joaocordeiro

The game "From the depths" has rotating and piston sub constructs. Not only that but those sub constructs can also have their own subconstructs.
 
Some rare times, a quick glitch happens when 2 ships colide with each other. 
But mostly it works fine. 

Kind of the same reason catapults are not in the game despite having been invented many many centuries ago. 

GG NASA. 

Kind of the same reason catapults are not in the game despite having been invented many many centuries ago. 

Kind of the same reason catapults are not in the game despite having been invented many many centuries ago. 

GG NASA. 

I do know some ppl that find it rewarding to scan, dig, find and mine ore. 
 
Specially ppl with jobs that are hard to set or achieve near term objectives. 
 
For those ppl that spent their entire work day asking "whats the point", being able to set a objective (finding iron) and accomplishing it is very rewarding. 

Historically this type of questions, trying to frame the unframable usually have an agenda. I wander if this one also has one. 
 
"What kind of game is this to you?"... 
This assumes the definition of "the kind of game" is not set by NQ but a open topic with several divergent opinions. 
 
A proper question could be:
"What kind of game would you like DU to evolve to? " 
OR
"What aspect of the game do you enjoy the most? " 
Those 2 questions have personal opinions as answer. 
Yours does not. 

@Abilton how frequent is your news paper?

Because I'm on enjoying your fight with the "dual universe today". And i was expecting to see one after the other every day.

NASA TV
NASA Television Upcoming Events
Watch NASA TV
ALL TIMES U.S. EASTERN 
Regularly Scheduled Programming
 NASA TV Schedule for Week of Feb. 15, 2021
Live Events and Special Programming
FEBRUARY
 
Feb. 18, Thursday
12:30 p.m. -- Mars Landing day live stream for students (All Channels)
1 p.m. – Mars Rover Perseverance Landing Live Chat at the National Air and Space Museum (All Channels)
2:15 p.m. – Mars 2020 Perseverance landing coverage. Landing at approximately 3:55 p.m. (All Channels)
5:30 p.m. – Mars 2020 Perseverance post-landing coverage (All Channels) 
 

Look, everyone is entitled to give their opinion. Even if it is one very aggressive and disconnected from reality like this one you just gave.
Then other ppl are free to disagree like I am disagreeing with you
 
So lets go in parts:
 
Look, no matter who you are, you don't have the right to call ppl "shit stain".
If you want don't want to be a "negative community member" you replace "shit stain" with "negative community member" and treat ppl properly. Or you become one of the ppl that you don't like.
 
Completely agree with you. That guy, that made a privacy breach by exposing a LinkedIn profile of an NQ employee was wrong. Not just wrong, but very wrong.
But he was not "very wrong" because of his opinion of the performance of NQ dev team. He was very wrong only on exposing private data on NQ.
In your opinion, all those ppl that bashed NQ, but did not expose private information, should LEAVE?
Who the hell do you think you are to say that someone who invested 400€ 5 years ago on the project and has been filling up bug reports ever since the bug report site went online are not welcome and should LEAVE?
 
Should I tell you that your 6 days of account and 5 posts on the forum make you someone without any informed opinion? NO.
You are a valid player. One that has the full right to have noob questions, noob ideas and zero experience on this game.
You have the right to get an answer from us and a proper argumentation when we dispute your claim or opinion.
 
BUT SO DO WE.
If we feel like there is some kind of gain to tell that NQ sucked, we have EVERY RIGHT TO DO IT.
 
Got it?

Look, everyone is entitled to give their opinion. Even if it is one very aggressive and disconnected from reality like this one you just gave.
Then other ppl are free to disagree like I am disagreeing with you
 
So lets go in parts:
 
Look, no matter who you are, you don't have the right to call ppl "shit stain".
If you want don't want to be a "negative community member" you replace "shit stain" with "negative community member" and treat ppl properly. Or you become one of the ppl that you don't like.
 
Completely agree with you. That guy, that made a privacy breach by exposing a LinkedIn profile of an NQ employee was wrong. Not just wrong, but very wrong.
But he was not "very wrong" because of his opinion of the performance of NQ dev team. He was very wrong only on exposing private data on NQ.
In your opinion, all those ppl that bashed NQ, but did not expose private information, should LEAVE?
Who the hell do you think you are to say that someone who invested 400€ 5 years ago on the project and has been filling up bug reports ever since the bug report site went online are not welcome and should LEAVE?
 
Should I tell you that your 6 days of account and 5 posts on the forum make you someone without any informed opinion? NO.
You are a valid player. One that has the full right to have noob questions, noob ideas and zero experience on this game.
You have the right to get an answer from us and a proper argumentation when we dispute your claim or opinion.
 
BUT SO DO WE.
If we feel like there is some kind of gain to tell that NQ sucked, we have EVERY RIGHT TO DO IT.
 
Got it?

Look, everyone is entitled to give their opinion. Even if it is one very aggressive and disconnected from reality like this one you just gave.
Then other ppl are free to disagree like I am disagreeing with you
 
So lets go in parts:
 
Look, no matter who you are, you don't have the right to call ppl "shit stain".
If you want don't want to be a "negative community member" you replace "shit stain" with "negative community member" and treat ppl properly. Or you become one of the ppl that you don't like.
 
Completely agree with you. That guy, that made a privacy breach by exposing a LinkedIn profile of an NQ employee was wrong. Not just wrong, but very wrong.
But he was not "very wrong" because of his opinion of the performance of NQ dev team. He was very wrong only on exposing private data on NQ.
In your opinion, all those ppl that bashed NQ, but did not expose private information, should LEAVE?
Who the hell do you think you are to say that someone who invested 400€ 5 years ago on the project and has been filling up bug reports ever since the bug report site went online are not welcome and should LEAVE?
 
Should I tell you that your 6 days of account and 5 posts on the forum make you someone without any informed opinion? NO.
You are a valid player. One that has the full right to have noob questions, noob ideas and zero experience on this game.
You have the right to get an answer from us and a proper argumentation when we dispute your claim or opinion.
 
BUT SO DO WE.
If we feel like there is some kind of gain to tell that NQ sucked, we have EVERY RIGHT TO DO IT.
 
Got it?

I will tell you a story.

When I 1st join this community, several years ago,
I came to this forum and asked NQ for info about if NPCs where going to be a thing.
I specifically said I did not wanted anyone else but NQ to answer me.
Yet some ppl replied with their opinion or interpretation of the information available.
 
I was really upset that ppl did not respect my wish to see NQ answer it and flipped on some guy, an old timer.
The community all came to me and defended that guy, bashing me for my response to him.
 
At that time, full of selfishness and afraid that ppl would set me aside I said I was sorry and asked for forgiveness. At that time I did not meant it, I just wanted to contain the situation.
After I did this, all the other guys started to give me some links with the answer I wanted.
Later on that thread, NQ replied. The entire community was quite happy with the new info.
 
It was much later that I understood that that old timer, and the other guys there replied to me, breaking my request, because they wanted to help me. To give me a reply. To make me a part of the community.
 
Over the years I have had many debates with those same members from that day. Some times, i disagree with them, sometimes i agree with them.
Sometimes I don't even agree on how they frame their posts.
And I blame some of them for bad choices that NQ did.
 
But never again I doubted the love they had for this game and for this community.
 
 
You may not feel it now.
But if you are still a member of this community in 3 years, I guarantee you that you will regret your choices today. Just like I regret mine that day.

Look, everyone is entitled to give their opinion. Even if it is one very aggressive and disconnected from reality like this one you just gave.
Then other ppl are free to disagree like I am disagreeing with you
 
So lets go in parts:
 
Look, no matter who you are, you don't have the right to call ppl "shit stain".
If you want don't want to be a "negative community member" you replace "shit stain" with "negative community member" and treat ppl properly. Or you become one of the ppl that you don't like.
 
Completely agree with you. That guy, that made a privacy breach by exposing a LinkedIn profile of an NQ employee was wrong. Not just wrong, but very wrong.
But he was not "very wrong" because of his opinion of the performance of NQ dev team. He was very wrong only on exposing private data on NQ.
In your opinion, all those ppl that bashed NQ, but did not expose private information, should LEAVE?
Who the hell do you think you are to say that someone who invested 400€ 5 years ago on the project and has been filling up bug reports ever since the bug report site went online are not welcome and should LEAVE?
 
Should I tell you that your 6 days of account and 5 posts on the forum make you someone without any informed opinion? NO.
You are a valid player. One that has the full right to have noob questions, noob ideas and zero experience on this game.
You have the right to get an answer from us and a proper argumentation when we dispute your claim or opinion.
 
BUT SO DO WE.
If we feel like there is some kind of gain to tell that NQ sucked, we have EVERY RIGHT TO DO IT.
 
Got it?

Look, everyone is entitled to give their opinion. Even if it is one very aggressive and disconnected from reality like this one you just gave.
Then other ppl are free to disagree like I am disagreeing with you
 
So lets go in parts:
 
Look, no matter who you are, you don't have the right to call ppl "shit stain".
If you want don't want to be a "negative community member" you replace "shit stain" with "negative community member" and treat ppl properly. Or you become one of the ppl that you don't like.
 
Completely agree with you. That guy, that made a privacy breach by exposing a LinkedIn profile of an NQ employee was wrong. Not just wrong, but very wrong.
But he was not "very wrong" because of his opinion of the performance of NQ dev team. He was very wrong only on exposing private data on NQ.
In your opinion, all those ppl that bashed NQ, but did not expose private information, should LEAVE?
Who the hell do you think you are to say that someone who invested 400€ 5 years ago on the project and has been filling up bug reports ever since the bug report site went online are not welcome and should LEAVE?
 
Should I tell you that your 6 days of account and 5 posts on the forum make you someone without any informed opinion? NO.
You are a valid player. One that has the full right to have noob questions, noob ideas and zero experience on this game.
You have the right to get an answer from us and a proper argumentation when we dispute your claim or opinion.
 
BUT SO DO WE.
If we feel like there is some kind of gain to tell that NQ sucked, we have EVERY RIGHT TO DO IT.
 
Got it?

The word "toxicity" is very often abused in this day and age to silence any and all difference in opinion. No doubt a product of the terrible overly "politically correct" culture that has infested every aspect of media and social networks. I am politically incorrect to the core and will always be. People that in your opinion are "toxic" and "salty" have the right to be so if they so wish. And in my experience most of the "toxic" arguments come precisely from people who actually love the game and would want it to succeed, but are repeatedly let down by irrational decisions on the part of the developers or a complete disregard of any and all suggestions and constructive criticism which could in fact help bring the game to the right track.
 

IMO it's no longer a case of being convinced or choice. That time happened at the end of alpha.
They simply do not have the budget to change direction.
What ever they committed themselves at the summer of 2020 they either go with it until the end or they fail to deliver a game before budget ends.
 
At this point, any feature that is not scheduled and requires coding will not happen.
And any change they squeeze into the code decreases the chances of delivering a viable game.
 
IMO I even think that they already past the point of no return. They already know that the game will not be viable with the current budget, but they are hoping that this last fight to complete it can bring new investment or subscriptions.
 
It is quite sad to see this project go from "relaxed" to "emergency" like this.
Proper management should be to coordinate the several parts and teams of the project and establish a proper timeframe for each of the objectives for each group.
There are (technical and other) questions that were only asked at the end of alpha. Most of those questions could be predicted and answered before that time.
 
Most of those questions were not technical challenges and could be answered back then.
Examples:
Pending operations -> This is a very hard technical challenge. We acknowledge that NQ asked that question at the correct time and that betting on the wrong technology (home made UDP proto) was delayed its fix. Management does not have a big deal of responsibility here. The technical lead was invested too much time in the development of a technology that already existed before choosing to abandon that idea and buy the existing solution. The lack of meaningful specialization -> this was not a technical challenge. NQ had warnings about this by the players for years. 1st they delayed any development about specialization to late alpha. Then they let PPL sink in the development for a year and only figured out that there was an issue after beta came out. Was it that hard to understand the problem 4 years ago? If 1 or 2 players could detect the problem back then, alone, how can a full team fail to detect it? How can a full team ignored the player warnings?  The lack of excitement in 99% of the time players spend playing DU. Any current cellphone app currently successfully has 1000 metrics about the engagement of players on their app. And we are talking about free to play phone apps! how can NQ management fail to understand how vital this was? How is this only a problem of 2020-2021? How was this a technical challenge? To me its 100% clear that NQ management style was like a coded program. With several things that had to be done and a sequential order to do them. And in this sequence several very important questions were delayed to even be asked to a very late time.
 
 
Why am I saying this? What is the advantage of me bashing NQ on this?
Several reasons:
1 - I hope, but don't expect, that DU is a success. In case NQ manages to salvage this, it is quite clear that in the future(after the storm as passed), management and development needs to adopt a different model.
2 - If DU fails, I want other current and future game developers, use this as an example of what not to do. So we don't get this frustration in a future investment.
3 - That players understand how too late "now" is, that they can calm down, reflect on the past. And hope for the future, without illusions that things can change just by talking to NQ. 
4 - That some NQ staff know that we know that you guys are not all part of the problem. We know some of you warned your management about the issues you were seeing and predicted. We know that some of you did your best and your best was quite good. And from your perspective it may seam like we are putting you all on the same bag, we are not. 
It is easy to thank exposed NQ staff like discord helpers, in game GMs, Forum staff for all their dedication in emergency situations. But if you are a programmer we know that bugs happen, we know that your conditions were not ideal, we know that you tried. We do not blame you.
We only blame you if you decided to ignore the warnings, if you disregarded your fellow programmer concerns without even taking the proper time to think about them. We blame you if you fired ppl that tried their best to give you advice.
 
 
There is nothing else to do but wait. Wait for release or wait for fail. Just wait while pray that the game is viable at release and hope if DU survives this, NQ learns and changes their management style.
Now it's not a time for NQ to change Staff, or management. Now it's not the time for NQ to change features. Finish what you are doing NQ. And GL

You are right in several points, but i mostly disagree with your conclusions. 
 
I agree that having a safezone that includes 40% of the points of interest reduces the chances of pvp. 
But my solution for this is not to disable safezone outside of sanct moon. My solution is to create more star systems. 
Eventually i would not even mind having this current system as 100 safezone, as long as there are 10 other systems without any safezone and full or riches. 
 
I agree that the economy startup mechanism at the beginning of beta was bad. Leading to heavy unfairness. 
But i dont believe the issue was the existence of bot orders. To me, the issue was that T5 ores were not rare at all. In day 1, a new player could just go to jago, dig 2km straight and find 20M worth T5, without the need of any territory scanner. 
Back in that time my triscaner was picking up t5 every 8 sectors. 
Clearly NQ bombed ore distribution. 
To solve this problem, i suggested then, and much earlier that ore nodes size should be relative to the rarity(T5 max being like 200l) and that ore should be much rare and should respawn on a random location. This way NQ did not need to spawn all the ore necessary for these months until next system appears. 
Respawn rate could be adjusted later once a new system is here. 
 
To me, the entire idea that players would create a functional civilization without any outside orientation is always extremely optimistic. 
Mostly because making a civilization requires work, good will, and a good moral understanding. 
Org leaders are, in general(ppl will be offended by this, and im sorry), ppl that sacrificed RL time to manage the org. 
In general org leaders that can do the work, will have a agenda or low social skills. 
And im sure there are some good leaders like Virtual that are actually fit to help build a civilization. But those are few, compared to the ones that want to rule DU or see it burning. 
My solution for this is security zones, NPC policing and NPC quests in a small part of the DU universe. Something that will give some type of penalty to a new player that entered the game to just cause destruction. 
Something that can be seen by leaders and players as what they want their territory to be like. 
 
But in general, the game has to be more fair to noobs. 
The amount of disadvantages a new/lone player faces compared of a older player in a big org are near infinite. 
This may be what some of you, hardcore capitalists want. But this has a consequence. 
Players that buy a 3 month subscription and find how screwed they are after 1 week. What how will those players play the rest of the 2 months and 3 weeks? 
Do you think they will try to "build a civilization"? Or do stupid stuff, like raging in support channel, dirt ball grief, crash against other players, disrupt discord discussions, etc?
 
In my opinion, DU should have a prototype civilization, enforced by NQ, already in place, with NPC economy, NPC policing and NPC quests in the start system. But then, there should be dozens of other systems completely free of safezones, markets, spawns, rules and with higher resources. 

You are right in several points, but i mostly disagree with your conclusions. 
 
I agree that having a safezone that includes 40% of the points of interest reduces the chances of pvp. 
But my solution for this is not to disable safezone outside of sanct moon. My solution is to create more star systems. 
Eventually i would not even mind having this current system as 100 safezone, as long as there are 10 other systems without any safezone and full or riches. 
 
I agree that the economy startup mechanism at the beginning of beta was bad. Leading to heavy unfairness. 
But i dont believe the issue was the existence of bot orders. To me, the issue was that T5 ores were not rare at all. In day 1, a new player could just go to jago, dig 2km straight and find 20M worth T5, without the need of any territory scanner. 
Back in that time my triscaner was picking up t5 every 8 sectors. 
Clearly NQ bombed ore distribution. 
To solve this problem, i suggested then, and much earlier that ore nodes size should be relative to the rarity(T5 max being like 200l) and that ore should be much rare and should respawn on a random location. This way NQ did not need to spawn all the ore necessary for these months until next system appears. 
Respawn rate could be adjusted later once a new system is here. 
 
To me, the entire idea that players would create a functional civilization without any outside orientation is always extremely optimistic. 
Mostly because making a civilization requires work, good will, and a good moral understanding. 
Org leaders are, in general(ppl will be offended by this, and im sorry), ppl that sacrificed RL time to manage the org. 
In general org leaders that can do the work, will have a agenda or low social skills. 
And im sure there are some good leaders like Virtual that are actually fit to help build a civilization. But those are few, compared to the ones that want to rule DU or see it burning. 
My solution for this is security zones, NPC policing and NPC quests in a small part of the DU universe. Something that will give some type of penalty to a new player that entered the game to just cause destruction. 
Something that can be seen by leaders and players as what they want their territory to be like. 
 
But in general, the game has to be more fair to noobs. 
The amount of disadvantages a new/lone player faces compared of a older player in a big org are near infinite. 
This may be what some of you, hardcore capitalists want. But this has a consequence. 
Players that buy a 3 month subscription and find how screwed they are after 1 week. What how will those players play the rest of the 2 months and 3 weeks? 
Do you think they will try to "build a civilization"? Or do stupid stuff, like raging in support channel, dirt ball grief, crash against other players, disrupt discord discussions, etc?
 
In my opinion, DU should have a prototype civilization, enforced by NQ, already in place, with NPC economy, NPC policing and NPC quests in the start system. But then, there should be dozens of other systems completely free of safezones, markets, spawns, rules and with higher resources. 

The button "insert other media" below the edit window and above "submit reply" 
Click on it, it says "insert image from url" 

You are right in several points, but i mostly disagree with your conclusions. 
 
I agree that having a safezone that includes 40% of the points of interest reduces the chances of pvp. 
But my solution for this is not to disable safezone outside of sanct moon. My solution is to create more star systems. 
Eventually i would not even mind having this current system as 100 safezone, as long as there are 10 other systems without any safezone and full or riches. 
 
I agree that the economy startup mechanism at the beginning of beta was bad. Leading to heavy unfairness. 
But i dont believe the issue was the existence of bot orders. To me, the issue was that T5 ores were not rare at all. In day 1, a new player could just go to jago, dig 2km straight and find 20M worth T5, without the need of any territory scanner. 
Back in that time my triscaner was picking up t5 every 8 sectors. 
Clearly NQ bombed ore distribution. 
To solve this problem, i suggested then, and much earlier that ore nodes size should be relative to the rarity(T5 max being like 200l) and that ore should be much rare and should respawn on a random location. This way NQ did not need to spawn all the ore necessary for these months until next system appears. 
Respawn rate could be adjusted later once a new system is here. 
 
To me, the entire idea that players would create a functional civilization without any outside orientation is always extremely optimistic. 
Mostly because making a civilization requires work, good will, and a good moral understanding. 
Org leaders are, in general(ppl will be offended by this, and im sorry), ppl that sacrificed RL time to manage the org. 
In general org leaders that can do the work, will have a agenda or low social skills. 
And im sure there are some good leaders like Virtual that are actually fit to help build a civilization. But those are few, compared to the ones that want to rule DU or see it burning. 
My solution for this is security zones, NPC policing and NPC quests in a small part of the DU universe. Something that will give some type of penalty to a new player that entered the game to just cause destruction. 
Something that can be seen by leaders and players as what they want their territory to be like. 
 
But in general, the game has to be more fair to noobs. 
The amount of disadvantages a new/lone player faces compared of a older player in a big org are near infinite. 
This may be what some of you, hardcore capitalists want. But this has a consequence. 
Players that buy a 3 month subscription and find how screwed they are after 1 week. What how will those players play the rest of the 2 months and 3 weeks? 
Do you think they will try to "build a civilization"? Or do stupid stuff, like raging in support channel, dirt ball grief, crash against other players, disrupt discord discussions, etc?
 
In my opinion, DU should have a prototype civilization, enforced by NQ, already in place, with NPC economy, NPC policing and NPC quests in the start system. But then, there should be dozens of other systems completely free of safezones, markets, spawns, rules and with higher resources. 

You are not wrong in the entirety of the post.

It was just the way you went hard on the guy, full of sarcasm.
 
You could just make a small comment on his situation and add a "PS: By the way, 'brick' implies that the computer will not boot, please don't use it in this case"

I know your objective was not this, but the result was:
1 Ppl thinking you just vented your own problems on someone
2 Ppl lose focus on the important subject of the topic
 
And by all means, I'm not helping on staying on the focus and I have done what you did 1000 times in the past and will do it again.
Just trying to give a friendly heads up.

Hum a reproducible bug like that. 
 
My uninformed guess would be somekind of disk->ram near infinite loop. 
 
This could be 2 processes
1 Ram exhaustion
DU quite often spikes in ram. Maintaining a low ram usage in average but spiking 10-20GB for a few seconds. 
I have only seen this happen when traveling at high speed and loading terrain. 
For ppl with 32gb or less this can be deadly. 
Lack of ram will impact every program in your computer making it go wako, sometimes showing data transfer between programa. Graphic disruption like crazy patterns apearing on screen, blue screens, but also total unresponsive hardware needing a full power cycle. 
 
2 CPU unavailability
Basicaly the same problem that happens above. But with better hardware. 
So if you have a large amount of free space you are not that likely to exaust ram. 
But if your disk is fast like 3GB/s NVME and/or your network is gbit low latency fiber, your computer's ability to get data to process, either from DU servers and/or cache can overwhelm the CPU. 
Completely stopping any other process from getting a hold of the Processor. 
This is usually below 1sec. But some ppl reported more. 
Extended CPU blockage can lead to errors in other programs, specially to hardware related calls like discord accepting packages or failed disk sync. 
 
A GPU problem (hardware or software) was on the table at some point but i ruled it out, because GPU problems either crash the computer completely or do not affect other programs, just DU. 
 
Im also assuming that your GPU has dedicated ram. 
 
The main issue here is that DU appears to lack an intelligent thread controller. 
It appears that any part of the game, no matter its importance is free to launch any number of threads, with the same priority of each other. 
It also appears that there is little to no performance evaluation on any of those thread. 
 
An example of this was a issue some earlier version had where closing the F1 help menu would make CPU spike for like 5 secs. 
Programmers can be excused for a bug there, we are all humans and we all make mistakes. 
But why is a helper UI in the position to spawns endless threads, making all my 16vcores go unresponsive? 
It is quite obvious that closing a F1 menu is a low priority operation. Surely the game needs to stop the running browser rendering, sure it needs to free the ram used by it, but that could be done over a long period of 30 secs if needed. No reason to block the entire game for 5 secs.... 
 
There should be a thread controller saying that operation was hard limited to 1/4 of total vcores and running with a low priority. 
 
But this pice of technology does not appear to be there. 
Instead of a
core.startthread(tag, class, priority, limit)
They have a
core.startthread(class)
 
If my belief is true, this is a major issue.
Because this needs to be changed.
Because this would require to change something that should be stable at alpha1. 

This is a very optimistic view.
 
Ppl will use any landmark to meet up. 
And lag will definitely be used as a diplomatic tool and as a viable combat tactic.
 
We have seen in January what happened on eve, with a server crashing as a giant fleet was attacking a vital system, causing a major flip in the odds of wining that battle and even the war. 
 
Server lag, client crashing, ddos will be used in the future.
 
We need mechanisms that work when players miss behave. Not mechanisms vulnerable to player decisions.