michaelk

RDMS is way more complex than it needs to be. Also you should never let programmers design a system or write a manual. They just need to write what someone understanding designing such a system asks them to write. There's too much of devs doing design/UX/UI stuff in DU going on.

This is why I don't screw around with Lawful Good alignments.  

This is why I don't screw around with Lawful Good alignments.  

You know what NAVY stands for?
 
Never Again Volunteer Yourself.
 
I spent 5 years with NAVSEA and learned my lesson.
 
It's ironic when you post about being an adult when you clearly have not grown up enough to shake yourself free of absurd childish idealism. 

Is this satire?

Stop,  I can't breathe, you're killing me, I'm laughing so hard - you're greifing me with your absurd posts - please stop griefing me - have some honor....

That compromise does not sound honorable...

Such insults do seem very.....dishonorable. What would your CO think!?

What? You can vote multiple times? That's not like NQ to implement a useful feature and then make it worthless by leaving it open to abuse... ?

Seriously though, they need to get lots of other features sorted first.
 
I really hate how they worded territory pvp item as well.
 
"- Final safe-zone definition" is listed as a line item for it - I hate that. It should be defined already.
 
Asteroid mining is needed because frankly the mole man mechanic is tiresome and is burning people out.
 
Energy managment needs to come before territory pvp.
 
pvp rebalancing should come as part of that
 
Then all the voxel tools and graphics
 
Then avatar pvp AND atmo pvp
 
Then once all that crap is working and balanced, you can turn on territory warfare.
 
PvP needs to be well balanced and thought out before it become a major part of the game and it's going to be a major task - lots of other things can and should be done first.
 

1:21 - it should be spooled up in that link to that point.
 
I do agree that clarity of communication has not been NQs strong suit - not even remotely - not just in this case but pretty much everything
 
 

Because NQ still thinks they need to deliberate and come up with solutions before speaking up. they could have declared an exploit weeks ago and then start working on a solution. These things should not take this long.

Challenging the validity of someone's claims is foundational to rhetoric; that necessarily involves calling out examples as valid or invalid through reasoning and discussion. And, yes, while the product of that is technically my opinion, it's based on logic and reasoning that I've laid out. It's no different from what you've done, and if you want your opinion to be take seriously, you have to be willing to defend it.
I agree with this, up to a point. Gaining new players and keeping them is incredibly important, obviously, and griefing should be addressed quickly and efficiently. But determining what is and is not griefing has to be more deliberate and specific than merely saying "don't be a dick." Establishing this concept has been the entire point of my posts. Game balance is an important discussion. Player interactions and behavior guidelines is an important discussion. Broadly labeling certain players or actions as "being a dick" does very little to forward either of these discussions.

It's almost like development is being led by someone that's never made a game before....yet has promised one of the most ambitious MMOs of all time...? ??‍♂️
 
To the OPs point, I think you should expect a good amount of abuse in DU -- because honestly the gameplay elements do seem like an afterthought. Letting players help balance things (figuring it out once the tools are in place) probably sounded better on paper than it does staring down the barrel of lost subscriptions... 
 
Unlike Worlds Adrift, at least DU is extremely expensive to run and has completely unpredictable costs since players can congregate en masse at any time...
 

A player taking advantage of how elements load into the game to construct an invisible wall of death is clearly exploitative. It takes advantage of technical flaws with the game, not an intended game mechanic.
 
I don't really think NQ should step in, though. When issues like this are dealt with ad-hoc by GMs, it is sloppy and prone to inconsistency. It doesn't stop bad behavior, it punishes it after the fact. Frankly, NQ will never be able to afford enough GMs to monitor players for "good behavior". 
 
If they want to stop a behavior, it's easy -- just fix the technical issues or game rules that make griefing possible.
 
The rules of the game shouldn't be a guess. If you can do it, it is legal. If you shouldn't be able to do it, the game should not let you do it...not an underpaid and overworked GM prone to human error. 

This.
 
Frankly I'm actually upset that NQ seems to have issues with space dongs.

I would have no qualms if every player who lost a ship in safe zone was reimbursed - good luck with NQ handling that.
 
I would have no qualms if players who stole ships were 'punished' but I am willing to bet that NQ doesn't even know who stole these ships.
 
Just like I bet that NQ can't find out who abused the mass or linking bugs or even duped items. They keep making threats and asking people to self report - but so far it seems to just be a case of empty threats....

Except this is actually a terrible way of thinking about rules. The more specific and technical rules are, the better because it leaves no room for interpretation. "Don't build walls in adjacent tiles to adversely affect neighboring players" is infinitely better than "don't be a dick" because that the threshold of "being a dick" is going to vary wildly from player to player. A person can realistically say that it's a dick move to blow up a tiny, unarmed hauler, but that is absolutely not an infraction against the rules. There are far more ways to argue and circumvent "being a dick" than a specific, clearly worded ruling.
 
Ideally, it will become difficult or impossible to take an exploitive action that goes against the design of the game as time goes on, but until then, NQ should endeavor to be as clear and technical as possible in rulings.

As I said before, I don't think JC has been griefed enough. He talked about games he's played - and I've never heard him say "Yeah I played ARK" or any other open world full loot pvp game.
 
Had he played ANY of these sort of games, he would know that grief and salt mining are business as usual.  
 
Everything that can be used to grief will be. Every cheese tactic will be used. In every open world full loot pvp game the player who refuses to use every possible tactic to their advantage will lose to one that has no such scruples. 
 
 

Guys, it really depend on how much time one can play : ) 
I totally get you - 20 dolars is really cheap - price for good indie game, far cry from AAA.
But still if one have an hour or two a day 3 days of week, monthly subscription is bad idea (not to mention that playing DU is bad idea too in this case ? ).
Same if you are short of cash to spend on throwaway thing, especially when you don't even know if game will be playable on your machine. Or is playable enough to spend dozens of hours - not everyone can stomach all the missing qol stuff of beta and could be turn away after few hours after all. With current economy i wouldn't ever assume that 20 dollars is easy to come by for everyone. 
 

A sensible design is naturally cool-looking, but also;
Death cubes don't work as well in atmosphere, will be less useful in territory warfare within atmosphere if at all Death cubes will always be slower than normal ships, given the same amount of things and engines carried And the uses of "cool-looking" ships beyond the obvious fact that it makes the owner / users happier;
Propaganda / branding of your faction Crew's psychological endurance (see how long it takes for someone to get bored of being a gunner in a floating steel cube)

IMHO, there is no realistic vision for the game. It makes me sad. The promises are so vague and grand, people see everything in DU. 
 
After six years of dev, the foundations for this game should be done and solid as diamond.
 
You can't build a civilization on a cracked foundation, and this foundation is like a thick soup. If someone told me this game has been in dev for 10 months, I'd believe them. 
 
JC isn't a game designer. He's an ideas person. It's dangerous when someone like that is at the helm, because they have fleshed out exactly 0 real details about how the game will actually function. It is a collection of "great ideas" and "hey wouldn't this be so cool" without a comprehensive plan. A complex project requires a solid foundation. That means knowing exactly what's going to be built on top of it. 
 
The balance between building and PvP should have been hammered down years ago; instead, they seem to be completely winging it
 
Humility is really important in development. Ideas that seem easy rarely are, especially at scale. Everything is soul-crushingly difficult. Being a brilliant roboticist doesn't mean you're going to be a humble leader that listens to designers and engineers that have been down this road countless times. 
 
If anyone remembers Lionshead and their propensity to overpromise...try "Civilization Sandbox". 
 
I do hope NQ can focus and make some definitive progress in the next few months. They need a veteran in the field with fresh perspective that can challenge JC's inexperience and hasn't spent 10,000 hours staring at the game...

A player taking advantage of how elements load into the game to construct an invisible wall of death is clearly exploitative. It takes advantage of technical flaws with the game, not an intended game mechanic.
 
I don't really think NQ should step in, though. When issues like this are dealt with ad-hoc by GMs, it is sloppy and prone to inconsistency. It doesn't stop bad behavior, it punishes it after the fact. Frankly, NQ will never be able to afford enough GMs to monitor players for "good behavior". 
 
If they want to stop a behavior, it's easy -- just fix the technical issues or game rules that make griefing possible.
 
The rules of the game shouldn't be a guess. If you can do it, it is legal. If you shouldn't be able to do it, the game should not let you do it...not an underpaid and overworked GM prone to human error. 

It's almost like development is being led by someone that's never made a game before....yet has promised one of the most ambitious MMOs of all time...? ??‍♂️
 
To the OPs point, I think you should expect a good amount of abuse in DU -- because honestly the gameplay elements do seem like an afterthought. Letting players help balance things (figuring it out once the tools are in place) probably sounded better on paper than it does staring down the barrel of lost subscriptions... 
 
Unlike Worlds Adrift, at least DU is extremely expensive to run and has completely unpredictable costs since players can congregate en masse at any time...