secure your builds in a non safety zone

[Gerald_Deemer]

I think we need a safety concept for surface builds like houses, buildings and other objects.

 

If somebody builds a house for example in a non-safety zone and loggs off. Everyone who finds this building can destroy it because the universe is persistent.

Even if you don´t build something accidentally in a non-safety zone there has to be a way to protect your creations.

 

Maybe some kind of protection shield which activates when a stranger attacks the building.

 

How do you think about that?

[norab7]

I'm all for the safety aspects of the game, as long as it can be worked in without damaging immersion to much.

 

I've been very vocal in another thread about the safety of vulnerable people to raiding, and I've thought about the safety of creations out in the wild.

 

I do agree than protection of constructs should be present maybe, if it can be worked in, because there was another game I played that had no protection to created buildings and you almost became unable to log off or build anything because your creations were gone the next time you logged in, or all of your items were gone and you'd have to start over, other than the few items you had on your person. And I really don't want to have to deal with the issue of when you log off for the night you could log back on the next day to an empty plot of land.

 

That in my book is not fun.

[Slaxx]

that is the point of organizations gerald. they protect their land.

 

this game is not a multiplayer game, its an MMO.

[AlexWright]

that is the point of organizations gerald. they protect their land.

 

this game is not a multiplayer game, its an MMO.

 

At the same time, I think there's a point to be made here. Even EVE-Online offers protection to player-built stations by going into "Reinforced Mode" (or at least, it used to) when the structure being attacked goes below a certain percentage on shields. Something like this system should be implemented here, that way you don't have to "Start Over" every time, and still allows an attacking force to deal damage and possibly destroy or take over territory.

[Slaxx]

dude, in reality there is no afk protection either. and dual universe will not need an AFK protection as you will have guilds protecting their structures.

 

i vote this is a really bad idea.

[KlatuSatori]

You will be able to install automated defenses that fire on trespassers, but I think there will also be an Eve style "reinforced" mode, to give you a chance to defend your stuff when you come back online.  I just wrote a post about small groups protecting themselves in the wild in this thread: https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/486-killing-inside-tus-loss-of-items/

[norab7]

dude, in reality there is no afk protection either. and dual universe will not need an AFK protection as you will have guilds protecting their structures.

 

i vote this is a really bad idea.

I'm not going to start being loud in this thread, but you've got to remember not everyone is going to join a guild.

 

So there will be single players going the game solo, and if any other MMOs I've played is any indications the majority will join a guild but then do things by themselves anyway.

[vylqun]

my answer to this would be a simple "no".

It should be increadible rare to have Territory which is protcted by the system. If you fear that your buildings could be razed while you sleep, then invest in defensive structures.

[Gerald_Deemer]

my answer to this would be a simple "no".

It should be increadible rare to have Territory which is protcted by the system. If you fear that your buildings could be razed while you sleep, then invest in defensive structures.

This is exactly what I mean. You could get the first defence shield for free during tutorial.

In the market place you should have the options to buy additional shields for ingame money. Here is an (free) example:

 

Shield generator type A - price: 10.000 credits - size: 50 square meters

Shield generator type B - price: 25.000 credits - size: 100 square meters

Shield generator type C - price 100.000 credits - size: 250 square meters

 

So you can build something within this protected area without using the safety zone.

 

For all haters of this idea. It´s much more difficult to build and protect something in the non safety zone than destroying it. There will be enough elements to attack for all outlaws and pirates of you. But if nobody dares to build outside of the safety zone because of the lack of protection the most players will stay in the safety zone. I think of traders, builders and programmers. Why should they risk thier work?

 

I think Novaquark will do it right and gives the intelligent, creative players more ingame support than the destrutive players.

[vylqun]

u dont exactly get what i mean, no.

with defensive structures i meant turrets, maybe shields with limited hp, that can be broken through if you deal enough dmg etc. i didnt talk about a time limited impregneable defense.

[norab7]

u dont exactly get what i mean, no.

with defensive structures i meant turrets, maybe shields with limited hp, that can be broken through if you deal enough dmg etc. i didnt talk about a time limited impregneable defense.

 

Time limited impregnable shield would be one way to go though (even though it's not been mentioned anywhere other than you yet)..

 

Would give you the time to build something and defend it before the timer expired, after than you are on your own. I wouldn't be so against this idea, because it does give you the change to build and if you don't build correctly in the time given then it's a little bit your own fault if you get raided.

 

I would still like some form of protection for the smaller/newer groups of people though. But a timed shield would be a nice start.

[KlatuSatori]

NQ have mentioned invulnerability mode in a few places.

 

About the Alpha devblog comments section https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2014/08/17/about-the-alpha-gameplay/:

 

 

This is a common and recurrent problem in persistent sandbox worlds. But several games have proven that some game mechanics can temper the necessary online presence. As much as we are gamers, we don’t want to see gamers obliged to stay in game for countless hours, just to protect their buildings, ships or starbases. Nothing is set in stone yet… But we have many ideas to find the right balance. One, for example, would be to implement a possible “Invulnerability” mode (for a limited number of hours) when your territory is attacked. That way, even if you’re at work or sleeping, you won’t have to worry and will have time to prepare (calling your friends, putting additional defenses, or evacuate all valuables things if the threat is too big) before the Invulnerability runs off. Again this is just one of the ideas we currently have, nothing certain yet. But we are keeping this problem in mind while developing the game, that’s for sure! 

 

There's also an interesting post by NQ in the comments section of the Arkship Security devblog https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2014/09/13/arkship-security-or-where-does-pvp-starts/

 

 

As the design has been directed so far (it may change during the project evolution), we plan to offer two possibilities to the players:

– If a player wants to have zero risk to be interrupted or attacked while designing a ship, the best option will be to build a small base in the secured area around the arkship. This option will emphasize “Security First”, but this will be unlikely the best option for optimal productivity for many reasons.

– If a player wants to have a very efficient base (installed near useful materials sources), there will be risk. Of course, it will be possible to set up powerful defenses to repel other players. But no defense will be designed to be completely unbeatable. Some hostile force can always be more powerful, either by numbers or by raw firepower. If such scenario happens, your base won’t be destroyed on the spot: When your base defenses will be running low, or about to be destroyed, your base will enter a temporary invulnerability mode. The duration of this mode is not exactly defined yet, but it should be at least 24 hours, to let the attacked player have time to react (calling his friends to defend his base, packing his base and relocating, etc).

 

Nothing is set in stone yet, but these are currently the main ideas of the concept 

 

More recently in a response in the territories devblog thread https://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/296-devblog-territory-control/:

 

 

This is too early to explain in details how difficult/time consuming it will be to destroy or hack a Territory Unit. Keep in mind this is an advanced feature: This won't be in Alpha. Only in Beta. And to announce right now how the balance will be wouldn�t be realistic, while we haven't talked about the combat system itself yet. Same thing for the hacking system. There will be a bit of "capture the flag" in the process, but this won't be that simple.

 

However, what we can say about it are the main design ideas we have in mind: 

 

1) Having a Time window for TU owner to react to an aggression: we don't want to see players feeling the need to be on guard 24h/24 7d/7 in the game. So after an attack lowering the shield or structure of the TU to a certain point, or a succeeded attempt to hack the TU, the involved unit will enter a temporary invulnerability mode (probably between a 24h and 48h time window). 

 

2) It's only after the temporary invulnerability mode has faded that the real attack hack can begin, and you should expect defensive from the owner(s). The victory will be decided by the most prepared side. Players in defense will have a "Stand your ground" scenario while players in attack will have a "Capture the Flag" scenario.

 

3) If the owner(s) didn't show themselves once the temporary invulnerability has faded, then destroying or hacking will probably be a matter of minutes (we are aware that shooting repeatedly for hours at something to destroy it is boring, so, if no resistance is encountered, the unit should be taken down quickly).

 

[KlatuSatori]

From all that it is clear that anywhere outside the ASA or arkified territories will be a PvP free for all.  You go out there and make your living out there at your own risk and should be well prepared.  There will be automated defenses you can use and there will definitely be mechanics in place that don't require you to be on the look out 24/7 for invaders, but ultimately you need to have good defensive plans and strategies in place.  Use your ingenuity to ensure your continuing survival out in the wild where the riches are...

[Slaxx]

they just should do it like in planetside 2.

when you capture a base, it doesnt fully belong to you until a timer runs out.

 

the way they suggest it now is a really bad idea.

 

if i want to attack a base with my forces, and have to wait 24 hours just so i can take over a little base, my soldiers will just disband over that long time period. besides, things should go quickly.

 

if i prepare an attack, or even a large scale attack, i dont have time to waste on every single little base to wait for 24 hours if i want to attack an entire empire.

 

the planetside 2 method serves well in this regard.

 

an enemy takes over a base, then a timer stars during which time the base still belongs to the enemy and has time to take it back and THAT could be 24 hours.

 

would be optimal for this game.

[KlatuSatori]

What if I am not interested in taking over it? I just want to raze it to the ground

[Gerald_Deemer]

So the real builders will be forced to build in safety zones. No one would spend time (and eventually money) for a base which lies in crumble when he comes back online.

 

I´m afraid the "destroyers" / "builders" ratio is not balanced. 1 is trying to build something and 10 are going to destroy it. What a joke....

 

If you destroy a building you should get banned from the safety zones and your bounty should get super-high, so other players are really interessted in hunting the evil players down.

 

If the game mechanics don´t support the "builders" clearly, the game will be lost.

[AlexWright]

If the game mechanics don´t support the "builders" clearly, the game will be lost.

I hate you so much right now. It's been 2 months, 9 days, 4 hours and 13 minutes since I last had to announce this but...

 

 

Lost the game.

 

 

Other then that, I agree with the rest of the statement.

[norab7]

So the real builders will be forced to build in safety zones. No one would spend time (and eventually money) for a base which lies in crumble when he comes back online.

 

I´m afraid the "destroyers" / "builders" ratio is not balanced. 1 is trying to build something and 10 are going to destroy it. What a joke....

 

If you destroy a building you should get banned from the safety zones and your bounty should get super-high, so other players are really interessted in hunting the evil players down.

 

If the game mechanics don´t support the "builders" clearly, the game will be lost.

 

I think you're thinking a little extreme there, even if the game has a lack of safe zone for the builders i'm still going to play it and i think many others are.

 

However though, i do agree with your concerns about there being a safe place to build and that the ratio of builders/destroyers will be heavily leaning towards the destroyers. But there is going to be a virtual 'world?' that you can build it to create blueprints and the like then create them in the real world.. (someone might need to help on the specifics, I've been engrossed in something else today)..

 

But there is a way to build safely, just not yet a way to build safely in the real world... (virtual real world...... grr.. whatever)..

 

EDIT: If i could downvote you AlexWright, I would.. Not because of 'the game' just that i don't think that kinda stuff should be on the forums... that is all

[Slaxx]

Lost the game.

Stop. no memes allowed.

[AlexWright]

Oh please, it's just a bit of fun.

 

Moving on to the topic at hand, I do agree with Nora that a virtual reality inside the real virtual world would be an interesting concept, and one that would likely be able to correct the imbalanced ratio of builders to destroyers. However, we must also realize that there are other factors which we are probably unaware of at this time. For instance:

 

You would still need materials to be able to build something. While you can design something in the virtual reality realm of the real-space within the game world, this would merely be a representation likely generating a blueprint for use afterwords. This allows you merely the option to design in peace, you still would not be able to build in peace unless you plan to build within the confines of arkified territory (including the territory surrounding the arkship).

 

This then comes down to the size and scope of the project. How large is that vessel? Would it extend over multiple territories, making parts of the building process safe and parts not? You probably would not be able to build some megqstructures near a planets surface, and therefore must build in unsecured space around a planet.

 

It really all comes down to the fact that while you might be able to design in peace, building in peace requires forethought and willingness to see that work through, regardless of the outcome.

[norab7]

Oh please, it's just a bit of fun.

 

Moving on to the topic at hand, I do agree with Nora that a virtual reality inside the real virtual world would be an interesting concept, and one that would likely be able to correct the imbalanced ratio of builders to destroyers. However, we must also realize that there are other factors which we are probably unaware of at this time. For instance:

 

You would still need materials to be able to build something. While you can design something in the virtual reality realm of the real-space within the game world, this would merely be a representation likely generating a blueprint for use afterwords. This allows you merely the option to design in peace, you still would not be able to build in peace unless you plan to build within the confines of arkified territory (including the territory surrounding the arkship).

 

This then comes down to the size and scope of the project. How large is that vessel? Would it extend over multiple territories, making parts of the building process safe and parts not? You probably would not be able to build some megqstructures near a planets surface, and therefore must build in unsecured space around a planet.

 

It really all comes down to the fact that while you might be able to design in peace, building in peace requires forethought and willingness to see that work through, regardless of the outcome.

 

Not a concept, they've got it in one of their DevBlogs

 

Link: https://devblog.dualthegame.com/2016/02/20/builder-gameplay-voxel-tools-elements/

 

I'm sure some part in there also says that anything designed inside the virtual world as a blueprint will be buildable quickly if you have the materials. So to answer your question, why would you start to build something precious if you didn't have the materials required for it ?

 

I'm assuming also, that the materials required are shown on the blueprint, can't remember if that's confirmed in there or not anymore.

[AlexWright]

Sorry, maybe I misspoke (I am on a cell atm) or am misunderstanding something. Being able to build from a blueprint is great, and I agreen with the concept. However, even with a blueprint things will take time to build. I believe the phrase 'Rome wasn't built in a day' would fit adequately here.

 

Now, obviously the size of the item on the blueprint would have to be taken into account for build time, even if it's an automated process. Building a small component? A few minutes to a half hour depending on materials used. Building a base? Couple of hours, again depending on size. Interstellar ship? Hours, maybe even days if you're going for a huge colony ship.

 

Point is, it should take time to go from blueprint to a physical three dimensional build. You can't just exit from designing something in real life to *snaps fingers* and poof it's there. That takes away a lot of realism and would, at least I believe, be a detriment. I'd also like to watch as the engine builds the creation following the blueprint. Maybe that's just me?

 

P.s. I didn't note anything about a virtual realm for designing in that article, but it was just a cursory glance.

[norab7]

Sorry, maybe I misspoke (I am on a cell atm) or am misunderstanding something. Being able to build from a blueprint is great, and I agreen with the concept. However, even with a blueprint things will take time to build. I believe the phrase 'Rome wasn't built in a day' would fit adequately here.

 

Now, obviously the size of the item on the blueprint would have to be taken into account for build time, even if it's an automated process. Building a small component? A few minutes to a half hour depending on materials used. Building a base? Couple of hours, again depending on size. Interstellar ship? Hours, maybe even days if you're going for a huge colony ship.

 

Point is, it should take time to go from blueprint to a physical three dimensional build. You can't just exit from designing something in real life to *snaps fingers* and poof it's there. That takes away a lot of realism and would, at least I believe, be a detriment. I'd also like to watch as the engine builds the creation following the blueprint. Maybe that's just me?

 

P.s. I didn't note anything about a virtual realm for designing in that article, but it was just a cursory glance.

 

• Virtual Simulator: enabling player to enter a virtual world (call it “inception syndrome”!). While in that virtual space, the player would be able to design any construct, in a completely peaceful setting. This would help builders to design their construct and create their blueprints safely, without being interrupted by any PvP action. For ships, it will also be possible to test their flight mode, without risking a crash or wasting resources!

[Gerald_Deemer]

 So to answer your question, why would you start to build something precious if you didn't have the materials required for it ?

 

 

 

Maybe you don´t know what materials are needed. I want to build a large vessel. What do I need? I don´t think the blueprint will tell you after planning the project, or will it?

 

I mean this would be cool. You could generate a blueprint and it tells you what materials are needed to realize the project.

So it comes to the next issue. If you can´t get the materials within the safety zone you will not be able to build any large constructs by yourself. You will need a company, a bunch of players where miners and other raw-material collectors are available.

 

So "shaping" the universe is not for the single player. It´s the power of fhe mass. The best organised group will propably have the biggest impact to the universe.

[AlexWright]

 

• Virtual Simulator: enabling player to enter a virtual world (call it “inception syndrome”!). While in that virtual space, the player would be able to design any construct, in a completely peaceful setting. This would help builders to design their construct and create their blueprints safely, without being interrupted by any PvP action. For ships, it will also be possible to test their flight mode, without risking a crash or wasting resources!

Ah, thank you. Yes I apparently missed that part. I was more interested in the LUA development blog, tbh. Thanks for pointing that out.