Emptiness

It was only so 'important' because of dev incompetence. Nothing more.
 
In a sanely designed game, destroying a market would've had no effect on the market orders, and replacing it and getting it functional again would take maybe 5 to 10 minutes at most.
 
Instead, the devs decided to tie the market orders to the existence of certain elements in the market, and we have this snafu.

Players lose bases? NQ is like .. eh, who cares, not our problem right now.
 
NQ's Aphelia loses a market? PANIC! PERMABAN EVERYONE!

Players lose bases? NQ is like .. eh, who cares, not our problem right now.
 
NQ's Aphelia loses a market? PANIC! PERMABAN EVERYONE!

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

Then I exect NQ will be consistently harsh to "bad guys" from now on, without any difference against who (or how) they do funny (not intended by mechanics) things.
 
 

I would advise NQ  take the time to get to know and understand the system and be cautious when making a construct or element usable by unknown players.
 
That way when their stuff gets jacked they don't need to whine on the forums about it.

So basically - what you're saying if players screw up RDMS, it's on them, if NQ screws up RDMS, it's a violation of the EULA?
 
Really guys? It's pretty clear when players are able to get access to other peoples constructs that they were 'not intended' to have access by the owner. Yet when it's players, that's fine.
 
But when YOU screw up - you ban the players?
 
Absurd.

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

If that was the result on the back end then NQ has _far_ bigger problems than this. That is just plain bad coding. We already learned form this that the market system is not actually physical in game and entirely "in the cloud". If cutting the link by removing the terminals means you destroy the data then that is just .. bad on their side and o, saying they'd not expect this to happen is not an excuse.
 

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

stop acting as if this were a beta.
We're far from the "beta" state of the 90s and early 2000s.
This isn't even a complete vertical slice.
 
But the subs helped with a cash injection, wich appears to have been needed.
That being said, the game needs a few more gameplay loops other than mining, because, while it's chilling, Minecraft's mining and building loop is more polished, and modded MC with galacticraft and mekanism is a really good alternative here... lol.

Oof. Find bug, make sure it's a visible problem. Get banned.
 
I guess it's time to cancel my sub. Been an interesting time guys, but if you want to completely hammer a promising game into the ground and punish people exposing issues while doing so is pretty much a total no-go from me. I'll watch the dumpster fire from the sidelines.

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

Can we get a dislike button?

I don't agree with you on many of these. The ship show had way more ships than the market and ran smooth -except for certain ships that had lua scripts - those did not run well at all. This suggests that the engine does fine - the scripting side is a mess though. NQ has stated that they are tasking a dev specifically with working on the LUA implementation.
 
I can't defend the PvP as it is. The implementation was flawed on paper. It should never have made it into a single line of code as it stands. Targeting speed and lockon distance being core based was - shortsighted to put it nicely.
 
NQ's communication is abysmal. I cannot defend it. Why do I find out more about what JC says about DU from 3rd party sources than from the main site/discord/foum? https://massivelyop.com/2020/10/17/some-assembly-required-the-future-of-dual-universes-puzzle-events-and-development/ WHY am I reading this on this site? Why do I have to go out of my way to find communication about the game I kickstarted!?
 
They HAVE fixed plenty of bugs and exploits. I can't defend that they often broke stuff to do so - but that neither here nor there - they are fixing exploits.
 
I agree that rule enforcement is nonexistance and their threats have been toothless. Whatever happened to the dupers? Nothing.
 
RDMS is extremely powerful and extremely complicated and extremely clunky. I have mixed feelings about it - I think it has tremendous potential once the bugs are sorted out. I don't think it's fair to NQ to say that they can't make it work - they just are trying to do too much with an abysmal clunky and unintuitive UI. The idea behind the system is solid, the implementation is not.
 
The subscription system is terrible yes. It's what I expect to see from 1 man indie projects.
 
 

LOL. 
 
The blame should be on the devs that allowed this to be possible. 
 
The "problem" is that NQ has never made a game before...
 
Let's review: 
- They can't optimize the game; don't tell me "it's beta" -- they've had 6 years to develop a solid core and failed. There's almost zero chance this game could support millions of players. Any actual dev will tell you optimization can't be an afterthought. Simply doesn't work like that. 
- They can't develop core features like PvP -- they still have no clue what they will do. It's been 6 years and they are in the design phase. Design comes before alpha, and they don't even have that done. 
- They can't communicate with players -- JC likes to go on streams but only deals with ass-kissers. Why is the CEO spending time on streams, anyway?!
- They can't fix basic bugs and exploits.
- They can't enforce the rules they created because they can't fix basic bugs and exploits...
- They can't create a permissions system -- even NQ can't seem to set this up properly. These are devs. That can't create a permissions system. 
- They can't even be bothered to make a subscription system (which takes a few days and a Stripe account)...Xsolla is for lazy companies that don't care about UX 
 
DU still has so much potential. If I didn't love many aspects of this game, I'd be gone by now. 
 
They can 100% fix the direction of this game...but they need major changes in leadership, which likely won't happen.
 
Hopefully events like this encourage them to quit going on streams and doing stupid easter eggs...and focus on making even one feature in this game actually work. 

This could be our first glimpse of how player markets could work. Can a market terminal have its properties edited or interface with lua somehow to set what market it is tied to?

Wonder if I could buy an, ahem, liberated terminal from the deconstructors.

? Maybe now they will fix the exploit, because of course it happened to them.......and maybe someone will get the hammer this time......
Nah, I’m expecting too much ? 

Slow down Satan.
 
Every single one of those would make the hell that is mining even worse.
 

How about: No.

A good first couple steps would be limiting weapon sizes to core sizes but maybe that's too much where as expanding upon the idea of a power system beyond mere buffs would be more agreeable to all?
 
Based on all I've seen so far, the stalking is the only fun part of PVP. Once you've found your prey, it's simply a matter of getting into range, loosing a shot with a button press, then repairing the wreckage and scooping the loot. One shot, where's the fun in that for either side of the hunt? Here I was always thinking engagements between single players would be more drawn out from the first shot to the kill, but that is simply not the case here.
 
I'm not entirely a fan of the fighting segment of PVP in general, but I eagerly anticipate a rework of the current mechanics.

It’s not player vs player when one person is flying a murder ship and is skilled out in combat skills and the other is just a hauler. Real PvP is a challenge fighting people in ships which want to participate in PvP.
 
if you are not finding enough people who want to participate in PvP with you than the problem isn’t warp destroying PvP, it’s a lack of people that want to be involved in PvP.
 
Warp isn’t free, it has a cost. These traders are making a decision, risk getting into a fight they have no chance of competing in, or add the cost of warp to there overheads.
 
combat ships murdering traders rather than offering them a charge to escape etc., that’s what is killing PvP as everybody has to use warp or just be killed.

The UI/UX in general is really not good, if not bad. Not having an actual UI/UX designer and letting developers do it themselves using a very basic framework with a simple set of templates. I can only assume there is no designer for the UI/UX as if there is, he or she is really not very good at their job; so much wasted screen space, font choices that really do not fit the purpose, a non modal approach.. It's all very... chunky and clumsy IMO.
 
But NQ has pretty much sold their soul to the Coherent Labs framework and only a full rewrite of the entire UI/UX/Lua component of the game will allow them to get rid of it.. which obviously will not happen. Coherent can provide much better results than the "box of blocks" approach NQ went for but it still is a resource hog.
 
Now, NQ may well have plans for a much needed revamp (and not just a reskin) of the UI and improve the UX but as usual they will just leave us guessing and speculating on this instead of communicating such plans once a discussion comes up here.
 
IMO we also _really_ need an API for a number of things in game, including markets. We need access to historical date, be able to pull data to see trends and more. Maybe not immediately but the sooner the better I feel.