MookMcMook

Many things:- 1. The virtual world feels like the ink is dripping off the pen as the story unfolds. 2. Happy newbies entering the DU virtual world and being blown away (unintended pun) by a developed area showing a glimpse of the game. 3. Fleet Battles coordinating serious team-work between players on all (multiple) sides (see eg below). 4. Overall the avatar-construct duality of gameplay: I always wanted to enjoy a game like this. For a visual of 3 and not just combat team-work but logistics and building team work equivalents:-

Scanning info, ship size for rough estimates of fire-power, and of course scanning-blocking counter equipment. Ie knowing your enemy and how they can:- * Shoot * Shield * Move Is what it all comes down to. The bit missed out is:- * Knowing ?

Poo-poo, clap-clap?! "Ships will be ships"... ah but of course, kind sir. Think it about it:- Planets will have cadres of small ships buzzing around. Then there's options:- 1. Leave these around planets for planetary (planetside roles and defence) 2. Ferry a number of these via larger transport ships to other planets and systems 3. Build new ships at new planets and systems 4. Combination of all the above. Remember the idea is to pose different problems at different ship scales:- Local: Small ships Immediate System: Medium Ships will suffice Between Systems: Large ships required So you have a bottleneck of sorts shifting ships around and a logistical problem to solve for defence and forces. Remember everyone and their dog will have a small ship. GROUPS will have to organize the medium and larger classes/categories at a higher scale of interaction and organization. Finally, this is mere THEORYCRAFTING or generating IDEAS about how ships will play out: It's fun, it's exploratory, it may stimulate better ideas or induce people to come out with negatives about the idea which are also positive feedback to dicussion. It will be tempered more and more as the devs progress with development. If you want to link to previous ideas and say "they're the same or it's been covered" then please update the forums by doing so and we can successfully branch out our ideas further. It should be realized there are a great many FANS of sci-fi who have FUN talking about sci-fi ideas in combination with DU. Working off that basis seems appropriate?

Are you previous LM players talking about DU to other previous LM players in other forums, out of curiosity?

Another angle on this sub question topic: A superior product can demand a sub price OP, if DU achieves that, then it will be the commercially best pricing option for NQ irrespective of any person's personal preference. Not even coming back to server costs, player investment in virtual economy and social groups ROI of sub...

Just to comment on another aspect of this interesting topic and questions posed by the OP which has not been explored in this thread so far:- One of the noteworthy things about EVE battles apart from large numbers, TiDi and server technology issues is as above REAL MONEY COST (as above). If the cost of these large battles is always "costly" it will reduce the frequency of them (apart from performance issues also). What I'm hoping with DU is that it's not so much a real cost problem for large battles although that will likely be linked to the economic output, but the logistics (large crews mobilized) and the strategy (distances are going to significantly break up the map) between opposing large fleets. And this is one area of the "battle front" where planetside all sorts of other strategies might be going on. I think a very high real money cost would naturally reduce the frequency of large battles for these reasons instead of the above interesting and exciting reasons of logistics and strategy. And oc boomeranging back to the OP's original concern: We hope to experience strong (enough) performance in the first place as a given.

QUOTEWARS! "Torpedoes Away!" Takao: I'm firing at G6-E3-andhmm:-K11 The size like I said can be a range of sizes DICTATED BY DISTANCE Function:- * Small = Atmospheric Physics and Space propulsion : Minutes between Planets * Medium = Interplanetary ie Jump Speed or whatever tech is called upon: Seconds Between Planets * Large = Interstellar ie can pass through Star Gates (again some critical mass requirement fangled technobabble reason interacting with Gravity or "Skip Space blowing a hole through the fabric of space and time itself"). Or as simple as the mass of the ship over a certain size to house the technological mass of the actual engine performing these distance hops... "DIRECT HIT! Takao is sinking..." Notice this fits in snuggly with the idea of increasing crew size and thence standardization of gameplay (crew number is critical point here because then it's what do the players need to be doing on board ships to have fun?) <-> Ship Categorization.

Yes, yes, yes. This is the picture I envision happening as it (I guess) works with the grain of networking atst as scaling up pvp into an organized resource-&-labour intensive endeavour of powerful constructs dominating huge domains in space thus creating very stable and very large swathes of safe space for builders effectively. Likewise: VERY large orgs are going to dominate this game and the rewards will be terrific: Entire Solar Systems for example! This no doubt will drive smaller orgs to explore and fight each other over the scraps of new solar systems with multiple small orgs fighting over an entire planet and it's moons... and this is where pvp will be at it's most intense. The proxy wars, phony wars will boil hottest here offsetting the established cold wars of large orgs.

Well is there a standard convention for DU on terminology for space ships? CLASS signifies to me: CATEGORY TYPE signifies to me: FUNCTION *impractical Incorrect, it can be categorically declared without need for accuracy eg * Small * Medium * Large The main point is, is:- CLASS or CATEGORY can be defined around SIZE which itself is a product of DISTANCE CAPABILITY. = "A set or category of things having some property or attribute in common and differentiated from others by kind, type, or quality." English Oxford Dictionary. Basically a SET OF OBJECTS GROUPED LOGICALLY. And the most logical ordering property we have to speculate on atm is: SIZE as related to:- 1. Number of Player Crew Required directly proportional to increasing size. 2. Distance of Travel possible related to increasing size above thresholds allowing some technology to be added. You have to have a substantial PAY-OFF for grouping an increasing crew-size in larger spaceship:- * More skill specialization per avatar * More cooperation complexity with increasing numbers to keep players functional and not redundant * Rewarding such social pressures with big pay-offs eg power in offense and defence, distance capacity and hawlage, ferrying prowess etc And bear in mind a superior Sized Ship even if not directly in battle as part of an organization is a powerful defensive/guarding/patrolling AREA OF SPACE CONTROL Construct for the Economic resource capture of the organization. This to me is the vision of where PVP will really shine, combat warfare being carefully calculated. Little pew-pew ships being a total write off against such a majestic beast... Anyway, if there is a standard terminology for DU spaceships, I'd like to know!

This is constructive discussion material. I'd make a guess that the system that could be employed could be:- 1. small ships are short-range fighters ie fly at speeds in planetary atmosphere and around planets, take a while to travel between planets, no jump drive. 2. Interplanetary ships with Jump drive much larger and require bigger crew, and practically impervious to smaller ships albeit a helluva lot of small ships needed, again comes with weapons system much more powerful and numerous - that's the big pay-off. 3. Repeat with Interstellar Ships again size and power and crew number requirements. These can cruise through Star Gates (some mumbo jumbo about size and gravity). Likewise large Freight Ships are going to have to be huge to use these gates too. Each "Size Class is a RANGE of sizes within each Class". Notably some megaships might be able to transport smaller ships like aircraft carriers as well. But the main outcome:- The higher up you go, the more the tactical battle between these colossus ships is like 3D chess over huge distances and power and movements (like what's that board game: battleships at G8 HIT!) kinda like The Forever Wars spaceship battles. Whereas those smaller ships, more like Star Wars pew-pew action around planets. Maybe this is entirely outside what the devs envision with "any ship anywhere" can travel anywhere if the right stuff is built. But then and again that's the point of large ships as ferries for smaller constructs perhaps and suddenly ferrying is a huge industry in itself? Or perhaps someone has an even better vision or spots the fatal flaw in all the above?

Large Fleet Battles will happen when ships "jump" to a point to capture it or outnumber & outclass the defensive units already there. So for example a large capital ship is holding down outside a planet with rich resources. Any smaller ships arriving out of jump will be easily chewed up by this bigger ship, small ships swatted like the mosquitos they are. So the correct response is to outnumber and with same level class ships this capital ship to wipe it profitably for minimum loss, then take control of this planet ie be the new current blocking party. Also noteworthy: Once a major planet of resources is found, setting up planetary defences and digging in infrastructure so that not only is there a blocking ship(s) but constant ground/air offensives for any invaders trying to resource/territory claim on terra firma also and not easy to remove either. Note we'll need avatar vs avatar pew-pew in underground fortresses while smaller construct ships and floating ground constructs attack above ground. So yes small engagements will be fun but large fleet battles will be STRATEGIC tipping-points for map control. Itself dependent on numbers of orgs (Alliance) and Economic Engine backing it.

Surely, it makes sense that:- 1) Large Ships (Interstellar Class) = Basically too strong (weapons and shields) for any smaller ships. 2) Medium Ships (Interplantary Class) = Basically need a number of these against the above and too strong for the next class even if lots of them. 3) Planetary Atmosphere Ships = Can't dent any of the above but need swarms and swarms of them to do anthing but can go into atmospheric gravity successfully. Perhaps there will be a continuum here? But overall tech advancement difference can be like a cliff between classes? So far from being "bored" different ship classes have their own battles to bear. Notably too: small single unit fighters can dock on larger ships ideally too (fuel conservation and jumping distances). You probably want large ships docked and able to "beam me up Scotty" different crews if they're called into action? Different crews depending on the rosta... hence free time vs duty time.

I mean "huge area to build" = "huge area to build that is protected to begin with". Devs already said the current areas are big calculating how many hexes and km^2 that is. So there should be a clear message that "pure builders" will have a place to enjoy the game. Bear in mind this is a bootstrap effect of the Early Phase of the game's development: When actual large player orgs develop with large territory control then, builders can find places inside such creations. Bear in mind player orgs elsewhere (in pvp space) will have a wider net of variable resource qualities and types giving them competitive advantage: Everyone wins.

@ShioriStein Why not build said monument in memory of said player?! Then 50yrs (in-game time) later when the revolution erupts players can haul down such a symbol of tyranny and oppression and smelt it for building something new "in the new ""Eternal Empire"" 's name!"

I don't think there's any need to be hasty. All these ideas fulfill various requirements:- * Beginner area * Builders area * Real World schedule pause for all players * Mixing up the map with various options for builders and pvp I think come beta we'll see how they mix and match. I do think sending a clear message to builder players that they can find a huge area to build in game might be a sensible move (that red planet in the Alioth System perhaps), otherwise clickbait journalists will throw open the "Stunning DU allows incredible buildings but at a dear price of open world pvp: Discuss/Flame on in the Comments!"

No doubt: But let's see how people distribute in space. Seems a lot of it to begin with to player population, I'd guess.

Pledge, Donation, Investment... it's all an early PURCHASE with the usual "caveat emptor" warning bear in mind Eg * Delays * Bugs/Performance Issues * Change of Features / Cut of Features * Minimum Release and future Growth dependent on Commercial Success etc Though DU does seem to be in a good shape in pre-alpha compared to a lot of mmos.

Fine OP, no lasers. But how about lazers? Totally different story!

After Earth, we're all Alions now...

Large Org. I have few RL friends who play video-games or boardgames. Also in DU a large org IS the game imho: Building Civilization takes "everyone" hands at the pump, so to speak. That said, I want to create a small org with a specific purpose which is apolitical and helpful to all.

Yes I do: "Be a big fish in a small pond", captures this I think? These planets are going to be VAST. The Solar Systems and Moons are going to be VAST and Interstellar distance to more Solar Systems are going to be even more VAST. I think Lone Wolves will do just fine, as above finding a small cave etc. Then and again, Planets are so big some Lone Wolves putting on mutual recognitiion agreements (MRAs) with big orgs will or can work just fine too: "There's Old Man Bob doing his thing again over yonder..."

That's all very comforting to hear! Actually I assumed I'd read that devblog, which I had not in fact so apologies and a second thank you to Lethys . Nonetheless it's positive, I think in this the devs are in fact EXTENDING the safe spaces idea: They'll likely end up extending it some more...

No problem with disagreeing, of course it is counter to stated intention and information. But this is development now and when the game does release it's emergent in how it will work for players, additionally. Because the devs are not going for scripted develped content, it is what it will be.

Thanks for linking, always good to read: Yes those are their current thoughts and they're imo to guess, likely not the final verdict by a big stretch or two. We'll have to wait and see.

It depends how much one takes current information at face value as well as emphasizing that projecting potential trajectories of DU is only partly from settled information but also estimation of possible change. I have no problem with PvP per se, to repeat, in fact I'm a very positive advocate of PvP, when and where it fits in for whom: It has a schedule which I'd argue is behind other schedules such as building, which we already see great things about even now in pre-alpha eg the latest twitter picture is awesome.