joaocordeiro
-
Posts
1810 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by joaocordeiro
-
-
9 minutes ago, Creator said:
Obviously this is the answer to everything... "shut up and leave" could be why this game has lost so many players, to many people taking advice like this... enjoy your graveyard. ☠️
NO.
YOU ARE WRONG. The terms of use of this forum were accepted by you when you joined.
You should not have joined in the 1st place if you did not agree with the terms. You are at fault here for expecting what was written down as not expected.
Also, i perfectly explained why i agree with the decision. Make sure to comment on those reasons too to have an enriched reply.
-
This game does not use Steam, making this a very odd place to ask about how to chance the Steam picture. But at least you did it on a Off-topic section
1 - On the steam client click on view profile (top right near your wallet founds)
2 - click on "edit profile" on the right, below your avatar and steam level.
3 - click on "avatar" on the menu on tle left, below "general".
4 - click on "upload avatar" on the right, to upload your own picture.
-
I agree with NQ decision. And i dont think its censorship, because any player can still "like" posts and can still create new topics and replies.
Also, any one of us agreed to NQ moderation to be on this forum, so if you disagree you can remove you account from this private owned forum and use your freedom of speech in places not owned by NQ.
But i agree mainly because polls mainly are used to create misinformation, because polls restrict the possible answers to a few answers that creator have carefully chosen to promote his goal.
Here is my example:
Now, could they do it with an announcement? Yes.
Would it change your opinion that this is censorship? No.
-
There are several points of view to give you this answer.
Yes, i am very excited about its imaging capabilities.
If everything goes according to plan, it will provide us with wanderfull new information and images.
But, im kind of pessimistic about the entire project.
The project is composed by a large quantity of extreme mechanisms that all have to work flawlessly.
And the telescope wont go to 500km altitude where it can be repaired, like Hubble.
If i add the history of Nasa, regarding telescopes, to the amount of details needed for success, with the delays the project has suffered, to the recent accident, to the location that its going to be sent, I feel like the odds are against it.
And being hyped like it is being, it will only cause a massive frustration to everyone if something goes wrong.
For those that dont know what has details that im talking about here are some:
The telescope has several mirrors that are folded, will have to unfold perfectly, and i mean, PERFECTLY. One micron too far is a massive failure.
The telescope imaging sensors (the camara) have to be actively refrigerated, those are aimed to detect heat waves (IR to microwaves) and if the sensor is too hot, it will generate radiation it self. This requires an container with a cooling agent that will have to last years. This requires a precise control over how much cooling agent is used. Too much, we will have the telescope rendered useless in months. Too little, images gathered are full of noise and useless.
To prevent the entire telescope from heating because of the sun, there are 3 reflective shields that have to be deployed to cast a shadow into the telescope.
Those shield are rolls of a metallic reflective foil and conposed of several triangle shaped forms per shield.
The chances of all (12-30 shapes?) unfolding after the stress of launch and months of cold harsh inter planetary trevel dont look very good in my eyes.
Then all the mechanisms focus movement, reaction wheels, aeronautics, comunications have to be in working condition
And all the theory, mathematic calculations have to be perfect (we have seen this fail with Hubble)
I really hope it delivers, but im not putting my money on that horse.
-
35 minutes ago, Underhook said:
Dont know if I read it or just heard about it (so I could be wrong) but Demeter was supposed to be no rock respawn except for Sanctuary.
Op already cleared that the situation happened on sanctuary.
-
Yea.. Simple programing does not solve complex issues.
So here is what i think is happening (and was happing before in alioth):
There is a max ammount of surface stones in the entire planet.
When this value is reached, one rock needs to be minned for a new one to be free to spawn.
The problem is that the rocks you mine in your territory will have a chance to spawn anywhere in the planet.
Because most of the planet is unowned or abandoned, no one will mine those locations, creating a chance for rocks to spawn back in your territory.
Its obvious that a planetary pool of rocks does not work unless players are allowed to surface mine everywhere.
-
2 hours ago, Msoul said:
As for the platform itself, the rule is that airspace within 2km of the market building must remain clear.
What rule?
So if you buy the Territory adjacent to the platform (500m) distance, you are not allowed to park your AGG ship floating above your territory?
-
22 minutes ago, Zeddrick said:
- If someone collides with a dynamic construct that construct starts moving (based on a conservation-of-mass type of calculation based on the two relative masses of the construct). It doesn't take damage and the colliding ship does, but both keep moving.
Can you imagine, someone bored with the game, approaching a market with a L core shaped like a hockey stick and and loaded with 1000 tons, just sending all those XS ships into oblivion?
-
13 minutes ago, Jake Arver said:
Anything that does not move on a market tile for 24 hours should be impounded and available to collect from the Aphelia Impound Office at the ARK ship for a fee which increases over time and will get higher the more frequent you have to come collect your ship there.
Look, i agree with you. Thats why years ago i suggested and keep suggesting that a virtual garage is added to markets and ships despawn from game into that virtual garage after X minutes (like EVE ships entering a station)
But markets are not the only place this colisions happen.
And XS cores without voxels are not the only thing players colide against.
In addition to any measure to clean markets, I belive some kind of colision system is needed.
-
26 minutes ago, Jake Arver said:
If I may suggest.. read OP again..
So, it is a dynamic construct inside the market hex?
Nothing to do if so. Dynamic structures are allowed to enter the market territoty.
While you may say that that's not a ship or that has been there for months, it will not change the fact that the pilot needs to aproach the markets carefully because other players may have AGG ships standing on top of markets.
In the end, a colision warning system or special rendering/highlight objects in front of the ship ia the solution.
-
Thats someone's structure in someone's territory.
If they were to remove that, they would then have to remove all space elevators around the map.
So, lets talk about the "problem" , instead of the "incident".
Should continue NQ allow for structures suspended kms away from the ground?
If not, how should the rule be written?
Should the game have some mechanism to warn players that they are about to colide?
Should structures get a heavy highlight border so people can see them (like a single voxel floating in the air )
-
2 hours ago, Anopheles said:
Human nature being what it is, there will always be a "best meta" or min maxers. The only thing Devs can do to stop games from being stale is to artificially change things so there is some freshness until a new meta inevitably emerges.
That argument is true in the limit of imagination. But its often used to give up and dont even atart addressing the problems.
Games with less variation are easier to be populated by meta.
The more variation NQ can add the better.
But NQ failed to understand that variation is about variation of solutions and not variation of problems.
-
I still think the solution is to allow players to build and mine in unowned territories.
Players using unowned territories would have to share resources, space and would not have any protection against attacks (pvp zones) or someone buying the territory with a TCU.
If the territory becomes owned, the player will have X days to remove their stuff or it becomes abandoned.
This creates an alternative for casual players and new players, while allowing pros to adquire territories and being protected that way.
This would also go in the direction of "stealth mechanics" as players could opt to not own a territory, not showing in map. (NQ would have to do something about radar detection of cores) -
27 minutes ago, EvilestOverlord said:
Dont know, but it is a legit question. I am going back to space engineers on a multiplayer server personally.
If you ever need to find a girlfriend, just do what you do and hit a funeral, 50% chances of one woman becoming available
-
2 hours ago, sHuRuLuNi said:
thus forcing you to use the boring looking elements which have remained the same SINCE PRE-ALPHA)
I think you are missing the point.
There is no problem what so ever to use an element for 10 years.
The problem is when the game is soo boring in all other aspects, that you have too look for interesting things on the element that does its intended job for 10 years.
You can find way simpler and way easier games that are very adictive.
Instead of looking at those games and saying "we cant compare a MMO with tetrix" you should be thinking "why are forms, dropping from the top of a rectangle, fun while piloting a ship to Jago not fun"
-
So you are directly proposing "7 days to die" (and yes, i reserve my self the right to dont know what 7d2d is) as an alternative to DU on a DU forum?
Isn't this against the rules gainst the rules?
-
Hum?
What the hell are you talking about?
Can you state your issues, hopes, suggestions, questions in a clear way?
-
24 minutes ago, Jake Arver said:
Sure @W1zard ..
He asked for direct transcripted rights.
He wants to know the name of the right you gave.
Print screens are probably the fastest way to do this.
Most times the error is with ppl misinterpreting the the actual right means individually then they come here saying they have a problem when it was their assumption that was wrong.
So please provide direct transcripts of was is on RDMS.
-
While i understand the moral duty to do this, i wander how many color blind people are there playing games compared to Linux people.
Anyway, i hope you get your colorblind mode or at least find a 3rd party program that changes the rendering.
-
I like the idea of automining but i dont like the requirements to automine.
Most issues i have are fixable:
Taxes are fixable (lowering those down)
Calibration Minigame can become optimal for extra bonus.
NQ can remove the need for a territory to mine, making new players have some fun.
I gave a grade above 5 because the direction was good, just needs adjusting.
-
Just now, Sevian said:
Sorry, I wrapped your two questions in one answer.
Yes, you have to pay taxes on ALL tiles you own (besides Sanctuary at the moment...).
Headquarters tile DO NOT become abandoned if you do not pay, only "inactive" for MU and industry.
I did understand that. But the "and" used in that quote says that headquarter territories also need taxes to not become abandoned.
Im quite sure you are right but i would still like NQ to fix the language there.
-
8 minutes ago, Sevian said:
It won't become abandoned as explained in the few devblog postings. However, you won't be able to use MU or industry.
Tnx, any chance for a direct quote?
Because this says otherwise:
"
If you have claimed your territory, designated your headquarters, and primed your wallet with enough quanta to cover the taxes (1 million per week per territory), you’re all set and don’t need to do anything further to prepare.
"
This clearly says that my headquarters territory will need 1m quanta or i have something to prepare...
@NQ-Wanderer can you clearly say if headquarter territories can become abandoned? And fix the language used in that statement? (remember that "and" and "or" are not the same word)
-
Quick question. If i set a territory as "headquarters", do I need need to pay taxes on it to make it not become abandoned after 4 weeks?
My interpretation of the announcement topic says yes.
Buy i have heard ppl say "no" on discord/forum/ingame chat
-
55 minutes ago, W1zard said:
So with all recent updates multicrew is literally gone from DU. You can totally handle all ship by yourself even in tough pvp scenario, and it benefits you to have multiple ships, than flying a big one ship.
1. Combat engineer role:With all damage increase and addition of shields and CCS it's now not needed to repair ship while shield is active and almost impossible after that.
2. Multigunner ships:
Again with shields it's now more profitable in total HP amount to have seperate shields rather than having one big ship with many people on board.
Here is my few thoughs how these can be reintroduced to DU without big changes.
1. Make shield absorb only part of damage (e.g. 80-90%).
This way, despite having a shield active you will still need a combat engineer to fix your elements while in active combat, and not being impossible to do so (like with current damage L weapon will oneshot every element)
2. Make a dedicated engineer role.
Indroduce a new seat and interface for a new role that can do some old and possibly some new things.
Here is some ideas what that role could be:
2.1 Analyzing and changing shield resisntaces only from that new seat. (You can still fly by yourself with default resistacnes, but it will benefit you to have dedicated person on board)
2.2 Very basic power managment with three options: Weapons, Shields, Engines. (Make it same like resistences, so you can have a default even layout, but one can be lowerd to increase others). And make it available only through this new seat and interface.
2.3 Long-range radar available only in this new seat. (Like 3 or 4 s.u. detection range).
With adding benefit of other roles on board it will be more valuable to have multiple gunners on same ship, because if you want to separate them on other ships, you would need extra engineers there, and that will make it not really viable.
Multi crew gameplay is gone because you cant convince your friends to play with you...
The game allows for players to be seated in different seats with different weapons.
One can be a railgun specialist with radar talents, while another can be a cannon specialist.
The problem of pvp is not what you are saying and you solution will make the game worse.
Gunners need to do more than 4 clicks for being a gunner to be interesting.
And single players have all the right of the world to engage and have a chance to win against your team.
Polls Gone From Forums
in General Discussions
Posted
Are you not free to provide your "feedback"?
What censorship are you talking about?
They removed one typology of feedback. One often used to miss represent the opinion of players.
We all know how to make a biased poll with only options that favor our objective.