Felonu
-
Posts
387 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Felonu
-
-
2 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
It's literally in the game's tagline. "Rebuild civilisation". Antisocial people like you don't like that, too bad, I don't like them not - very possibly - having no mel,ee weapon i nthe game. What can I do, I'll just go with it. It's not meant to be played as a singleplayer. Deal with it.
And like with your other blunders, you still haven't done your research at all :
-snip- because wall of textThank you for basing an entire post on assumptions about other people and using that to rant against those people without adding a single new piece of information to the conversation. This is proof of my point that assumptions don’t help the conversation.
Nothing you said was anything but a strawman argument. You turned your misinterpretation of my words into the strawman. I don’t think grieving should be punishable. I don’t want to play by myself. I wasn’t even talking about my personal game preferences. I also never said I knew what EVEs problem was. I was talking about the perception of EVE from new players, and people that won’t play because of perceptions. I was talking about things that I think could help DU avoid some of these playerbase limitations.
You don’t seem to want to have an honest conversation though. You want to belittle and twist the meanings of those insignificant dissenting opinions.
-
It’s really difficult to have any actual productive conversation with this name calling and assumptions made on both sides. I am not a carebear because I think offensive and defensive measures need to be balanced. I am not someone who wants to play alone because I want people who start the game to be able to have defensive tools that will allow them to get in and start enjoying themselves before making a decision on what organization they might want to join.
Also, EVE does have a reputation for being inhospitable to new players, and not because it’s complicated. My outsider understanding of EVE is of people starting playing it and not knowing anything about it getting ganked constantly which made it not fun. There are plenty of other similar experiences in game reviews. Other complicated games have ways of being fun while you learn the intricacies. This may not be a fair representation of how the game is, but it is the reputation as I have seen it.
My previous point was that there is a very limited playerbase for games that require you to do research and study if you want to survive to the point it becomes fun, and if you don’t have the time to figure out what a game is about before you either have to trust an organization you know nothing about to help you survive or last through a gankfest until you learn how to survive on your own that the player base will be severely limited.
These issues can be addressed by adding defensive systems and giving new players some time to get in and learn the game. How often people get attacked at random will naturally be dependant on the cost of offensive and defensive systems. A very simplistic and extreme example is that if it takes 1000 bullets to wear down a shield, and the shield takes 1 unit of resource to power and the bullets take 1 unit of resource to make then it takes about 1000 times the resources to attack as it does to defend. This makes attackers have to decide whether it’s worth it to attack or not. I do not think the system should be this lopsided, but use an extreme example to make the point clear.
Systems like these don’t take anyone’s freedom away. They can be built to let the game have it’s PVP danger and excitement without it devolving into a game where the amount of fun you have is directly proportional to the size of your gang.
-
2 hours ago, Forodrim said:
I think this is where we disagree and why this is such a difficult topic.
I'm more pessimistic, I don't think there will be "some", I think there will be quite a bit of those. And those players will have a huge impact. I would bet there will be players sitting outside the Ark Safezone hunting for new Players who want to explore the game world. Not because the new Players will have valuable resources, just because they can. This can reduce the number of players who will subscribe to the game after such an experience.
Also there will be players who simply love to destroy stuff. A Hermit Player spent a week or more to built something fancy? Just blow it up and laugh about it. And DU will have those hermit builders, unlike Eve. If you tell them to HTFU you will again reduce the playerbase to the usual Eve Player.
Those are things that can have a huge impact on the number of players in DU and a game like DU will need quite a playerbase.
But most of this is pretty much theory, I guess we will have to see how thing turn out.
I agree with your fears. Despite what some people say, EVE does have that reputation, and it's why a lot of people don't even give it a try. If this game turns into a new version of EVE, then I don't think it will do very well. It would be splitting the player base of people willing to try a game that has a reputation for being almost impossible for new players to start without being bullied, or griefed. My solution to these problems would simply be to increase the power of defensive systems over offensive systems. If you have the right balance of defensive tools/offensive tools it will take more than someone being bored to grief you. If you give defensive tools earlier than offensive tools, that helps too. This balance can have a major effect on the gameplay and it isn't something that we know any actual information on yet.
I am waiting for some discussion by NQ about the weapons systems and how they will be applied before I make up my mind. I am extremely excited and hopeful, but I can very well see the possibility of the game community making the game simply not fun for new players.
-
Why not post your preliminary sketches, and ideas (colors, and themes), and see what people run with? I’m not a design specialist, but sometimes do a thing for the heck of it, but I’d like to know your direction before taking a stab at a design.
-
1 minute ago, Lethys said:
See second part
If you mean that you just don't see the point, then I can agree that is one viewport. For others maybe they want the feeling of getting better with a specific construct vs getting better equipment. Some people not seeing a reason for a thing isn't a reason not to include it.
-
1 minute ago, Lethys said:
Easily exploitable, just kill cheap ships of org mates or (If that's not possible because you don't get XP for it) kill cheap ships of alts to get that bonus.
As there is already a progression system planned for players, I don't see any benefit for turrets....or engines to gain xp (wouldn't make much sense either). Players make a difference on a multicrew ship. Their ingame skills aswell as their expertise as a pilot or creative engineer, not some easily farmed and exploited numbers
This is assuming a Kill = xp model of leveling the ship. If the ship were to level based on time of ownership/usage or something similar you could mitigate this type of play if you are against that type of grind. In my opinion all games have grind of some sort. It's just s question of whether it is the type of grind you like.
-
Join in with some other people, and try to have fun. You will find your place in the DU. Remember that a lot of talk is based on personal ideas and expectations, and that people are just coming up with ideas and discussing possibilities. There might be some subject matter experts here, but a lot are likely to be based on experiences in other games and MMOs. Try to take in the conversations and pick up some information, but remember that a lot of what is said is speculation, and interpretation.
- Eris Bellona and Ben Fargo
-
2
-
Foreign Aid can always be handled by Organizations in game. It is something you could try to get your org to do if you feel strongly that it should exist. In the RW aid doesn't come from magical sources. Other countries put it together to send to countries in need. There are many reasons to do these types of things (better your perception, get future profit from that other organization, hide a smuggling operation in your aid shipments, gather intelligence about actual personnel numbers and locations, or just doing what you think is right). This is the system I think we should see in the game if anything. NQ seems to understand that any in game systems they implement take away emergent gameplay options from players to take care of these things, and I hope they continue with a generally hands off approach.
-
This is the purpose of things like the smooth tool. You can also place other shapes than rectangles (i.e spheres). Look through the videos released by NQ and you’ll see these and that building is much more advanced than placing rectangles. Anything more than what’s in those videos would be covered by the NDA that was agreed to by everyone outside NQ who has had access to the game.
-
This is the purpose of things like the smooth tool. Look through the videos released by NQ and you’ll see the building is much more advanced than placing squares.
-
Unfortunately the NDA covers all game information, and I don't know of any place in the public information where they have mentioned anything on how leverage is applied. Sorry.
-
6 minutes ago, Cybrex said:
Welcome, enjoy your stay, and stay away from Twerk, he bites.
Hah
Welcome Fierwerk! Enjoy the discussion!
-
15 minutes ago, Maangina said:
Still no luck on locating any information on element sizes. Suppose i wont be able to find out until later on if they decide to release it.
The only information we can give you per NDA is based on what was in the dev diaries. The 25 x 25 x 25 smallest voxel size. Any other sizes would be information from the game that we agreed not to talk about.
-
On 11/22/2017 at 5:03 AM, Lethys said:
This topic was already discussed to death in various threads and I won't repeat my points here why I think it's a bad idea to implement such a thing when it's not really really carefully balanced.
Mind NQs answer in some thread:
I marked the relevant section - you're not going to build a bigger ship alone, you need a team to do so
I would like to see something for prototyping existing. Lethys, you seem to have taken the quote from NQ out of context. They were describing the pros and cons of not having a prototyping system and you seemingly pointed to one of these as somehow proof that they want people to have to waste resources to build large ships. The conclusion in that quote literally tells us that they believe a prototyping system is a positive thing, but that it won’t likely be in the game until after release.
-
Everything you have mentioned is already talked about in the dev diaries. These are all planned features.
-
7 minutes ago, Glowtape said:
Anyone who thinks they'll make you fly for days on end to reach another system, or even weeks, is deluding himself. That won't fly (lol) with anyone gameplay-wise.
Travel will only take such long times until jumpgates are in place. This adds the ability for an org that specializes in logistics to send travelers to further systems and set up gates, and then be able to charge for the use of the gates. This seems like an important aspect of the economy to me, and I would be surprised if NQ decided to remove it.
-
I don't personally have an interest in newspapers per se, but to have the ability to share and communicate in different ways could have plenty of benefits to players. Whether that is producing types of periodicals that you can send to other players in game, or communication feeds that can be sent out and displayed on monitors.
I can understand that this may not be important enough to actually make it into the game, but I do believe there is some value to the ideas.
It doesn't benefit any attempt of communication to make assumptions of what other peoples reasons or motivations are for the views they express. That is a way to shut down conversations, and build division.
-
I believe it would be more analogous to college accreditation. The more respected the institution that provides the certificate, the more likely it will carry across more borders.
An idea like this is what makes immergent gameplay so exciting for a lot of us. If you have an idea like this, then try building an org or a branch of an org dedicated to it. Advertise your proficiency in some aspect of building, and see if you can get people to come to you to certify that they have sound practices making similar types of things.
-
Do you know of any instances of NQ mentioning having mining equipment? I kept waiting to hear about something but when JC mentioned the time it would take to cut the world up in the radio interview he said something about not giving tools that could make major changes to planets in any reasonable timeframe.
-
15 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
How does it add complexity?
Two of those mechanics (magnetometry and RADAR) have already their basic code added.Magnetometry for mining and RADAR is retrofitted aerodynamic profiles.
The signature is affected once, when the construct is made, it's a value behind the scens,. Heat is just an active component, you turn it on, itr reudces the heat siganture by XYZ amount.
Are you throwing words just for the sake of words at this point? You don't do any calculations on your end, your client only redners.
If you mean "it'll teka work to be implemented" then "no shit?" is my reply. What "engine" complexity are yo utalking about really? Dividing Siganture by Scan rEsoultion as values and getting an approximation of a "readout" ??
Are you meaning to tell me, they got the algorithms to make dynamic server clustering, but failed at CSD freshman mathematics?I'm saying NQ would have to add complexity to the system, to make it work for virtually no real difference. I also didn't imply a preference either way, I was just saying that I doubt the cost/benefit analysis on this would make it worthwhile.
-
10 minutes ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
DU is like that, we won't have a list of people who are in proximity with us displayed - if it sounds stuipid its because Local Chat is stupid in EVE. Having the cloak module is a sure way of :
"Build Battleship, put Cloak of Skill on it, become invisible".
You msay say "but NQ could hinder that". How? By adding arbitrary rules? Sandbox is the name of the game, not Theme Park to hae rules left right and center to coutner that.
Also, the mechanic I explained can be added for stealth on buildings , like Static Constructs. Same mechanics, use brains, build a base with non metallic materials - like concrete or - hey - sand, especially on a sand planet, to confuse enemy sensors. Put Heat Sinks to reduce the activeity of the base itself to belnd in with - possible - underground heat - whch can be added easily in ithe form of lava-rivers or what-not. Radar doesn't really matter for undergorund baes, and mass detection on a plaent is like trying to deduce your piss in the sewer.
P.S. : You missed the quotes around "rouge" every time I write it down, it means it's insinuating something, that something being brain dead mechanics.I actually wouldn't be surprised if this type of cloaking is what they go with. Not that there could be more realistic ways to handle the cloaking, but when all is said and done the outcome is the same.
If someone built their ship with proper heat, radiation, and visual camouflage and with ceramic/plastic exteriors, then they would have the same benefits as the person with what you call magical harry potter cloak.
Your system you are talking about adds a bunch of complexity on the engine side of assigning different materials different values of shielding of several different types, and using physics to determine how the external shielding would affect the signatures, and several other complex systems for what basically has the same affect as put a cloaking device on the ship.
I know your reaction to this is likely to be a reiteration of what you said, and call me names imagining that I don't understand you, or grandstanding by saying this would "ruin" the game. Hopefully others with cooler heads will realize that I'm stating my opinion, because none of know what this mechanic will look like yet.
-
3 hours ago, CaptainTwerkmotor said:
That is the kind of stealth we need, no magical harry potter cloaks from EVE Online or any "rouge" mechanics. That would also make patrolling asteroid belts on your territory as an alliance a legit thing, as pirates could park their metallic ship on an asteroid, then turn off their ship to remain "cold" and hidden, then when miners scan with Magnetometery they see "oh, only iron there, no detection of ships" and be ganked in the process.
Ok, I have to ask. I have seen you say rouge mechanics in several different posts now. I originally thought you were just misspelling rogue, but I have to assume you wouldn't do that this many times. What is a rouge mechanic?
-
Emergent gameplay doesn't mean that there can be no intervention. If the game deflates to the point that mining isn't fun anymore people will stop mining, and the price might go back up after a while, but the game could lose playerbase during that time period. This is just 1 example of how a little outside interference might be beneficial to keep the game fun and keeping the player base around. Personally, though, I hope NQ does mostly leave the market alone.
I trust that NQ will do their best to find a middle ground between too hands off and to much manipulation.
-
You could build a hovercraft with basic line following scripts and voxel "rails" to mark the paths. The line following would be a pretty basic script, and you could use logic gates connected to sensors to control the rails (like redstone in MC).
My biggest worry about this game
in General Discussions
Posted
You said those same things in your previous post, and as I pointed out they don't speak to any of my points. You are still arguing a straw man that you are building. You can't seem to actually debate the actual conversation so you make my post about what you want it to be about so that you have the ability to argue it. You simply don't have the ability to have a conversation with anybody who disagrees with you, because you are incapable of trying to understand what anybody else is trying to say.
@Msoul I appreciate you actually talking about my points and I agree that there does need to be complicated intricate gameplay in the macro game. I personally think that 1:1 ratio lends to a slightly more aggression based game than I would prefer, but understand the importance of both playstyles giving their input to come out with what will be the most fun for the most players. Having honest discourse with both sides stating their opinions, and NQ deciding the value of the different options and applying their vision to it is what I believe will make for the most fun exciting game play.