Jump to content

Permanent Bubble? They nuts?


EntropicDuck

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, blazemonger said:

 

The questions I have are:

 

Why are "PVP oriented players" so focused on being able to target those who have no counter/recourse? Are you looking for kills more than fight maybe?

 

Spoken like a true person who hasnt PvPd ingame much. The large part of PvP atm from orgs like NG and DSI is either arranged for the fun of it or people hunting whatever they can find because the space is SO limited. Ask a hundred PvPers. Most will tell you they care less about the loot itself and more about the thrill of fighting. Absolutely bottom tier take on the matter.

 

5 hours ago, CptLoRes said:

Sorry to break it to you all, but DU is fundamentally made be a building game more then it is a PvP game.

And the problem with building vs destroying is that when it takes 5 minutes to destroy months of work, builders leave the game.

Also a bland old take on the subject matter. There's a balance and the game is not even 1% PvP right now. And why should it not be easy to destroy such work? Instead of having people organically learn how to defend themselves, hire mercs, befriend the right people, take safer routes, etc, etc. You think its healthy to have people run around the entire world for free constantly like a massive creative sandbox? Months of work mean absolutely nothing when theres no risk to it. Because there will come one day where many people are saturated on building, or the resources and territory are dry. People like you will ask for one of two things at this point. 1) Respawning resources or getting a new system with the same safety principles. 2) Wiping territory on release because all the main system stuff is already claimed by that time.

 

The world will never have a real timeline if things cant both be built and withered down. It will just be one long session on creative mode and it will never rise to what it could be

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Treelessrain said:

you and I seem to have a different definition of what pvp is

Very observant of you, there's my definition and there's also a wrong one.

1. New player leaves the kindergarten bubble and gets killed - that is suicide by pirate caused by a learning disability

2. New player leaves the kindergarten bubble and gets killed the second time - that is also suicide by pirate but caused by a more severe case of learning disability

3. New player leaves the kindergarten bubble looking for a fight and somehow finds a similarly underequipped newbie who returns fire - that is a duel

A person familiar with MMOs will notice that all these fall under PvP because they involve two or more player-made ships, others will try to twist definitions to save face on the Internet. Which is it going to be, @Treelessrain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Randazzo said:

Literally every PvPer in here. Note that the biggest gripe is they can't gank people right out of the starter moon.

No, not literally.   I want violence because I came in for the politics and intra Corp and interpersonal violence is part of a living civilisation.

 

I'm happy with safety zones but they should be one olavet and one moon.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dumpeet said:

Very observant of you, there's my definition and there's also a wrong one.

1. New player leaves the kindergarten bubble and gets killed - that is suicide by pirate caused by a learning disability

2. New player leaves the kindergarten bubble and gets killed the second time - that is also suicide by pirate but caused by a more severe case of learning disability

3. New player leaves the kindergarten bubble looking for a fight and somehow finds a similarly underequipped newbie who returns fire - that is a duel

A person familiar with MMOs will notice that all these fall under PvP because they involve two or more player-made ships, others will try to twist definitions to save face on the Internet. Which is it going to be, @Treelessrain?

 

I am familiar with MMO's. I will stick with my definition , thanks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zamarus said:

Spoken like a true person who hasnt PvPd ingame much. The large part of PvP atm from orgs like NG and DSI is either arranged for the fun of it or people hunting whatever they can find because the space is SO limited. Ask a hundred PvPers. Most will tell you they care less about the loot itself and more about the thrill of fighting. Absolutely bottom tier take on the matter.

 

I get your point and you are not wrong. The ones who come here complaining though are not the ones you refer to and that would be my point..

 

I am not interested in PVP myself, that much is true. I do respect and understand that there are those in game who do and a lot of the point  made are valid for the game in it's current state and I can see how that is frustrating. What I do not agree with and will argue against is the attitude that the game does or should revolve around PVP as NQ has been very clear this is not the case and will not be.

That players who mainly enjoy PVP find ways to scratch that itch in the game is fine and that there will always be a risk for me to encounter such a player and may (well.. probably will) die and lose my ship in that case I can also accept just fine. PVP players wanting to have more options and have abilities to grab a player before entering warp or even have options to take them out if they are good enough sure.. I can see that and am fine with it.

 

At the same time though, _before_ any of that would come in, NQ will have to provide and implement counters which gives "us" a fair chance to get away.. And I do not accept "just bring friends/fit guns" and a valid argument there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, blazemonger said:

And this is where any validity of anything you say next is removed..

Thankfully I don't need two-factor verification to make forum posts, pressing Submit Reply works just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, michaelk said:

This idea that NQ is helpless because "a bunch of carebears want safety" is completely meritless. 

Well according to multiple recent interviews, NQ is operating on very low resources right now. So while NQ can make whatever decisions about the game they want they also need money to keep the lights on and keep making those decisions. The argument is that NQ is forced to cater to their paying subscription members(people who joined the game two months ago at most, as well as brand new players) in order to stay afloat and continue developing the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jsam333 said:

Well according to multiple recent interviews, NQ is operating on very low resources right now. So while NQ can make whatever decisions about the game they want they also need money to keep the lights on and keep making those decisions. The argument is that NQ is forced to cater to their paying subscription members(people who joined the game two months ago at most, as well as brand new players) in order to stay afloat and continue developing the game.

what the heck,, didnt they open montreal new bureau some months ago ? they were so prospering, where are all these people gone to ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think it's a good idea that they keep this kind of safe zone because in the end pvp will only be good and will only happen long term if there is a reason for it, you have an option to not have to pvp 99% and it is no reason that a pve player has no where to go but into a pvp zone...

 

let's face it - tho i personally still think darkfall, for those that know this (no safe zone, full loot pvp), was one of the best games i ever played but this no safe zone design will just never work as the big missunderstanding is: let's remove the safe zone so there is more pvp - this is just wrong, as most pve players will just leave and not stay for the ganking. darkfall would have survived if they would have created something like eve with empire, low sec, 0.0 space so players could choose their threat level - it's all about options and reasons after all.

 

you need a place for pve players where they don't need to worry about pvp but still be part of the eco system and you need reasons for conflict you can fight for so that enough interested players will join and this has nothing to do with a safe zone, this will just keep more players that otherwise would just leave and pure pvpers is a minorty in mmo's by far on top that mostly leaves as soon there is not enough sheep for the wolf ^^ 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jsam333 said:

Well according to multiple recent interviews, NQ is operating on very low resources right now. So while NQ can make whatever decisions about the game they want they also need money to keep the lights on and keep making those decisions. The argument is that NQ is forced to cater to their paying subscription members(people who joined the game two months ago at most, as well as brand new players) in order to stay afloat and continue developing the game.

Why are they on low resources? Money mismanagement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, klobber said:

what the heck,, didnt they open montreal new bureau some months ago ? they were so prospering, where are all these people gone to ?

That would be nearly a year ago (few 2019). And at the time it would be safe to say they were operating under the assumption still to have the game out around now for which they were given an additional investment of about 11Million in June last year. It's obvious things did not exactly work out as planned and in December last year NQ released their updated roadmap pushing release out to about a year from now with many Kickstarter features actually pushed out beyond that release..

 

I do not think it is unreasonable to expect NQ is running a healthy debt by now, I'd guestimate about 8-10 million or so and by going for soft launch at beta, generating enough revenue to pay interest on the debt and keep the lights on. BTW.. being in debt should not at all be a problem.. as long as you can keep making payments it may actually be a good thing. I would not be surprised though if a game studio came around putting say 15-20 million on the table they'd have little trouble buying NQ. Their bank will simply make NQ accept such an offer in order to recoup the debt and move on.

 

At this time I very much doubt there is stil investors involved as they will have moved on since NQ could not make good on the basis on which they provided the capital and they will have taken their loss. Crunchbase would be the source for this information

Currently NQ operates as a 100+ staff company spread across two countries in high profile (and expensive) cities with a live service game operating 24/7. To expect their monthly operation cost are at least close to 7 figures would not be unrealistic IMO ..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, blazemonger said:

At the same time though, _before_ any of that would come in, NQ will have to provide and implement counters which gives "us" a fair chance to get away.. And I do not accept "just bring friends/fit guns" and a valid argument there.

Ahh there are already counters, here are some.

 

Build a fast ship trade cargo capacity for speed, you don't have to get away if they never catch you.

Another is take a round about route, space is big simply not flying directly to your destination will mean the chances of even being spotted let alone intercepted are remote.

 

Fair is building a ship designed to escape, not expected a slow overloaded freighter to simply escape ships designed to hunt it.

 

Also bring friends, fit guns because well the point of being in some online universe is to play with others.

 

Also there is a warp beacon which currently has little practical use would actually be have a use with warp counters allowing you to setup paths avoiding a camped route.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is meant to be the 'difficult early period' in DU civilisation building.

 

The periods/eons of Dual Universe will look something like this, or at least NQ should expect this.

 

Eon 1: Wild West.  No law anywhere, micropolities with no real power,   no one is safe anywhere. Claims are staked.

 

Eon 2: The law comes to Dodge City. Small polities.  Small pockets of planets or space become policed, often by "poachers turned gamekeepers'.  Still lawless outside 'Dodge' but punitive raids may occur.

 

Eon 3: Tortuga. Medium sized and large polities.  Most places are lawful now, with only notable badlands where no one can hold for long or disputed lands where law is 'flexible'.

 

Eon 4: Space Sweden.  Huge Polities.  Law strong everywhere.  Criminal gangs are small and live in the walls or on the constant move, to avoid constant surveillance and pursuit.  At this stage the game needs to open up new territories to reset part of space to Eon 1/2.

 

....

 

Once you see this you can understand that criminality and violence is meant to be the driver towards making an organic creation of a lawful state.

 

You will eventually be safe everywhere.

 

This makes the artificial positioning of the game straight into Eon 2 or Eon 3 with over large safe zones a thin gruel.

 

It will also artificialise corp warfare into "we violently disagree, lets settle this 2500 su away"  because fake safe zones also means fake danger zones.

 

For a lot of us, Eon 1 or 2 is what excites us.  I can understand other people preferring Eons 3 or 4, but please dont ask NQ to takes us there too quickly.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, EntropicDuck said:

The magic safe zone destroys the sand box and eventually kills the game, other than people logging on to create art projects.

 

Real fighting is confined to areas outside the bubble that are small. They are then what amounts to a slap fight in which one side is going to take advantage of exploits to get their ship to safety because they don't want to face consequences should they start to lose.

 It's annoying that as the big draw of space battle is forced further and further into a corner, people are fawning over territorial warfare and planetary fighting. And what's going to happen is, sure that there's going to be territorial warfare, but then the goal post will be moved again.  The creative lithovores start crying that Space City 1 is under attack, then they put in place a whole slew of stupid rules and mechanics to make the game protect them because they are too antisocial to protect themselves.

The other day on the main discord, I was watching the chat roll, and the most badass discussions I thought came up about people having to convoy their ships to defend each other! Massive emergent gaming is the concept of people banning together to face a common threat! Each rule or modification to appease the players who want to exert power over their environments that they have not won prevents individuals from grouping up in reality. It causes individuals not to want to be social.  Every inch ground the developers offer to the nerdlings who want to create their super duper death star in "peace", ruins the game for hundreds in the future.

 

1.) At the top of the development list, addressing the exploits in PVP should be ranked. As there is no PVE, PVP is what is going to push this game. And it would be an easy win. You don't need people to be programmed.

 

2.) Second on the list should be PVP balancing. It's got to remain a challenge, I guess. The curve for learning must be steep. And that's what makes it interesting! It provides people with the need to be innovative. But it should also be engaging and stimulating.

 

3.) The bubble has to go down. The only protected place is the Sanctuary Moon and the space surrounding it.

 

4.) Get the PVP right in space, then think about territorial warfare and PVP in the atmosphere.

 

People want voxel tools and all that stuff, though I would personally think that addressing this and things like the whole voxelmancy crap and actually incorporating it into the game would be fantastic. To foster team play and rivalry, it does NOTHING. The PVP will drive the game. It is the entropy that makes it possible for industry.

This was my long winded way of saying the JC interview was frustrating.  

 

PvP is a placeholder at the moment, and will remain so until it is ready IMHO, NQ are happy to allow us to build some semblance of order before giving us the tools to knock at least some of it down.  Thought this was clear from both the development approach and the things they are saying.  Whilst genuinely understand the frustration of pvp focused players, it is not the be all and end all. I actually agree that pvp will be a massive driver in the game, when it is ready and when the game is ready for it.

I see this as a marathon not a sprint for both players and devs, there are a lot of pieces to put in place and a lot of prioritisation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the safe zone drops without some sort of security step down in place, the game will die, simple as that.  That NQ thought people would be willing to risk ships they spent hours crafting in a lawless zone right after they got away from the starter planet is just one more indication of their poor foresight. 

 

The carebears hiding in the safe zone will not play PVP with you if the safe zone goes away, they will quit and not come back.  As is, they might eventually get tired of mining and build a PVP ship.  You people wishing for free for all PVP are trying to kill your golden goose.   

 

I for one wont be engaging in PVP until I can do so in something more immersive than a cube and for a reason better than boredom.  

 

The best thing for NQ to do at this point is set up an Eve style security gradient that diminishes with distance from the arkship and let future star systems be lawless.  Don't whine about advanced ores, they will be mined out by the time this could happen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, le_souriceau said:

"Landmark lobby"

 

If you google "The Landmark Forum" there's some pretty sketchy sounding stuff.  I think it's a cult or a pyramid scheme or something.

 

Possible connection?  Who knows how deep this rabbit hole goes...

 

?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really, truly fail to see the issue with the current safe-zone, and I'm a player (along with my friends that play) whose top feature is PvP. I think the people that are demanding the safe-zone be limited to Sanctuary/Alioth are failing to see the bigger picture of how a truly player-driven sandbox would fail to function if people had only a small moon/single planet to safely build and run operations on. I desperately want NQ to rework PvP to make it a satisfying and comprehensive experience, but the safe-zone doesn't have anything to do with that. Give people reasons to leave the current safe-zone and there will be no shortage of PvP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zamiel7 said:

I really, truly fail to see the issue with the current safe-zone, and I'm a player (along with my friends that play) whose top feature is PvP. I think the people that are demanding the safe-zone be limited to Sanctuary/Alioth are failing to see the bigger picture of how a truly player-driven sandbox would fail to function if people had only a small moon/single planet to safely build and run operations on. I desperately want NQ to rework PvP to make it a satisfying and comprehensive experience, but the safe-zone doesn't have anything to do with that. Give people reasons to leave the current safe-zone and there will be no shortage of PvP.

I think everyone is missing the point that NQ have only published limited info on Atmos pvp / territories and that information makes it sound like player made safe zones are actually going to be pretty common.  People just hear pvp and think Rust, when in truth it might be very different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Anomaly said:

 

The best thing for NQ to do at this point is set up an Eve style security gradient that diminishes with distance from the arkship and let future star systems be lawless.  Don't whine about advanced ores, they will be mined out by the time this could happen. 

This would be great if civilisation was already here, but it isn't.  As I said above, a proper civilisation builder NEEDS a period of lawlessness to spur on the building of  a secure civilisation.

 

This isn't an argument between fans of pve vs pvp,  it's between those who want to start civilisation from scratch organically and see what it looks like and those who want to go straight to a premade civilisation created by the devs.

 

One of those two groups has misunderstood what NQ intended for the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any good sandbox (even purely PvP based ones) need to be hinged on a risk/reward balance. To accommodate the maximum number of players in your game, you need low risk places/activities with low rewards, and high risk places/activities with high rewards. That includes zones mostly or fully free of PvP risk. I am saying this with a 10 year Space Pirate career in EvE, with full intentions to do the same here. If they open everywhere to PvP, monopolies would emerge and devour all the interesting diversity.

 

PS: I admit the reward differentiation to compensate for no risk is not there yet. But it's very early. They should have kept the production capabilities of the safe zone to T1 only. There is no point at all to produce anything outside the safezone too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, blazemonger said:

 

I get your point and you are not wrong. The ones who come here complaining though are not the ones you refer to and that would be my point..

 

I am not interested in PVP myself, that much is true. I do respect and understand that there are those in game who do and a lot of the points made are valid for the game in it's current state and I can see how that is frustrating. What I do not agree with and will argue against is the attitude that the game does or should revolve around PVP as NQ has been very clear this is not the case and will not be.

That players who mainly enjoy PVP find ways to scratch that itch in the game is fine and that there will always be a risk for me to encounter such a player and may (well.. probably will) die and lose my ship in that case I can also accept just fine. PVP players wanting to have more options and have abilities to grab a player before entering warp or even have options to take them out if they are good enough sure.. I can see that and am fine with it.

 

At the same time though, _before_ any of that would come in, NQ will have to provide and implement counters which gives "us" a fair chance to get away.. And I do not accept "just bring friends/fit guns" and a valid argument there.

 

Link to comment
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...