Namcigam
-
Posts
131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Namcigam
-
-
Just now, VandelayIndustries said:
Lots of carebears in this thread.
All there's the other useless troll with his useless trolling comments...grow up child
- blazemonger and Zarcata
-
2
-
Yeah, I do agree with your point if it's too easy what's the point and that is true. Balancing a game isn't easy, The staff have a very tough job to do and I definitely recognize that.
-
Just now, tritan67 said:
So this is a gripe.... a rant.
But why are the developers making the cargo runs so slow? 1-4 hours of me just flying in a straight line, sometimes out of the safe zone. Then lets say you alt tab to do something else because your board out of your mind, you crash into another planet... you don't spawn there. you spawn back on Alioth. Now I have to go pay another player to get me to my ship in best case scenario.
Can we increase the max speed at least between planets and make space thrusters more powerful? JFC this is a game first and at most, a cargo mission should take an hour at most. Or just make warping allowed for NPC cargo missions.........
Or make respawn nodes on your ship, not die to crashes at high speed.
Or put respawn nodes on each planet.
Or add Space buses for all planets that are NPC based.
Or all of it?
make the game less punishing on things that are boring or make it less boring please.I agree I mentioned how time consuming hauling missions are as well. I didn't mention the extreme fragility of the ships I do find that odd it's like the ship elements are made out of explosive glass and the surface is mad out of plastic explosives. I do think ship elements should be a lot more durable than they currently are. I would like to be able to make a "Really hard landing" like in Guardians of the Galaxies 2 for example. I think the idea was to promote the heavy use of repair scraps but its seems like a bit much.
-
23 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
The notion that it went downhill "after schematics" is really not true. Things started unravelling very quickly shortly after beta started because the server cost went through the roof due to terrible design choices and budgeting both financially and as far as server resources go. And let’s just say that when JC announced the public beta end of April 2020 it raised a good many eyebrows in the backer community, the state of the game at beta would explain why that was.
And pretty much everything that happened after beta has been geared towards bringing all this back in line. First a massive database and industry refactor where batches were severely nerfed and then, frankly what I expect to be false pretence, schematics were rushed in to try and reduce industry use further. Cost cutting in staffing in several rounds, including pulling support back to just business hours with skeleton crews outside office hours and weekends. The devblogs from last year April pretty much confirmed all that and from there we've seen a string of cot cutting measures which kind of played into the community tagging the current changes as such as well.
Only after Deckard and in part Nyzaltar came out over the past days with some more background it became clear, at least to me, that NQ now seems to have been able to stabilize, although on a very strict and tight budget, and is now able to get back to getting the game ready for launch and while this may be true for taxes and MU introduction, I certainly believe that this is the main driver for the core count changes.
The problem for NQ is that they have lost a good 18 months (and nearly a year after JC was removed) with righting the ship and their (what I expect to be) hard deadline for launch end of 2022 has not moved and likely can't. So now they have to rush development to get to a MVP that will allow them to start the game "for real" and in a state where it can have the "released" label.
That the new roadmap was pushed out (quelle surprise) and we have yet to hear on the "wipe statement" to me indicates there is too many loose ends NQ needs to at least button down somewhat before they can release that. I'd expect they know internally but may need to push more stuff out beyond release to be able to hit their planned date. I steal think and fear that DU will release "as-is" at a specific date and not when it's ready for a release.
But we'll see and I hope the roadmap and wipe statement will not take too long as NQ is quickly running into single digit months to release in my estimation.
Yeah, I understand I can't speak on that I wasn't playing at that time. Just going off of my experiences I don't deny any of your talking points.
-
Thanks, non trolling comments are hard to come by on this forum and I mentioned you're point in other comments the need for counter measures and some type of evasive maneuvers etc. This notion that haulers are supposed be fish in barrel is absurd to me.
-
A Non-Combat Ship is a classification for vessels within the universe. Non-Combat Ships, as the name suggests, are vessels that are not fitted out for combat having either very minor or nonexistent weapons and are susceptible to being destroyed by enemy forces.
However, I don't think I'm wrong.
-
It's ok I got my big boy pants on I can be wrong...
-
-
I just thought of a way that you could remove the need of a safe zone that's really simple I think. no safe zones but you can only attack ships that have weapons. You would have to come up with a reward system for engaging in pvp per kill or damage done etc. That way haulers that aren't pvping are hopeless victims. Just a random thought I thought I'd put out there.
-
3 minutes ago, blundertwink said:
People have been criticizing JC for a very long time (well before he was replaced), it isn't some new thing -- it's clear that some people haven't been able to give up the arbitrary, random ideas he had and expects NQ to somehow unwind years and years and years wasted under the leadership of someone with no experience in the field.
It might not seem productive, but when changes come up that players don't like, remember just how long this project was mismanaged for...that mismanagement will affect NQ for a very long time.
So when people see changes that conflict with the "original vision of the game" it's worth reminding people that this "original vision" wasn't based on reality, it was an expensive "Ready Player One" fantasy created by someone that had never worked in the field at any level.
I agree, players seem to over look that this game is in beta which means random changes will come, that's part of the beta process try something see if it works make adjustments as needed that's normal. Dwelling on the past isn't going to solve anything. They need feedback on recent changes and how they effect game play and that's what I've been trying to put out there. I'm not trying to be hyper critical and if others would do the same the staff would get more relevant input. I mean can you imagine how frustrating it would be to sift through all this to find a few useful bits of information. I know its their job but that doesn't mean we have to make it as frustrating as possible. focus on now and the future and give useful feedback on what's at hand. I think it would be helpful for everyone players and staff. They made a mistake on cost estimations that's unfortunate but everyone and everything is susceptible to "shit happens" Best thing to do is move forward and give meaningful relevant feedback on what they are currently working on. I think the staff has proven they are committed to making this work and they are communicating more than ever before since I've been playing (shortly after Beta) suck it up and give useful input on what they working on that is path forward.
-
3 hours ago, Knight-Sevy said:
It's too easy for everyone to criticize JC now and blame him for all the mistakes.
I completely agree with that but it did start going down hill right after schematics
- Warlander and Maxim Kammerer
-
2
-
29 minutes ago, Kurosawa said:
Why would you shoot people that have no interest in pvp, sound a bit weak and pathetic, are you projecting your carebearness on to PvE players. there is plenty of room for everyone but perhaps the pvp's are to afraid to actually risk something ?
It's simple, there is nothing in this game worth risking your ship and your cargo over and satellite trajectory & pvp don't mix...it's like pvp ice capades, no counter measures and lil to no chance of escape.. it's an impossible sell in my opinion.
-
1 hour ago, Knight-Sevy said:
And you can have T4 on those who are in the safe zone.
And you can always warp completely safely on PvP planets to use Minning Unit without any risk.Finally NQ said that the asteroids were not intended to bring PvP.
So I wonder if they are going to do something, one day where we can have activities in the PvP area bringing really exclusive content to the latter.
In my pov warp cells are unicorns like warp beacons I hear rumors of such things but for me they are myths. If I bought warp cells I would have no profits. Making warp cells is above my paygrade.
-
Woah, another sane player it's nice too meet you I thought I was alone in dystopian world!
-
82 rumored asteroids & all of them are outside of the safe zone, This is not a coincidence... They are being actively ignored because the risk outweighs the reward.
-
Things happen in this game how we play changes due to changes in the game as well as players goals changing. Skills that weren't important before are important now etc. It would be helpful if we could pay a certain amount of quanta to reset our skills. For example, I had maxed or near maxed mining skills so when the MU came out it seemed like a good idea to put those skills back into mining but I'm not sure that was the case. It would be helpful to be able to pay for a reset. I have a feeling NQ doesn't want this but the reason is above my paygrade I think. I would prefer to wrong about this notion making this a great idea.
-
I was referring to Demeter. Back when we were able to mine under ground with mining skills I averaged 200-325L of ore per full mouse click. That used to take 5- 20 seconds roughly, now it takes an hour to get less than that. The ore supply has been crippled due to the recent changes. In this game Ore is everything because that's the only resource for everything. A trickle of ore causes the game to become a trickle. Of course if you was one of the fortunate players that sat on loads and loads of ore then this probably doesn't affect you YET but sooner or later it will. Those of us that didn't have large stashes or ore are instantly feeling the effects myself included. I've been trying to figure out the benefits of crippling the ore supply and I have yet find a solid reason for doing this. It slows the productivity down to a crawl. Hauling missions offset this a lil bit but I don't think its enough. Discovering ships in space might be a nice silver lining but I doubt it will be plentiful enough to become a full time scrapper and just do that within the game. I think that's going to be a semi rare perk that will probably not be a significant resource to depend on. The only dependable resource at the moment is hauling missions but they take a very long time to complete so many people spend %90 of their time doing hauling missions instead of building ships or static structures etc. Acquiring resources is supposed to a means to an end, a necessary evil in order to do what you want to do in the game whatever that may be. Acquiring resources should have never been the main feature. This affects pvp as well. the rarer the resources the more priceless the constructs become. You turn our ships into priceless vessels and then you wonder why people don't want to risk loosing them. I cant speak for everyone but I would be devastated if I lost my ship full of cargo. There is nothing in the game worth justifying loosing all that.
-
Yeah, I'm aware of all of that but that's not the point. Before these changes that tile was fine and now it's not at all fine. All of the tiles I invested in are drastically less than they were and it's definitely a problem. The amount of natron I get per hour using the MU is the equivalent of half of mouse click with mining skills I don't think people realize this.
-
1 hour ago, Zarcata said:
and what about the moons?
I thought about that but I'm assuming they may have a real need to reduce the number of headquarters. So, that was merely a compromise. A headquarter on each planet seems like a reasonable goal but their might be reasons for this beyond my understanding.
-
-
I'm trying to be open minded about this but it's hard for me. There is not enough Natron to justify using 2 MU's. That can't be as intended can it? because it feels crazy to me and wrong. The pyrite is even more crazy and wrong. The amount of ore and the types of ore per tile is all jacked up in my opinion in a very profound way. There's a chance I'm missing something but I doubt it. also this tile only has one t1 ore on it Iron. None of this makes sense to me and I hope they figure something out because these to pictures were taken out side of the safe zone which means that the tiles outside of the safe zone are just as depressing as the ones in the safe zone. I know you said your going to study the data and makes adjustments but I think it's important for me to bring stuff like this to your attention because I get the impression NQ thinks this is a little wrong when it's really very wrong in my opinion.
-
27 minutes ago, Koruzarius said:
Also, the 100 core count does really open the door for malicious usage of core counts against an org. I like the idea, but with the possibility (and in fact, certainty) of losing a massive amount of possible cores across the game, and the hours upon hours of effort it takes to tear down those cores, people are going to lose constructs because they literally do not have the person-power to dismantle them fast enough after a massive shift. A small group of infiltrators could boost an orgs core limit by a few hundred, and then remove them on the day before a two week period begins, leaving an org to scramble to dismantle literally hundreds of constructs in 14 days.
I'm gonna get on my soap box again and reiterate that the ability to compactify constructs, and/or the ability to dismantle them with a single click (even if it takes a few minutes on a large many element core) would do a *lot* to alleviate this risk.
Yes, deconstruction is incredibly tedious we do need a remove all command like remove all elements and remove all honeycomb that would be a welcome change and it eliminate the need for support to help with lost/buried honeycomb. and it would make deconstruction much faster and less of a burden.
- DrHowie, Briggenti and RetnuhRellik
-
3
-
1 hour ago, NQ-Deckard said:
Hello Noveans, as yesterday's discussion thread was so lively, we would like to open a new thread to hear your feedback on our planned revisions.
I can only speak for the individual player number of cores but that sounds really good to me.
-
29 minutes ago, NQ-Wanderer said:
Greetings! We would like to read your feedback on our latest DEVBLOG: CONSTRUCTION SLOTS AND STACKED ELEMENTS.
Yes, that sounds very good to me and I'm digging the more frequent feedback that's great.
Random thought regarding pvp, I'm just throw it out there
in General Discussions
Posted
I mean it's ok if you can only handle targets that can't shoot back ehh it's not that weird...