Supermega

The biggest reason for the failure of eve was more the community. Any group that revels in its toxicity is doomed to fail.

I'm sorry to necro this thread, but just for the sake of ppl who read this topic and Eternals explanation about lasers, literally everything he wrote concerning Lasers is wrong, so please don't remember or even distribute it.

I won't get into all of it right now, as I have dealt with the situation as delicately as possible to try and undo the damage, but it appears that not only was the community discord a target of spammers (people sending private messages to everyone in the user list to try and recruit for their org) but that several other communities were targeted as well. That all culminated in discussions about the game being banned in various places, someone trying to dox me, and a slew of other issues I've tried to fix today. Someone went so far as to accuse me of being JC himself even. 
 
I'm not going to drop names here now, you know who you are, but if I find out you are continuing the spamming and harassing other communities about Dual Universe, I will definitely report it and let NovaQuark deal with the situation. I've heard reports of everything from sending mass private messages to people, to joining other discords and spamming links to the game over and over, to someone joining voice chats to spam the game and harass people.
 
One person even had the audacity to go into discords and tell everyone they were the creator of Dual Universe and proceed to spam the game over and over. 
 
You are doing anyone any favors by spamming the game, and you are doing harm to DU's name by doing it. It's not helping any of us, and it certainly isn't helping your own reputation for doing it. 
 
99.999% of org's out there aren't doing it, but one or two org's in specific are, and they are going to ruin it for the rest of us if they keep it up. Nobody should be encouraging that type of behavior. 
 
I'm posting this here in the hopes that it will keep others from attempting to do the same thing, and so that the parties responsible know what their actions did. 
 

the devs are awsome does that count?

Minor correction, star citizens server structure does not even compare to DU. It splits the world in instances, with a maximum of 40 players per instance. I'm not sure if this is currently in the game or still on their to do list. This might improve over time but they can't do what DU will do or what EVE does. 
 
 
 

Don't forget large scale PvP which only EvE provides at the moment.
Jokes aside, DU may launch before Star Citizen too.
 
Regards,
Shadow

@Semproser
 
I think your missing the big picture.
 
In this game things won't be as easy as you think. Mining will be hard and time consuming, to locate good materials, then harvesting those materials. During that time players will be vulnerable to attack. So, players will have to build a base or defense at the mining site to protect it while they gather resources. An space travel isn't super fast like in most space games. Travel between planets will be a long voyage, which makes transporting goods to secure territory even more risky.
Then you still have crafting to refine those raw materials into something usable. An that doesn't include building and manufacturing. An the whole time a player or org is doing that they will be vulnerable to getting attacked.
 
The Moons have Zero valuable resources, and Alioth only has low value resources. So players will have to venture out if they want to get materials to build anything important in the game. And that's when they are vulnerable to attack.
Also, if you really take the time to think about it, the savezones in the game are a tiny compared to the rest of the game. only a few thousand kilometers around the Arkship, and one moon. The rest of Alioth, and 5 other planets is open to combat. Players have no choice but to venture out to gather resources.
 
If you just want to do running and gunning style pew pew, then this games is probably not for you, I'd recommend the game "Angels fall First". That's a pvp focused space game that has that type of gameplay. This game is focused on on rebuilding civilization, and you can't do that without stability. If this was just free for all PVP, then there wouldn't be any savezones.
 
Think about it this way, Players and Orgs will be constantly thinking up clever ways to defend and protect themselves, so they can build their civilization. So if you want to attack people, then you need to be equally as clever, an think up good strategies.
 
Also, their is another angle you should consider, and that's espionage and the meta game. Its no secret around here that some Organizations already have spy's everywhere, and are planning to destroy other Organizations from the inside. Those spies can simply steal any resources. If anything, the sanctuaries and savezones are just a false since of security. 
 
 
 

@Semproser
 
I think your missing the big picture.
 
In this game things won't be as easy as you think. Mining will be hard and time consuming, to locate good materials, then harvesting those materials. During that time players will be vulnerable to attack. So, players will have to build a base or defense at the mining site to protect it while they gather resources. An space travel isn't super fast like in most space games. Travel between planets will be a long voyage, which makes transporting goods to secure territory even more risky.
Then you still have crafting to refine those raw materials into something usable. An that doesn't include building and manufacturing. An the whole time a player or org is doing that they will be vulnerable to getting attacked.
 
The Moons have Zero valuable resources, and Alioth only has low value resources. So players will have to venture out if they want to get materials to build anything important in the game. And that's when they are vulnerable to attack.
Also, if you really take the time to think about it, the savezones in the game are a tiny compared to the rest of the game. only a few thousand kilometers around the Arkship, and one moon. The rest of Alioth, and 5 other planets is open to combat. Players have no choice but to venture out to gather resources.
 
If you just want to do running and gunning style pew pew, then this games is probably not for you, I'd recommend the game "Angels fall First". That's a pvp focused space game that has that type of gameplay. This game is focused on on rebuilding civilization, and you can't do that without stability. If this was just free for all PVP, then there wouldn't be any savezones.
 
Think about it this way, Players and Orgs will be constantly thinking up clever ways to defend and protect themselves, so they can build their civilization. So if you want to attack people, then you need to be equally as clever, an think up good strategies.
 
Also, their is another angle you should consider, and that's espionage and the meta game. Its no secret around here that some Organizations already have spy's everywhere, and are planning to destroy other Organizations from the inside. Those spies can simply steal any resources. If anything, the sanctuaries and savezones are just a false since of security. 
 
 
 

There is no logic.  Only sandbox.
 
If you want shields you have to hire other players to lay on the hull of your ship and act as human armor.
 
Sorry I don't make the rules.  

Hi everyone,
 
It seems the DevBlog was not clear enough on some points.
We have said it many times before, and we'll continue to say it again:
While many players wants to see Dual Universe with a dominant gameplay aspect, it's important to understand that it's NOT the case. 
 
Building gameplay is as important as Combat gameplay. Not more, not less. Balancing both won't be easy and we are aware of it. No, Building is not the major feature of Dual Universe. If the Building aspect has been made first, it's only because, it was making total sense to start the development with this part: we are pretty much in R&D field regarding the Voxel technology. It was an essential piece of tech to build the base of the game: Voxels were necessary to create editable planets in the first place. Then the logical next step was to develop tools to give players to manipulate voxels. That wouldn't make sense to develop Combat gameplay before the two previous steps because, there wouldn't even something to destroy, or even an environment where the combat could happen.
 
The order in which the features are developed are NOT by order of importance.
It's just a matter of logical game development roadmap.

We have no plan to make Dual Universe a total free for all PvP game, just as we won't make it a whole game universe safe, just because some players want to explore it completely without taking any risk. While we don't plan to make our game some kind of "EVE Online 2.0", we don't want either to make a "No Man's Sky 2.0". We understand this may not appeal to everyone taste, and we totally understand that. However, if there is something that is very unlikely to change, it's the fact that there's no intention to catter to only one specific category of players. 
 
A final word about the griefing and the mindset of the community. Our point of view is that griefing mainly proliferates when it's an easy way to get rewards with little effort, not necessarily because many people really wants to play that way. Of course, there are people who like to grief just for the enjoyment of annoying other players but we are convinced they're not a majority. If game mechanics are designed in such a way that griefing doesn't give easy rewards, then griefing will be naturally limited. 
 
Why not simply remove the possibility of griefing, then?

Yes, it would be clearly easier and quicker to remove the ability to grief other players, but while we have no intention to encourage griefing, removing it totally would go against the very definition of the sandbox concept: players are free to interact in the way they want. If we remove any kind of interaction, then we are not in a Sandbox MMORPG anymore: we would be in a Theme Park one. And that is not Novaquark's vision. We want a game universe where bad behavior is discouraged by game mechanics and heavy in consequences if a player still choose to do so, than arbitrarily forbid the said behavior. We want players to be free but also to live with the consequences of their choices. That's what Sandbox mean to us at Novaquark.
 
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

Hi everyone, just a reminder to be nice and friendly in your replies, please respect everyone's opinion. We want discussions, not insults or flame wars. Thanks.
 
~ Meldrik
 

Hi everyone! 
Here are some answers to your questions and additional information to your feedback

@FleetAdmiralCoke
We are not sure to understand what you call "safe building zones to very small areas in very specific places". Moons having MSA will have thousands of territories each. Arkship Secure Areas will also contain thousands of safe territories. Those are not particularly "very small" areas. Planets will be huge, and safe areas, while limited, will be huge too.
 
About choosing the location of a city outside the MSA and the ASA, it has never been confirmed that we will let players choose a place for a city, then make it officially invulnerable. The idea may have been mentioned somewhere, but it was just an idea and with this idea comes a lot of issues of game balance. The most obvious possible abuse is the following: 
 
If we let players choose which location should become permanently safe, then you will have very big organizations, able to mobilize hundreds or even thousands of players installing invulnerable cities just next to their smaller opponents, giving endless possibilities of harassing theme easily. That would give an unfair advantage to big organizations. Abuses can be made by installing invulnerable cities on high value resources with no revert that once it has happened. Unless we find a reasonable way to prevent such issues, it's unlikely that the Secure Areas location could be decided by players.
 
Now, all the explanations above are for MSA and ASA, for areas 100% safe with no exception.
However, that won't prevent players to build heavily protected cities in Unsecure Areas. A city built in an Unsecure Area will still have a chance to be attacked and destroyed. We won't start to give details here of what could be reinforce defense for such cases (cities in Unsecure Areas) but it could be the topic of a new DevBlog in the future. The present DevBlog was released mainly to answer the recurrent questions of "Will Dual Universe be a complete Free For All game ?", the answer is "No, there will be room for very different player types, but it doesn't mean it will appeal to everyone either."

@Lethys
- If we were to use domes instead of bubbles, what would happen if an agressor starts to dig a tunnel under the dome?
- About DPS saturation and the risk of player blobs, we will take that into consideration. For now, it's still too early to confirm how PvP Mechanics will work.
- MSA can't be placed anywhere as those will be located on specific moons, decided by Novaquark.
 
@Hades
It's still too early to give details on the final mechanics for the Protection Bubble. As said to FleetAdmiralCoke, this Devblog was meant to address recurrent questions from newcomers. We won't give right now the details regarding the protection bubble.
 
@AeonReign
Well, for game balance reason, basic protection (protection bubble mechanics) should be affordable and not that expensive, otherwise playing in Unsecure Areas will be only viable for people that never disconnect from the game (and we don't want to encourage such behavior).
 
 
@Takao
 
Thanks for reporting the typos.
1) In Arkship & Moon Secure Areas, you CAN'T claim an already claimed territory, for obvious reasons.
2) If you install Forcefields in a certain manner, it may lead to a situation where you can prevent people to enter a territory.
3) MSA won't be on every moon. There will be MSA only on moons decided by Novaquark.
As said to Hades, we won't go into details for now.
 
@PerksPlus
Moons with MSA won't be next to planets with valuable resources.
Or else, it would nullify the concept of "risk vs reward".
Moons with MSA will be near planets with ASA, or with low valuable resources.
That means that if some pirate want to ambush miners gathering valuable resources, he will need some time to go back to the safest area (and plenty of time to be intercepted). Moreover, we are considering also game mechanics that could discourage greatly the behavior "Go In/Go Out" from a Secure Area abusively, just to ambush people without taking any risk.
 
@Shadow 
@Ben Fargo
We won't go into the details of the Protection Bubble mechanics yet.
As said to Hades, this Devblog was meant to address recurrent questions from newcomers.
There will be another Devblog later giving more details on that aspect, and it will most likely be when we will talk about PvP
 
@Zamarus
The difference between ASA and MSA:
- ASA will get have basic, low-value material in the ground. Players who just want to build things without being bothered by PvP (and aren't interested to compete with other players in terms of construct optimization or combat) will be advised to stay in this type of safe area.
- MSA are Safe Areas with no other perks than being a safe place. So yes, if you want to build in Sanctuary Areas, it will necessitate to bring resources from outside.
 
@lethak
@yamamushi
@LittleJoe
Of course, we have considered APIs.
But as already said before, it means additional development time (far more than just an email alert) and we want to stay focus on the features promised during the Kickstarter first, for the official release. However, there is a high chance that the dev team plan something on this topic once the game will be launched (we prefer to take the proper time to develop one if we want to avoid issues)
 
@mrjacobean
@Kurock
- There will be MSA only on moons decided by Novaquark, nowhere else.
- If a moon has a MSA, it will cover the whole moon (unlike ASA, which will cover only a part of the planet where it's located).
- No, "Sanctuary tile" can't be taken by military means, just like territories in an ASA.
- Moons with a MSA will be always near a planet having an ASA (there might be reasons for that reccuring "coincidence") so only near no to low value resources, nowhere near high value resources.
- Yes, We plan some means to gain ownership of a Sanctuary tile that is occupied by a owner inactive for a long time (and one of the current idea considered is that inactive user assets will be archived but not lost. The inactive user would just lose the ownership of the territory).
 
@supermega
Sending a notification to a Discord in case of agression has been added in the Feature Suggestion list and will be discussed with the developer team. However, depending of the feasibility and the amount of time to develop such a feature, it may or may not be implemented. If the idea is validated, it may also be implemented after the official release.  In any case, thanks for giving the idea!
 
@Setzar
the "Force Field" Unit doesn't create a "Safe Zone" (if we stick to our definition of Safe Zone in Dual Universe), it's indeed more like a barrier that prevents entry from unauthorized entity. 
 
@CyberCrunch
This is a bit too soon to talk advanced game mechanics regarding cities located in Unsecure Areas.
Let's just say that the dev team is currently thinking of something that has similar points with what you suggested (not to the point to make permanent Safe Areas decided by the players though), but again, we will talk advanced mechanics in another DevBlog. This one was made to give only the basics
 
@Fins_T
We have several Ogame players among Novaquark staff so we know (and understand) what you're taking about
We totally agree that needing to check regularly if you're attacked is tiring (even if there are fleetsaving strategies and the use of moons to temper that) and that's why Protection Bubble mechanics, with email alert/notification will be put in place: to inform you only when necessary without having to check constantly in-game if you're attacked or not, and giving you the opportunity to manage your real life without being permenanently worried of what's happening to your assets in-game.

However, in terms of gameplay, combat mechanics will far more similar to EVE Online than Ogame: You can't just assume in advance what will be the strength of the defense, the number of player coming to defend a territory, etc. Moreover, one player can't have an overwhelming force built by himself alone. So, a combat result will be far less predictable than in Ogame. Player numbers, the involvement, and the skills of each of them are all factor that will impact victory or defeat, because no matter how much spaceships has... it can only use one at a time, and even a huge battleship with lots of weapon turret won't be used efficiently by a player alone.
 
We don't plan to copy Ogame much in this regard, because in Dual Universe, you play a colonist, not a governor managing an empire with many planets and a whole fleet at your command from the start (unless you achieve the difficult goal of having many real players accepting your rulership to colonize planets and pilot the said fleet under your command, but even then, there will be natural limits of how much firepower you will be able to bring to take down opponent bases).
 
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.
 

Thanks for the Blog Novaquark, its always exciting when you put out new info.
 
So far I like the idea of the force-field unit having a cool down timer, and being indestructible for 24-48 hours, so nothing to add on that point.
 
My only suggestion would be to possibly add Discord as a notification. The reason being, that most Organizations are already using Discord as a means of communication, plus if you use Discord it would be easier to notify an entire group or Org in the event that a territory unit is compromised.
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also here are some ideas for the name of the Force Field Unit:
 
Terrain Energy Shield
 
Spacial Protection Field
 
Agents of Shield
 
Force Field 2 Electric Boogaloo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sorry I'm bad with naming things

@Hades I never say that it was, I stated the many other aspects of the game besides building, if you read my comment.
 
Also, I've stated many times before that the game will be shaped my the mindset of the player base, because thats the nature of a sandbox.

Dual Universe is a Civilization "BUILDING" MMO, as stated by Novaquark. It has many gameplay mechanics including voxel building ships, making habitats, and stations, Mining, Crafting, Manufacturing, Exploration, macro and micro Warfare, Territory control, etc....
 
This is the impression players are getting from this game. pvp is not the end all be all of the game, its only one, of many aspects of the game.
 

Honestly, just let it play out and see how it all goes guys... Cause of right now, you're just going to keep beating the horse over and over based on theories, beliefs and wants... 
 
Will pvp be as bad as some are making it to be? Who here really knows for sure? Legitimately. Who here 100% knows what the universe is going to evolve into?
 
Or at least wait until NQ releases the devdiary/blog regarding griefing, maybe it'll answer some questions, maybe it won't...
 
Again, the main point being, we don't know for sure what the universe will be down the road.
 
Just ponder on that.
 
 
Cheers,
Comrademoco

@Zamarus  I understand what you tried to imply, but what you see as pointless or invalid might be just the opposite to someone else. You don't have to like it, or even participate in those discussions, but you don't have any right to discourage them either. The Good Ol' Boys Club in this forum is no doubt strong, but it's not divine.
 
If NQ delivers, I plan on doing everything the game has to offer. I'll likely suck at all of it, but excelling isn't really my goal. Having fun is.
 
As for the game, there is a belief that it will be "player driven" and "emergent" game-play will dictate how the game develops. Those buzzwords are the basis for much of the pro PvP arguments in this thread. Players will be allowed to do whatever they want, including ganking and griefing because in theory, if players don't like it, they can organize and fight it... which is really just the other side of a PvP deathmatch, but regardless, NQ decided that PvP won't be allowed in certain areas. They also said they would intervene if needed. So, isn't the whole PvP freedom already crippled? Why not do away with the safe zones altogether?

Emergent:
"in the process of coming into being or becoming prominent."
 
Emergent Gameplay: 
"Complex situations that emerge from simple mechanic interactions"
 
 
As many stated DU is NOT this first then that second...
 
Whilst a simple headline - like the one used above as an example - can lead someone to believe DU will be a building game first. You have to understand the whole in order to understand the meaning of what that headline means or is trying to portray...
 
 
So what does this mean?
 
Well, it means that during the first couple of months, maybe even years, the primary focus of the emergent gameplay maybe be building... and not in the sense that everyone is making it to be but as building (the process of creating - not physical items - but the emergent gameplay that will play the bigger part, of the later years of DU) the universe. You can't have warfare, politics, trade and pvp without having built the emergent player driven universe first. And sure, that building process can even entitle physical building of constructs as part of the building process of the "emergent universe". 
 
So again, while that headline in the website says "Building MMO" understand the context of it: DU is a "Civilization Building" MMORPG. What emerges from that... it is up to the players to decide when they interact with the simple mechanics of the game; trading, building, exploring and warfare. Who knows! Maybe it'll be more building of constructs, maybe the clashing of big empires and alliances, maybe it'll be a universe run by pirates full of pvp... The point is, we dont know what DU will be in the later years... we have to build that emergent universe ourselves and see what it turns out to be.
 
 
 
 
Cheers,
Comrademoco
 

The big problem is that destruction is so much easier then construction or protection. You(an individual or group) have to spend countless hours building and pay mercs(which I suspect will be costly due to the high demand) or guard it yourself 24/7, which may not be possible, while all it takes is a few people to just log in and open fire to destroy.
 And it seems like some people here are fine with this. I won't say any names but the real problem it seems like is the community's attitude towards the issue which potentially stems from NQ's *marketing* of DU as a "do-whatever-you-want" MMO (at least before the website change).

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.

Dual Universe is a Civilization "BUILDING" MMO, as stated by Novaquark. It has many gameplay mechanics including voxel building ships, making habitats, and stations, Mining, Crafting, Manufacturing, Exploration, macro and micro Warfare, Territory control, etc....
 
This is the impression players are getting from this game. pvp is not the end all be all of the game, its only one, of many aspects of the game.
 

Dual Universe is a Civilization "BUILDING" MMO, as stated by Novaquark. It has many gameplay mechanics including voxel building ships, making habitats, and stations, Mining, Crafting, Manufacturing, Exploration, macro and micro Warfare, Territory control, etc....
 
This is the impression players are getting from this game. pvp is not the end all be all of the game, its only one, of many aspects of the game.
 

I think super understands that the game’s core is emergent and player driven.  Which means there won’t be some arbitrary feature in place to make combat more difficult than building.  If you want something protected, you have to protect it.  Whether through your means, or riding off the coat tails of others.  Now something might be more difficult to destroy because it’s player driven.  Such as someone wedging a base in between a canyon or something.
 
This isn’t landmark in space, and I do think some people think it is... which is a problem, and it will be rectified quickly upon release haha.
 
It won’t take hours to destroy a standard single seater ship, it won’t be more costly to make bullets than it is to make a ship.  And there certainly won’t be a NQ built punishment system in place.  Defenses are going to be costly, weaponry is going to be costly.  If it’s any other way, we have a dull game on our hands and it goes against the vision brought out in Kickstarter videos

NQ built a custom engine to handle a single shard voxel based universe. They also sacrificed popular twitch based PvP mechanics in favor of a single shard voxel based universe, where everything is player built, and PvP will come later in development. So there is that.
 
My biggest concern with PvP is that I can load up an alt and grief newbies all day long. When a hired merc or security force comes along and kills me. I can load up another alt and continue getting my jollies. I'd like to hear a player driven solution to that behavior?

Yes, you can't have a single shard with people being able to run free killing others
 
Dom't force anything except for your will to harm other players. That is the definition of conflict: forcing your will on others when the parties have conflicting wills.
Destruction is inherently easier then construction. Its called entropy.  And balancing it contridicts:
Which will apply not only to cheaper armour but a shift in balance to favor defence.
 
Unless the mechanics make it so you can't counter them.
 
The real question here is: will thesw rules be strong enough?