Jump to content

Mamba_Lev

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    45
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Mamba_Lev got a reaction from OBER0TH in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    Yeah, i'm really looking forward to staring at empty space for hours..
  2. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to bleakcon in NQ Your lack of action regarding the schematic fiasco is disturbing   
    What follows is perhaps the most critical thing I have said regarding NQ, I don't think it is unfair though.
     
    Ok so my understanding is this: In an effort to fix a issue with pricing on a particular schematic someone managed to somehow set every bot order to about 1/100 of the price it should be selling at. Please let me know if I have missed something.
     
    Now, full disclosure, I wasn't able to gain from this, I wasn't online, I am telling you now I would have taken full advantage of it and anyone who is honest knows they would too.
     
    It might be fair for you to ask me something like "Why are you putting a post up of something you aren't even sure of?".
     
    That question would be fair only up until you realise that nothing is being done about it, with NQ stating they were "to err on the side of caution" whatever that means.
     
    Caution? It's a bit late for that now isn't it? Where was this caution when someone decided to make changes to live servers. I bet there are a ton of engineers and developers playing this game and almost all of them know the cardinal rule: You never, ever, ever mess with production code or data before fully testing it on a representative environment or as close to one as you can get!
     
    By now I suspect many reading this have seen the screenshot of someone holding 112 warp beacon xl schematics, not 1 or 2 but 112, if they also bought the necessary sub components then you are looking at production of an end game item at a scale that just should not be.
     
    NQ, where is the philosophy you so passionately and vocally used to defend the changes made in 0.23? Your insistance that having players being able to run up mega factories is a bad idea? Everything you as a company put out at that time is contradictory to the inaction on this issue.
     
    NQ, how are you meeting the statement you made after 0.23, you remember don't you? The one that stated you would be more communicative, you would test things out more before you rolled them out, what about internally? Did you not learn from the knee jerk reaction that was the talent reset?
     
    NQ, it boggles my mind that you don't see this as a serious problem, it isn't just about those 30 minutes and the minority of players getting a leg up it is about what comes after.
    Looking at this selfishly as an example, i mine like a madman for weeks and I finally buy schematics and a warp beacon, i mine more to build the beginnings of a space station, i keep on mining to buy more schematics and before Thursday I at least figured I had made an honest dent into building a foundation in this game; those 30 minutes demolished all that work.
     
    These points don't just apply to me, they apply to any player who wasn't lucky enough to get in on the schematic grab.
     
    Ok ramble over, NQ it is time to point out why this is all quite disturbing to me as a player (i would hope others too):
     
    1. This has demonstrated a severe lack in your processes, you've lost customer confidence
    2. Your decision making in the aftermath is abyssmal; your going to do nothing? 
    3. The reasoning for your inaction is.....well it isn't reasoning; 'err on the side of caution'.
    4. Your inaction points to (from more likely to tinfoil hat):
      a. You truly don't see this as a problem and are content to carry on (your wrong, it's more than just the schematics, it is the message you are sending)
      b. You now see it as a problem but you can't rollback
      c. You always saw it as a problem but you are unable to perform a rollback and you don't want to admit that
      d. You intend to wipe
      e. This was intentional for the benefit of a group of players (tinfoil yes but it's not the first time a mmo has done this).
    5. You either can't trace player transactions or don't have the time to rectify your mistake meaning this is an intensive process.
    6. Your communication on this matter has been more pointed to 'stay silent and it will blow over' rather than addressing concerns.
    7. Your indiffference to this matter
     
    I like DU, I see the potential, but potential isn't enough, at this point features won't be enough, your team appears to be lacking process, experience or maybe just passion, that or someone is calling the shots and  overriding the devs decisions, this isn't the first simple mistake as a result of quick decision making or poor thought, something needs to change and it needed to change 4 days ago
     
     
  3. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Nayropux in So, when is the game getting rolled back?   
    After this mornings huge screwup and bot prices were reduced 100x, I've seen screenshots of 10s of billions in schematics, and have heard of people who bought items at the bugged prices and resold to players who made hundreds of millions in a few minutes. When is this getting rolled back?
     
    At this point it is probably too late to just reverse the market transactions. People are trying to hide the money in ore or moving it around, so the only way to catch it all is to rollback. If you just remove the schematics and return the money, you screw over all the people who had their buy orders filled and the people who sold them bugged items get to keep all that money. The longer it takes to rollback, the more annoyed people will be, so probably best done sooner rather than later.
     
    I won't speak for everyone, but if people are allowed to keep these items, or the money they got from selling them, then I'm personally moving on to different games. There is no reason to play if someone who logs in for 5 minutes at the right time makes more progress than others who have been playing for months.
  4. Like
    Mamba_Lev got a reaction from AlexRingess in Increase element draw distance   
    Current element draw distance is farcical.
  5. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Namcigam in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    This is a step in the right direction but it's pretty urgent in my opinion. You are going to need to expand quest tree asap b/c hauling only will get old pretty quick like mining did. Expand, expand, expand. 
  6. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to fiddlybits in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    I think having separate secured and unsecured available makes sense. It gives the shipper options on whether they want to protect their cargo or save money and trust their collateral estimates. For the shipper's that are cutting costs it also gives the courier a risk free way to steal items that have the wrong collateral set. There should be a system that allows for risk/reward on both sides of the transaction.
  7. Like
    Mamba_Lev got a reaction from admsve in Increase element draw distance   
    Current element draw distance is farcical.
  8. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to sHuRuLuNi in Unable to create blueprint of ship   
    So ... any news on this? I too cannot create BP of my ship (despite positive message), and have worked over a month on my ship ...
  9. Like
    Mamba_Lev got a reaction from sHuRuLuNi in Unable to create blueprint of ship   
    I get a positive message but no blueprint in my inventory, i have tried removing all parts with LUA scripts, refreshing construct rights, releasing construct DRM protection and adding it again.
     
    I am able to create blueprints of other ships without problems, is there a solution that doesn't involve me deleting everything and starting again, i've spent quite a bit of time on this ship.
  10. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Burble in RDMS Issues   
    Not sure how useful this will be but there are two options for sharing stuff. 
     
    1: if you set element rights on the core or another element, this one seems a bit limited. For example if you set the rights to board construct on the pilot seat element the person wont be able to fly as they dont have rights to use the fuel tank, etc.
     
    2: if you right click on honeycomb > constuct > advanced > set construct rights this then sets the rights for everything in the construct at once, I get more luck with this way.
     
    probably you already know this, but just in case
  11. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to SiLeNCeD in Movable Parts and Pivots   
    First off, Great start to a game!
     
    I did add something like this suggestion to https://upvote.dualuniverse.game/, but couldn't find it. Figured I'd share here and not seeing quite the same suggestion, so I hope this one is worthy.
     
    I would like to see the ability to attach special dynamic movable elements that allow functional movement of elements and/or voxel 'parts'/'groups'. Things like a hinge, pistons, rotators... stuff like that.
     
    One example would be a dynamic 'Hinge' element that allows attaching 2 elements and/or voxel "parts" (a group of voxels considered as an 'object' - after a selection is copied and pasted, which defines 'grouping').
    Elements are easy to consider an 'object' as they are. Individual voxels must be moved to the movable hinge element and separated from the rest of the construct so it can define a grouping of those voxels that will allow movement (think of it as creating a sub-group of voxels in order to define a piece that can be manipulated using movement). Dev note: This can likely be set using the copy and paste feature (I copy a selection at a certain point and when I add the 'movable' object (and it is voxels), I use paste so that it treats it as a sub-object of the entire construct)  
    Workflow (Door using hinge):
    User buys a Movable Hinge element User attaches the hinge to an opening in their base (the base acts as the 'locked' object) User attaches a wall piece to the unlocked side of the hinge By default, the hinge element will think the 'wall piece' can swing from start of the 'locked' hinge side all the way around to the other side - 360 degrees) User then sets the movable side of the hinge to have a 'max open' at 45 degrees from the 'locked' side of the hinge A controller can be added to use the default 'open' and 'close' functions (users could set individual stopping points as well to give it extra position options that the control could pin-point and/or cycle through). User steps back and now has very new options to how they open the entry-way of their base, the ground, a garage, etc.  
    General Examples:
    The first thing I thought of when this popped in my head was making an x-wing fighter. Unfortunately, I didn't proceed because I love the functionality of the actual x-wing, which are wings that will separate after you've taken off. The hinge element I described would actually be perfect for that... attached a second wing directly above another using the hinge, set the angel to like 15 degrees (you can flip and repeat to do the same thing to the other wing if you want them to open away from each other) and attach a controller that would open the wings together. The door I mentioned in the above workflow. It also opens up some other opportunity about creating very flashy entrances with interesting moving mechanisms (build whatever size Tardis you want and throw on some swing doors). Note: It may be worth while to define a 'max amount of moving elements' a person can have within a single construct. Imagine you're flying in and you are within range of a remote door at your base. You click a button and the ground separates open (using sliding door elements or possibly the hinge element), then a landing platform raises up (using piston(s)). You land, hit the button again, the landing pad lowers you into your personal hide-away and the doors above close once you're clear. Very batman-esc lol... but actually a nice plan for "pirate stashes" and  Note: The movable elements could probably support the different sizes like cores, but they should also support a max weight. That gives DU more control over what the user is trying to add to the element (ex: Max weight stops user from attaching a building to another building since that would distract from the reality of the game and doesn't line up with physics in general) (Added on 1/14) Gun force - You see a ship coming in. Looks like it's just a freighter. As it gets closer, hatches open on the sides of the ship (sliding doors or voxel doors - flip with hinge or slide open using pistons), guns slide out (pistons) and you realize it's a pirate/bounty hunter. Note: On a fun note, you could have a "camper" ship (think "Space balls")... you bring it to an event for display. When you arrive, you hit a couple of control boxes and your camper ship extends out "for show" rooms with fun and interesting decor.  
    Additionally... I believe this can actually set a 'foundational' framework for "attachable constructs" where you can link one construct to another and it will move together (this one is pretty straight forward, but a really clear example would be something like a train where I have my dynamic construct at the front pulling smaller dynamic constructs). A funner example would be the Enterprise D... where I build the saucer section separate from the body. In that case, attachment allows control to be ran in different sections, but to move the 2 constructs as 1... then depending on the situation, allowing from my "Number 1" to take the helm and split off for tactical or escape advantage. It could also be a desperate move to save half your ship (perfect movie moment).
     
    I've attached a draft of the hinge (more of a side view just to keep it simple). What are your thoughts?
     
     
     

  12. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to NQ-Naunet in Unable to create blueprint of ship   
    Hey everyone! Happy New Year.

    I'll see to it that we look into this! Thanks for the reports.
  13. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Hiturn in Server is down   
    NQ-Blacksunhoy a las 22:01
    @here Hey everyone! Sorry for the inconvenience. We'll need to reboot the server as we're currently experiencing some issues. Thank you for your support! 
  14. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to blazemonger in How to give PRO feedback!   
    NQ is trying to sell an early alpha state development as a released game in beta as a paid for live service game. They are not owning up to their commitment and promises set out starting from kickstarter and continue to water down the game.
     
    They are trying to make things work but due to the way they designed the game are not able to build complete game loops to facilitate that and seem unwilling to make changes to be able to actually do that by introducing PVE content which is needed to make mechanics work and instead think that they can save the game by introducing a Battle Royal mode and a creative sandbox mode.
     
    They think that the mission system is the silver bullet that will solve all problems, they think that by adding a magic "available power" number to tiles they can create power management that is immersive and attractive. They do not consider options and suggestion that actually trigger gameplay for all game play styles and make the game complex, strategic and emergent.
     
    If players find creative ways to play without affecting others, they nerf these options. If players find creative ways to play while impacting others  though creating obstacles and risk for others with the same end goal/effect, NQ thinks that's fine and really cool.
     
    They say that the industry changes are what was always intended but they were not ready and the result was that  too many player got to "endgame" content (whatever that means) too fast.. Thing is, the changes do not take that endgame content away, it just denies those that did not get there yet for whatever reason the ability to do so while the ones that did will be able to carry on . NQ pretty much is of the opinion that as a solo player or small group you have no problem as you can just pay others whatever they want to ask for by using te markets.
     
    Large orgs can isolate entirely from the in game economy and fend for themselves regardless of the changes because it hardly affects them as they have already stocked up and have so much money they can just blanket buy what other will have to work weeks, if not months for to get to. _THAT_  is what the economy is not starting, the isolationist behavior is not with the "small guy", it is with the big orgs who have build their own infrastructure internally, and did so to some degree by using early exploits, loopholes and possibly insider info, and have zero need or incentive to use or feed markets/the economy outside of dumping surplus at whatever price they desire to set for it and/or use their position to undercut and push out anyone trying to get a piece of the pie.
     
    Yes, it would certainly cause a setback for many who worked hard to build a small business for themselves in game but the only way to correct the stranglehold the big orgs already have on the game will be to wipe and allow everyone to build their dream on even footing after massive changes are introduced which really are the definition of alpha state of development for a game.
     
     
    To quote myself from Discord;
     

     
     
     
    And yes, I do feel I am being "clear, polite and to the point."
     
     
  15. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Daphne Jones in WTF NQ?   
    resetting talents again? It's F...ing three clicks per GD level to buy them back. My wrist has gone numb already. F this.
     
    How about rolling this back and trying again after you give us 1 click to buy a talent and all its prereqs?
  16. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Captain Hills in We now know why...   
    for me the smoking gun is:
    a new player will probably play with his first territory Scanner once when all tiles on all planets are already scanned and extracted
     
    they play another deck of cards as anyone being there before them
    - and this puts the game in danger for them because its NOT fair ... and they will know that one day
  17. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to CptLoRes in We now know why...   
    So in case people missed it. The reason for the L core hording is now pretty clear. Price for Dynamic Core L Schematics is 656 millions..
  18. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Captain Hills in We now know why...   
    I can not even craft a simple screw right now - YEAH  !!
     
    I'm thinking of the time on Sanctuary when I've build my first dynamic MCore for the Moon-Mining-exploration - LOL -> any new Player needs to farm rocks for 2 Months before even thinking about an MCore excitement
     
    ¿ did anyone think about new Players when implementing the, lets call it, BIGORG:HAPPY-Patch ?
     
    the pricing for that Schematic Shit is INSANE !
    eg. MCore = 36000000
     
     
    the game was supercool - I really loved it 
    I'm totally pissed now
  19. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to michaelk in We now know why...   
    The simple solution is to equalize the playing field. 
     
    - You know how things are going to change in advance
    - You know some players will learn about this early no matter what
    - Post it publicly to minimize the impact of leaks -- details will leak no matter what; let the entire player base know instead of a select few scammers 
  20. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to blazemonger in We now know why...   
    We now know why suddenly L cores were massively bought up on the markets. Someone got tipped off by NQ staff on the changes as this happened before ATV got their hands on the patch I suspect.
  21. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Ethariel in Roll Back   
    What broke the economy?

    Ships with 3 territory scanners and maganodes.
     
    Take those two away and progress would have been slowed right down as the raw resources would not be available in the bulk needed to go nuts, but no, they reward the rich and kick everyone else in the nads.
     
    I love to play, craft mess about - everything on my starter pad i built from the ore I dug up, now it's useless.
     
    Good luck to all who can be bothered to stick about. My Un-sub won't mean anything till Jan 2021 but then, heck im just another statistic that does not fit in with thier deluded vision of the way forward.
  22. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Alpinesun in Roll Back   
    That would be the best situation. Level the field and make people truly collaborate at the same level. The economy gulf between the rich (older players) and the poor (new players) is too wide for the economy to work. 
  23. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to Revelcro in Roll Back   
    I wish they would just wipe it.  Rather start over than see this go on.
     
  24. Like
    Mamba_Lev reacted to michaelk in Where to go for info   
    Odd. 
     
    It is very concerning that these updates seem to be mostly geared toward existing players. Why? Existing players aren't the issue -- they are so diehard they'll keep playing even if the world was literally aflame lol. 
     
    Nerfing industry to make it harder for new players is incredibly counter-productive. 
     
    Frankly, NQ's primary concern right now should be improving the new player experience, because that's literally the only way the game will grow.
     
    If they engineer the game's design around today's niche player base, how will this reduce the churn rate? The beta launch showed how much work there is to be done to fix the new player experience (count those ghost speeders -- there's massive churn) -- with release being <1 year away, the focus should be revamping tutorials, reworking UI to make it more clear/clean for new players, and cleaning up the new player experience overall. 
     
    Who freakin' cares if the diehard players have all the stuffs...? Fix that later or wipe pre-release. The harder it is for new people to "get established", the more the churn. There's a lot more money to be made attracting new players vs. trying to prevent existing ones from churning.
     
    They'll come back after updates if they buy into the core premise/promise -- but they won't come back if they churn after a day of play because they don't believe the game will ever live up to the trailers. 
     
    IMO, this should be a much more urgent thing -- they don't have much time before release based on their dev velocity. 
     
    They need to sit down with a notepad and watch completely new players try the game and set their dev priorities accordingly. That means having the humility and wisdom to take a step back and look at where the game is actually weak instead of trying to push forward with features that won't make the game easier to swallow for new gamers that NQ needs to survive. 
  25. Like
    Mamba_Lev got a reaction from BonemanJones in Folders for bookmarks   
    Nothing special, just a way to nest bookmarks into categories.
×
×
  • Create New...