ADCOne
-
Posts
124 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ADCOne
-
-
On 3/22/2022 at 12:10 AM, blazemonger said:
generate revenue more than losing players who mostly already are playing for free ..
Sorry to Nit pick but no one plays the game for free - The people who are not paying monthly subscriptions payed up front far over the cost of monthly subscriptions as described by the original details of being an alpha backer.
Though I do agree its turned into a bargain in terms of initial cost versus subscriptions for myself, when considering how long Beta has been going on for (I think I get a year of subs when it releases too but I would have to check that and the T-Shirt etc) and I assume this is true for other people also on that package.
If I had found the game earlier (and had the money) I would love to have paid for unlimited access I have enjoyed the building of ships etc that much but I guess I'll have to pay subs when that time comes.
As for notions that the game will disappear - I doubt it based on how far it has come and the fact people enjoy playing it even with the 'limited' activities. I do hope the PVP update adds some more for PVP's to do - though I am dead set against reducing speed of large vessels for no physical (as in scientific) reason why. Anyway I am certain adding activities is not as difficult as making the playable, which it certainly is at present.
Addendum: Forgot to mention the topic of the thread - I an not fond of the idea of a wipe I think it would be waste of the content made. That said I like the idea of giving new players on release the vision of a blank canvas, I kind of like the idea of a new system instead of a wipe.
If they do wipe then I would say I am for the 'magic' blue prints that are time locked to allow new players to catch up since I really want to keep my designs especially the ships because they took ages to make and a lot of effort. I am even starting to like the look of the new ships I am building - looking less like boxes with engines (so much so I'd like to get a 3D printer to print them out for my desk). It would be fair that I am very please with them even though they have not been peer reviewed and I can see other ships that look outstanding in game too.
-
On 4/6/2022 at 4:47 AM, Taelessael said:
People with auto-pilot scripts disagree... and the rest of us generally really don't care about whether or not our aim is perfect enough to shave 5 minutes off a 6hr flight.
I appreciate that steering clear of the pipes and course-corrections can take a bit of time (as can acceleration/deceleration if you have bad twr), but odds are any argument that can so easily be construed to mean "the math for an average person's flight time is useless in finding an average person's flight time because it doesn't take in to consideration how I personally fly" will not be seen as a great argument. They Increased everyone's flight time by 50% (assuming they used to fly at top speed), so everyone running big missions will average roughly 2/3 the quanta per hour they used to manage. Most of those big missions were 90% coasting, so nobody is going to see you as excessively disproportionately hard hit if the missions were 95% coasting for you.
The issue for missions that NQ was trying to resolve was the amount of money the big ones generated. I would have personally preferred if they had just stated that they needed to nerf missions and then cut the payout down, but they needed to do something about the nano-ships and thought they were taking two birds with one stone (they didn't, I can still take a mission, get moving, go to work, and then turn the mission in when I get home for the same pay).
As for the rest of Athena, who knows, maybe we'll get lucky and finally stop seeing disjointed element-only L-core needles, but I don't think I'll hold my breath on that one.
Thank you for reply, my only issue is I did say I do not do any missions - I tried one or two (I cannot remember if actually took the second one) and its not really my thing just now, mainly because I prefer making ships. I might use missions to test the ships later on because I found out the cargo can be very heavy.
I think that we agree more than we disagree since I too would have preferred another solution and mentioned this in one of my previous posts
-
19 hours ago, Shredder said:
Do shorter routes/missions. Annoyed that means less money? It’s called game balance, missions have been too lucrative and too easy.
You have misunderstood - I do not do missions and space flight as it is currently is not broken, so breaking is not a good idea.
But I take it this means there was no testing done for flying hours compared to normal, I know you can use a calculator but I do not remember the last time I did a perfect flight and would surmise that no has actually done a textbook flight in this game at all. Which means a calculator job is not really an accurate measure.
Also it occurred to me today that if they do a wipe and slow down of ships is going to hurt PVP'ers mainly since no one is going to willingly fly the extra time (at least for a long time). So it will all turn into pure warp flights (assuming we can buy the ships and fuel for it). Though I suppose some new players might do it.
To be perfectly clear I do not like the slow down of ships currently because I like the challenges involved in over coming atmosphere to space and back again within 1G planets and low gravity no atmosphere moons, with high cargo volumes and across large distances. I have been making my own ships and (two finished and a third on the way) and slowing down the max speed of the ships will drastically reduce the difficulties when slowing down a massive ship in order to enter an atmosphere and then land at a market to sell the goods. Simply put I like space flight to be as realistic as possible since it makes the achievements more satisfying and I am little surprised more PVP'ers are not of a similar mind set.
-
55 minutes ago, MukkBarovian said:
After playing the test server, these changes are excellent and NQ put a lot of effort into getting the test server ready to go.
How many extra hours of flight time did you have to do at slower speeds, when you were moving cargo - or was that ignored and not tested?
(I do mean cargo not missions)
-
I do not see why the speed needs to be reduced for larger ships at all, it seems more like a PVP insanity chose.
IMO The ship speed should be entirely based on realistic physics: The factors from the mass, engines, fuel and gravity combining to be the only features that affect how quickly a ship accelerates, with no limit on the max speed just an equation based on these four factors that determine how quickly the ship accelerates in a given direction.
It just makes no sense to limit the max speed based on how heavy a ship is, its simply a change that seems to be taking some of the challenges away from space flight and like all things that are arbitrarily decided its going to be controversial, where no controversy was needed.
As for the suggestion slower ships will benefit PVP, they are surely going to just have carrier ships with warp drives making this change redundant anyway. So I really see no point to this change from a PVP standpoint and with the mention of stasis weapons there would be no need for this change to even be considered in addition anyway.
Note: I have not actually tried PVP yet so just commenting on what the changes suggest based on the details provided.
Anyway from the blog update the reducing ship speed based on mass is the only item that seems like a bad idea and I am certainly not a fan of this just from reading what they said about it.
Addendum: Also, if the speed changes are purely due to the mission's system and alts (I assume the alts and main avatar are all traveling in the same ship), then I would suggest as an alternative to breaking space flight in an attempt to try and fix something else that is broken (and not going to work) that instead the mission packages are 'made' into stasis weapons in their own right with a max speed / reduction on the ship they are on. When more than one player character is on a ship this stacks exponentially. I think this would be a far better solution and would only affect the broken aspects of the game without affecting working aspects.
-
I think it would be handy to have info boxes round planets when you look at them in game, far off they would just say the name and distance (to the closest side) but close up as the boxes get bigger because the planets are bigger it could have info like ores found on that planet, indicating mined or on surface and potentially the book mark points you have for the planet too or just territories since some people might have a lot of book marks - might have to limit to closest territory for those with a lot or territories.
Also the box for a particular planet should disappear for that specific planet once you get in the planets 'height from surface' indicator, or it would get confusing.
-
Just read this, and it sounds depressing but I agree they need more payment methods and I only use PayPal online to pay for services so they will kind of need more in the end.
(To be clear I do not have a credit card - I had one when I was a student but lets say I overused it and my overdraft and after they were taken away from me and I did pay it all back in the end - I have not gone back since and never looked back either)
-
Not sure if this one has been suggested yet and I do not currently own a 3D printer however, it would be nice to be able to export my ship designs ready to print to a 3D printer. Which I do hope to own one day
-
I like what's been done so far but it is still a Beta, or Alpha if you think of it like that but I have to say my experience of Alpha makes me see this as a Beta. As for politics you are not really going to get that until PVP gets going with players of 'vision' doing the things they want and watching the fallout happen and create the politics. Which basically means people who want to build something or rule something or steal stuff play and interact will make the politics happen.
I think to make it more 'interesting' you would need niche activities in areas, which people are encouraged to go to and do (for instance WOW has its mounts) and this would make that happen. Though personally I am enjoying making ships for various tasks - mainly haulers of different sizes at the moment, so you could argue that the interest of the game comes from what you put into and the 'people' mentioned in the above paragraph could make it more 'interesting' without anything else being needed.
Also on a side note and thinking about PVP and making things more 'interesting' I am reminded of WarOwls law: 'If it supports custom maps, there is a Dust II', I have been tempted to create dust II area somewhere with some spawn pads and forcefields to stop cheating especially with a war update coming soon. I do think you would need to be better at Lua than I am to make it work though.
-
I am not sure if this has been suggested before (I did not see it when I searched just now) but I have just finished taming my own piece of water by putting it in a cube (as seen in the screenshot) and I was thinking it might be nice to be able to drain water from the cube. Not sure how difficult this is to do but if it was server intensive I could be happy with an optional module that works similar to the mining units (only works on active tiles). I also think making them drain by default would be a mistake since, even though I would like it I think others like the water being there and I see no reason to spoil other peoples fun to get what I am after.
I would also like to be able to vent oxygen and hydrogen but I am sure that is something that has already been suggested.
Thanks for the consideration 👍
- Utzilo and Aaron Cain
-
2
-
5 hours ago, Gottchar said:
By default, hover lift you up (as seen from planet) and boosters lift you up (as seen from the ship).
You can however, just rightclick the engines and enable or disable "thrust along gravity".
There was no change to the engines.Sorry its not the 'thrust along gravity' option. I tried it just now and it seems quite good but if I rotate the ship it just flips, so I am not really sure how this would be useful in a planet, unless they can become makeshift engines for forward thrust instead.
I wonder if they just made the hovers less powerful or less responsive or made it so they do not thrust below the ship to maintain the desired height from the ground anymore and instead only thrust vertically down if they can reach the ground in line with gravity. No matter what has been done it makes it a very different experience.
Thanks for the suggestion though
-
No need for apologies
you provided me with a potential answer and I am sure there are loads of reasons my ship could be flying differently, I just assume that its the hover engines since that is where I notice it on the terrain that is harder to manoeuvre on.
-
The ship certainly is moving differently and it was hovering 'up' based on the direction of the ship against the closest ground directly from the ship originally. So if its not an engine change then its a ground change or the 'thrust along gravity' was off (depending on how that works) or something else but there has been a change - I am not good enough at LUA or configuring the ships to have done anything else.
-
Recently I have noticed that my hover engines do not lift up from the ground surface my ship is orientated with and instead are only lifting from the downward direction aligned with the planets I am on. It used to work really well by being orientated with the ships bottom instead and made traversing mountainous areas 'fun' in the correct ship. Instead its now not really possible and since the wipe of the game removed the runway (Dug out with the flattening tool) I made is now causing me lots of crashes so basically I am not really pleased with these changes based on how its caused me to crash my ship twice now in the last month just trying to get to the first outpost I ever made.
It would not have been so annoying if this has worked as it is now originally but since its a change and makes the game worse based on what I learned to do. I am not a fan at all of these changes.
-
@NQ-Naunet LOL, took so long to figure it out but putting a post here to explain what I was missing and how it works:
(The video explains all the Lua code you need so you can watch that and just read the bit that took me a while to figure out, to save you some scratching head time).
If anyone was wondering the LUA code does work, but (The dreaded but) to turn off the engine you have to press the down button 'c' by default before you toggle off the engines otherwise the engines just stay at max power because the code seems to keep them at the last thrust value they were using.
I have no idea what this is since I just turn them on an off rather than freeze the 'change in thrust value' to what that is when the engine tag is set to false but it works so I cannot complain. Thanks for the help with this and the code used was as follows I called my engine tag DTHE (Stands for something like Down Tag Heave Engine - I forgotten what it was ?
Slots -> Unit & Filters -> Start()
DTHE = False
Slots -> System & Filters -> ActionStart(Option1)
DTHE = not DTHE
Slots -> System & Filters -> Flush()
if not DTHE then Nav:setEngineCommand('DTHE', vec3.zero, vec3.zero) end
So all I have to do is press C when I want to turn them off and then press the option 1 button (I have set to keypad + button).
It makes a big difference when overloaded in a 1G environment but with the fuel tanks I am using the four engines only last about 2 to 3 minutes of flight time so you have to be quick!
Thanks for all the help with this one
-
On 1/20/2022 at 2:26 PM, m0rrtson said:
-- 1. if people place a lot of elements, they spend 30-50 minutes repairing after crash. You don't value peoples life-time?
I have to say I have spent hours (at a time) doing repairs on my small ship designs after a crash (letting me know it needs more work) and 30 - 50 minutes sounds like an end game time estimate, when you have the higher tier ore scrap to use for repairs. I should point out that I do not begrudge the game this time since its been a while since I had the problem and the game was shiny and new
Also the ability to create contracts on the job board for a section group to be made and delivered or just delivered from A to B would probably be a good companion to this idea, since it would save moving some resources around and only require finished products to be moved around for ship construction.
Assuming they are still using this: https://upvote.dualuniverse.game for suggestions to the game I think it would be worth adding your suggestion their if they reopen the portal for suggestions. (It has a strange system in use, which means only when its open can you add suggestions or they get deleted)
-
On 1/20/2022 at 5:00 PM, Gottchar said:
As soon as a player exits their construct in Aphelia territory, a 168-hour (seven-day) abandonment countdown will begin for that construct.
Hell yes, thank you, please don’t backtrack on this one, it is the only way to really clean up markets and make them usable for everyone.
Maybe make this timer start after people log out and their ship is still in Aphelia, then it starts the timer? Since if you go to the shops in town and leave your car in the car park, you do not really want a count down to destruction while you parking meter is running. But I guess if that is not easy this will do.
On 1/20/2022 at 7:33 PM, blazemonger said:I'm not sure about any of this.
The space wrecks seem more of a hazard
Also I agree, with the hazard part of the above and space wrecks need to show up a long way off on the radar, or not be possible to crash into unless going below a speed that would allow a 30 seconds to change direction upon detection since turning at max speed is not easy (Or some other mechanic that prevents crashes at high speed). Though this should not be confused with PVP wrecks since they should just be hazards regardless of speed or distance and I believe a good aspect of PVP - though I admit I have yet to try it
-
I think I got lucky with my current ship, it was only overlapping two of the back four space engines and once fixed (Moved two of them upwards one arrow press), I am not too fussed about the update. I was quite cross initially since I had just returned from holiday to see the message about my ship being threatened with malfunctions.
So I think the update is fine once you've fixed your ships but I guess lowering aggressiveness of the detection as stated above for existing ships and leaving it on full for new ships is probably the answer (Everyone wins).
-
50 minutes ago, Sawafa said:
Build mode -> TAB -> Build Helper -> Information -> Elements -> Hover mouse over element with the problem -> TAB.
Now u will have problematic element being highlighted with red light.
Thanks for some reason I did not get the notification of your reply and just noticed it ?
-
All sorted now
. It was the cluster of four engines at the back were a little too close together.
-
-
Hopefully someone has the answer to this one since I really do not want to dismantle my ship to figure out what the game is talking about.
So I have returned from holiday today to notice the message 'Some elements are colliding and will be deactivated a future version', the trouble is I never overlap / overlapped any elements (to my knowledge) and only place where the build system would let me. I have tried to start 'building' the ship to see if I can find anything in red but nothing shows as obviously wrong.
Anyone one know how to tell what is overlapping without destroying the ship to find out what item boundaries have been moved to make them overlap since I built the ship?
Thanks in advance.
-
I like the idea of planet rotation 'Newtonian Physics' it would make space station locations more meaningful. You could even have gaps in the safe zone areas at times to add a little bit of risk to planet travel on occasion however, you would need to have a much better dynamic map for that.
The amount of ore I cannot comment on since I am still picking tiles to mine so not really sure what a full output looks like yet. Also I have not tried asteroid and PVP yet so I am not able to comment on these either.
-
Zarcata's post shows the work around - use discord polls - Since you already stated it cannot be done here, no real need to rehash it.
NQ: Time to answer the question - Will there be a wipe?
in General Discussions
Posted · Edited by ADCOne
typo and last sentence
Everyone payed to play so everyone is paying but now I think about it the only people who did not pay were the people who received a free beta key so you can have them if you like but I certainly payed money to play and the notion that only subs payed to play is incorrect.
Sorry to the original poster this thread seems to be turning into a lot of off topic arguments and I hope you get the answer you are after sooner rather than later.