Jump to content

vylqun

Alpha Team Vanguard
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    983

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by vylqun

    Bring Back the DU We Love

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    yeah, i'm still waiting for the incentives of building large bases that i again and again suggested and theorycrafted since before the pre-alpha. Would've created a lot of emergent gameplay and actually keep ppl together instead of everyone having their own small base.

     

    On 11/10/2023 at 4:37 PM, blundertwink said:

     

    So...on one hand its an arbitrary guess, on the other its powered by a small sample size of your friends...but somehow that generalization is unlikely to be wrong...?

     

    that 'small' sample size is roughly 30 players. If you call that small compared to DUs currently active playerbase then we agree on that point :D

    Bring Back the DU We Love

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    On 10/23/2023 at 6:04 PM, blundertwink said:

     

    The problem here is that the numbers on Steam are actual numbers, whereas 400-800 concurrent players is completely arbitrary.

     

    For other MMOs, they actually market their native clients, so you might be able to make this claim, but you'll never be able to have an objective window into native stats without internal data. 

     

    In other words, you're pulling this idea out of nowhere with no evidence...what makes you think that the numbers are this high? That the native client attracts oh-so-many people when DU hasn't marketed or updated this game in MONTHS...? Where is this claim coming from? Have you ever seen 400-800 people online at once in the last few months? 

     

    yes, its a more or less arbitrary guess, but its based on the ratio of native:steam account players i know about from the group of players i play with (orgs and racing community). The assumption that this can be generalized for the whole DU-community might be wrong, but its unlikely.

    Bring Back the DU We Love

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    On 10/11/2023 at 5:11 PM, blundertwink said:

     

    Those numbers are per Steam charts by the way, not just random stuff I'm making up. It's likely there's several hundred people left, but rarely more than 50-60 online at the same time....in other words, at any given time, there's not even enough people in this "MMO" to do a round of Fortnite. 

     

    thats just the steam client tho, the majority of players use the native client which wont show up on steamcharts. If Steamcharts show 50-60 concurrent players, then the actual amount should be 400-800. Still not a lot, but also not as bad as you make it sound. 

    Dual Universe - Release 1.1.0 - Change Log

    in Patch Notes

    Posted

    Please add some scrap (Tier depending on the item tier, maybe randomly 2-5% of the used pures worth) to the items you get from recycling, as it is now its pretty much useless. If we could get some scrap besides the random part, then recycling would have its uses in case of crashes or if you escape pvp but have serious damages and need to repair some essential systems. If you could do that then the recycle system would be pretty useful.

     

    (And let us stack elements with the same number of lives, as your streamer yesterday expected it to be, no one wants to right-click -> recycle a few hundred times)

    Improving PvE gameplay as basis for putting more rewards in the Risk&Reward of PvP

    in Idea Box

    Posted

    On 9/4/2022 at 5:14 AM, Taelessael said:

    -Mining-

    I like everything there except for the reduced ore yields on MU. I'd agree that the upper-level stuff could use a nerf, but NQ had a lot of issues with tax vs mining output because newer players and players that didn't have a large enough quanta-buffer to take advantage of scale-economics couldn't keep up with the costs. It is supposed to be a thing for casuals to make some cash to play with on their weekends, but if you nerf the output that hard then you'd need to re-balance a lot of other stuff to avoid either inadvertently crippling them, or accidentally rolling someone else in economic power.

     

    -Industry-

    Limiting how much you can put on one core will only annoy people here. Most large industrial complexes will be owned by large groups of players that can afford to drop a couple dozen cores if they want that amount of indy going. As for the rest of it... the goal is to not turn the game in to a job, and while your proposed requirements are all quite easily met, they would still be pushing precisely toward that.

     

    Yes, taxes probably would have to be adjusted, But in the current state of the game, T1 will be worthless one or two months after the start of the game again, because MUs just produce to much. That problem would (probably) be solved if we get a proper wear&tear system, which would require regular replacement elements and thus bolster T1 element sales.

     

    Concerning the industry, i never said anything about limiting what we currently have. What i want is jobs that work similar to talent boosting, that give additional benefits to the running industries. Just that its not completely afk-able, but needs a semi active player to keep it going (which is why the job level is bound to 2-4h playtime per week)

     

     

    49 minutes ago, Hirnsausen said:

    Then I and many, many other players could not pay the property taxes anymore, nor could we build anymore ships in time, to venture into PVP space. Your suggestion is contra-effective as it reduces the ships you can unprovokedly attack. Also, ships won't fly that often anymore to transport ore as it takes then so much longer to get enough ore to make sense to come with a transporter. So you PBP guys will have much more time to spin your thumbs around each other and feel bored. Just saying.........

     

    people only wont be bale to pay their taxes anymore, if t1 becomes worthless, but in that case i'd consider reducing the taxes per hex or similar. But currently there is no need for asteroids, because after a while MUs will completly satiate the ore market. (And i never pvp'ed in the past 1,5 years, so i'm not saying it because i need targets, but because the economy and the game needs it)

    Improving PvE gameplay as basis for putting more rewards in the Risk&Reward of PvP

    in Idea Box

    Posted

    A while ago there was a discussion in the discord about limiting access to certain resources to the PvP space as well as the importance of PvE-players for PvP-players and vice versa. My conclusion to improve this interaction, is to improve the PvE aspect, because only if PvE-players hold a value to PvP players (besides target practice), a meaningful interaction can exist. Currently PvP-orgs require barely any purely PvE-players, because everything from resource acquisition to crafting can be more or less automated. The solution is a more active and specialized PvE gameplay.

     

    1. Mining

    Pre-MU planetary mining was in a pretty good state if you ignore its lack of excitement (which could be introduced with rare minerals/gems as random encounters). It required active play and every successful org had at least some dedicated miners to supply them with ore. With MUs now that completely changed. Ore can be acquired passively, and especially the yield for higher tier ores (T3+), which you mostly need in smaller quantities, can easily support a large org. No active input besides the calibration by an alt once every 5 days is required.

     

    For miners to be valuable again, mining has to consume active playtime. For that i suggest a few changes:

    • significantly reduce the MU output, especially for higher tier ores. Without indepth calculations, i'd suggest to reduce the yields to 50%/40%/20%/10%/5% for T1/T2/T3/T4/T5, respectively.
    • randomize the spawn time and increase the spawn rate of the current asteroids in the safe zone, make the ore node size more variable (no meganodes necessary, but the occasional supernode would be a nice find)
    • place a few copies of Thades moonlets (or moonlets generated similarly) at a region outside the safe-zone and have a significantly increased spawn rate for asteroids in that region to create a more or less dense asteroid belt for mining and PvP base building
    • randomly (time and location) spawn large amounts of surface rocks of a single ore (5000%+ of MU-mini-game generated ones) on the surface of planets (T1-T2 in safe-zone, T1-T4 in PvP space), with a rarity of the spawn relative to the tier of the ore. This enables repeated scouting of planet surfaces for surface rock deposits, gives new players the ability to start mining without neglect able initial costs and adds to the importance of surface rock picking talents.

     

    These changes require nearly no new mechanic that isn't already in game, but would improve the value of active mining and thus the value of dedicated miners for orgs immensely.

     

     

    2. Industry

    Industry is a bit harder to tackle, because its automated by definition. The schematics update is a step into the correct direction, even tho i would prefer to have a proper CPU/Power system which would have similar and more effects. One way to increase the importance of active game time in industry (as well as other aspects of PvE) could be the introduction of a job system that is based on a players ingame activity and provides boni to cores or elements. Each job has an activity bar, which fills whenever a player does certain ingame activities. The amount of actions to fill the bar should be relatively low (fill-able with 2-4h standard game time) and reduces over time (exponentially dependent on the fill status, very slow when its full, faster when nearly empty, from full to 50% without any actions it should take a week). The maximum job bonus should be kept as long as the bar is over 50%. In addition you can only have a single job active at any given time, and changing jobs will reset the job-bar to 0. Let me give four examples:

     

    Job: Miner

    • Actions to fill job bar : calibrate MUs, mine/harvest any ore

    • Effects : Increased mining efficiency with hand tool and calibrated MUs (0-30% depending on job-bar)

     

    Job: Industry Manager

    • Actions to fill job bar : interact with any industry unit (limited to once per day and unit)

    • Effects : decreased ore, pures and product consumption (0-10%) and craft time (0-20%) (applied to a core, not to individual elements, limited to a low number of cores)

     

    Job: Pilot

    • Actions to fill job bar: fly any mobile core

    • Effects: improved handling of flight elements (0-20%)

     

    Job: Soldier

    • Actions to fill job bar: shoot&hit other mobile constructs

    • Effects: improved hit chance, improved radar range (not a PvP guy, so no values suggested)

     

    With this system we could encourage specialized and especially active game play. As a bonus the impact of alts on industry would be reduced as well. Due to the core-limitations for the Industry Manager boost, every org with several factories would require several players that focus on doing industry related activities ingame to have an efficient production that can compete with market prices. If we get a CPU&Power system that would limit the maximum amount of industry units per core, so you can't place 5 or 6 large production lines on the same L-Core, in the future the effects of the job system would be even better.

     

     

    With the following increase of importance for PvE-centric gameplay, DU could then start to put up higher incentives or stakes for PvP-space, like adding exclusive resources that you can't get in the safe-zone. Bcause the new incentive for trade between the safe-zone inhabitants and the PvP-space occupants, a good and enjoyable interaction between those two pillars of gameplay should be possible.

    RESET: HOW TO PREPARE - discussion thread

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    Why did you even waste time writing that post? There is literally no new information that wasn't already given in the stream or past AAs.

    We don't need you to reiterate known information, we need a definite time for the release! Time zones are a thing you know? If you want to start at server launch you need to know in advance at when the release actually is (27. or 28., 3AM or 3PM etc.) thats the most important information needed to prepare for the release.

    New Schematics

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    Adding schematics to industry units is tedious and extremely annoying. You can't really expect us to be happy about schematics becoming consumables (even tho the idea itself and the schematic creation process is a much asked for improvement). 

    It is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY that you give us a central schematic bank element which provides all industry units on the core with schematics, so we don't have to run to every single assembler to restock schematics all the time. Please dont half-ass "improvements" again!

    ROADMAP UPDATE: PREPARE FOR WAR WITH THE COMING OF 0.29 "ATHENA" - discussion thread

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    Don't get me wrong, its something, but adding "lmb hold improvement", to the roadmap?  Shouldn't the roadmap be for larger things and not for tiny improvements?

    That being said, i'm quite curious how the alien cores will turn out, hopefully its not just "here we have a small static construct that regularily spawns items into a container". Please tell me that some elements for military space stations etc. is also included.

    DEVBLOG: CONSTRUCTION SLOTS AND STACKED ELEMENTS - discussion thread

    in General Discussions

    Posted

    2 hours ago, Emma Roid said:

    What it is is the total disrespect for their player base, especially loyal daily players like me:

     

    they never respected the time of their players, just remember what happened before demeter. They confirmed in a dev video that old scans would carry over, making many players spend 2+ weeks scanning tiles, just to flip flop later on without any compensation for those wasted days.

     

    As for me, when they don't change their core limitation plans i'm out, and its final this time. I have ~40 cores in MUs, ~10 in constructs for different uses (race car, market hauler, atmos hauler atmos/space haulers etc.). My race track desert oasis uses 100+ cores and then there are some smaller bases on other planets which i could probably scrap. But even tho, thats at least 150 cores, and if i have to delete even only 10% of them, my racetrack will be gone, and so will be I.

×
×
  • Create New...