Jump to content

Resource

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    20
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Resource got a reaction from Mncdk1 in Decorative Items: Non-Destructible   
    If NQ made decorative items non-destructible ship builders would be more likely to use them to decorate their ships and make them look great. Builders and players avoid decorations because they do not like having to repair dozens (or more) of items all over the ship. Removing destruction from decorative items would negate the need for dynamic properties to be stored on many of the elements considered decorative.
     
    I am proposing this because of the overwhelming support I have received from everyone I've talked to about this.
  2. Like
    Resource got a reaction from Belorion in Decorative Items: Non-Destructible   
    If NQ made decorative items non-destructible ship builders would be more likely to use them to decorate their ships and make them look great. Builders and players avoid decorations because they do not like having to repair dozens (or more) of items all over the ship. Removing destruction from decorative items would negate the need for dynamic properties to be stored on many of the elements considered decorative.
     
    I am proposing this because of the overwhelming support I have received from everyone I've talked to about this.
  3. Like
    Resource got a reaction from Eviltek2099 in Decorative Items: Non-Destructible   
    If NQ made decorative items non-destructible ship builders would be more likely to use them to decorate their ships and make them look great. Builders and players avoid decorations because they do not like having to repair dozens (or more) of items all over the ship. Removing destruction from decorative items would negate the need for dynamic properties to be stored on many of the elements considered decorative.
     
    I am proposing this because of the overwhelming support I have received from everyone I've talked to about this.
  4. Like
    Resource got a reaction from W1zard in Decorative Items: Non-Destructible   
    If NQ made decorative items non-destructible ship builders would be more likely to use them to decorate their ships and make them look great. Builders and players avoid decorations because they do not like having to repair dozens (or more) of items all over the ship. Removing destruction from decorative items would negate the need for dynamic properties to be stored on many of the elements considered decorative.
     
    I am proposing this because of the overwhelming support I have received from everyone I've talked to about this.
  5. Like
    Resource got a reaction from Selena in Decorative Items: Non-Destructible   
    If NQ made decorative items non-destructible ship builders would be more likely to use them to decorate their ships and make them look great. Builders and players avoid decorations because they do not like having to repair dozens (or more) of items all over the ship. Removing destruction from decorative items would negate the need for dynamic properties to be stored on many of the elements considered decorative.
     
    I am proposing this because of the overwhelming support I have received from everyone I've talked to about this.
  6. Like
    Resource got a reaction from wokka1 in DEVBLOG: CONSTRUCTION SLOTS AND STACKED ELEMENTS - discussion thread   
    I could not be more angry about your destruction of org core limits. I think you have lost your mind.
  7. Like
    Resource got a reaction from apollo0510 in Welcome our new CEO - Discussion thread   
    Welcome Nouredine Abboud.

    I sincerely hope your influence will encourage your team to minimize negative gaming experiences, game breaking changes piled up and delivered all at once, and to add large wings and xl atmo engines.
  8. Like
    Resource got a reaction from DogMinion in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    @NQPann and & @NQDeckard:
     
    The element collision changes modified the collision boxes of existing elements. This will cause ship builders who believed they were building ships that were "as nq intended" and sold ships as "not stacked" to have customers come to them reporting that the element list is showing stacked elements. Compounding the problem is that it only reports the type of element that is now "stacked" without giving any visual indicator as to which specific element is considered "stacked". You have told us it's your intention to disable elements considered stacked.
     
    Additionally you are changing brakes so the tops have to be exposed to the outside of the ship (without actually changing the indicating visual that shows the leading edge as the impacted portion that needs to be exposed). This change will cause most ships in the game to become obsolete without major changes. 
     
    These two changes are game breaking. Why are you pushing two game breaking changes while also fundamentally changing how resources are allocated, collected, and imposing a 1m per week tax per territory on every player in the game? This feels like the kind of upset I heard from my friends who no longer play the game before the .23 patch went live. Please explain why this is necessary and how you are going to keep this from becoming another exodus.
  9. Like
    Resource got a reaction from Fembot68 in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    @NQPann and & @NQDeckard:
     
    The element collision changes modified the collision boxes of existing elements. This will cause ship builders who believed they were building ships that were "as nq intended" and sold ships as "not stacked" to have customers come to them reporting that the element list is showing stacked elements. Compounding the problem is that it only reports the type of element that is now "stacked" without giving any visual indicator as to which specific element is considered "stacked". You have told us it's your intention to disable elements considered stacked.
     
    Additionally you are changing brakes so the tops have to be exposed to the outside of the ship (without actually changing the indicating visual that shows the leading edge as the impacted portion that needs to be exposed). This change will cause most ships in the game to become obsolete without major changes. 
     
    These two changes are game breaking. Why are you pushing two game breaking changes while also fundamentally changing how resources are allocated, collected, and imposing a 1m per week tax per territory on every player in the game? This feels like the kind of upset I heard from my friends who no longer play the game before the .23 patch went live. Please explain why this is necessary and how you are going to keep this from becoming another exodus.
  10. Like
    Resource got a reaction from J-Rod in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    @NQPann and & @NQDeckard:
     
    The element collision changes modified the collision boxes of existing elements. This will cause ship builders who believed they were building ships that were "as nq intended" and sold ships as "not stacked" to have customers come to them reporting that the element list is showing stacked elements. Compounding the problem is that it only reports the type of element that is now "stacked" without giving any visual indicator as to which specific element is considered "stacked". You have told us it's your intention to disable elements considered stacked.
     
    Additionally you are changing brakes so the tops have to be exposed to the outside of the ship (without actually changing the indicating visual that shows the leading edge as the impacted portion that needs to be exposed). This change will cause most ships in the game to become obsolete without major changes. 
     
    These two changes are game breaking. Why are you pushing two game breaking changes while also fundamentally changing how resources are allocated, collected, and imposing a 1m per week tax per territory on every player in the game? This feels like the kind of upset I heard from my friends who no longer play the game before the .23 patch went live. Please explain why this is necessary and how you are going to keep this from becoming another exodus.
  11. Like
    Resource got a reaction from jkspartan in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    @NQPann and & @NQDeckard:
     
    The element collision changes modified the collision boxes of existing elements. This will cause ship builders who believed they were building ships that were "as nq intended" and sold ships as "not stacked" to have customers come to them reporting that the element list is showing stacked elements. Compounding the problem is that it only reports the type of element that is now "stacked" without giving any visual indicator as to which specific element is considered "stacked". You have told us it's your intention to disable elements considered stacked.
     
    Additionally you are changing brakes so the tops have to be exposed to the outside of the ship (without actually changing the indicating visual that shows the leading edge as the impacted portion that needs to be exposed). This change will cause most ships in the game to become obsolete without major changes. 
     
    These two changes are game breaking. Why are you pushing two game breaking changes while also fundamentally changing how resources are allocated, collected, and imposing a 1m per week tax per territory on every player in the game? This feels like the kind of upset I heard from my friends who no longer play the game before the .23 patch went live. Please explain why this is necessary and how you are going to keep this from becoming another exodus.
  12. Like
    Resource reacted to DontPanic in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    Well, where to start, maybe with the definition of play:
     
    Play is an activity that is performed without conscious purpose for pleasure, for relaxation, for the joy of itself and its result.
     
    I chose Dual Universe as a game and not as a job.
     
    Here was a text wall I spare you I tried to reduce it to a few points.
     
    If Dementer Patch comes like it did on the PTS server, I will pack my things and go to the Sanctuary Moon.
    I will not buy any more ships because I don't know if they will work tomorrow.
    Also, I can't recommend the game or rather the working simulation at the moment.
    I am annoyed that I invested the time and continued to play/work after the 0.23 patch to provide myself with schematics.
    I will wait and see if the game survives.
     
    Maybe NQ should hire someone who knows about game design.
     
    To all others I wish a relaxing busy game.
  13. Like
    Resource reacted to Fembot68 in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    This is the final nail in the lid for this game.   If they cant see that by now there is no hope.  
     
    Another game comes to mind that is dead set on not paying attention to the majority of players and listens to the vocal minority. They have barley 400 people playing on weekends now.  They are using that as an example,  Good work NQ.  lol 
  14. Like
    Resource reacted to Hagbard in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    i just opened another thread just before this Q/A was created...
    Ok, usually i am not negative but the balance of Demeter on the PTS server has some severe problems.
     
    1. Territory costs of 1m per week:
    this will lead to almost nobody claiming any tiles any more outside of the sanc moon unless the territory can produce some serious income. so all "player made content" will disappear after some time
     
    2. Scanning results do not get deleted and show l/h for mining units
    this will lead to ALL really valuable tiles being claimed within the first 24h after demeter goes live, as it is really easy to identify  the most powerful tiles for mining units if you have containers full with scanner results.
    so after day 1, the fun is over and the "mega tiles" will be claimed by those players/orgs that have all the existing scans.
     
    NQ, as demeter is balanced on the PTS, it would kill the game if it goes to the live server
     
    - New players some days later would not have a chance to find income opportunities despite missions.
    - earning quanta will be a lot harder, so people would stop spending.. this would kill industrialists workflow.
    - the imbalance between experienced players/orgs and new players would get worse and even more players would demand a wipe or simply not enjoy the game

    please reconsider your decisions.
     
  15. Like
    Resource reacted to Gottchar in Call for Demeter-related questions   
    So, here are some questions. This time I even spent time on the PTS and watched the full video first

    -Demeter fees will pull a lot of money "out of the system" and slow the inflation or even reverse it (deflation). The 1M per week fee is set now, at a time when it is equivalent to only 10kl or hematite, or one t2 engine L. Will you adjust the fee should the buying power of the quanta change significantly? The whole "player driven economy" is, by far, not really player driven anymore, and this patch is yet another step in that direction, the fixed rates for schematics, missions, other bot buy and sell orders, and now territory fees see to that.

    -I generally like airbrakes now finally getting an obstruction zone, however the current direction indicated by the yellow arrows is not only unintuitive but would also just lead to players stacking them on the inside of the craft pointing outwards to the sides. On the current PTS it appears the obstruction is checked above the brakes (if placed on horizontal surface). What are the plans for the direction of the obstruction directions for the airbrakes?
     
    -This is a nice reminder that plenty of items have obstruction zones which dictate a certain usage, which is often not visually pleasing, intuitive or, for better lack of word, "feels right". Any plans for an overall overhaul of obstruction mechanics and directions?
     
    -To use mining units to their full potention, by at least never wasting charges because the charge pool is already full, you have to log in almost daily (every 30h with no talents, every 35h with full charge gain and pool talents). It feels rather tight. Do you think DU is a game for casuals, RP players, weekend warriors and others who are not playing in a regular profit oriented way? (So not like me   ).
     
    -My first ever ship sale was to a player who just travels the planets and maintains a little base on almost every planet and moon. Quite serene and dreamy actually. He will now have to set up mining units and get into business, or collect rocks, or quit. He is not allowed to continue the way he is used to play. The fee is too high for that. Patch .23 stopped groups of people from having autonomous outposts and building civilisation away from alioth. Demeter now stops another group of players from playing their way. What is the intended and therefore likely future-proof way to play DU? 
     
    -With planet based mining gone, yet another thing to actually do in the game is removed. For players who have time on saturdays there is still asteroid mining, for the rest there are AI missions, which consist of taking off and waiting for 5h to arrive, assuming you do one that actually pays something. Player made long distance haul missions can not compete with AI missions. Any plans on revisiting Apelia missions, their payout, or the fact that the long distance ones are overly profitable with multiple accounts or "car sharing" via VR?
     
    -Related to above: Any plans to add anything to the game that is fun to do and at the same time brings an amount of resources?

    -In order to find asteroids you need access to a DSAT which is t3. In order to mine t3 via units you also need t3 ore for the advanced autominer. Will it be impossible to get t3 ore without already existing t3 ore?
     
     
     
     
  16. Like
    Resource reacted to NQ-Naerais in Market Clean Up - Today!   
    Despite our recent efforts to expand and clear out Market 6, we are still getting reports about performance and clutter. We want to assure our players that we understand your frustration and are still working to find better permanent solutions. 
     
    Meanwhile, we will be addressing clutter across Alioth this weekend. Our plan is as follows:
    Dynamic constructs that have not had direct interaction with their owner over a set duration (currently 30 days*) will be hidden.  Constructs at the market that violate our rules,  Code of Conduct and EULA will be removed.
    If your construct is hidden, you can unhide (recover) it by using the Fetch tool. To do this, right-click on it in the Construct list on your Map screen. Any constructs that you own, whether visible or hidden, will appear on this list.
     
    Fetch functionality now works for organization-owned constructs as well. For hidden constructs that belong to your organization, your legates can retrieve them via that same functionality. 
     
    Our customer support team is at the ready if you still need assistance recovering your constructs. Simply ping our Live Support staff in the in-game help chat with “@GM” or file a ticket on our support page and we will dispatch help right away!
     
    Please note that this is intended only as a temporary measure to aid performance and improve your experience when visiting these areas. 
     
    We look forward to seeing the results from these changes over the weekend.
     
    May your frames be plenty.
     
     
    *Duration may change based on our findings 
  17. Like
    Resource reacted to NQ-Deckard in Changes to Lua screen units   
    Hello Noveans!

    Currently, screen unit content is an HTML page. We synchronize screen unit content between players by sending the whole HTML; however, screen unit HTML content can be pretty big and uses a lot of bandwidth and frame time to render when updated every frame by a programming board or control unit. This has a significant impact on client performance for players, especially when a lot of screen units are in the same area. 
    Performance improvement is of paramount importance to us and an ongoing request we get from players. Consequently, it is something we will continually work to achieve. 
     
    To address this, we are bringing a possible solution to PTS so that players can try it out. This prototype involves using a new API to draw screen units with a dedicated Lua script. This will use simple drawing commands like
    drawRectangle(a,b,c,d) drawText(“Hello DU”) Simple actions like setTextContent will not be affected. 

    In addition to performance improvements, this new tech also allows for some unprecedented possibilities to create even better screen displays than before. Check out this video to get a taste of what it can do! 
     

    We realize that this change will mean that players won’t be able to use SVGs on screens anymore, and that SVGs are easier and more flexible than uploading static images. It’s important to note that the new Lua system will still allow you to draw complex images. You don't really need any Lua knowledge, and it’s easier than the DPU system.

    Additionally, we added an option to deactivate HTML screen units for players who experience the worse framerate. We expect this to bring significant performance improvements in markets and parking areas.
    Once the change is fine-tuned, thanks to your feedback after trying it on the PTS, we will announce a transition period to allow players time to switch over to the new API before we disable support for HTML-based screen units. We will continue to support both techs during this transition period.

    We strongly encourage everyone to check out this change when it’s available on PTS and share your constructive feedback with us on the forum. 
     
×
×
  • Create New...