Novean-51583
-
Posts
33 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Novean-51583
-
-
Feedback post
New launcher is way better, only the patch notes on it makes it better.
However some "informations" are missing from it:
-
I guess you gotta wait for territory wars ?
-
14 hours ago, Hazaatan said:
People want FFA PVP so they can destroy anyone at anytime, but we can't have rotation because a planet might destroy your ship??
Jesus Christ, the priorities in this game are completely out of whack...
They could just add a warning if you are in a planet orbit ... seems more like an engine limitation.
-
18 hours ago, aliensalmon said:
Just wanted to hear your ideas. I think a common complaint about this game is that the planets aren't very interesting.
I said in another topic they could add other moving beings such as wildlife and robotic machines, but another user said that it would be difficult to implement. I was thinking of varying the landscapes a bit more. Thades's large canyon is a good example of a unique feature that makes the planet look interesting. For example, maybe have the Alioth trees look more varied (with different shapes and sizes?) Maybe add some effects such as mist?
Unique ore on some planets.
-
5 hours ago, IvanGrozniy said:
A classic case of vision getting in the way of good game design (also known as fun). This is a post about what civilization is / can be in Dual Universe, and perhaps what went wrong. Before diving in, here are some of my assumptions:
- JC is a scientist, not a game designer
- JC is a micromanager
- JC does not want to listen to his devs (some of which worked for Ubisoft and know a thing or two about good game design and mechanics)- Because of the assumption above, I also assume there's a degree of conflict between devs and JC
- I assume a lot might change up to release since this is a beta, but something tells me... not really, given the track record so far of very good ideas being thrown away or not listened to (classic examples include bot market orders screwup in beta, this was talked about extensively by Blazemonger and a slew of other people in the community, was completely ignored, and the results are clear)
Lets get the whole "but it's a beta" shtick out of the way... if you can't, just pretend that you can.To the point:
The game suffers from very bad game design choices. My stance is, if this game was really about civilization building, the mechanics of the game would be very different than they are now. What is civilization?- organization of individuals into social bodies due to selective pressures
- characteristics of civilization include: social structure and hierarchy, efficiency, work organization, supply of needs, development of more efficient technologies
- selective pressures that create civilization include, but are not limited to: resource shortage, non-uniform resource distribution, geography, weather, proximity to neighboring civilizations, war, dangerous environment, dangerous neighbors
I'm sure a lot of you have seen (or were part of groups that tried to build) cities in DU. Some have actually done so. The problem is, they are completely useless and empty. They look nice, there was tremendous effort in making them, but they are completely nonfunctional because no one needs to be in a city. And that is due to the fact that there really are no selective pressures for civilization at all. There is no reason to be in a group because there is no danger. There is no scarcity of distribution of regular ore. We have safezones on all planets, and a big giant safezone around three planets. Why would anyone live in a city? There are no "white-collar" and "service" game mechanics that characterize cities.
- DU has no danger element at all (even in pvp zone, if you don't fly in the pipe, you're pretty much golden)
- DU has no progressive tech tree
- DU has no progression, it has quanta gates for elements that anyone can acquire and use given they have the quanta for it
- I can go on, but for an analysis of "civilization" just read this discord post: https://discord.com/channels/184691218184273920/304455542162587649/80629454165311491
I know this is wishful thinking at this point, but DU would be much better off with actual game design:- Better Talent System: scrap the Eve talents system (some things should really not be copied), instead have a tech progression tree where you unlock technologies you can use. And have the skill grow based on your activity in the game, not a set amount of points per hour. It's gamey , it's simple, it's fun, it's very intuitive. And you can always add more tech to the tree indefinitely as the game grows. This will allow whole orgs to gravitate towards a direction in the tech tree so we actually get diversity in org playing styles. For example, one org can develop their pvp armadas with ballistics (machine guns, gattling guns, big bertha weapons), another org might focus their armada pvp tech research into laser or electonic warfare. The same can go with unlocking building technologies. The same can go for politics and leadership styles within an org. Have it all be a research tree. There are countless ways of adding diversity and different paths to a game using this mechanic instead of the Eve Talent Points system.
- Safe Zones: seriously.. is Sanc Moon not enough? The game lacks any danger and people just stop playing because of tedium and burn out. You won't believe how hard it is to convince people to gather into PVP events in this game because they're just too bored of it, it has zero consequence. Sanc moon is a sanctuary moon. That is its purpose.
- Better Consequences: This game has the wrong consequences. What seems to be happening is a bunch of nerfing to create more consequences in the game, such as talk about nerfing linked container distance, brakes, mining, this whole permadamage to elements, etc. How about actual danger, not the tedium of fixing and replacing parts? How about lowering the cost of building guns and ammo? Halfing most of the voxel HP? How about designing the game so that more people can get into pvp easier, and if they lose, the cost isn't too great that they are discouraged from ever trying it again?
- JC should actually listen to his devs and game designer (if he has one): lets face it, economists, mathmeticians, scientists, or whoever NQ may or may not consult about their game.. they are not playing the game. WE ARE. What we are witnessing is the result of the disconnect between how gamers play and how JC thinks a game should run. And it is our wallets that are paying. This means JC should listen to his devs. This means JC should really hire a game designer, they are a rare species and it's difficult to find a good one, but if you do, please listen to that person. JC may know stuff about robotics, but as I see it, he has no clue about human psychology, especially gamer psychology.
My rant is over. Catch me outside how bout dat.There "was" no reason to build anything "as civilisation" because everyone was independant or was building industry to be independant from other players.
Edit: Has changed a little since shematics.
So no reason to group at all.
A agree with your research point.
Concerning PvP I think the huge problem is that there is no reason to PvP at all, if you want you can stay in safe zone forever and build what you want without any risks.
IMO safe zone should be only in Sanctuary and Sancturay should have only base ores to get into space. You want better equipement ? Go in PvP zone.
Also planet unique minerals could create PvP choke points.
Concerning internal Novaquark decision making I wont make any comments since I have no idea in how they function.
Edit: Progressive skills based on what you do would be nice idea too, works very well in Valheim, but DU may be already balanced around an EVE like system.
However EVE system has way bigger buffs (more than 300% damage bonus based on your talents in some areas) and way more dependencies. So I think they should go deeper and have way stronger passive buffs based on talents.
-
33 minutes ago, Uajrh1 said:
You can try the new features in the PTS, I believe.
How do you access PTS ?
-
A lot of people will declare 0.23 a bad update since it removed the industry gameplay for some people (also removing the possibility of being independant) while not having added another gameplay.
So a lot of people may say "no" to "was 0.23 a good update" but in fact they may dislike the removal of industry gameplay but not the shematics addition.
So I think you should separate that in 2 questions: shematics and not being to be independant anymore.
Other than that I think shematics force specialization which is a good thing for the economy (so not everybody is independant).
Job system gonna add content for most people and should help I think.
-
On 2/7/2021 at 4:33 PM, Daphne Jones said:
I hope the skybox sun is a placeholder in which case, let's not be putting a lot of effort into making it look good. Or have they ruled out rotating planets now?
Hope they add at least that, rotations planets + planets orbiting the sun would de 10/10 but let's not dream too much ^^
-
On 2/3/2021 at 10:23 PM, CaptainStein said:
The sell of bugged schematics has begun...
@NQ How it is supposed to balance that in the future? that is not the only bugged price schematic out there. as seen on another screenshot he holds over 100 of warp beacon xl schematics........
He will only make 42.5 billion quanta off this
-
32 minutes ago, LuckyZz said:
Why DU has to be like Eve...
and
When you Up all the talents (to save money) to make.. let's say warpcells... you become able to make all T3's (while "saving money"), I dont see any specialization. If you can make XS engines, you are very near to be able to make XL engines. It is not specialisation, it is just made to slow people (building end game things) and to make them use the market. All that coding should have been used in new content.
Schematics could come back later when they will be made by players, when they really add something.
DU since alpha was sold as an EvE like economy with custom ships and stations.
T2 Schematics (the important ones) in EvE drop from exploration content and PvE (not sold by NPCs).
You can buy them from market since exploration players sell them, also people can copy permanent schematics into a version with limited usages.
T2 permanent/usages are very expensive. T1 are way cheaper and are sold by bots or PvE (not sure on this one) but have worse stats.
You shouldn't see T2 as mandatory tho, T2 is like for "special occasions", when you are sure you won't go boom, T1 is always revelant since people use it for yolo ing.
The idea is to introduce new crafts via shematics so you can expand content as the game goes on.
Also keep in mind that EvE talents are way more time expensive and you need more, it forces specialization, you can't be a good PvPer and a Industrial at the same time in less than a year. You have to see DU talents as a nerfed EvE talents that's why you just see only the "made to slow down people" part.
It's the industrial talents + market talents + price/access to T1/T2 + general game knowledge that makes industrial gameplay a specialization.
However in EvE you have way more content that cover your "specialization period" so you progress in skill and in game wealth while doing it, you just don't rush T2.
-
20 minutes ago, LuckyZz said:
I dont care of people beeing extra rich, they are like Npc's with infinite ressources for me. Problem is that they f*ck the market even more than the bots. Remove schematics and we dont need to make money, problem solved.
Shematics are way to specialize people in some areas so they have to play with other people and can't be autonomous.
It work great in EvE for industrials since they have to be specialized in it. PvP / PvE players are specialized in combat and so buy from industrial players and that create a interresting market. Same for explorers.
However it got introduced so early in DU when you just have like 4 activities: PvP (for fun), mining, industrial and builders.
It will be ok when activities grow in numbers.
I think the problem with extra rich people and orgs will start when map control will be a thing and some orgs are just gonna dominate the map.
Edit: You could add trade as activity.
-
19 minutes ago, iNFiDeL said:
Didn't make it personal I didn't point out a single individual besides you now. I pointed out a fact. Every other week there is someone pushing this wipe hype rumor and I'm calling those guys out telling them to stfu cause its actually harming the population. I know of 2 new players myself, which are rare to find in the first place, that have quit simply because they have heard some type of wipe rumor in discord. Their reason? I don't want to play if my progress will be wiped.
There are people (myself included) that wanted to wipe at first exploit. Now I think it was a mistake and instead the wipe should be towards the end of the beta just before "release".
However it wasn't about spreading a rumor it was just about talking about it.
This OP post is the only that can be considered a rumor.
-
13 minutes ago, michaelk said:
https://www.dualuniverse.game/news/devblog-missionsystem
I'm sure most of y'all have seen this already...
I'm doing what has been asked, which is to go to the forum and discuss ?
It seems like this answers a lot of questions I've seen related to how the mission system will work. I'm curious what else might be coming with 0.24 or if it is mostly just the mission system.
It sounds like missions will launch with only hauling missions. I wonder if there will be enough people hauling to make it worthwhile...I mean, it isn't mining, right?
So colateral is in that nice IMO.
The communication tab is a good idea like it.
There will be scams with unreachable places to someone tho IMO.
Huge orgs may dump money on hauling just to avoid doing it themselves to anwer you question.
Mission rewards will go up by themselves if they are too low since no one will do it for a low/useless reward.
-
15 minutes ago, Zeddrick said:
I put a lot of hours into the game already on the assumption that I was building up a base to play from for years. If a wipe is needed then a wipe is needed (and I get why it might be in order to start everyone from a fair baseline again) but it would be nice to get something back for the effort I already put in? Perhaps they could turn the assets value into DAC or some other game time voucher so it wasn't all for nothing? Handing loyal customers who put hours in more free hours at launch time isn't a terrible idea anyway ...
Also perhaps announce it properly and let people discuss what they might want in exchange for the assets they built up which doesn't imbalance the game? Also perhaps schedule it for after all the disruptive changes have been made, everyone agrees the game is fun and viable and all the bad economic interventions, urges to tell people how to play the game, etc are out of everyone's systems first so it's the last wipe?
That"s a good idea however there would be a cap, otherwise alredy rich people gonna have years of game for "free".
-
Just now, Daphne Jones said:
500% is a guaranteed scam. If you succeed in delivering it just means the mission giver failed. Even if the customer loses more than the cargo on failure, that's on him - don't fly what you can't afford to lose... it cuts both ways.
That an opinion there I think, if you ask me you take responsibility for the cargo the moment you accept the mission.
Since it's a single shard MMO you will get known as trustworthy or not if you do a lot of missions anyway.
And yes 500% is obv a scam or an idiot but that was just an example.
But know that, if I'm not wrong, in EvE most people go for 130%ish colateral.
-
3 minutes ago, Daphne Jones said:
That brings up an interesting question. Will we (haulers) know the value of the package we're hauling. It would really stupid to put up more in collateral than the package is worth since that provide motive for the scam. Both side have to have an incentive for the mission to succeed or it never will.
If you see 500% colateral you have to ask yourself if that not a little shady. But it's also the importance and the time, someone may need that cargo asap, and if it gets destroyed that someone may lose more than the cargo.
Edit: You also need at least the volume moved to plan the ship you are gonna use.
-
2 minutes ago, Daphne Jones said:
I expect the offered payment for delivery will just barely cover costs, if that. With margins that range from razer-thin to negative, scams don't have to be common to destroy the business. Just mining and playing the markets will bring better (or at least some) profit.
The price is gonna be set to what people accept, if everyone refuse low payement then it will go up, hard to know right now how it's gonna be IMO.
-
6 minutes ago, Daphne Jones said:
Yeah. I won't be taking player missions - at least not out of safe space - cause the whole idea is shit. It's really sad. If I want to do missions I'll log into SC where if the mission giver is scamming, it's part of a carefully crafted story-line.
I think you are surestimating the will and time of someone to scam you for no real reason.
Even in EvE the most common scam was using zones inaccessible for players delivering stuff as destination and get back the colateral.
Edit: With current inflation and some orgs having insane amounts of cash it will probably be very profitable to just haul things around IMO since people may lack time or are lazy to do that themselves.
-
54 minutes ago, Deintus said:
No real infrastructure is in game even tho many players have requested it. Just shooting out thoughts.
Maybe it's like @Daphne Jones
says and we front 15 mil quanta to make 100k? But I imagine a tax or fee is taken off the top, so you get 90% of your deposit back. End up paying to do a mission ?I agree that game lacks so much base infrastructure I personaly love some stock exchange market I would only do that if it ever get added.
-
49 minutes ago, Daphne Jones said:
My point is the customer gives the hauler a deposit lol. If I get attacked by pirates, it's a pretty good bet that the mission was a scam to set me up for the pirates - in which case, the customer's deposit buys me a new ship. I'm not putting up collateral to accept a mission that's probably a scam and I'm not taking a mission in unsafe space without insurance for my ship.
If you get attacked and your ship gets destroyed the only thing lost is your ship since if colateral equals the transported goods (and colateral is always more than the goods in EVE btw) then your employer just gets the value of his cargo back. Obv you can always get scammed but IMO it's a better option. Your ship, your reponsibility, don't fly what you can't afford to lose etc.
On the other side your employer has no reason to trust you at all, not only he pays you to do the job but also he has everything to lose if you scam him.
-
Just make it user defined like EvE, colateral less than 100% of transported goods is up to losses in case of a problem (attack, accident, stealing etc).
I would take the possibility of a scam from the person creating the job than from the person doing the job since there are way more potential problems this way.
-
On 1/29/2021 at 9:24 PM, Deintus said:
This would be the perfect time that a big rich org create online insurance for cargo.
We don't have the tools to do that.
How can you trust someone to pay him/her x quanta each x time for covering your loses ?
Nothing in the game allows you to make it secure yet.
-
I just hope they add colateral for transport missions since without people can just steal the cargo.
It lead to other problems like scams (see EVE transport missions scams) but I think it's necessary.
-
I like your idea if it's doable, it makes everyone happy I guess.
However it is better to wait for a "release live patch" to do something like that. Let the beta get broken due to bugs/exploits ect and at release get everyone on same page.
Doing this right now makes no sense since it's a possibility that next week an exploit/bug like this one may appear again.
When they introduced EVE like blueprints (even if these bp are generous compared to EVE) they alienated a lot of the player base, however I think it's a good thing if this game wants a proper economy.
But I don't think they can alienate people like that non stop if they wanna keep their game alive, and a wipe would do that right now.
NQ suggests buffing engines, your thoughts?
in General Discussions
Posted
I think they should hard cap the maximum of cargo per ship otherwise people will just ducktape as much cargo containers as they can to engines.