Jump to content
Spartan_raidrhater

No Construct vs. Construct at Launch a Good Thing

Recommended Posts

I tried to make sure a similar topic wasn't already posted, but I didn't have time to look through every post on this forum or any other.

Many may think this idea is crazy or stupid, but I think that not having construct vs. construct at release may overall help gameplay. My reasoning for this has to do with getting settlements and cities built by multiple factions early on without one group coming and destroying everything. I could easily see one large organization being able to put the time and resources to building a massive mobile weapon platform before doing anything else while most others start by focusing on establishing some sort of base of operations. If this were to happen, then that destructive organization could easily find any settlement fairly quickly, as we will likely be locked to one planet for the early stages of the game. Using their weapon, that one organization could steal any valuable resources, and defend the most valuable resources in order to prevent other organizations for growing. This would force others to either join the ruling organization or quit playing, as there is nothing they could do without the resources to build anything of worth.

Any other thoughts on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what you're saying, but I think you aren't taking into consideration the size of the planet and how that will provide many different areas for essential (valuable) resources. Organization are going to distance themselves and get their bases set up, and no one really knows the complexities of the territory system when it comes to capturing, securing, and attacking/defending. We do know that it's not going to be something that you can pull off in a few hours, so it will take significant planning for an organization to completely take control of another's territory.

 

For me, it's about the game being established under the premise/gameplay style that results from having CvC combat. This means lots more coordination among friends to secure important areas, whereas without CvC, and player can come waltzing in without a care to what's around them. Simply put--there's a lot less to worry about. Some would argue that's a good thing, but I like challenges and creating opportunities for coordinated organizations to begin taking control of certain areas/aspects of the game.  

 

It's important to note that there are a lot of great organizations out there. Not every organization is out to reign with an iron fist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see where you're coming from, but as Schoff said, I think people will be able to distance themselves. The reason for the 20km Arkship safe zone is to allow for some stability in the very early game and will likely have the first settlements. I don't think it's likely that if a major organization conquered everyone, that they would be able to maintain power for very long. Players can always form rebellions and regroup on faraway star systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to make sure a similar topic wasn't already posted, but I didn't have time to look through every post on this forum or any other.

Many may think this idea is crazy or stupid, but I think that not having construct vs. construct at release may overall help gameplay. My reasoning for this has to do with getting settlements and cities built by multiple factions early on without one group coming and destroying everything. I could easily see one large organization being able to put the time and resources to building a massive mobile weapon platform before doing anything else while most others start by focusing on establishing some sort of base of operations. If this were to happen, then that destructive organization could easily find any settlement fairly quickly, as we will likely be locked to one planet for the early stages of the game. Using their weapon, that one organization could steal any valuable resources, and defend the most valuable resources in order to prevent other organizations for growing. This would force others to either join the ruling organization or quit playing, as there is nothing they could do without the resources to build anything of worth.

Any other thoughts on this?

 

You make some good points. I think a key factor as well is the time it would take to build the various weapons systems and the ships that are capable of transporting them. Even if construct vs construct combat was included at launch, that process could easily take a month or two, if we go by what the developers have said. We will see.

 

Regardless of the reason, I agree that the initial period of peace (or at least limited hostilities) will help people get settled and the game world get on it's feet. There will still be avatar vs avatar combat and that will keep things interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Building constructs is too essential to the game concept to completely prevent their construction. I think it could be a serious problem, but it would require a different solution.

 

The ability to distance yourself seems like it would be more important for a player or group of player that are just starting, and less important for an established group. However the way it has been stated, everyone starts in the same exact spot, and only have their own two legs to get away from that spot. Ironically, the established and wealthy groups will have more ability to distance themselves than the poor newbies.

 

Another solution would be multiple arkships, and the ability to respawn at a different arkship if absolutely necessary. To balance this you may be forced to abandon everything you have built so far, (but of course that wouldn't be such a loss if pirates blew up your base).

 

Of course a larger safe zone that allows people to gather and build enough to gain the reach the point where they can migrate a long distance the moment they leave is a solution. (The aggressive player group probably cannot maintain an absolute blockade.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree but i fear this will scare off new players from joining.

 

A space sci-fi game without space combat sounds crazy even if it has advantages.

 

Yeah it doesn't exactly make for great marketing ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it doesn't exactly make for great marketing ...

No but perhaps the game will show strong development when future players read about the free expansions. Grow over time like it used to be with mmo's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it doesn't exactly make for great marketing ...

 

Well, if things go as planned, it will probably take a month+ to get the infrastructure in place, just to start on getting everything needed to make the parts for ships (Totally dependent on how much time is able to be spent).

 

So, if you look at it as we're starting without even the infrastructure to create a ship yet, and building from scratch the entire infrastructure needed to begin the construction... not having space combat (or even CvC at all) at the beginning doesn't break the game. Plus, with what was pledged on Kickstarter, if they mark the extra for CvC as it was the first stretch goal, then it could be out in an earlier patch than if they hit the minimum funding amount.

 

-M

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

  • We didn’t reach the “Construct vs Construct” stretch goal. However, we observed the brilliant effort you made to reach it in the last few days. To thank you for that, we just decided to include the second stretch goal in the official release! This won’t modify the schedule for the “Construct vs Construct” goal. We said it would happen in the first expansion or important patch of the game after the release, and this is still the case!

 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1949863330/dual-universe-civilization-building-sci-fi-mmorpg/posts/1705499

 

WOOT!   :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's fine, ofc I'd love to have CvC from the beginning, but is not a big deal. There's no risk it would break the game as op says, for various reasons. The game after CvC will be quite different to the one we will play before, i like that, a gameplay that changes over time. I can already imagine that people will stack materials in order to build the new elements for CvC the days before, people with fighters ready to mount weapons on and maybe the first real war that someone will try to surprise their enemy. I usually focus on the economy and character progression when a MMO starts (while I PVP only after that), doesn't really matter to me much if I have to wait a few months. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's fine, ofc I'd love to have CvC from the beginning, but is not a big deal. There's no risk it would break the game as op says, for various reasons. The game after CvC will be quite different to the one we will play before, i like that, a gameplay that changes over time. I can already imagine that people will stack materials in order to build the new elements for CvC the days before, people with fighters ready to mount weapons on and maybe the first real war that someone will try to surprise their enemy. I usually focus on the economy and character progression when a MMO starts (while I PVP only after that), doesn't really matter to me much if I have to wait a few months. 

 

And I will be there with a warehouse full of stockpiled resources in the safe zone ready to capitalize on the inevitable spike in demands for goods 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, if things go as planned, it will probably take a month+ to get the infrastructure in place, just to start on getting everything needed to make the parts for ships (Totally dependent on how much time is able to be spent).

 

So, if you look at it as we're starting without even the infrastructure to create a ship yet, and building from scratch the entire infrastructure needed to begin the construction... not having space combat (or even CvC at all) at the beginning doesn't break the game. Plus, with what was pledged on Kickstarter, if they mark the extra for CvC as it was the first stretch goal, then it could be out in an earlier patch than if they hit the minimum funding amount.

 

-M

 

Yeah this is exactly what I have been saying in a number of threads. I was merely agreeing that not having it in at launch doesn't make fantastic advertising. "You can build space guns" sounds much better than "You will eventually be able to build space guns". It makes no difference in terms of gameplay and is probably a good thing, just in terms of marketing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, don't underestimate Avatar vs Avatar combat. You can kill people with it, and break blocks with it. Since at the beginning not many will have ships (especially medium/large sized), most of the stuff that you would attack will still be land bases and players (and AvA does a good job here). And most people will build their base inside the safezone on Alioth, there're really no reasons to build outside at the beginning, since we'll likely not have a territorial unit (so you couldn't attack much with a construct anyway). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just read the first post some i am not sure anyone mention this already but i think you are wrong. Sure there might be one organization ruling for a while but that does not stop others from banding together and stop them and so on. 

 

What i wanted to say is that i see your point however i think it is a very sort-sighted one. 1, 2, 3 and so on years after release then first months probably wont matter. organizations and alliances will come and go that's just how it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree but i fear this will scare off new players from joining.

 

A space sci-fi game without space combat sounds crazy even if it has advantages.

There will still be Avatar vs Avatar combat, and there is a strong likelihood that avatar weapons will be able to damage constructs. Combat is going to be very STRANGE, but there will be combat.

 

The biggest implication this has for me, is that as a builder we won't be able to really develop fighters until after the game has already been released. If avatar weapons can damage constructs, we may be able to build ships and structures that allow players to shoot from them at other constructs. For example, a fighter with a machine gun nest built in, where a 2nd player fires through gaps in the fighter's armor at other ships, or a bunker with firing slits.

If avatar weapons can damage constructs, than a ship could have its weapons disabled, and be subject to a boarding action if it is a large enough construct for it to have a control center.

 

But when proper CVC gets implemented, there will be a development frenzy of builders retrofitting existing constructs to allow for weapons. It will prevent alpha and beta players from having an advantage in holding military blueprints through wipe, and will dramatically alter player behavior at launch. There won't be an arms race (apart from avatar weapons), instead each org will be racing to get infrastructure in-place for producing military constructs, stockpiling resources, TU's, etc.

 

That notion is kind of exciting and could be used to build hype for release. Everyone will have an opportunity to get "set up" before it all hits the fan.

 

But again, they might raise enough funds through paypal to hit that goal post-kickstarter regardless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will still be Avatar vs Avatar combat, and there is a strong likelihood that avatar weapons will be able to damage constructs. Combat is going to be very STRANGE, but there will be combat.

 

I think it was mentioned that players will be able to damage constructs from the beginning. Avatar vs Construct in other words. If its not then taking over territory is not going to happen right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it was mentioned that players will be able to damage constructs from the beginning. Avatar vs Construct in other words. If its not then taking over territory is not going to happen right?

If a hacking system is implemented prior to Avatars damaging Constructs, then it would be possible to take over a territory.

 

You would need an assault force and at least one player with a high hacking skill, and this would be under the assumption that a player wouldn't be able to literally bury their TU.

 

If the TU was located in a secure building, the player with a high hacking skill would be needed to open "locked" doors. The assault team would have to defend the hacker during the process of breaking into the secure building, room-by-room, until the hacker reaches the TU. At that point, the hacker would need to effectively need to change the TU ownership, and bingo territory taken.

 

The more likely scenario is that Avatar weapon damage on constructs will happen first, in which case the doors can be destroyed, the TU can be destroyed, and the attacking faction would simply need to deploy their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more likely scenario is that Avatar weapon damage on constructs will happen first, in which case the doors can be destroyed, the TU can be destroyed, and the attacking faction would simply need to deploy their own.

Good point, hacking will make that work.

 

But if the base is walled of you really need to be able to damage constructs. Digging wont work because of the no mining restriction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, hacking will make that work.

 

But if the base is walled of you really need to be able to damage constructs. Digging wont work because of the no mining restriction.

If their base is walled off, the people that own it wouldn't be able to get in or out. If they used ships to get in or out, in theory an attacker could do the same.

 

The real trick would be whether or not they could Bury or Wall-off just their TU. If the org needed to have access to the TU on a regular basis (for upkeep or to adjust permissions) then they would need to not wall it off or bury it, but if they maintained build permissions, they could simply remove the panel that protects it, do their needed upkeep, and replace the panel.

 

We are on the same page that Avatars damaging constructs is kind of a must.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point, hacking will make that work.

But if the base is walled of you really need to be able to damage constructs. Digging wont work because of the no mining restriction.

Digging may work because it is "destroying" ground if mining restriction only restricts collecting ore, while digging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...