Jegleebow20 Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 I was wondering, if group-A stumbled upon group-B's base and B banned A from building/mining on their land. So would group-A only be able to destroy/take over group-B's land claimer or will they not be able to do anything about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethys Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 It wouldn't make much sense If they couldn't do anything about it. So yeah, they can attack them even though they might not be able to mine there. The exact mechanics are not finished yet, so it's all speculation. Iirc jc said somewhere that for invading they want immersive and fun mechanics and that players feel it's something big. Like having them have adjacent tiles before they can attack. Lord_Void and ATMLVE 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord_Void Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 I think conquest mechanics are still on the drawing board. There will undoubtedly be conquest, but the specifics have yet to be determined, or at least have yet to be announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anaximander Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Hey there. NovaQuark on other posts, have expressed the multiple ways of dealing with such a thing. One of them, is hacking - think of them Battlefield games where you capture a point, that's what the Territory Claim Unit is a way - and the process can take a while. While you can "restrict" people from building on your claim, PvP is not really something you can restrict, if you blockade the other guy from getting fuel fto power their shield, you can win by process of attrition. Even with the in-game lore explanation of brain implants that can prohibit you from using a gun within a person's territory claim via the RDMS, the fact that hacking exists means you can hack your implant's software to make it able to ignore those restrictions - essentially, turning you to the equivalent of the "Outlaw" mode from other games, and with a , hopefully, red name to boot But that's just one way of dealing with it, to be honest, NQ is due to make a DevBlog on Shields, Protection Bubbles and the RDMS - soon? - so you might get the answer as well from them directly. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Costanius Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Novaquark, what about answering this question here? Otherwise it''s all just speculation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Takao Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 I'm pretty sure the mechanics will work similar to Eve online: After, either you "declare" an attack on a base or destroy it's shield, that base gets invulnerable for a specific time (or rather it's invulnerable until a specific time, set up by the defenders) after which the base can be attacked, captured or destroyed. This allows the defenders to actually defend their base, because otherwise you would need player guards there 24/7, which isn't very nice. Alternative, if you could hide bases easily or set up strong defensive mechanism, possible including npc guards(?), you wouldn't need the mechanic above. In either way, this will be a very crucial mechanic to be done right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethys Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 15 minutes ago, Takao said: I'm pretty sure the mechanics will work similar to Eve online: After, either you "declare" an attack on a base or destroy it's shield, that base gets invulnerable for a specific time (or rather it's invulnerable until a specific time, set up by the defenders) after which the base can be attacked, captured or destroyed. This allows the defenders to actually defend their base, because otherwise you would need player guards there 24/7, which isn't very nice. Alternative, if you could hide bases easily or set up strong defensive mechanism, possible including npc guards(?), you wouldn't need the mechanic above. In either way, this will be a very crucial mechanic to be done right. Protection bubbles (or domes as they call them now) have a 48h invul timer (at least jc said that in a talk and it's the latest info we have) after which the base could be raided (for now). There won't be any npcs aroun to defend you and that is certainly Not planned. Automated turrets on STATIC cores are possible but at a drastically reduced efficiency - Player manned turrets will always be way way better. I'm against timers though as it's a boring mechanic (though needed to prepare). It was boring af in eve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarlosLoff Posted January 31, 2018 Share Posted January 31, 2018 So Solo players are doomed and banned from building bases, lol Any Org will bring massive forces that will only loose a battle if another mighty Org runs the base That means an Lone Wolf is out of small base building, not a nice mechanic, there will always be a bigger force than our own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jegleebow20 Posted January 31, 2018 Author Share Posted January 31, 2018 1 hour ago, CarlosLoff said: So Solo players are doomed and banned from building bases, lol Any Org will bring massive forces that will only loose a battle if another mighty Org runs the base That means an Lone Wolf is out of small base building, not a nice mechanic, there will always be a bigger force than our own You can survive as a lone wolf if you build underground, live on a less populated planet, or live deep in a cave system. These are some of my ideas for what I might do at some point in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lethys Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 10 hours ago, CarlosLoff said: So Solo players are doomed and banned from building bases, lol Any Org will bring massive forces that will only loose a battle if another mighty Org runs the base That means an Lone Wolf is out of small base building, not a nice mechanic, there will always be a bigger force than our own see MarrrV 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warden Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 To me, that's just how it is in the end. The collective power or effort is usually always superior or has more reach, range, etc than that of a smaller force. A pond contains less water than an ocean. But (therefore) many might go to the ocean, linger, get into conflict with others while the pond might not be known and be at relative peace. If you get what I mean. It all has pros and cons in the end. If you knowingly pick a certain playstyle, try to make the best out of it. And if you find too many problems or annoyances, consider adapting: by teaming up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MookMcMook Posted February 1, 2018 Share Posted February 1, 2018 1 hour ago, Warden said: To me, that's just how it is in the end. The collective power or effort is usually always superior or has more reach, range, etc than that of a smaller force. A pond contains less water than an ocean. But (therefore) many might go to the ocean, linger, get into conflict with others while the pond might not be known and be at relative peace. If you get what I mean. It all has pros and cons in the end. If you knowingly pick a certain playstyle, try to make the best out of it. And if you find too many problems or annoyances, consider adapting: by teaming up. Yes I do: "Be a big fish in a small pond", captures this I think? These planets are going to be VAST. The Solar Systems and Moons are going to be VAST and Interstellar distance to more Solar Systems are going to be even more VAST. I think Lone Wolves will do just fine, as above finding a small cave etc. Then and again, Planets are so big some Lone Wolves putting on mutual recognitiion agreements (MRAs) with big orgs will or can work just fine too: "There's Old Man Bob doing his thing again over yonder..." Warden 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoreVamore Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 On 01/02/2018 at 8:15 PM, MookMcMook said: Yes I do: "Be a big fish in a small pond", captures this I think? These planets are going to be VAST. The Solar Systems and Moons are going to be VAST and Interstellar distance to more Solar Systems are going to be even more VAST. I think Lone Wolves will do just fine, as above finding a small cave etc. Then and again, Planets are so big some Lone Wolves putting on mutual recognitiion agreements (MRAs) with big orgs will or can work just fine too: "There's Old Man Bob doing his thing again over yonder..." Which is great! Just remember that just like in real life, when an enemy finds your underground hideout it can quickly become a tomb ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MookMcMook Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 15 minutes ago, CoreVamore said: Which is great! Just remember that just like in real life, when an enemy finds your underground hideout it can quickly become a tomb ........ No doubt: But let's see how people distribute in space. Seems a lot of it to begin with to player population, I'd guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now