Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • backer_title
  • Alpha

NanakotheNarcface's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. I'm very pleased that the packs look very reasonable. I might dip in when NDA lifts and I hear more about the game.
  2. I get what you're saying and, to clarify, when I say 'capital ship combat' I mean more like 'anything that has 1 or more turrets on it'; I'm not necessarily envisioning Star Destroyers duking it out! That said, when I say I'm worried that tab-targeted turrets would 'kill capital ship combat' I mean it more in the sense of "what is the point of having a ship with, say, two gunners who would have a boring time (in my opinion) with tab-based targeting when you could have 3 small 'fighter'-type ships that have much more engaging gameplay?" Hence why I'm unsure about the idea of tab-based targeting and mandatory manned turrets. To be honest, I'm just worrying about something that I have no idea about so I guess there's no point in debating hypotheticals. Still, though, I'd like to see a comprehensive explanation from Novaquark explaining how they envision combat working in DU since it's going to be a pretty important part of the game.
  3. This is all speculation because we still have no confirmation as to what the combat system will be, but if it's a system as you and Zamarus suggest then that might make it a bit more engaging. As to whether WoW combat is boring; it's a subjective thing, isn't it? What one person finds entertaining another might find boring. That said, In WoW you can move around and have dozens (or is it hundreds now?) of different powers you can use in combat for different effects. In the scenario described you wouldn't be able to move (as you're in a turret), and I doubt you'd have more than a couple of additional actions (maybe changing ammo?) if any. Basically, I'd imagine that tab-targeting in this situation would be like combat in EVE only you don't get to control the ship and you only get a single turret to fire, not exactly fun for me, but maybe other people will find it entertaining. Like I said, though, it's all speculation; we still don't have a solid understanding of how combat will be done other than their ideas so we might all be totally off-base. That said, I do genuinely hope it's not what I described as I think that would kill capital ship combat.
  4. Actually, the bolded part of your reply got me thinking of another issue with this whole 1 person = 1 gun discussion. Novaquark have categorically stated that, due to the networking limitations, combat in DU will be percentage-based, rather than aim-based (in other words, like EVE or WoW). If this is indeed the case, I'd imagine the job of being a gunner would be incredibly boring: sit at the turret, left click target, left click fire button, wait for the target to die or your ship to blow up. I dunno about you but I think such a role would bore me to tears, and I'm sure I wouldn't be the only one either. If they decide to go ahead with each turret requiring a gunner, then I'm pretty sure that the only combat that will take place will be fighters due to the fact that larger ship combat would just be flat-out boring for the players. That said, I do agree that the other engineering stuff might be interesting to do.
  5. I am excited about DU's premise as I really like the idea of designing my own spaceships and travelling through space. I also look forward to forming an organisation with some friends and carving out a chunk of the universe. A lot of this game sounds fun, interesting and very achievable, so I do feel a certain amount of optimism towards it. As good as it sounds, though, I'm also a bit wary about this game; I've been burned by a couple of other Kickstarter/EA games, so I'll take a wait-and-see approach towards it. If it comes out of NDA and the feedback is good I might take the plunge and buy into it. That said, I've seen nothing from Novaquark that gives cause for concern and the game does seem to be progressing smoothly. Hopefully this is the case and DU will be a big success.
  6. I was referring to having everything generated and in-game at release, waiting to be found (like in Elite Dangerous or NMS) vs making planets by procedural generation, but added in one at a time by devs as and when they're needed (like in Star Citizen). I was under the impression that it might be the latter, but I just rewatched the AMA video on this and it looks like it might actually be the former. AMA is here, btw:
  7. Wouldn't it then make sense for each star system to be its own 'map' then, to avoid Floating Point errors? Also from what I understood, although the planets are procgen, that doesn't mean that the whole universe is; from what I gather the developers will add stars/planets as the userbase (and their means of travel) expands.
  8. Or that! It would be a concerted effort, nonetheless, though!
  9. I dunno, judging from what I've seen in the dev blogs, if you want to colonise a system and claim it, you'll have to get there (which takes a long time and (maybe?) resources), build a gate (more resources) and then put down territory claim units (which aren't cheap!) in areas of particular value/importance before anyone else does. With all of that in mind, an organisation that plans ahead and sends a large ship with plenty of supplies will be better placed to do all of that immediately, rather than a single person that just turns up, has to scan for resources, mine them and then build the things they need. So yeah, I'd imagine a single small ship could go to the system and build things for themselves, but they'd probably lose out a ton of resources/claims when a better prepared and equipped rival arrives and is able to set up shop immediately. This is all just speculation, though; for all we know the mechanics are totally different, we'll have to wait until more information about DU is released.
  • Create New...