joaocordeiro
-
Posts
1810 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by joaocordeiro
-
-
2 minutes ago, Anopheles said:
You managed to make salvaging as a valid pve experience even more unlikely. Well done. Again.
Maybe they can reactivate random spanning of abandoned ships, so this mechanic can exist without any dependence from player's assets.
And technically, if some player has to lose his ship for you to get it, its PvP -
38 minutes ago, Creator said:
Regarding NQ's communication, I made a post on this...
I think this is probably the root issues even more than the changes themselves... how the changes are announced/communicated.Is there a reason for you to spam this forum?
Cant you use this topic or the oficial one to express your feed back?
Do you have to make publicity on this topic about your "Now im pissed, now they gonna hear me good!!"?
Cant you just go take a walk in the park to vent your frustration?
Can you play CS go against easy bots and headshot them all?
-
PS, you do not represent the community in anyway. And it does not matter how many documents you send to NQ via email.
The community includes all those players that have abandoned the game and those are the majority of players and you dont represent a single one of them.
So please change this crap topic's title to "Creator VS NQ"
-
27 minutes ago, Creator said:
Avoid forcing players who have inactive subs to resub just to protect assets
Can you read yourself?
Should NQ point guns at our heads to play their game?
How about making the game fun to play? Maybe then players return.
We all have valid (DAC wise) subscriptions, our ships and territories have the same right to exist and create load as yours.
Making hostile actions against players that are waiting for the game to be fun is not the solution.
Play your game, report your issues and STFU about what NQ should do with other player's assets.
-
10 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:
So basically as long as I play my cards close to my chest, I can do whatever I want and not be accused of any wrong doing?
Yes.
Just like you can say "i was shot" and explain the pain it created, but you can't say "you shot me" without prof.
Its about removing the accusation from the equation.
-
1 minute ago, CptLoRes said:
Nope.. NQ is an organization. But if you replaced NQ with a specific person in NQ, then I would agree.
Dont see the difference.
Whats the difference between accusing one single person of ill intentions or accusing a group of people?
If you have no inside knowledge of the factors that lead to the decision, its still an unfounded accusation l.
-
8 minutes ago, Maxim Kammerer said:
Well, that makes no sense at all - unless NQ already decided to wipe with release.
Yes and no.
Yes, i think a wipe has already been decided.
No, it would still make sense even without a wipe.
Currently, being beta and with all the issues around the game not being interesting, NQ has not activated any real "abandoned subscription" measures.
But I fully expect those measures to be implemented at release.
But a "abandoned subscription" is an account without a valid DAC for several months.
If someone keeps paying the DACs for their account, their stuff will never be deleted/abandoned.
-
A quick note:
While its 100% legit for anyone to talk about the impact of NQ's decision, it is not ok to say that NQ intended this or that. Unless we have direct prof.
What i mean is.
Its ok for any player to say "I felt threatened by the automatic abandoning of territories"
Because this is a feeling you own. Its yours to state as a fact.
But its not Ok to say "NQ wanted to threaten players with the automatic abandoning of territories"
Because what NQ intended to do is not yours to state as a fact.
Saying that NQ intended to threaten players can be considured an insulting accusation.
-
10 minutes ago, Underhook said:
If I understand this correctly:
NQ gambled that they could threaten non playing (paying) players that if they didnt come back they would lose everything.
I dont think you are understanding it correctly.
I think taxation was never aimed at abandoned territories or players.
100% about balancing/moderating automining.
After the announcement they realized the consequences for abandoned territories and created a fix.
-
1 hour ago, Jake Arver said:
That's bascially removing a core argument they hav eused as to why taxation of tiles is a thing that is good.
I dont think taxation was implemented because of abandoned territories.
I think taxation was implemented to moderate automining.
Also to have some base for a future territory warfare, where paid territories have some kind of protection against pvp.
-
Actually i missread your comment. So
Removed..
-
Hey @NQ-Pann, do you have any reaction to the endless stream of threads complaining and suggesting changes to taxation?
-
11 minutes ago, VandelayIndustries said:
All you have to do is use the light from the nebula and you will never crash again. Your words.
To bad you can't understand that there are complicated problems that require complicated solutions.
The nebula does help me. But wont do miracles when the game simply does not render.
-
Just now, Megabosslord said:
You mean my 6 arguments. Did you even read the whole post?
Did you read mine?
The original one had quite a large reply.
-
1 minute ago, Megabosslord said:
Try to keep up.
My statement is a valid opinion being against your sole argument or against something already decided by NQ.
NQ should not wipe or "abandon" any thing in the with the sole intention of reducing load.
Because they are just dodging the problem. A badly crafted mechanic that does not support a large population.
-
1 minute ago, Creator said:
I do think we need to do something about build height. That is my feedback on this thread.
The problem is "what"..
A simple limitation?
1000m? To allow for agg parking?
Below 1000m?
I dont see a big issue with tall structures, the issue i see is with poor rendering that leads to poor pilot awareness of those structures.
Structure stability could be a thing. Making tall structures require very large bases and eliminating floating blocks.
But this would require a huge ammount of new and hard coding.
Maybe rules could force players to make the structures with allot more width instead of 1 single voxel, that way rendering at a higher distance and being clearly visible.
-
How about you try to play the game as it was intended to be played and provide feedback about it?
This is beta. Its a time to experiance the game and provide feedback.
You are expected to not find any territory available near a market, and deal with that.
Lets say that NQ deletes 1000 subs and frees territories, how fake is your evaluation of the game and its performance if you are living in a reality that will not match the crowded end game?
Same with load because of bases and ships standing idle.
Same as space towers.
Do those things decrease your game quality GOOD, now provide feedback about it.
If the game ever takes off with a huge population, those things will happen and NQ needs to hear from them now.
So your crappie game play experiance has nothing to do with the game not deleting abandoned stuff, but with the game design not providing a good experience when too many players exist.
Thats why NQ should never delete anything in this beta. For ppl like you to test the game under realistic circumstances.
Also, anyone with a valid subscription should never get their stuff deleted, no matter how much you want to salvage it...
Again, if you have a problem making quanta, getting elements, having interesting stuff to do, dont call for salvage into idle accounts, simply report your issues with the feedback tools so we can all have a great game without those issues in the future.
-
Just now, Creator said:
word ?
Same here
-
1 minute ago, Creator said:
Do you win if you get the last word? ?Do you?
-
Im still waiting from 1B quanta from each of you guys that believe polls have any relevance, as decided by:
-
2 minutes ago, Creator said:
I was humoroursly pointing to your behavior
That answer is also valid for me.
I was also humorously pointing to your behavior.
Now that we all humored each other, do you understand that removing one form of feedback is not censorship as long as another form, one more complete and detailed is available?
-
4 minutes ago, Creator said:
Touts the terms of use of the forums, and violates them by getting political... you just validated my previous statement.
Now one question for you sir, have you renewed your expired auto-warranty? ?And what did you do when you asked me if i was a forum cop? Was it not a personal attack? Was it a argument about the subject of the topic?
So dont do personal attacks to others and you may not get replied the same way...
Its not censorship, because they allow any player to express their concerns. Just not in the format of limited option polls that you then trow at NQ as proff they dont hear you..
-
1 minute ago, Creator said:
Interesting, coming from someone claiming "perfectly explained" responses... smells more like hypocrisy & arrogance to me.?Often the smell you feel is coming from your own mouth(specially while using covid masks)
-
Staggering Upkeep - Discussion thread
in General Discussions
Posted
Nope. You wanted an easy (defenseless) kill to loot. NQ said No, now you are frustrated.
it's a normal reaction.
But you should encourage NQ to add actual fun stuff to do in the game.