Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates

  1. Today
  2. Access to wallet should be the elected treasurer of the org. Only they have the power to disburse. They have to be convinced to disburse. And there should be transparency where everyone can see the balance and financial history (record). Should there be any graft committed by the treasurer, there must be a way to remove him out of power. I don't think you should limit it. If the treasurer is a trusted individual (which he should be in the first place), he won't abuse his power. That is the point of the wallet: to keep the funds in the hands of the trusted individual/s. Only the
  3. Unbelievable complaint. I have never, and will never, concern myself with anyone that has 10 accounts, much less 20. Let them no-life away.
  4. They do need to address infinitely regressed sub-orgs that have no actual members other than the parent org, but why can’t they just allow a type of org that has no superlegate? Then allow the org creators to choose initial voting mechanisms and (on creation) rules on what legates can and can’t do without voting. even allow temporary, time limited powers to certain legates, for example. Make rules like: access to wallet requires at least 3 to agree, or maximum daily wallet use limits etc. and also rules for org owned assets: containers that require two or
  5. What’s not practical in real life? Varying rocket thrust? Vectoring?
  6. Owning the land/property and possessing the land/property are 2 different things according to the law. The trespasser has rights according to the law. If they are not evicted for amount of time, they become the new owner according to the law. This is what will happen to this game, I'm telling you, otherwise what are we gonna do with the abandoned constructs/tiles?
  7. And what are we gonna do with abandoned constructs and territories since many people have quitted this game? Let me see. NQ might introduce an adverse possessor (squatter's rights) mechanics for these properties to have any use to the public than remain unused. It's a stupid law in real-life ( a very stupid one and one that I suffer as a property owner). Squatters will become a profession in this game. They will occupy someone's property until they now legally own it and they have more claim than the title holder. Seriously! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession
  8. So organizations in this game can own assets such as tiles and constructs, but what happens in the event of dissolution? Who are the individuals that are entitled to those assets? Let's say that there will be no liquidation since you have to find a buyer to sell something to liquidate something, who are the legal owners of the property according to the game now that the company is dissolved? Is there any legal framework in the game to settle these claims or it is all up to the parties? If this is so hard to resolve, then the company must find a buyer to liquidate it's properties a
  9. I agree its just adding more restriction on players. Considering they wanted the game world to be built by players they sure are trying to make it difficult. PS> You dont need to take them apart and rebuild just tokenize and use the key for the other org.
  10. I, as the owner of 3 orgs with me only as a member, find this change to be a kick in the balls. I can now look at how to get the active core of all orgs into one only because it is now no longer possible to lead the post as legate in different orgs that one owns oneself. great change, applause keep it up, this is how you make yourself popular with players. I will have no choice but to take down the buildings in the other orgs and build new ones in the main org. Not to mention that thanks to this change i will reach the core limit soon. Great cinema
  11. Yesterday
  12. Doesnt the core limit gets picked up from the best legate / or supper legate. So you could change your toon that was supper legate to be a legate and effectively you will not loose the number of core this corporation can have ?
  13. The "one child org" direction will not bear fruit here either. The infinite orgs can be solved by adding actual features that would naturally limit that. For example, like a cost and an economy that supports it. I don't really understand that. If you want to have a restriction on how many orgs you can have as a superlegate, then please not 1... tied to the account. That is not conducive to the community after seeing this change. You don't build a community feeling that way if you don't want to bring people together. In retrospect, I'm glad I'm not running an org and putting extra
  14. I can't think of an MMO where having multiple accounts doesn't generate an advantage of some kind over a player with one account. I can't think of a workable solution as free-to-play (eliminating the pay aspect) will just make things worse.
  15. you say it's pay to win like this, but what do they win? Being rich at a game where there is literally nothing worth spending it on other than building materials to build things that almost nobody will ever see or care about? DU is an impressive and beautiful game in it's best moments. But there is absolutely nothing to win no matter what you pay. If people exploiting loopholes and oversights to get rich is the issue here, fear not, people have been doing that since forever and those that wanted to get stupid level of rich have already done so and secured that wealth for eternity.
  16. Oh wow, who possibly thought of that Posting a problem to circumvent things....noone saw this coming. Except for everyone playing since alpha and the introduction of orgs Good change in and of itself but as blaze said, poor thinking on NQs part and the introduction of this
  17. indeed, not going for the exploiting person but kill a feature How many times now already? So now i must disband either CATS or Tranquility as all the legates already have more than 1 superlegacy, and most members too and i am not going to ask someone else to kill off one of their organizations. And all because somewhere someone actually made a shitload organizations to place more cores?
  18. There goes another part of JC's failed vision, nested organizations. So 5 org leaders join forces to make an alliance. But 1st they have to find a random guy to be the super legate? And that guy, not trusted by anyone will have full power over org ships and org wallet? What a disaster. One thing we can count on NQ for is to chose the wrong answer for each problem...
  19. The changes are good in themselves. The problem though is that NQ has allowed expectations and situations to evolve which will now be run into the ground. The victims are the ones using the abilities they had to create solid and interesting projects as a fallout of NQ dealing with wild growth of massive towers and waterfall orgs consisting of Alts because "Jonnie wants his own little tower all to himself", and allowing that. While the community clearly told NQ this would not end well since well before beta, NQ thought they know better and it would not get as bad. Currently we see o
  20. Probably this will kill the alliances as there is no safe way to do it in a different way
  21. Maybe there are some options to merge organizations with the same ideas that follow community projects. But if nobody wants that we will see alot less.
  22. I am having the same issue, also a community project. Also how will this affect alliances where all members of that alliance are super legates and the alliance itself chooses one of its members, and in such always a superlegate. I think there are some unforseen issues here that are forgotten just to close a door that someone used to again bypass a limitation. Hurts a lot of people for some eveldoers.
  23. I would love both but can keep neither. Rip community projects.
  24. Also, i don't think a 1 month notice will be enough since it could take a couple months to train all the talents needed to increase core limit.
  25. maybe there won't be as many space elevators or roads/runways
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...