Bazzy_505

I've been playing DU for a good long time now and I'm convinced that the developers don't play their own game.  They have accounts, but they have a very different perspective about DU than most of us do.  Announcements like this one make that painfully obvious.  It seems like this core limit announcement is not so much the problem, but a symptom of the bigger problem which is lack of meaningful communication between player and developer.
 
Dual Universe needs to have a player council made up of people from a cross section of play styles - miners - haulers - builders - pvp players - factory owners and so on.  If the community, via a player council, had the opportunity to discuss changes like this with the development team before announcements like this drop, it would at least give them a chance to consider the ramifications of their decisions without immediately pissing everybody off.  We do have this message board, but so much of it is just people complaining.  We need a meaningful dialog between the players and the developers and a player council would do just that.  I've seen it in other games and while it isn't a cure all, it certainly improves communication between us rabble who play and love the game and the rabble up there in that ivory tower who love and develop the game.

I welcome the try to scale the org constructs in some way. the core limitation of 275 was really not bearable for larger organisations. We had to split up in several sub-orgs for all our constructs and the managing of this was a nightmare, because of the 5 orgs per player limit.
 
BUT:
If I have with all talents just 25 org construct slots, this is quite an issue.
I mean, you have just a few personal construct slots.
- Most of them are already occupied with the cores for the mining units.
- So if you want to build a fancy building and more than 1 single ship, you already need several of your org construct slots for yourself
- Preparations on a larger scale will be nearly impossible

In my case I currently build a city layout so that other players and I can build a realistic (still small) city later. A project like this needs a layout and a structure before it really starts, or it ends in chaos. Currently I have already ~150 cores placed and filled. But projects like this, that need a massive amount of cores for preparation before others can benefit from it, will be nearly impossible. Because everyone have to be in your org (remember the 5 org limit) and has to give you some of their org construct slots before they get anything in return (and be honest: how many will do this?). And even if I get enough slots from people beforehand and I spend massive ressources and time - it can be all lost if just a few players leave the org/ reassign their slots/ cancel their payment. Then the core limit drops and the already placed cores will be abandoned...
 
This will really kill many larger projects.
With this system, you can only start big projects, if you are already big. Big projects from small groups that form a larger organization later will be nearly impossible. So this may be okay for large orgs, but will make it way more difficult for smaller orgs to rise even if they are really active.
Better invent some milestones.
For example: You start with 50 Cores for your org, and with achieving several goals (spend massive ressources/quanta) you can scale up this limit and it remains permanent. So even a small group can get to a decent amount of org cores with the time if they are active (this idea is absolutely not perfect, it shall show just another direction).
 
A system like the announced one that is so fragile that a few leaving/reassigning/inactive members can destroy your organization with the reduced core limit - that is not really thought to the end.
 
I understand the reason and I appreciate that you are try so solving this.
But this is the wrong way NQ.

I have 8 mining constructs that will now come down.  I have a ship museum that will now lose its structure and most of the ships on display.  I have a two core hangar and 4 cores if parking that will be torn down and my few remaining ships will sit on the ground.  Building was what I enjoyed most.  There is no more reason to gather resources if I can't build.  

Numbers wise, i would say the population has been rather flat.  I've been bumping into new players quite frequently in the last 2 months. But most of them tend to go silent after first 2 or 3 weeks.  I have feeling that once they build their first base/factory, get the first workable S and M core ( which we often give them for free because we treat them as unicorns) they tend to run out of things to do, unless they have the Landmark bug.  Can't really blame them, there isn't much to do beyond that.
 
After demeter i've noticed quite a few pre 0.23 players peeking their heads back in, mostly to come back to check on their old stuff and see if anyone from their old orgs is still playing.   But like new players i would say only about 1/3 of them stick around beyond the move my stuff from surface to space/sact tile.
 
All in all i'd say DU doesn't bleed any more than it gains back, but it's certainly not growing, and quite frankly why would it?  Even if we get wrecks and salvage in next major pach it isn't quite some novel or excitiong new game loop.  Builders will build, rest will loiter around for a while than shake their heads and move on.  It's the way it was, and apparently that's way it will be for forseeable future.
 
happy voxeling and trolling general lads and lasses

I wouldn't say economy any weaker or stronger as before. What you seeing right now is the effect of us gorging on meganodes at insane pace in the last 3 weeks before demeter. I will take a while for the estabilished players to burn through their hoards of ore/modules. 
 
In pure numerical values, prices buy/sell sit roughly at levels they were around patch 0.23.   Having said that it is real bummer to new players who aspire to get into production, as schematics have effectively become 3 times as expensive as they had been just a few weeks ago.  

I wouldn't say economy any weaker or stronger as before. What you seeing right now is the effect of us gorging on meganodes at insane pace in the last 3 weeks before demeter. I will take a while for the estabilished players to burn through their hoards of ore/modules. 
 
In pure numerical values, prices buy/sell sit roughly at levels they were around patch 0.23.   Having said that it is real bummer to new players who aspire to get into production, as schematics have effectively become 3 times as expensive as they had been just a few weeks ago.  

Hello,
 
I am not here to talk about Demeter the pro/cons.
This is a personal list of improvement I see that could be added to the game and would change player life quality.
Some of the improvement are more for new players, the goal is to make the game less confusing for them.

Some of the improvement can be complex to develop, some others are easy.

Blueprints / Tokens
Blueprint should update while the elements in container change.
When you are preparing all the element to deploy your blueprint, you inspect the blueprint to see how many of each elements you need. While you are filling the needs, the blueprint should update.
  We should be able to deploy compacted construct without having to select the nanopack.
As we can have only 1 compacted construct and that the compacted construct can be only in the nanopack, there is no reason to have to select a specific container to deploy it.
  Add a shortcut to deploy the compacted construct
We could use the same shortcut (Alt+B), if the player has a compacted construct in his nanopack it deploy else it tries to compact the targeted construct
  The error message displayed when you try to deploy a blueprint from the wrong container should be more explicit.
If the blueprint you try to deploy is in the other container (not your current selected one) it should display a message like "Select your 'nanopack' to deploy this blueprint" and not "Invalid element".
  Allow blueprint to be deployed with element having less life.
The player should be able to use element having less life to deploy a blueprint. By default, if there is enough full-life element in the container it would take those, but if not and there is less-life element it should take them.
  Show the construct as an hologram when deploying
When deploying a blueprint, the player should be able to see an hologram of the construct to help him for placement. (more useful for static and space construct). This option could be deactivated via settings for performance improvement.
  We should be able to use a token without having to select the container it is in.
Currently we get a very confusing error message when trying to use a token from a container that is not the one selected. Many player don't understand what's happening.  

Surrogate
Add a filter "show owned only"
Display surrogate owner by the player
  Add a filter "show company only"
Display surrogate owned by companies the player is in.
  Allow multiple filter to be checked in same time
  Save selected filters
Player should not have to select filter every time he opens a surrogate, they should be saved client-side.
  Save station sorting selection 
By default every time, surrogate are sorted by "most used". If the player want to have them sorted alphabetical he has to do it on every search.
  Add possibility to save a search as bookmarks
For people that use a lot VR, they search for the same names/filters all the time. It would be great to be able to save the search as a bookmark. The player could simply click on it and it would load his saved search. (search, filters and sorting)
  We should be able to use "Surrogate VR Station" in VR to switch station.
A player in VR could be able to use a surrogate station while being in VR. It would prevent to have to exit and enter again when we want to switch Station. Of course the initial station will always be the point of origin.  
 
Piloting
Add an option for player to start in 3rd person view then entering in a piloting seat.
Most of the player are piloting ship in 3rd person view. This could be done by adding a way to switch the view in Lua or via game settings.  
 
Mining Units
Add Lua API to it
We need a way to manage the MU in a construct as any other industry unit.
  Available Mining Unit charge should be displayed for player
Currently if you want to know this information, you have to open a MU. This information could be displayed on the right of the player's quanta.
Charges  3/8        Balance 1 000 000 h
  Add a possibility to skip mini-game
Many player just want to apply the default calibration percentage to the mining unit, they don't look for the additional rock.
It would be great to have an option to apply the default percentage without having to load the mini-game, in that case no rock would pop and no bonus would be applied.
  Notification should contain the MU element name
It would help to keep a track of which MU has been calibrated in a specific construct when you have to manage multiple MU for an organization.
  Notifications should have a specific filter for MU
The player should be able to display only notification related to MU.
 
Avatar
Keep auto-run enable when opening a window
All user interface opened while auto-running should not stop the auto-run. Currently I can't check a market price while auto-running.
  All locked screen should be unlock with ESC
Currently if you are locking the screen with "TAB" you can't unlock it with "ESC". But if you are locking the screen with the chat, then you can't unlock it with "TAB" and you have to press 2x "ESC".
  Allow player to close channels
Chat interface has too many tabs. We should be able to close them so only 1-3 tabs would be displayed. For every channels we should be able to choose if we want it to display when a new message come in the channel or not.
  [19.12.2021] Add time to whisper chat
When you get a message from someone, sometime you miss it, there is no way to know when this person sent you the message. (5 minutes?, 5 hours?)

  Map
Split constructs in 3 sections (dynamic, static, space)
For people that have access to many constructs the list is sometime very long and hard to find a specific construct.
  Add a way to hide a construct from the list
Some construct have no interest (multi-core building, showroom ship, ect...). We should be able to hide some constructs from the map drop-down with an option to show hidden construct.
  Keep the previous selected tile filter.
It's mainly when you are scanning tiles, you want to display your scan results. But every time you open your map, you have to go and select again the scan result filter.  
Add a search
Most of the time we know exactly which construct we are looking for. Instead of having to go though all the construct list, if we could search for it it would help us a lot. Of course the search should stay if you close the map and open it again.
  Add a RDMS right for organization's constructs to allow member to see constructs in the map
Currently only legates can see constructs on the construct list. But sometime you give right to an org construct to a member and he has no way to locate it on the map.
 
Building
Allow player to switch engines / weapons
It would be nice to be able to switch engine of same type/size on a ship. Example switching "Basic Atmospheric Engine L" to a "Advanced Military Atmospheric Engine L".
It would make the life easier so we don't have to deal with the placement, links and tags. Of course the applied talents would not be saved.
  Add a shortcut to start a new link from previous element
This is more when you are setting up factory, but can be also the case when you are linking your engine or containers. It would be nice to be able to have a shortcut that will start a new link from the previous element.
Example: I want to link 10 engines to the same fuel tank, I start a link from the fuel tank and then go on the back of my ship. Link first engine, hit the shortcut, link the second one, ect...
Same if I have to setup 5 Metalwork Line for a specific production.
  Add a shortcut to swap link direction
This is more for the factory but could be also used for button with PB. Would be nice to be able to change the link from "OUT" to "IN" or vice-versa.
  Increase the jetpack speed
When you have to go through all you L core to make a link or something else it takes a long time. Would be nice to be able to fly very fast with a modifier key. This speed could be configured in the settings.
  [17.12.2021] Add an option to delete voxels
With some limitation (max 3m³), but being able to delete last voxel in a construct we want to remove. I will reduce number of time we have to ask NQ to help us when we want to remove a construct.

  Effects and Sounds
Add possibility to remove certain effects
For some people effect in the factory are not needed or glowing rocks are glowing too much. Would be nice to be able to choose which effect we want or not. 
In some area there is too many effects, it's lower the game immersion.
  Add more sound channels
It would be nice to be able to reduce the "industry sound" or other noises while maintaining the sound level of other sources.
  Add color filters for color blind people
Some colors are very difficult to see in the game. Also the Nvidia filters are not supported so we can't use them to help us.
 
Missions & Jobs
[18.12.2021] When creating a mission, the parcel containers for the origin/destination should be sorted alphabetically.
If you have multiple parcel containers (10+ in my case) you have to search for the one you want to select.
  [18.12.2021] The weight of the package should be displayed in the "Reward & Collateral" section.
There is 3 parameters to take in consideration when you are setting the reward/collateral: the distance to travel, the value of the package and his weight. (warp cell calculation)
  [21.12.2021] Increase the number of mission player can create.
Being limited to 3 missions is not enough. If you start to use that to create content and give mission to carry your goods, you need to be able to create a lot of them.
As the mission system is based on reputation, if you are creating too many mission that no one will pickup then your stats will be bad.
  [21.12.2021] Add a notification when someone answer your job.
Actually you have to check all the time your job to be sure that you don't have miss an answer.
  [21.12.2021] Add the date/time of message posted in communication.
Actually we are not able to know when someone as answer our job, as the game is worldwide and we are not all in the same timezone it's hard to follow without this information.

Hahahaha this ia going to be hilarious to watch unfold and Crash. Love it

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?
 
 
 
 

Same, any ship I made has the air brakes hidden because you need a bazillion of them in anything larger than a small core and who wants an ugly ship ?   The damned wall of engines design is ugly enough, now we will have walls of brakes.

The Devs need to play their own game so they understand how it works, You can't make a medium or large core ship without dozens of brakes. 

The L/hr seem too low even with talent and adjacency bonus for the 1 mil/week tax. Either the rate needs to go up or the tax drastically reduced. The brake change is horrible. I know the current implementation was temporary, but requiring the entire brake to be exposed is going to usher in the golden age of freaking ugly ships. Please change the requirement to be only the front surface to be exposed.

Yeah, to this day, it's one of  the more glaring problems. Those trailers as well as website content is really not representative of what Dual Universe is.  It wouldn't be a far stretch to consider most of it false advertising.
 
I do remember learning of Dual Universe existence through one of those pre-alpha videos back in the day. Based on that i bought into paid alpha.  It was quite a shock when the next alpha 2 day test started and i finally go the chance to login.   I thought it was a scam and i unistalled the client in about 40 minutes in a fit of righteous wrath.
 
When i did eventually calm down, I reinstalled it again thinking for the money spent i may just as well have some fun with this piece of shovelware.  It eventually grew on me, mainly because landmark servers were down for years at that point.   I still play now, but what i have installed is certainly not a game i see in trailers, not even now.

I would very much like to believe that, but the circumstances of Hello Games and Novaquark were quite different.
By the time Hello Games started working on NMS, they had already shipped 3 games, so it's not too much of stretch to say they have had a small, but fairly experienced team to work with. Most of the launch troubles of NMS were due to not having experience working on project of that magnitude, consequently falling behind the production schedule,  which led to having to choose between releasing what they had at the time or go bust.
 
In Novaquark's case it's a team that has never realeased a commercial title, led by someone who had no experience making any game indie, hobbyst or commercial.  To make things even more complicated, they decided to license a rather obscure game engine with no proven track record, besides a few simulations and couple of obscure games that have not even been released at the time.  Add a rather play it by the ear approach to design, NQ setup really has Sisyphean quality to it. 
 
If you think about it, with the way they stacked their own deck, it's quite a miracle NQ managed to release anything at all.  Like quite a few of you i did enjoy DU for a while but at some point i realized DU really is as wide as an ocean and as shallow as a pond. And it's hard for me to see it changing with NQ's  unique talent of spending incomprehensible large share of their time digging themselves out of countless holes, instead of spending a little extra time on avoiding jumping into those very holes in the first place.

I would very much like to believe that, but the circumstances of Hello Games and Novaquark were quite different.
By the time Hello Games started working on NMS, they had already shipped 3 games, so it's not too much of stretch to say they have had a small, but fairly experienced team to work with. Most of the launch troubles of NMS were due to not having experience working on project of that magnitude, consequently falling behind the production schedule,  which led to having to choose between releasing what they had at the time or go bust.
 
In Novaquark's case it's a team that has never realeased a commercial title, led by someone who had no experience making any game indie, hobbyst or commercial.  To make things even more complicated, they decided to license a rather obscure game engine with no proven track record, besides a few simulations and couple of obscure games that have not even been released at the time.  Add a rather play it by the ear approach to design, NQ setup really has Sisyphean quality to it. 
 
If you think about it, with the way they stacked their own deck, it's quite a miracle NQ managed to release anything at all.  Like quite a few of you i did enjoy DU for a while but at some point i realized DU really is as wide as an ocean and as shallow as a pond. And it's hard for me to see it changing with NQ's  unique talent of spending incomprehensible large share of their time digging themselves out of countless holes, instead of spending a little extra time on avoiding jumping into those very holes in the first place.

I would very much like to believe that, but the circumstances of Hello Games and Novaquark were quite different.
By the time Hello Games started working on NMS, they had already shipped 3 games, so it's not too much of stretch to say they have had a small, but fairly experienced team to work with. Most of the launch troubles of NMS were due to not having experience working on project of that magnitude, consequently falling behind the production schedule,  which led to having to choose between releasing what they had at the time or go bust.
 
In Novaquark's case it's a team that has never realeased a commercial title, led by someone who had no experience making any game indie, hobbyst or commercial.  To make things even more complicated, they decided to license a rather obscure game engine with no proven track record, besides a few simulations and couple of obscure games that have not even been released at the time.  Add a rather play it by the ear approach to design, NQ setup really has Sisyphean quality to it. 
 
If you think about it, with the way they stacked their own deck, it's quite a miracle NQ managed to release anything at all.  Like quite a few of you i did enjoy DU for a while but at some point i realized DU really is as wide as an ocean and as shallow as a pond. And it's hard for me to see it changing with NQ's  unique talent of spending incomprehensible large share of their time digging themselves out of countless holes, instead of spending a little extra time on avoiding jumping into those very holes in the first place.

I would very much like to believe that, but the circumstances of Hello Games and Novaquark were quite different.
By the time Hello Games started working on NMS, they had already shipped 3 games, so it's not too much of stretch to say they have had a small, but fairly experienced team to work with. Most of the launch troubles of NMS were due to not having experience working on project of that magnitude, consequently falling behind the production schedule,  which led to having to choose between releasing what they had at the time or go bust.
 
In Novaquark's case it's a team that has never realeased a commercial title, led by someone who had no experience making any game indie, hobbyst or commercial.  To make things even more complicated, they decided to license a rather obscure game engine with no proven track record, besides a few simulations and couple of obscure games that have not even been released at the time.  Add a rather play it by the ear approach to design, NQ setup really has Sisyphean quality to it. 
 
If you think about it, with the way they stacked their own deck, it's quite a miracle NQ managed to release anything at all.  Like quite a few of you i did enjoy DU for a while but at some point i realized DU really is as wide as an ocean and as shallow as a pond. And it's hard for me to see it changing with NQ's  unique talent of spending incomprehensible large share of their time digging themselves out of countless holes, instead of spending a little extra time on avoiding jumping into those very holes in the first place.

At this point, removing schematics would have been contraproductive. 
Schematics are, on fundamental level, the right call. The problem was its shallow implementation and outright disastrous rollout ingame.
NQ seems to go to EVE for ideas quite often, which is fine, but when taking a page out CCP's workbook, it would have been wise to read that page first, and read it with comprehension before slapping it on sticky note in the office.
 
Having said that, i belive it doesn't really matter anymore. Those who left past 0.23 are not comming back, 0.23 wasn't a cataclysmic event, to many it was just the last straw that broke the camel's back.  I suspect many of the very same people still lurk around the forums from time to time, but it's more out of curiosity how the final act plays out , than of a desire to buy a ticket to the movie to watch it again. 
 
NQs best bet is to cater to the white unicorn crowd ( regardless of the size it is ) that came after,  who discovered DU in the state it is now and are not burdened by dissapointment with the end product of grand promises and lofty goals JC sold to original backers.
 
 
I keep warning you. Doors and corners, kid. That's where they get you.

At this point, removing schematics would have been contraproductive. 
Schematics are, on fundamental level, the right call. The problem was its shallow implementation and outright disastrous rollout ingame.
NQ seems to go to EVE for ideas quite often, which is fine, but when taking a page out CCP's workbook, it would have been wise to read that page first, and read it with comprehension before slapping it on sticky note in the office.
 
Having said that, i belive it doesn't really matter anymore. Those who left past 0.23 are not comming back, 0.23 wasn't a cataclysmic event, to many it was just the last straw that broke the camel's back.  I suspect many of the very same people still lurk around the forums from time to time, but it's more out of curiosity how the final act plays out , than of a desire to buy a ticket to the movie to watch it again. 
 
NQs best bet is to cater to the white unicorn crowd ( regardless of the size it is ) that came after,  who discovered DU in the state it is now and are not burdened by dissapointment with the end product of grand promises and lofty goals JC sold to original backers.
 
 
I keep warning you. Doors and corners, kid. That's where they get you.

It is kinda telling when this forum as sad as it is, is giving me more entertainment then playing the game.

Considering how many players we lost after 0.23 it would seem the majority vote would be yes. But they are no longer here to say so..

1. That is the most overused / oversimplification of socialism ever. Please. No.
2. You can imply character development is not rewarding enough in DU, and you may be right. But political analogies do nothing for your argument.

I think you need to educate yourself on what socialism actually is before making oddball suggestions like this.

i guess it's about right time to lighten the mood and take out popcorn XD

Well fine, have it your way,  endless parking lot filled with meat-trucks, which would be slowly eroded by sun, wind, and rain into eery valley of menhirs that turist would visit for the religious experience, not knowing what it really was originally.  I would watch them from above and snicker as all those silly notions of what the site's original purpose was.
 
Call me weird, by when you look all those photos of bronze age menhirs, u can't tell me it wasn't originally a schlong, before weather and time did their polishing on it. 
 
 

We need "Dramatic Exit" doors in real life, it would be hilarious