Jump to content
Lord Gecko

Some questions about the game

Recommended Posts

I haven't bought any founder package yet, will most likely purchase the silver soon though. I have a few questions i would love to have answered by someone more informed than me, i could possibly find some of this information if i googled it but tried and didn't really find anything.

 

  • Do we know if the game will have rotors/pistons like in space engineers.
  • Is the insane flying speed and acceleration we see in some of the trailers actual or just a showcase.
  • As far as i understood there will be vehicle combat in the game, if so, will it work with some voxel destruction or just a health bar.
  • Im generaly mostly interested in making awesome spaceships in an envoyrement where they are usefull, so do we know if the combat favours effective spaceships way more than "good looking"?

 

I realise that we may not have information on everything here but if you know something some answers would be highly apreaciated, thanks you :).

Alsan_Teamaro likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Lord Gecko said:

Do we know if the game will have rotors/pistons like in space engineers

 

https://trello.com/b/Y6WNMd2S/dual-universe-community-suggestions

Rejected for now.

 

2 hours ago, Lord Gecko said:

Is the insane flying speed and acceleration we see in some of the trailers actual or just a showcase

That's under NDA, unfortunately.

 

2 hours ago, Lord Gecko said:

As far as i understood there will be vehicle combat in the game, if so, will it work with some voxel destruction or just a health bar.

PvP isn't yet implemented, so we have to wait on that one. 

 

2 hours ago, Lord Gecko said:

Im generaly mostly interested in making awesome spaceships in an envoyrement where they are usefull, so do we know if the combat favours effective spaceships way more than "good looking"?

Well ofc, Performance is always better than just "good looking" in PvP. 

 

Oh, and welcome to the forums.

Lord Gecko and GunDeva like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Lethys said:

 

https://trello.com/b/Y6WNMd2S/dual-universe-community-suggestions

Rejected for now.

 

That's under NDA, unfortunately.

 

PvP isn't yet implemented, so we have to wait on that one. 

 

Well ofc, Performance is always better than just "good looking" in PvP. 

 

Oh, and welcome to the forums.

Thanks a whole bunch, the answers are really apreaciated, and ty for the welcome to the forums :)) i look forwards to being here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Lord Gecko said:

As far as i understood there will be vehicle combat in the game, if so, will it work with some voxel destruction or just a health bar.

It's planned to be per-voxel destruction.

 

19 hours ago, Lethys said:

Well ofc, Performance is always better than just "good looking" in PvP. 

Well, it's not that obvious. There are some games where you can build fairy dragons and they are still effective, and some where you need to follow quite strictly building rules to be competitive. It all depends on game mechanics.

 

Example of first could be Machinecraft, mostly because it uses HP bars. Robocraft also goes in that direction. On the other end there is Crossout and From the Depths.

 

I hope DU will find some nice balance, maybe a bit more towards function over looks. A lot depends on how armour and damage works and how important internal components are.


Some mechanics can be also used to encourage certain nice looking aspects. I.e. heat propagation could be used to force players to separate ships into barely connected sections.
I.e. engines create a lot of heat but it doesn't harm their performance, thus they are placed in sticking out pods.
While generators require low temperature to operate
And guns require low temp to initiate charging, but jump to very high ones once fired.

 

Some other mechanics generally dumb down builds into bricks, borg cubes and balls. I.e. physical armour. 

 

And some force long cigars. I.e. drag based on frontal surface or star-gates with limited size.

 

Internal layout can be also heavily affected by game mechanics. I.e. if combat-repairs are viable (armour>weapons) and repair tool has short range, then for sure ships will be filled with maintenance corridors. If repair is a long range and can go through walls, you may expect ships filled without any empty space.
Same effect could be created by making loading/unloading based on physically moving entire boxes, rather than having pipe that sucks items in-between constructs.

Lord Gecko likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/04/2018 at 10:43 PM, Lethys said:

 

https://trello.com/b/Y6WNMd2S/dual-universe-community-suggestions

Rejected for now.

 

That's under NDA, unfortunately.

 

PvP isn't yet implemented, so we have to wait on that one. 

 

Well ofc, Performance is always better than just "good looking" in PvP. 

 

Oh, and welcome to the forums.

I intend to make my ships so beautiful that to shoot at them will cause the aggressor to die from shame.   

 

The Aesthetic Aegis, if you will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hades said:

Hmm, I thought it was a wait and see on voxel destruction.  For the same reason they aren’t planning on implementing collisions.  Could be mistaken though 

Main reason why they don't want collision damage, is that they don't want kamikaze-like ship designs.

It also make things easier for servers, but I think that's side effect.

And I think there will be collisions, they just won't cause any damage. Otherwise someone could just fly his ship through the wall of you base/battleship. Would look silly to have entire fleet gathered in one spot, phasing through each other :D

 

Regarding block destruction - how else could it be done? HP bar for entire base that have just antena sticking out of the ground? Or base that looks small outside, but have stacks of armour underground that multiply it's HP tenfold?

Or maybe only dynamic constructs would have HP bar and can fight, while static ones wouldn't be allowed any weapons?

Or only elements taking damage, while shots go through voxels without noticing them? Then should they also go through the ground (to prevent single-voxel dirt coverage to be ultimate base armour)?
Or maybe indestructible one-voxel armour in general, making all interior devices indestructible?

Or simply no CvC at all., and you can freely use nanoformer to make holes for AvA assault?

 

I just don't see any other way. If you do, please share.

Lord Gecko likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, CalenLoki said:

Main reason why they don't want collision damage, is that they don't want kamikaze-like ship designs.

It also make things easier for servers, but I think that's side effect.

And I think there will be collisions, they just won't cause any damage. Otherwise someone could just fly his ship through the wall of you base/battleship. Would look silly to have entire fleet gathered in one spot, phasing through each other :D

 

Regarding block destruction - how else could it be done? HP bar for entire base that have just antena sticking out of the ground? Or base that looks small outside, but have stacks of armour underground that multiply it's HP tenfold?

Or maybe only dynamic constructs would have HP bar and can fight, while static ones wouldn't be allowed any weapons?

Or only elements taking damage, while shots go through voxels without noticing them? Then should they also go through the ground (to prevent single-voxel dirt coverage to be ultimate base armour)?
Or maybe indestructible one-voxel armour in general, making all interior devices indestructible?

Or simply no CvC at all., and you can freely use nanoformer to make holes for AvA assault?

 

I just don't see any other way. If you do, please share.

Static deffences have been confirmed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, CalenLoki said:

Main reason why they don't want collision damage, is that they don't want kamikaze-like ship designs.

It also make things easier for servers, but I think that's side effect.

And I think there will be collisions, they just won't cause any damage. Otherwise someone could just fly his ship through the wall of you base/battleship. Would look silly to have entire fleet gathered in one spot, phasing through each other :D

 

Regarding block destruction - how else could it be done? HP bar for entire base that have just antena sticking out of the ground? Or base that looks small outside, but have stacks of armour underground that multiply it's HP tenfold?

Or maybe only dynamic constructs would have HP bar and can fight, while static ones wouldn't be allowed any weapons?

Or only elements taking damage, while shots go through voxels without noticing them? Then should they also go through the ground (to prevent single-voxel dirt coverage to be ultimate base armour)?
Or maybe indestructible one-voxel armour in general, making all interior devices indestructible?

Or simply no CvC at all., and you can freely use nanoformer to make holes for AvA assault?

 

I just don't see any other way. If you do, please share.

Yeah I was pretty vague, I meant there would be no damage/destruction on collisions.  It wasn’t so there wouldn’t be kamikaze designs, it was simply the servers can’t handle it.  If they can, I imagine it will be implemented.

 

We will have to see whether or not there will be voxel destruction or not.

 

You seem to be getting voxel destruction confused with damage with locality in mind.  They can still have local destruction without implementing voxel destruction.  

 

But either way, we really have no idea.  I imagine NQ has a little inkling of an idea, but who knows :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Hades said:

Yeah I was pretty vague, I meant there would be no damage/destruction on collisions.  It wasn’t so there wouldn’t be kamikaze designs, it was simply the servers can’t handle it.  If they can, I imagine it will be implemented.

 

We will have to see whether or not there will be voxel destruction or not.

 

You seem to be getting voxel destruction confused with damage with locality in mind.  They can still have local destruction without implementing voxel destruction.  

 

But either way, we really have no idea.  I imagine NQ has a little inkling of an idea, but who knows :)

ships will bounce off eachother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, unown006 said:

ships will bounce off eachother?

AFAIK, but remember... it’s always subject to change.  I also doubt they’ll bounce, it’ll be a collision with no consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hades said:

AFAIK, but remember... it’s always subject to change.  I also doubt they’ll bounce, it’ll be a collision with no consequences.

so hit and stop?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s what I’d assume.  But hopefully they’ll be able to optimize that server tech and get voxel destruction and collisions in there.  That’s probably wishful thinking though ;)

 

We won’t know for quite some time.  Something tells me combat is a ways off 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hades said:

It wasn’t so there wouldn’t be kamikaze designs, it was simply the servers can’t handle it.  If they can, I imagine it will be implemented.

 

1 hour ago, Hades said:

That’s what I’d assume.  But hopefully they’ll be able to optimize that server tech and get voxel destruction and collisions in there.  That’s probably wishful thinking though ;)

 

We won’t know for quite some time.  Something tells me combat is a ways off 

 

Actually I seem to remember JC mentioning in one of his articles or interviews that they don't want the PvP to devolve to player-made missiles (including kamikaze ships).

NQ wants to design a balanced combat system with balanced weapon elements (including missiles) etc.

So I don't think they would want to implement collision damage even if it weren't a performance issue.

Atmosph3rik likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's entirely possible, collisions don't really seem like something that fit in DU anyway.

 

One thing I do like about Star Citizen is they seem to open a lot of different dynamic gameplay opportunities.  Standard combat, stealth, EMPs/electrical warfare, and ships "designed" for ramming.  It takes a lot of skill but if you line up a Scythe/Glaive correctly their blades can slice through a small/medium sized ship.  Kamikaze pilots attacking ships on a landing pad used to be an issue... but they seemed to alleviate that problem by making it harder to reacquire a ship.  Even a 15 minute timer on insurance was enough to alleviate the issue.  However, ramming and collisions during a space battle adds a whole new dynamic to the fight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Hades said:

That's entirely possible, collisions don't really seem like something that fit in DU anyway.  Just the control scheme and everything else doesn't align with it.

 

One thing I do like about Star Citizen is they seem to open a lot of different dynamic gameplay opportunities.  Standard combat, stealth, EMPs/electrical warfare, and ships "designed" for ramming.  It takes a lot of skill but if you line up a Scythe/Glaive correctly their blades can slice through a small/medium sized ship.  Kamikaze pilots attacking ships on a landing pad used to be an issue... but they seemed to alleviate that problem by making it harder to reacquire a ship.  Even a 15 minute timer on insurance was enough to alleviate the issue.  However, ramming and collisions during a space battle adds a whole new dynamic to the fight.

In DU you get to completely design your own ships. With collision damage that would mean you get to design your own weapons. That's a potential game balance nightmare that I don't think applies to Star Citizen. They design your ships and your weapons. NQ just designs your weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nanoman said:

In DU you get to completely design your own ships. With collision damage that would mean you get to design your own weapons. That's a potential game balance nightmare that I don't think applies to Star Citizen. They design your ships and your weapons. NQ just designs your weapons.

True, what you see as a bane I see as a boon.  I don't think it fits because Star Citizen is much more of an "arcade" feeling... where ramming is even possible in space flight.  We'll have to see as the game develops, but something tells me DU won't have that feeling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Hades said:

True, what you see as a bane I see as a boon.  I don't think it fits because the Star Citizen is much more of an "arcade" feeling... where ramming is even possible in space flight.  We'll have to see as the game develops, but something tells me DU won't have that feeling.

This is not my opinion we're talking about :P I'm just saying that JC has explicitly mentioned this somewhere as (part of) the reason for not wanting collision damage, if I remember correctly. And it makes sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nanoman said:

This is not my opinion we're talking about :P I'm just saying that JC has explicitly mentioned this somewhere as (part of) the reason for not wanting collision damage, if I remember correctly. And it makes sense to me.

Oh haha, the bane vs boon was purely directed at your opinion of players being able to build their own weapons.  That’s a dynamic characteristic to me, not a balancing nightmare.

 

I completely understand NQs stance for not implementing collision damage.  In fact, I think I was the one who brought it up that it probably won’t happen.  I just think there are possibilities there for deeper gameplay IF it were.

 

If “kamikaze” pilots are the blocker and not server tech, I don’t think they’d be an issue. But that’s NQs call.  Something tells me it will be hard to even “kamikaze” in DU haha.  But being able to launch a lump of mass at a ground base is dynamic to me.  Imagine trying to ward off what seems to be an asteroid hurtling towards your base.  Completely new gameplay opportunities 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Hades said:

If “kamikaze” pilots are the blocker and not server tech, I don’t think they’d be an issue. But that’s NQs call.

Well, all I've really done is point out what NQ has already publicly stated perhaps years ago.

 

33 minutes ago, Hades said:

Oh haha, the bane vs boon was purely directed at your opinion of players being able to build their own weapons.  That’s a dynamic characteristic to me, not a balancing nightmare.

No, it's what JC said was the reason for not wanting collision damage (if I remember correctly).

 

33 minutes ago, Hades said:

But being able to launch a lump of mass at a ground base is dynamic to me.

Yes, and it's also a player-built weapon. Precisely what NQ does not want (as far as I know).

 

Atmosph3rik likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Nanoman said:

Yes, and it's also a player-built weapon. Precisely what NQ does not want (as far as I know).

 

Do you have a source for this?  As that’s a very strong statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been confirmed that ships will take damage when they crash into the ground. I'm assuming that only the ship and not the ground will take damage so people don't use this as a method of getting rid of a large amount of voxels (like a base) quickly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hades said:

Do you have a source for this?  As that’s a very strong statement.

I'm pretty sure it was a video, I think one of NQ's official videos on their youtube channel. Could be a devblog or the kickstarter AMA.

Or I could be wrong and it was a 3rd party interview video. Sorry :unsure:

Lethys likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×