Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    Germany, NRW
  • Interests
    Making stuff, 3d printing, openscad,arduino, raspbery Pi, RC, etc.....
    and of course DU
  • backer_title
  • Alpha

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Hagbard's Achievements

  1. I think risk reward is OK, but as the system is designed, it leads to a monopoly in the long term. currently most of the alien cores are usually in possession of just one group. It should be possible as well for individuals to have a chance to get plasma, even if a high risk is involved. sure, the most powerful group should be able to have the best supply of it, but it should never be an exclusive thing. especially if then that brings with it additional power that makes it harder again to ever change the situation as it is usually. and honestly. i assume it must be boring as .... to sit on the honeypot. 😉 this does not encourage people to challenge the current distribution of force. it mostly just keeps people from even thinking about getting involved in PvP, and showing some will to go out to the PvP zone
  2. a really nice set of features. looking forward to this release! thx NQ!
  3. in case i did not make it clear enough above, that would be what i suggested above. one fuel hub, linking up to 10 fuel tanks of the same fuel type, requiring only 1 link to the control unit. obviously, it should act like a container hub , just for fuel tanks as well..
  4. i would suggest to reconsider the "for a single fuel tank" bit. a problem that all advanced Flight Huds have is the number of links on the control units. mainly the fuel tanks are the limiting factor, as whenever you have a bigger number of fuel tanks, those consume so many links, that we are unable to link all elements needed to control the ship to a single seat. there are some workarounds in place, like not linking the fuel tanks and going via core and talent levels to try to get the correct amount of fuel in each of the fuel containers. but this is painful, difficult and honestly nothing we should have to do. Just implement this change as a fuel "hub" allowing 10 fuel containers per fuel type to be accessed via one link and the problem would be solved, and wouldn't cause a risk,like increasing the general number of allowed links might do. Hagbard.
  5. i completely agree, the talents available via VR should be still in effect for calibrating, calibration bonus and collecting surface ore, that way, even a solo player would have at least some chance to generate a reasonable income by spending time in vr to work on the calibrations of his Mining units. Instead those, that before flew to their remote tiles once every couple of weeks, just to spent their calibrations to get some ore supplies now need to find a new income source. but not everyone is a builder and not everyone likes to run missions or become a pirate. as there are to few possibilities to earn quanta in this game, the change to calibrations did cut off a huge number of players from their only income source. this creates frustration and drives players away from this game. So i suggest as well to NQ to consider this change. ( i gave the same feedback to them last week as well..)
  6. a good ship builder should design the original ship in away that an engine change is simple and easy to do.. if you bought a ship, where that is not easily possible, just feed that comment back to the builder and ask the question the next time before you buy a ship... than the builders will adapt and try to make it possible as it becomes important for selling their ships. On most ships i sell, i pay attention to allowing easy engines swaps. but do we need a mechanic for that.. not really.. just some more buyer awareness
  7. i honestly like it the way it is now. stacking should not be allowed. instead players should try to build more efficient, which requires skills and learning how the physics in this game work. if a planet has a high gravity, it should be expensive and difficult to bring mass to the orbit, this is what forces us to invent either more efficient ships or other clever to achieve what we need. i wish they would even make it more challenging by introducing energy systems that would stop those massive ships with engine walls to exist. this would create job opportunities in the game and drive innovation forward. but just allowing single ships to hide even more engines by allowing stacking would not be the right way forward. same for xl or xxl atmo engines. just accept that a single ship cannot do everything and at the same time be efficient or cheap to run. Instead we should innovate and try to live with the physic limits. can a single player run 60l containers without efforts from the surface to orbit? no. so how can we solve this? today there are lots of ways already. use agg ( and accept the slow ascend speed, use elevators, use smaller shuttles that bring up some mass each flight to orbit or space station, use bigger space only ships, work together, think innovate based on the given limits. this is what creates challenges and drives us forward. ( and somehow slows down the mission misuse as well, which is a good thing)
  8. NQ does not want those Huge ships i assume. If you want to carry more out of atmo, start thinking about how to organize that.. use space only big haulers, use smaller shuttle ships to bring up ore in multiple flights from surface to orbit or use an elevator platform. there are so many ways to get it done. and most of those would be a lot more efficient than trying to build one ship that can do all at once. and honestly i agree with that approach to not bring the XL atmo engines etc into the game. in the end the same would happen again, just for even bigger haulers and even bigger cargo loads. then people would start the same discussion and ask for XXL elements/engines 😉
  9. Sorry to see another talented old Player go.. you did so much for the Player community and created the kind of content this game needs. I was in doubt if i would return as well, but am giving DU a try again now... even though they broke their promises. Thx for all you have done for DU! Hagbard
  10. Basically DU is a grinding game. You invest your time to achieve progression. NQ promised that under all circumstances that investment would be persistent. That's why most of us invested so much time in it. By breaking that promise, i lost my trust and probably won't do that investment of my time again. I don't even know how many thousand hours i spent to progress. The reasons they state for this being a must, are weak. Honestly, i don't care if any "exploited" stuff that people gained stays in the game or not. there will always be a lot of players with more Quanta or other possessions in the game. In the end that is NQ's problem. If they did not act with a small rollback after accidentally giving away Warp Beacon Schematics for a way too low price. And if people used lots of alt accounts to make money with the missions, i would say. clever.. they invested their time into that game mechanic when it was possible and made a fortune. I personally did not benefit from any of those Exploits and have never been a mission runner. So why should all players be punished for that? Just because there is too much quanta or elements in the game? Come on NQ there are enough possibilities to resolve that. The way they are doing the reset, is in my opion just a desperate attempt to make money with new player subscriptions,by giving the max "bonus" to anyone who now invests fresh money into the game. And by doing that they accept the risk that a majority of senior players will just quit.(financially not a huge loss for NQ with available DACs for a lot of those senior players.) If they want to give new players a fairer chance for fast progression without having to compare themselves to senior players.. Just create a 2nd system, make it extremely expensive (energy or time consuming) to transport mass there and have a new different currency there. problem solved without breaking promises. New players could spawn there if they want and build up that system. Senior Players could travel there accepting the price and knowing that their Quanta would be more or less worthless there.
  11. So a player that had been supporting DU since many years gets the same reward as a fresh player that subscribes for a full year before the launch... interesting approach. 2 further Question to NQ: - So does it mean if we place a BP made from a core BP, it will not contain any LUA any more? - will you add some better sorting/grouping in the nanopack inventory to handle that huge amount of core BP's some of us will have after launch? 😉 Edit: no word about the magic BP's.. feel like i bought in on a lie tbh....
  12. Just bringing the potential wipe on the table again is enough to instantly put me on a "pause" mode with DU. it just feels like i invested years of time on the single promise that there is persistence and a wipe would only occur if there is kind of a fatal problem that cannot be resolved otherwise, and even if a wipe would happen all progress and constructs could be taken over to the after wipe time.. so basically that was a lie (looking on all those options being discussed "internally" at NQ.) - getting rid of schematics ==> do you know how much grind it was just to get there and obtain those schematics? - the quanta i own was earned honestly. and yes that was another grind to get there, so why take it away? just because NQ did not react when some people took advantage. so let's punish all players instead.. no, does not sound very reasonable. i don't honestly care about the players that have "more". for all players except one, there will always be players that have more, so who really cares (except the new players joining and want to avoid the grind we all had) - if you wipe any of my quanta, exp, stuff, (without giving me all back via magic BPs, or the benefit of the grind by removing all schematics i see it as betrayal. will probably not return.. - even putting the long term players on an optional parallel DU is not an option. what would be OK for me: - planetary reset (all constructs as magic BP's) - Ban of players that cheated before - removing the requirement to own schematics for Tier 1-2 (or even Tier 3) items - game play changes that do not in-valuate previous "grind" - removal of all bot orders - creating a new System with new planets and resources without the possibility to transport big amounts of mass there where different rules may be applied. maybe even having a new 2nd currency there, so you cannot bring your quanta with you. So yes there are lots of options of adding new gameplay and mechanics even without having to betray all the beta players that spent an insane amount of time in game to get where they are today. But the 2 wipe options you described are not really satisfying in my position. So please: reconsider put your heads together again without just serving those people that scream wipe wipe in order to get an unfair advantage by purging a huge amount of time in grind for senior players who believed in past commitments that had been made by NQ.
  13. I fully support the full talent reset in this case. That would be a lot better than first having to empty the world
  14. ok, i'll better get started to remove a lot of stuff. i have dispensers wiuth free stuff at various locations. i have the Marina with all boats that are in this game that use my LUA. i have mining units various static cores for my showroom with landing plattforms i have my infrastructure withj various elevators, space cores and bases on remote places. i have various ships at all of my bases. this sums up to way over 200 cores.. probably more 250-300 As i still need my infrastructure, elevators mining units and ships i start with dispensers for free stuff on xs cores and than i will probably have to remove all ships from my marina. i don not want to go out begging for org core # from other players. i did all of this as a single player and do not have any plan to change this. so my contribution to content in this game unluckily has to shrink significantly. And Honestly NQ : I DO NOT WANT TO DO THIS if we are supposed to build the content in this game we need the tools & possibilities to do it. my progression in a game like this should not be limited to having a fat wallet one day and lots of BP's representing previous milestones. but as it looks today. my progress only can be measured in quanta and the content created can always only be visible for some time before cores run out again. And did NQ think about how much work it is to manually remove about 200 constructs?
  15. What i wish NQ would do when changing basic core mechanics or limits like it is the case for each update lately: instead of throwing something out in a devblog to all, then receiving the hell of a shitstorm and then react and go back to the design table and leaving the playerbase wounded and demotivated. Talk to us first, i bet if you would have asked any senior player about the core limit , you could have avoided the shitstorm. if you want constructive feedback let us now what the problem is you are trying to solve. you have a lot of game knowledge out there. we are the ones playing the game more than probably most of the NQ employees. so we might have good ideas. but to come out with potential solution ideas we need the problem statement first. is it about server storage costs? is it about network trafic? is it about client limitations when rendering? what are the problems, what is the data behind it. i bet there are a lot of players like me who would happily think about it and come up with ideas. but just asking for feedback on an upcoming core limitation does not give me enough data to properly think about the problem itself and propose good potentiality working ideas. So pls involve us. use us. but put a bit more on the table and preferable before creating damage by coming up with something that first sound like a final decision.
  • Create New...