Leogradance
-
Posts
143 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Leogradance
-
-
16 hours ago, joaocordeiro said:
If you can afford a pc capable of running DU you can afford to WAIT a month for a refund that NQ has no obligation to pay with out doing a bank escalation.
Anyway, you dont know.
Its only a your supposition. Cant know situations.
-
I am not an expert.
yet it seems so damn easy to understand that DU's graphics are inferior to that of any contemporary game because the other games are all pre-built 3D models, while the voxel doesn't work that way.
the game is tough because the possibilities offered are gigantic.
At least when it comes to creating with the voxel. You really have no idea what you can do with the voxel, if you did you would immediately understand why there is such a difference.And anyway DU has great graphics
Need only a lot of optimization, ok. Will arrive. We are in beta. Keep calm and patience.
-
47 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:
Not the same. I'm talking about something that automatically places voxels (or elements) to the other side of the plane when you place them. One click places both voxels/elements.
Yes. I understood. but it is superfluous at the moment. With a few more clicks you get the same result.
47 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:"No Clip" is when your character model is able to move through otherwise solid objects. Allowing this as an option in build mode would let you move through walls/floors/elements/etc to get a better angle when placing voxels or elements.
Mh. Easy exploitable. I can understand you. But voxel dynamics could transform a feature in an exploit.
47 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:For example, the barrier can only be rotated around its Y axis. I shouldn't have to place voxels at specific angles to rotate an element a specific way; I should be able to just rotate it freely.
This should apply to everything. Current tools are rather ... anti-intuitive. But they still allow you to do whatever it takes.
47 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:Difficult to explain. You would select a number of voxels and/or elements. Assign them as a group. From that point forward, instead of selecting all of them again, you can select the entire group with one click and then modify the group, but you can also select individual parts within the group if you want.
Understood. I think ?
Yeeeeeeesno. You can create a template of voxel portion inside or in another construct, copy and paste or modify when you need.
47 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:I must be encountering a bug then, because when I try to paste into another construct I get an "invalid construct" error.
Sure.
-
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:
• Lighting. Add an option to enable "global" lighting that evenly lights the entire construct area, instead of using the world lighting.
No.
If you want a better place for building, build a shipyard.
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• Mirroring. Add a "mirror" tool that lets users add one or more planes to the construct area that mirror elements and voxels placed on one side of the plane.
You can to do already: copy and mirroring. Only voxel.
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• Copy/Cut & Paste Elements. Allow copying/cutting elements and pasting them. Also allow copying/cutting & pasting voxels and elements simultaneously.
Mmmh... maybe. No feels need.
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• No Clip. Add an option to enable "no clip" while in build mode.
Not understood
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• All-axis rotation. Allow the rotation of elements around all axes; a number of elements only allow rotation around one or two axes.
You can already. Axis rotation depends about refer surface
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• Vertex editing. Add mode that allows moving individual vertices on voxels. Also allow the selection and movement of multiple vertices at once.
Yes. This should be very helpful.
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• Groups. Allow the ability to assign elements and voxels to "groups". A group can then be moved, rotated, copied/cut, deleted, etc.
Not understood.
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• Blueprints w/o cores. Allow users to create blueprints from voxels and elements they have selected, but do not include the core. They can then paste those to other constructs.
You can alreadt copy from a core and paste in another construct
11 minutes ago, Teufelaffe said:• Wireframe option. Add an option when using the link tool to have all voxels displayed as wireframes to make it easier to see connections between elements that go through walls, floors, etc.
No feels need
-
technically, $ 5 or $ 500 makes no difference. If they have agreed to the refund, they are right to be bothered by the delay.
If, on the other hand, he has asked for a refund and they have not answered him, it is different.
But pointing out how much 5 dollars is is wrong: not only at the change from country to country that money can change a lot, but also subjectively you cannot know how much it is worth for that specific person.
-
Im not sure where search this on discord. So im here.
Looking a specific voxel library, the '2d voxel board", laser version, by Stan - NRD
Anyone can help me? Or tell me who can help me?
-
6 hours ago, Moosegun said:
Completely wrong sorry I run an org with 20+ people, NONE of them 'like' pvp in as far as they do not play the game for pvp, they do not look for pvp, they joined an industrial org, BUT 100% of those players ACCEPT that pvp is part of the game that they bought, and that it WILL EVENTUALLY be mainly player regulated. All your comments are based on the ridiculous notion that it is only players that LOOK for pvp that want it is the game, this is fundamentally WRONG, sorry and I can put your in contact with 20+ org leaders who feel the same way. There are a lot of groups in this game who will be happy to defend the assets of those willing to work with them.
We are working together, alongside other orgs, to put in place measures to make sure when PvP EVENTUALLY (several months away) comes to the rest of the game we are prepared for it. So should everyone else.
Noone is yet to address my point that you can do everything in the game currently with zero risk of pvp anyway (apart from fly in certain areas of space where there is nothing to do but pvp)No. I'm right instead. And the reason is very simple: it is atavistic.
Man acts on emotions. Whatever choice he makes will always be based on the emotions he feels. Even if you think it's rational, it's because going in that direction will give you a pleasure to do it.
It is not something you choose whether it is so or not.
That's it.
If you want to pvp it is because you are convinced that doing it will preserve the pleasure you feel in playing DU.
Let me talk to 100 leaders if you think: the speech is always the same.Emotions.
Anyway my answer was not specifically aimed at people who want PVP to preserve the other things they like to do in DU, but to those who want it as an end in itself and especially to those who mock those who do not want it with the 'adduction that "they want to save their pixels", which is a childish motivation, provocative and unworthy of adult reasoning. -
I would like to try to understand why people who want indiscriminate pvp (and precise - indiscriminate - because pvp itself is certainly not bad, if regulated) keep saying that those who don't want it are worried about pixels.
What should it be? A provocation I guess.
I refuse to believe that you can be convinced of such a stupid thing.The concept is very simple.
Those who pvp do it because they like it. In this sense it means that it causes him positive feelings.
Assuming this, it is impossible that one cannot understand that since pvp is a subjective activity, there are people who like these emotions and others don't like them.And for those who wanted a pvp game, it has already been clearly stated several times: this game will have an open pvp as part of the game, not the primary activity.
PS: what is the name of the repair module? this is very interesting
-
The BP allows me to recreate from scratch a structure of which I made a blue print. But not to repair damaged voxel sections.
If I have a construct, be it static or dynamic, filled with complex details made with the Voxel, unless I have missed something very important (and if so, please tell me because it changes my life! LOL) there is no tool that allows me to restore parts of that voxel, but only to replicate the whole construct. So I would have to, in order to "fix it", completely dismantle the previous construct and reuse the BP. Unless I organize myself with a second construct made only of the voxel form of the first to be used to "copy and paste" on the first. But even then it wouldn't work effectively and voxel handlers know that it's not enough to copy and paste the voxel to place it well.Welcome to you too
The fact that I play alone does not mean that I "am alone"
But thanks for your concern.
If in the future I find myself seeking shelter and the people I work with are no longer available, I will certainly consider leaning on orgs.
Or just drop the game. Some say it as if it should be a threat, or I don't know what ... if something that created me pleasure becomes disturbing and I can keep it from bothering me by simply not doing it, I generally don't do it anymore.
The problem isn't what I'm going to do though.
The problem is that many will do so.But I'm not hiding by saying that a pvp or pve mechanic is necessary or not.
I'm interested in having fun.DU is beautiful at the moment. I like it. I relax and it's fun.
The PVP part doesn't interest me. They say it is very lacking and still needs a lot of work. I am unable to speak about what PVP would need.
But I am quite capable of understanding what it would cause and my fears are the same that have already been expressed and emphasizing or repeating them makes no sense.We'll see.
-
I do not know.
Optimization is certainly completely lacking if not completely absent. I expect it to be among the last things they will work on, just before the release.
Regarding the Voxel technology, DU is perhaps a little ahead of the times, but it has already improved appreciably.
-
DU is not an easy game and I hope it won't be.
However "difficult" does not mean "incomprehensible", and it is undeniable that many game mechanics and tools are not very intuitive or completely unexplained.I am against all the changes proposed at the top of the post.
The way the game is, they are fine as they are. -
Another reason why I am very worried and against indiscriminate PVP concerns creativity.
I currently see a multitude of extremely elaborate works. We talk about advanced and aesthetically exceptional voxelmancy.
Not just ships, but lots of buildings and org bases too. And not just small orgs.The voxel in pvp is deleted. And there is currently no voxel "repair" tool.
This means that the simplest forms will be rewarded in a pvp context for the speed of use and optimization.
Because once all the artistically beautiful creations are canceled, why spend resources and time to redo them? For the amusement of who will return to destroy them?
The cities with the tall towers full of glass and rich in detail will become endless expanses of flat and smooth cubes and the ships will have the appearance of flying cubes.I'm sure pvp lovers don't care. Yet I Play was also advertised for its creative side. So it is objectively an important part wanted and programmed by the developers.
If the current safe zone becomes permanent in the future, I would be delighted. There is a whole huge remaining solar system in which to build cube-shaped bases and shoot flying cubes and cylinders.
There is space to do all of these things. I don't see the need to force those who don't want to pvp to suffer it.
Above all, I don't see the need to condition the whole creative aspect in function of a single component of the game.If you think that making beautiful ships or buildings is silly, that they are just "beautiful sandcastles", you are right about castles, but you are greatly underestimating the advertising aspect of building a really cool ship or base.
Because if 2 years ago I had seen DU ships in the shape of cubes with wings, with the heck I would have done my subscription!Someone mentioned ethical or moral arguments.
Nonsense.
It is a game and what we are discussing is entertainment.
I know he talks about mechanics that should have fun for us.
Realism and morals are not topics for discussion -
12 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:
The point of the alts is, when you stick to your vision you pitched as a game company, you are rewarded with loyal customers that spends money on your product. And yes new players are needed too, but NQ shouldn't cater or listen to her fly by night people who pop in, lose a ship, and complain then unsub. Chances are they weren't gonna stick around long term anyway. I'm very passionate about stuff like this, because of the many things that happened to eve online. A vocal minority whined about being ganked, and while eve didn't remove it, they just nerfed it and mechanics over and over. They went with quick fixes to appease people thinking it would generate more subs and it didnt happen. The opposition happened. Instead they could have looked st balance options or new game play mechanics. General sweeping nerfs are often very bad, especially when it goes against Core mechanics. Eve highsec use to be a place where you could pvp beyond ganking, but it was nerf after nerf.
Ok. Now I understand your point of view, and while I disagree with indiscriminate PvP in DU, I have played other PvP games in a hardcore way and have seen them ruined by reckless developer choices.
But the point is, it's not the people who complain about the problem. They will always be there, everywhere, in any situation.
Even if you have the perfect game, there will be complaints.
Complaints are not the problem.
It is to evaluate them and find appropriate solutions. If the game goes well or badly, it will not be the fault of the community, but of those who have managed it.So far I have seen NQ find a series of technical innovations that despite the undeniable other mistakes still make me trust in their work
-
57 minutes ago, Moosegun said:
Great post but you have slightly missed my point, I am not interested in my opinion, I am interested in the DEVS sticking to THEIR opinion, which has been very open and honest from the start, that there will be limited safe spaces (sanc moon) and the rest will be self governed open pvp.
I am interested in large player made governance, I am interesting in building a civilisation and civilisation comes with unified defence. I have no issue with solo hermit players at all, I have an issue when they want to divert the game from the devs stated path. If people do not want open pvp, why did they buy a game which open publicised it would be the case, I will tell you why, because they knew if they complained enough it would change....... and I can see it coming. Solo hermit do nothing to contribute to civilisation, nothing to make the world bigger or better, they just offer soft targets when the fighting does start.
Please note that all of my opinion are solely based on NQ giving us all the tools we need to properly implement player made security / defence. I STRONGLY believe that this includes some sort of robust offline protection, and generally strong defence. NQ have also gone on record that they will strongly favour the defender AND that offence pvp will have to be planned to be successful. Still interested to see who they are going to achieve this.
Did like the shitting in my hand comment lolNaah. I absolutely do not think that soloists come aware that they can then change the game.
I was personally drawn to the creative abilities of the game and that is what attracted a considerable amount of players.
The fact that many are also interested in PvP is because the game's target range is very large. It's a sandbox for that too.The point is, if you let me do indiscriminate PvP everywhere, apart from a small safe zone, it's no longer a sanbox game with PvP elements, but a PvP game with sandbox elements.
And that's what's wrong.People who want PvP will have it. But forcing those who don't want to do it isn't "PvP". It is a "stretch". And whether it is realistic or not is certainly not a problem: the sun is a cartoon in the sky and the planets are stationary! LOL
About poop: it is an Italian saying that means "it causes me a strong performance anxiety". More or less
-
36 minutes ago, JohnnyTazer said:
Then this game isnt for you. Same people cry over and over about being ganked in eve. I dont give a fucking shit what their reasons are, because they are wrong. Point blank. Because the DEVELOPERS of eve said high sec isnt safe. The DEVELOPERS of NQ said the majority of the universe will be open pvp. I don't go to carebear games and whine and complain why I can gank someone, instead I just go to a game that let's me (eve). People will argue about money, saying a developer should do whatever brings in the most money but that is just absurd. They are trying to make a game, their game, and a somewhat unique one.
Here is another thing, I'm more valued customer than the solo carebear. There is no denying it. A lot of my pvper friends in eve sub lots of alts with our credit cards, and purchase lots of Plex. Same will happen in DU. Some months me and a buddy would spend over 1k a month on eve. He subs 12 accounts with his CC, I do 6. And we buy plex packs. NQ already knows they if they go back on their promise of freedom and open world and player driven they will lose massive money, because at that point they are backing off on the original vision they sold us on, the reason we even backed the game.
1. I urge you to stay calm. You're unjustifiably animating.
2. Honestly, I understand nothing of your opposition. I didn't say I don't want pvp.
3. Whether you have 1, 10 or 100 accounts to whom and what should change?
Let me understand: do you have a particular privilege more than those with fewer accounts than you? You already have an advantage because you have more. What should you still be entitled to?4. I take your opinion into account.
But as for whether the game is for me or not, I invite you to stop expressing yourself about it: it is a judgment that is not up to you and declaring it is totally worthless. -
1 hour ago, Moosegun said:
100% bet that the majority of players crying about pvp and safe zones are also solo players. EVERY game I go to they do the same thing. join and MMO, play solo (why do they join an MMO in the first place), complain that they can do everything large groups can, complain that they are getting 'zerged' even though they could easily be protected by playing in a bigger group. They have no interesting in being part of 'civilisation' they want to be hermits but they also want the game changed to suit them.That's exactly how it is. Mostly at least.
The point is, it's not wrong.
It is a voice in the choir, who wants to be heard. The same way you make yours heard and express your opinion.It doesn't matter if you can't understand the reasons for playing solo in an MMO. Nobody can understand everything about everyone. What is important is that they recognized the existence of different points of view.
Which is what happens in an MMO, which is basically a social container.And if you accept the risk of pvp and what it entails is your choice. That others may or may not share.
This does not automatically give you wrong or right.
You accept it.
Others don't.Personally: this is a game. I'm here to have fun. If the pvp becomes insiscriminate and everywhere, I will move to the sanctuary moon and greetings. I'll dig there and probably get bored and drop the game.
Do you know why?
Because pvp in a sandbox MMO makes me shit in my hand. I'm honest.
It's not the pixels.
But the comparison. The sense of helplessness and abuse that I would suffer, the idea of being attacked while I'm doing something that has nothing to do with pvp.
I don't have to "be strong". It's a game. I have to have fun. If I don't enjoy it, I cry and quit.This is what happens to non-pvpers.
I don't care if you understand it or not.I care that you understand that if you don't understand or share a thing that isn't automatically wrong.
-
praise the sun!
lololSeriously.
PVP will reach everywhere. Sooner or later, excluding the promised zones.But whether it helps the economy or not is another matter.
And I'd like those who want pvp to stop justifying it as a useful mechanic to make the game work.
I find more honest people who tell me they want to blow up other people's ships because they find it funny than someone who insists with this nonsense that it will help the economy.
-
I think you have really optimized the production capacity of a tiles on the sanctuary moon.
Personally what I did was:
1. Claimed the territory in a place that I like
2. enjoy the view
3. leaveI haven't dug a single hole in the moon sanctuary. the amount of minerals and the type you can get from them are limited.
I currently have a base on Alioth of 2 M cores, 2 outposts on Madis, 6 ships of which a carrier to carry around the other 5 and still several tens of thousands of liters of raw materials and parts for ships (I build ships).
And I play alone.
The sanctuary moon is an initial area.
Use it to understand the game but don't stop there, the game starts out there. -
in the lineup of jobs to do the pvp on the planets is among the last (c is on the first page at login, no guesswork).
Considering the time to do everything else, I think it will not arrive for 6-9 months.
And maybe I'm optimistic.
So don't rush to leave the sanctuary for this.Rather consider that once you run out of resources in your land you will have to find a way to continue without.
In this sense you can rely on orgs, or go to other planets, trade or sell services etc. -
I love you!
I mean: I'm a ship builder and designer with a very different target than yours (mine are more like "sports ships"), but this commercial is really fun to read: DI expect more and soon!
-
NPC? Please no.
Putting NPCs to tell you what to do means using a significant amount of resources to create a system of automatic missions that reward players for doing something.
It is a typical mechanism of modern games.
Would putting it in DU hurt?
I'm not sure.
Maybe that's an interesting thing that could come in the future, but certainly not a priority.I have been trying to return to my shipyard for three days to start a new ship and I still haven't gone there because:
1. I helped some friends with their project
2. I fixed the cargo ship of one of them that was badly set up (he still owes me 2kk: D)
3. I blew up my carrier and had to do my best not to waste 3 hours fixing it
4. I went to retrieve friends in Alioth laps that had been crashed or lost for various reasons
5. I went to mine (half hour) to get two bucks (500k) to buy some things
6. Opened a collaboration between org
7. and first of all I built a carrier in 3 hours to transport my smaller shipsAnd I don't have a penny in my pocket, nor can I say I'm full of resources.
There are things to do. In abundance.
There is no time to do them. -
17 hours ago, pewpewpew said:
I have zero interest in industry.
I'm a pilot that also mines, literally mine tons and instant sell, made 5 different ships so far (by parts from market), latest a nice big fat hauler. I bet I make more money faster than you. Mining is super easy cash cow, they will probably nerf it eventually.
I didn't understand what you mean. I have 4 ships, 2 M core bases, and numerous industry and container pieces.
The problem is not making money: the problem is that the markets don't sell you everything.
So what you can do is limited by what the market offers you, and you are forced to use the industry to do the rest or trade with other players by adapting and hoping to find what you need.It is not a question of speed, but of opportunity.
-
I currently have this problem with the difference that I made the BP of one of my ships that I could not fly because since last night it keeps giving me the error "this elements is already in use".
So I took it apart, bought a new seat (because I couldn't take it apart) and after abandoning the old core I tried to place the ship from the new BP and ... ECU error.
But I don't have any custom scripts on the old seat.I will try with a BP from an older version.
Could it be that the error that led me to this also affected the BP?
-
I am unable to help you with your technical issues or where to direct you for a refund.
I can tell you is that they are officially arranging to offer a month of free subscription following the numerous connection problems.
PVP possible in "Safe Zone"
in General Discussions
Posted
Exploit.
Clear and limpid.
It is not a bug. It is not a glitch. But an exploit yes, and it has already been amply explained why.
The "safe zone" must be "safe. It is not" safe zone but be careful ".
It's "safe zone" and that's it.
Sanboxes have always been full of these things and will continue to be. There will always be those who play by the rules and those who play by exploiting the rules.
Regarding this specific act: it is useless to talk about it. Many answers are only trolling.
Report and hope they change the mechanics as soon as possible.