Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hirnsausen

  1. That's exactly my way of thinking about the PVP lobby. ? I see them as totally self-centered in their view.
  2. Hi. Please do not see it as an insult that I have a very different opinion than you, or that I am a non-aggressive player, or that I refer to your arguments and counter them easily. There is no insult in any of that. Just regular discussion. I am, in real life, actually an employer. But I never do play my employees, as I respect them. For me, I have better ways to keep employees than to play them. I am not a triky person. And in regards to "taking away someone"s fun" - do you really think, it is fun when another player unprovokedly starts to destroy your ship and take away all you have? I think, your argument here is a very selfish, and indicates a highly self-centered way of thinking. It may come to a surprise to you, but it is not all about your own fun. A good game must give fun to ALL players. Take a minute or two, lean back, close your eyes and think about it. Could it be that I am right..? Fly and stay safe and healthy.
  3. I am not understanding a number of things you are mentioning. You said I should pay money. To whom, and why? Do you mean I must pay money because I am using public space? Like the "protection money" that criminals demand from their victims? You also indicated that you are a pirate who - somehow - looks down to other priates, you would feel "insulted". You act like a pirate, yet you feel insulted when compared with a pirate. It may come as a big surprise to you, but it is the actions we do, not where we do them, that defines us as what we are. Did you know that? Though I give you a point - in real life, we have organized criminals who also don't like to be called "criminals" but see themselves as "honorable". Somewhere in Italy, I think, are many of those, but als to a good extend worldwide. So I kinda unerstand that while being a pirate you don't want to be called a pirate. But I am seeing that you mention you are currently running missions and not actngin piracy Well, my respect here, and my above argument won't be valid therefore until or unless you do piracy (again or first time). There are many more points I would like to refer inside your last posting, but #metoo need to do some mission now ingame. So see youl later, looking forward for your next posting. Stay safe and healthy.
  4. Dear NQ, a number of players I spoke to (here and on Faebook) wishes for ornithoper wings. Rapidly vibrating, solid or transluscent wings that give a good amount of lift (more than a fixed wing) but are also, on the downside, extremely fragile. When they beat, they do that so fast that we see them only as a blur. Purely atmospheric, of course. If you look at my image, you will se some dragonfly-alike speedboats. And many other players have insect-alike boats, too. So, it would be nice for the game universe to have them. Real science fiction!
  5. Might be nice if we had some image competitions where NQ can select winners. They can be edited, but must contain DU contents. Winners get prizes / NQ uses winning images.
  6. So, because they face risks if they would attack armed ships, you want that we unarmed, peaceful players should be the easy dish for you with no risk? Come on, you can do better. ? When Somali pirates attack peaceful, unarmed bog ships with their arms, those ships use water to fight back, being able to siink those small pirate vessels. I know you do not like that these big ships fight back pirates, but that is how it is. They do not use weapons like the Somali pirates do. And there is no one whould tell these big ships that they must not defend with methods that are not using weapons. So, you could of course write to the UN and too all ship owners and try banning that they defend themselves as that would be unfair to pirates. But meanwhile, while you probably do that, I will go on and let the developers know that there are unusued options to put some hot chili pepper into the existing PVP. Self-destruction devices are a cool way to defend oneself, or just to make you Somali pirates think twice. It would surel add much needed spice to the game, and distribute the risks more evenly. A good game needs a more evenly distribution of risk. No "easy dishes" for Somali pirates... ?
  7. Hey Vandelay, do you remember me? How are you? Hope you had a nice new year's eve!
  8. I am getting maily ore,but ore is low in earning, only 22 Q at the moment. I have 8 tiles, of which 5 are coal, and 2 are petalite. After 4 weeks, what I have in petalite is just 1 0.8 million in Quantas, The coal each week gives me 6 to 7 million Quanta. Each week, I have 1 million Q less available. My skills are almost all at L 5 (new mining skiils), one skill on L 4.
  9. Any action must have a risk, not just on the side of the victim. So why bothering then to unprovokedly attack peaceful ships? Stick to attacking other armed ships, and nothing like that will happen to you. As surprisingly simple as that.
  10. Through the Facebook groups about DU, I am aware of players that cancel their subscription now because of the unexpected hardship of the new tax and mining system. It affects me, too, in a bad way, so bad that I calculate I will be fully bankrupt in 4 to 5 weeks and not be able anymore to act ingame. If I am affected, then many many many others are, too. I am open-minded, alwas saying that DU sets new industrial standards for player-made ship and base designs. I gave time to try the new changes. But now I have to activate the Alarm Bell. Here are my suggestions, and these are very URGENT suggestions to Novaquark just to stop the rising bankruptcies of a vast amount of players: - increase the amount of fully calibrated mininung units a player can have at the same time by 16 to 32 from whatever it is now. - re-calibration only needed over time when the match was below 100%, but at 100% it stays calibrated as "disturbing forces are eleminated" - the weekly teerritory tax needs to be lower, maybe half of what it is now Besides, to limit territory occupation "en masse" by some big organizations, there are other,probably better ways to counter that. Dear gamers, please show that you agree by posting positive answers to this thread. NQ need to see a wide and general agreement t become aware of the problems and make swift adjustments.
  11. It would be extremely useful, if we could switch on with a key the "x-ray view" during Build Mode, that would allow us to see where the elements are by blending out any honeycombs from the view, or blending them out to some extend (slightly visible). This would ease a lot the placement of elements in tight places that are otherwise hidden behind walls.
  12. It would be useful to have a feature, that would allow to switch a smaller core with a larger one, provided the player made enough space for the new core to hold.
  13. Yes, after some weeks of observation now, I still agree with the initial posting. The current taxation brings me slowly closer and closer each week to bankruptcy. Today is the first week I cannot pay anymore in time for all my territories, and I need them because of the mining I do on them. In around 4 to 5 weeks from now, I will be totally bankrupt and unable even to fly around because the fuel amount I need is too big for making it inside my nano crafter. Already now, I just stay ingame for a few minutes only to calibrate the MUs, and since ay other activity is too costly, I just leave the game after those few minutes of calibration. I renew my former suggestions again (one, some, or all should be implemented by NQ): - increase the amount of fully calibrated mininung units a player can have at the same time by 16 to 32 from whatever it is now. - re-calibration only needed over time when the match was below 100%, but at 100% it stays calibrated as "disturbing forces are eleminated" - the weekly teerritory tax needs to be lower, maybe half of what it is now
  14. I just refer to what PVP lovers in this thread here stated: that they prefer the challenge to hunt and kill ships with weapons, ships of other PVP players. That unarmed vessels are not really their focus. Unless these were lies of PVP players, my idea would be a good one, as the SSD would make just unarmed ships in PVP space safer. The PVP players can still kill each other, and I won't ever stop it. So, I do not see why the PVP lobby has so many fears of SSD-equipped ships (which actually equals our fear of armed ships so it is just and fair). Unless, their arguments were just lies, and with lies you can't have a proper discussion. But i want to trust them, and so I accept their argument that they not really look for unarmed ships. So, why so much resistance against SSDs if that would not affect at all their main target ships - other PVP ships? And thus I continue to promote my suggestion.
  15. It would be useful, if the search phrase inside the market search field could handle the * sign as placeholder. This way, we could search in a more effective way for items. - Gamers, if you support my suggestion, please post your support - only then the developers can see the big interest in our community -
  16. Hirnsausen

    Small MUs

    Small MUs as T2, T3, T4 and T5 variant are needed, as the yields of those ore categories are very low. - If you agree, please post your agreeent, only then the developers can see the interest in the community -
  17. Many speeders, due to their attempt to achieve low drag, are very slim. The smallest retro rocket we currently can get, is the S size. Too wide in its dimensions. I suggest the Retro Rockets XS. This would close a gap open since a long time. When agreeing, please post that you agree. Only then the developers will see the need. Thanks, stay safe.
  18. Amazing how long you all stick to my suggestion. I admit, I never expected such a big interest in the discussion of a Self-Detonation Device. Sees, My suggestion trul gets attention. Even so much attention, that other players (like you) start to develop possible scenarios involving the Self Destruction Device, and strategies. Cool! I decided to give you a Blue Heart for your assistance. Yes, I agree with you, such a SDD would create possibilities for new strategies. I want to thank you cordially for helping to perfectionalize such an SSD. The scenarious you created are interesting, and I will incorporate them into some more suggestios for the SSD. When the dveloers read your two scenarios and consider an SSD, they too will use your two scenarios as help to find ways what is possible and what not. Like, can an SSD harm any uninvolved ship, and such. Good point I like it, if other players are constructive and help developing the SSD. Ummm, what other scenarios could you think of? The more scenarios, the better. Good ones, bad ones - all is welcme.
  19. Yes, I could support the motion, that the rocks glow only when the harvest tool is active. Would make sense. Without glowing, the rocks would still have some minor differences, but not so easy to see.
  20. I created a suggestion about the same problem, here inside the Idea Box forum. My suggestion is, that the mining talents on level 5 allow for 16 or even 32 fully calibrated mining units more than the current maximum amount. But I agree, that T3, 4, 5 seems to be so low in yield amount, that the earning is just the same or less than with T1 and 2. Maybe intended. Is the purpose to equalize the earning of each territory? Could be. However, the market prices have fallen very deep, and many players find it hard to earn any money with mining. And there are many players, who maily rely on mining.
  21. With the revamping of the mining, some of the tools are not needed any longer. While other tools are still needed. I am proposing here some new tools. 1. Existing Construct Tool 2: - increase maximum size to the dimensions of an L core - to save honeycomb usage and follow building logics, add an option for HOLLOW shapes (minimum required wall thickness), add another option for open ends - add cone (rounded and straight walls), torus (with variable middle opening size), various more shapes like a cube with one side rounded, etc. - allow to rotate by user-deined angles 2. New Construct Tools: - tool to resize all axes or just one) or scew voxel areas 3. Existing Construct Tool 7: - add an option to copy honeycombs and elements within the selected area 4. New Landscaping Tool: - tools 2 and 5 can build tunnels and rooms underground, but with irregular shapes causing lots of data. Instead, I can envision a tool to build tunnels and rooms, that can be expanded up to the area of an L core, and the shape would be - like the excavations - a simple cube or cylinder that can be modified (scale, axis-scaling) and also rotation and angling should become possible, like for tunnels that go diagonally down into the soil. Optionally, soil can be stored in inventory, and used for building same shapes with this tool. Dear fellow players, if you refer to any of my mentioned tools, please use that associated number, and if you suggest own new tols, kndly add a number to them, too (first chek the numbers other gamers might use for their suggestins).
  22. Interesting. I will follow. Can other players be invited into this construct?
  23. At the moment, I earn just 10 M Q each week, and after territory taxes, I have only less than 4 M Q left. Due to the resulting constrains in fuel, I cannot do much flying around. I cannot sustain myself. I believe, other players encounter similar situations. I suggest, to change the mining units skill in a slight way, that we can use some more calibrated mining units - maybe 16 or 32 more than possible now. I would see this as a balancing measurement.
  • Create New...