Warden

Greetings and welcome to Dual Universe. To leave a short bit of feedback that hopefully helps in shaping the orgs in the long run, from an outsider perspective: - I like how straight to the point the description of IDS is even though I wonder if that "business model" works in the long run unless you do it for free; many orgs might just do political crisis management on their own if it's cheaper and doable. Maybe you can elaborate the benefits of picking IDS further? - I didn't (personally) find the same clarity in the other group. Perhaps you could change some descriptions, elaborate further, make some things more clear. Why is it called "Unknown"? If you work a bit further on 'em you'll attract people easier - in my humble opinion. Good luck either way.

Interested in taking part in the long run, as I've told one or two on occasion. I think this has solid potential and might outshine many other city projects that are solely player faction (just by or for them) based, as this involves more folks and appears more neutral. Whether it is building (construction), security or entertainment related, we can surely help in the long run. We, as organization, used to build railways in MC and patrolled areas (villages), too. Also, science stuff, I guess. Also, basically a bump so others see this, too.

If your (organization) goal is to compete with them in the first place... that is. Not everyone has to go for the full cake - or can. Sometimes, you can and should be fine by having your own slice, and keeping that might be more than a challenge. Unless you mean the above in a way that you kinda always have to compete because of a presence large orgs can exert over other groups, smaller or not, passively or indirectly at least. Still, sometimes it's not even any direct or notable competition anymore, because of different goals or interests, or styles.

Good for all but those who happen to get into the crosshairs of (larger, unhomogenous) Youtubers or their fanbase, though

Not sure where the initial issue is or where the fears are. Was never a classic "Youtuber fanboy" of some person who always tried to be "present", take part, voice opinions, or even zealously defend said person. I'm mostly a passive consumer. Show me good content, I watch, I leave a like or maybe a comment on occasion. And sometimes, if a Youtuber shows an interesting community or server (that was there to begin with, not made by the YTer), I might check that out. Why that explanation? It basically means that, while I wasn't some kind of "first level fanboy" I think I got enough impressions to see that especially large and known Youtubers can have odd communities, or odd people among it. As some others here assume or say, I think in the end it can be rather volatile. What would unite most if those ... fans were in some faction? The person(s), first and foremost. So it's kinda like a cult of personality. And then you have vastly different kinds of people, from kids to adults and various playstyles. And then, of course, a lot depends on the personality and target demographic of the Youtuber. But I still kind of think that if a known Youtuber were to rally fans for some DU campaign, it might most notably attract those who want to be close to their "idol". While there might be plenty of reasonable "fans" who simply join to take a look or simply take part to have fun, you can never rule out the zealous, crazed "groupies" who might create more trouble than help in the long run, or simply give up upon organized resistance. On the other hand, you could argue that you might have to face a large playerbase because of the potential high number input and the large fanbase that could be utilized against you, if you were to become enemies. I see pros and cons, but in the end you can still say that (known) Youtubers are also people with weaknesses. You could even argue that stirring the pot might be easier due to so many angles you could go at, given the large size of the adversary and the not so homogeneous community behind it, and potential lack of long-term cohesion. -------------------------- To summarize or rephrase key aspects: - I see no reason to worry, for aforementioned reasons I doubt large Youtubers appearing with their communities might be a problem in general - With the right effort and mindset, they could be "dismantled" or crippled over time, thus overcome as obstacle if hostile tensions were to arise - They might as well, maybe, be or turn into a big problem for some (their enemies) if they can manage to bring a steady supply of people and more - Maybe just like your average large faction? On the plus side, large Youtubers mean more media coverage of DU, thus more players. We kinda benefit from that. Closing note, detached from personal aspects: Good for the game, not really problematic for the community. You can already expect plenty of known YTers to cover the game and bring their fans aboard, if DU will be remotely successful and bind players for a few months at the very least. Given the idea of the game, I think we can even manage the very known Youtubers and their usually large communities, should they set foot on Alioth and beyond.

Maybe you can even manage to find a (subjective) "balance" and cater to more people that way, minding the past and setting (lore) while being unique and doing your own things that make you stand out for the future. Besides, classic RPers will always try to mind the lore in some way, and I guess DU will invite those, too. They can not literally create their sandcastle but any faction and style they want, which seems to be more than lucrative if you ask me. Next thing you know you might even have groups resembling famous factions from other franchises. Not that this did not happen already, eh?

Derelict ships will become even more fun if you are able to save text logs in items or in containers, giving you a ship log or similar. Or if this can be some integrated component of the ship systems like a black box. Especially explorers will likely keep an in-game log others can read in case things go wrong or to have a shareable journey for others regardless of that. Of course you could also apply this to the other scenarios such as the remote faction wars and so on, on the ground.

I actually wonder about this. Will it be large enough to basically allow a whole microcosmos to exist within? Examples of far-away encounters: you discover a sect-like small faction in some totally remote location or in another place or on another planet there's a post-apocalyptic war going on on some bombed planet with factions and players no one really heard of because they kept quiet in general or simply because they drowned in all the larger community news. Kinda exciting. A bit like some minor Stellaris exploration events. The bottom line likely is that you may have factions and conflicts that might be very or completely detached from your average daily or mainstream galactic politics if such a thing will later exist. Like that famous Star Wars intro: in some distant place...

Since it's first come first serve most of the time, I will do anything but lollygag unless I am then in some alliance or group that gets "a good spot" (I know, highly subjective) via contract or guarantee. Space (even Alioth) will be big, but with potentially thousands of players in one spot or running around... Also, I will make sure to get one full week on vacation to get sh... stuff done.

Greetings.

"Code is taking arrr jawbs!" I suppose I'm personally used to "manual mining", given that my last really in-depth or primary time I spent with my faction was in Minecraft Beta, although newer endeavors also only offered mining by hand ("7 Days 2 Die" for example). Whether you only know this or saw better, easier methods in other games, I think it might not be a bad choice because it puts emphasis on manual labour and thus people. You might actually have to hire miners temporarily or permanently. (Large) Economic power in that branch might not lie at the folks who have the best "code" or automation, but those with high manpower (in addition to how they manage supplies and so on of course). And it gives new players not just a chance in general to compete but job opportunities in all these player nations, corporations, groups, organizations. While likely many can't get around mining at the start to get some basic resources to move on from there, if you don't necessarily need ores yourself as new or somewhat established player, you can mine for someone else and get monetary compensation, or maybe even totally different compensation? Imagine working for someone for other favors or material goods. A lot is possible. I, personally, don't mind manual mining as I usually did that before in comparable games. I just mostly wonder about the (lack of?) mining ships or rigs or equipment for ships. Might as well refrain from trying to build dedicated mining ships and bring the big cargo freighter to a belt or so right away if you have to get outside to mine the rocks anyway. ---------------- Also, for those who consider it a (necessary but boring) grind: Think of it this way. Daily, toilets are scrubbed somewhere, goods for consumption are made (don't think of a factory now, maybe more like some store where someone prepares sandwhiches daily), hairs are cut, etc. If you just look at it from a superficial view, it might seem monotonous a lot. Often, it can be annoying. But it's necessary in the end, if you integrate that particular task into a bigger picture. We sit in heated homes and enjoy various goods today, right now, because someone at one point mined some sh*t somewhere, and someone else moved it around, and someone else in turn processed or refined it, integrated this into goods or made goods out of it in the first place, etc. Rinse and repeat. While it can be monotonous, if I look at the larger picture it suddenly becomes very exciting or at least somewhat interesting. You never know where that particular rock you mined (or processed) might end up. Even if you mine for some internal use within a larger player faction only, you never know. In other words, consider it like a contribution to (this digital) society that made it possible in the first place. Kind of like the foundation. Build a foundation. Be a miner. Join today. Oh, sorry, turned into ad-mode for a second! Nevermind!

This made me want to jump out of my seat and yell "Amen!" You will likely not be able to play this game without being shot at or shot down or vaporized on occasion, even if you pursue a path that tries to avoid combat. Frankly, I see no problem with it. If you generally want to avoid it, you will have plenty of options over time - maybe not initially as there is nothing beyond Alioth (or not much), but eventually, such as more safe zones. If you just do it right, you can even have said options initially - it all depends on who you associate with and who can back you up, no matter if right away or later on. Judging from some comments or what has been implied in other games and communities about this over time, I personally feel that some might be overly nervous about "being griefed", however they want to define this. I don't see an issue in a game that will attract many types of players including those who'd rather focus on an economy, industry, entertainment, events, socializing, science, etc. You can find your group or "bubble" over time and mostly do what you want to do - at the always looming risk of overlapping conflicts or simply enemy encounters if you travel out there in space or just walk down the wrong alley in some giant town where combat would be possible due to the rights system or lack thereof. I think that abstract risk is acceptable and in the end, primarily YOU can influence how real it becomes or how abstract it remains by your choices. And if some person, group or faction decides to view you as enemy and pester you constantly, there are also some options to pursue in order to fight back. There are whole industry branches making money of that, I'm sure players facing a persistent opponent will find other players willing to do something about it and help - for a price or not. This also mostly depends on how you react, thus, your actions. Do or don't, basically. But if you lie down and just give up or only complain (without counter-action or evasion), nothing will change. In other words: Relax, it likely will not become that bad on average, some level of order or safety will establish itself due to the safe zones or controlled territories that will also find patrols and so on. I never played EvE a lot or not much, not beyond high sec mining for a few months (yeah yeah, throw stones at me). But the stories I heard so far, over time, basically tell me that the controlled nullsec space saw huge alliances (-> many people working together) that patrolled their own space, and so far we already see police-type or defense force-type groups in various factions. Like, you can later probably call the cops or military and have them investigate or protect, instead of having to solely rely on your buddies depending on where you go. How interesting is that?! Call 'dem space cops! Or bounty hunters! Or assassins! Or the army...well, navy, if it's in space. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- On another note, just in general, I would like to suggest that "griefing", aka hostile action against you, can have many forms and shades. In a way, I'd almost argue that you should not worry about the random pirate or bored kid shooting you down or harassing you in some area temporarily just for crossing paths. Like, wrong time in wrong place. That usually ends eventually. Especially as not so combat oriented player or, rather, in any branch you can think of, competition can exist and does not necessarily need to engage you with weapons or blow you up. Sabotage, influence operations, cloaks n' daggers, backstabbing, waltzing over you without any use of arms (or little use of them)... can destroy or set back your "in-game existence" just as well as some kid blowing up your vital cargo in some part of space. And some of them might decide to simply aggressively attack you all the time, whenever they can, to build up pressure, to take your idea or company out of the picture. Anything might be and should be possible, as long as we also get to see hubs that are relatively safe so that it is not total chaos and preventing players from engaging the game long-term, which is in NQ's interest and in ours, too. So far, that appears to be the case. And this is why I can look into the future with a relaxed stance and not worry about (random) "griefers". I'd rather worry about a really zealous opponent that might be after you at one point, whether the reason or spark for the conflict was trivial or not. Given the insights I get about possibilities, it's scary. Or can be. To me, again, more so than a random person blowing you up or annoying you for a bit. But alas, all of that can be seen as part of 'emergent gameplay' - in the end, the players drive the content primarily and let 'Empires' (or other entities) rise and fall. Always in motion, never really boring, never really unexciting. But with risks anyway.

In my simple idea (that is, of course, simplified, while in reality many factors come into play including solid game mechanics that need to be always checked and maybe revised or expanded upon, etc) the players are the main driving factor of long-term goals and motivations. It is, in essence, a bit like life: rinse and repeat, rise and fall, try something new. Dominating or influential factions will form and over time might fall, or generally be contested by others. This can go on for years, over a decade and longer. Until perhaps a relatively subjective better game comes around. As you already implied or said, players are the main content drive. This offers a huge potential and many possibilities; anything not being the base planet or other object anymore will be built or modified by players, everything will be unique compared to developer-given maps, planets or bases as players have to deliver it all. At the same time, this also requires a lot of community effort, as almost everything has to be made first. A huge task in a way. But this is what will keep things going I suppose. And if the need for adjustments arrives to get back on track, then surely NQ will do so in a non-invasive way when possible.

I'm not that fond of "magic (elite) skills" to suddenly make items disappear to be honest. Like, what is this, Fallout New Vegas holdout weapons you smuggle into a casino? I get arguments in favor of this, but it still feels a bit wonky to me to have classic weapons vanish after a certain skill. Ideally it is more complex or you get the option to embed weaponry within other objects. Or do it like some "evil states" do: you think they can just buy or make nukes including rockets completely? Nah. What some might try is obtaining small or specific parts that only result in a weapon system when brought together, but on their own are unproblematic or can have other purposes. I think the term is "dual use" (how fitting given this game's name). In short I'd rather favor the long classic prep work than a simple vanish skill. Alternatively there are concealable weapons or armors with limited use that can avoid detection of systems. Might as well smuggle in parts and assemble later. But a lot of this is yet speculation to me so far. Let's wait and see. I also only skimmed through, so if I missed a vital part with official definite info, blame me.

This group produces the best memes and satire I have seen (here) so far and the approach is rather unique. Even if I was the one being made fun of I couldn't help but laugh. Actually, that was already the case (*cough raptor cough*) so no regrets. While not everyone will like a group like BOO I think they will provide a unique angle to DU and be one of many "special snowflakes" (no, not like that, more positive!) in the community - and make it unique. Can't only have Empires and mega corps, right?

Some of those aspects sum up my thoughts about it. To give anyone reading this a better understanding: I don't even consider myself as a hardcore PVP'er or some "badass", or whatever. If I had to summarize, I'd rather focus on creation than destruction. And yet I can't help to agree with some here that some people would consider PVP-focused. In my opinion, some here currently seem overly nervous about an undefined future of DU and some arguments in the debate, on both sides I suppose, seem somewhat exaggerated at times - maybe just to prove a point or because they have that actual fear? I can't tell or look into people's heads, but only wonder. Then again, I suppose my background is a bit different. While I favor creation I ran around PVP / potentially-lose-it-all environments. DayZ, MC, ARMA 1 to 3 (RPG servers), etc. In MC, random people attacked our base (and there were some sort of safezone mechanics, temporary or depending on certain factors). Complaining about those particular threats didn't make them go away. Surviving and fighting them actively usually did the trick in MC, and in other games if it was not possible, evading them was an option. An DayZ RP server is a good example I can give to people. There, currently, a bunch of criminals and communists banded together trying to establish a new state. They want to also disarm people of certain weaponry, causing a large ruckus and lots of heated debates on the radio and maybe in person. Nobody would think of complaining about it, as it's part of the setting and "roleplay" or gameplay. They have many people and you either try to hide or organize a fight and find allies, what some people do. It's simply part of the game to have abstract or specific threats. If we can all agree on that, what are we generally arguing about? Some harder safe zone mechanics will be in the game, but not easily obtainable by loners or perhaps smaller groups - which seems fair to me. There'll be risks and rewards, compromises, mechanics, and something for everyone. But sometimes someone wants to annoy you or bring you down because you stand in their way. Do something about it actively, evade or, either way, simply accept that it could happen and that it is part of the game. The people that attacked us in Minecraft surely didn't want to get "wiped" or vaporized by us after attacking us unprovoked, but that's also part of the game and exactly something you can do if someone attacks you: Fight back. ---------------- To summarize, it will likely not be that bad as some imagine it. And if something becomes bad, the players (in general) can still try to find a solution or counter-action to this. That's part of 'emergent gameplay' after all I suppose.

Rebuilding civilization doesn't take forever, however, depending on how different parties define society or rebuilding it. I thought about pointing that out since I've seen the argument a few times. On the large scale it might be ongoing as new players enter the stage and try to build up whatever society they imagine, for others, the step or phase might be complete at one point. And then they act against others at one point, whether it is forced upon them or if they cast the first stone.

I dunno, to me DU seems good enough if they can later provide sufficient assets for further customization of player (gear), construct and other things (misc items, furniture, etc) alike. I'd only consider "jumping ship" if the same grand scale can be offered with voxel-like building and notably better visuals without sacrificing in terms of scope and mechanics. Before something like that comes out I feel like more time has to pass for the tech to improve where this becomes feasible. Look at Star Citizen's current problems in 3.0 with memory and processing many objects in the background while looking good = problematic client performance. They might fix it at one point but still can never put 1000s of people in an instance-less game (or the same instance alternatively). DU might just be the next big thing for a decade before it slowly gets replaced by something that can offer the same with overhauled tech and visuals, if not by the same people bringing us DU (NQ). Just saying, anything gets old or replaced at some point. But I so far don't see competition on the very same level.

The abstract threats are universal for space stations as threats can come from any direction. On planets or larger celestial bodies, you usually have a better control or view over approach vectors. While space stations have their uses and will be a thing many individuals or groups might need to use at one point, I imagine in voxel based games they will be a pain in the ass in terms of covering or securing them from all angles. If you don't need to operate or build one, you can have it easier.

I don't see a need to "sweat it"; there is always long-term competition anyway. Curious to see how a follow-up might look like though, if they make one.

Never had much (or long-term) EvE experience, but as they like to say: Many ways lead to rome. Here it was a bit of advanced Minecraft PVP and so on (advanced in the sense of NOT having a bunch of children build things or pink genitalia out in the wilderness, but something encompassing an economy, faction plugin, emergent gameplay, the likes) and a bit of DayZ. While even comparable games can have vast differences on a more specific level I still think that you can obtain or get into general mindsets through other games - as long as the core ideas are roughly the same. Minecraft (and anything comparable I suppose) In short, I saw many build bases or outposts to last. But after a time, the ruins spoke for themselves. Abandoned, (partially) destroyed or maybe even completely razed to the ground? Who knows? The field you see with a few trees or the plains with nothing in particular at all but grass might've contained some house, village, base that was completely removed by the owners as they moved or an opposing party. Like it was never there to begin with. Ruins were even more fascinating to me, telling stories to some extend. The most fascinating thing I saw was an abandoned city. It actually was completely surrounded by a notable wall and looked like a city (of sorts, not modern design by the blocks they used but not too medieval or fantasy-like either) that was abandoned because the people left the server. Just by looking at the ruins you could immediately tell: They built this place to last or to stay, otherwise who would've poured all that effort into it with that high amount of people only to let it rot a short time after? DayZ Some might probably raise eyebrows as this isn't specifically your comparable sandbox game with building elements - but it contains some of the same aspects. Social interactions, emergent gameplay, focus on material possession or advancement and the risk to lose it all to others or even yourself if you do wrong things. Like in any sandbox game online anyone could come around the corner and take what you have, or try to. I recently dipped into a private server with RP components. The experience is somewhat different to the standard public servers that also allow ghosting or teleporting behind obstacles on one server due to just going there on a different server. The private shard with RP elements is somewhat closer to sandbox experiences because factions on that server are more persistent, so I think it is a good example because all share that one shard and all stay on that one shard instead of hopping around. And there it is the same, basically, with the difference that you obviously cannot freely build things. You have to rely on what the map gives you. While the map is also limited where sandbox worlds tend to be larger on average and more dynamic, it's still fascinating to see how factions interact in that world. And from my experience and since whatever storage or base you put up can be found by others, you just have to move all the time. I lost track of how often we or I had to move because someone suddenly found the hideout or base and stole, thus compromising the position. It was also more than once where a hostile criminal or ideological faction settled nearby, forcing us to move again. Because you can be as noble or bold as you want, if a bunch of (roleplayed) mexican criminals or communists settle nearby and you don't fit their world view, you'll think twice of staying in an area where you are heavily outnumbered and could be attacked any day. Heck, from the report I got, we occupied a police station and eventually had a mob of slave traders form up in front of it and throw threads around, just to give you all a few specific examples. Moral of the story or recap This basically just is intended to underline that you can plan all you want but in the end, a static location has potential cons and if you (plan to) build it, you better accept the risk that you might eventually lose it. A mobile base like a larger ship might be more preferable in some situations or as additional asset. If you lose static or stationary assets you can at least still move that around. Or you simply hope the stationary asset you build will never see war or takeovers due to location or obfuscation. But in these games, it's to be expected that due to conflicts, wars, etc. people will lose and gain assets and you, the average player, will likely not be an exception to this. Those who want to avoid it better make the right policies, politics and find the right friends, but it can still happen. As with many things you can likely just try to lower the risk or run damage control, but not completely avoid it. Text wall over and out.

Ah, that is quite simple, it is [redacted]. ----- In the end, likely multiple "setups", as many can have pros and cons by style or location (and intent) alone. And just "one" might not cut it in the long run here.

Done and done.

My suggestion, as stated prior unless this becomes problematic in the eyes of NQ: keep it as it is unless you want to rebrand everything (visually). You explained your reasoning and that should suffice. If this arises on the community side in the future, having a disclaimer or pointing to this (not this, but yours of course) post might do the trick. I see no issue in this case and from an in-character POV it is also no biggie in this case, with many more decades and millenia in the future. Maybe simply because it's not that known or questionable like a swastika look-alike.

Interestingly, every (present-day) higher German sergeant has that symbol (looks just like the rune) as rank thingie on the shoulders. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hauptfeldwebel_(rank) No implication, just an observation or as "fun fact". As for the posts above, I think ODY never had particular implied intentions or affiliations so I'd rather shrug it off or clarify (if I were in their shoes) because that seems easier than to rebrand everything visually. In terms of work effort and keeping a visually established brand, I mean. But that depends on how many other people (in the future) draw that connection and consider it problematic.