Jump to content

Heidenherz

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    37
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to NQ-Wanderer in NEW BLUEPRINT TOOLS AT LAUNCH   
    Rebuilding Helios will be easier with our enhanced Blueprint Deployment Tools.
     
    bptoolv3.mp4  
    You can omit any element, swap missing honeycomb, and soon after launch, snap blueprints to deployed cores.
     
    What will you build first, Novean?
  2. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Jupiter8 in Dual Universe - Erfolg oder gescheiterte Vision?   
    Ich habe das Game hier als Patron mit Alpha Zugang unterstützt.
     
    Habe mich aus Zeitgründen immer mal wieder eingeloggt, um die Fortschritte zu begutachten. Bisher hat mich die Performance noch nicht überzeugt (teilweise 25FPS bei einer RTX3090Ti / Intel 10900K). Die Grafik ist Geschmacksache.
     
    Das Abo-Model ist m.E. eine klare Fehleintscheidung - Das kann man machen, wenn man erst mal genug Fans nach einem erfolgreichen Release gewonnen hat, um diese dann zu binden.
     
    Die Frage nach einem Erfolg wird m.E. heute Abend und in den nächsten Tagen im Rahmen des Steam Releases beantwortet. Dann wird es darum gehen, in wie weit Verbesserungen, Inhalte und ggf. Anpassungen am Geschäftsmodell (überhaupt) nötig sind und im Bedarfsfall umgesetzt werden.
     
    Ich drücke dem Team von Novaquark fest die Daumen !   
     
    Jupiter8 
     
    PS: Wo sehe ich eigentlich in meinem Profil, wie viel Spielzeit ich noch habe ?
  3. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to DreadZep in Dual Universe should change it's target audience.   
    OH joy, a race track that will be fun for about 5 minutes and then just more boring repetition like everything else in this game. And lets call it a time trial track because lets be honest you cant actually race anyone reliably without the desync completely ruining the experience
  4. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to CousinSal in Dual Universe should change it's target audience.   
    I disagree. Game will not survive long because it's not in a good state at all.  It's bare bones. People will sub if the game is good, and has content.
  5. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to ElKayro in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    I would like to add a point of view to the discussion:
    Imagine we are in 3 years from now. The server has been life all the time. There have been hardcore gamers and casual players for the whole time. There will be a big difference between the players depending on the how they have been playing the game.

    Imagine you join as a new player in 3 years.
     
    What will be the difference beteen the new players now and new players in 3 years?
     
    What will a vipe improve in the long run? I can't imagine that you wipe the server every few years.
    I think that you have to find a way to do ballancing on the run.
  6. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to StoneSpoons in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    I'm not against a wipe as long as we keep our blueprints and talent points.
     
    Starting over is fine, but the time and money (paid accounts) that went into designing ships and training talents - not willing to start over on that. It just wouldn't be fun and it wouldn't be worth it - in time and money - to have to do that again.
  7. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to MelTuc in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    I do not like the wait the option is presented, clearly NQ is using the "Remove Schematics" as the bait or carrot at the end of the stick, my question is simple why make us go threw the drill of reducing construction and limiting orgs and such, why make us go threw the drill of buying Schematics, why make us go threw the drill of terrain reset and the list goes on and on. Why did you decide to turn your early backers and supports into unpaid testers, better yet Testers that have to pay NQ to test your game. 

    So my choices are loose everything Talents, Constructs, Quanta so a new player can do WHAT. Play the game like I did, no the can not I played for 2 years, so a new player should never be able to walk in the door and be equal to me simple because you "Release The Game". 

    Did the NEW PLAYER pay you for 10 accounts for 2 years at 9.99 a month NO
    Did the NEW PLAYER  have to learn how to use Schematics and now UNLEARN how to use Schematics NO
    Did the NEW PLAYER spend hours DIGGING their base out of the dirt after a Terrian reset NO
    Did the NEW PLAYER have to play with and countless Towers, Game Errors and Bugs and still played the game NO
     
    Why the hell  Do you OWE this NEW PALYER anything when in fact YOU NQ owe US those that are here NOW, those that Play NOW, those that paid you NOW those that will come back when you screw us ONCE AGAIN for a pipe dream of the Magical NEW PLAYER that you cant seem to get to come to the game now but for some reason they will at RELEASE. So you Lied about Sancturary to I guess that the next statement that I am waiting to hear. Remember the lie Sanctuary will never be wipe and will always be save.
     
    And for the record, you have no idea who, what or HOW MANY ....NEW PLAYERs you are going to get if any. If so Where are they NOW...
     
     
  8. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Distinct Mint in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    There're several things to pick up on in this DevBlog/Post, but the one I'd like to most highlight (as I think it relates to the best solution) is:
     
     
    Here "Would split the community" is only a temporary thing. Everyone who has proposed this as a possible solution has suggested that the split be created with new players (or those wanting to start anew) spawning in a new star system (including Haven), with the legacy server continuing in Helios, with no connection between the two systems. The temporary nature of the split is resolved after (say) 1 year, when players in both systems work to construct the "stargates" (or whatever mechanism NQ wishes to implement) to bring the two systems together, from which point everyone is on the same server again. (Or rather, they always were, but the start systems were not connected.)

    This process could require lots of quanta/materials from Helios and the old players that have more than the new ones, and it creates a very big in game event with huge publicity.
     
    The only down side here then, relates to the "number of new issues server-side", which we are not privvy to. But as we know multiple systems are intended anyway, this is a problem the dev team need to resolve at some point. And the benefits of doing so early (keeping all players very happy, including new ones, publicity etc) might outweight this effort.
  9. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Vellico in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    Basically any form of wipe after telling us no for 2 years, and id walk away. I don't see any path of fair restitution for ripping out of my hands everything i worked for without using exploits or shady bullshit since beta start when NQ told us no further wipe. i didn't like schematics at first, but its a reasonable mechanic that i work well with for my usage/needs now and could be handled by throttling them like using industry skills. but taking away what I've built in 2 years, which with current systems would take nearly 3 years to replace. And honestly wiping to give a level playing field will only make a difference for a month at best, before the knowledgeable people are back in a position of power
     
    I'm not unique in my opinion, and NQ will have to consider how many people will continue to play, or just give up and walk away because they were lied to. I backed in alpha so i haven't paid money monthly, but i would of been happy to of for all this time to aid in the games support. 
  10. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Shredder in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    Yeh I wasn’t aware schematics were hated, just the implementation. 
     
    If schematics go, then something else needs to replace them. Maybe talent based efficiencies to encourage people
    to specialise and use the market??
  11. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Physics in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    Apologies for the caps but the tone is intended. LEAVE TALENT POINTS OFF ANY WIPE DECISION JUST LIKE BLUEPRINTS.
     
    As for my opinion. If you must weigh pro and con list make it so Voxel only constructs survive the wipe. Make a warning pre-wipe if the construct will fail the check just like you did with element stacking.
     
    Pro - Builders can keep their hard voxel work and only have to replace the elements on the other side of the wipe.
    Pro - Far less Back Lash.
    Pro - Closes nearly all Loopholes apart from Voxel but Voxel will be the most easy to reproduce post wipe anyway so economic effect is very limited.
    Pro - Newbies can be instantly inspired by the veterans creations of the Beta period.
     
    Con - Some veterans will have to dig out ther buildings again.
    Con - Nq will have to add a small bit of effort to save the 1,000's of hours of work created by the community.
     
     
  12. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Kurock in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    I have never read a bigger pile of one-sided bullsh*t basically advocating for full wipe in order to easily do away with schematics.  Just announce the decision and get it over with.

    At beginning of beta it was announced "no more wipes except as required for updates" (like the mining update that was done).  So if NQ do decide to wipe, it would be yet another promise broken.  This also completely ignores that people have been paying monthly to play...

    As for "removing unfair advantage" and "level playing field". These are fallacies to help people sleep better at night.  The players with the know how will return to the positions of abundance they have now in short order.   There will always be "haves" and "have nots".   All a wipe does is a slap in the face of the people that put time into the game after being told a wipe would not happen.
     
    Make a system that creates schematics rather than remove them.  The problem with schematics, like the markets, is that they do not give player agency.  A player cannot make a schematic at all, they have to be bought.  Make science research a thing.

    Cons for wipe have already been mentioned:   As I said, the "NQ thoughts" are heavily aligned to a wipe disregarding promises and small details like leaving an empty world, avid supporters of the game just leave, and paying customers just get their stuff removed.  

    What a wipe also does is remove the history of DU such as it is... like Thoramine.  Deleting a piece of DU history like that is unforgivable.
  13. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to blazemonger in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    I do not get this post at all as it really does nothing as far as answering any of the questions. It is a PR/marketing answer which really does not help at all. As NQ plans to release the game in a few months, it would be _really_ bad if NQ has not yet made this decision and is working towards release with that choice in mind.
     
    It also makes things more convoluted and complex as in reality NQ has only two options:
     
    No wipe
    Not the prefrred option for me for most of the reasons explained in the post and in general I believe it woudl hurt the game long run and cretainly at  release.
    But I could live with  it if it happened
     
    Partial wipe
    Players get to keep blueprints and accrued points are retunred to the talent pool, world is wiped
    This I prefer to happen, it maintains the benefit for existing players in tha tey wil be able to jumpstart a new world with their tal;ents to be reassigtned as wanted
    It also allows players who used beta accounts to change their choices if the wipe happens shortly before release.
     
     
    A full wipe wil not be an option as NQ has charges people to play and taking away that time by removing any benefits from that woudl be at best unethical. A parallel server is just a very, very silly idea as NQ hardly has the resources to afford one cluster, let alone two
     
     
  14. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to vylqun in SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread   
    If ther eis a full wipe (which i would prefere) then there should be a way to regain the old talent points, because thats bascially what ppl paid for. Be it that they get all their TP back 2 months or so into the game, or an increase in TP/hour until the "legacy TP-pool" is empty or whatever.
  15. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to NQ-Naerais in Market Clean Up - Today!   
    Despite our recent efforts to expand and clear out Market 6, we are still getting reports about performance and clutter. We want to assure our players that we understand your frustration and are still working to find better permanent solutions. 
     
    Meanwhile, we will be addressing clutter across Alioth this weekend. Our plan is as follows:
    Dynamic constructs that have not had direct interaction with their owner over a set duration (currently 30 days*) will be hidden.  Constructs at the market that violate our rules,  Code of Conduct and EULA will be removed.
    If your construct is hidden, you can unhide (recover) it by using the Fetch tool. To do this, right-click on it in the Construct list on your Map screen. Any constructs that you own, whether visible or hidden, will appear on this list.
     
    Fetch functionality now works for organization-owned constructs as well. For hidden constructs that belong to your organization, your legates can retrieve them via that same functionality. 
     
    Our customer support team is at the ready if you still need assistance recovering your constructs. Simply ping our Live Support staff in the in-game help chat with “@GM” or file a ticket on our support page and we will dispatch help right away!
     
    Please note that this is intended only as a temporary measure to aid performance and improve your experience when visiting these areas. 
     
    We look forward to seeing the results from these changes over the weekend.
     
    May your frames be plenty.
     
     
    *Duration may change based on our findings 
  16. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Underhand Aerial in DevBlog 4 - Rebalancing the Universe   
    Vielleicht ist ja mittlerweile ein neuer CM in Aussicht ?

    Ich würde sehr gerne NQ mehr helfen und nicht nur ich, sehr viele Leute würden sehr gerne bei Übersetzungen helfen. Wäre echt schade, wenn wir die große deutsche Community nicht nutzen ? Dabei mein ich nicht nur hier bei den DevBlogs, sondern auch im Spiel. 
  17. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Lexatris in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    "The long-term goal is to enrich the Mission system with more mission types, starting with “taxi” missions, SoS, and later adding PvP and various other “formalizable” activities. For now, we’re introducing the Mission system with transport-type hauling missions. "

    "(Please note that the UI for the Mission system is still in progress. The images below are samples of what it will look like.)"
     
    Why release an unfinished mission system? This sounds great and all but would be nice if you would release it when its ready. This is the perfect example of something you release on a test server first, make tweaks and perfect, then release on the live server.
  18. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Makashima in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    If you want to just compare things back to other games, then Elite;Dangerous, No Mans Sky, Empyrion, Everspace and many more are just rip-offs from Eve.

    Of course some games will have similar features to others. If the feature works for the game, then why not have it also? Seems like common sense to me.

    As for half-done: Why would we want the exact same system that CCP uses for Eve, in DU? Do we have NPC space stations and such for the pre-set destinations? Also, player constructs usually consist of many cores, so would you list ALL the players cores in the game as pre-set destinations to choose from? Seems rather silly to me... I'm glad they are implementing a basic version and then tailoring it to DU's style that straight up copying another games setup.


    Now, my question is if they will consider being able to create 'Loans' to players, so that you can help someone invest in something and they agree to pay it back (and maybe with interest) over time? Giving, say a construct they have or items as collateral...
  19. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Kruzer in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    Overall, this is great news a mission system will potentially give players something to do but with the game as it is it may not be enough. 
     
    I don't know about pirating missions. There is no pirating in this game just murder.  The combat mechanic is so horrible that basically once you've been targeted/scanned and your warp drive is reset, you are done.  The balance of risks is terrible you can lose weeks of work mining ore and getting a large hauler just to lose it to some guy who slapped some guns on a box.  On the other side, killing another ship is basically just getting into range and button pushing.  The only real purpose of "combat" in this game is basically just a harmless outlet for psychopaths.
     
  20. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Elitez in [Discussion] DevBlog: The Mission System   
    How will the scoring system work ?

    My only concern...Point/Reward/Scoring system. How do you reward somebody knowing you can abuse the system since day 1 with alts, org alts, friend's alts, friend of friend alts, etc?!!?!

    Scoring/Value system will have problems if with 1 account you can Create Missions and Vote multiple OTHER accounts on daily basis. How will the scoring system work ?
  21. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Dupont in Poetic justice for schematic abusers   
    I believe the easiest, cleanest, and painless (for the innocent) way to deal with the "low cost" schematic debacle is to simply reverse the transactions from the market logs.
     
    For everyone that purchased an affected schematic during the time when they were 1/100 of their normal price, simply subtract 99% of the normal price from their account. If the person still has that schematic, then they can sell it on the open market.
     
    If they don't have the money in that account anymore due to money laundering, then it should be allowed to go negative so they can work off their greed.
  22. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Dupont in Poetic justice for schematic abusers   
    Well then you will end up paying the same amount for that schematic as everyone else. If you really need it then keep it and use it.
     
    If you purchased it for making illegal profit and laundered it at a discount then oh well. You either get to pay off the discount or stop using that account.
     
    If you are truly in the business of buying and selling schematics then you should be aware of the prices. Your argument is kinda weak.
  23. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to le_souriceau in NQ Your lack of action regarding the schematic fiasco is disturbing   
    In way I feel, that this flawed "internal" thing actualy degraded CMs to "just  messangers". Like Naunet at fist attempted to be our real CM in way (with some success, because people welcomed this short-lived change very warmly), but looks like somewhere during Christmas/New Year she was whiped back into silence, as "normal" NQ communication goes for years now.
     
    We have 5 CMs (or more?), but I have no slightest idea what they all doing (besided Pann, who likely workind with surviving half-dozen DU streamers or something).
     
    Sure, they may be doing something super-cool in secret, but...
  24. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to bleakcon in NQ Your lack of action regarding the schematic fiasco is disturbing   
    If they have the necessary metadata, part of my little essay questioned whether they have. This is why this is so disturbing, it transcends the event itself and gives us an unsettling insight into what is and is not possible, obviously the decision making speaks for itself but that is damned disturbing too.

    This isn't a game issue, this is a company issue and that is worse in my opinion.
  25. Like
    Heidenherz reacted to Leogradance in Analysis of why some people left after patch 0.23   
    I played with a new group of players who joined DU for the first time after the release of 0.23
    Just one / two days later.
    I felt their fantastic enthusiasm die a little at a time crashing into bugs, optimization completely absent (one of them has a PC for work with which he runs Cyberpunk at ultra and fixed 60fps: DU snaps them ...) countless ships destroyed by docking mechanics, lethal manouver tools, endless loading and handling of game problems ... nonexistent -> impossible to reach markets.
    When the technical assistance put the umpteenth ticket of one of them on hold indefinitely (after a week they still have not said anything) they started to abandon the game.
    And the same thing happened to 2 other groups of players in the last year.
    The problem with DU is not 0.23.
    DU's problem is NQ.
    Contradictory communications, advertising bordering on deceptive (we all know how they presented the game for the launch of the beta ...), lack of communication with the community.
    I understand that they are short of breath and that they are trying to save the shack.
    But they are doing it bad.
    Really bad.
×
×
  • Create New...