Felonu

Ultimately i think @CalenLoki you are making way to many assumptions on how the dispenser/links work. Most everything else you have mentioned comes at a pretty large cost if you cant move resources to your base easily:
 
Assumption 1) Links are not distance locked. There is zero reason to suspect this applies to dispensers. Dispensers are being shown as a control unit not a transport unit. A dispenser dispenses things it doesnt teleport them. If they wanted them to be transporter units they would make them that or make another element that does that. As of now there is no reason to suspect that a link between storage and dispenser can go over long distances, or that such a link exists(is there a video showing a dispenser linked to anything?). The only links that appear to not be distance locked are data links/fuel links, but no confirmation on that. However there is a distinct different between those links and what you are saying the dispenser unit can do. Take the fuel link, allows the engine to use the fuel in the tank. We have never been shown an engine that has storage on it and fuel tanks has been shown in several ship building videos as required(engines blink without the connection in tutorial video). This means when you link an engine to a fuel tank the resource doesn't move its simply consumed by the engine.You cannot transport fuel from the surface to an underground base using an engine, you can only consume the fuel on the surface with an engine underground. So best case you would be able to maybe craft using your dispenser or storage up top if you linked it to a crafting table or w/e underground.
 
Assumption 2) No area damage. Your entire kill room concept is predicated on there not being any area damage in the game. If there is i can use the corner to get a 1v1, 1v2 on your turrets. If your turrets are close to each other i may be able to target one with a missile/explosive and damage everything in a radius around it including things i cant see and cant see me. If they are spread out to avoid this i cant see how you can assure anything more then a 1v1, 1v2. There has been some talk about targeting something will do area damage around it in an interview JC did but combat in general is almost all theoretical at this point so you have to make a lot of assumptions to say if a kill style room will work at all.
 
And lastly something that has been pointed out by others, is you are limiting your own ship use to whatever can fit in your base. If your ship can get through so can mine. I'm not saying an underground base wont be very beneficial. It probably will be, i just don't think its gunna be nearly as game breakingly good as you make it out to be. At the very least i think it will come at a large cost of convenience.
 
 

Well, it's all speculative currently.  I don't think having underground bases will make you invulnerable, and stated my reason why.  You think they would be and stated your reasons.  When we have more information about the mechanics of these things the debate will actually have some level of accuracy.

So I saw a comment on this tweet from Dual Universe where someone wanted a plushie made of the robot pet:
 


And then I had one made

Unless required otherwise by law, I don't think NQ should be in the business of playing content police.
 
If players don't want something ugly, they should be the ones to go out there and change it.
 
Once NQ starts removing every little thing that people are reporting as offensive, there really is no end to the rabbit hole that would open up. 

There is already a plan for force field units that will provide protection outside of safe zones.  These will allow protection for at least 24 hours before needing personnel in place for defense.  We don't know what exactly will be able to be protected by these protection bubbles, but if the item you want to protect is located inside one you will have time to notify/post your need for help.  Just be careful that your posts aren't answered by the enemy trying to  infiltrate your base with your own invitation.

There is already a plan for force field units that will provide protection outside of safe zones.  These will allow protection for at least 24 hours before needing personnel in place for defense.  We don't know what exactly will be able to be protected by these protection bubbles, but if the item you want to protect is located inside one you will have time to notify/post your need for help.  Just be careful that your posts aren't answered by the enemy trying to  infiltrate your base with your own invitation.

Hi everyone,
 
Despite the fact some seem to believe the contrary, it was never said that it will remain forever impossible to add a Supporter Pack to a Founder account.
It's not possible, for the time being. It's not meant to stay that way. It's a huge work that has started before we released the Supporter Packs. Ideally we would have released this possibility at the same time as the Supporter Packs. However, as we saw it would never make it in time with the Supporter Packs schedule, we decided it will be implemented at a later time. We hear your concerns and yes, it was already planned, just delayed for now. We apologize for the inconvenience.
 
We will keep you informed when we will have more details on this topic.

Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.
 

I am here to apologize for my misbehavior regarding my toxic post "How complicated can this game get?". I do believe that this is not an appropriate conduct; for that I am going to apologize; I am deeply sorry! I realized that there were no logic to my rants at all and that the game is on it's current phase of development (longer testing-periods will come on later development-stage of the game).
I don't have a better way to mend this but to express my sincere apology and regret to you all regarding my inappropriate behavior through this letter of apology. I am so sorry! 
Here today, you are looking at the new me, the new Eternal; I am adopting a new approach to change (by means of "change", I am not talking about Obama's concept of "change", but change of conduct for attaining improvements). As much as possible, I would like to have and maintain a positive relationship with you all (the Community) as well as the Developers. I want to work and I will work towards that goal of redemption!

@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.

@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.

@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?

@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?

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.

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.

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.

I think food/water/oxygen would have a good benefit to the game if implemented correctly.  As long as it doesn’t feel like you have to struggle to maintain it.  If it takes a small amount of resources to maintain your levels for a week or so, and you don’t loose levels while offline it just becomes a minor thing you deal with occasionally, but would add the ability for people to have functionality like farming if that’s what they want to do.  It would also add an aspect to longer sieges.  Blockades, and blockade runners would have more value with these mechanisms also.  
 
I think it is something worth debating the pros and cons.

We all have different ideas of what things like emergent, and player-driven mean.  It seems like these differences have become the core argument of this thread.  I don't think this gets resolved by us trying to convince each other at this point.  I stopped posting here a couple pages ago I think because I said all I wanted to say about my opinions of how the PvP can be handled, but it seems like the discussion hasn't moved at all. 
 
We'll all have to see what NQ decides these things mean to them, and their vision.   It could end up being a lopsided newbie gank-fest that isn't any fun to try to start for new players, a builder only game where the PvP never gets implemented enough to keep PvP players interested, or an anarchic mess where everywhere outside of the Ark-zone is at such violent war that noone ever feels safe enough to spend time trying to build anything.  If any of these things happen I believe the game won't be even close to as successful as it could be, and I don't want it to turn out like any of these thing.

I never gave an example of the kind of balance I wanted.  I gave several examples of unbalanced in both directions.  You are correct though that our opinions of balance are probably different, but I have always stated that it is up to NQ to take what they consider balanced in line with their vision.  
 
Yes, both will be possible.  I have said that I want a balance between both.  I provided ways that NQ could do that without implementing any additional mechanics, or artificial gimmicks.  Again, I will say that the amount of ore it takes to make a bullet CAN NOT be player driven.  It is a base mechanic of the functioning of the game.  I keep saying that my idea of how to balance the game has nothing to do with Emergent gameplay, and either you or Zamarus (I'm not sure who at this point, possibly both) has said that my idea would make the game less Emergent and player driven.  That is the disagreement about the definitions of player driven and emergent I was talking about.

We all have different ideas of what things like emergent, and player-driven mean.  It seems like these differences have become the core argument of this thread.  I don't think this gets resolved by us trying to convince each other at this point.  I stopped posting here a couple pages ago I think because I said all I wanted to say about my opinions of how the PvP can be handled, but it seems like the discussion hasn't moved at all. 
 
We'll all have to see what NQ decides these things mean to them, and their vision.   It could end up being a lopsided newbie gank-fest that isn't any fun to try to start for new players, a builder only game where the PvP never gets implemented enough to keep PvP players interested, or an anarchic mess where everywhere outside of the Ark-zone is at such violent war that noone ever feels safe enough to spend time trying to build anything.  If any of these things happen I believe the game won't be even close to as successful as it could be, and I don't want it to turn out like any of these thing.

We all have different ideas of what things like emergent, and player-driven mean.  It seems like these differences have become the core argument of this thread.  I don't think this gets resolved by us trying to convince each other at this point.  I stopped posting here a couple pages ago I think because I said all I wanted to say about my opinions of how the PvP can be handled, but it seems like the discussion hasn't moved at all. 
 
We'll all have to see what NQ decides these things mean to them, and their vision.   It could end up being a lopsided newbie gank-fest that isn't any fun to try to start for new players, a builder only game where the PvP never gets implemented enough to keep PvP players interested, or an anarchic mess where everywhere outside of the Ark-zone is at such violent war that noone ever feels safe enough to spend time trying to build anything.  If any of these things happen I believe the game won't be even close to as successful as it could be, and I don't want it to turn out like any of these thing.

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.  
 

I already supplied a solution.  It simply has to be worth more to leave most people alone than it is to attack them in standard point and shoot circumstance.  This doesn't take anything away from you PvPers except you would have to make a cost benefit analysis before ganking that newbie.

Anyway.  I feel like I've said my piece, and instead of discussing options and possibilities we are at the point of just arguing over small details and differences of opinions and viewpoints.

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.  
 

Because that engulfs everything else in PvP.  You are doing the exact thing from a different perspective that you accuse @MookMcMook of doing.  I think we've all put our points of view out there now, though, and we'll have to rely on NQ and their vision to decide how they implement it.