Zeddrick

I do like the idea here, but it would be useful to be able to link multiple accounts into one TOTP. At the moment if I put 6 accounts into my google authenticator they will all be saying 'novaquark-production' followed by the first 6 characters of the e-mail address for each account before the rest scrolls off the screen. It will cause the authenticator to use more than one page of codes on the phone (because there are about 5 others in there already) so I'll have to mess about with scrolling and suchlike. None of these are showstoppers, but grouping accounts so I just have one TOTP saying 'dual universe' would be a lot more useful.

36 pages and still no decision. FFS come on NQ, if you still can't decide just flip a coin and get it over with! Like if you agree ....

X4 is good. There was a new expansion recently and I've mostly been playing that and occasionally forum warrioring. I have a list of other games I've been meaning to play for a while. I'm noticing the longer I stay out of the habit of playing DU the less interested I am in coming back and starting from scratch again.

OK, I'll give you that one. Although it's paying a lot to win a bit, which is the kind of P2W I don't mind as much.

Still?

By encouraging the use of alts/multiple subscriptions and creating a market to buy and sell game time/DAC.

Brilliant, let's keep repeating that. The pvpers are all somewhere else now, come out and play carebears!

Because all of the options on the table are bad and everyone is hoping someone will come up with a good one?

OK, so I saw this thread and it triggered me a bit. I can't help thinking that anyone who thinks DU PvP is P2win either: - hasn't actually done any PvP in DU - is bad at PvP and is making excuses - has no friends to PvP with Having done PvP using two acounts and posessing a mediocre amount of skill I can attest that it's a lot harder to use 2 accounts than one and when you lose you usually lose to either a bigger group or someone who is better at PvP. Actual fights where you are fighting against an opponent of equal skill with a comparable setup but who has an extra set of guns and a second account are so rare as to come under the 'in open world PvP sometimes you get unlucky and lose' category. Convince me I'm wrong ...

I don't really disagree with any of this, or anything Blaze said per-se (I could probably pick at points but in general they're right). And I get the frustration, I'm frustrated too and as I said I've certainly posted this sort of doom-and-gloom type of stuff myself. It's just that all the negativity is wearing me out and I think making sure we try to add a suggestion or at least something positive along with the griping would be a good habit to get into. After all, if we convince NQ that they have irredeemably messed it up and there's no way back they might as well just shut the whole thing off now right? And I don't think any of us want that, and that in itself should tell us that any mistakes which are made are not really irredeemable because *we are all still here talking about it*. We all know what the mistakes were and stating the obvious doesn't really move anything forward does it?

No, it's the number of accounts you need!

All very good points. You are almost certainly correct and absolutely no EULA violations took place. Every. single. beta. key. was. gifted. to. another. player.

The people with 80 accounts definitely didn't pay 3600 Euros for them, although at some point someone did. What has happened is that a lot of people have left the game over time and given their accounts to other people when they did so. Some people have collected a lot of accounts in this way so, although they weren't free to begin with, they were free to the person who is currently using them. Of course there are also people who paid a lot of money for a lot of accounts and also people who paid for the accounts they got from others in other ways, I don't want to knock anyone's hard work or contributions. Just that there are people who have a lot of accounts and at least some of those are ones they got for free. Also I think each account got an extra free beta key at some point and you could go '60E for 1 main + 2 beta', so 'only' 1,600E for 80 accounts. I think a lot of many-multiboxers have more like 20-30 each so it is believable that those were bought for hundreds of Euros.

A lot of what you're saying here just comes across as bashing NQ without offering any suggestions at all. You're basically pointing out a load of problems and saying it's too late to fix them. So why not just shut the whole game down now? I don't think this sort of thing is particularly helpful. I've probably been guilty of similar posts myself when frustrated but I always try to at least make an alternative suggestion as well. I think if we actually want the game to succeed we have to start by assuming it will succeed and working out how rather than starting from a position of 'here are all the ways NQ have messed things up' and no ideas. I liked a lot of Honvik's ideas you were bashing there. Some of them would be easy to implement and would make things better ...

My biggest construct has 60 EXL containers. It can hold everything I own, including around 15 million L of ore. It's a proper ship someone made a while ago, not a canned example of how much you can get in a construct. This is really an example of how any 'you can keep some of your stuff' rule will get abused. Can keep 50 items? Someone will take 50 warp beacons.

Not obvious who 'we' is here. Looking at the 28 page wipe thread it's not obvious that the majority of players agree with it.

A bit offtopic, but I agree with this, IMO either T4/T5 should be removed from mining units or it should be from a limited pool which respawns randomly somewhere else when used up (in a way which means you can't just look back over old scans). But from what people have told me these are usually up to 50 L/h per tile for 7 tiles, which would be quite far short of 1000L./H. I don't doubt that there might be one or two out there at that rate but I don't think that's typical for a T5 farm ...

I get that, and part of me thinks it would be fun to completely start over. But I also worry that I will get bored with the game 3 weeks in if it looks like the first year or more of the wiped game will be the same experience I've already had but slower, more grindy, with a smaller community of players and without the 'artefact hunt' to make the first few months interesting.

I'm not sure what his problem is with it, but mine is that someone who has 50bn quanta ends up with the same amount of quanta as someone with 120M. It's true that missions gave us all an easy way to make money, but the people who made billions *did* put a lot of effort into doing that and the people who have 120M probably put less effort in. I'd suggest just dividing all quanta balances by 10 instead. The richest would still have single digit billions, but given the effort they put in they could have got that amount without missions in the current game. There would need to be other changes too to go with it.

Cool and welcome back! I hope there are a lot more of you, having a more people playing would fix a lot of things. Yours is the only reply like this I've seen. I hope more speak up.

I stated my opinion and made it clear that it was just my opinion. I also mentioned that I have been trying to confirm my opinion, something which I expanded on in another post further up. I didn't just brainfart out a number like '95% of players are going to be happy' and state it as fact when you can see from the balance of posts in here that this certainly isn't the case at the moment.

....um... you misquoted me there. I certainly didn't say anything of the sort. Perhaps you edited my reply badly. Please edit it so it doesn't look like I said "So your guys tears only represent 5%." when actually it was J0hnyB who said that and I just replied to it. If you're going to call someone an idiot, it's just common sense to make sure you direct that at the correct person right?

If I believed that there was 20x the current 'veteran' player base out there ready to start playing within 1-2 months of launch and stick around long term I would be 100% behind a wipe. Personally I think that this is a niche game and most of the people who are interested in it will have already tried it by now at some point. So a launch will have mostly the players who are already playing or players who have stopped and decide to start again. And it's hard to find players who have stopped and who are just waiting for a wipe-and-launch to dive back in. If you want to say I'm wrong, they're out there and I just can't find them then I'd be delighted to be proved wrong, but just saying random numbers without any evidence is not a very convincing argument for a wipe.

So what you're saying is you want a wipe so long as you can keep all your money, talent points and stuff. How is that a wipe?

Yes, there are comments to the effect of 'keep my schematics or re-imburse them', etc. This is what I mean. Yes, I don't think the T1 and T2 (and also the non-variant T3 like elevators, container hubs, etc) schematics really add anything to the game but friction. The cost of them is small so won't put people off buying them, but it's hassle to fly somewhere to actually pick them up. That's not really the discussion here though. The point I'm trying to make is that a wipe+removal would be for the people who aren't here any more whereas non-wipe is for the ones who stayed and played. Also that trying to mess with the industry system at the last minute by shooting-from-the-hip like this is likely to lead to more exploits, rich people and another unsolvable wipe debate.