Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'Weapons'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Starting Zone
    • Rules & Announcements
    • The Arkship Pub
    • Novark's Organization Registry
    • General Discussions
    • Off Topic Discussions
  • Ideas & Gameplay discussions
    • Idea Box
    • The Builder's Corner
    • The Gameplay Mechanics Assembly
    • DevBlog Feedback
  • Fan Art, Fan Fictions & Roleplay
    • Novark Agora
    • Novark Archives
    • Novark Art Gallery

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL










Found 32 results

  1. Have yet to see a generalized topic on this subject, so I figured I would compose something and then place it up for debate to see what you all think on the subject matter. There are several different ways weapons as I see can go in Dual Universe, and when your basing it off RND otherwise known as Research and Development, it may go something like this as you progress throughout the game. {Anything here is subject to change, and or new ideas} Base Game Starting Weapons: Auto Cannons - High rate of fire, low damage, decent against fighter defense or other assorted light or unarmored ships. Artillery - Long range, slow to mid fire rate weapon that deals fairly heavy damage against mid to large size targets. Dumb-Fire Rockets - Line of sight rocket for fast assault frigates or fighters & bombers against mid to large size targets. Short Range Cruise Missiles - Mid to Long range heavy damage weapon with some target acquisition and tracking abilities. Low yield Nukes - Heavy damage weapon just meant to obliterate targets, or demoralize the enemy. Maybe even use in instances of planetary bombardment? Flak Cannons - Low damage - Very high rate of fire - for protection against Rocket, Cruise, and Nukes. Then as you progress throughout the game then you may start being able to access research opportunities like this. . . Mid Game Weapons: Rail gun - Long range heavy damage weapon with armor piercing capability - requires massive power output to use effectively. Emp Bomb - Pulse weapon to disable or destroy un-shielded electronics and other assorted ship / station systems. Pulse Cannon - Early stage energy weapon, uses fairly large amounts of power to fire off a mid range damage projectile of energized matter. Capable of chewing through armor with ease. Now as you start understanding technology far better, this is where the "Interesting" weapons that will scare the hell out of you come into play. End Game Weapons: Beam Cannon - Late stage energy weapon that uses insanely massive amounts of power, fires continuous stream of energized matter {plasma ?} that is capable of obliterating armored targets. Knife to butter anyone? ? Other ? For all of the weapons no matter when they are researched they should have different tiers of each, meaning a higher tier rail gun for instance would still be viable later game while facing off against energy weapons. The only difference is to achieve the higher tier weaponry for the older tech would require significantly more research to keep it effective. Now there are things I have certainly forgotten to add to this list. If you have any ideas feel free to tack them on below. As well let us know what you think of these weapon choices, after all your opinions matter, especially if you want to see some of these weapons in-game, as a lot of us definitely would. As for the {Debates} topics, I will be trying to write one a day for the considerable future, so stay tuned to see what I might bring up next. Feedback is appreciated... so click that like button!
  2. Bit of a trivial topic, but seeing as projectile weapons are a thing, there are a couple ways one could go about supplying ammo for such a weapon. You could use: A) a Mass Effect style system, where your ammo comes from a wedge of steel inside the weapon; the top layer is shaved off and used as a projectile. This means you'll only have to replace the item once in a blue moon, though you're still limited by thermal energy produced within the weapon. B ) a normal ballistic weapon system, with the ammo being stored within clips and magazines, and loaded into the weapon separately. This means you'll have to produce bullets and the like, and magazines for them. Could become another market within the game. A bit less limited by thermal energy, but it could potentially prove a problem. C) a conveyor system, like in Space Engineers, where if they're in your inventory, or a ship's cargo hold, they feed directly into the weapon. Simpler than the other two, but less realistic, and thus less immersive. Commence deliberation!
  3. I've been reading a lot of the information on this game and everything seems fine but I would like to suggest finding a better weapons mechanics than EVE online. Although EVE has it's fans, the whole lock on weapons takes away from the battle in my opinion. I guess it's fun for some but for a game like DUAL Universe it takes away from the freedom idea. So many other Sci FI voxel base games allow you to manually fire your own weapons and even games like Emyprion allows you to take control of your turret and manually fire your turret if you choose to. One of the most entertaining parts of building a ship is having full control over your ship and its weapons. I think using a EVE online weapons lock on system will be a step back for such forward thinking game such as Dual Universe .. Smaller ships dog fights will not be as entertaining and since you're planning on doing multi crew capital ships. If I'm a gunner in a turret then me just locking on and letting my weapons auto aim and shoot will be kind of boring for me. Again I'm not saying that there aren't tons of players that love to point at something and let the game aim and shoot for them but a weapons system like that doesn't bring the Star Citizen or Elite Dangerous fans. They need full control over their weapons. I don't know if this suggestion will be taking seriously because EVE is a popular game but I think for this style of game a EVE combat style of game play will take a lot away from a game like this.
  4. The biggest disappointment in space engineers was the fact that there was no actual engineering. Building in the game (to me) feels more like an exercise in esthetics, slapping on functional parts as necessary. The fact that the capabilities of a ship in space engineers is defined more by what and how many functional parts were on a ship, than the actual design is extremely disappointing. In From the Depths, on the other hand, design has a meaning. In FTD most functional parts of a ship are multi block structures. The way these are built effect the performance of the ship drastically. This means compromises must be made. Summarized into a triangle, a design of any component must balance between size, power and efficiency. For example: there is a very efficient 7x7x2n engine design (2n means it is tile able, but one tile must be 2 blocks thick) however, of the 98 blocks per tile, only 4 are the power generating cylinders. The rest increase power output per cylinder and efficiency, or are pipes and dead space. Thus I cannot use the design on small ships or ships that need a lot of power in a small space. This gets a lot more complex for some systems, like the advanced projectile system. So I would really like to see a multi block systems mechanic added to this game. It would significantly increase depth and variety, while being avoidable by those who do not want to go so in depth. It adds on to player interaction as well (pro/con list below). Of course, some people are not interested in designing stuff. In FTD, you get around this by either copying someone's design or using prefabs, which are like blueprints that place parts of or even entire multi block assemblies. This way, if you don't want to spend a long time designing a system, you don't have to. Also of note: the capabilities of a system don't have to depend solely on the design, just as you could have multiple/upgraded parts, components of a system could have upgraded or specialized version, that require certain resources, research or infrastructure to produce. This also adds cost/ effectiveness to the design considerations. Single block components would also still be relevant. They should be cheaper (as the are prefabricated) and smaller, but less specialized and not a scalable. They would be used to quickly produce small, inexpensive objects (drone, turrets, mines, etc.). Pros: -more depth -better customization -more individual designs -no optimal design/better specialization -more balancing factores/more subtle balancing allows for better over all balance ( if done properly) -adds an appealing side to design other than esthetics -expands perfectly on the build your own universe idea -avoidable if you're not interested -adds another specialization possibility for players (engine designer, weapon designer, etc.) -adds another trade good (blueprints, possibly the prefaced system) -adds more weapon/system variety for all players, not only those who would use the system design mechanic Cons: -longer (but not steeper) learning curve (that can be avoided) -takes longer/may be harde to balance -may take more processing power (server side) Note: I mainly imagine thes multi block structures for larger ships, not for something as smal as a fighter.
  5. This is for those who are new to Dual Universe (and the forums) and whom have not seen some of the art/in game assets shown by Novaquark. ​You can see more art assets made for Dual Universe by visiting the media section here. http://www.dualthegame.com/medias This is a large Weapon Turret to be used on larger spaceship constructs. The PIPES here would feed to these guns to provide power. Too cool! http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/static.www.novaquark.com/marmoset/Turret_01.html?platform=hootsuite​ https://twitter.com/dualuniverse/status/703285049853140992 EDIT: Below is another weapon, a Laser Cannon http://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/static.www.novaquark.com/marmoset/Canon.html?utm_source=hootsuite​ https://twitter.com/dualuniverse/status/667770755724263424
  6. So say, you and a group become large enough to colonize a planet. You're also going to be big enough to notice, especially if your planet or territory falls strategically. I would enjoy seeing the ability to construct limited range shield 'domes' on planets, that protect you from external/orbital bombardment for a limited damage or duration. These generators would be fueled by 'x item'. If they run out of fuel, they go down. This does a couple of things over all. It allows people to have a comfort blanket above them for installations on a planetary surface and forces, possible ground assaults instead of flying assaults or orbital ones. It means fights would be more centralized. Now, the downside, I guess would have to be a restriction of how many within a specific area are allowed, so you have to protect your more important areas, spaceports, mining areas, living areas, whatever you deem important. Another downside would be possibly defense systems would have to be outside of the dome, thus making them 'vulnerable'. I'm not sure how the system with organisations is going to work, but hopefully there will some form of 'standings' systems between people so you can judge who has access to the shielded areas. I'll assume bunkers will be possible with the simple installation of a building underground, as it's all voxel based. -- However, on the ticket of standings, etc, seeing shield doors for docking bays on stations and capital ships that allow only selected people in and stop projectiles from straight penetrating into a docking bay would be a lovely addition. -- As for anti-orbit weapons, I would like to see various systems that can be used to track hostiles in orbit or that you are allowed to possibly control, but that are quite large and require defense on the planet surface. -- On the line of defensive weaponry, how possible would point defense/anti-missile systems be? i.e, a system that tracks and has a chance to kill incoming missiles or smaller ships? I understand there is LUA, but I guess the speculation would be that maybe missiles and other projectiles would be almost impossible to kill on the fly. However, we are yet to see weapons, etc. -- Keep in mind, this is all speculative, as there isn't much about the way standings and relations between organisations will be dealt with, whether there will be a war system like EvE or whether it will just be groups brawling it out and letting their intentions be known via projectiles.
  7. I have a specific, but sort of general, question about sensor granularity when it comes to DPU events and functions. What level of granularity can we expect from various sensor systems for things like developing an AI-based targetting system? For example, in the Lua DevBlog, the radar was mentioned with an enemyAt(x, y, z) event and the inclinometer would have our ship's getPitch() / getRoll() functions. Let's say I am building a targetting AI for a laser-based weapon. I would simply use the current enemyAt(x, y, z) position for the target location as it would be very unlikely to combat at or near light speed. But if my ship is using a projectile weapons system with a bit of delay before reaching the target, I would need to program the AI to use the enemy position plus their current direction of movement and velocity, combined my my ship's current direction velocity to compensate and lead the gun appropriately to hit the target if they maintain their current speed and vector. So, will things like getEnemySpeed(id) and getEnemyVector(id) functions be available from the sensor systems? Or will the gun DPU system have basic targeting and appropriate aim leading code already implemented for AI and human firing? On another note, would there be a mechanism for rayCast targetting from a gun? ie. Checking in the direction the gun is pointing to find the collision position and ensure it isn't a point on my own ship, or a friendly ship before firing? Sorry for all the technical questioning, but thanks for listening!
  • Create New...