Emptiness
-
Posts
381 -
Joined
Posts posted by Emptiness
-
-
5 minutes ago, Hiturn said:
If you want the game to be hard its easy to solve under your parameters. Dont use markets (just to buy schems )and delete 80% of what you mine .
I believe that your suggestion is confusing tedium with difficulty.
-
2 hours ago, Xennial said:
Most things you read on forums etc are born not from the desire to make a game 'better'. They are born from the selfish desires of players to make things better for themselves.
Agreed.
Edit: And now for my personal opinion: As a long time Kerbal Space Program and Space Engineers player, I think that the current element destruction/repair system is far too casual.
However, this is said from the perspective of someone who has never lost a ship to a disconnect or crash, and has never crashed a ship on accident; only in deliberate testing.
I understand that many people say they have had problems with crashes and disconnects and the 'ship continue moving' patch made it so they would have much harsher penalties.
A potential solution to this whole mess would be to make the emergency controller (1) baseline to a ship core and (2) much better at emergency ship control.
-
-
9 hours ago, Xennial said:
This is what happens when game dev insta cave when adding elements that provide challenge. They couldn't even get element destruction in for a full week before insta cave to whining.
If they allow themselves to get caught in the age old trap of shoveling out "content" to the solo/casual ADHD crowd you can just kiss the game vision goodbye. Next we will be shooting bunnies that have magical $$ or drop super spiffy engine +5.
Keep on caving to those whom came to a unique game only to cry for mainstream 'features'. We will end up with generic sci-fi MMO with an indi short on funds end product.
Make the game hard. Take the training wheels off and let those that can't hack it go back to whatever SP game that will spoon feed them do X to get loot Y quests and other nonsense.
This. I come from Kerbal Space Program and Space Engineers, where a ship crash at speed means complete replacement is needed. Not this easy mode garbage where even a light-speed equivalent crash into a planet just means repair with magical scrap and fly away.
-
Honestly, I think that all ore tiers should generate in equal quantities. The increased mining time already prevents their acquisition very fast (although I would not be adverse to higher tier ores mining time greatly reduced), and if someone wants to use a massive quantity of t3/t4/t5 for honeycomb for a creative project, the cost is prohibitive. 400kl of a t1 or even t2 for a lot of honeycomb? No problem. 400kl of a t5 for honeycomb? Currently, that's a colossal waste. Builders should not be punished for wanting to use interesting honeycombs.
-
The below is part of the reason why some people are asking for a wipe: the unfair advantages accrued in the first week of Beta that only Alpha players could access.
QuoteNQ didn’t listen when people told them to remove the bot orders from the get go, they left them on soft beta release. This in conjunction with leaked information on the location of wrecks (very unbalanced and unfair) and leaked information to a selected few on other matters, including but not limited to ore locations and prices, lead to an unprecedented rush that made a few people extremely wealthy by day 2 of soft release. Now, NQ claimed that some of us where exaggerating the amount of wealth and made a vague statement claiming it wasn’t much and everyone was going to be reset to 50 million. What NQ didn’t say was that they only accounted for the Quantas and not the assets (and that I can prove, as my assets weren’t touch), couple with, yet again, more leaked information to a selected few, made some stack up on billions of hard assets by day 4-5. So they took the money sure.....they didn’t touch the assets, meaning some had enough factories, equipment and everything you can think off to play the rest of their lives without a care. Add that money was also moved prior to the cap to alts and players (50 million a piece), and some people having 6-10 alts, well, you do the math.
Also
QuoteYou know how some corps own 50- tiles on various planets? All done on week 1 before the flood gates open to the public, with the dirty money before it was capped, and that didn’t get remove either. People knew the money was going to be remove a day before it happened...... Admitting to that would really bury them as it it make it clear that only a selected few get the info before hand, on everything....they will never do it.
-
I wonder how easily the 'Destroy Them All' one could be cheesed. I suppose it depends if it requires x value of stuff to be destroyed, or just an arbitrary "5 'ships' (xs core is fine)" deal.
-
5 minutes ago, Iorail said:
Admitting to that would really bury them
Not admitting it is going to bury them. Now more than ever, we need open communication.
This is like one of those ridiculous movies with over an hour's worth of drama just because people couldn't fess up to their mistakes.
NQ needs to (1) admit what they did wrong and (2) administer punishment to the unjustly favored ones.
-
57 minutes ago, Demlock said:
With T4-T5 mega nodes on Asteroids? OMG would you see some heavy activity in the community.
Ahhahaha. Maybe. More realistically, the super orgs would make a non aggression pact to share them and all the smaller fry who tried to get some would get ganged up on by the supers.
-
6 hours ago, WylieFox said:
Can I give my cores to an Org I start?
Yes. You will need to create an org and train the above skills, then tokenize each static construct and use the key you get for the org you created (r-click the key in your active inventory, expand the 'for org' submenu and click your org name).
-
On 12/21/2020 at 5:01 PM, Iorail said:
At this point the NDA is a mood point as we are already talking about it, so here it is.
NQ didn’t listen when people told them to remove the bot orders from the get go, they left them on soft beta release. This in conjunction with leaked information on the location of wrecks (very unbalanced and unfair) and leaked information to a selected few on other matters, including but not limited to ore locations and prices, lead to an unprecedented rush that made a few people extremely wealthy by day 2 of soft release. Now, NQ claimed that some of us where exaggerating the amount of wealth and made a vague statement claiming it wasn’t much and everyone was going to be reset to 50 million. What NQ didn’t say was that they only accounted for the Quantas and not the assets (and that I can prove, as my assets weren’t touch), couple with, yet again, more leaked information to a selected few, made some stack up on billions of hard assets by day 4-5. So they took the money sure.....they didn’t touch the assets, meaning some had enough factories, equipment and everything you can think off to play the rest of their lives without a care. Add that money was also moved prior to the cap to alts and players (50 million a piece), and some people having 6-10 alts, well, you do the math.
Now, with that say, I could care less about the above statement and if I can say it or not, at this point it doesn’t matter cause NQ can’t penalized me for breaking anything when they are completely back peddling themselves. So, consider this my last meal before I jump ship for better seas.
Quoting to save. What a gigantic %$*#up on NQ's part. We need transparency on this and a public NQ announcement admitting fault and poor judgement. @NQ-Naunet Could we get a word, please? This is obviously still affecting the ingame economy even ~4 months later.
-
3 hours ago, NQ-Naunet said:
We're collaborating on a kind of guide
We don't need a 'guide'. Mining is the ONLY source of new quanta. I don't consider the daily login to be a statistically relevant quantity. 150k = 6k of T1 ore at 25q/l. Big whoop. Not. 6k of ore takes me a couple minutes at most to mine.
We need missions already.
-
54 minutes ago, Haunty said:
And if you think DU performance is bad now
From my perspective, you seem to be defending its poor performance. I say, its poor performance is inexcusable.
- Thugaar, CptLoRes and le_souriceau
-
3
-
1 hour ago, SneakySnake said:
Did I do everything in vain?
You'll still have your memories of what you did.
And we lose everything when we die IRL; does that mean the journey is also meaningless and a waste of time?
-
The devs just didn't think about it. Just like they haven't really thought about the chat interface, or the notifications interface, or ...
-
15 minutes ago, le_souriceau said:
Any ideas what now is good thing to invest to not lose value with new soft-wiping miracles?
Find another game(s) to play for a few months and check back on DU in half a year. It's what I've decided to do. The current game just isn't worth wasting my time on.
-
2 hours ago, SneakySnake said:
Wipe = death for DU.
Or, a wipe could bring back all the people who quit because they would now feel they're on an even footing, rather than with all the exploiting megacorps and their insane stockpiles.
-
10 hours ago, Kormolos said:
I ask for a general WIPE and without BP magic. A new start on the basis of the original 0.23 with Sanctuary as the only safe place as promised at the start.
Yes, please.
-
It could also be because the devs are horribad at programming. CptLoRes said this in another thread and it seems relevant here.
On 12/18/2020 at 2:32 AM, CptLoRes said:The problem with blaming CPU bound on low FPS, is that with regard to DU the CPU is used to calculate voxels/stream server meshes. So there is a paradox here. Not being able to stream all the voxels in time (causing high CPU usage) should actually translate to less work for the GPU and higher fps. But this is clearly not happening in DU, and the effect we are seeing are typical for badly designed graphical systems that does not properly decouple CPU and GPU operations.
-
12 minutes ago, GraXXoR said:
It beggars belief that JC still has bots in the game...
bots giving out free money, bots buying ore at a fixed price and bots taking all the quanta back by selling magic potions.
This is basically the China factory syndrome: pay your workers then force them to use your restaurants, accommodation and leisure facilities, completely capturing the flow of capital and leaving little “leakage” for third parties.
I’m no economist, but this just seems like patent nonsense to me from a gaming (not a hyper-exploitative cotton farm in China) viewpoint.
JC has decried the lack of human interaction. Hell he was even willing to risk losing or at least alienating half his player base to address the issue...
and what does he go and do? Basically set up a short circuit between a sweet trifecta of his own bots, effectively cutting human interaction out of the entire transaction from ore to store.
dig by yourself. Sell to bots. Get money for existing, the give all that money back to JC... so that you can once again craft your own shit for your own ships.Well played, JC, you could have probably written the background story to Brazil!
Quoting for truth. Perfect way to describe the existing 'system'...
-
6 hours ago, Pleione said:
I continue to watch (play a little) and unfortunately continue to be disappointed.
As I said in a different thread just now: NQ doesn't have customers. We're paying a pittance for access, and even the backers weren't that big of a percentage. NQ is only doing this for their investors. We are nothing. NQ has been toying with us from the beginning, and we really should wise up to it and find other games to play.
-
11 minutes ago, Deintus said:
never NEVER ignore your customers.
NQ doesn't have customers. We're paying a pittance for access, and even the backers weren't that big of a percentage. NQ is only doing this for their investors. We are nothing. NQ has been toying with us from the beginning, and we really should wise up to it and find other games to play.
-
15 minutes ago, Bazzle said:
I also agree with these posts. We play this game because it is a simulation, and it is what we might like to be able to do. In real life, we are still flying B52s designed in the 50s and intend to still fly them into 2050. The longevity of parts should be based on flight time for atmospheric (i.e., thousand hours) and SUs (i.e., hundreds of thousands) for Space. Yes, we may need to throw in a burner here or screws there to fix it, but three lives are crazy short. However, I do not agree with PVP only destruction. Maybe combat would decrease the hours due to combat like a multiple.
If that B52 flies into a mountainside at 1000km/h, it's going to be catastrophically destroyed and be unrepairable.
Having 3 lives for elements seems more than generous. As a long time Space Engineers / Kerbal Space Program player, I'd be happy with destroyed elements just vanishing (once they fix all the crash/disconnect bugs, anyway).
-
10 minutes ago, Rimezx said:
If you want my advice dont keep quantas in this game.
Org creation and territory claim costs disagree with that 'advice'.
NQ please stop listening to players.
in General Discussions
Posted
I've heard that way back in Alpha, ship design actually involved paying attention to the interaction of Center of Thrust and Center of Mass. That kind of challenge? Because it's something I really wish was still in the game.