Physics

Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
 
As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
 
Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
Pro - Far less Back Lash.
Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
 
Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
 
 

Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
 
As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
 
Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
Pro - Far less Back Lash.
Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
 
Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
 
 

Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
 
As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
 
Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
Pro - Far less Back Lash.
Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
 
Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
 
 

Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
 
As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
 
Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
Pro - Far less Back Lash.
Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
 
Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
 
 

Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
 
As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
 
Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
Pro - Far less Back Lash.
Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
 
Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
 
 

Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
 
As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
 
Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
Pro - Far less Back Lash.
Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
 
Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
 
 

I know this is a sensitive subject, but isn't it time to bring back element destruction also in PvE?
 
Personally, I think it is a must for a functioning economy. What are your thoughts on the subject?

We would like to thank each and every one of you who has taken the time to visit our Public Test Server (PTS) and that tried our new Athena update. A special thanks to those who were able to attend our Fools Defense PvP event on April 1st, we hope you enjoyed it!
 
We recognize a good number of players were unable to attend the PTS event due to other engagements. As with any test, we had to make sure that our development teams were able to actively monitor and be present as the event took place. Thanks to your participation though, we have been able to identify some areas in need of improvements or adjustments - and thanks to your feedback, we will be working on improving them.
 
In addition, we are excited to announce that we will be bringing the PTS up for a couple of additional days, before heading into the next portion of our PTS test for Athena.
 
ATHENA ON PTS - SCHEDULE
 
- Wednesday 6th April 13:00 UTC to Friday 8th 09:00 UTC
We have finished adding more of the late stage game items, such as the schematics for the new Relic Plasma Harvester and Space Mining Unit, along with the variants of elements that have been introduced. We have also applied some fixes for added performance and stability for players to test out.
 
- Friday 8th April 11:00 UTC to Monday 11st April 09:00 UTC
Moving into the second part of our planned PTS testing for Athena, we’ll be focusing on the First Time User Experience (FTUE) beginner introduction guide. More information on this will be released very soon, so keep your eyes open for the upcoming devblog with all the details!
In order to fully test the new FTUE, the PTS will be completely reset on Friday, April 8th (hence the two hours maintenance between the two sessions). Please note that said maintenance might be a bit longer. But once it is done, everyone that connects to the PTS will be able to experience the new FTUE in detail. Of course, there will still be dispenser towers providing many in-game items for free, so players are able to continue to test other features that they are interested in as well.
 
Regarding the FTUE itself, brace yourselves for an upcoming devblog on this topic! The FTUE devblog will be available by the end of this week, so keep on the lookout for it. There will be many details to help you get ready for the FTUE PTS session!

As always, we would like to remind players that this is a Public Test Server and as such, many unforeseen issues can arise; this can include performance and stability issues. In the event that issues do arise, we will do our best to remedy them as soon as possible.
 
Get out to the PTS and test when the time comes! We look forward to reading your feedback for our Athena update in our Forum thread here.
 

-> Something i would add to the changes
The max. size of a shield generator should be matching the actual core size.
Shield Generator L on Dynamic Core L only Shield Generator M on Dynamic Core M only etc..  
 
 
 

I personally don’t agree with the OP’s views at all but this I 100% agree with.

This community has become so much meaner...it's pointless and petty. 
 
Someone stating that they'd rather not return unless there's a wipe isn't "demanding" anything. It's stating their opinion, which they have every right to. 
 
This sort of rhetoric is really not helpful -- twisting a simple and commonly expressed opinion into a "demand" so that you can frame someone you don't know as "selfish" is not productive communication. 

Welcome! DU can be a very in depth game to get a grasp on but don’t sweat the induction week! 
 
We have our moments but I think you will find we have a great community for you to get stuck in and involved with and I hope you enjoy your time working with us! ?

Some people really like to dig deep in the topic graveyard ?

Honestly if you put as much effort into playing the game as you do in posting new topics on the exact same subject you’d be swimming in ore by now. 

Honestly if you put as much effort into playing the game as you do in posting new topics on the exact same subject you’d be swimming in ore by now. 

Honestly if you put as much effort into playing the game as you do in posting new topics on the exact same subject you’d be swimming in ore by now. 

I am just getting started, but I've got some ambitious ideas. I expect setbacks -that's not going to stop me from moving forward. If everyone sits on their hands the game will really stagnate. I know a lot of the skepticism here is rooted in experience, but I'm not going to borrow trouble from tomorrow. 

Even if the XL core cost 100 core slots (and probably should) and cost equivalent of a warp beacon to produce… gimme gimme!
 
I don’t even care if the construct looks like melting play dough in build mode when looking across.?

I’m not looking forward to the org construct slot changes. Common sense does slap you in the face that it will be a huge nerf to solo and small orgs to bring balance to the gap of available personal core slots in comparison to personal org cores. 
 
If I got told to do this and was harsh without thinking about backlash, I would remember that org construct slots start with 0.
 
From there I would take a piece out of the residency idea I’ve been asking for and instead of just having the legate issue the constructs through talents I would give every character 1 available org construct slots they can choose to issue to an org of their choice. Every character would be able to boost their construct slot donation to 25 through talents tho. 
 
But let’s see what NQ does.. returns to sharpening pitchfork on grinding stone. 

The asteroid spawning is entirely automated. It got interrupted by a situation which was supposedly impossible but is not. We will sneak in a patch at next minor release to prevent this from happening again. Meanwhile this was manually fixed and asteroids are spawning again, yay.

This is one of the changes that players cry much and get reverted. But listen I first was overwhelmed by all my ship's red messages and thought the same, why on earth? If I did no stacking it is like this now. Then I figured out that once you fly the cursor to the marked element that seems stacked it shows red on the ship in build mode where it is and you just move it a bit and then it's ok. So it is not the big deal and I think as a player base we should just fix our constructs for benefit of the game.

Hi everyone!

As you were quite a few to wonder what was the reasons behind "it's more complex than it seems" regarding the tax rates, here is an explanation frome the Game Design team: 

"It's all about faucets and sinks. When implementing a major system like taxes (which should have been there from the beginning),  "more complex than it seems" refers indeed the interconnection of several systems: Tax rate/Upkeep of course, but also resources generation through Calibration and Asteroid Mining. Another important factor quite difficult to anticipate is "Player habits". When taking into account all these factors, it's extremely difficult to make it right on first try. When balance issues occur, the best way to find a long-term solution (and to be sure to have identified the right issues) is to analyze at least a few weeks (if not one or two months) of data. Fixing a balancing issue too hastily has a high risk to backfire, as it might generate other unbalance issues if not handled properly.

Now to explain a bit what was the original plan:
It was about to provide enough Tier 1 resources (through calibration and asteroid mining) to pay the taxes and have a comfortable margin of T1 resources for building.
Unfortunately it seems that players got a lot less Tier 1 resources than we expected, which generated this feeling of "struggling" for many of you. It was not intended.
The Game Design team is actively working on tweaking the balance of various systems (not just one) so the global player experience improves again. Still, we know that it will never satisfy everyone: some will find that it's still not enough, some others will think it's too generous. Just keep in mind that we will have to find an acceptable middleground for the majority."

Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

Awsome to hear NQ is keen to expand on working with the community and want to increase their two-way communication! Here is tip 1: Dont start failing this on literally the next sentences of an announcment ?
 
 
Ok so the purpose and functions of the system go beyond "land-grabbing". Maybe if NQ explained why the system is more complex than it appears on the surface the community could fire back ideas and feedback to make it better with the info in-hand? Just saying "it's more complex than you think" puts off these feedback think tanks and kills the subject and any possible two-way communication. Design team does not have to come up with inspiration and ideas on their own, they just need to make the decisions with all the possibilities that come from their own minds and ours. 
 
Edit: just read up replies. Damn it Blaze beat me to the punch! ?

Says a mission running whale with multiple accounts(I see you out there- with you, yourself and I!) hahahaha. I'm sorry, but your view is only slightly skewed due to the quanta you're making from alt-running missions. For most casual players it's too much- and too much of a grind for relatively low reward. 

Though it's not so bad if you run multiple accounts & missions to effectively print quanta. That's not a slight at you either, more of a commentary on the state of the game that the only real way to make any sort of quanta 'quickly' is literal P2W via multiple accounts. The game needs more readily avalible faucets that involve ACTIVE gameplay loops, because as it is the casual player is being hit hard with a "game mechanic" of taxation... *sighs* 

You either have alts to help make quanta, or you don't. This extends to people needing industry alts / talents. This extends to calibration charges/mining fields. For those poor souls that are true single account players, the grind is rough- the gameplay is thin- and the uphill crawl is too much for most.

But ya know- just buy a couple more accounts and the game becomes easy-mode  

You hit the nail on the head though @Physics, with how you describe the "it's more complex than you think". Because saying you'll do better and then immediately go back to pretty much saying "you just do not understand" is not exactly a good start there.