TranquilClaws
-
Posts
35 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by TranquilClaws
-
-
How about buying cumulative hours instead of a time frame?
-
TranquilClaws how realistic do you want this conversation to be? I ask because your weapon examples follow some very well established though unrealistic tropes in Hollywood and science fiction. (Nothing wrong with this it does make their use exciting.) So I don't understand what flaws you want us to point out. At the speeds, you reach in space most of these weapon systems would only be useful in area-denial tactics for instance, and the others are classically misrepresented in the before mentioned tropes.
Eh, I was thinking from a game play standpoint. The idea was to ask if people thought these things would be "fun" to use.
-
I would be okay with a system of payment that isn't so constricted by time. I would never be willing to pay on a monthly basis. The constraint of only being able to get online for a month is suffocating. So why not replace that model with a similar one that is essentially buying hours to play the game, so that it is still a subscription, but instead of being pressured to play the game as much as possible, one could decide that the game in it's current state just doesn't suit them and would rather wait a while and save the hours they bought until a later time when the person actually wants to play.
I personally find this beneficial in that it gives the player freedom to play when they want to play and not be "forced" into playing the game. This was something I absolutely hated about the free trial for EVE Online. It was timed. The game still gets a constant stream of income, since the player will eventually run out of hours and have to pay for more.
-
ARC WEAPONS!
WE NEED ARC WEAPONS!(basicly the abbility to shoot lightning)
The problem with ark weapons is that electrical currents caused by lightning only travel along the outside of surfaces that they touch. Basically they just don't harm ships in space, however I could see them being added as an anti-infantry weapon and for overloading energized armor. The other problem with them is the immense energy requirements, but hey it's Sci-fi so who cares.
Tesla weapons are now on the list.
-
Here are all the things I'd like to see on the battlefields of Dual Universe, whether in space or at your base.
-Weapons-
- Cannons
- Lasers
- Missiles
- Mines
- Flak
- Electromagnetic Pulses (including ion cannons)
- Railguns
- Plasma
- Rockets
- Corrosive
- Cryo
- Bombs
- Tesla
-Defenses-
- Solid Armor
- Reactive Armor
- Magnetic Shielding
- Energized Armor
- Deflector Shields
- Absorbing Shields
- Stealth
- Self Mending Armor
-Mechanics-
- Cannons require ammo and are versatile yet slightly less powerful than more specialized weapons, coming in all shapes and sizes from automatic rifle caliber guns to large mortars
- Lasers require a constant input of energy and deal scaled damage over time with energy consumption, distance from the target lessens the effectiveness of the laser and absorbing shields will almost completely nullify it, however any light craft will be devastated by lasers
- Missiles require more materials to produce and can be intercepted, however they are able to home in on enemies, deal a lot of damage, and be filled with different lethal ingredients
- Mines are multipurpose bombs left in space or on a surface that can be used for ambush of an enemy, defense against projectiles, drones, fighters, or even restricting the movement of an enemy, the only downside to mines being that they sacrifice other factors for utility such as cost or movement
- Flak are a subclass of cannon that is more costly for the ability to explode and still deal damage to nearby targets
- EMP's effectively take the form of any weapon that is capable of disabling a ship's systems if they are unprotected, however, they take a lot of power to fire when emitted directly from the ship (in the form of an ion cannon), the advantage there being that they cannot be intercepted
- Railguns take a lot of energy and a solid slug to punch through multiple layers of armor and do critical damage in a thin straight line
- Plasma cannons accelerate a magnetically contained packet of super heated gas that bursts on contact, melting everything it touches, but coming at the cost of a significant amount of energy
- Rockets are unguided missiles that are cheaper and capable of packing a larger punch than missiles
- Corrosive elements can be added to any container of explosives for a less powerful explosion but a constant stream of damage over time
- Cryo weapons work by filling a container with an extremely cold gas and dispersing it into small fissures in hard metals, causing them to become brittle and freeze up mechanical systems, allowing a followup shot of sufficient force to shatter the material, the trade off being that cryo weapons on their own do next to no damage
- Bombs are powerful explosives that are cheap to produce and only work with the presence of gravity
- Solid armor is extremely effective against smaller caliber weapons and lasers while not being that effective against piercing, explosive, corrosive, cryo, or melting weapons, with stronger armor materials allowing for higher defense against larger projectiles
- Reactive armor is extremely effective against explosive and kinetic weapons but is partially used up in the process, allowing a few hits to be absorbed fully before becoming ineffective, meaning that lasers and high fire rate weapons can quickly use it up
- Magnetic shielding protects against EMP's so long as it completely surrounds the system it is protecting, meaning that any large enough gaps will make that shielding ineffective
- Energized armor is armor that is strengthened by a stored electrical charge, meaning that it will sustain all damage thrown at it by drawing on the charge of energized armor connected to it (the more damaging the projectile, the larger the area drawn from), weakening itself and the armor from which the charge was drawn from until becoming a very weak solid armor
- Deflector shields are dome shaped shields that block all types of incoming damage at the cost of a lot of energy for every impact, meaning that large kinetic weapons do additional damage, whereas smaller weapons deal less
- Absorbing shields nullify energy based damage (lasers and plasma) and conform to the shape of the object they are protecting, effectively reducing the overall damage of energy based weapons at the cost of a constant stream of energy scaled with the percentage of damage nullified
- Self mending armor draws on a ship's power to mend itself (up to a fixed rate of health regained per second) and is otherwise a slightly less powerful solid armor
- Tesla weapons fire arks of electricity that, while not so useful against enclosed ships, will devastate unprotected electronics and personnel
Feel free to point out any flaws with this and share your own ideas on what features space combat should have.
-
Anyone get thoughts of the Flood from Halo when they read this?
Because I certainly did.
-
Someone else had the idea on here that it was open world PvP, but t hat there could also be virtual or training PvP matches to hone your skills. I like that idea. I definitely want 99.9% to be PvP for the realism.
You can thank me for that idea
To expand on what was just said I will add to it that this could make galactic E-Sports a thing WITHIN a game. Virtual reality can also serve the function of any other wacky mini game that just wouldn't make sense in the main universe. The game itself is one giant story that every player gets to take part in. The more it feels like a second life the better.I was thinking about this today, and thought it would be cool to have a bounty system in place, where if I come harass you, killing and destroying your stuff, you could put a bounty on me. There would be PvP driven players that would love to hunt these players down and collect that bounty, just for the satisfaction of doing it. The game could also include a finders fee, for other players to report where these targets are located.
what would be cool is if enough bounties made you fair game to be attacked in a safe zone as well. And also if there was a system to give titles, or other non monetary awards to good bounty hunters.
I think bounty would make a great mechanic to counter people who like to be mean for no reason.
- caravaggio2000 and Dreamstar
-
2
-
The game lore states that we are the first ones to be awaken
But i agree with your opinion we should avoid spawnkilling at all cost
And to do that the spawn hub becomes obsolete. I think the only way spawn killing can really be avoided is by avoiding the spawn killers themselves. This could be accomplished in a few ways, mine below being an example of how it might work.
One way is the one I suggested, making ark ships spawn a set distance away from the central cluster of players and then allowing a community of newly joined players to pop up around that ark ship. These ships would come with onboard tutorials for the new players to start up a community and learn the game. The ship would also include information for these new players pointing them in the direction of society and the current status of said society such as how much warfare is going on between factions in certain areas and other useful information. This would allow the new players to explore the game at their own pace without having an immediate fear of stepping outside the protection of the ark ship.
-
The only potential compromise I can think of to accomodate both Arkified safe zones and not ruining the immersion of territory control is if there was a physical "Ark node" that generated the "safe" part of safe zones and prevented PvP and/or destruction.
By disabling or destroying this physical Ark Node, the territory tile would no longer be an Arkified region and would be subject to damage, destruction, and PvP as any other territory would. Given the tangible existence of the Node, the owners of that Arkified area would naturally have to have the Node well hidden and well protected to prevent anyone from disabling it, and by extension, the Arkified area.
Alternatively, Ark Nodes could be hacked (some way or another) and have their functionality changed. For instance, ownership of the Ark Node could be transferred to the offensive party (the hacker), or perhaps the Node could be programmed to protect only a certain portion of the area.
More on this later...maybe.
That would allow just any player to disable the whole field protecting that area. Not exactly a good plan in my eyes. Still gonna go with the idea that a state of war with a "significant" faction would be the only way to temporarily remove the no pvp shield. In which case all city/basewide defenses would turn on and begin attacking the invaders. Should that city be deemed precious due to the presence of monuments then it is up to the defenders to preserve it.
One thing to note about builders in this game is that they won't be making just static things to be looked at. Whether it be a home, base, ship, or cultural marker, everything made by the builders should have some meaning in the universe, even if that meaning attracts the eyes of envious conquerors.
-
There should be safe zones... but not necessarily permanent safe zones.
A "safe" zone could be player made if enough security devices are built which activate and engage anyone doing some disallowed action.
More rigid indestructible safe areas where characters are rendered incapable of such actions are also desirable.
But Decay should be built in.
If we can freely move about this universe... If we can colonize and build large civilizations... then Populations centers will shift. Old starting locations will be disused or far from the frontier and population concentrations... And so as new things are built and populations remain then those places should be maintained but if populations move and abandon an area... it should decay over time to lower and lower levels... losing safe zone status and start point status and even eventually becoming ruins of the past civilization.
With this idea... if a war were to break out... The actual safe zone could be small... and the attackers could whittle away... drive out the defenders... and when enough people have left... or certain destructible defense structures fail to be maintained... it could lose its indestructible status.
I was thinking about a beacon system which allows players to find where civilization currently resides as well as a system for reclamation. It would be cool to come back to an abandoned city and find it overgrown with plants and weathering.
Side note: If a player decided to come back to the game after 10 months of inactivity that would be hilarious to watch his reaction.
-
I totally agree and here is what they are implementing to avoid this very problem
(taken from the short wiki post on Resurrection Nodes):I also agree. This is the way it should work.
-
From what I have read on the DevBlogs, there will be only one default safe zone. However, as the game progresses it is technically possible for players to build their own safezone using the arkship technology.
To balance this tech they will have to be incredibly costly to build and maintain. So much so, that their value is questionable. I also recall reading that these player made safezones are not completely indestructible and that given an overwhelming assaulting force, they can be taken down.
I think this is a great compromise, because it means only one safezone actually managed by the Dev's. while also providing a way for civilization to thrive.
This sounds right. I love the idea of non-permanent safe zones which can still be taken down but will otherwise deactivate any player vs. player mechanics. This makes a lot of sense as major cities will be able to ensure their own safety unless a war were to emerge which afflicted that city. It'll be much like a major event which affects a large number of people can bypass anti-troll/griefer mechanics for the sake of roleplayers.
-
The problem with one main hub that everyone spawns at is that it's like starting in a crime infested metropolitan city where everyone with knowledge takes advantage of everyone who doesn't. Because of that I'm more in favor of scattered spawns with temporary safe zones that deactivate after a certain time period and then set up beacons to contact the civilized world again. It would be far more gentle on newer players joining the game while fitting in with lore. It also gives that group of players time to form their own little community before getting thrust into the universe with nothing but the basics. The mechanics behind this would ensure that such spawns would only happen at a specified distance from the majority of players.
-
I'm all about the consequences and I don't mind if I lose everything or some portion of it (including skills, etc.), but I hate respawn timers. If you have all day to play it isn't a big deal, but when you only have a limited playing time, having to wait 15 minutes or whatever to get back into the game stinks.
There you go, the perfect incentive not to die. Timerz fer evaryone! Also the reason why I suggested scaling the time to the experience a player has in the game, is to not discourage newer players from trying new risky things.
-
Wow thanks! I guess I need to read the Dev Blog more and start looking into LUA scripting.
Will there be any limit to the number of constructs one player can automate? Could I potentially have a fleet of thousands of drone fighters for example?
Can anything be automated? Could I say, strap an engine and control system onto an asteroid and launch it at my enemies planet from afar?
The robot invasion is looking more and more likely and I like it.
Happy to help.
-
Space is black. Space does not have texture unless you count what fills it. What fills space will be in the game for players to interact with, otherwise one could travel endlessly and never reach that vast object he/she wants a closer view of. If this game wasn't a single shard universe it would work, but sadly for this case it is not.
Now for virtual reality instances in game... hurray! Yes it can be done!
-
The short answer to that is yes.
The long answer to that is here https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/314-devblog-lua-scripting-and-distributed-processing-units-dpus/
-
What about items in the bank or that you have on the market? Would those also disappear upon death or only those items you have with you?
I don't think it would work if your items just "disppeared". That destroys realism and makes it harder for looters when they only get a fraction of what they were after.
Yes but in real life the rich born get punished if they die... because they die
In a game the guy who dies should at least have some consequences, it would be quite boring if the freighter im robbing rams me because his death doesnt matter
Death will definitely matter if people take advantage of the fact that you are temporarily not around to defend your things. They could steal your ship or blow up the building you were trying to defend. What I'm saying is that death does matter a lot if you have something to lose. Something like a reduction of your skills would also help make it not worth dying. Long respawn timers could also have an effect, with more experienced players having much longer wait times in comparison to new inexperienced players. Attacking innocents will be far less rewarding than targeting known individuals in this system, making the game harder the more you play it by raising the stakes.
-
So you're basically suggesting a visual version of coding where tags replace functions? If so I FREAKIN LOVE IT! This would do wonders for the average player who doesn't know how to code. The way I see it working is like looking at a circuit board with the wires connecting the functions together to form a complex system, essentially replacing code with a fun game that is easy to use yet hard to master.
Basically it would be setting up a bunch of cause and effect gates that have a function that is either on or off, which could then trigger multiple other functions down the line. The first function in any hierarchy would be the condition on which every other attached function is triggered. This is only an idea but my god the possibilities.
A visual representation of the code would make it far less intimidating than the potentially messy look of Lua or C+.
-
Basically if the loot a player has is valuable, then that player's life also gains value. This reflects real life where the rich are made targets by thieves and hired killers.
-
I'll be interested in learning much more about the safe zones as time goes on, and I am in split mind concerning them. Personally, I believe some things should be protected. Much like in the real world, we pretty much have safe zones. Any major city in a western nation is a safe zone to the degree that it is protected (or should be). Most nations are particularly protective of their airspace for this reason. For a civilisation to thrive, which it will need to do so in Dual Universe, there has to be safe zones for things to be built and stay built.
On the other hand, there is a lot of motivation in fighting to defend your home, or your city, or whatever it is you've built, and keep it safe from potential invaders. I guess this is where guilds and organisations come in. Perhaps alliance will be forged to protect each others interests, but not everyone will be in a guild, and not everyone wants to PvP.
Some roleplayers will appreciate full destructive capabilities, others will prefer the town or abode or station they took a long time to build isn't easily open to destruction so that they can continue to roleplay in a way that fits their own desires.
Not having safe zones (as you pointed out) causes a lot of other options for players to open up. As this is a player driven game that is excellent news. It makes a lot of sense that to protect your in game creations you have to either hire guards or build security systems, and both these things open up opportunities for player run organizations to step in and make a profit, furthering development and the economy at the same time.
Having safe zones automatically removes all those features and puts more strain on developers to manage things for players.
-
Death in my opinion should only make the player lose the items they currently had with them. These items would then be dropped and made lootable by others. As to respawning I agree with the idea of having respawn pods which players could create or capture for their personal use. These respawn pods would then become objectives for anyone who wants to prevent you from coming back to regain your stuff.
-
I don't think this game will be using generic sky boxes, as all of the stars you will see are actually there. Perhaps space anomalies could be randomly spawned to add more variety to the sky if that's what you are talking about. Things like black holes and nebulae would work.
-
Although, I am extremely curious to find one of these safe zones when/if they will exist, I do think either interesting gameplay mechanics or restrictions on them might be needed.
I thought I had an idea, but I'm not sure on this one.
The general problem with safe zones is that players won't learn to become independent if they're able to go to safe zones to just play an easy game of market place simulator. The hub is the only exception to this rule for obvious reasons.
Ensuring that Subscriptions are Done Right
in Idea Box
Posted
There are two kinds of subscriptions which I can think of off the top of my head. Monthly subscriptions and hourly subscriptions. The difference is as follows. Monthly subscriptions last for a duration of months after their activation and constantly count down regardless of whether or not the player is online. Hourly subscriptions pay directly for the hours a player can be online, which can be used whenever the player wishes, meaning that you are directly paying for the time you are online.
The inclusion of both would be very beneficial for creating freedom in choice for purchasing time to play the game. The major difference is that monthly is often cheaper, but doesn't account for players who rarely get on or who get on extremely often, resulting in a less predictable load on the servers. With the hourly system, players directly pay for the time they will be using up server resources, which is more precise and can be saved for when they want to play.
As someone who often plays something a lot but in short bursts, I would prefer the hourly subscription.