antanox

"Hello, Noveans!
 
This is Cyrille Fontaine (NQ-Kyrios), and today I’m joined by NQ-Entropy to discuss an important change coming soon to Dual Universe.
 
Schematics have been one of the most controversial changes we’ve made to the game and a significant challenge for us to fix. While the purpose behind the system remains as needed as ever, the way we implemented schematics has caused great discontent within our community. In today’s letter, we’re excited to discuss the changes we’re making to the schematic system, based on your feedback, to improve it.
 
Over to NQ-Entropy:
 
When we released schematics in 0.23, it was to address a problem that had the potential to adversely affect Dual Universe as an MMO. Players were able to be fully self-sufficient with ‘build-it-all’ factories, reducing interaction between players in the game’s economy.
 
We acted too quickly in implementing the current system. The limits we placed were too harsh, too binary, and too expensive. You needed too many schematics to run an industry chain and it was painful to manage them all. We saw the flaws in the system and listened to our community’s feedback.
 
Schematics achieved our goal of creating specializations in what players were able to craft and limiting private, ‘build-it-all’ industries, but they also paralyzed industry gameplay for many players that couldn’t afford schematics.
 
Our first attempt to fix the system was to reduce the price of schematics, but this wasn’t enough. It has taken us a long time to return to the schematics system and create a solution. This delay has meant that schematics have continued to impact players. However, we are now ready to introduce our solution to the schematic issue.
 
OUR APPROACH
 
We’ve decided to go back to the drawing board and remake schematics in a more accessible and fulfilling way.
 
Remaking features in Dual Universe is never easy. Our time is limited, and our decisions on how to spend it directly impact the state and quality of the game. Remaking a feature means investing time into something that may not improve the game if we misfire. It also means risking making something worse, requiring even more time to fix later.
 
The simpler solution would have been to just remove schematics from the game, but despite our missteps on how we had implemented them, schematics did meet the role they were designed for. Removing them would just bring back the original problem that we were trying to solve in the first place.
 
We hope that this new system will be worth the wait.
 
NEW SCHEMATICS
 
The new schematic system is split into two major parts: copying and consuming. The brunt of the change is on the copying side, which is a brand-new system.
 
We wanted to make schematics more accessible and easier to use while retaining a portion of their limiting effect. We have made them more scalable across the board and made the system easier to balance and adjust from our end.
 
COPYING
 
Players will have access to a new interface in which they’ll be able to copy batches of schematic copies from Aphelia’s Master Copies. Players will have access to several copying slots that can run simultaneously and will each be able to create a batch of schematic copies.
 
Copying schematic batches will cost time and a small amount of quanta. For example, a batch for smaller tier-one elements or tier-one honeycomb may only cost a couple of thousand quanta to copy, while the most expensive and larger schematics may cost a couple of million. Different types of batches will also give a different number of schematic copies per batch. For example, copying a schematic batch for a large high-tier element may only give you two or three individual copies, but copying a tier-one honeycomb schematic may give you a batch of 25 or more.
 
CONSUMING
 
Schematic copies will be consumed by the industry unit when an item is made. You will input schematic copies into the schematic banks in the same way as before. Apart from some interface changes to accommodate the new system, the industry unit’s function remains the same.
 
However, there are a few important points to note:
 
Not everything will require a schematic
 
Parts will no longer require schematics at all. This could be subject to change, but we’re experimenting with it in the first release.
 
Additionally, decorative elements, including doors, will not need schematics, though some exceptions may apply.
 
You won’t need a schematic for every individual item
 
We have many items in Dual Universe. There are types of elements, with different tiers and variations, and all of our honeycomb, scrap, and materials. We felt it was too frustrating and demanding to need a schematic for each item.
 
We want more flexibility and ease for our players. We’re creating schematic copies for each category of items based on factors such as their tier and size, rather than each item in particular.
 
For example, you could have a schematic copy that makes large tier-three elements and use it to create all types of corresponding items such as large tier-three weapons, engines, industry units, etc. Similarly, for example, you would only need one schematic for all tier-one pure honeycombs and another for all tier-one product honeycombs.
 
Finally, you’ll be able to list your schematic copies for sale on the market, enabling you to manage your stocks by buying and selling schematic copies.
 
CONCLUSION
 
To summarize, our goals for the new system are:
 
For personal and smaller industries, players can make schematic copies for a relatively minor cost and run a small number of industry units. This brings back small, ‘backyard’ industries of convenience. Note that you can still have a lot of machines, but the number of schematic copies you can copy by yourself will limit the number of machines that can run simultaneously.
 
For larger scales, it will require player cooperation, making larger industrialists purchase schematics from the markets or rely on friends and organizations to generate schematic copies for their factories.
 
Schematic copies are more flexible and easier to handle. You don’t need a schematic for every item. You can use the same schematic to make one of many different items. This limits the total number of schematics, making managing them simpler.
 
Copying time, batch sizes, number of copying slots, and quanta cost can be more easily adjusted and modified based on feedback and metrics.
 
The new schematics will come to Dual Universe very soon. In the meantime, we will be listening to feedback on costs for copying and balancing them accordingly. We will also be watching for your suggestions for items that may need their own schematics, issues with the way items are currently grouped into schematics, or potentially items that currently have schematics but shouldn't.
 
We won’t initially implement talents related to schematic copying but we will be implementing them in future updates.
 
We’re also devoting a whole episode of Ask Aphelia to schematics. If you have questions about the new schematic system, please send them to us by Thursday, July 14, with this link.
 
Thank you for bearing with us, Noveans. We know that this change has been a long time coming. We hope that this new system will revitalize industrial gameplay in Dual Universe for everyone.
 
We invite you to join in the discussion about this topic, using this thread. 
 
NQ-Kyrios and NQ-Entropy"

My thoughts exactly.
 
Also:
 
Graphical upgrades - will this fix the issue introduced in Athena, namely that all thin voxels have shadows, esp when lit by the flashlight?
 

Summer approaches and with it comes Mercury, our next update to Dual Universe.

As Cyrille Fontaine, our Creative Director, mentioned in his letter, our focus is currently on polish, and Mercury is no exception. This update also brings new features such as The Alioth Exchange, better lighting to improve visuals, Summer DACs, and more.

Read on for an overview.
 
THE ALIOTH EXCHANGE

We’re about to deploy a new installation in the heart of Alioth where players can apply to build a display to advertise and sell their creations. Applications will be open to all players who want to advertise their ship shops, markets, Lua Scripts, organizations, voxel libraries, or anything else that they create.
More details about, ‘The Alioth Exchange,’ will be available in an upcoming dedicated post.
 

 Note: constructs featured are samples only.

CONTINUED GRAPHICAL UPGRADES
 
We’re tackling illumination, vegetation, and explosion visual effects with the Mercury Update. You’ll find that the game world will be more radiant and realistic with our new global illumination, vegetation asset fixes will improve the look of foliage in the game, and whether you’re fighting or simply crashing a ship, you can enjoy more vibrant explosions.
 

 
SUMMER DACs
 
We’re implementing a separate, test version of DACs, allowing every active player to invite a friend to try Dual Universe free for one month. 
These Summer DACs are separate from real DACs, and will not impact your accrued pool of DACs from crowdfunding packages when gifted. 
One Summer DAC will be given to every active player and can only be redeemed by new accounts not yet subscribed to the game. They will expire by the end of the summer if not used. Summer DACs should allow us to test our web-based DAC system before the game’s release while offering your friends a chance to try the game for free!

NOVEAN OVERVIEW

We're adding an in-game interface which provides an overview of your general account information and unlocked possessions. We’ll expand this feature moving forward, but in Mercury, you’ll be able to see your unlocked cosmetic skins in a dedicated tab.
 

 
LUA API
 
Our vision for Lua has evolved over the years and with the new directions we’ve taken, it’s become necessary to entirely revamp our Lua API. These changes will future-proof the API and make it better serve the game by improving and tidying the system. We’re starting this process in Mercury. 
 
Naturally, such a major change will come with an enormous changelog, but to give you a brief overview of what’s coming ahead, we’re going to:
 
Restructure the entire Lua API Prepare an object-oriented approach to be ready for future evolutions. Reduce the use of JSON in the API to favor the use of real Lua tables. Rely more on event-driven code to reduce player loops and server requests. Reduce the complexity and size of scripts Add some of the, ‘nice to have,’ features Add further points of interest to some elements such as the telemeter.  
To summarize, our goal with this update is to reset the API and prepare it for future evolutions. Rest assured that your codes will still work in Mercury and that we’ll give you ample time to adapt your creations.
 
TALENT POINT RESET

Every character will have their talent points refunded back to their pool with the Mercury Update. While we must perform this reset for technical reasons related to upgrading our systems, this is also an opportunity for players to refocus talents into different areas and try new ‘builds’, or to simply correct training away from unwanted talents.
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As always, we’ll publish a series of articles delving deeper into Mercury’s features, but for now, thank you for reading, Noveans! We’re excited to move forward with Mercury and are eager to hear your thoughts in this forum thread.
 
 

Hello, Noveans!
 
I’m Cyrille Fontaine, Creative Director here at Novaquark. These are exciting times and I wanted to give everyone an overview of our objectives and direction for Dual Universe.
 
 
A game like Dual Universe is a never ending labor of love and ongoing development, but there is a point when you just need to assess if it is ready for a release. After close to two years of testing and numerous major additions to the game, we have decided to prepare the game for launch.
 
Development of Dual Universe continues at full speed, and we’re spending the lion’s share of our focus right now on fixing bugs, stabilizing the game, improving our back-end systems, and overall continuing to polish the game.
 
We’re close to deploying a brand new feature that we expect will be a hub for creators and merchants alike to gather and present themselves to other players. It’ll be open to anyone who wishes to participate and advertise their shop, museum, service, or any other point of interest.
 
We’re also working hard to deliver our promises to our Kickstarter backers that supported us from the beginning. We’re searching for a new shipping partner to deliver the physical rewards as well as delivering the digital rewards through the major game updates of 2022. We’re also implementing an initial web-based version of DACs.
 
  Our team continues to analyze game data and read your feedback to focus our efforts on where we can be most effective, and this means that our plans can change with developments in the game, but looking to the future, I want to share some of what we currently have planned in upcoming content updates for Dual Universe.
 
Flotillas are a new feature we’re developing that will allow players to form temporary groups of constructs. These will help in identifying friend from foe, assuming your foes haven’t already infiltrated your squad. This will improve many different aspects of group play ranging from fleet engagements, running convoys, piracy, and more.
 
Another gameplay feature we’re looking to add is recycling, which would enable players to better manage their inventories by turning parts of broken or unwanted elements back into components.
 
We want to expand PvE with the goal of helping players bring the game-world to life and improving the story in which everyone experiences the game. The mission system is one area of focus for this goal in developing more complex, interconnected, and lore-oriented objectives. 
We’re also developing a power management system. A good way to consider how energy will work is to look at how construct maximum speeds have changed. Players must decide how to specialize each ship, and similarly, must make choices on how best to distribute power across their constructs.
 
We want to increase the quantity of discovered planets and moons as well as new aspects, biomes and gameplay opportunities, and to produce planetoids the size of big asteroids, much like the Thades belt rocks, but claimable as a territory.
 
One of the most resource-intensive features that we have to tackle is planetary warfare. It brings significant change to the game and, before we can achieve it, we have to bring PvP in general to a more mature state. We know that territory warfare is an important game system to many of you, so continue to help us improve PvP by engaging in fights to generate data for us to analyze and continue to improve the system.
 
There are also many other features that we are looking to improve or introduce in the future.
 
 
Now, let’s discuss the topic of a reset.
 
We have seen your many posts across Discord, our forums and social media. We’ve heard your frustration and know that many of you are waiting for a decision about whether or not we will reset. Let me assure you that no matter what we decide, you will not be reset back to square one. Of the different options we’ve been discussing in case of a reset, we are certain that you will keep your core blueprints, including blueprints owned by an organization that you lead. We are also looking into which other important parts of your game progress could be kept if we do reset.
 
Yes, the internal discussion about a possible reset does continue, and it’s no exaggeration to say that this is the most significant decision we currently have to make for Dual Universe. We appreciate our players and your engagement with us, but I also want everyone to know that all of us here at Novaquark are eagerly awaiting the day we can share concrete news with you.
 
That is all for this message. Until next time, thank you for your attention, Noveans!
Please don't hesitate to provide your feedback here.
- Cyrille Fontaine (NQ-Kyrios)

I will not let you die, my little topic, until NQ made those changes!
 

Hello, Noveans!
 
We have good news: DACs are coming to Dual Universe! As many of you already know, DACs are an important feature of the game’s economy, allowing players to gain game time with quanta. We will initially be releasing a website-based DACs system in the coming months and will then be further developing the system moving forward.

WHAT IS A DAC?
 
A Digital Access Coupon (DAC) is equivalent to a month of subscription. Think of it as a digital coupon that you can use to gain 30 days of subscription time or transfer to another player. 

HOW CAN I REDEEM AND TRANSFER DACs?

Players will interact with this first iteration of DACs on our website. You’ll be able to see an overview of your DACs and be able to redeem as many as you’d like in exchange for game time. You’ll also be able to find other players by searching for their name and transfer DACs to them, but in order to receive DACs, a player must first have an account or create one on our website. There are no limits to the amount of DACs that may be transferred from one account to another.
You will also be able to view your DACs history, giving you an overview of previous transactions.

HOW DO I GET DACs?
 
The initial set of DACs being released has already been purchased by our Kickstarter backers through the Founder and Supporter packages. You can however receive DACs from any player who has already purchased them, for example in exchange for quanta, allowing you to buy Dual Universe game time using your in-game assets, or to gift game time to friends.
 
 
Just as a reminder, we wish to reinforce that this is only the first iteration of DACs in Dual Universe. We’ll be adding to this system over time and will work on integrating DACs into the game as an item that can be traded directly from a market. As always, we welcome your thoughts and look forward to reading your feedback in this forum thread.
 

Hello Noveans, let us know your thoughts on 2FA implementation right below!

Hello Lads,
i´m a big builder myself, with 2 citys (30 and 90 L core) and streaming.
 
If it should come to a reboot (wipe), I would be for a complete wipe with concessions!
- 1. implement XL Static and Space cores (all ends have the same length!!!)
- 2. implement XL Atmo engines and Wings, revamping the area around the stabilizers
- 3. every existing player gets 10% of his talent points he had so far.
- 4. Blueprints are kept
 
Negotiable but indispensable in the future:
- 5. skin designs with color changes of the elements, like the avatar only related to almost all elements.
 

Yeh I wasn’t aware schematics were hated, just the implementation. 
 
If schematics go, then something else needs to replace them. Maybe talent based efficiencies to encourage people
to specialise and use the market??

Why do they want to remove the schematics again? That is one of the only reasons why we got trading in this game <.<

Following our policy of being as transparent as possible and to keep everyone informed, we want to give you some insight about the internal discussions the Novaquark team has on the delicate topic on whether we’re going to have a wipe or not, and under which form. The discussions are numerous, as there is no easy answer and we have to take into account all of the pros and cons for each possible solution. We also have been taking into account the players discussions which have happened - and for some, are still happening - on Discord and our official forum. On one hand we have you, our early backers and players, who supported us for quite some time now, and we want to renew our thanks for being so patient and passionate about Dual Universe. On the other hand, we have the constraints of making the game appealing to new players.
 
Please note: By “new players”, we mean players who’ve just heard about Dual Universe, but we also have many backers that have chosen not to participate during Alpha and Beta, so they can begin playing once the game has reached a polished enough state with game mechanics.
 
SO, WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS WE HAVE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT?
 
We know that players have repeatedly asked for an answer to this question. It has been on the table for many months, if not since the Beta opened. The team has been discussing many options on the topic and we’ve gone back to the drawing board many times. Here is an overview of the factors that we are taking under consideration:
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 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).
 
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 CONSIDERED SEVERAL ALTERNATIVES SO FAR TO REACH THESE GOALS:
 
- Doing no wipe at all.
 
Pros:
Satisfying for some of our long-time builders and traders Cons:
Unsatisfying for players wanting to discover the game and start with a more polished version of the game. Does not allow to remove Schematics properly. Does not allow to revamp the old planets properly. Does not allow the rebalancing of the economy properly. Potentially keeping bugs related to very old Constructs.  
 
- Making a partial wipe where the economy would be wiped, but not the Constructs, which would keep all player-made creations intact, with also in mind to prevent some players from storing resources on said Constructs to circumvent the reset of the economy.
 
Pros:
Relatively satisfying for some of our long-time builders. Cons:
Extremely complex to put in place properly without the known loopholes interfering (such as piling up Resources and Elements on existing Constructs before a wipe and removing them after to sell them). Unknown loopholes could break the wanted healthy economic reset. Does not allow to revamp the old planets properly. Potentially keeping bugs related to very old Constructs.  
 
- Having a “legacy” live server and a new live server, where only the blueprints made before the new server opening would be transferred to the new live server.
 
Pros:
Could prevent any wipe with this solution while managing issues the dev team is trying to solve. Cons:
Opens a number of new issues server-side. Would split the Community.  
 
- Having a full wipe (except blueprints) with solutions to make old time players able to rebuild their favorite Constructs quickly through various means.
 
(Here are a few examples of discussed ideas to reach this goal: for our veteran backers, starting pool of talents points and/or quanta, resource multiplier event right after the reset, etc.).
 
Pros:
Prevents loopholes for an economic reset compared to a partial wipe. Most efficient, proper way to remove schematics. Most efficient, proper way to handle a planet revamp. Cons:
Some possibilities discussed could be seen as an unfair advantage.
Keep in mind, if the above solution is decided on, that an improved version of the Blueprint / Construct deployment tool available to all players will be implemented in-game at the time (or maybe even before) such a solution would be applied to the game.
Such improved version will enable players to have:
A preview of the Construct before deploying the said Construct from a blueprint (this feature should be available with Athena release). An ability to auto-align the preview of the Construct on an already deployed Construct (this feature should be available a bit later after Athena release).
   
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Though this may seem to be a long explanation, it’s a (very) short description of everything the Novaquark team has discussed so far on this topic. So stay tuned, and we thank you again for your patience and support. As mentioned before, our decision will not be made on a whim, but will be made considering and pondering all of the factors mentioned above.
 
Let us know your thoughts on all this here!

Hello, Noveans! We’ve teased graphical upgrades coming to Dual Universe in Athena across our social media over the past couple of weeks, but we also want to present them to you now together to give a clear picture of what’s changing ahead:
 
 
NEW SKYBOX
A stunning skybox is essential for enjoyable space flight in games, and Dual Universe is no exception. Whether you’re hauling outside the pipes, hunting within them, or trying to claim an Alien Space Core Unit, you’ll fly in the new skybox coming with Athena.
 
 
BLUEPRINT PRE-VISUALISATION
 
The ability to see your blueprints visualized in the game before placing them, and to finely control their placement using keyboard keys will improve our player’s quality of life when deploying constructs.
 
IMPROVED WATER VISUALS
Living under water in Dual Universe can be more meaningful with the upgrade to our water VFX. Whether you want a sub-aquatic factory, to loop your racetrack below the water line, or simply have an internal pool, we hope you’ll like the way water looks now in Dual Universe.
 
NEW WARP VFX
White streaks are part and parcel of space games, they mean we’re moving fast! But, with the graphical overhaul to our warp travel, we hope you’ll enjoy the feel of spending a warp-cell or two roaming Helios.
 
-----------------------------------------
 
We’re always carefully reading your feedback. Do you like the new warp vfx, or the new skybox? Please share your thoughts in this forum thread.

Our new system map overhaul gives powerful new tools to players in visualizing the Helios system. You can read about this new Athena update feature below!

OVERVIEW
 
Players can now see and navigate around the entire system map laid out to scale in three dimensions.  

 
Setting a Warp Point will no longer replace your current destination. Players may now set a destination waypoint separately to a warp-specific waypoint.  
Space resources such as the Alien Core Units are accessible through the map.   
We’ve added a better organized menu that opens quicker and has a more useful filter system in the top-left menu, allowing players to filter items on the map by name, owner, or construct type.  

 
Players can see coordinates displayed in real time as they move the target around the map, allowing for precise copying of coordinates, position input and bookmark creation.  
THE CONTROLS
 
You can freely move around the map, rotate it by holding left click, pan around horizontally by holding left + right click and pan vertically by holding right click. You can zoom by scrolling your mouse wheel. You can also reset your view back to default with a button in the top menu.  
You can toggle display settings using the associated button in the top panel, such as the target plane or the safe zones. This will let you choose the amount of elements visible on the map at all times.  

 
You can select any item with left click, select and move to any item with double-left click, and select, move to and reorient the camera with middle click.  
You will also see an exact distance indicator between your avatar and any location (or your current selection and any location, if there is one), by mousing over them. Distances can also be quickly gauged using the grid size indicator at the top.  
Players may set destinations, warp points, open planet maps and more from the menu on the top-right of the map when selected. These actions are also served through contextual menus displayed on bodies in the map.  
----------------------------------------

As always, we’d like to hear from you. How do you like the new map? Will it have an impact on your game? Please let us know here.
 

The upcoming 0.29 Athena update is about more than just PvP and improved visuals. Among the many features this update brings is the Aegis Market.
Read on to learn more about this new commercial hub in space.
 

 
  SPACE ECONOMY  
With the introduction of The Aegis Market, players may now directly access a bot-free market housed in the void of space. Located in a zero-gravity environment, the Market station provides a new dynamic in the transport of cargo, in that merchandise can be bought and sold without the need to make planetfall.
 
Players can now transport resources, including from the new Alien Core Units, and sell them at a market using craft designed purely to function in space. This, along with the updates to our Space Warfare feature can provide new design routes to the next generation of player designed spaceships in Dual Universe.
 
NEW PATHS AND AVENUES TO EXPLORE

 
The Aegis Market is a vast place and it’s surrounded by landing pads for ships to dock. These pads have teleporters which can then take the players straight to the core of the market. The landing pads are all named after the planet nearest to them, and are only about 1KM away from the Aegis. 
 
A landing pad where ships can dock.

 
Teleporters leading players to the market.
 
The market is located at the very center point of the safe zone, at roughly equal distance from Alioth, Madis and Thades. There is also a public warp beacon to the Aegis Market available.
 
Please note that the Aegis Market has an interdiction zone surrounding it. You can't deploy a space core within 50KM of its location. You can however, deploy a dynamic core in this surrounding zone - just like in Aphelia territories on the planets.
 
SPACE MARKETS – SYSTEM EXPANSION
 
While we study the impact and player reactions to the addition of the Aegis Market, we will only be implementing this single new space market. If we can determine that the implementation of this feature is a positive addition to our game, we will explore the option of adding more of them in the future.
 
We’d like to invite you to share your thoughts with us on this feature. Would you like to see more space markets in Dual Universe? What is your initial reaction to their implementation? Please Let us know your feedback here!
 

Dear Noveans, 
 
We took the time to look at all the feedback you gave us during this weekend and the past few days. We understand there are still concerns and that the second version is not the perfect solution to all potential problems. That doesn’t mean we are just going to deploy this version and be done with it. As mentioned previously, our goal has never been to punish players and we don’t want you to feel pressured to destroy/abandon/remove some of your current constructs.
 
Therefore, while monitoring how things will evolve (reminder: we are still in Beta, and things are bound to change or to be tweaked. Nothing is set in stone yet), we are going to act on two aspects when we will deploy the core units limitation with the Panacea release:
 
Extending the time period during which the automatic abandonment feature for core units in excess will remain inactive (1 month was previously announced but we now aim at 2-3 months at least). This is  to make sure everyone has enough time to reach the amount of core slots needed through queued talent training focused on specifically construct slots.  
In rare cases where it wouldn’t be enough, the Novaquark team is willing to help players who have large community projects, assuming they don’t gain any particular profit from them, and they’ve been in the limit of “one player personal cores + organization cores limit of one organization (which is 275 pre-Panacea)” and for whom the limit of 200 cores per player is not enough. We know those cases will be quite rare as there are currently less than 40 organizations going beyond the 200 Core limitation.  
If you are a player in charge of an organization with more than 200 constructs and you have a genuine issue about keeping all your Constructs, please reach out to NQ-Deckard or NQ-Nyzaltar on Discord or on the forum by private message and we will see how we can assist.
 
Again, the goal is not to frustrate you, our players, nor put you in panic mode to reduce the amount of core units you may currently have in your organization(s). We are not applying limitations with a light heart, without caring for players. We do know that these measures are frustrating for many of you, but at some point, we have to think also about the long-term sustainability of the game. All the restrictive measures already deployed, going to be deployed or activated in the coming months, have been all decided with this main goal in mind.
 
We do acknowledge the first version of the core units limitation was way too low and too much based on metrics that weren't detailed enough, not taking into account many edge cases. To show our good will, we decided to approach the problem from another angle: what could be the highest limitation of core units we could give to the players without endangering long-term sustainability? The answer is what has been suggested in the second version. Even if we wanted to go further, it would be unreasonable.  What would be the point of keeping the "no limit" policy if we find ourselves unable to sustain the model one year after its release? Dual Universe is meant to become a MMORPG and as such we have to do our best to design it for the long term.
 
You might ask:
Why didn't you set the limitations sooner?
Why is it just now you talk about long term sustainability?
 
Those are legitimate questions and here is the explanation: 
We had, of course, from the beginning, some rough estimation regarding long term sustainability. But as you can imagine, estimation on paper (or even simulations with a massive amount of bots) can vary quite significantly from actual metrics we get from running a live server with a massive amount of real players. To have accurate numbers, we needed to have two things: having all the main gameplay mechanics implemented in game, and enough metrics about player habits once all the main gameplay mechanics have been implemented. Those are things we didn't have yet before Beta launch and we could only guess before for some of them. Player habits are, for example, a parameter no one can predict perfectly in advance. Even after reaching the Beta stage, it required quite a few months to accumulate enough data to have an accurate idea of what could be the real cost per player. So yes, ideally, we should have set the limitations much earlier, to prevent players from going wild in creativity beyond what was technically reasonable and sustainable. However, this would have been a decision with just "gut feeling" (which is always very risky) and not based on relevant metrics.
 
Now to reply to the many suggestions and concerns you’ve mentioned in past few days:
 
Isn't there a risk of seeing the organization slots weaponized by opponents infiltrated in the organization through Alts?

Weaponizing organization slots - if someone ever does that - will have a very limited impact. There will be no way of catching by surprise the legates of an organization:
- Legates of the organization are all notified when a construct check has failed for the first time (opening the two-week period before random abandonment), in order to check what happened, take immediate action and handle the situation before the next check.
- Once lent, construct slots cannot be taken back for 30 days, which limits the possibilities for immediate negative actions and allows for anticipation.
- Organization legates can know from the list of active slots whether a donator is part of the organization or not (and how many slots are lent), therefore caution should be taken not to rely too much on 'external' slots to deploy new constructs, especially to the point where it becomes critical to pass the construct checks.
- Deploying a construct is restricted to legates and via RDMS, so people actually using the slots are assumed to be trustworthy.
- The log keeps track of every movement in the slot count (who gave/took back slots, how many and when, what happens to the amount lent by this player, what happens to the total amount for the organization)
  Will you give us more control ( show the values ) of : 
 - how many cores do you have free?
 - how many org slots cores do you have free?
 - what is YOUR org potential limit?

The org related numbers are visible in the new UI elements, we will look into creating better insight into your personal construct counts however this will not be available in the initial release of Panacea.  
Why chosing core units abandonment randomly?

We understand it might seem a strange decision at first glance, but we think it's a necessary measure to prevent some players to abuse the system (like inflating temporarily the number of core unit slots before a war and fill them with junk or "can afford to lose" ships). We did consider ways of selecting which type of constructs should be abandoned first, but in the end we found none exempt from loophole.   
Why not go with “constructs are not abandoned when the limit is not high enough? You just can't place new ones (otherwise many constructs will be abandoned long before the players will have leveled the skills for that)

This would in fact result in a situation where an organization could get players to temporarily increase their slots, deploy a very large amount of constructs, and then remove the slots to leave the constructs in place. This in fact does not meet our requirements.  
Suggestion: assigning automatically 10 organization core slots to each organization the player is joining? If he joins the organization, he must participate in the group effort.

While we definitely agree on the idea (each member of an organization should participate a minimum to help an organization to achieve its goal(s)), there are a lot of edge cases if we enforce a hardcoded assignment. What happens if the member doesn’t have 10 organization core slots available? Can he still join the organization? What happens to those who are already in organizations and don’t have the required slots? Moreover, if someone really doesn’t want to share some organization slots, he might just quit an organization if we try to force to assign organization slots to a player. In every case, whether it’s enforced or not, it’s up to an organization leader to convince their members to assign some organization slots to the said organization. Last but not least, enforcing an organization core slot assignment shouldn’t be a prerequisite: not all organizations have a purpose of sharing constructs, and we want to let the organization system be flexible in this regard.
  Suggestion: putting a maximum amount of organization core slots being assigned per member to one specifically organization? (beyond the 10 automatically assigned, like 25 max)

Limiting organization slots assigned per organization will just have the same effect as the suggestion above: if a player wants to keep organization slots for personal use, they will still find a way to do so by creating several organizations for personal use. Beside, as some of you may be wary of potential opponents infiltrating an org, letting the option of having the maximum amount of organization core slots assigned to one organization should be useful to make sure that even in big organizations,  you might have a significant amount of organization core slots with just a small team of trusted people.
 
Will we have a way to disassemble or deactivate easily and quickly a Construct to avoid taking hours to just remove the Constructs in excess of the Core slot limitation? (for example, an ability to compactify a larger variety of constructs in a way that retains their mass and volume, so you can basically box away ships - or even buildings - not currently in use to avoid the core count cost)

This kind of feature is on the roadmap. While we’ll try our best, we cannot guarantee it will be delivered before the activation of the automatic abandonment feature for core units in excess owned by an organization.  
Will there be in-game assistance from GMs in deleting or dismantling the constructs?
 
As we plan to extend beyond 1 month for the inactivity of the automatic abandonment feature as mentioned above, we aim at developing a tool to make it easier to disassemble or deactivate Constructs using the Core Units in excess. We’ll keep you informed on the topic once we’ll have more information about it.
 
What do you think about limiting to each player to be a member of 5 orgs maximum?

That could be an idea, but being aware of how frustration is accumulating after many limitations, we don’t want to push more limitations than the ones really needed.
  How long would it take to train all the talents to max them and reach the maximum limitation?
 
Currently we estimate to maximise all the talents from nothing, will take approximately 6 to 7 months.
However there is a curve, the last few talents take the longest:
- In 30 days, you should be able to reach around 60 slots total.
- In 60 days, you should be able to reach around 90 slots total.
- In 90 days, you should be able to reach around 130 slots total.
- In 120 days, you should be able to reach around 170 slots total.
The remaining slots will take considerable time.
Remember you will also have a partial refund of talent points, which should speed up quite significantly your training in the new talents.
 
If cores were tokenized will they count towards the cap? So if I was to tokenize 90% of a HUGE station? that might save it? Technically they wouldn't be my core right? Might be a legit way to save larger projects. Then hand out tokens to people who buy / already own... These tokens expire after 3 months or something. Tokens are always inactive, so server wise not as much load? Boom, in game tradable property token market aka NFT's (without being able to buy these with USD but they would be considered as "Non-Fungible Tokens"). 
 
While tokenized, constructs still count towards the organization they belong to until the token is claimed. And transferred ownership is to another owner.
 
 
That's all for now, but if you have additional feedback on the upcoming changes, let us know in this discussion thread!
 
The Novaquark team.

Following the discussion around yesterday’s devblog, the community asked us to look over our figures to see what we can reliably sustain in terms of construct limits. In this communication we want to take the opportunity to outline what we have decided to change from the previous devblog as well as to explain some decisions such as the mechanics of construct abandonment and our reasons for arriving at our previous figures. These proposed changes are still being developed by our design team and we welcome your continued feedback on this major update.
 
Organization Constructs Slots versus Personal Construct Slots
 
There appeared to be some confusion in yesterday’s devblog between organization and personal construct slots. Personal construct slots are always independent of organization construct slots. 
 
Before outlining the details of the construct slots, it’s important to note that our position on excess construct abandoning mechanics. For the avoidance of doubt, when this change is implemented in the Panacea release. No construct will be subject to abandonment through the following mechanics for at least the first month after release.
 
This is to ensure as smooth a release as possible, and to allow our players who want to specialize in the architectural gameplay loop or the collecting of wonderful constructs, some time to accrue talent points and to adapt.
 
Personal construct slots:
 
Can only be used for constructs in the player’s ownership. Can not be assigned to organizations. Are non-transferable to other players. Are gained through talents independently of organization construct slots.  
Organization construct slots:
 
Can be assigned to any organization, regardless of membership. Can not be assigned to players. Once assigned to an organization, can not be repealed from that organization for 30 days. Once repealed, the organization will have until the next bi-weekly construct check to ensure that it meets its construct slot requirements. If that bi-weekly construct check determines that the organization has more constructs than it has slots, the organization will receive a warning and be required to ensure the constructs count is brought down to its capacity. If the next bi-weekly construct check following that warning determines that the organization still has more constructs than it has slots, random constructs from that organization will be abandoned until the organization is back in compliance with its slot capacity. All this means that even if you go over the available slot count, you have at the very minimum 14 days to correct it.  
We are keeping the random nature of selection for construct abandonment. This is because as game developers we know that if there exists a way for a game system to be broken, our players will find it. In this particular instance, given the gravity of the impact, we feel that it’s important to protect the game and our community from abuse, and the randomization is an effort to do that.
 
We hope this clears up some of the lingering questions that were remaining yesterday.
 
Player allocated slot amounts, why so low?
 
Following internal research, we determined that currently per active player there are approximately 25 constructs in the game at the present time.
 
Therefore we believed that having a total of 42 slots per player would have been enough to provide an overhead for the community to be able to distribute the available slots amongst each other and support each other's projects.
 
We do value our players and recognise that some of you own considerably more constructs than that average, and though we want to encourage collaboration and community, we don’t want to constrain those players that prefer to go it alone.
 
And, we’ve heard you. 
 
We are looking into an alternative approach that we feel will meet the majority of the community needs while also meeting our requirements for the long term sustainability and balancing of Dual Universe.
 
Talent Changes
 
We are going to increase the core allowances. In yesterday's devblog we proposed a figure of 42 total constructs. We are going to increase that through the introduction of talent changes that will require considerable time investment but keep the door open to players that wish to own many constructs.
 
The new talents are separated into three tiers, increasing in expense significantly per tier.
 
The new figures are (subject to change)

For personal construct slots:
 
The base personal construct slots will be increased from 2 to 10 slots without any talents. The first tier personal construct talent will grant 3 slots per level (up from 2), for a total of 15. The second tier personal construct talent will grant 5 slots per level (up from 1), for a total of 25. The new third tier personal construct talent will grant 10 slots per level, for a total of 50.  
This will allow for a maximum personal construct limit of 100, once all the talents are fully acquired.
 
For organization construct slots:
 
The base organization construct slots will grant 10 slots without any talents. The new first tier organization construct talent will grant 3 slots per level, for a total of 15. The new second tier organization construct talent will grant 5 slots per level, for a total of 25. The new third tier organization construct talent will grant 10 slots per level, for a total of 50.  
This will allow for a maximum organization construct limit of 100, once all the talents are fully acquired.
 
The combination of the two will allow a determined player to reach the maximum number of construct slots that we can reasonably maintain. This will take substantial time investment in order to be a specialization within the game. 
 
We will still be refunding the following Legate based talents:
 
Organization Construct Management Organization Construct Management Specialization Advanced Organization Construct Management Specialization  
These talents will be buffed to collectively increase the maximum ceiling for the organization's construct limit to 1625.
 
If you have already trained Advanced Organization Construct Management Specialization to level 5, by reinvesting the refunded talent points, we estimate that you will be able to reach at least a construct slot capacity total of 80. Further, given the grace period of at least 1 month following the Panacea release, we hope that those amongst our players who value their construct capacity can increase it to a comfortable level of approximately 125 construct slots before needing to make decisions on which constructs to keep.
 
We want to thank you all for your feedback and take this opportunity to recognize the passion you our community have for the future of this game. We would love to hear how you feel about the new changes outlined above in this forum.
 

Suggestion:

A way to quickly disassemble a ship into a container with out removing all the fuel etc first (it just appears in the box as another item) would be a good way to reduce all the ships lying around that are not being used. There could even be a special storage box for this function, a bit like a parcel container, but called a 'hangar' or similar.  You link to it and it allows you to dump a ship and whatever cargo/fuel it has into it. It only works on static constructs so you can't move ships around with it. The storage would automatically make a blueprint of the ship in the state it was stored in. Then if you are linked to a 'hangar' storage box you have the option to deploy the construct and it's contents back to the way they were. I would suggest each box only allows one ship and has to be of corresponding size to the core (S/M/L). I would further suggest that the box is a 'black box' you can only put a ship in or take it out, you can't go taking individual parts etc. out of the box, if you want to do then then disassemble it the conventional way. 

@NQ if the new proposed changes are going to require me to delete or abandon over 200 cores, can you please implement a way to disassemble cores without having to remove all the voxel and elements manually. I think we would all appreciate this greatly.

I AM A SOLO PLAYER AND I HAVE 40 CONTRUCTS WHAT THE HELL AM I GOING TO DO THIS MOVE IS WRONG SOLO PLAYERS LIKE ME WILL NOT BEABLE TO PLAY WELL IN DU. I ONLY HAVE 1 ALT SO THAT MEANS I CAN HAVE A MAX OF 25 CONTRUCTS, with my org.

Hi everyone.

Thanks a lot for all your feedback on the topic.
We understand the slot limitation described in the devblog is quite frustrating and we're transmitting all your feedback to the Game Design team.
We'll try to come back ASAP with a reply from the team. Please be patient.
 
Edit: "current slot limitation" changed by "slot limitation described in the devblog".
 
Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

i've been playing since alpha.
i always tried to create content and give back a lot to the community via new fancy stuff ( like hagboards or boats etc.) and i operate a showroom with all ships on display and a marina where i try to keep a copy of each boat/sailboat using my lua for people to walk around in and enjoy the creations.
additionally i have to make some money and operate mining units on around 20 cores. then i have an industry and need a LOT of cores for prototypes and my own ships.
when i am selling tokens i often have to place new temporary cores.
so with all this even after cleaning up every so often i operate around 260 cores in my construct org.
even if i massively reduce stuff, i still would have to remove most of the stuff. so basically this would end my career in this game.
even if NQ would reconsider and go to 100 cores it would be constant struggle of which stuff i would have to remove.
i never used nested orgs ( which was basically more in those past mining days to claim tiles) but still i create content, i have a life in this game and i want to grow. so this could honestly be the final nail in the coffin for DU.
NQ always talked about the visions where they create the plattform and we the players fill it with life and content. but HOW?

If this is about server space or network traffic i would rather pay 1$ more per month to end this stupid plan.

 

I just want to say, thank you NQ for the continued  stream of information.
 
EDIT
 
As a ship builder, I like to have examples of my ships next to the BP dispenser  so that a potential customer  can examine  the ship. As a solo player with no alts, this change will make that impossible. 

So this is an interesting question which I will attempt to answer to the best of my ability...
 
I'm really fighting the urge to make the "It never was" meme here, but I'm sure one of you will do that for me soon enough.
The reality here is that you never actually were making 1/8th or 1/16th slopes, you've been creating what is the closest approximation of that.
 
In the old system, we used 253 points. In the new system, we use 252 points. This means that in the old system, a single voxel was: 84.3333333333333 (recurring) points.
84.333 also does not divide by 8, 16, 32, or 64.

In fact, in the old system you couldn't really reliably cut a voxel in half to an exact precision, and even a single voxel was not precise. As for example:
84.333 / 2 = 42.166 (in reality this would have been 42 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 4 = 21.083 (in reality this would have been 21 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 8 = 10.541 (in reality this would have been 11 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 16 = 5.270 (in reality this would have been 5 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 32 = 2.635 (in reality this would have been 3 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 64 = 1.317 (in reality this would have been 1 because we don't store decimals) Sure, the difference is so negligible that you can't see it by eye. But that's essentially the same in the new system as the new pattern looks like this:
84 / 2 = 42 exactly 84 / 4 = 21 exactly 84 / 8 = 10.5 (in reality this would be either 10 or 11 again because we don't store decimals) 84 / 16 = 5.25 (in reality this would be 5 again because we don't store decimals) 84 / 32 = 2.625 (in reality this would be 3 again because we don't store decimals) 84 / 64 = 1.315 (in reality this would be 1 again because we don't store decimals) Now, if we had changed the division to 64 instead of 84.333 you could expect the following to happen to all currently existing constructs:
A loss of precision around 25% Every existing voxel would have lost around 25% of its available detail. You would see huge changes in your designs and most existing designs would likely loose a lot of their detail. Curves would be less curvy, more blocky. But you would have access to a 1/8 slope. With the new division of 84 instead of 84.333, you can expect the following:
The precision loss is only 0.395% Every voxel will look near enough exactly the same, except for a few edge case ones. You likely not see any noticeable change in your existing designs. Curves are still curvy. But your 1/8 slope might be a bit wonky, and its probably better to adjust to 1/7.  In short, the precision cost of changing to 1/64 is not worth it. It really isn't. Trust me, we've looked. It's ugly.

I can already see the new question brewing in your minds: Why didn't you increase it to 128 per voxel?
Sure, this could increase the detail and be more divisible, however it also doesn't fit inside a single byte. So now we are talking about every single construct in the game taking up twice as much in terms of data. And if you feel your cache is big now, you really don't want to know what its like with double the resolution of voxels.  

We could perhaps consider introducing a pseudo 1/64 grid mode further down the road, which would give you a 1/64 grid. However it will still not actually place a vertex at a 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64 position. It would place it at its closest available position.

Also, to answer the question about the scale at which the tool works. No, it will always be 1.5vx in each direction from the vertices point of origin.
I thought maximum adjustment range on this image made that quite clear, but perhaps that was an error on my part:


I highly recommend you try it before you cast to much judgement on it, as someone who's tinkered with voxels for a long time. I absolutely love using the tool.
I find myself mostly using Grid 2 and Grid 7, using the control key to make bigger jumps.
 
I hope this answers some of the burning questions you all have.
I wish you all a wonderful day, and look forward to seeing what you will all create with it.
- Deckard

I find the claim that 64 steps per voxel would deform ships dubious, since as far as I can tell the voxelmancy-heavy ships (those built using voxel reactors, the ones where deformation would become obvious) would align exactly to those steps - as far as I know, all voxel reactors have a detail degree of a multiple of 2, and I've never heard of anything more detailed than 64 step. Even if it did deform ships a little, 1/64 of a voxel is not even 4mm/0.2". I think 64 steps per voxel would make much more sense.
 
Please do not lower the voxel extension range below what it is today. Being able to extend a voxel by 1.5vx in any direction is extremely useful for things like detail work and connecting complex shapes without having to line them up to each other. Just as an example, many of the finer details in this build (e.g. the struts, landing gear and horizontal stabilizers) were only possible due to the ability to stretch voxels by 1.5vx on each side. Limiting this range now would probably ruin this and many other builds.

Hi guys !
First of all, thank you all for the warm welcome to the VPT. We've been working for a while now, trying to make it as ergonomic and intuitive as possible, we hope it will live up to your expectations when you test it yourself with Panacea. 


I take the liberty of intervening on this non-Lua devblog for questions related to it, and thus to answer your question @EasternGamer 
 
Having the ability to export/import with Lua or without, a bunch of voxels was considered but we were faced with a lot of quick and hard to prevent automation possibilities, copyrights ...etc. The game could have quickly become an import show of all kinds of 3d models. 
So we decided not to implement it.