Endstar
-
Posts
238 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Endstar
-
-
Changes like this that make most ships require rebuild is becoming common place.
What gets me is that this is a reason NQ stated as a reason to wipe. Yes they used stacking element case but in the end it is just changes to constructs that make current ones outside the game rules (for good or bad).
-
Again this loop gives PvP players hours of doing nothing in game for minutes of fun some of the time.
Just fix that all these PvP changes are great but they keep missing the point...
Hours of no fun to have minutes of fun is a super bad trade and not good for any game.
- blundertwink and CousinSal
-
2
-
Figure after endless anti-wipe comments I would practice empathy and try to see why we should wipe. I honestly think the below are valid reasons (like them or not) to wipe. The other stuff I have seen are not great reasons. The truth can help people, telling them stuff that lacks common sense like saying a bunch of stuff that will repeat wipe or not is problematic at best.
Why Wipe:
-To slow the game down. We were in beta and the game had to be paced quicker to allow us to test end game aspects that could not have been achieved or tested in the needed detail if the game was paced as indented.
-Protect DAC as once that is in the game the game's economy has real world value. This makes many people abuse exploits in greater numbers while also incentivizing them to never say anything about them.
If these are valid reasons tell us and tell us what or how your protecting or changing things to support these. If these are not the reasons and they are what was said thus far please, please help us understand how a wipe is not kicking the can. Exploits will emerge and wiping the game after release should not be a option... Unless that is option and the answer when exploits emerge post release... is to wipe and wipe again -
I can sum it up in a simple meme.
-
This feels like another wipe thread. Odd that NQ locks all other threads about wipes and ask we use the 40 page one until this new one NQ created emerged. I would rather see the 80 page thread over a two forty page ones but what do I know...
All I do know is all these reasons for a wipe assume exploits will never again occur, players will never join the game after release, and there will never be another change that will make us have to redo ships. If all of that is true wipe. If not wiping is just filling in a hole in the ground with one shovel while digging it deeper with another.
- Yoarii, KaraThrace, Saammiii and 3 others
-
6
-
On 4/14/2022 at 1:21 AM, Shredder said:
Wipe means more players at the start, which helps attract other players.Which means there’s a greater chance the game will still exist.
This reason fails 18 months post a wipe. Attracting other players a year after release is different than new player starting now how?
-
We keep asking that they add Mega nodes to asteroids. Seems like a good balance.
-
Weight changes was to slow down the alt mission running more than supporting PvP. PvP needed a means to bring a reason to field smaller ships these changes are to solve for both of these... If that works is another discussion.
-
Need to justify the popcorn... I assume that tech has a cost.
-
A game that takes hours and hours to get to minutes of fun needs some adjustment. The new cores should help here with this.
-
So post release are we doing this again when power comes into the game? Based on the reasoning I saw for pros and cons about a wipe seems like the answer will be a wipe post release.
-
Really upset when I hear "low priority" claims and see really pointless additions like virtual flies that add nothing but annoyance.
We had a upvote site, what happened there?If the player base wants a feature and votes it as high priority via a majority it would be good to see how or why NQ thought other stuff no one wanted was higher priority. What we see is a lot of comments of how things must have the correct priority. I really do want to know why or how stuff that lowers the players fun, adds nothing to the game but an annoyance is prioritize above things that factually have majority vote for inclusion.
-
1 hour ago, blundertwink said:
Plus, it's just bad practice for customer engagement and communication. They've promised to do better with this but have expended very little effort in doing so -- a few small windows where they actually respond cushioned between vast gulfs of silence.
Is it too much to ask NQ to display/inform how they improved this to date?
-
Did you get that as a answer or is that your assumption?
-
22 hours ago, trytryagain said:
there's never a guarantee that any online game or service will remain online or available.
Pretty sure a DAO based game solves that.
Well until it is hacked! lol
-
-
Please NQ please give us mega nodes on asteroids!
They only last a week and if small amount of asteroids have these there will be more content for explorers and PvP folks as there will be certain asteroids of higher value "not just ore tier wise". Many of us disliked the ore veins not having huge random sizes with jackpot ones we might get luckily and find. NQ dropped a hugely one more action/turn game loop when they removed these. That rush of maybe finding a huge ore vein was real fun and real immersion as many wanted to do just one more scan or track down one more node hoping for that big score.
-
Keep saying it all the time...
How do you win in DU?
How can this game be pay to win if there is no actual win condition?
-
Why can I only make some tier 1 HC types in my nano and not others?
-
I tried to address the NQ post without any emotion or position. While I would rather not wipe I'm not completely against it. I'm really concerned the reasoning for a wipe is over looking the root causes that will come back post any amounts of wipe.
Fix the problems not erase each time they occur!
-
Quote
A reset would be an opportunity to remove things that have been deemed very unpopular by the already existing community, such as the schematics. The only way to remove them in a clean way without causing too many disturbances in the economy is clearly when the in-game economy has been just reset.
So any future features (AvA, TW, Power) that end up being unpopular will be handled how? The above suggest a wipe is the answer to that post release if unpopular features happens again.
-
Quote
Many tests/adjustments during Beta have impacted the in-game economy, leading to have some players getting extremely rich way faster than intended, due to an intensive use of some features in their early stage, such as the mission system (and that's understandable, as the situation is part of a normal process in the development of a game). However, it's also common practice in the game development process to usually have some kind of reset when critical milestones are reached, and resetting the economy to have a healthy start once the game has been stabilized and the game features have become more balanced makes sense.
There are many things we were told that never came as of now and most likely will hopefully come post release. How would any of these be different in impacting the in-game economy or allowing players to get extremely rich way faster than intended, due to an intensive use of some features in their early stage? This is again telling us a wipe is the answer and wipe will just occur again when new unpopular feature is introduced.
-
Quote
As you, our current experienced players, will have quite an advantage compared to the new players on many levels (game knowledge, talent points, wealth, constructs already owned), there's a need to make things a bit more balanced to give a fighting chance to the wave of new players that will join the Community later.
A wipe to achieve this helps how in 18 months from now?
-
Quote
We also want to give all the players (new players as much as a big part of the early backers who have waited for the game to be in a fairly polished state) to have the opportunity of the right start.
In 18 months, what is being done to help new or returning players then?
-
Quote
In case of a wipe, finding a way for our veteran players to allow them to keep (or rebuild quickly) their favorite constructs, without creating any loophole for players to bypass the reset (and defeat the purpose of why it’s done).
Snappable preview based BP's solve this and we seen some of that on PTS.
-
Quote
Some planets currently do not have the quality and polished state the Novaquark team wants to give them. We also have seen that a part of the Community has the same opinion on the topic, and this is why the dev team has been planning a revamp for the planets which haven’t received one already.
We had a terrain wipe for this purpose. This seems like a item that will always have iterations and improvements. The above provides a impression that we either will not get more planet visual tech updates down the road or the answer to them will be wipes post release.
-
-
Hopefully we see more core-to-core data exchange abilities or an increase in emitter receiver ranges.
The mining unit LUA would benefit from this so we can see MU status from adjacent hexes from the center base you VR to in order to check MU status. -
Remove past "mistakes" and fix the "economy" is a good reason to wipe. Better would be answers to how to deal with both of these matters as they will return no matter how hard NQ tries to stop them. Exploits are always a when never a if sort of thing. An answer of wiping the game while it may work now will not work in two years.
-
22 hours ago, FuriousPuppy said:
just sell it to microsoft and be done with it, NQ can't be educated fast enough to repair all the failings within my lifetime. They should go on to develop the next 3d voxel minesweeper game or something
No major tech company will buy the shims of intergradation between existing commercial systems they cannot acquire.
-
Is it ok to sell us stuff and never provide it?
Pocket Ship rules
in General Discussions
Posted
Whatever NQ picks for rules I do agree the pocketable ship needs some rule adjustment. Be great to see talk about how things around pocket ships could be abused so NQ can address such. I thought unpacking a ship, slapping on the PvP elements you have in your nanopack and shooting a unarmed miner was not indented nor desired. If these rules expand we need to help NQ limit abuse.