Haunty

I wouldn't have anything against making ownership private (up to a certain range), but I haven't seen any real convincing reason yet. The advantage of not using a TCU would be to remain hidden. I just like the idea of having pros and cons for each option rather than trying to have the best of both worlds. And if you can turn off your ownership broadcast, that means your enemies can turn off theirs also.

Players should know the risks of building in unsecure areas. I doubt placing a TU would change anything about the permissions on existing constructs, perhaps just prevent digging and the placement of new constructs. So they could disassemble and move out of there at least. The person claiming the territory should be responsible for removing other players by force also, not just by claiming the territory. And they should also be at risk of the player just destroying their territory unit. The only other issue I see in that situation: - Person claiming the territory finds the entrances to existing underground base and closes them off. Perhaps weapons could damage terrain enough to make a tunnel out, but should probably be much slower than normal digging tool.

Maybe you don't realize the vastness of the Dual Universe, good luck to any griefers who think they can cover all of it. People who don't want to take any risk can sit in safe zone and stagnate 😏

Indeed, welcomes 🚀

Welcomes! 🚀

I liked the idea of SC back when they released their kickstarter video, because at the time I was burnt out from Eve and wanted a more first-person space MMO instead of the RTS micromanagement of Eve. But now I am more interested in sandbox gameplay rather than theme park.

Welcomes 🚀

Welcome, to Dual Universe *Jurassic Park theme* 🚀

Hello and welcomes 😎🚀

It has been brought up before. NQ hasn't declared anything final. I don't think options 3 and 4 make good gameplay sense. I could see regenerated resources only in the safe zone be a thing. Not sure how that would work though, there are a lot of things to consider.

I don't disagree because I still consider the player economy pvp even though it is non-combat, since designers/manufacturers would be competing with each other to sell their stuff. Just things like allowing players to create safe zone territories, NPC authorities, or anything that removes control from players would limit the emergent-ness. Though some sort of fixed safe zone is necessary so players can't completely destroy the economy.

I don't even think it is possible to make non-PVP and PVP players completely happy in the same game world, it has to lean more towards PVP, especially with emergent gameplay as a defining feature.

Basic scripting, analytical stuff, and avoiding people

That argument doesn't work anyway because they aren't the same thing, one is player behavior and the other would be a game mechanic.

I was thinking about this also, would be nice to have a fuel port instead of having to cut slots in my ship's hull to access the tanks.

Guten tag, mate

Ex-eve player here also. The more the merrier.

That's because there is so much gray area, you can still get sued even though you're not breaking the written law. And platforms like youtube will block content, even when it follows fair use.

I wanted a game like DU ever since I started playing Space Engineers, and found a link to the E3 video in the SE forums. I also played Eve for many years and was looking for the "next step" in single shard mmo evolution. I don't really have any goals other than to have fun, and figure it out as I go.

I was never trained in Eve, just listen to the FC and get thrown into the fire, that's good training. 😁

You should be able to tell if you're a kickstarter pledger if you log into Kickstarter and look on the DU page: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1949863330/dual-universe-civilization-building-sci-fi-mmorpg