Jump to content

Everywon

Member
  • Content Count

    3
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. My preference, beyond crash damage being excluded from destruction until there is a better ship building/analysis UI, would be to have a ship repair suite. This would potentially be multiple machines (even multiple core sizes depending on the ship/parts). They could use scrap or materials/parts to fully repair a nearby/linked ship. Perhaps in this approach, cores/parts could be nanocrafter-repaired only three times or lose 10-20% efficiency each nanocrafter repair, before needing to be machine repaired. I would prefer not to have mobile repair kits or anything requiring extra time to create. The current repair system of rushing back to a downed ship with nanocrafter/scrap and then using onboard scrap from repaired containers is already complex enough. My current ship takes 4.5hrs to repair with T1 scrap (done that three times before trying some T3 scrap). This has been more than enough punishment/cost for crashing each time - even with keeping container contents and ship. It may be strictly realistic to have a ship/contents destroyed permanently on impact/crashing but, as a game, the current system is already a gut-wrenching enough experience. It may also be realistic to lose cargo or limp home but they add even more insult to injury. So, I think NQ should balance strict realism with enjoyable/challenging gameplay. To introduce complexity into repairs for crashing, it may help to lock the ownership of a crashed core to the player for some time (eg 8/12/24 hours) to allow time to return from anywhere in the galaxy and repair (and create any complex repair items needed). I don't support the extra complexity but this could be a compromise approach if NQ was to go down that path. For PVP, noting that it is consensual at the moment, I would be quite happy to immediately/completely lose any ships committed to PVP outside a safe zone. To encourage leaving the safe zone, the rewards should be much higher than in the safe zone (eg rarer ores). Finally, it may be worth considering more intensive tutorials with flying tests to pass, even to unlock some talents/core/parts access. If someone has demonstrated the skills to fly a heavier ship, operate space engines or a warp core or even operate weapons, then these sorts of proposed damage/destruction limits could be easier to accept.
  2. In PVP, fine on the damage/destruction, though i'm not anywhere near getting into PVP in this game yet. However, for PVE, I would strongly suggest that the UI/UX is considerably improved from its current state before implementing permanent crash damage. Currently, I am at a stage of flying a hauler ship around Alioth and have travelled in space to mine elsewhere. I have a warp drive and just setup a factory to churn out a reasonable number of warp cells. Not an early-backer, just subscribed a few weeks ago. So, the issues that I have centre on having little to no idea of the capabilities of a ship as it is built. The beta currently has a build guide to whether there is or is not a problem with atmospheric or space flight but there is very little guidance on, for example, how much cargo mass a ship can handle. I have crashed the ship a number of times, usually when it the L container is full (eg 500-650t). I have happily gone to nearby planets and moons and managed to take off due to steady atmospheric flight or low gravity and then plummeted through the surface of Alioth (as many of us would have done). So, my current approach in this game (very different from Eve and other games) is to experiment with ship builds and to try to gather minerals and expand factories. If PvE/crash damage is implemented without a better UI, it would heavily impact my gameplay and I would likely spend a lot more time elsewhere (Space Engineers and Eve) until there is a better balance that allows me to build things and be confident about their characteristics before taking off rather than once I am rushing back with scrap to repair each smoking wreckage. Please consider improving the build info/experience before implementing PVE/crash damage. That said, I really like DU and think it has a huge amount of potential to grow.
  3. Agree, P2P for any meaningful development and customer support (and definitely no pay-to-win). The current/beta model of charging 50-70% of the subscription price of the biggest western MMOs is what drew me to this game and will keep me here. I see it as fair and affordable for an enjoyable game.
×
×
  • Create New...