Okay so, I'd just like to point out that I'm not really a diehard proponent for Dual Universe. It's just something I'd like to get funded, but I don't necessarily believe in every single thing the developer says. My "tactic" of getting hyped for games has worked for Starbound, No Man's Sky, Stellaris, Beyond Earth, and more. Sure, some of the games didn't exactly live up to my expectations, but in teh end I still enjoyed every game.
Except NMS. But I bought that a week after release after being very obviously against it in the NMS thread pre-release.
But regardless.
As I said, while it looks cool, the budget and the amount of features not even on the table has me immediately skeptical and apprehensive. You can see, in your first picture, some mounted turrets; what would those turrets even fire against if combat isn't a base part of the game?
Well, while the ship-to-ship combat as a stretchgoal is definitely a strange choice, there almost definitely is combat (vague, I know). In their explanation for the grids feature they did mention fighting for this kind of stuff. So while you may not have combat between capital ships or fighters, you probably will have personnel combat.
With territory comes combat ...
So there definitely is combat. Question is to what extent exactly. We just know that without the stretch goal/post-release updates, it'll be entirely ground-based at the very most.
But yeah. Being skeptical is perfectly fine. I talked about maybe backing it myself, but honestly, I don't think I would now. It's not because I don't necessarily fully trust the developers, it's just that the risk, whatever it is, isn't worth early access/$10 off.
It has to be done to be done right
Okay,
this is stupid. It's a figure of speech. Besides, I'm talking about the design here, which is already done.