Felonu

They haven't shown or talked about moving items using links. Only data transfer links. It's not almost invulnerable if there are reasonable ways to attack... and I consider bombs from the air, and armored tanks reasonable ways to attack when you can't be attacked back without the defenders exposing themselves to your attacks. It's also not from time to time. Every time you want to take something to be protected you have to move it the extra distance equivalent to how deep you want to build. I think that makes sense. This isn't really an assumption. If I can fly my transport ship that I need to get to/away from the base, then you can fly your attack ship to the same location to destroy it. You just have to use a small bit of strategy to overcome this. I can think of ways off the top of my head to defeat the one-sidedness of this math (Send in probe to test offensive and defensive capabilities, and then add armor to give the tank enough time to take out 1 cannon at a time while nothing except your tank is vulnerable because of the defenses.) This is how testing defenses, and sieges work. All of these assume that raining down fire from the sky is not viable though. I think it will be, and the idea of collapsing tunnels adds different strategies. If tunnels can collapse then bunker buster type weapons become truly devastating, as all you have to do is drop one down, and let the falling debris do the killing for you. The math that I see says that TNT displaces about 100x the volume of soil as the volume of TNT used. The information comes from operation plowshare, and is converted from nuclear explosions to the equivalent TNT amount. Link here. So you would need about 5 detonations of about 1 m3 of TNT or equivalent to get down to your 500m deep base. I don't think that fits with your massive numbers. It would obviously take more than actually 5 since you would probably want a hole biger than 1m x 1m, and this assumes all the force is focused into 1 spot. There has been no information about the weaponry in the game, so we can only guess, but a weapon that powerful doesn't seem crazy to me.

All backers should have access to all the following alpha/betas after the initial one that their backer status awards. This isn't specifically stated in the packs, but I think one of the NQ people responded to a similar post already.

Option A - I have not seen any data that makes me think anything will be able to teleport materials the way you describe the dispensers doing. Even if there is a way to do this, I would hope they would only work 1 step, and fairly short distances. (You could transfer between each input/output unit to only 1 storage unit so it couldn't extend past 1 set, but could be multiple input/output units on storage unit) Option B - If the way is big enough for a cart, then you can build a ship to fit through it to bring in constructs weapons. The owners are taking the extra time each time they take stuff into their base to transport the goods from the top to the bottom. They would also have to leave ships and other mobile constructs up on the surface where they would be vulnerable. Answer 1 - The explanation in Option B be would explain the extra time and loss of efficiency in building a base this way assuming Option A is not possible. Answer 2 - I don't see a need for any exceptional effort. The efficiency loss and vulnerability of topside assets would offset the added effort in infiltration. Answer 3 - By either taking weapons down the shaft with dense materials on the front as armor, or blasting down from the sky until you penetrate. ( I think dirt will be MUCH less protective than strong materials.) PS - Why would the weapons magically stop after a few meters down? I would assume they would put holes at least the size of the mining function, and would be able to keep going as far down as you are willing to wait for them to get to. I could also see a benefit for Bunker Buster type weapons that are built to penetrate a certain depth before exploding to offset some of the time needed to penetrate these buildings. PPS - I don't think there has been any information from NQ whether these types of physics will be implemented or not. Obviously all of these matters are affected in some way by the persistence of destroyed materials.

RDMS might allow setting who can dig. I agree with the several people that pointed out that it won’t be very useful for people to build the way that is described. If someone doesn’t have access to the surface with a construct the benefit of having the base will be minimal, and if there is access then you can fly your own constructs down to attack them. If there are manually storing materials down a small shaft far underground, and you think there is enough to warrant the effort, then you block the entrance, and start blowing up the ground until you get down there. They spent extra time and effort every time they went down there to deposite whatever they are keeping there, and it should be offset with a little extra work on your part to get to them.

This is already mentioned in the official Trello. Here.

On your profile page select edit profile and I think the about me section has replaced the public comment section.

That actually doesn’t really apply to the system presented. Though I think it could go 1 more step and have a group that you consider trustworthy, and a group that you have trust in their opinions. That might be necessary if you want to trust a vendor, but don’t necessarily trust all of their customers (who they are likely to “+1”). So you’d have a “friends” group and you would see how anybody that you marked as a friend rated this person. Again each would only be able to +/- 1, and no more. I think a lot of you are reading rep system, and are applying your own perception of the system without reading what the OP is actually saying. The post already points out ways his system might try to solve the items that keep being brought up.

The voting system is an option. Not all orgs have to be democratic.

In practice the idea ends up working like a social network. You have friended (+1) some people, so you can see how many of your friends (the people you have +1ed) have friended(+1ed) the person you are deciding whether to negotiate with. So if a bunch of people you trust do themselves trust this person then you can make a judgement that they are likely trustworthy. Add that you can only +1 each person once, and you can't really artificially increase your reputation. I don't really see any downsides to the idea, but I don't really see a necessity for it either. TL:DR I'm ambivalent whether a system like this is implemented, but if it is this isn't a bad way to do it.

@BlorgonSlayer I actually completely disagree on cosmetic items. You mentioned SWTOR, and the change from subscription to f2p ruined that game for me and a lot of others as they turned their focus from new game content to making cosmetic items. Game developers will focus on the aspects of games that fund the business, and microtransactions tend to pull the developers away from content to focus on the items people buy.

@Mod-Merwyn Can you move this to General? I don’t think there is anything in here under NDA and I don’t feel like the content aligns much with JDSplices thread.

The cost will fluctuate a lot at the beginnings, until there is a steady supply and demand. We can’t know yet where the balance will end up falling in general, let alone at specific markets. I would consider any speculation at this point is just random guessing.

@Ravenskysong Currently you cannot purchase one of the new support packages for an account that is already connected to a founder pack. I started a thread asking NQ if they will allow us to add the perks of the new packs in the future. You can follow and see if they respond here:

@Hades Merwyn already asked for discussion about lootability not to be done in this thread. Please post your ideas on the thread he posted.

NQ has provided a lot of information about this already. They provided the information primarily in the news announcement http://dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/03/07/supporter-rewards-for-founder-backers/ and then some clarification has been added in the following posts: -Edit- The founder information can still be seen in the kickstarter page: There has been no information that would point to us losing any of those founder items.

@BlorgonSlayer My understanding is that DACs will only be purchasable with IRL money. Then they can be traded inside the game. So their value will be set by the market forces around how much the people who purchase them provide them with value. I realize this doesn't directly answer your question, but it's likely the only information available currently.

@NQ-NyzaltarI am a gold founder, but would like to upgrade to get some of the items from the new backer pack that we weren't aware would be in the game during the kickstarter. I clicked on the "Buy this pack" button for the patron pack, and it won't let me check out. There is a message "No need to upgrade, we have your back! We plan to give you all the new items for free under certain conditions, please refer to the dedicated F.A.Q for more info. ". Of course "all the new items" isn't completely accurate, as there are new items available we won't get. I would be willing to spend more money to increase my pledge in order to get some of the higher level outfits extra STUs, etc. Will there be any way for us to do so in the future?

I am aware of at least 1 person who was successful.

This is probably going off topic at this point, but if it was my wallet that was dropped I would be offended. I am just saying that NQ hasn't specified what would and wouldn't be considered "offensive" in the context of the RDMS system.

Yes, we have to assume that pr-alpha access includes alpha 1 and 2 access. No other information has been given, and that would logically follow. It makes us all look bad when anyone is disrespectful.

Actually theft could be considered offensive. There aren't details/definitions to tell us exactly yet.

According to the information available, yes, you can dig a hole and put something inside it, and cover it up. It would last forever (Though some people have proposed ideas for things to degrade over time I don’t believe NQ has addressed that), and if there is a terrain smoothing tool, then you should be able to smooth the ground above it. This would be possible anywhere outside controlled areas, inside any areas you have the rights to modify the terrain, or if you have a way to modify the terrain without rights.

@Tango_Lima You might want to be careful talking about what is or is not in the game. The only information that isn't covered under NDA are the videos/information provided publicly by NQ.

Can you site any sources for this information. I can just as definitively state that the sky is purple, but it wouldn’t make it true. Now, I’m not saying you are wrong, I’m just trying to be clear that this is your opinion based on your ideas of what the game will be.

AI does not mean sentient AI. They are very much different things. AI has been used for decades to describe the logic (simple and complex) of scripted automated actions in gaming(the AI in x game isn’t smart enough to walk around x to get to me, etc..). Making an assumption about the complexity of an AI when someone mentions it is a mistake. A drone being able to follow a person is a basic AI. Then if it is given the logic to travel around intervening objects it is made into a less basic form of AI. I read people dismissing ideas completely too often because of assumptions. Back to subject: I believe NQ’s wording was that they wouldn’t add any npc life except possibly some wildlife. This seems to imply that the life would be more cosmetic than for the purposes you described.