Archonious

First thing off, this discussion is no longer under control of the rules, which is bad, because it's dominated by some respectable, yet hiperactive personas and it was not intended to be a discussion in a form of constant replies. Let's try to stick to the rules provided by community management, which were completely ignored.

Secondly, my arguments will probably reitarate some of the most relevant points that strucked me as accurate, but still I will add my voice:

1. DAC system should be reserved for subscription continuation only - users buy DAC's off NQ, reedem their subscription continuation and put the DAC on sale on the market, so other player can buy a sub for in-game money. DAC should not be resellable once they're bought from original holder, who bought them by IRL money.

2. All the discussions about lootability of DAC's are not logical without a identical consideration of other "goods" being lootable in same aspects: in-game credits especially, since this would be much more immersive and much more directly shaping the gameplay than making meta-currency lootable.


3. DAC's should be considered a safe one-way harbor for your in-game credits - once you invest in DAC's, you put your credits out of the game, turning them into subscription time. Player decides: should I leave my credits in game and risk them being stolen (if enabled), but still be able to turn them into resources, investments, assets, etc., or do I permanently remove them from the game but prolong my subscription? 

4. Creating complex, multi-layered mechanics of DAC's lootability means using a lot of limited developement resources - there are many more interesting aspects of the game which can be developed without risking disappointment for many players, facing a probable loss of DAC's = subscription time, due to some game mechanics.

That's all for now.

Seems like you can just turn DACs into digital coupons ala digital currency in the game.
 
Weak argument is weak.  I stand by my argument that if DACs are lost, so should currency.
 
I also understand the argument that hoarding DACs is a lot like hoarding a commodity, so I do see where you're coming from.  Just don't think it warrants being lootable on death.  
 
Ultimately, I don't see it being much of an issue either way.  What's to stop someone from just hoarding their DACs in a safezone?  Just don't see the point of lootable DACs is all ^^

It is nothing about services or hire. I speak about contacs only. It would be good for future negotiations in game (like trading preferences, any kind of agreements, technology share/cooperation agreements, defence agreements, coop-operations and other. Depends on level of trust and experience in cooperation between factions). 
P.S: I do not offer anything yet, want create contact only (Discord or something else) for both sides. Like embassy in real life.
I would send PM bit later.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Anti-piracy. Good. Will try to create contacts in close future. If your project won't stop, it would be greate to have contacts for future cooperation expansion.
 
P.S: didn't read everything yet
 
Thanks,
Archonious

A little correction...
 

Hi,
 
If I'm not wrong, NQ stated, players will have chance to be in many organisations at the same time (if I am wrong, please correct me).
I don't want to say it is wrong, just because it is wrong for my vision. It could be very great option for many other players.
 
So even in this stage there are two kind of people - who want see option to join multiple organisations and those who don't.
 
Following that, I find necessary option in organisation design (technical option, not just a rule):
Option to turn on/off multiple organisation join.
 
If it is on, every member can join any kind of organisation (in addition to current).
If this option is off:
-Nobody of members can't join any other organisation
-Member who already joined organisation can not be invited
-Member who is in multiple organisation (after switch off) will be marked in member list (so organisation leaders can sort it out, if necessary).
 
This is way to choose. As founder of one of the organisations, I don't want to spend hours for investigations every day.
 
There could be some excludings:
1. List of organisations
2. List of members
 
P.S: It does not break spying actions, but make it bit harder. So idea, as you can understand, does not forced against this kind of action.
 
I don't want to take possition of white or black, I want everyone (organisation) has option. If multiple membership is better for organisation A, this organisation can freely allow this. If this is bad for organisation B, this can be freely banned. Players will have option to choose where to join. Simple.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

There is no need to create tools, but would be much better to have some animation of hand/glove (like little transformation). Hand of God or Iron Man looks strange. I understand it is pre-alpha, so not final version, but I can feedback about what I see only. Looking forward for future improvements.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

A little correction...
 

A little correction...
 

Very nice information. But I also would like to see something like:
 
● Nanoformer battery (how long player can dig), which can be improved (same as power of nanoformer). And not with 5 sec recharge.
● Ability to restore ground. This could be very useful. If you removed too much ground by an accident or maybe when somebody did underground dig to your base. To make blocks could damage interior of surrounding enviroment.
●Defence module which will increase power needed for digging (making "shield" of basic ground similar as rare mineral, as example). This could really help against underground abuse. No need point on TU, it is very expensive and give many other opportunities (which could be unnecessary and have no need for player).
 
P.S: Not sure what .gif image shows, but I hope it won't looks like "God Hand", and we will get some tools for scan and dig.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

A little correction...
 

A little correction...
 

Many hope on that. But how will players act? Nobody can predict. How easy will be to make damage and to repair. How organised will be teams? How much players vision will vary? What I try to say, we think everything will go how we want. Same as most other players, but when our visions will clash, it will make a troubles =) I remember, when me and my friend played Space Engineers together, building same project was a problem very often. There were two of us, I can't even imagine how it will be "great" build with 10 at the same time...
 
Of course, players can design some plans for cities during Alpha/Beta. Then organise team to reproduce this in release. Very hard to say even about that (it would be boring to reproduce somebody's plan for me, as an example). So we can dream, but we need to wait.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

This is core of the game. Nobody try to break it. That exactly work other way. If you create this TEMPORARY (destructible) Safe Zone, it make pirate factions (+your enemies) focus on it. It is like boss in PvE, but it is PvP "boss".This idea also make real PvP possible. Player vs Player, not Player vs Defence buildings.
Attackers prepare their attack (if we speak about large targets). This idea give time prepare to defend (not build more defence towers, but organise team for defence). And then, only then this would be real PvP.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

You are not first day on forum, but welcome anyway =)
 
Won't suggest organisations from your description, it is far too early =) Peacful organisations could become even worse than pirates, pirates could become builders and other. Don't forget big organisations contain ~90% unknown people who joined just to join =) Maybe I am wrong, maybe not. Time will show. But stay realist
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Didn't read (from quote), but if that reduces stupid mindless PvP (kind of PvP) and add punishment for suicide, then I support it.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Dear backers,  
 
Although the Kickstarter finished 10 days ago, our team has still been busy! We’ve barely had time to catch our breath before we look forward to the next phase of development. However, we wanted to take the time to answer the questions we know many of you still have.
 
8,000 Backers Social Goal Reached, Reward Revealed  
 
We were amazed to reach the goal and go significantly beyond it in the final 24 hours. You guys rock!!! If you missed the good news, we revealed the 8,000 backer reward just before the end of the campaign. Every Kickstarter backer will receive a unique and Kickstarter-exclusive blueprint of a single-player hovercraft! (Players will still have to gather the materials to build it.) We will give more info soon.
 
Backer List and Funds Transfer  
 
Usually, Kickstarter sends a list of backers between 1-2 weeks after a campaign has ended. For larger campaigns it is usually closer to 2 weeks. It shouldn’t be long before we receive the list. Once we get all the data, we will send you a form to fill out in order to get additional information, like the name reservation for your character(s). As for the funds, we are still waiting to receive them. They should be transferred soon, and we are working with the Kickstarter team to make it happen as soon as possible.
 
Payment Portal Launch and Packs Availability  
 
Development of the new payment portal that will help us continue the crowdfunding effort is underway. We want to make sure you understand what will and won’t be available on this new platform, so read on to find out more.
 
There will be two phases:  
 
Phase 1 will be short and temporary, starting from the payment portal launch date and going through the end of the year. Packages will be quite similar to the Kickstarter packs, so that those of you who couldn’t pledge during the Kickstarter campaign for various reasons (not being able to pay with PayPal, missing the end date of the Kickstarter, etc.) can still support us. The available Founder packs will have the same number of DACs as the Kickstarter ones. However, they will have a few less perks.
The following packs/rewards will not be available because they were all Kickstarter exclusives:  
Early bird and boosted packs. The rewards tied to social goals (reaching 6,000 and then 8,000 backers), which were name reservations for every backer and the exclusive single-player hovercraft blueprint mentioned above.  The Kickstarter outfit for Bronze packs and above, and the in-game pets for Silver packs and above. Phase 2 will begin in January 2017. The Founder packs will be removed permanently, and will be replaced by Supporter packs. The Supporter packs will be significantly different and the price of the DACs slightly higher. Don’t worry, they will still be cheaper than after the official release! For those who like in-game pets and didn’t have the opportunity to get one from the Kickstarter, we plan to make a new one available through an add-on.  
 
Update frequency
 
The Kickstarter campaign was very intense, and necessitated frequent updates. While we still plan to update you regularly about the development progress, the updates will come less often than during the Kickstarter. You can still count on hearing from us when we’ve achieved a milestone! If you are interested in more regular communication with us, you can follow us on Twitter and like us on Facebook. You can also subscribe to our monthly newsletter.
 
We have also some exciting things to share with you that we didn’t have time to tell you about during the Kickstarter, including details about the storyline and guidelines for fan fiction compatible with the official lore. We also have not one, but two community contests planned for November and December, so stay tuned!
 
The Novaquark Team

Overall i really like this idea. However i do think that i would need a lot of balancing and fine-tuning to find that perfect amount days and so on. I wouldn't now where to start but if it becomes a function that real balanced i think it would be a awesome function.

@ Archonious
I see your point, and I like it because safezones will make big trading hubs possible and by that way create content for pirates, and many others.
 
There is, as we speak some attributes in zones/tiles
0,) default is free pvp, warzone
1.) Ownership, by TU
2.) Protection, by weapons, and bubble
3.) Access rigths, by RDMS
 
As of safe zone RDMS could go there, if it includes, "no weapons or agression" - attribute.
 
I also agree that balancing defence by numbers is hard and many lead to grinding.
 
Timers is good as long there is someone to ask for a help or there is options to deal with owerpowered attacer.
 
How ever I saw in Eve that help was newer there, when needed.
 
There could be also other attributes wich may make safezone stronger and harder to destroy.
 
- it could be decleared by its owner as DMZ, demilitarized and neutral zone.
- more civilian activities stronger dmz
- if there is groving industry and other civilian installations and buildings they make DMZ attribute stronger.
 
DMZ
- is dmz same as safezone? generally yes.
- how ever it could exists witout TU or buble.
- it could expand itself slowly, by activity and population and it may go down if no activity.
- it could be created also by political agreement.

Welcome.
And no worries about KS miss. There would be the second campaign, so you will have chance to get what you want =)
 
Thanks,
Archonious

Welcome. Since you are very experienced in gaming and probably team management, hope to see organisation (which is not another pirate one) under your beginning.
 
Thanks,
Archonious

What I'm saying is, rather than spending a bunch of time making an overly complex self destruct system... why not spend some time developing actual components that can create actual constructs that act as mines and other traps?
 
I do not disagree though, I think everyone would like to see a big ship overload... and I'm sure we will!
 
I'm also of the personal opinion that there shouldn't be a timer... if you hit the big red button, it should blow up at that instant.  Incurring death on yourself, and whatever penalties that are involved in death.

If they want to put the work into it, by all means...  Doesn't seem worth it IMHO, lots of work for not much payoff gameplay wise.  Besides, if you self destruct... it's pretty hard to bounce back from being spaced
 
I imagine we will end up purely with a system that uses the size of the power core to determine destruction levels.
 
However, I vehemently defend the fact that self destruct should destroy any blueprints you have saved related to that ship ^^
 
As this is where the discussion is heading, what's to stop someone from just building a bunch of power cores and using them as "mines".  Shouldn't there be a specific weapon set to work as mines?  Why should we have to use derelict ships and unfinished ships for this emergent gameplay?
 
All of this development you guys are asking for should be directed towards an actual subset of weapons, mines and other sneaky traps.

You can't steal a ship if there is an easy self destruct ... everyone will have it which would make stealing a ship impossible.  This is Grand Theft Spaceship/Space Station/ Planet Base/Hovercraft/Territory since JC has talked about taking over cores both in space and on planets. He has actually said that capturing a ship mechanic will probably be in game before ship v ship combat.
 
You are assuming game mechanics like EMP weapons in your post that don't exist yet or even have been discussed by JC/NQ  If you can EMP electronic systems that itself would be OP. He has discussed hacking but to hack you can't have a self destruct. You said so in your post it won't be easy to hack/take a ship over so why even add a mechanic like this.  You want to scuttle your ship so the enemy doesn't get it ...  then do it the old fashion way ... shoot it to bits.
 
If you have a game mechanic like this that in effect doesn't become a choice and a counter that then in effect doesn't become a choice then the mechanic becomes tedious.   If the end result always comes out the same .... BOOM .... then people won't even attempt to take over a ship.  There is nothing emergent about that.
 
You are assuming I would want to capture to reverse engineer.  I do want to have the choice to steal ships from those who are aggressive towards others.  I have in mind a trophy hanger and has nothing to do with building capabilities. If I captured it then why in the hell would I want to make a fleet of them since I already beat it with what I had.
 
I am talking in more general terms because we do not know the details of these things yet.  They have not been created or even decided.  You talk about very specific details which may end up just being only in your imagination at the end of the day. 

https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/272-devblog-rights-duty-management-system-rdms/