Jump to content

TheRealBeowulf

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    66
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Heresiarch in Collision damage - workaround suggestions   
    @lethys:
     
    I get your point
    I still feel that we are talking past each other.
     
    I'm not talking about some kind of realistic damage model, or a lot of additional calculations, just about using the checks that the engine has to run anyway - with or without collision damage.
     
    I would assume that speed, mass, vectors and collisions are things that the game already needs to check very frequently - or how should the game know how fast you can accelerate, where you are right now, if you can land on that platform (or even on another ship) and not just fall through?
    How should the engine know if your ship is already touching the platform, if it doesn't check collision points anyway?
    Also, touching the platform / ground will usually slow you down to zero - so it does interact with the ships speed.
    And if the engine is able to handle the weapon damage of large battles (let's say about 50 shots and also 50 hits / damage locations per battleship every second), it should easily be able to handle one or two collision-damage locations per two ships / second.
     
    I don't think that the game would crash because of that, if it does, it could potentially crash at almost any time, even if there's not much going on.
     
    So, ramming tactics would be an absolute valid thing, you just would have to take into account that you would most likely lose a lot of ships - so maybe retreat would be the better idea.
     
    Maybe I should ask a mod to change the topic's title to "collision damage - workaround suggestions".
    Again, this topic originally wasn't meant to be about high end, super realistic, calculation heavy damage models - just about possible ways to handle it in an easy way, so it doesn't have to be completely abandoned.
    In the original post, I mentioned the AMA video and the KS post of Novaquark first, which already make it clear that realistic collision damage won't make it into the game, but maybe some kind of workaround.
     
    And my question was: If it is implemented in a stable way that doesn't cause lags and crashes, would you like to have this feature?
  2. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Saul Retav in Collision damage - workaround suggestions   
    @falstaf:
    If they would use the weapon damage system, this could be easily balanced, because you would also be able to have shields against that.
     
    Maybe they have some kind of kinetic damage weapon type, then this could also be used as damage type for collisions.
    Shields that are effective against kinetic weapon damage would then also be effective against collisions.
     
    I really don't think this system would lead to amounts of ramming ships that are really worth mentioning, because if you put the same effort and resources into building a standard ship with moderate weapons, you would most likely have something much more effective.
     
    As I said, since JC mentioned that resources will be a crucial part of the game, I think that ramming would cause too much damage to your own ship (repair costs), so most people won't go for this.
    A turret can deal damage without taking damage itself, that doesn't work for collisions.
     
    If I didn't get JC completely wrong, the main reason for saying no was, that a realistic collision damage model is not yet doable in such a large MMO for technical reasons.
    Being asked about this again, Novaquark said that they know it's not the best in terms of immersion and that they remain open for workaround suggestions (which is what this topic is about )
     
    I get your point / JC's point, that you don't want to have everyone ramming ships into each other, but I actually think that a balanced collision damage model is a way to do that.
     
    Think about it that way: the game already does collision checks, so if there's no damage, people might very often collide with buildings and other ships (cause there's no real downside to this) - so the engine could be very busy with collisions.
    If there's a risk of damaging your own ship, you would have a good reason to avoid collisions.
     
    @lurknautili:
    Glad to see another one on the pro-collision-damage side
    I already was worrying I could be pretty much alone with my hopes for at least a very basic collision damage model.
  3. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from BliitzTheFox in Collision damage - workaround suggestions   
    Collision damage – thoughts on gameplay:
     
    So, as I’m really curious about this specific topic, I’ll just start with my thoughts on this.
    Note: some things might be subject to change, and maybe I have got some things wrong, so please feel free to correct me
    (quote / link to the correct info would be nice    )
     
    Caution: this is going to be a somewhat longer post… 
     
    I definitely agree with NQ, that people ramming other ships could negatively influence the gameplay experience, but I think that this may not be such a huge problem in DU, because:
    -          Specialized ramming ships would require very heavy armored parts to keep damage minimal for themselves – this would make them very costly (resources) and also very heavy
    -          Players won’t be able to just “spawn” creations in DU, gathering the necessary resources will take quite some effort (you could also build more lighter ships, instead of one heavy).
    -          Heavy ships will most likely not be very nimble, unless you use lots of and / or very powerful engines -> the ship would become even more costly.
    -          Energy / fuel is said to be a mayor limiting factor, so people will most likely have to choose between engines and weapons
    -          the lack of weapons and / or the limited maneuverability would make them easy prey for lighter ships with better weaponry, or ships specialized in boarding
    -          For the most other ships, I think that people would want to avoid damaging their ships, so they’ll try to avoid ramming (repair costs).
    So I would expect that this kind of ship might rather be an exception than the first choice for battles.
     
    Torpedoes - I can’t actually say that I wouldn’t like to see those, but I think that they wouldn’t be so common because I’d expect them to be somewhat difficult to handle:
    -          In the video about server technology, JC Baillie says, that far away objects are less frequently updated – which makes targeting moving constructs with unguided torpedoes difficult if not impossible over distances
    -          Torpedoes need for example propulsion and a firing mechanism to launch them from a ship (maybe also a guidance system) – this is often quite tricky and doesn’t handle very well, unless you put a lot of effort in building and scripting those – which would make them rather rare and their production almost exclusive to more experienced builders / scripters.
     
    Last but not least, the main reason for me to still hope for collision damage as a feature is the immersion and the engineering aspect of ship building:
    -          No collision damage would also mean no fall damage for constructs. This could also lead to a very carefree piloting style, which is also not very immersive.
    -          dropships (or drop pods and other single-use landing devices) could in theory just be simple “boxes” without engines, and would still fulfill their purpose. This would, in my opinion lead to some disadvantages for people who are more into proper built constructs with proper systems.
     
    (Note: suggestions like: “…just try to think of the ships as they are so advanced, that they completely avoid collisions.” Just don’t seem to work for me when it comes to boxes without power sources or engines – no offense   )
     
    Greetings
     
    TheRealBeowulf
  4. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from LurkNautili in Collision damage - workaround suggestions   
    Hello everyone!
     
    Collision damage has already been discussed at some points in other posts, but I didn’t find a post especially on this topic, so I’m starting a new one.
     
    In the latest AMA Video, https://youtu.be/efu_129hI9o JC Baillie talks about how the weapon and damage system (note: construct vs construct battles are still a stretch goal) may work, and that precise collision damage will most likely not make it in the game for several reasons.
    The main reasons he mentioned are:
     

    - Very high server load for precise collision damage calculations, that could kill the game performance especially in large ship battles
    - Unwanted playstyle of some players, who could mostly rely on ramming ships in battle and / or build kinetic torpedoes as weapons, increasing the server load even further
    After the AMA video, Novaquark was asked about this topic again in the kickstarter comments, and their answer was the following:
     
    “…Collision damage is one of the most costly feature (calculation-wise) that can be imagined in a voxel-made environment. It is (at least for the moment), not compatible with a massively multiplayer, seamless environment. There are a few games where realistic collision damage system has been implemented. By making this choice, they sacrificed the possibility to have a massively multiplayer feature running smoothly. It was a tough choice, and on our side we opted for the other solution. We know it's not the best for game immersion, and we remain open to all suggestions that could be used as a workaround.”
     
    This brought up a few questions to me, especially these:
     

    - What does the community think about collision damage? Is it a feature that a lot of players would like to have (if it's stable and balanced of course), or do you think, that this would not benefit the gameplay?
    - What possible workarounds could be there?
    I’m looking forward to your opinions and suggestions!
     
    Greetings
     
    TheRealBeowulf
     
    Edit: Please note that this topic is not about realistic collision damage models, because they are already confirmed not to be in the game - It's about possible workaround ideas!
  5. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from LurkNautili in Collision damage - workaround suggestions   
    Collision damage – thoughts on gameplay:
     
    So, as I’m really curious about this specific topic, I’ll just start with my thoughts on this.
    Note: some things might be subject to change, and maybe I have got some things wrong, so please feel free to correct me
    (quote / link to the correct info would be nice    )
     
    Caution: this is going to be a somewhat longer post… 
     
    I definitely agree with NQ, that people ramming other ships could negatively influence the gameplay experience, but I think that this may not be such a huge problem in DU, because:
    -          Specialized ramming ships would require very heavy armored parts to keep damage minimal for themselves – this would make them very costly (resources) and also very heavy
    -          Players won’t be able to just “spawn” creations in DU, gathering the necessary resources will take quite some effort (you could also build more lighter ships, instead of one heavy).
    -          Heavy ships will most likely not be very nimble, unless you use lots of and / or very powerful engines -> the ship would become even more costly.
    -          Energy / fuel is said to be a mayor limiting factor, so people will most likely have to choose between engines and weapons
    -          the lack of weapons and / or the limited maneuverability would make them easy prey for lighter ships with better weaponry, or ships specialized in boarding
    -          For the most other ships, I think that people would want to avoid damaging their ships, so they’ll try to avoid ramming (repair costs).
    So I would expect that this kind of ship might rather be an exception than the first choice for battles.
     
    Torpedoes - I can’t actually say that I wouldn’t like to see those, but I think that they wouldn’t be so common because I’d expect them to be somewhat difficult to handle:
    -          In the video about server technology, JC Baillie says, that far away objects are less frequently updated – which makes targeting moving constructs with unguided torpedoes difficult if not impossible over distances
    -          Torpedoes need for example propulsion and a firing mechanism to launch them from a ship (maybe also a guidance system) – this is often quite tricky and doesn’t handle very well, unless you put a lot of effort in building and scripting those – which would make them rather rare and their production almost exclusive to more experienced builders / scripters.
     
    Last but not least, the main reason for me to still hope for collision damage as a feature is the immersion and the engineering aspect of ship building:
    -          No collision damage would also mean no fall damage for constructs. This could also lead to a very carefree piloting style, which is also not very immersive.
    -          dropships (or drop pods and other single-use landing devices) could in theory just be simple “boxes” without engines, and would still fulfill their purpose. This would, in my opinion lead to some disadvantages for people who are more into proper built constructs with proper systems.
     
    (Note: suggestions like: “…just try to think of the ships as they are so advanced, that they completely avoid collisions.” Just don’t seem to work for me when it comes to boxes without power sources or engines – no offense   )
     
    Greetings
     
    TheRealBeowulf
  6. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Schoff in Collision damage - workaround suggestions   
    Hello everyone!
     
    Collision damage has already been discussed at some points in other posts, but I didn’t find a post especially on this topic, so I’m starting a new one.
     
    In the latest AMA Video, https://youtu.be/efu_129hI9o JC Baillie talks about how the weapon and damage system (note: construct vs construct battles are still a stretch goal) may work, and that precise collision damage will most likely not make it in the game for several reasons.
    The main reasons he mentioned are:
     

    - Very high server load for precise collision damage calculations, that could kill the game performance especially in large ship battles
    - Unwanted playstyle of some players, who could mostly rely on ramming ships in battle and / or build kinetic torpedoes as weapons, increasing the server load even further
    After the AMA video, Novaquark was asked about this topic again in the kickstarter comments, and their answer was the following:
     
    “…Collision damage is one of the most costly feature (calculation-wise) that can be imagined in a voxel-made environment. It is (at least for the moment), not compatible with a massively multiplayer, seamless environment. There are a few games where realistic collision damage system has been implemented. By making this choice, they sacrificed the possibility to have a massively multiplayer feature running smoothly. It was a tough choice, and on our side we opted for the other solution. We know it's not the best for game immersion, and we remain open to all suggestions that could be used as a workaround.”
     
    This brought up a few questions to me, especially these:
     

    - What does the community think about collision damage? Is it a feature that a lot of players would like to have (if it's stable and balanced of course), or do you think, that this would not benefit the gameplay?
    - What possible workarounds could be there?
    I’m looking forward to your opinions and suggestions!
     
    Greetings
     
    TheRealBeowulf
     
    Edit: Please note that this topic is not about realistic collision damage models, because they are already confirmed not to be in the game - It's about possible workaround ideas!
  7. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Dygz_Briarthorn in Thoughts on these designs?   
    @Dygz_Briarthorn:
    You may be right if it's only about small craft, but for the larger ships you will be able to use voxels for almost everything. You will most likely also be able to use voxels to cover or hide elements. In his ship-building-video, JC Baille said that wings are only decorative elements for players that aren't so much into building and that you could also use voxels if you like. The voxel tools that are shown the newest update video also look quite promising in terms of creative freedom
    A thing that I've been missing so far, but which will hopefully be added, is some kind of glass / transparent material. The control room of the large station that's been shown in the trailer didn't seem to have glass windows.
  8. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Phroshy in NovaQuarks latest KS update   
    @Phroshy:
    In one of the dev blogs
     
    https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2015/09/18/lua-script-and-distributed-processing-units/
     
    they actually talk about plans for something you would call more "hardcore" physics ("...Engines are real (they physically push your ship where they are, with the power they have)"). So if they manage to implement it as planned, thruster positions will matter.
    Most likely this would also mean, that the cornering capabilities of ships won't depend on gyros like in SE.
  9. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from wizardoftrash in MagicaVoxel Editor - Easy prototyping for anyone   
    @Leonis:
    At least the so called "inception syndrome" (that's what NQ called it, maybe the name will change?) will be available. It is ingame, but you can build and test and even create blueprints without necessarily having sufficient resources and without anybody being able to bother you. It'll be like some kind of creative mode. There are no plans for external editors or import of designs from third party software besides that, at least as far as I know.
  10. Like
    TheRealBeowulf reacted to Danger in Alpha Academy (Open Community)   
    Alpha Academy is community for all players. Everyone is welcome to play with us in alpha and beta. After that, you are of course free to move on.  
    Plan is as follows:
    - Alpha & Beta: Playing together, getting new friends, collecting information and creation of player guides. Those without game access are welcome of course to join us too and follow us. We will be posting a lot of articles, guides, videos.
     
    - Release: To be decided.
        DU Website: https://community.dualthegame.com/organization/alpha-academy   Join our Discord now: https://discord.gg/MdmyZJZ
  11. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Danger in Exo Dynamics (currently not employing)   
    Welcome to Exo Dynamics – Your No. 1 Choice for integrated System Development and Production!
     
    Exo Dynamics Ltd. is your partner for development, integration and scripting of advanced technologies.
     
    Our company was founded in 2024 on earth as a manufacturer of high end components for heavy industry and aerospace corporations. Exo Dynamics was among the first companies that aimed for the establishment of orbital factories. This has enabled us to push the limits of production capabilities on earth, and get closer to our goal of reaching the stars.
    Ever since the 26th April of 2027, when the dawning destruction of earth of earth was discovered, we have been pushing the limits of technology to avoid the almost inevitable extinction of mankind.
    After the landing of the arkship, our goal is to supply you with everything you need to be able to rebuild our civilization – from Allioth to deep space.
     
    Planned Services of Exo Dynamics are:
    - production and sale of high quality elements for ships and constructs
    - upgrading hard- and software for ships and constructs
    - planning, constructing and scripting of ship- and construct systems for your needs
    - manufacturing of small to mid-size crafts in limited-lot production for customers without own automated production capabilities
    - tech development
     
    Exo Dynamics is located inside the Terran Union.
    All personnel must be legal citizens of the Terran Union.
     
    We are currently not employing.
    Employment will start when more information about the actual gameplay mechanics of Dual Universe is revealed.
    We will be active in Alpha Engineering (Organisation) once the Alpha of Dual Universe starts.
     
    If you have questions about our company, our services or future jobs, please feel free to contact us!
    We are looking forward to hear from you!
  12. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from RagenTerror in Distance between planets?   
    Hello everyone!
     
    As far as I can tell, the distance between planets in a solar system will be much longer than in the recent trailers (JC Baille also said that in the god mode trailer).
    Novaquark said that you will first have to unlock warp technology, because the distance will be too long to travel effectively with standard engines. It will probably take a long time (weeks or even months in real time) after the release to gather the necessary tech to reach other planets. The Stargates, that will be necessary to reach other solar systems - which will be even farther away, may actually not be implemented from day one.
    One main reason for that is that they want to encourage players to settle and work together instead of quickly go their own ways and leave you with a mostly empty universe. Also, this is meant to make discovering new planets and systems feel like a real big achievement.
     
    So I think we can expect really great distances.
     
    About rotating planets and real orbits: somewhere in the Q&A (I think it was near Q&A 30 or so) Nyzaltar said, that they have 3 options for solar systems in mind, static planets with the sun only rotating in the skybox, only rotating planets and real orbits.
     
    For now, it's only the skybox.
     
    If they find a way to make a "sticky" planet atmosphere, so that ships in the atmosphere could move along and so remain static relative to the planet, rotating planets will be the solution they are aiming for.
     
    Real orbits will most likely not make it into the game for several reasons.
    Such a mechanic would require everything (asteroids, planets, player build ships and structures) to follow an orbit, otherwise static space stations could for example be run over by a planet.
    Also it would make navigation much more difficult, as you would have to calculate where your destination-planet would be when you will arrive.
    Just like it is a thing with real-life mars missions, distances between planets would change over time, making it more expensive (time and fuel) to get there in some times.
     
    Like many other aspects of the game, this may all be subject to change.
     
    Greetings
     
    TheRealBeowulf
  13. Like
    TheRealBeowulf reacted to ostris in [DevDiary] - Massively Multiplayer Server Technology (Video)   
    I would agree aws is most likely, possibly google or microsoft. Unless they have a completely custom setup for their servers. Whatever the situation would be very cool to hear.
  14. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from yamamushi in The Hyperspace Mechanics of Stargate Travel   
    Hi there!
     
    While reading the suggestions about FTL travel, the hyperspace mechanics of Homeworld 2 came to my mind - especially the thing with the hyperspace-inhibitors.
     
    It could be interesting, if entities wouldn't simply disappear at one point and pop out of another. Instead they could travel in some kind of hidden subspace tunnel, which may be interrupted by some kind of hyperspace inhibitor field, causing the ship to fall out of hyperspace...
     
    This could be very interesting for pirates, but would also be hard to balance...
  15. Like
    TheRealBeowulf reacted to Goemoe in Few questions on ship and ground mecheanics.   
    With no collision damage, ships would just bounce of any other space objects. It would be silly, if large capital ships bounce of much smaller vehicles. Imagine the game press, if such things would happen. But when you adjust collision effects to the mass of the colliding objects without adjusting damage, the result would create battle tactics, where ships will not be attacked but bumped away, or guided to crash into something lethal. The press for this wouldn't be well too.
     
    I really wonder, how Novaquark will manage to avoid collision damage and bad news coverage at the same time.
  16. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from Autojoe234 in Few questions on ship and ground mecheanics.   
    Re-entry heat could make ship-building a lot more complex. Maybe you would need heat shielding, or powerful engines / a slower entry. It also could be a counter-player for "stealth"-hulls - if they add something like that - so you maybe would have to decide if you want a ship that is either stealth, or capable of quick landing on a planet with atmosphere.
    Sounds interesting to me
    I'm really looking forward to more information on those basic mechanics.
  17. Like
    TheRealBeowulf reacted to LordSilver in Few questions on ship and ground mecheanics.   
    based on what i have read there will be players on the ground and in space and it is all on the same server. Say there is someone on the ground in some city they have built, how will the mechanic of players on the ground and players on ships work? Will players in the ships be able to unload heavy ordinance onto a ground based target? Or will there be a mechanic to protect ground based players that are just getting their feet wet?
  18. Like
    TheRealBeowulf got a reaction from MaximusNerdius in Few questions on ship and ground mecheanics.   
    Hi!
     
    I just stumbled over this topic and I must say that when I read that collision damage isn't planned to be a core feature from the beginning, I was like "WHAT?! How should that work?"
     
    I know that this is a bit difficult to handle (I've seen a lot of issues in Space Engineers), but in my opinion, there are a lot of things, that simply wouldn't work right without collision damage - landing for example. If I get you right, then there would also be no need to add stopping engines to, for example a colony ship which isn't supposed to take off again, because I could just let it crash on the surface of a planet and it won't take any damage?
    It would also feel very odd, if for example two capital ships collide and just stop or bounce off without taking damage - to me this would be a huge balancing issue...
     
    The second point would be, like shadow already mentioned, weapons. To be more specific: Player made weapons. One negative thing in Space Engineers are the very few and weak weapons. If you don't want to use mods (and i think DU isn't a concept that could support mods so easily), you don't have anything that could be a capital ship weapon - except PMWs, like for example the guided missiles of whiplash141. Even if you have a lot of pre-made weapons for all kinds of ships, DU with the planned economics would be great for such engineers - there could be a custom weapons market and a real need to develop countermeasures, even better weapons and so on... Real challenge and real technological progress.
     
    I really don't want to offend anyone, because i still think that DU is a great project, and i had a big wow-moment when i first heard of it, but to me this is an important topic (i just made an account to reply to this )
     
    Please correct me , if I got something wrong, or if the plan has already changed. To me any, even unrealistic, collision damage mechanic would be better than none
×
×
  • Create New...