Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A classic case of vision getting in the way of good game design (also known as fun). This is a post about what civilization is / can be in Dual Universe, and perhaps what went wrong. Before diving in, here are some of my assumptions:
 - JC is a scientist, not a game designer
 - JC is a micromanager
 - JC does not want to listen to his devs (some of which worked for Ubisoft and know a thing or two about good game design and mechanics)

 - Because of the assumption above, I also assume there's a degree of conflict between devs and JC

 - I assume a lot might change up to release since this is a beta, but something tells me... not really, given the track record so far of very good ideas being thrown away or not listened to (classic examples include bot market orders screwup in beta, this was talked about extensively by Blazemonger and a slew of other people in the community, was completely ignored, and the results are clear)

Lets get the whole "but it's a beta" shtick out of the way... if you can't, just pretend that you can.

 

To the point:

The game suffers from very bad game design choices. My stance is, if this game was really about civilization building, the mechanics of the game would be very different than they are now. What is civilization?

  1. organization of individuals into social bodies due to selective pressures
  2. characteristics of civilization include: social structure and hierarchy, efficiency, work organization, supply of needs, development of more efficient technologies
  3. selective pressures that create civilization include, but are not limited to: resource shortage, non-uniform resource distribution, geography, weather, proximity to neighboring civilizations, war, dangerous environment, dangerous neighbors

 

I'm sure a lot of you have seen (or were part of groups that tried to build) cities in DU. Some have actually done so. The problem is, they are completely useless and empty. They look nice, there was tremendous effort in making them, but they are completely nonfunctional because no one needs to be in a city. And that is due to the fact that there really are no selective pressures for civilization at all. There is no reason to be in a group because there is no danger. There is no scarcity of distribution of regular ore. We have safezones on all planets, and a big giant safezone around three planets. Why would anyone live in a city? There are no "white-collar" and "service" game mechanics that characterize cities.

  1. DU has no danger element at all (even in pvp zone, if you don't fly in the pipe, you're pretty much golden)
  2. DU has no progressive tech tree
  3. DU has no progression, it has quanta gates for elements that anyone can acquire and use given they have the quanta for it
  4. I can go on, but for an analysis of "civilization" just read this discord post: https://discord.com/channels/184691218184273920/304455542162587649/80629454165311491


I know this is wishful thinking at this point, but DU would be much better off with actual game design:

  1. Better Talent System: scrap the Eve talents system (some things should really not be copied), instead have a tech progression tree where you unlock technologies you can use. And have the skill grow based on your activity in the game, not a set amount of points per hour. It's gamey , it's simple, it's fun, it's very intuitive. And you can always add more tech to the tree indefinitely as the game grows. This will allow whole orgs to gravitate towards a direction in the tech tree so we actually get diversity in org playing styles. For example, one org can develop their pvp armadas with ballistics (machine guns, gattling guns, big bertha weapons), another org might focus their armada pvp tech research into laser or electonic warfare. The same can go with unlocking building technologies. The same can go for politics and leadership styles within an org. Have it all be a research tree. There are countless ways of adding diversity and different paths to a game using this mechanic instead of the Eve Talent Points system.
  2. Safe Zones: seriously.. is Sanc Moon not enough? The game lacks any danger and people just stop playing because of tedium and burn out. You won't believe how hard it is to convince people to gather into PVP events in this game because they're just too bored of it, it has zero consequence. Sanc moon is a sanctuary moon. That is its purpose.
  3. Better Consequences: This game has the wrong consequences. What seems to be happening is a bunch of nerfing to create more consequences in the game, such as talk about nerfing linked container distance, brakes, mining, this whole permadamage to elements, etc. How about actual danger, not the tedium of fixing and replacing parts? How about lowering the cost of building guns and ammo? Halfing most of the voxel HP? How about designing the game so that more people can get into pvp easier, and if they lose, the cost isn't too great that they are discouraged from ever trying it again?
  4. JC should actually listen to his devs and game designer (if he has one): lets face it, economists, mathmeticians, scientists, or whoever NQ may or may not consult about their game.. they are not playing the game. WE ARE. What we are witnessing is the result of the disconnect between how gamers play and how JC thinks a game should run. And it is our wallets that are paying. This means JC should listen to his devs. This means JC should really hire a game designer, they are a rare species and it's difficult to find a good one, but if you do, please listen to that person. JC may know stuff about robotics, but as I see it, he has no clue about human psychology, especially gamer psychology.


My rant is over. Catch me outside how bout dat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

A classic case of vision getting in the way of good game design (also known as fun). This is a post about what civilization is / can be in Dual Universe, and perhaps what went wrong. Before diving in,

and we got it because people that had 0 experience in PVP cried that "xs cores are overpowered" so they got double nerfed(guns + lock range). Now they will cry it's too expensive to get into pvp...

No, such gating is counter-productive, because "invested" people just go 10 accounts and will not give much muck about it. This is root mistake of 0.23.   Key is not in characters, but in pl

I’m curious where this info comes from was there an interview with staff stating that JC doesn’t listen? Or an insider report/leak? 
 

also, halving voxel DP? Not sure what that brings to the table. 

How about just disabling 3rd person view or making 3rd person/external view reliant on actual camera elements. Meaning that you can only bury your cockpit in voxels at your own peril. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, GraXXoR said:

I’m curious where this info comes from was there an interview with staff stating that JC doesn’t listen? Or an insider report/leak? 

speculation on my part, I simply refuse to believe the devs are this dumb :) 

 

19 minutes ago, GraXXoR said:

also, halving voxel DP? Not sure what that brings to the table. 

 

If you  build a proper ship with voxels that actually are used for pvp, it will take literally hours to kill it. It's all wars of attrition. And because that's the meta, smaller ships are useless because they can only fit so much voxels and can only use guns relative to their size.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Enviromental pressures/motivations to work together in interestic/sci-fi way is horribly missed opportunity. Like hard planets, but great rewards.

  • Planet with super agressive nano fauna (no even need to make them visible!), that literaly eats equipment/avatars, if not carefully protected via constantly maintained (24/7 no jokes) network of special emitters/domes.
  • Hollow planet, where all resources located 20-30 km underground in immense network of caves, also due magnetic anomanies, map/coordinates not working, yet players can build on site static mapping/radar stations and, via assigned dispatch, help each other (to not get lost).
  • Planet with constant surface 10/10 windstorm, making conventional atmo-flying impossible and challenging players with some specialized ships/lua programms and piloting techiques.

 

Its just thing I come up in 15 min. Lot of stuff (with not that challenging implementation) can be done.

 

Such adventures is key to memorable experience and, seed of civilization, not some stupid screw factories JC want us to put in.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am expecting the assumptions on 

3 hours ago, IvanGrozniy said:


 - JC is a scientist, not a game designer
 - JC is a micromanager
 - JC does not want to listen to his devs (some of which worked for Ubisoft and know a thing or two about good game design and mechanics)

 - Because of the assumption above, I also assume there's a degree of conflict between devs and JC

 

 

I really can't see much here I expect to be inaccurate.

 

We've seen plenty of examples on how NQ changes things up which make no sense to then see JC come out and try to explain why in a way.. Which seems to only make sense to him even when the very arguments he uses are easily debunked by basic facts as seen in the game.

 

1. JC is right

2, If JC is not right, see 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the achievements list, you can see some stuff they were trying to achieve.

Like transporting 100 peeps! But how does one get so far to implement it in the game?

 

Well... I think they never thought of that, or most of their first ideas.

"Roaming the galaxy"... in a system that has 11 planets on a 2D map isnt what I thought of when they said that. I thought it would be like no mans sky galaxy....

 

Now, the game is just a 1-server museum for builds, where you can waste time by either flying or mining.

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

If you  build a proper ship with voxels that actually are used for pvp, it will take literally hours to kill it. It's all wars of attrition. And because that's the meta, smaller ships are useless because they can only fit so much voxels and can only use guns relative to their size.

and we got it because people that had 0 experience in PVP cried that "xs cores are overpowered" so they got double nerfed(guns + lock range). Now they will cry it's too expensive to get into pvp...

The current combat is 2 twitch streamers taking S cores and shooting each other 50km away from safezone "until first blood" and calling it PVP in a sandbox game or the one you explained. Don't know which is more stupid/boring.

 

It's not only the game design that is lacking, it's the whole approach that is conceptually inconsistent.

 

NQ appeals to the casual players so they make safezones all around so casuals don't get blown up by hardcore PVP players but then NQ turn casuals off by forcing them to fly 30min each time they want to move anywhere (30min flying is only fun for the first couple of times, then it's just staring at the screen). Let alone that casuals have to stare at expanding circle for hours to mine enough to be able to fly anything decent.

 

NQ appeals to the hardcore PVP players but then gets them bored af because there is literally 0 risk vs reward factor. There is no kills in PVP unless pirating, there is 0 reason to fight anyone and if you do you just both lose resources and that's all.

 

I think JC was thinking that making a "sandbox game" is a magic that makes the game work on it's own. He didn't know that you need a very good box and a lot of sand for that to work let alone know EXACTLY what you trying to achieve beforehand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right in several points, but i mostly disagree with your conclusions. 

 

I agree that having a safezone that includes 40% of the points of interest reduces the chances of pvp. 

But my solution for this is not to disable safezone outside of sanct moon. My solution is to create more star systems. 

Eventually i would not even mind having this current system as 100 safezone, as long as there are 10 other systems without any safezone and full or riches. 

 

I agree that the economy startup mechanism at the beginning of beta was bad. Leading to heavy unfairness. 

But i dont believe the issue was the existence of bot orders. To me, the issue was that T5 ores were not rare at all. In day 1, a new player could just go to jago, dig 2km straight and find 20M worth T5, without the need of any territory scanner. 

Back in that time my triscaner was picking up t5 every 8 sectors. 

Clearly NQ bombed ore distribution. 

To solve this problem, i suggested then, and much earlier that ore nodes size should be relative to the rarity(T5 max being like 200l) and that ore should be much rare and should respawn on a random location. This way NQ did not need to spawn all the ore necessary for these months until next system appears. 

Respawn rate could be adjusted later once a new system is here. 

 

To me, the entire idea that players would create a functional civilization without any outside orientation is always extremely optimistic. 

Mostly because making a civilization requires work, good will, and a good moral understanding. 

Org leaders are, in general(ppl will be offended by this, and im sorry), ppl that sacrificed RL time to manage the org. 

In general org leaders that can do the work, will have a agenda or low social skills. 

And im sure there are some good leaders like Virtual that are actually fit to help build a civilization. But those are few, compared to the ones that want to rule DU or see it burning. 

My solution for this is security zones, NPC policing and NPC quests in a small part of the DU universe. Something that will give some type of penalty to a new player that entered the game to just cause destruction. 

Something that can be seen by leaders and players as what they want their territory to be like. 

 

But in general, the game has to be more fair to noobs. 

The amount of disadvantages a new/lone player faces compared of a older player in a big org are near infinite. 

This may be what some of you, hardcore capitalists want. But this has a consequence. 

Players that buy a 3 month subscription and find how screwed they are after 1 week. What how will those players play the rest of the 2 months and 3 weeks? 

Do you think they will try to "build a civilization"? Or do stupid stuff, like raging in support channel, dirt ball grief, crash against other players, disrupt discord discussions, etc?

 

In my opinion, DU should have a prototype civilization, enforced by NQ, already in place, with NPC economy, NPC policing and NPC quests in the start system. But then, there should be dozens of other systems completely free of safezones, markets, spawns, rules and with higher resources. 

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

A classic case of vision getting in the way of good game design (also known as fun). This is a post about what civilization is / can be in Dual Universe, and perhaps what went wrong. Before diving in, here are some of my assumptions:
 - JC is a scientist, not a game designer
 - JC is a micromanager
 - JC does not want to listen to his devs (some of which worked for Ubisoft and know a thing or two about good game design and mechanics)

 - Because of the assumption above, I also assume there's a degree of conflict between devs and JC

 - I assume a lot might change up to release since this is a beta, but something tells me... not really, given the track record so far of very good ideas being thrown away or not listened to (classic examples include bot market orders screwup in beta, this was talked about extensively by Blazemonger and a slew of other people in the community, was completely ignored, and the results are clear)

Lets get the whole "but it's a beta" shtick out of the way... if you can't, just pretend that you can.

 

To the point:

The game suffers from very bad game design choices. My stance is, if this game was really about civilization building, the mechanics of the game would be very different than they are now. What is civilization?

  1. organization of individuals into social bodies due to selective pressures
  2. characteristics of civilization include: social structure and hierarchy, efficiency, work organization, supply of needs, development of more efficient technologies
  3. selective pressures that create civilization include, but are not limited to: resource shortage, non-uniform resource distribution, geography, weather, proximity to neighboring civilizations, war, dangerous environment, dangerous neighbors

 

I'm sure a lot of you have seen (or were part of groups that tried to build) cities in DU. Some have actually done so. The problem is, they are completely useless and empty. They look nice, there was tremendous effort in making them, but they are completely nonfunctional because no one needs to be in a city. And that is due to the fact that there really are no selective pressures for civilization at all. There is no reason to be in a group because there is no danger. There is no scarcity of distribution of regular ore. We have safezones on all planets, and a big giant safezone around three planets. Why would anyone live in a city? There are no "white-collar" and "service" game mechanics that characterize cities.

  1. DU has no danger element at all (even in pvp zone, if you don't fly in the pipe, you're pretty much golden)
  2. DU has no progressive tech tree
  3. DU has no progression, it has quanta gates for elements that anyone can acquire and use given they have the quanta for it
  4. I can go on, but for an analysis of "civilization" just read this discord post: https://discord.com/channels/184691218184273920/304455542162587649/80629454165311491


I know this is wishful thinking at this point, but DU would be much better off with actual game design:

  1. Better Talent System: scrap the Eve talents system (some things should really not be copied), instead have a tech progression tree where you unlock technologies you can use. And have the skill grow based on your activity in the game, not a set amount of points per hour. It's gamey , it's simple, it's fun, it's very intuitive. And you can always add more tech to the tree indefinitely as the game grows. This will allow whole orgs to gravitate towards a direction in the tech tree so we actually get diversity in org playing styles. For example, one org can develop their pvp armadas with ballistics (machine guns, gattling guns, big bertha weapons), another org might focus their armada pvp tech research into laser or electonic warfare. The same can go with unlocking building technologies. The same can go for politics and leadership styles within an org. Have it all be a research tree. There are countless ways of adding diversity and different paths to a game using this mechanic instead of the Eve Talent Points system.
  2. Safe Zones: seriously.. is Sanc Moon not enough? The game lacks any danger and people just stop playing because of tedium and burn out. You won't believe how hard it is to convince people to gather into PVP events in this game because they're just too bored of it, it has zero consequence. Sanc moon is a sanctuary moon. That is its purpose.
  3. Better Consequences: This game has the wrong consequences. What seems to be happening is a bunch of nerfing to create more consequences in the game, such as talk about nerfing linked container distance, brakes, mining, this whole permadamage to elements, etc. How about actual danger, not the tedium of fixing and replacing parts? How about lowering the cost of building guns and ammo? Halfing most of the voxel HP? How about designing the game so that more people can get into pvp easier, and if they lose, the cost isn't too great that they are discouraged from ever trying it again?
  4. JC should actually listen to his devs and game designer (if he has one): lets face it, economists, mathmeticians, scientists, or whoever NQ may or may not consult about their game.. they are not playing the game. WE ARE. What we are witnessing is the result of the disconnect between how gamers play and how JC thinks a game should run. And it is our wallets that are paying. This means JC should listen to his devs. This means JC should really hire a game designer, they are a rare species and it's difficult to find a good one, but if you do, please listen to that person. JC may know stuff about robotics, but as I see it, he has no clue about human psychology, especially gamer psychology.


My rant is over. Catch me outside how bout dat.

There "was" no reason to build anything "as civilisation" because everyone was independant or was building industry to be independant from other players.

Edit: Has changed a little since shematics.

So no reason to group at all.

 

A agree with your research point.

 

Concerning PvP I think the huge problem is that there is no reason to PvP at all, if you want you can stay in safe zone forever and build what you want without any risks.

IMO safe zone should be only in Sanctuary and Sancturay should have only base ores to get into space. You want better equipement ? Go in PvP zone.

Also planet unique minerals could create PvP choke points.

 

Concerning internal Novaquark decision making I wont make any comments since I have no idea in how they function.

 

Edit: Progressive skills based on what you do would be nice idea too, works very well in Valheim, but DU may be already balanced around an EVE like system.

However EVE system has way bigger buffs (more than 300% damage bonus based on your talents in some areas) and way more dependencies. So I think they should go deeper and have way stronger passive buffs based on talents.

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

If something doesn't change soon, I think I will have to do a "What the bloody hell happened?!" Video on DU (see for example my "What happened" review of Osiris: New Dawn here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wh0c2You-y4 )

 

Hoping it doesn't come to that though ...

 

Like this? (from the same guy)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tS1OxjrgJmQ&ab_channel=sHuRuLuNi

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with @XKentX on NQ inconsistency as one of root causes of current mess. Just dig little bit deeper into their history and JCs endless talks to spot a lot of huge "U-turns" (PvP, starting conditions, other critical systems/concepts).

 

Like this particular interview from 2016 quite a goldmine:

 

https://www.gamerpros.co/exclusive-interview-novaquark-ceo-jean-christophe-baillie-mmo-dual-universe/

 

 

 

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

 

That is my review from the start of the beta. My "What happened" reviews are a tad different, and I do them only after I definitely give up on a game, like I did with Osiris. I really love DU and as a Ruby Backer have supported it from the very beginnig.

 

Thus the "hoping it doesn't come to that" part ...

 

 

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

 

That is my review from the start of the beta.

Lol, I failed to connect your forum name to your YouTube name.
Well, in my opinion, you will have to do a "What happened" video less than one year from now.

But fear not. The server technology will be sold by investors to another company, once NQ exits the picture. So even if DU fails this year, 3-5 years from now, someone else will be using this to make us a great space MMO.
 

PS: I do like the clear way you bring your points in the video, also your voice doing so. Keep up the good work.

PS: I feel, from your voice, that you were kind of suffering on your bad reviews, because you really wanted to play those games as they were promised. Hang in there m8. Remember it's just a game. There are good books, movies, comics single player games in space to lift your spirit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The reality is, you can't have this dynamic universe filled with "emergant gameplay" (something that JC says over and over) when you cant effect the gameplay of someone else.  Thats just the way it is.  Is the current combat completely broken and unbalanced? Yes.  But even if they fix that, they need to drop the majority of the safe zones.  Alioth + Sanc at max.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:

The reality is, you can't have this dynamic universe filled with "emergant gameplay" 

Well, if you frame it in absolutes, you are right.

 

But once you frame this in a scale instead of absolutes, your point stops making sense.


Can Dual universe have a never ending story that can rival cyberpunk? Definitely no.

 

Can Dual universe have a story line like WOW? Probably not.

 

Can Dual universe have Avatar characters that can open chats at you offering you missions and presenting events? Probably yes.

 

Can we have quests? Definitely yes.

 

So this is a scale, from "must have" to "impossible to do" with a lot of things in the middle.

But NQ failed to achieve the "must have"

 

So the definition of your "filled" for NQ is "none".

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'no safe zone' game that you're talking about, doesn't work.  Not because of the PVP,  but because of griefers.  People forget that the most important variable in any game is sustainability. 

This game has building.  Because it has building, it will attract builders.  In any building game, the PVE builders dwarf the PVP builders.  Without the safe zone, griefers will turn the game into ARK.  A griefing zergfest that keeps new players from getting a foothold.  That's not a civilization building game.  We all know what everyone wants.  We all know we can't have it.  We can't have nice things because grifers will ruin it. 

So lets move the PVE builders to sanctuary moon?  You want PVE builders to pay for a game that is on one moon???  Are you serious? That makes no sense.  who is going to pay for that? Sanctuary moon should be a starting zone, that's it.

Realize that THE GAME needs PVE builders.  PVPers can not, and will not, sustain a building game.  Everyone will move underground, unless you're stupid, then what's the point of building? Just remove the building system and make it PVP?  There is already a game that mastered that, Planetside 2 - kill, die, respawn, rinse and repeat.  And it's a really good game. If you have a hard on for real, no BS PVP, go play Planetside 2.  The also have safe zones... to combat the greifers...

I get that the game needs work, I agree that the direction sucks.  But this idea of PVP everywhere just doesn't work in a building game because of griefers.  You may think there's not that many griefers, you may think they wont ruin the game, but you would be dead wrong.

A better solution: a massive forcefield that covers linked territories so cities can be built.  Make the forcefield an endgame item so corporations can get them first.  You have to claim the center tile plus the petals around it in 5 layers to drop the forcefield.  Then corporations would have to defend it, and that defense would warrant the tax if you're not part of the corporation.  The force field would not be impenetrable, but just to hard to destroy for any small group of griefers.  It would have to be an actual armada, real corporation warfare, to break through that forcefield. You can shoot out, but you can't shoot in.  And as a bonus, the forcefield will slow down all the land grab, because you have to keep your tiles close to even put the forcefield down.  You can even make S-M-L forcefields.  5 layers for L with the most hp, and 2 layers for M, and just the first set of petals for S with the least hp.  It would be a race to build your defense towers before you build an actual city.  you would have to RDMS the entry so haulers/traders can enter, or build the trade depot just outside the forcefield with better prices inside.

Anything that creates a place for PVE builders to build. Again, they are a huge advantage to have because they will pay to play if it's safe.  It doesn't have to bee 100% safe, just something to avoid the 'build, greif, rebuild' cycle.  

I agree with a lot of things you said, and this game has massive potential, but none of this brainstorming will mean anything without a wipe...

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

A better solution: a massive forcefield that covers linked territories so cities can be built.

Guess what, that was always promised. They just faff around with other stuff instead of adressing that 

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

The 'no safe zone' game that you're talking about, doesn't work.  Not because of the PVP,  but because of griefers.  People forget that the most important variable in any game is sustainability. 

This game has building.  Because it has building, it will attract builders.  In any building game, the PVE builders dwarf the PVP builders.  Without the safe zone, griefers will turn the game into ARK.  A griefing zergfest that keeps new players from getting a foothold.  That's not a civilization building game.  We all know what everyone wants.  We all know we can't have it.  We can't have nice things because grifers will ruin it. 

So lets move the PVE builders to sanctuary moon?  You want PVE builders to pay for a game that is on one moon???  Are you serious? That makes no sense.  who is going to pay for that? Sanctuary moon should be a starting zone, that's it.

Realize that THE GAME needs PVE builders.  PVPers can not, and will not, sustain a building game.  Everyone will move underground, unless you're stupid, then what's the point of building? Just remove the building system and make it PVP?  There is already a game that mastered that, Planetside 2 - kill, die, respawn, rinse and repeat.  And it's a really good game. If you have a hard on for real, no BS PVP, go play Planetside 2.  The also have safe zones... to combat the greifers...

I get that the game needs work, I agree that the direction sucks.  But this idea of PVP everywhere just doesn't work in a building game because of griefers.  You may think there's not that many griefers, you may think they wont ruin the game, but you would be dead wrong.

A better solution: a massive forcefield that covers linked territories so cities can be built.  Make the forcefield an endgame item so corporations can get them first.  You have to claim the center tile plus the petals around it in 5 layers to drop the forcefield.  Then corporations would have to defend it, and that defense would warrant the tax if you're not part of the corporation.  The force field would not be impenetrable, but just to hard to destroy for any small group of griefers.  It would have to be an actual armada, real corporation warfare, to break through that forcefield. You can shoot out, but you can't shoot in.  And as a bonus, the forcefield will slow down all the land grab, because you have to keep your tiles close to even put the forcefield down.  You can even make S-M-L forcefields.  5 layers for L with the most hp, and 2 layers for M, and just the first set of petals for S with the least hp.  It would be a race to build your defense towers before you build an actual city.  you would have to RDMS the entry so haulers/traders can enter, or build the trade depot just outside the forcefield with better prices inside.

Anything that creates a place for PVE builders to build. Again, they are a huge advantage to have because they will pay to play if it's safe.  It doesn't have to bee 100% safe, just something to avoid the 'build, greif, rebuild' cycle.  

I agree with a lot of things you said, and this game has massive potential, but none of this brainstorming will mean anything without a wipe...

Well....

You could do something like this:

Instead of wiping the whole thing, corporations can have spawn nodes in their basesv/cities. And a new player who just joined the game can either choose to spawn at Alioth /Sanc, or at any of the corps who want to recruit new players. 

 

As far as safezones go... you said this game needs builders. I'd say prove it. Not that I'm against builders, it's just if we're talking about a civilization building game, there need to be reasons for building, not just for the hell of it. Yiu need outposts, strongholds, towers, etc... elements that can protect territories. The building style would change drastically if there was danger of destruction. What this game needs are players :) And a lot of the players who do not play the game anymore are pvp oriented players. We'll see if the asteroid implementation brings them back or not.

 

I like someone's else's solution to the problem where... sure keep the safezones in this system but make the new systems coming up with 0 safezones. Basically system 0 is the newb friendly zone, any new system is pvp.

 

Your shield idea makes sense. Only why so complex? I can put up a shield on any territory regardless of connected territories. What would be cool though is to fluctuate shield power based on interconnected tiles. I'd say the more tiles you connect the more power you need.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, IvanGrozniy said:

As far as safezones go... you said this game needs builders. I'd say prove it

I don't believe an org with that spreads terror in kill on sight tactics should be allowed to hide its buildings and infrastructure behind safe zones.

So, as new systems appear I'm 100% opposed to any kind of safe zone on the new systems.

 

But safe zones are essential to new players.

New players need to be allowed to travel to a near planet and figure out how reentry works on another planet and how that "risk" pays off. Without being hammered with 1000 battle cruisers killing him on sight for existing.

 

I think NQ needs to add new systems 100% PVP covered(maybe some temporary shield from interstellar travel). Once we have like 4 systems, NQ should convert fully the Alioth system into a pvp free zone.

Inter stellar travel should be expensive to a point that it does not pay off for an org to fly back to Alioth system to hide.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, IvanGrozniy said:

A classic case of vision getting in the way of good game design (also known as fun). This is a post about what civilization is / can be in Dual Universe, and perhaps what went wrong. Before diving in, here are some of my assumptions:
 - JC is a scientist, not a game designer
 - JC is a micromanager
 - JC does not want to listen to his devs (some of which worked for Ubisoft and know a thing or two about good game design and mechanics)

 - Because of the assumption above, I also assume there's a degree of conflict between devs and JC

 - I assume a lot might change up to release since this is a beta, but something tells me... not really, given the track record so far of very good ideas being thrown away or not listened to (classic examples include bot market orders screwup in beta, this was talked about extensively by Blazemonger and a slew of other people in the community, was completely ignored, and the results are clear)

Lets get the whole "but it's a beta" shtick out of the way... if you can't, just pretend that you can.

 

To the point:

The game suffers from very bad game design choices. My stance is, if this game was really about civilization building, the mechanics of the game would be very different than they are now. What is civilization?

  1. organization of individuals into social bodies due to selective pressures
  2. characteristics of civilization include: social structure and hierarchy, efficiency, work organization, supply of needs, development of more efficient technologies
  3. selective pressures that create civilization include, but are not limited to: resource shortage, non-uniform resource distribution, geography, weather, proximity to neighboring civilizations, war, dangerous environment, dangerous neighbors

 

I'm sure a lot of you have seen (or were part of groups that tried to build) cities in DU. Some have actually done so. The problem is, they are completely useless and empty. They look nice, there was tremendous effort in making them, but they are completely nonfunctional because no one needs to be in a city. And that is due to the fact that there really are no selective pressures for civilization at all. There is no reason to be in a group because there is no danger. There is no scarcity of distribution of regular ore. We have safezones on all planets, and a big giant safezone around three planets. Why would anyone live in a city? There are no "white-collar" and "service" game mechanics that characterize cities.

  1. DU has no danger element at all (even in pvp zone, if you don't fly in the pipe, you're pretty much golden)
  2. DU has no progressive tech tree
  3. DU has no progression, it has quanta gates for elements that anyone can acquire and use given they have the quanta for it
  4. I can go on, but for an analysis of "civilization" just read this discord post: https://discord.com/channels/184691218184273920/304455542162587649/80629454165311491


I know this is wishful thinking at this point, but DU would be much better off with actual game design:

  1. Better Talent System: scrap the Eve talents system (some things should really not be copied), instead have a tech progression tree where you unlock technologies you can use. And have the skill grow based on your activity in the game, not a set amount of points per hour. It's gamey , it's simple, it's fun, it's very intuitive. And you can always add more tech to the tree indefinitely as the game grows. This will allow whole orgs to gravitate towards a direction in the tech tree so we actually get diversity in org playing styles. For example, one org can develop their pvp armadas with ballistics (machine guns, gattling guns, big bertha weapons), another org might focus their armada pvp tech research into laser or electonic warfare. The same can go with unlocking building technologies. The same can go for politics and leadership styles within an org. Have it all be a research tree. There are countless ways of adding diversity and different paths to a game using this mechanic instead of the Eve Talent Points system.
  2. Safe Zones: seriously.. is Sanc Moon not enough? The game lacks any danger and people just stop playing because of tedium and burn out. You won't believe how hard it is to convince people to gather into PVP events in this game because they're just too bored of it, it has zero consequence. Sanc moon is a sanctuary moon. That is its purpose.
  3. Better Consequences: This game has the wrong consequences. What seems to be happening is a bunch of nerfing to create more consequences in the game, such as talk about nerfing linked container distance, brakes, mining, this whole permadamage to elements, etc. How about actual danger, not the tedium of fixing and replacing parts? How about lowering the cost of building guns and ammo? Halfing most of the voxel HP? How about designing the game so that more people can get into pvp easier, and if they lose, the cost isn't too great that they are discouraged from ever trying it again?
  4. JC should actually listen to his devs and game designer (if he has one): lets face it, economists, mathmeticians, scientists, or whoever NQ may or may not consult about their game.. they are not playing the game. WE ARE. What we are witnessing is the result of the disconnect between how gamers play and how JC thinks a game should run. And it is our wallets that are paying. This means JC should listen to his devs. This means JC should really hire a game designer, they are a rare species and it's difficult to find a good one, but if you do, please listen to that person. JC may know stuff about robotics, but as I see it, he has no clue about human psychology, especially gamer psychology.


My rant is over. Catch me outside how bout dat.

Last time i have checked JC

 

1 hour ago, Hazaatan said:

The 'no safe zone' game that you're talking about, doesn't work.  Not because of the PVP,  but because of griefers.  People forget that the most important variable in any game is sustainability. 

This game has building.  Because it has building, it will attract builders.  In any building game, the PVE builders dwarf the PVP builders.  Without the safe zone, griefers will turn the game into ARK.  A griefing zergfest that keeps new players from getting a foothold.  That's not a civilization building game.  We all know what everyone wants.  We all know we can't have it.  We can't have nice things because grifers will ruin it. 

So lets move the PVE builders to sanctuary moon?  You want PVE builders to pay for a game that is on one moon???  Are you serious? That makes no sense.  who is going to pay for that? Sanctuary moon should be a starting zone, that's it.

Realize that THE GAME needs PVE builders.  PVPers can not, and will not, sustain a building game.  Everyone will move underground, unless you're stupid, then what's the point of building? Just remove the building system and make it PVP?  There is already a game that mastered that, Planetside 2 - kill, die, respawn, rinse and repeat.  And it's a really good game. If you have a hard on for real, no BS PVP, go play Planetside 2.  The also have safe zones... to combat the greifers...

I get that the game needs work, I agree that the direction sucks.  But this idea of PVP everywhere just doesn't work in a building game because of griefers.  You may think there's not that many griefers, you may think they wont ruin the game, but you would be dead wrong.

A better solution: a massive forcefield that covers linked territories so cities can be built.  Make the forcefield an endgame item so corporations can get them first.  You have to claim the center tile plus the petals around it in 5 layers to drop the forcefield.  Then corporations would have to defend it, and that defense would warrant the tax if you're not part of the corporation.  The force field would not be impenetrable, but just to hard to destroy for any small group of griefers.  It would have to be an actual armada, real corporation warfare, to break through that forcefield. You can shoot out, but you can't shoot in.  And as a bonus, the forcefield will slow down all the land grab, because you have to keep your tiles close to even put the forcefield down.  You can even make S-M-L forcefields.  5 layers for L with the most hp, and 2 layers for M, and just the first set of petals for S with the least hp.  It would be a race to build your defense towers before you build an actual city.  you would have to RDMS the entry so haulers/traders can enter, or build the trade depot just outside the forcefield with better prices inside.

Anything that creates a place for PVE builders to build. Again, they are a huge advantage to have because they will pay to play if it's safe.  It doesn't have to bee 100% safe, just something to avoid the 'build, greif, rebuild' cycle.  

I agree with a lot of things you said, and this game has massive potential, but none of this brainstorming will mean anything without a wipe...

1: Correct. Not even i with 10k+ survival ffa hours in games like Ark or Rust want another survival/ffa mmo.

2: That linked forcefield will be a thing. Tiles with the same sinergy will have bonuses to defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As it stands now, and the future, why is there a reason to have cities in the safe zone?  I see hardly any purpose.  Flying around a planet is easy if you have played the game longer than 1 month.  Why group up?  What benefits besides a couple friends living together?  You cant say for markets, because their are no players markets, and even if/when they come, you wont have hundreds of them on 1 planet.   There needs to be buyers for markets to work.  So again, WHY THE FUCK WOULD ANYONE GO LIVE ON SOMEONE ELSE'S CITY LAND?  There are no mechanics for it.  If they want a civilization building game, they need to make it so not everyone can drop a TU down or a static construct, and Rez nodes be POWERFUL things, that dont go on dynamic constructs, and where you live can determine where you respawn.  Stuff of that nature.  I see nothing in the works where people would congregate in a city in a safe zone coming anytime soon, if ever.  At least with the pvp zone, it can be the "safety in numbers" and turn a normal hostile pvp zone planet into a "relatively safe area" as it would take weeks/months of war to seige a huge area with hundreds of territories connected.  This is why we need to reduce the safe zones down to only Alioth + sanc, and rework how contructs/TCU's/and Resurrection nodes are deployed.

 

They already talked about power management of tiles.  They need to completely rework how Resurrections nodes work.  For one, remove them from Dynamic constructs.  You die, you die, go back to your "city".  How many active rez nodes should be determined by the tile, and how many connected can increase that.  1 single tile should not support more than say 5(or whatever is balanced) people tied to that rez node.  The more connected tiles, the more that increases.  Now you have city areas start to form.  There needs to be major benefits to building together.  

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...