CoreVamore
-
Posts
1186 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by CoreVamore
-
-
I started to watch the promo video then woke up two hours later ?
- Zorodek and Alsan Teamaro
-
2
-
<dumb joke ahead>
I dont know what the number one wonder will be, but I'm sure one of the wonders will be "Can I survive outside of the safe zone?"........
<end of dumb joke>
- 0something0 and Hades
-
2
-
-
Welcome aboard
-
One aspect I think will be interesting, and partially similar to Eve, is space combat in groups.
As we know everyone in Eve is a ship of some sort, and often they travel in packs to camp gates, kill structures, or brawl it out against other group(s).
I think this will morph in DU. A group, instead of being several ships, will be in one. This will change the dynamic. Instead of having a fleet leader you will have the ships captain instructing everyone on board what to do. A fleet could just end up being 10 ships, one actual fleet commander and perhaps a hundred crew in total spread out between the ships.
Naturally we could end up with massive space battles, with hundreds of players, but may only involve several tens of actual ships.
When a ship blows - oh the carnage! Oh the humanity! Oh the looooot!
So yea, DU wont be like Eve, but, I think thats possibly going to be a good thing
-
-
Welcome aboard
-
12 minutes ago, Superskunk said:
Alpha 1 has started and alpha 2 will soon be starting, if really interested can buy the €60 pack an get alpha 2 access.
Alpha 1 is starting this month, though, hasn't actually started as yet
-
Roadmap:
https://www.dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/08/08/release-roadmap-alpha-launch-announcement/
i.e. its still at least 1 year away for the beta
-
Welcome aboard
-
Welcome aboard vizzual
-
Welcome aboard mate
-
4 minutes ago, SonEasterZombie said:
If i'm looking to purchase a gun design, player-made element, static/dynamic construct, etc, what is stopping the person selling it to me from installing a backdoor or override switch in the construct that will allow them to screw with me?
Well, that would be bad for their business, which, if they want to stay in business would be worse for them - so thats what would stop them doing it
4 minutes ago, SonEasterZombie said:If there is nothing, then that could make collaboration between organizations and individuals a lot more risky. I'd love for the economy to develop to the point where you can go to a market and purchase a construct that you can attach to your ship, or even an entire ship, but if each time you purchase a ship you risk having the thing tracked, self destructed, or hacked then no one would ever buy ships from other people.
You may get hacked by an outside source, it may not intrinsically be the products fault. (Well except for the fact that it has a hacking vulnerability).
4 minutes ago, SonEasterZombie said:One way I could see this being prevented is if blueprints have a unique name. Lets say someone makes a very good ship, and you want to buy one. When you went to a market you could compare the ships actual layout to the layout of the Uniquely named blueprint. This could even be an automatic feature. There could be a database where you upload blueprints with a unique name, and if a construct that is for sale matches a blueprint in that database, then in an info tab or something it could mention that it matches that blueprint. This would mean that any knockoff that is made with a tracker in it or whatever wouldn't have the certification of being the same as the uniquely named blueprint. Obviously you would not be able to download peoples blueprints off that database, the server would handle the comparisons between constructs and the blueprints.
That's pretty much the only way I could think of to ensure that a construct you buy is actually what you paid for. Are there any other ways this could be done?
Pretty sure that the maker of the blueprint is shown on the blueprint. So, for example, if you know that CoreVamore makes the "Flabbergaster" battleship then all you have to do is make sure that the "Flabbergaster" blueprint on the market, that you are looking to purchase, is made by CoreVamore, then you know its genuine. Simple, effective, done deal
However I do like the idea of having a 3D spinable/walk-through representation of any blueprint just for the sake of giving a client an idea of what that blueprint actually produces. That saves having to actually make a construct to show off the ship (Though thats always fun as a practical demonstration as well)
-
in the vids they talked about having to reach escape velocity otherwise you would fall back to the ground - so at a guess I would say that there are orbital mechanics
-
2 minutes ago, Pantera said:
True. I guess it’s a no win. Give em attention and they like it. Let me run rampant and the like it.
Back to the topic though I really am not sure if a sub model will 100% deter them but hopefully slow them down. Also some people can see hardcore pirate RPers as a troll. We’ll see. I believe that with the amount of land we’ll get that there will be room for everyone’s own vision of the game to exist.
Agreed, some people will see pirates and gansta's as trolls, and they need to learn that it is in fact emergent game play in a sandbox. Are they a nice thing to have in a game, probably not for some, do they provide content? Hell Yea!
There was a whole thread on this subject a year or so ago, for anyone interested in this, but it is off topic from the original thread.
So yes a reasonable subscription fee to play DU is fine as far as I am concerned, and for those that cant afford it, well..... get a job?
-
2 hours ago, Pantera said:
Welp, I foresee the formation of the ATF or Anti Troll Force.
I’ll sign up for that in a heatbeat.
You cannot stop trolls but we can make it really hard for them.
Pretty sure a troll would love trolling such a force..... triggered just a little are we? ?
-
-
3 minutes ago, NanoDot said:
Tbh, the whole "bumping" thing may be a storm in a teacup.
Antigrav's are not intended to be the only propulsion for a ship. They are a temporary "high altitude hover engine", expensive to operate, but still cheaper and easier than getting the same effect via vertical atmo engines. So dropping below 1000m will at most be an irritant for the average dreadnought using antigrav's, because the ship's main engines will kick-in once the antigrav switches off.
Thats if the crew is paying attention, as, unless its scripted, the main engines wont auto fire up......, so yea, not that irrelevant
Its just added game play
Just remember it may not be a ship.... could be a platform who's main engines may no longer have the ooomppfff needed to keep it in orbit ?
-
8 minutes ago, NanoDot said:
Sure, but no amount of "alignment bumping" will damage the target. You still need to bring tacklers and enough firepower to do the job.
"Bumping" an antigrav platform to below 1000m altitude will have the potential to make it crash, without the "attackers" needing to fire a single shot. So the whole intended design of combat (knocking out the Pulsors) will be circumvented.
The solution is as simple and cheesy as the "bumping" tactic: make antigrav platforms immune to bumping !
I've got no qualms with having an antigrav platform immune to bumping IF it is not moving - remember those platforms can be massive ships too, and such a hard and fast "cant be bumped cause i got my antigrav engines on' wouldnt be fair either - hence it cant be moving, and if it is moving then it is able to be bumped and potentially have it crash to the ground.
-
Just now, Bomdiggety said:
NQ seems pretty on top of things as far as keeping out the trash, im not worried.
Maybe while things a small, maybe not as DU grows.
Keep in mind that emergent game play can, and does, bring out baiting and trolling. So there is a very fine line there.
Lines naturally should be, and are, drawn at rl death threats etc..
All I am saying is that one persons tease could be seen as another persons troll.
Easy way to combat it - is just chill
-
33 minutes ago, NanoDot said:
I did not miss your point at all.
If the intention is to prevent damage (direct or indirect) resulting from ramming, then repeated "bumping" to force an antigrav platform below 1000m is just a workaround to circumvent the intended design.
There's a fine line between "emergent gameplay" and "exploit"...
If you're employing repeated "bumping", then you're exploiting the fact that ramming causes no direct damage to either vehicle.
It's also my contention that "bumping" should have almost zero effect unless the mass of the two objects is fairly equal. Gnats don't bump your vehicle when they hit the windscreen, they become a smear.
No, that's not an exploit at all, its simply attacking something that has a known weakness. It's no different to attacking a ship that with a weapon type that it has little armour/shield/defence for.
The exploiting of the 'no damage done to either ship' is not an exploit at all. Thats a design mechanic/decision that NQ has made, and I am for it as it avoids 'death spears' - which kills game play. For example, in Eve online, bumping is used as a way to disrupt ships trying to align to get away, and can be used effectively. It fits the mechanic, the lore, and the game. Do I personally like it? Nopes! But I also accept it as a part of the game and something to be worked around. The same for DU. Do I like what I am suggesting? Nopes! However it is a possible tactic that may be used and so people should be aware of it, and if possible, take steps to mitigate it.
And the bumping could be done by several large-ish type ships (not gnats), travelling at high speed - remember velocity is a thing. The downside of this approach is if the ramming/bumping/attacking ship misses then that ship is only seconds away from face planting into the ground....... so yea, pros and cons
Cheers
CoreVamore
-
13 hours ago, NanoDot said:
Given that NQ have already stated that "ramming" will not be a viable option to cause damage, I doubt that "ramming" will be a way to bring antigrav platforms down. It would invalidate NQ's policy.
Sorry NanoDot, you totally missed my point. I never mentioned damage did I? I was talking about bump mechanics which come into effect instead of damage. Bump mechanics basically mean that when my ship hits another then my ship will bounce off and the target ship will bounce a little too - usually in the direction that my ship was travelling in.
So, if you had enough ships dive bombing/bouncing the top of a hovering ship/platform, using anti-grav evngine, the bounce reaction may be enough to knock that ship/platform below the height limit set for the engines. This would cause the whole platform/ship to fall from the sky.
This form of attack would not invalidate NQ's policy, if anything it adds to emergent game play.
Food for thought..... ?
-
-
Welcome aboard
I now exist and did not before.
in Org Updates & Announcements
Posted