this project
    or
    No, I prefer to play alone and be alone forever
    If you feel like you prefer to do your stuff alone, ie not build with the others.
     

    23 minutes ago, Captain Jack said:

    This sounds like a terrible idea, but I'm in. Has anyone given any thought to city planning? I mean, do we build the roads first, or the football stadium? Do we have to vote for the Mayor of Alpha Land, or will it be a free for all? What about laws? Since space ships might be a ways off, will we have a rail system or perhaps we should build near water. We're gonna need mules to pull the barges. Not it.

    First, let's see which tools we have, then we will see accordingly, probably be a bit of FFA, as long as we don't have people destroying each others building, we are ok.

  4. The idea is simple, we alpha players, have the opportunity to test and try before everyone. So why not build our own city, as an experience ? Anyone can join and build is own stuff, no need for big. So, who's in ?
     

    Why this ?

     -Do a social experience
     -Strengthen the community
     -See how much it's doable or not
     -Test the game, and see if we have to address issues to the dev, or new ideas.


    It would be very nice if the major organization participate (even with few members) to this and have their own quarter here.

    I do not want to own the city, I just want to do a prove of concept, see if it's socially acceptable, as well as doable.

    It has to be a community project, and it can be done because we are not yet a huge amount of players. We are all here as tester, so let's do so and see what we can do with this game.

    Thank you for your vote, whatever the answer.

     

    EDIT:
    I created an Organization for convenient reason, it will just let us build together under the same zone and have no other purpose than rising the Alpha City.
    https://community.dualthegame.com/organization/alpha-city

  5. 15 minutes ago, Lethys said:

    losing ships is a faucet, not a sink ;)

     

    Sure but open hundreds of faucet and ... you know :P

    12 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    Constructs however - like ships - are fair game for salvage, in other words, you blow up the enemy's Core Unit, you can then mine their ship :P 

    Ha nice, I thought salvage won't be their until some game extension.

     

    We will see anyway, yet I feel like I will stack money as much as I can because I expect deflation :P

  6. 5 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

     I mean, hey, gold is gold, right?

    Yeah I thought about this also, would be nice to use gold or precious minerals to trade directly :P
     

    6 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    That's what CCP did with EVE Online. NPC missions in EVE are paying out of the moeny Jita taxes on trading.

    Most likely, yes, but in EvE you have both a way to reduce the money quantity with taxes and a way to increase it with NPC, so player will regulate this by just playing.
    I mean there is an in and an out. I strongly believe it's not just a matter of game design but a matter of money regulation.

     

    We will see, but I could bet a huge quantity of coins that they will need to inject money :)
    Just because if you lose your bare new starship you just bought on the market with your pocket money, then the said money is gone so is the starship, or the other way.

    Or maybe I miss something ? I thought if you get kill only a part of what you have will drop and the rest will disappear ? (like EvE right)

  7. 3 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    According to what NQ said on money injections, they will have Bots do Buy Orders at first, until they can inject enough money in the economy, then they can simply jsut remove the bots.

    It's a good plan.

    I guess they will figure out another clean way to inject money after that. You always need to inject money, even a little bit.

  8. 5 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    I mean, there won't be minerals EVERYWHERE, just in certain places.

    Ha didn't know that, cool, yet still I hope their will be enough :P
     

    5 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    At least, that's what smart people will do :P

    You mean like me right.

     

    Ok for the holes, what about the rest ? Does NQ will do only buy order on the market to inject money ?

  9. Did NQ said something about limited amount of mining materials ? I think they said so.
    That means if a NQ bot buy those limited material, they will vanish from the game :P
    I know there is plenty, but I already see a holes planet...
    Also, they will constantly need to inject money in the game, from one way or another, because of player turnover, they will be constantly new joiner without money and people leaving the game with money. Plus, they will be people stacking money, limiting money circulation.

    I guess the whole topic is a very tricky things, that's probably why EvE hire professional to regulate the free market.

  10. 5 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    @Aesir

     it's like you never have played a game with P2P.

    The notino of "you donb't choose who you vote for is just false on concept. I can hack my client to never send arange of updates o nthe hostlist tha t says "my Buddy got hit with X amount od amage". 

    You didn't get it, it's ok. The only thing you can send is "where did I fire", Hostlist does not expect anything else from your client. You don't chose your Hostlist, they don't chose you neither, they are selected by the server. HostList are not your organization mate, they are not necessarily someone close to you, it doesn't matter where they are on the map and who they are. HostList may be a wrong name I should have said "ListOfClientWhoGonnaHostThePhysicsComputation" but it's a bit long for a name.

     

    6 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    I guess hat yo uare saying is "go screw yourselves Australians". cause P2P and Australia won't mix.

    I will nerver say that :)

     

    Cheers.

     

  11. 1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    That's even worse, sicne a group of peoople with hacked cleitns will jsut say "nope, my buddy over here never got hit".

    That's actualyl even worse for the game, people will actualyl buy accounts to have more "votes" on whaty actually went down in combat.

    You don't choose who you are voting for, obviously... neither you choose who is voting for you.

     

    1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    Also, you miss something crucial, each ship in DU is an instance on its own, so your confirmations will run off of that isntance's PVO in your model. 

    And no, you can't enforce a person with a 16GB RAM to host an isntance. That's actaully an order of magnitude worse than forcing people to have to get a VPN to pla a game without fear of being trracked and on top of that, it's making hacking the game even more possible.

    But you don't do have to do that to simulate a bullet hitting boxes :huh:

     

    1 hour ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    P2P is crap, it always was, it's nop longer 1995 and DU is not a F2P game that can't afford to do something other than partial P2P to cut down o nserver costs. If you ican't see the problems arisign from Peer-2-Peer connections mate,e I can't help you to see the problems yourself.

    Well I do know the pro and con, we talked about it already ;)

    I'm not arguing it is the best model ... it just have pro and con, you clearly don't like it, but it doesn't make it "always crap", saying it's for 1995 F2P games is a but rough. For Honor is in P2P, their is a nice post explaining this choice bellow:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/forhonor/comments/5u8jlh/why_forhonors_p2p_is_preferable_over_dedicated/

    Anyway, thx for the talk mate, i'm done. See ya.

     

  12. 13 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

     P2P in fact is the exact opposite of what NQ wants to implement. Planetsidee 2 does something liek the thing you said, and tat game is just full of cheaters whop are immune to damage. And P2P game is full of these issues.

    P2P is something, letting a person involved in a fight doing the damage calculation of this fight on his own computer then send the result to the server, is something else.
    You assume that it has to be like this, but no, you can send the physics calculation to tiers computers who have no clue who is fighting who and will give a result, you cannot cheat that, you don't even know who gonna compute your fight. Plus it's not 1 other computer who do the math, but several, and majorities give the result. That's kinda the basic of blockchain.


    A and B are fighting, A fire at B.
    C, D, E ,F are computing the physics for A and B.

    D say: B didn't get hit.
    C, E and F says: B did get hit.
    "B did get hit" is the majority, and so say the server. A and B can say whatever they want, they have no vote here.

     

  13. 7 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    @Aesir your suggestion can't really work, cause of the fact you watn to ping people. That's why Star Citiizen is such a bad game and wil lbe a bad game on launch. People can delay what packets to send to other palyers in PvP. I can simply let other players know "hey, I didnd't got hit", which in turn will just ruin the game.

    No you can't, you are not the one deciding if you get hit or not...
     

     

    8 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    And even worse, P2P inherently means Johnny the Psycho-Killer can ping the IP of a guy that blew him up in-game and then harrass them IRL.That's how Call of Duty has becoem impossible to play unless you use a VPN, cause otherwise anyone can find you - ltierally, it's not THAT difficult to ping someone back if you know how.

     

    13 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    Yes, what you said can work, nobody sad it wouldn't work, what I am saying is it shouldn't be done, cause of the problems iwth psychopaths who would trac your UP and harrass you IRL. And no, not everyone has a VPN, NOR SHOULD THEY HAVE TO get a VPN to play DU, in-case Johnny the Psycho-Killer woke up the wrong way.

    That's actually a good reason, I knew about it, there is probably a way to avoid it correctly without setting your own VPN. But well, that's part of the things to fix, you could use a part of the server to redirect the messages betwwen P2P co, but that's kinda heavy.
    Anyway yes, that's not a perfect solution, it needs more encapsulation and so on to deal with this kind of issues.

     

    17 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    No, no, no target lsit, only Action Prediction systems. If people palying from Australia can't find latency an issue in ESO 's EU megaserver, I can't see why DU would suffer that much with a cloud-server.

    You mean because you may have latency with people from your target list, ie if you're in EU and they are in Australia.

    HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM yes, that's the argument, can't see any workaround from this fact :P

     

     

  14. On 09/09/2017 at 2:07 AM, Partum said:

    So if bullets arent going to be able to exist. How would combat take place? What would be the replacement of the bullets? I guess I just dont understand how this would all work.

    If you read everything that Twerk said here, and you didn't get it, then try to have a look at The Elder Scrol Online gameplay and imagine the same with starship. Won't be the same, but it is an entry point.

     

    21 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:

    But, that's the point of the whole thing... the actor model is there for many a reason (mainly for the way they partition the server to server clsuters to maintain a playercount er voluime of space, so we don't have lag spikes or the game having to reside to EVE's Time Dilation).

    I am sorry I probably didn't explain it correctly.

    My concept is not to replace the existing server implementation and design, but use it, see it as a plus on TOP of the existing.

    I do not have all the answer of course, I don't have enough knowledge and I don't even know how really the server is implemented (and I'll nerver know unless I join NQ).
     

    But I had a talk with few friends who actually personnaly know the guy who implemented a part of the server we are all from the same school but my friends (as the said guy from NQ) did network and security specialization.
    They told me that my idea could work, maybe, somehow :P

     

    ALERT: this is not what NQ MUST DO, this is an idea, I'm not saying it has to be like this in anyway, it is more an idea from a brainstorming and certainly not a prove concept.

    So I try to explain it better:

     

    You have your normal DU implementation with the combat system that Twerk described earlier.
    If I do a short recap of the system it could be something like this :
    I'm sitting in my spacecrat and I see a foe, I want to agress him.
    I lock my target (rather soft lock) by aiming at it, I do see on my UI that i'm locking him.

    Depending of my weapons stats, speed, direction and resistances of my target, I will do a certain amount of damage when firing (they will be probably much more parameters)

     

    In my scenario it would be:

    I'm sitting in my spacecrat and I see a foe, I want to agress him.
    I aim at it, using a crosshair. There is no lock.

    If after firing, a bullet hit then, depending of my weapons stats, speed, direction and resistances of my target, I will do a certain amount of damage when firing (they will be probably much more parameters, we could also thing about where did the bullets hits the target)

     

    As explained by Twerk, my scenario is for now impossible with the current implementation of the game because of techical limitation of the current design.

     

    Now, the concept to make it POTENTIALLY possible :

    I'm sitting in my spacecrat and I see a foe, I want to agress him.

      *At this point, My game client already have a list of other player's client that I can connect in P2P, they have been selected because they are availible and they have a good ping with     me. Let's call this list, "HostList".
    I aim at it, using a crosshair. There is no lock.
      *That's a lie, there is actually a lock but invisible for the player, this lock is actually a list of several potential targets: Knowing the physic of my weapon, ie bullet speed and vector, and because their is already a movement prediction implementation, I can know who may be hit by the bullet, before I press the fire button. With this "maybe hit" list, I start a P2P connection to have their "real time position" and therefore by pass the server prediction, but not with everyone, just this short list. This list must be dynamic someone can enter or leave it. Let's call this list "TargetList"

      *At this point, no physics have been done, only few P2P connections with 2 lists the "HostList" and the "TargetList", only the TargetList is really used to retrieve exact position of the     objects of this list.
    Now I'm firing, hopping to reach my target.

      *When I fire, my weapon create a bullet which is a vector and a speed (as said earlier), I send those information to my HostList, I also send the TargetList to the HostList. Now, the HostList will perform the physics for me, they will retrieve the position of the objects (ships) from my TargetList and with the information of the bullet they will be able to determine who get hit, if anyone did.
      *When the Hostlist have finished the compute, they send the result to : Me, the server, the player who get hit (if any).

      *Everyone able to see my shot will see it (like expected, whatever the scenario), including the hit on the target.

      *Damage are computed, depending of the different parameters.

     

    There is a lot of things to improve and this is just a concept, for exemple, can we have one list instead of 2 ? Wouldn't be better to have a "turn on weapon system" ? (because you could use the delay of the animation to open the P2P list as well as prevent thosands of list to be opened if people don't actually want to fight).
    What is the acceptable delay between the moment I fire and the moment the server is able to say what damage have been done to who.
    That's not perfect.

    Yet I just wanted to explain the idea, and hopefully it is more understandable than before. Remember that I see it as a feature in plus of the existing and probably just for certain type of weapon, missille and long range weapon should still works on the lock system as explained previously by Twerk.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...