NQ-Naunet

These are awesome!!!

@Eternal, I'm SO sorry to hear that you contracted it. (Glad you're okay, but wow... the bit about your nails!! I can only imagine how irritating that must be.) This year has been... insane, to say the very least.

Thanks for continuing to deliver quality feedback, everyone.

'Pus Monk' sounds like the name of a garage punk band! ? @GraXXoR

While we really regret to see that you're not enjoying yourself, we invite you to submit a ticket to discuss the matter further.

?

?

?

? Great suggestion!

Hey everyone! I wanted to kick off this section of the forums by inviting you to post about your fave in-game creations. If you've made something you're really proud of, we'd really like to see!! Take care, and happy Monday!

We've got a Q&A scheduled with JC very soon (that I'll be part of!) - I will bring this set of questions to him. If he can't answer on-air, I will try to at least get his thoughts and bring them back here.

Sorry for the delay - it was a crazy busy day for me.

Happy Friday, Noveans! I'm coming to you with a few more answers/clarifications for your reading pleasure. I really appreciated everyone's patience while I rode the merry-go-round of feedback handling. Alright, let's dive in! To start, I think it's prudent to address the question of "why did you make a tool change without fixing [insert bug description here] first?" As predictable/banal as this may sound to some, it's worth saying; while we are forever working hard to fix *all* current bugs, certain issues will be looked at before others. We deeply respect your opinions about our priorities (NQ is especially fortunate to have a community full of game-dev-savvy people), but we simply won't be able to please everyone no matter what direction we take. We ask that you continue to trust in the internal knowledge we have (combined with your feedback) when it comes to bug fixes paralleling feature development and/or changes. Alt+F4: As many of you are relieved to see, we fixed a longstanding limitation to the feeling of continuity in DU; quitting the game should never stop a ship! The recent changes we've made ensure that as soon as any player sees a construct, that construct will remain visible to everyone in the vicinity. So, using Alt+F4 during a fight will no longer 'freeze' your ship. Instead, she'll still be simulated for any other player who is still there. (And if nobody is around you, you won't have to worry about a thing!) By making this change, we hope to prevent players from "gaming the system" using Alt+F4. Of course, we'll be keeping a close eye on your feedback and will rebalance things accordingly to make sure this gameplay pillar keeps retains its depth! Regarding the 50m restriction: Based on feedback from all of you, this has been increased to 128m, which is the size of the largest build zone! As for concerns about moving unwanted constructs from player-owned tiles go (@casegard): We've seen some solid points raised about how the maneuver tool was being used to clear away constructs - the scenario quoted above being a great example. We're currently thinking hard about a viable solution for this! AGG: As mentioned previously in this thread, the intended meta for AGG will reveal itself in 'atmo PvP'. We acknowledge that it currently functions as a temporary solution for hauling heavy loads from the ground into space, and that players like to leave their ships hovering above their base. We will consider formally implementing an “anchoring” at high altitude feature in the future! I sincerely hope this has been helpful to everyone, but please continue to deliver your (welcome) feedback here. Have an excellent weekend!!

Hi there! We're aware of the issue some players are experiencing with logging in/loading. It seems to be related to a recent Windows update - have you recently updated Windows?

Not yet, but it hasn't been forgotten about!

Good question! I'll find out.

I understand that there's a lot of hot debate centered around this DevBlog (which is AOK), but I do not like the escalating language & mild flaming I'm seeing in this thread - those in violation of the rules have been moderated, but to the rest reading this: please be civil.

First up I'm here to respond to this, as promised! @vertex I'll paraphrase the answer I received from JC: "Having a ship 'parked' and frozen above your base is not the intended use of AGG. A ship using AGG should ideally be parked in orbit or on the ground, as AGG's true benefit is in allowing ships to navigate at ~1000m in the atmosphere. For future missions that require altitude consideration, this is where AGG will shine." So 1) your design will be somewhat invalidated by this change, yes, and 2) if you still plan to keep your ship parked above your base, equipping it with powerful engines and carrying a lot of fuel will be the thing to do. I hope this answers your question!

Hey all! I'm back and getting caught up on the replies that have come in since my last visit to this thread.

My shift is coming to a close, but I'm not going to forget to reply to this! Stay tuned.

So based on what I've read so far here and on Discord, these are my main takeaways: Many players are concerned that the Alt+F4-stop-and-login-to-instantly-regain-speed workaround will potentially be used as an exploit piloting maneuver during PvP, giving those that use it an overpowered advantage. While some players are feeling comfortable with the maneuver tool distance restriction, many are requesting an increase of up to ~250m to accommodate bigger elements such as L Cores. There are some concerns about moving unwanted constructs from player-owned tiles. That there are some bugs that should have been addressed before NQ nerfed the maneuver tool. Please let me know if there's anything I need to add to the list!

I'm going to take a crack at summarizing the feedback I've received so far - I invite everyone to pile on and let me know if I've missed anything! Hang tight... it's-a-comin'...!

I'm curious - I've been seeing a lot of chatter about the 50m restriction; some players really want this increased, and others are saying "no, please leave it at 50!!". What are the arguments for/against having the 50m restriction?

You're the best. Thank you for this explanation!

I am somewhat of a newbie because I've only been at the company for a few weeks now. General gameplay doesn't elude me (because I play DU and have played similar games in the past), but when we get into workarounds and bugs I'm still trying to get the lay of the land. When DevBlogs like this drop, I like to *really* understand what all of you went through pre and post changes, you know? That's why I'm asking for people to handle me with kid gloves in this thread. I really want to know the full story - it'll only serve to improve my responses in the future!