Msoul

The inactive asset requisition system (IAR) responsible for cleaning up old constructs was implemented in he Panacea update and you can read more about it here. As Wyndle indicated, your sanctuary tile and any constructs on it are 100% safe. If you had any additional tiles prior to the update then up to five of them were automatically designated as headquarters (HQ) tiles and thus would not be lost due to unpaid taxes. Now here is where it gets a little tricky, if you had constructs on these headquarter tiles they will be protected from the IAR system but only if you maintain an active subscription. In the event you have not subscribed to Dual Universe for 90 days, all constructs outside of your sanctuary tile will become abandoned regardless of whether or not you own the territory they were placed on. Note that accounts with full beta access (either through pledge packs or beta keys) are currently immune from this requirement.

Sie erfüllen die Mindestsystemanforderungen, aber um das Spiel mit dieser Hardware reibungslos spielen zu können, müssen Sie möglicherweise Ihre Grafikeinstellungen reduzieren. Ich empfehle, die Schatten auf oder unter Mittel zu halten und die maximal angezeigten Konstrukte auf 100 zu reduzieren, es sei denn, Sie benötigen höhere Werte. Beschränken Sie außerdem Hintergrundprozesse auf ein Minimum, damit der Spielclient den Großteil der Systemressourcen nutzen kann. Reduzieren Sie dann einfach Ihre Auflösung, bis Sie mit dem Kompromiss zwischen Grafik und Leistung zufrieden sind. Das obige wurde von Google übersetzt. Hier ist die ursprüngliche Nachricht: You do meet the minimum system requirements, however in order to play the game smoothly with this hardware, you may need to reduce your graphic settings. I recommend keeping shadows at or below medium and reducing the maximum displayed constructs to 100 unless you have need for higher values. Also keep background processes to a minimum so the game client can utilize the bulk of system resources. Then just reduce your resolution until you are satisfied with the graphics vs performance tradeoff.

Ben arrivato. Non sono a conoscenza di alcun piano per la localizzazione italiana, ma se c'è abbastanza richiesta da parte dei giocatori allora accadrà. Note the above is a google translation of the following message: Welcome. I am not aware of any plans for Italian localization but if there is enough demand from players then it will happen.

Contact a GM via in-game chat or via support ticket if at any point you are unable to access key Aphelia structures due to other player's constructs or poor parking jobs. While the inactive asset requisition system (IAR) should naturally prevent long term issues that does not mean you need to wait for it to take action. GMs still have the right to move constructs around and can even delete them if they feel that the owner is being intentionally malicious.

It has actually been awhile since I experienced a memory related crash so I suspect the devs have already plugged the majority of leaks. Do keep in mind that the minimum system requirements for DU currently state you need 8 GBs of RAM and 3GBs of VRAM but as with most things, more is always better.

Setting which backer title is displayed on your account was actually controlled by the community page. You would pick the title you wanted from a dropdown list and it would then show up on the forums after a small delay. Unfortunately said page is currently being updated and thus it is not possible to manually modify your title at the moment. There is currently no eta for when the community page will return but I suspect it will be fairly soon.

Ah I see now, thank you for clarifying. The 15 minute window was originally implemented to give players mining on open tiles enough time to escape should someone on the surface lay claim to it. I agree that this functionality is both not required for sanctuary/haven tiles and that it can lead to abuse as you have seen. Thank you for bringing this up, please do submit a bug report detailing your discovery so the developers are aware of the issue and can decide on an appropriate course of action.

Absolutely love it. Thank you for sharing!

Right now unclaimed Haven territories do not permit harvesting, mining, or terraforming. It is also not possible to perform these actions on claimed Haven tiles, unless the owner has given permission via his RDMS settings or by right clicking the sanctuary territory control unit and selecting "share with friends". I suspect that you have performed the later action but if not and you have somehow managed to find a way around this restriction, please submit a bug report to NQ Support detailing all the steps you took so they can attempt to recreate the problem and address the issue. Note if you did give your friend permission and now want to take away territory rights, just press "F7" while in-game, click your picture at the top of the page and delete the associated policies.

Hello Leniver, it is currently possible to add a subscription to beta key accounts by pressing the play now button on the website when logged in to your DU account. This however would limit you to a max of 12 months as that is currently the largest length of time in which you can subscribe. To go beyond this amount you would need to supplement it with a gametime code. These codes can be purchased from the Markee Dragon website (they are an authorized reseller as stated in the lastest Ask Aphelia FAQ). Any codes applied to your account add to your total and NQ have confirmed that codes applied before launch will count towards the pioneer packs. Hope that helps. Please reply back if anything is unclear or if you have further questions.

You make a good point but it is difficult to account for said discounts because they are technically optional and hence some players may have played all of beta on a monthly subscription. With regards to the second graphic, the idea was to follow through with Sycopata's investigation on how the pioneer pack's talent rewards scale with time subscribed to Dual Universe. However, rather than time I decided to reference dollars directly as I felt the resulting chart could more easily assist players in calculating the merits of adding additional gametime before launch. I personally prefer to view these packs more as a reward but as of writing many players are trying to decide if they should resub to hit a higher tier. All this chart does is take the total bonus skill points for each pack (ie: 6M 12M and 18M respectively) and divide it by the cumulative subscription costs. Thus it highlights the talent point cost efficiency which I believe could be helpful for some. Naturally this does not take into account the other Pioneer Pack rewards so please do keep that in mind. I understand the point you are trying to make here but I believe that a flat rate of skillpoints/time would create too large of a discrepancy between players. By applying the current rewards we end up with a more balanced outcome in the long run. Veteran players still keep their edge but its not so large where it becomes a potential problem.

To clarify the bonus skill points and quanta are allocated to players at the end of every month over the first 6 months of release. Thus the cumulative talent point reward trend (neglecting any passive skill training) would look something like this. (Note: 1M/month for Advanced, 2M/month for Rare, 3M/month for Exotic) Now subscription costs vary a little bit based on the taxes in each country/region but for the sake of argument lets assume that a one month sub costs $13. If we perform your proposed analysis and take a look at the total number of skill points rewarded per dollar spent (ignoring any discounts from purchasing larger subscription packs) then we arrive at the following relationship. As you can see there is indeed diminishing returns like Wyndle indicated so please take this into consideration when deciding whether or not to upgrade your Pioneer Pack. Obviously if you want to be frugal the best option is to meet the minimum subscription requirement for the reward tier you are targeting but remember you don't have to upgrade if you don't want to. These packs are primarily a thank you from NQ and its perfectly fine to just accept it. Cheers.

I am not going anywhere. Hope to see you all post release.

Appreciate the update. I am sure this decision was not easy but you did an excellent job explaining everything and have now given the playerbase a clear answer. Also thank you to those of you in the community who previously took the time to share your thoughts and feedback on this topic. Regardless of what your opinion was, the fact that you shared it is what counts. Looking forward to see what comes next.

That was cool, not only did you cover some of my questions but you even kept in the exact wording. Really interesting to hear a little bit about the maintenance side of things too. Also that ship you are flying looks really nice, sort of a space catamaran style. Looking forward to next week. Cheers!

Honeycomb_Values.csvHere is a csv of the table provided in NQ's main post if anyone is interested in taking a closer look at the numbers. I have included my findings below along with some personal feedback. Hopefully you find it helpful. Resistance Feedback The proposed progression curve is quite interesting. Looks like products on average are 15% more resistive than their pure counterparts with a little bit of diminishing returns at the exotic level. I think this might be a bit too much as the difficulty of obtaining higher tier materials is substantially higher than merging two different types of the same tier. Consider reducing the offset on products to make them equal or less effective than the next tier of pure. Also the variance across resistance types is constant throughout the tiers (~9%) with products having only slightly less spread than pures (~8%) . Consider further reducing this and establishing that manufactured materials have more uniform resistances. The idea behind this change is to give manufactured materials slightly more consistency in light of the fact there are fewer options to choose from in a given tier. As to the overall extent, I think the extreme ends (10% and 75% average resistance) are right where they should be. If however, you are considering implementing other features that will influence these values (ie: talents, elements, etc) then you might want to reduce said range to reserve some working space and avoid needing to revisit these changes later on. Hitpoints/Mass Feedback Obviously these factors are not associated with progression so the objective is just to find a a good setpoint for the hitpoint/mass ratio, the average material mass and an acceptable amount of variance between material types within a given class. The currently proposed figures are as follows: 45 hitpoints/kg/L Pure material average of 2790 hitpoints (62 kg/L) with variance of 1440 hitpoints (32.5 kg/L) Product material average of 2129 hitpoints (47.3 kg/L) with variance of 608 hitpoints (13.5 kg/L) Building materials are all identical with 450 hitpoints (10 kg/L) I fully agree that building materials should have minimal hitpoints (and mass) along with little to no variance. Ideally this will encourage players to use said materials in non-pvp/non-critical applications without needing to worry too much about optimization. Products and pures have approximately equal average but products are a bit more consistent. I think this is perfectly fine and the current setpoint of around 2500 hitpoints (55 kg/L) seems reasonable. The only potential problem is the hitpoints/mass ratio. This is actually a very important number because mass affects speed which can also contribute to effective hitpoints when you take into consideration tracking limitations on weapon elements. Unfortunately I have no idea what a good setpoint would be as it really depends on what kind of dynamic you are aiming for with regards to small/fast vs large/slow.

I really like how you spread out the resistances based on material. It helps to give each one a unique application and adds another layer of intel gathering and planning for more experienced pvpers. The mass changes along with the tradeoff between hitpoints makes perfect sense too. I can't comment on the particular values yet but I absolutely love the direction you have taken here. Even if balance adjustments are needed in the future, I hope you keep this overall strategy. Awesome Job Entropy!

The last official information on the topic comes from NQ-Kyrios's recent letter where he mentions that the internal discussion is still ongoing and reassures us that Novaquark is eagerly awaiting the day they can share concrete news on the subject. In addition, please note that NQ-Deckard has graciously clarified that core blueprints will be preserved in the event a wipe were to occur. I see that you have already shared your thoughts on the subject in the official discussion thread but for anyone else reading through here and wondering what is going on. Please review this news article and if you wish, feel free to leave your thoughts/feedback in the associated discussion thread.

Schematics are now player created. When in game press Ctrl+K to bring up the new schematic interface where you can queue up any schematics you wish, provided of course you have the necessary quanta to produce them (note limit is 5 production slots right now). After a preset delay the schematics will become redeemable and you can add them to your active inventory. Thus there is no requirement where you need to visit the market to acquire schematics but these player produced schematics can still be bought and sold there similarly to regular items. All of the new schematics are now single run copies and the infinite run schematics from before have been completely removed with quanta refunded to their respective owners. Lore wise I believe the story is players are essentially copying the master schematics that Aphelia has stored in her databank and she is effectively charging a small fee for this service. It is unlikely that we will ever have access to the master schematics again but these new copies may eventually be added as rewards for various Aphelia missions or special events. Hope that helps.

I am not sure what counts as a top gaming keyboard but I would recommend anything by SteelSeries. They generally offer a good compromise between performance and cost.

So the launcher is actually very simple. It examines your current game version (if applicable) and then downloads whatever you need to update to the latest patch. The download process is quite literally just grabbing a zip file containing all the relevant gamefiles. Once downloaded, said zip is extracted to your installation directory and then an integrity check is performed to ensure that there are no errors. If the download process is interrupted, upon relaunch, the program will perform a check and if able, will resume downloading from where you left off. Sometimes this check fails and the reason is typically because the launcher itself hard crashed or was forcibly shutdown (note a pc restart can cause this). There are also rare instances where unstable internet connections can lead to corruption of the downloaded file. If the launcher detects such an occurrence it will automatically delete all download progress and restart from the beginning. To help ensure things go smoothly, make sure to manually close the launcher (via the X in the top right corner) if you wish to pause the download and save your progress or if you suspect your internet connection has become unstable. Now with that said your internet speed is extremely slow to the point where I think it could negatively impact your gameplay experience. Please understand that Dual Universe is an MMO game and thus there is a substantial amount of information that needs to be exchanged between your client and the game server. I highly recommend you reach out to NQ support via this link and inquire about any minimal network requirements or tips for handling excessively slow connections. They will be able to advise you on how best to procced.

Looking forward to see what the community has created. Also thank you for taking the time to stream it for everyone.

List Updated Added suggestion for implementing icons for each of the respective item/element subcategories. Added suggestion for setting the default market order quantity to one instead of zero. Added suggestion for keyboard controllability when interacting with the market, organization, inventory, barter, and RDMS interfaces. Added suggestion for a deposit/withdraw from org wallet option in the territory management screen.

Balanced feedback is important because the devs need to be able to distinguish which particular things the playerbase enjoys/appreciates vs dislikes/laments. This however becomes very difficult when feedback is unspecific and/or one-sided. Simply put, if you only point out the positives then the devs wont know what needs improvement just like if you only point out the negatives the devs wont know which parts need to be emphasized. If there is absolutely nothing you like/hate about this update then it is fine to state as much, but at the very least try to be specific about exactly why you feel that way. My thoughts I personally do not enjoy industry gameplay because I find it rather mundane and repetitive. I do however understand that many others enjoy it and that this change is significant for them. From a macroscopic perspective I believe this change makes sense and @TobiwanKenobi already did an good job outlining why and so I don't really have anything more to add at this time. Quick Summary I have read through this entire thread and these are the main issues players have identified thus far, roughly in order of popularity. Its tedious to have to constantly refill schematics copies on industry units. This places a soft limit on how many things a single player can produce at once. Thereby placing an emphasis on group play or using alt accounts to further production goals Thereby creating a relatively stagnant endgame for industry players (Note: conflicts with "the factory must grow" mentality) The justification for this change is not clear enough and the intended outcome is difficult to comprehend Schematic prices/copy-times do not align with current production rates and will lead to price corrections. Lore wise, this change implies that Aphelia has substantial control over Noveans whereas an emphasis on self-autonomy is preferred. Additionally the nanocrafter not requiring schematics could use some elaboration. Generic schematics based on element tiers feels different and there are some conceptual size discrepancies like large detectors that add confusion. If you would like to help contribute to the discussion, consider commenting about how you feel about the above points, offer suggestions on how to address them, or identify additional areas of concern with respect to schematics. Please try to be productive and stay on topic. Cheers!

You make a good point, I don't necessarily know the future with 100% certainty and of course the last thing I want to do is mislead players. With that said, based on NQs recent news articles and overall direction on monetization, I am confident enough to assert this as one potential avenue for maintaining player subscriptions. Could things change? Absolutely, but there is currently nothing to indicate that we are deviating from this path and I fear that omitting DACs from the list of potential options would thus be more misleading. Remember the principle behind the DAC is to allow players to purchase a tradeable form of gametime and the current implementation (ie: the summer DAC system) is just being used to test functionality. Being an out of game item does not necessarily prevent it from fulfilling its intended purpose but either way the plan, as stated in that most recent news article, is to add DACs to the in-game market. Just an fyi, should anyone experience issues obtaining/canceling/renewing their subscription don't hesitate to reach out to NQ customer support. They have some great people who would be more than willing to help you figure things out.