Jump to content

Warden

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Content count

    806
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Warden

  • Rank
    Novark Citizen

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • backer_title
    Sapphire Founder
  • Alpha 1
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

1311 profile views
  1. Good story, short but sweet. I guess it's a good example how "viral marketing" or gossip can promote a game or idea and we should perhaps do our part on occasion and when it seems organic to do so. No, dear readers, it does not mean going around reddit(s) and whatnot, spamming DU links unsolicited like some people did in the past (you know who you are). Anyway, for me a similar promotion made me aware of the game: basically the combination of Minecraft (or SE) and EvE Online. The perfect mix on paper at least.
  2. Warden

    Safe Zones

    If I remember how such debates were sometimes held on an abstract level and if I read between the lines, I sometimes get the subjective impression that people - subconsciously or not - always slightly exaggerate no matter what side they're on. Proving a point is okay based on your preferences, but there could be a fine line sometimes where (according to my feeling) I think that sometimes people try to see their own preferences 'enforced' while considering anything else "wrong". Simplified: PVPers argue in their way, strict non-PVPers do the same and eventually some mini-debates turn into repetitions of preferences. I mean, you're probably all arguing "past each other" if that makes sense. To my knowledge, we get hard safe zones on the starting planet, then on some moon(s) and then you get tiles any faction can claim, which do not translate to classic safe zones however and are contestable. I will try to pull up the according articles or sources in the next post when I have a bit more time at hands. What I basically want to say to all sides is: relax a tad, you all will get your way. And I think that is awesome. Unite the builders, the creative people, the hardened, the vicious, the artists, whatever you can think of. Everyone will have some place in this universe. However, if you (subconsciously or not) keep arguing in a way that your primary preference should be the leading example or focus of general gameplay, you'll naturally see others do the same for their viewpoints and it potentially ends in a repeating back and forth. Not saying "stop debating here", just saying "try to keep this in mind here and there". ------------------------------------------------------------- I'd also not advise trying to downplay "the other side" depending on what side you are on, even if it might sometimes be hard. To those it might concern: Not everyone who is not into full risk and PVP at any time is a "carebear", their interests and strenghts might simply lie in other areas and you could even benefit from that somehow. The next ship you use in your Empire might be built by someone a hardcore PVPer might consider "carebear" because they prefer to work away in some safe zone without abstract or real interruptions, to give an example. At the same time, one who prefers to avoid conflict should not assume it's automatically total anarchy and a 'gank fest' beyond any hard-coded safe zone borders. Or that someone who is generally open to attacking others is a bloodthirsty monster - some simply have other motivations or reasoning behind their attacks or actions. Chances are in the long run many spaces that cannot be claimed by a hardcoded safe zone device, but maybe by normal 'tile claimers' might be relatively or very safe since they get policed by the organizations and empires who run the space. Those might also want business and stability to make money and attract people, so they have people patrol. And even then... hey, in the end, abstract risk remains and isn't that somewhat exciting if you don't know what happens and who you could run into? If you transport something vital at the same time and have to go out, work together and get friends to help you transport things or hire a player group that offers this as service. Or maybe TL;DR: It won't be that bad. See for yourself in the future and re-assess. But all kinds of players will have a place in this game and I like it. It will likely attract more people that way and we all benefit from a big community that interacts with each other on various levels.
  3. 2019 will be the year of ascension What long has been postponed and neglected shall be renewed! As one cycle comes to an end and starts anew, we intend to utilize this change for long-intended but never completed changes to determine our future with clarity. As to what exactly we intend and have in store, you will have to see as time unfolds. I can summarize this in simple fashion, however: Re-define the target group and goals to reach, possibly according to SMART approach Overhaul application system according to target group Work continuously on multimedia and promotion as time and dedication to other projects permits Create a solid leadership/management foundation and expand local projects, at last These simple-sounding steps are just for one purpose: To make us better so we can empower you more effectively. With a realistic approach, we only want to attract those who want a challenge and don't mind more difficult starting conditions and obstacles to overcome. While our branches will remain broad, we will also try to focus on certain projects. In the end, we prefer those measures over mass-recruitment for simple number boosting and being unable to specialize in certain areas. If you align with our approaches, do not mind a challenge and responsibility while being able to display notable patience, this might be the right Corporation for you. If you need to be in the biggest and most known - look at the top X organizations on the community hub. ------------------------------------------------ To summarize, we want to overhaul our content, promote more, re-define some goals and make recruitment, requirements and target groups more clear for 2019. We want to focus on leadership-related and dedicated positions rather than gaining numbers blindly and are ready to filter and test applicants more. From our perspective, it doesn't matter if this rarely nets successful applicants quantity-wise if the quality and dedication of "the few" is according to our expectations. We also want to focus on getting management positions filled in the long run so that DU operations can run on their own. In turn, applicants and future members can expect a challenging but also very rewarding adventure where they can slowly notice the positive changes of their time and work investments. This, combined with our mindset on our multimedia approach is grounds for a very good and immersive experience. Any veteran member (most will deploy later on are are currently not active) you might ask would surely give you the highest praise and best stories from our first successful campaign in another world in another time. But they did not just get that experience by expecting handouts and entertainment all day, but by actively and willingly contributing and enjoying the time here. If you're of the same caliber, the 'verse will be open to you. Spread your wings and ascend - with us
  4. Warden

    Safe Zones

    I think the currently planned system, assuming it is "more or less" set in stone, is totally fine and a compromise for all. You get your initial starting point safe zone, then anything claimable but serving as regular claimable tile, placeable in most areas with risk and then the dedicated safe zone moon sanctuary thingies as 'extension'. Did I forget any? I really can't see either side complain much, assuming each individual from any crowd can work with compromises.
  5. Warden

    Star Citizen

    At this rate I think they will deliver, but 1,000 people per instance? Plans or not, I will only believe it when I see it work in stable or live branches and would consider ~500 (or 350, etc) already huge groundbreaking milestone with the tech currently involved.
  6. Warden

    Star Citizen

    Capital ships were always intended as "end-game-tier" and workload-type of ship or asset. If numbers cannot go notably up per instance to make them feasible to use (more than one), I can imagine them adding automation to reduce max crew slots, so you can do the same with less people. Or actual people. You could as well fill existing ship positions with NPCs so you save space for players. Just a thought or assumption, time will tell what comes out of it.
  7. I think in terms of "craftsmanship" this is a very well-done video with the right visuals and emphasizing. Or in other words, it seems authentic and "blends" well. Some more feedback
  8. Warden

    Star Citizen

    Apart from any current sub-debate or topic, here's a perhaps useful video that explains the game in an optimistic outlook. Of course the project has seen and will likely see "controversy" and it has many vocal opponents. I personally think it is a vision to believe in (without saying you cannot criticize aspects of it). It just needs a hell of a lot more time and content and refinement, but if all ends up in working order it will maybe revitalize the industry and bring encouragement where you could sometimes get the picture of it being a shallow or questionable thing, thanks to certain big actors who deliver rather shallow products. My impression anyway. Whatever your stance about the game, supporter, opponent, neutral, anything else, maybe you find this video interesting: On a personal note, I stopped trying to compare it to DU a long time ago. I see gems in both with their distinctive pros and cons and maybe slightly different target audiences. They do not seem fully comparable due to how they're set up and what they intend to offer to the players. Chances are I will play both.
  9. I would have to agree with this, and it reminded me of something I thought about recently, with more modern depictions of information: Yeah, it's "sciency" or "modern" and all and may fit theme-wise, but it's harder to read. This is why, should I ever resort to similar images, I will actually do the good old "white paper - plain text" approach, even if it's the future. But it's what people are used to today and it's relatively readable. I actually like the visuals and idea n' all. I just find it harder to read compared to "classic things".
  10. Warden

    Star Citizen

    I'm unaware myself, but then again I don't think we can expect to be able to play with literally thousands of other players at a time, I doubt the tech and framework could handle it any time soon. However, perhaps a few hundred per solar system might seem obtainable. I do remember an older quote where he more or less mentions the possibility of playing with a lot (thousands?) of players but that remains to be seen. If I recall right, currently about 50-60 can be in an instance, but I'd have to check. It should show it somewhere as you join. This is an increased number to before where I recall about half of that being possible per instance. So far the trend indicates upward progression, and it has to because I remember the crew listing for a destroyer being about 70, max or ideal.
  11. Warden

    Star Citizen

    Tbh, I never expected this from the game if he literally means thousands at a time with that quote (that I missed), per "instance" and depending on what counts as "instance" later on - the whole universe? Or will each solar system be an "instance" meaning you are not locked in with the same players in your area once you join. Or in other words, you join and pop up in whatever system you were with X people, and once you leave the system you could be in another instance, but that would mean once you return the people who were there when you joined would be gone. No clue, just guessing. It wouldn't be consistent like that, but I doubt they count the whole universe as instance because an instance can only hold a certain amount of people, meaning that a universe would feel rather dead-ish player-wise, regardless of how many NPCs populate it. Anyway, as I hinted at the beginning, I don't have the expectation for thousands of people (per instance). Perhaps if you played games like EVE you might change standards, but I personally think games like EvE with single shards are not as common - at least they don't seem to me. Most games with online components are limited in terms of player size per server or instance due to technical reasons. I just think they notable need to increase player count per instance or server. Right now it might be more than it used to be, but I think it's still not high enough. While I'm not quite sure where the number is right now without further research, as far as I know it's not sufficient yet because one has to factor in all the upcoming capital ships. What use are capital ships that can sometimes require a crew up to like 70 or several dozen people at full contingent (including marines and replacement staff) if one of those would already notably fill up the instance. While I don't expect huge fights between player-only fleets with several capital ships, there needs to be the possibility for larger fleet operations by players, for larger player organizations. And who knows, if the technology allows more in the upcoming years and decades, perhaps such statements will be revised. TL;DR: I personally never expected the standards of EvE for example, if that quote is to be literal and seen as "at a time within an instance". It just needs to be more than it is right now and give the subjective feeling of allowing sufficient player numbers, even if they always said you will encounter 90% NPCs or whatever. Larger groups should be able to play together at a time. Who knows what the future will bring. But for a single shard experience akin to EvE with many players, I look for DU to fulfil those needs right now - most other games cannot do this by design it seems.
  12. That sounds about right and is also usually what I throw out to people to explain it fast or in a simple way.
  13. I don't consider myself an "EvE player" in the sense of saying that implying I was involved in it much. I played it briefly, few months tops, did some mining in high sec. Had some ominous friend who was a goon alliance skirmish commander with a funny story of plot twists and betrayal, won't spill his name though. But technically, I am a former EvE player even though I never got into it much. I'd support the notion that people shouldn't automatically laugh at Minecraft, because that's what I played about 2 years or so, extensively, in a semi-serious setting. Yeah the graphics were crap (unless you used a texture pack, then could even be rather beautiful) and the character models weren't that detailed due to the blockyness of it all, but damn, the game could offer a certain depth, and when I played most modern sandbox games who picked up the torch were not around or not released for early access and whatnot. In the MC community we played (with the same group I once started promoting here) we brought a semi-serious, immersive approach to how groups would interact with each other. My point is, yeah sure there's probably some weird kids playing Minecraft and we all know that cringy video from Minecon or so where the devs get asked cringy questions by kids, but it also offered a mature mindset and approach or setting. Most communities I saw were populated by older teens and adults who delivered a unique experience, wether on my own former community or the Civilizationcraft servers with unique hubs and 'cultures'. But enough of MC for now. I get your point, I think. There's usually only few extensive, complex games or games you start to play that shape you in a distinct way. Perhaps you eventually stop playing them, but eventually look back in a nostalgic way. I do so with Minecraft primarily, due to the great experiences and adventures I had there, and primarily because we won in that particular community I was in. By design or idea, I find Dual Universe to be the perfect combination of what I was always looking for: The emergent gameplay and player influence of EvE Online (which I disliked for its controls and focus on operating ships, instead of people sitting in ships with a focus on first person or on character, and lack of planetary components) coupled with the sandbox elements and ground components of games such as Minecraft. If it's done well by NQ, this will be considered a better EvE Online for me because it then may offer the same idea (without your filler NPCs though) but with things people missed from the game. The "best of both worlds", so to speak. But time will tell.
  14. Warden

    Star Citizen

    There is a (new) roadmap that has been around for a while, usually containing the next few version estimates including all planned milestones. https://robertsspaceindustries.com/roadmap/board/1-Star-Citizen/info
  15. Warden

    Star Citizen

    Here's something that made it into SC related news on google and whatnot: I think we shouldn't expect something like a "classic release date". Due to the scope of the game, the game will simply always be worked on, with bits and big milestones added. Even if you say "Release is in 2 years", so much would likely come after this ominous "day X". I mean, "release date" would likely be a marketing tool by now to get attention to the game again - although I assume such "release date" would be further into the future as the game isn't anywhere of being done in terms of the multiplayer universe. Now unless you mean a release date for Squadron 42, the singleplayer campaign, then it'll take many more years to even think about a "release date" for the multiplayer component since so much is missing and they still seem to focus on notable framework or background technology. Once that is in place and working, I'm assuming the progress on content should be faster, maybe notably faster. If you want to know how much is missing, look at the interactive star map on the website. See all those systems? Yeah, those are missing. The current system that is in isn't even fully done, with major planets missing. Once the whole system is ready, then we can tick that off as milestone. I have no clue how fast they can be once they dedicate more personnel to creating content and systems, but damn, it'll take many more years for it all to be fleshed out. I'd say a lot should be done in the next 8 to 10 years.
×