Fitorion

What do you do when you start in a theme park MMO? I join a faction... and go around talking to NPCs about the various rolls... and then choose one. The goal is for Players to fill that structure themselves. So you'll enter the game and research which large Org to join... and then you'll talk to people to find a roll you enjoy and are given tasks to teach you how to do it and which are beneficial to the org as a whole. One Roll could be mining. Another could be shipping... or loading cargo... or lua scripting... or building... The point is to make a virtual world where people can function is as many different ways as they do in real life. And real life like pressures that keep people grouped up will have to be used. Fuel cost... tech limitations... time to travel and cargo capacity... and yes finite resources are needed to make the world as dynamic and changing as desired.

I remember something about a build mode... where you're in a safe place where you can tinker and test your designs a little... Basically just their interactive parts or their flight characteristics. I haven't heard anything suggesting there would be any sort of targets to test weapons on in such a build mode... But that could be something added later. Highly unlikely they'll have NPCs though.

shifting early game activities. At the start mining will probably be a high priority... But after the game has been out for a while ... and a lot has been mined and the easy close in deposits have been harvested... Mining probably won't be as important for a new player to engage in right away. So what will the early game be for a new player be later on? I'm not sure. I imagine there will be guilds actively recruiting... And the starting area will be built up with market interfaces, storehouses and space ports... player housing and org headquarters. If player made quests are a thing then a new player could take on some of those to make some cash. Depending on how much cash a player starts with and how the player economy pans out... they may be able get out fitted with a beginner ship by purchasing it on the markets or not. Heck new players could have some sort of voucher that enables them to purchase something that contains a certain amount of resources. So the seller gets market value... and the new player can always afford a basic ship... I'm hopeful there will be sufficient mechanics in place for player made quests... missions... politics... factions... for players to effectively take over the rolls that the NPCs and story would in a non sand box game.

some sort of on screen indication of who's talking could be helpful... Especially if you can assign local temporary labels... like say rank on a ship which is separate and distinct from guild rank and only applicable while you're on the ship. Or I guess doing something associated to it... like picking up the cargo or something.

P2W is paying to gain an advantage that another could not achieve through other means. The second part is important. I could see a slight modification to the second part... like say "that another could not achieve or would require such an onerous set of tasks as to be essentially impossible through other means." But if one makes that alteration the definition of what an "onerous set of tasks" is comes into debate... and can be whittled down to just anything anyone doesn't want to do... rather than a particularly unpleasant and long thing. Under some interpretations DAC may be slightly pay to win... But the question I have is... Is that too bad of a thing that it offsets the benefits? After all no game is devoid of pay to gain advantage options... even those who actively try to ban them... people still pay third parties and risk either being banned or having their accounts hacked. Free people will exercise their freedom and rebel against efforts to restrict them. The only way to exercise any semblance of control and maintain stability is to provide a structure in which the activities those playing want to engage in can be engaged in.

meh. I don't see a point in being a part of any org prior to release. This isn't to say that others can't or don't have good reasons... just that I don't. I don't have any idea really what activity I'm going to most enjoy doing or what will need an org to help organize it... Until I actually get to play the game. I don't know what will actually be a viable play style... if say a person could never leave a town... provide crafting services... sell wares... and issue quests for crafting components... and whether doing that would be fun. Or if I'll find a loner asteroid miner or other such thing more to my liking. I expect most orgs made now won't survive long. The only thing I think could have some value (for me) would be some sort of pre-release social club that closed to new membership after release... except for adding your alts... so people who have been around from the beginning could hang with each other. I'm an alt-aholic in most games. I make characters with certain character traits in mind... even if I don't partake in any overt role-playing... There is an element of role play in every character I make... they aren't me. And I tend to split my time between them evenly... I'm not sure if I can do that in this game. And the idea of having a main character... a representation of me for the long term... the years it may take for the civilization within the game to grow and expand ... for my character to stick around in an org... is sorta weird to me. But the Op was taking about artificially inflating your organizations membership numbers in order to attract members... Yeah that's clearly something you shouldn't do.

this isn't primarily a space exploration game... it's a civilization building game. While it's set in a scifi setting and some exploration is necessary to expand to new territory for the civilization to grow... If you're expecting a free roaming space exploration game... you'll be disappointed.

Depends how hard interstellar travel is... how many methods there are and how long each takes... And the game ceases to function if people spread out too much too quickly. The corporations and services and PvP require other players to be around... or they have no purpose. I hope it's a full year before players working together unlock the technology and then construct a way for people to get from one system to another. And then it takes very nearly as long in the new system to build the necessary infrastructure to allow further expansion. But exactly how long it takes and how they limit our expansion is speculation at this point and a matter of balance they will have to consider carefully.

I want a tidally locked planet with Desert on the side facing the local sun, a temperate ring at the terminator, and frozen icescape on the side facing out to space. I don't think there should be single biome worlds... except maybe at the extremes. Like Desert or Ice or Water planet. If a planet can have more temperate biomes like plains, forest, and the like... then it should also have deserts and iced over poles... In Star Wars there's single biome planets... and a lot of scifi actually... but it isn't very realistic. Mars has different biomes... cold desert and perma frost like areas and iced over poles... In the Star Wars expanded universe books and games before it all got dumped... they actually explained why so many planets have a single biome. Habitable worlds were rare... and in ancient times... long before humans became prevalent in the galaxy a race of beings used technology to seed worlds with life and maintain good climates. Overtime some have malfunctioned... turning Tatooine into a desert instead of the jungle it's supposed to be... and making the trees of Kashyyk grow to monstrous proportions. If this game is to have single biome worlds... which is just plain easier to code... then I'd like to see some sort of recognition that it's odd... and some sort of lore hints as to why it's that way.

First you need to restructure how you're thinking about the game. Unless something has changed... they're still planning on it taking months from release for us as a community to get off the first planet. To begin moving through space to the other planets in the first system... and then who knows how long before interstellar travel becomes available. So this isn't a free roaming space exploration game where you can be alone on a planet... at least not for very long. Maybe 5-10 years down the road someone might be able to get themselves lost on a world the rest of the game population isn't actively using... but I expect there will be lots of people around for a long time by virtue of how the game systems for travel will be designed to function. Namely that we won't be able to scatter to the corners of the universe right from the start and will have to work together to build transportation capability.

I'd like to see a full web portal with terms of service... where people could submit equipment... gear... clothes... ship parts... any and all meshs of anything and everything it's possible to imagine within the terms of service. Such submissions could be voted up or down by the community and reported for terms of service violations. Then the devs could ... say once a month... take the top 10 or something and import them into the game. If done right this could significantly reduce their work load and enable the large depth and breadth of itemization of long established games much much faster.

You are delusional. Making up stuff you want to be in the game which hasn't been announced. Twisting words to your liking and arguing against things I haven't said. And you cast insults at anyone who disagrees with you. When you return to being rational I'll discuss game systems with you. Until then bye.

1. Irrelavent 2. if you land in someone else's building zone they could build over top of you yes. I see no reason to prevent that. In fact It could be quite useful if someone doesn't pay their landing pad rental fee... No where does anything I've said contradict mass and inertia while ships are being flown. Small ship flying to a large ship is hardly going to effect the larger ship and the little ship will bounce right off. Big ship will plow right through little ships being flown around it. 3. can you read? apparently not since you ignore where I mention the pod using weapons to open a hole in a ship. 4. Space is mostly Empty. That's why it's called space... The planets will not be moving in orbits. The stars probably won't either. So yeah you could just go in a straight line in a lot of cases. However if you did fly into an area highly populated with objects you would bounce around and end up pointing completely the wrong direction to where you intended to go. Not to mention you'd be extremely vulnerable to attack while you're afk... with your craft in flight mode. 5. Cite a source. because Nothing you've said here has been said to be in the game by any dev I'm aware of. In Fact it's quite the opposite. They've said that projectiles will not at all be physically simulated. 6. So what? You need powerful engines for large ships... No duh. What is your point exactly? Complexity does not mean difficult and easy does not mean it isn't complex. Game systems of good successful games are easy to use but difficult to master. But simple mobility in a game should not be. The simple things should be simple... like flying from point A to B and landing or taking off... Where piloting skill should be on display is combat. Not moving boxes around a cargo bay. This game is not a Physics Sim. As for Rouge One... The Devs specifically cite large scale collisions and the mass destruction they can cause as the reason they don't want collision damage in game. I completely get why you want it though. The visuals of massive objects colliding and exploding are awesome. I find them just as awesome but I recognize how much it would suck to have a city or large space station destroyed with out any of the players in said city or station having any agency to prevent it. And a massive object being able to be driven into another object such that they explode is that.

As I understand it... when you land a ship/exit it/stop controlling it/deactivate its core (all ways of phrasing the same idea) it becomes a static object like a building or space station. If parked in a safe area either player made or at the ark ship then any thing colliding with it would simply bounce off just as shown in Dev videos with ships bouncing off the ground. If not in a safe area ships would still bounce but then you'd be subject to a player getting out of their ship and using their hand weapons on your ship (at launch) and their ship weapons on you when ever they add ship combat weapons. If 2 ships which were under control/ in flight mode or whatever you want to call it... then when they bump into each other the impact could effect both vehicles flight paths. This is as it is currently and is my understanding of the interviews and descriptions of game systems I've seen thus far. Subject to change... game in development... yadda yadda disclaimer. I don't think breaching pods would be too hard... All you really need is a way to attach your craft to the craft you want to breach... Then just open your door and use hand weapons... or a ship to ship weapon when they add those... Couple of potential scenarios: 1. You've done enough damage to deactivate the core... the target ship is now dead in space... no different from a static space station or asteroid which don't move... just pop on over ... zero difficulty. 2. Your main ship or fleet of ships use some sort of tractor beam to immobilize the target ship. Requires coordination and team work... moderately difficult 3. Your breaching pod just has to be fast enough to catch and latch on to a ship. Not sure how difficult this would be... could be pretty easy and could be very very hard. I don't think we really need collision damage... Landing speed really doesn't concern me. I don't think piloting a ship should be too much of a skill... A little more control than No Mans Sky but not Elite Dangerous levels... And you could limit speeds around massive objects like planets, asteroids, or really big stations... call it interference with the engine drive system or something. Plenty of lore friendly ways to explain such a thing. Now don't get me wrong... I do love Higher simulation games. The first time I docked two craft together in Kerbal Space Program was a 3 hour nerve wracking and extremely satisfying ordeal. I am better at it now but I'll never be 100% confident I won't knock off solar panels... So I save before hand... retract panels and come in very cautiously... slowly... and methodically. Which isn't the type of Game play I and most people would want from DU. How would I like DU landing to work? VTOL. Vertical Take Off and Landing. I'd like to come into a planet... building... carrier type ship... whatever and hover above what ever surface my down facing radar detects... I'd like to select a hover altitude from my ship computer... or shift to raise and ctrl to lower. use wasd and maybe q and e to shift around and rotate my craft just the way I want then lower myself until contact. Simple. No velocities to cancel. And heck if I don't care about the precise orientation and position the good old No Man's Sky style press button to land or take off works plenty well for landing on and exploring planets.

Depending on how permissions work... what permissions are available to work in safe zones and outside... it could also prevent such safe zones being used as warehouse space... Which I'm ambivalent about. A trade hub needs materials to trade... and the ability to store them... If you limit just how much can be stored then shipments from an Org warehouse to the trade hub would have to occur... the warehouse itself and the shipments would be vulnerable to attack. An org might elect to set up their own... "outlet store" at their warehouse where they can concentrate their forces to guard everything... This could reduce the viability of the safe zone as a trade hub. However there is some inherent value to shopping in an area where your fellow shopper can't just shoot up the place. What I'm saying is that it will take some careful balancing work.

On the one hand ... I think it should be different for every planet. Axis of rotation different as well... even planets that are tidally locked so one side is always facing their local Star... I think that'd be cool and interesting and give unique flavor to the planets. But I can also see how that could be confusing... if they do the above then there could be large ranges in how long a day/night cycle is or even if one exists... Planets are smaller than IRL Earth... and travel is way faster than anything we have IRL... So I don't mind at all if day/night cycles are really long as I can just fly to what ever part of the planet has light or darkness as I see fit... Really short cycles as are in quite a few space games ... if they're ubiquitous would annoy me. But if a random planet just spins really fast and so has short day/night cycles then that's just an interesting environment to encounter. Last I heard they were still uncertain if they'll be able to get planets to rotate at all... They certainly won't be moving in orbits... So what I'm asking for is a bit more complex than anything that's been talked about... But I really hope they get planets rotating. If they don't then they're going to have to have the sun for each system move... which will mean every planet in a system will have the same length day/night cycle. And if that's the case ... at least for the first system... I'd like the day/night cycle to be a full real time 24 hour cycle. I'd love to see a planet that's tidally locked... with desert on the side facing the sun... frozen wasteland on the side facing away... and temperate zone in a ring in the twilight zone at the terminator between day and night. Planets rotating on their side so one of the poles of the axis of rotation is pointing at the sun so the sun just makes a circle in the sky with every rotation of the planet... such a planet would have to orbit the sun to have a day/night cycle... as one pole and then the other pointed at the sun during the year... I'm having a hard time imagining the code that would be needed to precess the axis of rotation with the planet in place... But I guess you would need to precess the axis of rotation in place of all the planets if you want them to have seasons... again because you aren't having them orbit.

1. There's no Collision Damage. In interviews all over the place they specifically call out the idea of making a ship to ram another ship and how they will not allow that to be possible. Ships simply bounce off each other without doing any damage. 2. Safe zones exist. Safe zones can be created by players and will last as long as said player maintains them. So safe trading spaces can be set up for a price. If you don't have a safe zone set up then you are vulnerable... which is a reason for you to join an organization so they can protect your stuff while you're offline. 3. Resource depletion is necessary to drive population to move out and explore. As the area near you gets depleted you must travel farther out to find resources and new settlements to trade in goods will have to be constructed and protected... This is the Game Play of the game. It's how real civilizations grow and it's how civilization will grow in the game as well. At the launch of the game ... unless something has changed... ship to ship combat will not exist. The only combat will be on the ground person to person. Eventually they'll add ship to ship... but the point is at the start the potential for mass destruction is limited. If they do get Ship to Ship combat in then safe zones will be very important and drive people together to form communities. Everyone being spread evenly over a planet... solo... building by themselves... not interacting with anyone else is a bad thing. Combat... resource depletion and costly to maintain safe zones are mechanics to drive people together and will be what makes this game work.

Pretty sure the 48 hour shield referenced is the player made "safe zone" for structures. I don't think any combat ships should have it. Space stations should though... so your combat ships can dock there while people log off. But then if we can have spawn points in our ships... that might not be needed as people could log in and take over for those logging off without it mattering where the ship is.

well... yeah... but just doing that still seems a little too simple to me. Not engaging enough. If we could combine it with some sort of hazard... explosive pockets or even false materials... So you have to pay attention... work around obstacles... I don't know what the best solution is. I just want mining to be enjoyable as well as profitable.

the problem isn't so much the speed... it's the monotony. Most of the suggestions in this thread aren't about speeding mining up but about making it entertaining and intellectually engaging. Doing that may actually slow down mining...

I haven't back peddled anything... and you apparently don't know what a strawman argument is. And I gave you the link. That's the entirety of it. There isn't collision damage in the game at present and they don't think they'll be adding it. This is fact. There's the video with the Devs saying precisely that. The game is under development so they can change their mind if they find a way that works for them... But nothing is guaranteed. So lets see... I stated there's no collision damage which is a known fact. And referenced our mutual speculation on how moving ships such as carriers might work. You said that would prevent Space stations from working. I thought you were referring to the speculation on moving ships. So I responded that I don't see how it would. Then you went off about collision... This made me think that you thought I was saying there's no collision... which isn't what I said... and how anyone could think that is still a mystery to me. So I then told you that's not what I meant... And now you're getting all emotional over absolutely nothing as far as I can tell. We seem to be talking past each other and I don't know how to get us on the same page.

I only entered a first name for both my first and second choice. I too saw nothing in the survey to indicate a last name was needed or even allowed.

You still seem confused. As evidenced by the fact you are saying what I said and thinking you have to explain what I clearly already described. You seem to think I've said something contrary when in fact we've said the same thing and are in agreement. You're getting emotional about it to... Starting to cast insults against someone who agrees with you. Though you are entering the realm of speculation when you go into things exploding... That clearly isn't in the game yet. In the video JC collides with the ground and just bounces off it. He clearly states that they don't want people making kinetic kill vehicles... which means to me that collision damage either won't ever be in the game or will be very carefully implemented so no damage is done to the person on the receiving end of such a collision. The simulation requirements don't enter into this. It's a game design decision.

Here's static buildings If they get planets to rotate... One of my question would be will the space station rotate with it... always hanging above the same spot on the planet or will it stay stationary so you can see the planet rotate bellow you? He also mentions no collision damage. You seem to be confused... No collision damage doesn't mean no collision... doesn't mean things pass through each other. It's not No Clip. But it also doesn't mean that colliding will move another object. So you can't push things around. ... well not things that aren't made to fly... and which aren't being used to fly at the moment. I expect that if you're flying around next to another person flying and you bump into them you could push them. I expect that any landed ship... building... or space station not currently being moved via its own engines will be immovable. So no one can do like the OP suggests. Also here's a thread you participated in... in which we speculate on how transport ships could work. https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/10319-transporting-constructs/

how so? Doesn't prevent them in any way I can see. Don't project what you want onto what is. We have what they've shown us and nothing more. People projecting their hopes and dreams onto something and then being presented with the reality that was always there but they refused to see is how we got No Man's Sky.