Zeddrick
-
Posts
700 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Zeddrick
-
-
12 hours ago, Haunty said:
That's not the same, they were adding avatars when there were none, DU has always had avatars and is just missing the combat part.
There was a whole plan to go further with it and have combat, etc. It upset players who wanted the effort to be put into the actual spaceship game and not making another game to distract from it.
-
If I were NQ I absolutely would *not* want to address this topic! Look at what happened in other games -- CCP tried it in eve first with walking in stations, which caused a player revolt, and then with dust, which had some success on its own but never really connected back to the game. Frontier tried to add it to Elite Dangerous with Odessey and nearly killed their game off completely. The only game I can think of where this type of functionality has been added without the players hating it is Star Citizen, which has added it before even releasing the game in the first place.
IMO there are more important and much lower effort/higher reward things that could be worked on in DU than AvA. If it were me I would leave it for later and then see what the player base actually wants from the feature.
-
Yes, it has been showing red for me all weekend. I have been ignoring it and it has been working fine. More or less.
-
-
How will things work with the STU? Is it the case that only the backers will have a sanctuary territory unit and everyone else will spawn on Haven? Or will there be another way to get an STU or the option to spawn on Sanctuary instead?
-
8 minutes ago, Haunty said:
NQ obviously bit off more than they could chew, but that is all behind us now. I think they have been more realistic lately.
AvA was never going to be like an FPS, it would be lock and fire just like CvC. Seems kind of tricky though like how would it handle obstructions...
I don't think anyone ever got far enough to know what it would have been. Lock and fire does seem easier to do, but it would be a weird system compared with more or less every other game out there.
Might even be better to instance a tile into an FPS environment and have a different game engine unreal run the AvA part of things ...
-
5 minutes ago, Ninator said:
Hey guys,
there is a misconception here. Stuff like AvA can not be "added" to the game. AvA requires a centralized server architecture that makes strategic decisions, like who shot whoom nearly in realtime. Comparable systems in E-Sports are usually very streamlined and limited to very few players. The DU infrastructure is completely different. It uses the clients workstation for all physics / collision simulations, and uses the server only for data storage. The server itself is programmed in a very generic high level way, or with other words : it's quite slow.
So AvA in DU ? not going to happen.
I'm not sure that's true for the current PvP is it?
Also I'm pretty sure that 'twitch' types of games all simulate things like shooting collisions, etc on clients which work in lockstep with one another and detect if client states diverge. Whereas server-centric games typically look a bit more like eve and DU where you have to lock a target and press shoot to shoot at it rather than manually aiming.
The difference with DU is the state of an object is simulated by *one* computer which then tells a server that then broadcasts that state to all the others. Which is the worst of all worlds because you have high latency and high network comms without centralised simulations.
I imagine someone thought doing it like that would reduce server costs but I bet in practice the oposite is true.
-
The average eve player isn't going to want to play DU any time soon of ever for a number of reasons including the culture of the comunity. What DU needs to do is stop chasing away the people who *do* want to play by trying to get them to play in a different way. It really is that easy.
I'm in a discord where there are lots of people who used to play DU. Most don't any more since 0.23. Many of them were never interested in the quanta-market based game but wanted to mine/build everything themselves and the current changes don't really seem to have them excited. They should have let people play the way they wanted to play and built features on top to make that easier.
- Hazaatan, Kurosawa and Deathknight
-
3
-
1 hour ago, Wyndle said:
The impression I get is that they don't want production to be "AFK play" nor do they want a set it and forget it system regardless of incongruities their chosen course may cause. I don't feel up to digging through CCP's old change logs to see when/why they added their version of this system or any of the public discussions about it there just to make a point. At least with the current implementation it can be tuned as needed without as much risk of breaking stuff.
The point I was making there is that NQ seem to be taking elements of eve and putting them into a different game but I don't really think they understand what made eve what it was. So the result is a bunch of broken features designed to 'fix' the problem that people aren't playing DU in the market-centric way they played eve.
But eve is a different game with a different economy, different things to do and a different player mindset. If you try to push DU players to behave like eve players it will just annoy them. Let people play in survival mode with no quanta of they want. They will be happy and make the rest of the game better.
I have actually seen a group trying to play eve that way. It was impossible and they gave up in 6 months. If it's easy to do it then people will do it. And if you can build everything from the same 20 raw ingredients which you get in the same way then it's easy to do. So accept it and let them have fun.
Or strap on bird wings and jump off something. You never know, it might work his time.
-
45 minutes ago, Wyndle said:
Patience is rewarded one way or another, just be wary of blind allegiances.
So far my patience has been rewarded by everything I ever did in the persistent world getting deleted. And it does not appear that NQ have learned from past mistakes. I think they will just mess it up again and end up with another broken sandbox.
I think I might have run out of patience now.
- Mordgier, Novean-61657 and CousinSal
-
3
-
1 hour ago, Aaron Cain said:
The new schematics are even more cosly on the long run and far more time consuming as the previous version. Is this intentional or will we see a fair system soon as the new system is even harder but brought as more fair as the previous.
Previous system i buy 1 schematic and keep forever for a not too high price, new system i get a copy that i can use once but its almost as expensive as the old schematics that i can use for eternity, how is this Better for players?
It's a copy of some of the things Eve does without fully understanding why eve works. It reminds me of the people who tried to fly by strapping feathery bird wings onto their arms and jumping off stuff.
I think they're scared of people playing the game without really being interested in quanta (presumably because they want to sell quanta in the form of DAC?). So this new way has quanta baked into the creation of every single item, making it the most important ingredient for everything.
There are some nice properties though. The items which had expensive schematics now have much cheaper copies. Look at warp beacons for example. Also the production capability of a character has a limit and it is easy to sell that limit. Also the need to spend quanta making everything might discourage people from over producing if they happen to have too much ore.
-
I don't really see the trial being useful because DU is a game where the players create the content for each other (and then, cleverly, have to pay to host it for one another). Without that created content and the interaction with other players all you have is a fun building game.
Since the trial is in another sandbox there will be no player created BPs or orgs, no racing/other player created games, no new player help and support, no DSAT to find asteroids, etc. So essentially you can just surface gather and build things. You won't be able to get a feel for what the game is really like.
But you will be able to tell how grindy it is and how little there is to do if you don't interact with other players.
I don't really care about kickstarter promises, etc but I do want something to do in the game. And I am reminded that this is still produced by the company which s deleting all the existing content from the game after having lied to us for a long time about their intentions to do so. And the same company which made (or just didn't make any) bad game-management decisions which led to the sandbox being so badly broken it needs to be reset at all.
The least they could have done is add some content to replace what was deleted.
-
-
As the proud owner of 200L of Thoramine (which I had as a result of actually getting it as a result of helping solve the puzzle rather than RMT'ing it from someone who quit the game) I'm a bit pissed off that 500L is where you set the bar. I get that you don't want people to split this up into pieces and get multiple rewards but surely the intention was to actually give the item to people who genuinely held a stack of Thoramine for a long time?
I had some more abusive things to write here but I'll leave them out.
-
Same here. I noticed a it was more blurry than it used to be and have been meaning to look at the post-processing settings.
-
6 hours ago, Niemand said:
Dont come with "our engine cant do it" or any other BS excuse. a pro programer could add it to the game in 1 day. do it for the launch!
Are you sure? This type of feature will have hidden costs, for example if you put a transparent voxel next to a non-transparent one then you make a 'surface' between the two voxels which otherwise would not be there. Normally the rendering engine would only need to consider the sides of a voxel which do not have other voxels next to them when figuring out what the surface of a blob of voxels looks like. The need to consider extra surfaces could make the process of working out a mesh for a blob of voxels much more expensive, which is clearly bad for everyone. I'm sure you could do it in a naive and inefficient way fairly quickly but can you do it in a performant and low-cost way in a day? Probably not....
-
Actually I've been playing a few times this week for the first time in about 6 months. I'm seeing other players around too, which is more than I was during the whole 'wipe abiguity' period. I wonder if the server load is higher now than it was before not lower?
-
2 hours ago, Osyraa said:
What are some of the best ways for me to buy core BP's between now and reset? IE are there hubs/locations I should go to to buy from a market unit, are there individuals selling lots, or do I need to contact as many individual sellers as possible? Any insight would help thank you
How would you pay for the core BPs? With money which is about to be deleted? Why would anyone sell to you?
-
35 minutes ago, Wyndle said:
...will become free for anyone to salvage if left for 7 days. If they players are coming back and resetting that timer with no effort to repair or move away then it should be a ban worthy offense.
You know there's a wipe coming right? People are crashing ships into market 12 with names like 'NQ I hate your decision' and leaving them to expire (as far as I can tell.
But why should it be ban-worthy to reset the timer on your protest ship? It's not stopping anyone from doing anything? Why is is different from resetting the timer on any other ship?
-
I saw some crashed ships there and a fantastic toilet roll but was able to use M6 just fine a few hours ago. What exactly is it people have done which deserves the ban hammer?
-
4 hours ago, Deathknight said:
Yes, this is a super annoying issue. It is not just on ships where this is a problem. You can place new industry elements, turn them on, and they will begin production and then a day later you can come back and the machine is stopped with an error due to overlapping elements.
Yesterday I tried using my factory for the first time since the madness was implemented. I had to move some boxes before I could open them. I'm struggling to see how it relates to the original 'sneaky snake and the engines' problem.
It's like they let a developer obsess over the perfect solution and deploy it without letting usability people review the changes or something ....
-
8 hours ago, Wyndle said:
I suspect NQ has two different systems checking element placement that don't talk to each other or get triggered in the same way. They have mentioned several times that one team makes a change that impacts other teams, and this is likely one of those instances.
I think you are probably right. But when I'm trying to fix a ship I don't really care and neither will all those steam reviewers. Keep it simple. If the element is blue when I place it then it works. If it's red I can't place it. If the two teams disagree then bang their heads together until they come to an agreement. Or fire one of the teams. Or whatever. Just do it consistently and simply in a way that makes sense and can be explained in a single short sentence like I did above. Or steam reviews will be filled with the howls of frustrated spaceship nerds whose ships were fine yesterday when they built them.
-
Logging out and back in fixed the framerate and smoothness issues. The ship is still horrible to fly but I guess this is intentional for some reason ?!
-
I finally got it working and OMG what have they done to this game?! A ship which used to fly smoothly is now getting a single digit framerate (which I never had when I played last except when things were broken for big mission ships), the ship moves forward in jumps, the controls are laggy, the ship itself flies like a brick, constructs don't render until I get soo close I have no hope of avoiding them except, so far, dumb luck.
It's a perfect time to bring the game to steam and re-introduce element damage. Nothing can go wrong!
Will there be trackable roids on launch day?
in General Discussions
Posted
You will need to build some M sized industry machines then an L assembly line first. Then build an XL assembly line from that to make a DSAT (I think). Then build the DSAT in there. That's probably the critical path with other things able to happen in parallel. IDK how long the schematic copies take though.