Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sparktacus

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • backer_title
  • Alpha

Recent Profile Visitors

424 profile views
  1. discordauth:MraqL3JYioI3KiH3gqf4Leo-9ZvB0U70VNRJtqphvBc=

  2. So there's only issues with large numbers of players collaborating if theyre in the same org? Whilst we know almost nothing about combat, I'm fairly confident that a 100 players from a single org, or 100 players from 10 co-operating orgs will have roughly the same effect.
  3. You don't even need to alt spam. A group of allied smaller orgs who give each other rdms access would have the same effect. And I think they would have a really hard time putting in a mechanism to stop that. It's a civilisation building mmo, people collaborating is a core concept.
  4. If it becomes the case that auto defences can hold against serious numerical advantage, then fights with close to balanced sides become massively weighted towards the defender. If that happens, then the only viable attack tactic will be overwhelming numbers. That will exacerbate the "issue" with big orgs, as smaller orgs wont be able to muster enough force to take anything on, so the big orgs just wander around with impunity.
  5. ^^ That. Auto defenses are there to serve 2 purposes for me 1) stop casual raiders blowing you up for a laugh. 2) Make things a bit more interesting for those who make the decision to come and make a concerted attack on you. They shouldnt ever stop a co-ordinated team from taking your base when unmanned. They should make sure that theres a bit of a cost for doing so (repairing damage etc)
  6. Absolutely agree there. What I want to avoid is there being no cost or risk to attacking a ship. An unarmed ship is basically a pinata, no risk to hitting it on the off chance something good falls out. If there is some form of defense on the target, you need to weigh up whether the loot you get from attacking is worth the damage you get in return, however minimal. Sure, a dedicated combat ship vs a freighter, 1 on 1, you should still win, but youll take a few hits in return, and that will cost a bit to repair. With that in mind, if there is no automated option, you have 2 choices 1 - fit a manned turret, and only ever fly when youve got a friend willing to sit in your ship waiting to use it on the offchance something happens 2 - go unarmed entirely, and accept youre a going to be a pinata for anyone who fancies it. I really dont see it as likely that we'll have large groups of players flying around hunting down lone ships. I think its much more likely that we'll see lone players or small groups of 2 to 3 doing that, and thats what im talking about these defenses being for - not to win the fight, but to give the attackers some form of consequence for attacking so they at least have to consider if attacking a target is worth it.
  7. Correct. All im looking go for is for a to be able to shoot back a bit so its not a free kill for a single seat attack ship, and not have to haul a gunner about with me on otherwise dull cargo runs.
  8. Its on my to do list as soon as it does. As i say, hate leaving things on a vague note.
  9. Providing the engine supports that, sure, not a bad idea. Personally, id like to be able to build/edit smaller ships while aboard a larger moving ship, as I want to be spending most of my time shipbuilding.
  10. This is why im so conflicted about multiple characters. It does resolve the problem of downtime for travel, but it just dosent seem right somehow. As I say, still trying to work out why myself.
  11. I absolutely, fundamentally disagree. Games are meant to be fun to play. I do not spend my free time playing them, to be bored. If there are significant gameplay loops that are little more than watching a screen, that is going to significantly detract from the experience. Now of course, there are lots of different gameplay loops. Mining, building, fighting etc, you dont have to like all of them. But players should always have something to do in order to keep them engaged and entertained by the game. If thats not the case, youll find a lot of players just going and playing other games instead of DU, which would be a shame. This game has a huge amount of promise, but its going to rely on having a solid community of players im order to thrive.
  12. Right up to that point, I completely agree. Time spent in game should be fun and engaging for the player. But being able to swap between avatars and effectively change what region youre acting in instantly makes me twitch. It might be a good thing, leading to more players taking part in a given fight as everyone activates their combat avatars, but it still makds me twitch for some reason. As I say, im conflicted. Still havent figured out why.
  13. Id be ok with that kind of thing. Extra logistics and widgets required to make any automation happen. As for multiple chars per account - im honestly not sure how I feel about that. I'll need to give it some thought.
  14. I voted for cryo/beds, but really I think it needs 2 mechanics, as you need to accomodate for people dcing away from a tube. So, beds and cryotubes as a "safe" option (avatar disappears, tube switched to show its occupied), and ragdoll or similar otherwise, leaving the avatar in place to whatever fate awaits it. Obviously, if your tube or bed gets blown up, youre toast, but that shouldbe more difficuly than just taking out a prone avatar.
  15. Yeah, solution there is hoverpads, with round voxel "wheels" hiding them. Did someting similar in empyrion to make an E:D rover
  • Create New...