Zarcata

That is not possible. Deckard has already ruled it out purely in terms of time. Of course, if I continue to learn these talents after the release, they will be available to me "at some point", my question refers specifically to this change and the loss related to it, when I have reached the corresponding limits with the patch, the skill possibilities. It is therefore not possible to save my cores with only character slots when it comes to at least 80 or 125 slots.

Thanks for the quick feedback. I really don't want to be a nuisance, but I am concerned that players will create organisations again just because of these slots and the faster availability. Is this really the way it should be? I would like to protect my buildings regardless of the talents of an organisation and limit myself to the talents of the character slots. How far would I get with this, i.e. how many core slots can I secure with this?

@NQ-Deckard I have a question of understanding. So if I use the refunded points to get my back to core places, which ones exactly are you talking about in your example? Are these 80 or 125 core places then the character places common or about the organisation slot? Or are the points just enough to get a mix of the two? I only ask because I would then focus on the character slots and wonder how many of them I can unlock in time, so how many cores I have to delete now then. I apologise if there are any misunderstandings due to the translations.

There is the developer let's call him NQ There are investors, i.e. those who support the developers with a lot of money, but then also want to earn money from it. There are players, let's call them customers, and thus at the end of the chain actually those who are at the beginning of the chain. It's always a kind of balance of developer-investor and customer. If one of the three pillars is gone or weakens, the construct collapses. That a kind of "negotiation" has taken place over the cores, clearly this is assessed as "no" in order to save the face of the developers. Nevertheless, the customer's request to provide more cores for gaming was met. Customer orientation is very important in many areas. Without customers, there is no income. Without income, no investors who then want to enrich themselves from the profit. Who would buy shares if a company went bankrupt? Unless, that is, one secures a majority and takes over the company. But hey, it doesn't really matter, the investors here are not directly interested in DualUniverse, but in the technology behind it....which I find interesting as a customer and as an investor, but at the moment I don't believe that it can really cope with masses or that it can even be affordable for masses. But, to answer your question again, NQ has opened the topic for the forum. They revealed their idea with the core limitation to us and we should express our opinion about it. Many players did that and it was taken into account. So in the second modified form, the players' opinions were taken into account and at the same time we were asked again to give our opinion and have a discussion about it. I took this accordingly and participated in the discussion again. That this discussion now promptly ends with the fact that one does not want any opinions or further discussions, although this was formulated in the forum, can be seen as one likes. Since Deckard has now made it clear that the maximum number of slots is 100/100. So basically any further discussion is superfluous, right? So if our feedback had no weight, I would save my valuable time here in the forum, no problem.

I had simply made a request and received an answer accordingly: The question: Die Antwort von NQ-Deckard:

I would like to point out here purely for information from the Discord, in case not everyone reads along there and this information is missing here. My question to NQ was: The answer came from NQ-Deckard (Thanks Deckard, for the quick feedback). https://discord.com/channels/184691218184273920/304455542162587649/937300647903109150

So, now that the second proposal from NQ with the core limit changes is on the table, and they do look better than the first offer. It remains to be seen whether the offer will be left as it is or whether further negotiations will take place. I would very much like to have more private character slots to choose from, the 100 are simply too few for players who want to play the game over a very long period of time. Some already have well over that limit. Of course, one could now say that a player could also -again- create an org at the same time in order to get the other 100 slots, but that wouldn't solve the problem of players only creating organisations because of the slots. I therefore ask NQ to drastically increase the number of private character slots so that the org slots do not have to be used for private cores. At the same time, attention should be paid to how intensive the talents are designed to be, so that they are worth the skilling and the points compared to an organisation. (Currently, many players are skilling an organisation and not the character slots, because the org is faster, cheaper and allows far more slots). I also ask that NQ introduce a separate "builder subscription" due to the cost intensity, which offers far more free building core slots, but also costs 5,-€ more per month as an example. But this skill system does NOTHING to help the players, who will already lose many things NOW because of the update, if it should come like this. A sensible solution must be found NOW. If NQ is only going to make it about how many skill points a builder has to invest there, then PLEASE, reset all the talent points so I can invest right there to protect my builds.

The problem is that both types of core are visible and must therefore be calculated. It would make more sense if you could store your dynamic constructs in a ship menu, including image preview and evaluation. When you need it, you click on it to activate it and it is put in front of you. All other ships are parked in this menu "like in a garage". The same can be done with voxel libraries, a menu where I can help myself when I need something. This also saves having lots of constructs standing around.

I have now deliberately not clicked on this link, so I can neither determine investors there, nor see how much capital is involved at all. If it were a question of reasonable and real large sums, what would prevent an investor from actively taking this money into his hands now in order to support a development studio? We can all see that it doesn't seem to be working here at NQ and that the game has been developing in a different direction for years - why wait for a low-cost entry opportunity when you could have started long ago? If it's only virtual money, try exchanging it for real money, depending on how large these sums are, it's not always so easy to find real equivalents for them.

It would make more sense if the protection zones of the outer PVP planets and moons were to fall at the same time as the taxes there. It makes no sense to pay taxes in the PvP area. In the protection zone - OK, you can finance the shields with the protection fee...

and what about the moons?

There are already beautiful cities, what makes it a bit unattractive is the performance as soon as a city gets a bit bigger, whether through a lot of details or too many cores or too much terraforming. For me, it would be interesting to see if the technology can even handle the game - we've experienced so many limitations recently, no improvement has been made as a result. Why don't you come and visit Hyp City? ::pos{0,2,16.6215,111.9266,0.0000}

How does NQ envision the game? That we all just have a base, make some elements and voxels there to build small PvP ships and then immediately fly into the PvP zone to fight each other? Whoever dies first lands back on their base and can "quickly" set a new BP and fly to battle again? Shit, and I really thought we were supposed to build cities-villages-an entire civilisation that is full of great creative masterpieces, each building can present its builder in its own way, and from walking through the area and looking at everything you can only marvel at what players could create. I'm currently in the process of tearing down cores again, abandoning my plans for a Borg construct, because I'm simply already way over the corelimit and I would otherwise lose everything. At the moment I wouldn't even care about the loss, because I'm not even sure if DualUniverse is still the game I want to play - I might be better off in Minecraft.

Are the current changes fixed and you want to have feedback on them or can we also negotiate further with good reasons? Please take a close look at all the figures. Many players have not skilled their character slots at all, but have founded one or more orgs and skilled the slots there. It was quicker and easier to get many more cores than with the character slots. I would also like to ask you to pay attention to large-scale projects such as the AAE of Hyperion, which is now endangered. are there plans to add more slots via the core limit in an ingameshop or via subscription directly, if you then pay for it with real money, to compensate for the financial inequalities or difficulties that a few more cores trigger?

I had suggested this a very long time ago, in the meantime my basis has arrived in space via copy-paste - that was a feat of strength. Due to the new core limit, I now have to delete some of the cores again. Would generally be in favour of a selection of BP, in which form you want to summon it (static-Space-Dynamic). But it would also make sense to be able to dismantle an entire core via "collect all" and disassemble it into the inventory. It takes an enormous amount of time to dismantle 100 cores, for example, just because the core limit has been changed again.

Why can't we just get a menu and store our BP of all kinds there? Even in WoW I can look at hundreds of mounts or pets in an overview and use them as needed. There are no mounts standing around everywhere....

What exactly is so great about DualUniverse? So, in its current or soon to come state? The best content is building via voxels, if you are aware that you are relatively limited in this, depending on how much time you want to put into the game. We should first clarify what DualUniverse really is and stop chasing the dream of that time. I am sure that so many new players will then no longer be attracted.

If a player gives away his 100 Org seats to an organisation, then later his subscription expires because he no longer wants to play, does the Org then have to somehow beg for new 100 Core seats?

Will there be in-game assistance from GMs in deleting or dismantling the costructs?

At no point were the coreslots infinite! This always seems to be an interesting misunderstanding. I tried to test it several times, with full org skills. So you could put all constructs up to the cap and that for a maximum of 5 organisations. As soon as you tried to create a sub-organisation and set another core there, there was always a warning message saying that the cap had already been reached in the main organisation. What worked was to create more and more sub-organisations in order to take more and more territories. For example, you could only claim the first 3-4 cheap territories per suporg and simply create more sub or subsuborgs.

Charakter-Slots: 2 (unskilled) Charackter-Core-Limit: 275 (full-skill) Expandable: +10 Core-slots a 5,-€ ingameshop maximum: 1.000 slots Org-Slots: 0 (unskilled) Org-slots: 1575 (full-skilled) each Member +75 max

But it does not solve the problem that a player then creates an organisation for himself. Why do they want to introduce these skills for an organisation? If a player needs more core spaces of his own, these extensions must be made possible for the character, not for the organisation. In the theme itself, we have several problems that need to be solved at the same time. we should always keep that in mind. - Players who want to build (for themselves) - Players who want to build together (as an organisation) - Players who create organisations even though they don't need one, just to get coreslots. - Players who join organisations and leave them again (according to the new system, they can cause damage). - Players and organisations that build so much that it becomes a financial aspect (real money) - Performance of too many constructs -......

It will show that players do many things. On the one hand, to find variety for themselves and, on the other hand, because some of the content they want to play has other content as part of it. The game now consists of dependencies. Player A wants to build an industry because he likes industrial plants. - So he has to get quanta, because industry requires expensive schematics. - He must therefore also skill according to the industry in order to be competitive. - He needs raw materials - he needs quanta for taxes Means he "must" do things to be able to play what he wants in the end. I'll take "me" as an example. I came into this game for one reason: I want to build something. (A Borg-style city) I didn't need any quanta, no schematics...I just had to collect some ores, convert them into voxels in the nanocrafter and start building. I decided how much ore to mine and when. I could continue building accordingly. Quite one-sided, but I planned on needing at least 10-15 years in the game to reach my goal. In general, however, there are also many players who are very divided. Today they want to build, tomorrow they want to do PvP, the day after tomorrow they'd rather do a dungeon and on the weekend something completely different again. So players' interests vary, once individually and once depending on the game content. DualUniverse is very badly positioned in this respect, because it can simply satisfy too few interest groups and there is no symbiosis between the interest groups. One could argue that DualUniverse only appeals to a small, very specific target group, but still tries to achieve goals that should attract a large mass. For me, this is a contradiction.

It is partly understandable. It is a problem that players form an organisation just to get to the core seats. This problem is now mitigated because an organisation only gives 15-10 places. This creates a new problem because the private slots are too few and players are now founding organisations again in order to get to these 15+10 slots. If the private slots were more plentiful, there would be no need for an organisation. (I had already written this several times, as an example 275 core slots skilled, expandable up to 1,000 core slots through an ingameshop. +10 core slots cost a one-time fee of 5,-€. limit with 1,000 slots it would be a maximum of 362.50€ for +725 slots (those who really need it should pay, if this is really a financial problem on the part of NQ. Alternatively, one could also introduce a "premium subscription" that already includes the 1,000 core slots and then the subscription costs 5-10 € more per month.

That will not be a solution! The problem will be that as soon as the multiplier is set in the skills system, it will again be seen as a duty for players, as every player can then get these core places for themselves through skills. So it would be the same problem as now, that players only use organisations for themselves. The solution here would be: Increase the private character slots drastically as compensation. Then make it possible to donate character slots to an organisation in addition to the 15+10 org slots. We want to move away from characters creating their own org for slots. At the same time, however, it should be possible for an organisation to determine exactly which cores must be removed in the event of a loss; the organisation needs control over a core loss in order to rule out cheating. That's why I would also suggest that an organisation should have 4 weeks to remove cores and not just 2 weeks.