Jump to content
Valhalo

Safe Zones

Recommended Posts

Hey there, so I have recentlty been considering buying into alpha 1 and have been watching some more videos when I cam across this one: 

Where at  3:07 it is stated that there will be safe moons where players can build without risk.

 

So heres my question, is this really the model they are going with?

 

I thought that this was going to be an open world PvP game without any safezones asides from the starting areas/spawns, however having whole moons that are safe on which you could potential store resources and build etc will take away from the PvP aspect alot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Valhalo said:

Hey there, so I have recentlty been considering buying into alpha 1 and have been watching some more videos when I cam across this one: 

Where at  3:07 it is stated that there will be safe moons where players can build without risk.

 

So heres my question, is this really the model they are going with?

 

I thought that this was going to be an open world PvP game without any safezones asides from the starting areas/spawns, however having whole moons that are safe on which you could potential store resources and build etc will take away from the PvP aspect alot.

See https://www.dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/01/30/our-toughts-on-territory-protection-mechanics/

 

Those moons are there for builders but ppl need to ship resources there first. 

 

It don't take that much away, because rare resources can only be found far away from those zones. Starters and pure builders can live there and start their projects without to worry if it's still there the next day. 

 

Those zones are important for DU to cater to more than one group of ppl. And only having basic resources, if any at all, forces ppl to go outside and actually interact with others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dual Universe is not an open world PVP game, it is an open world civilization/community building game. PVP is part of that yes, but is not the main driver in my opinion. PVP as I see it will be a means to an end wit he purpose of settling disputes if all else fails. (source: the DU website front page)

 

Now, obviously (and queue the proponents of this commenting) there will be those that just want their pewpew and so consider PVP to be the holy grail and expect PVP to be the main focus and driver for the game. I believe this will not be the case to a large extent because from what we know so far (large scale) PVP will not be as simple as jumping into a ship and raising hell.

 

Players will have access to tools that will create personal safe zones and sanctuary but those tools will be (very) expensive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, blazemonger said:

 

Players will have access to tools that will create personal safe zones and sanctuary but those tools will be (very) expensive.

Source for this please? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Lethys said:

See https://www.dualthegame.com/en/news/2018/01/30/our-toughts-on-territory-protection-mechanics/

 

Those moons are there for builders but ppl need to ship resources there first. 

 

It don't take that much away, because rare resources can only be found far away from those zones. Starters and pure builders can live there and start their projects without to worry if it's still there the next day. 

 

Those zones are important for DU to cater to more than one group of ppl. And only having basic resources, if any at all, forces ppl to go outside and actually interact with others

Thanks! Yeah I get what you are saying about having to bring the rss there, it won't be that bad as long as there aren't too many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you really play a game where everything you build 1) has to be built from expensive resources and 2) is persistent but there's no safe zone to put it in? I wouldn't.

 

You can't build civilization if you can't make your cities safe... that would be called building barbarism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the currently planned system, assuming it is "more or less" set in stone, is totally fine and a compromise for all.

 

You get your initial starting point safe zone, then anything claimable but serving as regular claimable tile, placeable in most areas with risk and then the dedicated safe zone moon sanctuary thingies as 'extension'. Did I forget any?

 

I really can't see either side complain much, assuming each individual from any crowd can work with compromises.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, blazemonger said:

Dual Universe is not an open world PVP game, it is an open world civilization/community building game. PVP is part of that yes, but is not the main driver in my opinion. PVP as I see it will be a means to an end wit he purpose of settling disputes if all else fails. (source: the DU website front page)

 

Now, obviously (and queue the proponents of this commenting) there will be those that just want their pewpew and so consider PVP to be the holy grail and expect PVP to be the main focus and driver for the game. I believe this will not be the case to a large extent because from what we know so far (large scale) PVP will not be as simple as jumping into a ship and raising hell.

 

Players will have access to tools that will create personal safe zones and sanctuary but those tools will be (very) expensive.

Come Alpha 3, there will be a lot of dev on the mechanics of combat. Come Beta, as you correctly point out, there will be a lot of dev on the scenarios that work for game. I'm sure the large game world will be conducive to PvP and to Safer Zones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, DaphneJones said:

Would you really play a game where everything you build 1) has to be built from expensive resources and 2) is persistent but there's no safe zone to put it in? I wouldn't.

 

You can't build civilization if you can't make your cities safe... that would be called building barbarism.

Its your job to keep your cities safe, from what I have read here and from the official statement the safe zones will be for small individual or group constructs for select individuals who are scared of conflicts, not for building a city or empire.

Share this post


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

Its your job to keep your cities safe, from what I have read here and from the official statement the safe zones will be for small individual or group constructs for select individuals who are scared of conflicts, not for building a city or empire.

I think any sensible org is going to put down a SZ marker on any hex where they have considerable assets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, DaphneJones said:

I think any sensible org is going to put down a SZ marker on any hex where they have considerable assets.

But you do not create your own safe zones, there are only some safe moons where you can claim land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To make this game appeal to as many people as possible there has to be safe zones. The amount of space we’ll have to occupy is going to be dumb big. Safe zones are on planets/moons but not the space between. There’s plenty of room for builders and pirates. Thinking that it HAS to be 100% pvp is selfish to your playsyle. I’m a builder. I know that I’ll have to deal with pvp at times and will have to plan accordingly. Like blaze said we’re here to build a civilization. 

Share this post


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

But you do not create your own safe zones, there are only some safe moons where you can claim land.

I thought there was a device you could put down that created a safe zone. Maybe I'm thinking of the land claim device. Without a sz device the game will be unplayable... or not fun anyway. I'll just stay on a safe moon and build spaceships. Sounds like the rest of the game will just be a gank fest. yuck. And I guess there's leveling? So it will just be high level bullies abusing low levels.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember how such debates were sometimes held on an abstract level and if I read between the lines, I sometimes get the subjective impression that people - subconsciously or not - always slightly exaggerate no matter what side they're on. Proving a point is okay based on your preferences, but there could be a fine line sometimes where (according to my feeling) I think that sometimes people try to see their own preferences 'enforced' while considering anything else "wrong".

 

Simplified: PVPers argue in their way, strict non-PVPers do the same and eventually some mini-debates turn into repetitions of preferences. I mean, you're probably all arguing "past each other" if that makes sense. To my knowledge, we get hard safe zones on the starting planet, then on some moon(s) and then you get tiles any faction can claim, which do not translate to classic safe zones however and are contestable. I will try to pull up the according articles or sources in the next post when I have a bit more time at hands.

 

What I basically want to say to all sides is: relax a tad, you all will get your way. And I think that is awesome. Unite the builders, the creative people, the hardened, the vicious, the artists, whatever you can think of. Everyone will have some place in this universe.

 

However, if you (subconsciously or not) keep arguing in a way that your primary preference should be the leading example or focus of general gameplay, you'll naturally see others do the same for their viewpoints and it potentially ends in a repeating back and forth.

 

Not saying "stop debating here", just saying "try to keep this in mind here and there".

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'd also not advise trying to downplay "the other side" depending on what side you are on, even if it might sometimes be hard. To those it might concern: Not everyone who is not into full risk and PVP at any time is a "carebear", their interests and strenghts might simply lie in other areas and you could even benefit from that somehow. The next ship you use in your Empire might be built by someone a hardcore PVPer might consider "carebear" because they prefer to work away in some safe zone without abstract or real interruptions, to give an example.

 

At the same time, one who prefers to avoid conflict should not assume it's automatically total anarchy and a 'gank fest' beyond any hard-coded safe zone borders. Or that someone who is generally open to attacking others is a bloodthirsty monster - some simply have other motivations or reasoning behind their attacks or actions. Chances are in the long run many spaces that cannot be claimed by a hardcoded safe zone device, but maybe by normal 'tile claimers' might be relatively or very safe since they get policed by the organizations and empires who run the space. Those might also want business and stability to make money and attract people, so they have people patrol. And even then... hey, in the end, abstract risk remains and isn't that somewhat exciting if you don't know what happens and who you could run into? If you transport something vital at the same time and have to go out, work together and get friends to help you transport things or hire a player group that offers this as service.

 

Or maybe TL;DR: It won't be that bad. See for yourself in the future and re-assess. But all kinds of players will have a place in this game and I like it. It will likely attract more people that way and we all benefit from a big community that interacts with each other on various levels.

Share this post


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

If I remember how such debates were sometimes held on an abstract level and if I read between the lines, I sometimes get the subjective impression that people - subconsciously or not - always slightly exaggerate no matter what side they're on. Proving a point is okay based on your preferences, but there could be a fine line sometimes where (according to my feeling) I think that sometimes people try to see their own preferences 'enforced' while considering anything else "wrong".

 

Simplified: PVPers argue in their way, strict non-PVPers do the same and eventually some mini-debates turn into repetitions of preferences. I mean, you're probably all arguing "past each other" if that makes sense. To my knowledge, we get hard safe zones on the starting planet, then on some moon(s) and then you get tiles any faction can claim, which do not translate to classic safe zones however and are contestable. I will try to pull up the according articles or sources in the next post when I have a bit more time at hands.

 

What I basically want to say to all sides is: relax a tad, you all will get your way. And I think that is awesome. Unite the builders, the creative people, the hardened, the vicious, the artists, whatever you can think of. Everyone will have some place in this universe.

 

However, if you (subconsciously or not) keep arguing in a way that your primary preference should be the leading example or focus of general gameplay, you'll naturally see others do the same for their viewpoints and it potentially ends in a repeating back and forth.

 

Not saying "stop debating here", just saying "try to keep this in mind here and there".

 

-------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'd also advise trying to downplay "the other side" depending on what side you are on, even if it might sometimes be hard. To those it might concern: Not everyone who is not into full risk and PVP at any time is a "carebear", their interests and strenghts might simply lie in other areas and you could even benefit from that somehow. The next ship you use in your Empire might be built by someone a hardcore PVPer might consider "carebear" because they prefer to work away in some safe zone without abstract or real interruptions, to give an example.

 

At the same time, one who prefers to avoid conflict should not assume it's automatically total anarchy and a 'gank fest' beyond any hard-coded safe zone borders. Or that someone who is generally open to attacking others is a bloodthirsty monster - some simply have other motivations or reasoning behind their attacks or actions. Chances are in the long run many spaces that cannot be claimed by a hardcoded safe zone device, but maybe by normal 'tile claimers' might be relatively or very safe since they get policed by the organizations and empires who run the space. Those might also want business and stability to make money and attract people, so they have people patrol. And even then... hey, in the end, abstract risk remains and isn't that somewhat exciting if you don't know what happens and who you could run into? If you transport something vital at the same time and have to go out, work together and get friends to help you transport things or hire a player group that offers this as service.

 

Or maybe TL;DR: It won't be that bad. See for yourself in the future and re-assess. But all kinds of players will have a place in this game and I like it. It will likely attract more people that way and we all benefit from a big community that interacts with each other on various levels.

This is a very thourough and thought out post and I do agree with many points you have made and the fact that yes, this topic does get me worked up a fair bit. 

 

It's just that the first thing I heard about the game was that its a persistant world without safe zones, and ever since then I have been building upon that within my imagination so I was shocked when I found out and worried after seeing what trammel has done to other titles.

 

I think that having a couple of safe moons aside from the safe starter zone is a good compromise, it will allow those types of players focused on the architectural side of the game to work on their own visions in peace and resource transport to these zones can also create traffic and PvP hotspots.

 

2 hours ago, DaphneJones said:

I thought there was a device you could put down that created a safe zone. Maybe I'm thinking of the land claim device. Without a sz device the game will be unplayable... or not fun anyway. I'll just stay on a safe moon and build spaceships. Sounds like the rest of the game will just be a gank fest. yuck. And I guess there's leveling? So it will just be high level bullies abusing low levels.

I totally have to disagree with this particular post however, one thing you have to keep in mind is that you are never a victim. I have played PvE roles in games before and yes occasionally you are killed, but you have to do everything in your power to make it more difficult for those people trying to kill you, not sit there and whine that you are being bullied. There will be some safe zones in the game and that is official, so those are available for your use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DaphneJones said:

I thought there was a device you could put down that created a safe zone. Maybe I'm thinking of the land claim device. Without a sz device the game will be unplayable... or not fun anyway. I'll just stay on a safe moon and build spaceships. Sounds like the rest of the game will just be a gank fest. yuck. And I guess there's leveling? So it will just be high level bullies abusing low levels.

it's NOT a safezone which you can build.

 

It's thought about by NQ to give players some kind of module/element to create a SHIELD bubble which protects an entire hex. Enemies can't destroy anything inside that bubble - first they have to attack and destroy the shield. Once they attack the shield, the defender gets a warning and a 48h timer starts for the defender to organize the defense. After that time the shield can be attacked again and killed - and the defenders can try to kill the attackers first.

 

There's NOT leveling - it's a similar system to EVE. You gain skills passively by just playing the game (NOT while doing a certain activity). Then you just gain a small bonus on the task at hand (+5% to accuracy, +10% build speed, +20% inventory capacity, +% to whatever skill there is). Obviously these numbers are all made up and we have yet to see the skill system - so take everything with a grain of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Warden said:

I'd also advise trying to downplay "the other side" depending on what side you are on, even if it might sometimes be hard. To those it might concern: Not everyone who is not into full risk and PVP at any time is a "carebear"

Very true. It's IMO also true that many that are into PVP are in fact carebears. For me a carebear is basically a risk averse person who will go out of his/her way to not take any risks, avoiding any situation where loss may be an option.

 

For me, and my org, we do not instigate, support or promote aggression and will make every effort to avoid it but when we must we will be prepared to take defensive action to the point where we would certainly end a conflict in our favour if we can.

 

Personally I see the desire for some to be in a constant state of conflict and be protagonists of aggression for the smallest of reasons even when to me that is not anything I could ever see myself engage in. I do accept though I could be on the receiving end of such action and this do need to be prepared to responds as needed. Where my opinion may be different from others is that I do not believe that PVP is a main driver for this game, it is much more a supporting mechanic which has it's time and purpose. How that all plays out remains to be seen.

 

Violence and aggression do not build (lasting) communities or civilisation, thus they go against the main vision for the game by nature is what I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The information on this thread has me a bit worried. I have felt like for awhile that NQ's messaging on the game has not really matched the pvp/safezone system they have planned. If I had no knowledge of the pvp system in this game and i looked at the feedback in this thread I would assume the game is a PvE game with high value PvP planets or zones and mechanics to encourage building in those zones. Every game i have played that allows open world pvp with limited or no safe zones becomes almost entirely about the PvP. Everything in the game gets impacted by pvp. The iron to build a building is really expensive cause its also used in ammo and that pisses off the pve types, as an example.

 

Ultimately, I'm ok with the current system, pvp game with pve zones OR the opposite pve game with pvp zones. I think both can work and make a fun game. But it concerns me when the developer implements one system and then hedges against it. So pvp anywhere except some zones with no resources......but its not just a pvp game guys its about civilization building and crafting. I get the same vibe i got from Fallout76. KILL OTHER PLAYERS - PVP, 2 months later. Well you can slap other players and they can choose to fight back and if they dont its nearly impossible to kill them and if you do kill them they will only drop junk ....soooo dueling we implemented dueling and called it PvP. I'm not getting that bad of a vibe from NQ but I guess I'm sensing it a bit. A clash between saying this is a PvP game, kill anyone, anywhere and trying to make it appealing to pve types by saying its not really a pvp game its a civ game. I don't really care what system they pick as long as its in line with the true direction of the game and the messaging NQ puts out.

 

In short, as the game mechanics are now, I see this game as being a PvP oriented game with, say half the game being about pvp and half being PvE and that is a PVP game not a civ building game. If that's not the game NQ wants they should change the pvp system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ostris said:

In short, as the game mechanics are now, I see this game as being a PvP oriented game with, say half the game being about pvp and half being PvE and that is a PVP game not a civ building game. If that's not the game NQ wants they should change the pvp system.

 

As we do not really know how NQ intends to implement combat, while we can express preference anything said as to how PVP will work is speculative at best. While we know that combat will be lock and shoot and not free fire, that really means little in that regard. We'll know more in a year maybe when the first signs of combat mechanics may start to appear.

Share this post


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

 

As we do not really know how NQ intends to implement combat, while we can express preference anything said as to how PVP will work is speculative at best. While we know that combat will be lock and shoot and not free fire, that really means little in that regard. We'll know more in a year maybe when the first signs of combat mechanics may start to appear.

I honestly don't know if you do it intentionally or not or if you are just a troll or what, but every time you reply to pretty much anyone you pick one sentence out of context, greatly misrepresent it or completely miss the point. The only reason I bother replying is that maybe i need to clarify so that if someone else reads this topic they will understand what I am saying.

 

To clarify the only game mechanics i am referring to are if the game is structured as a pvp game with pve zones or a pve game with pvp zones. Currently this is a pvp game with pve zones. The vast majority of the game world is pvp and all/most resources are mined in areas where people can fight. Even if a player doesn't pvp and stays in safe zones, the minerals they build with are acquired by someone who risked pvp. A pve game with pvp zones would be a game where certain planets or spaces are pvp and those planets have some advantage like large amount of high value resources. In that game you could choose to mine in pve zones and build in pve zones and ignore pvp completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ostris

You yourself write the last paragraph as a summary for the post as you start it with 'In short' so commenting on it would really only need a quote of that part, even when a response is to the post as a whole. You do not have to agree with me and I do not have to agree with you. You are reading way too much into it than what is there, seemingly on the premise of personal bias. If I mistake your summary for what it's intent is then yes, please clarify.

 

I am not saying you are supporting or disagreeing with how combat will turn out, as I read it your opinion is that if NQ does not want to create a PVP centric game they need to change the PVP combat system of which you seem to claim you have knowledge as far as what that will look like as you state (and I quote) "If I had no knowledge of the pvp system in this game and i looked at the feedback in this thread I would assume..". However, there is no PVP system that we know of yet, not even a concept. So which PVP system do you refer to? It seems you base your opinion on what some are sharing as what they believe PVP should/could be like (which in itself is fine). NQ has not shared any details on this as they themselves do not yet know where they want to take combat mechanics (which was pretty much what was shared during the recent E3 interviews).

 

 

Now, to get back on topic. I think the idea that DU will be 'a pvp game with pve zones' is not accurate. DU will be about building communities and civilization (again, source; the website frontpage). I do believe that combat as a form of PVP action will have a place in the game obviously and will be a main driver for a lot of people in or coming to the game no doubt. I do however not think that for the game itself combat is a major driver, it is a means to an end, a tool available to achieve a purpose when it is needed. Pretty much like it is in real life.

 

We as members of the DU community will build this universe through shaping it to our needs, be it by adopting and adjusting our environment, making alliances, battling those that stand against us or defending ourselves or those we feel need defending. 

Share this post


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

The information on this thread has me a bit worried. I have felt like for awhile that NQ's messaging on the game has not really matched the pvp/safezone system they have planned. If I had no knowledge of the pvp system in this game and i looked at the feedback in this thread I would assume the game is a PvE game with high value PvP planets or zones and mechanics to encourage building in those zones. Every game i have played that allows open world pvp with limited or no safe zones becomes almost entirely about the PvP. Everything in the game gets impacted by pvp. The iron to build a building is really expensive cause its also used in ammo and that pisses off the pve types, as an example.

 

Ultimately, I'm ok with the current system, pvp game with pve zones OR the opposite pve game with pvp zones. I think both can work and make a fun game. But it concerns me when the developer implements one system and then hedges against it. So pvp anywhere except some zones with no resources......but its not just a pvp game guys its about civilization building and crafting. I get the same vibe i got from Fallout76. KILL OTHER PLAYERS - PVP, 2 months later. Well you can slap other players and they can choose to fight back and if they dont its nearly impossible to kill them and if you do kill them they will only drop junk ....soooo dueling we implemented dueling and called it PvP. I'm not getting that bad of a vibe from NQ but I guess I'm sensing it a bit. A clash between saying this is a PvP game, kill anyone, anywhere and trying to make it appealing to pve types by saying its not really a pvp game its a civ game. I don't really care what system they pick as long as its in line with the true direction of the game and the messaging NQ puts out.

 

In short, as the game mechanics are now, I see this game as being a PvP oriented game with, say half the game being about pvp and half being PvE and that is a PVP game not a civ building game. If that's not the game NQ wants they should change the pvp system.

I appreciate the logic of how you are classifying.

 

Just to be clear, Dual Universe game world is IMMENSE. It's like nothing else (apart from EVE but then that works according to your model with it's sec status).

 

Instead of this classification (incidentally PvE is incorrect as that's player vs mob_AI. It's P+E as players scan, mine, purify, haul, make, combine, design and build using all the materials by voxel and other game systems. Also your category is an old-throw back to MMORPGs where you have a dislocated game system full of non-interacting sub games.

 

Let's think of DU as a pyramid for convenience: Base = Voxel World. Next = P+E (civilization building activity based off the base). These whatever anyone thinks of the design now, will be the largest by far segment of population numbers, just as you find in population pyramids in ecology. And using this classification , you have above this combat system: Much smaller by proportion but still likely very popular (I think space battles are going to be a sight to see). As Blasé (I mean Blazemonger!) says, the design of the mechanics will happen in Alpha 3. The scenarios of how combat happens in Beta. In that time we'll see a lot of different scenarios zoom in on an optimal outcome for release for that pyramid to retain it's correct shape. Be that safe zones, economy functionality, server load, player distribution and of course the development of large player orgs, new systems themselves. The most interesting of all perhaps.

 

TL;DR: It's a misconception though correct logic within that to describe as 2 pots, 1 larger than the other. It's a Pyramid of interacting layers by population numbers and the energy flow between those layers. It's 1 consistent thing. Some layers may never interact with other layers, but indirectly all layers interact.

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

×
×
  • Create New...