Penwith

Again, After two hours, automatically dump the ship's cargo, if any, in to the market container nearby. Turn the ship into a special token and also put that into the market container. The special token can only be used in the same hex as the market container it was pulled from and only one such token can be used every 24 hours. This not only gets rid of the mess, but also prevents players from exploiting tokenized ships with cargo. It's all still gotta be hauled away and players cannot simply log on every 2.1 hours to replace their crap, in the way of people actually playing the game. It is not so restrictive that players who have a RL situation and have to log out unexpectedly are penalized as it has no cost to them at all. If they know they are going to have to leave, they can leave the market and go back to their base.

I'd get rid of whiny, salty, toxic players and go after more sensible folks who can think outside the box, not focusing purely on parts of the game that are not fleshed out and then demanding their specific playstyle be catered to immediately, at the expense of nearly everything else. But since that won't happen, here we are.

Yes, I am enjoying the game, very much so. I am producing lots of concrete (12 refineries at once) and building for hours a day. Some of that is design and layout, but as I get the foundations sorted, it will be constant construction. I've placed 13 static L cores in the past few days, adding to the dozen I'd already put down, and am having at it, when not working in RL.

I play solo, almost 100%, and I am still playing, still building, still traveling to other planets. Unplayable, this is not.

At the moment only. Depending on how players go, things could easily change. Also, the 10% was just an example only, it could be 1% for all I care. I am and was more looking at new players who need a have a chance to get their feet wet with various aspects of the game, for less cost. Also, 1-use schematics received as rewards have zero volume and mass, making them easily transportable and better for folks to deal with than trying to fit larger and heavier items into our pockets or cramped storage containers (which is usually a big problem for the average starting player).

I hear ya. I am sure money making opportunities will come, but it may not be in time for many. Were this this situation at or after full-release, then it would be a disaster. As it is, being that there's very likely 18-24 months (at minimum) of further development before release, there's time.

And in my explanation, I gave reasons why I believe your suggestion would need to be changed to someone more in line with what I stated. In either case, we both know NQ won't be doing it.

This is what I was referring to. The value of their ship should not even be considered in the discussion. The higher reward should come from, and only from, the fact that they delivered and sold more of the same good than someone who delivered and sold less. Doesn't matter. The time investment, apart from that of shipping, would still remain. And honestly, the 5-10 minutes of shipping to a market to sell the goods isn't going to break the game. I imagine that, at the very least, players with small industry would love a chance to sell goods to the market. That your recommendation was used elsewhere doesn't matter; apples and oranges. Many of the mechanisms that work in EVE, for example, would not work well here at all. If anything, the closest comparison would have to be Starbase, but their current economy suffers from near-hyper inflation (and a few other things), so even that is problematic. Also, in my qualifier, the sale price of the market goods would follow the formula used to set the current buy price of ores. They can scale up, from that baseline, to be sure, but tagging it to a player-made item (warp cells in your example) is going to cause problems as players, especially larger orgs, will certainly manipulate the market in order to cause the price to change for their benefit. While they can do that now, to a certain extent, they cannot directly cause the bot purchase price of ore to change. Lastly, my qualifier would need to use a steady trickle of demand, probably by the hour, instead of a daily dump that is quickly fulfilled by the most industrial. This would mean that demand would exist throughout the whole day, with player actions determining whether or not it gets filled. If not, the buy price increases slightly, otherwise it remains unchanged. Again, this could easily be tied into the mission system, with an increase in reward for the more distant planets based on how that system allocates rewards.

Except, you completely ignore or discredit the fact that enterprising players could run to these other planets, buy the schematics not available on Alioth, fly back to Alioth, and sell them through the market for a profit. If you use the support chat, because that's the only global chat right now, you may even find someone willing to make such a trip for a given price, on top of the costs for the schematics. Your jealousy of those who have wealth in the game is blinding you to the possibilities and opportunities.

You do need to account for the cost to program this in. What takes less resources, less cycles, and less man-hours is the most likely route, because of budgets. One does not need a 1billion ship to ship goods anywhere, players choose to do so. Thus, the reward method is much too high in your calculation. Someone delivering 10,000l of Item X will stand to make more profit than someone delivering 1,000L, the more efficient the ship, the more % in profit, but the absolute numbers will, of course, fall on the side of the one delivering more at once. Ignore the ship being used by the player to make a delivery in your calculations (and argument) of risk/reward. The real consideration would be is the demand being met on time? If someone orders 1000 of something, they don't care if it goes by plane, boat, truck, or a person walking it to the door, as long as it arrives on time and is unlikely to be delayed in shipment. Businesses care about such things due to efficiencies in cost to ship vs weight of goods shipped, but that would be for the player doing the deliveries in-game to take into account, not the game itself. Where this applies in your example and my qualifier, is that we are both talking about a mechanic that does not follow the design philosophy of the game, and so would very likely be used as a temporary crutch until the game is ready for full release, and perhaps a short time after. Therefore, any such addition have to be viewed in that light. Why I think that actual items that are produced through the assemblers, instead of bots, is that 1) all player types, except perhaps for builders, are involved, and 2) these items may potentially serve other uses down the road, as the game grows and expands, with more content. If players are creating these goods, then people will need to mine, others will need to use industry, others will need to haul them, and pvpers/pirates will sell them if looted from their victims. While any one player can choose to do all of these, many do not like to mine at all. Others will find the industrial side either too costly or time-consuming, etc. Thus a mechanism that hits all the buttons is better than one that ignores two out of the four archtypes I mentioned above. It a bot sells the item, then there's no need to mine for the goods or for an industrial player to produce them. Also, this can be dove-tailed into the upcoming mission system, where contracts for these market goods could be issued to and fulfilled by players, as a mission. They could even be set up to where a player with a smaller cargo ship can meet the contract in multiple trips and not just one. I could continued with further explanation, but will leave it here. I think your idea has potential, just not in the way you set it up. Which is why I added my qualifier.

I think for this type of thing, it would be better for an industrial production based on "needs" of a planetary NPC population (that we don't see but are assumed to be present somewhere). So, Alioth and Sanctuary would have a set demand, that would fluctuate based on how well previous demand has been met, plus a random variable. These would be market goods, and could either be a single item, or be classified as "food, "dry goods," "hardware," etc. This would give something to people to make in order to sell for a modest profit, but would be limited in order to reduce its potential to be exploited. As the game progresses, other planets and moons could have an NPC base placed on it, that would also need these types of goods, again for a steady source of income. I imagine off-planet locations would make for profitable traderuns for dedicated haulers. As the market stabilizes, this particular crutch could be progressively withdrawn as new content is added; content which provides income opportunities. At the same time, I'd rather see bot purchases of ores go away, entirely, as the market goods would serve the same purpose, but not directly determine the price of t1 ores (player's should be doing that). A point of clarification: These market goods would be single items, not a container of anything, just "Hardware" at 1L each and a mass (to be determined). The number of these should be kept fairly low, perhaps up to five, with higher tiers of ores producing more in a batch. I suggest there's no set volumes for anything beyond 1L worth per item, as this allows players of all kinds and carrying capacities to participate, with less hassle. This suggestion is made as a qualifier to yours, as I think bots producing anything is bad (beyond schematics) as is the bots directly effecting the prices of goods on what is supposed to be a player-driven market. Sure, the same materials go into my suggested market goods as other player-made items, but that's an indirect effect.

Single use, because it would be a LOT cheaper than a full-use schematic, and this would allow for some industrialists to do one-off production runs, but would not be efficient (since talents would not apply). My intent with 3 was to provide the schematic for the usable element, not the parts that went into its creation. If enough of these special event schematics were out there, then people could play the markets with them, trying to either complete the set (of those schematics needed to create the end product) or sell what they do have, in order to create cash for themselves. Again, the long-term efficiency and ultimately market prices of goods would be more based on the economies of scale and efficiency found through the full-use schematics, but finding a bargain here and there from one-use schematics could and should be a thing. This last part is especially true since NQ would know exactly how many one-use schematics they seeded in the events and could track them as they are used. This is no more game breaking for markets than finding a wreck and pulling expensive elements off of that, so it should be acceptable to most everyone.

As I continue to ponder and consider the long-term ramifications of the patch, and how it directly affects game play for beginning players (which I will state as lasting as long as a month, depending on the frequency and extent of their play sessions), it would likely be a very good idea to have a few different options for schematics, which would be in addition to the post-.23 mechanics. These, of course, would be limited to t1, maybe t2, but I think there's something to be said for making them available. 1) Single-Use schematics. These would help new players, but also a little more established players who are still finding their feet in the game and who have not yet fully committed to a career as an industrialist. The schematics for these would cost about 10% of the cost for a full schematic, and not benefit from any of the industry/crafting talents the player might possess. With this, people would have an option do work with the industry side of things before making their long-term play-style decisions. 2) Package deals. These should be limited to a one-time purchase only, but for each. I suggest 3 different themed packaged deals, centering around taking the starter speeder to a space-capable flyer, ground facility construction, and storage (S-sized containers). With these, beginning players would have the opportunity to "test the waters" on how industry works, beyond the very brief tutorials, and immediately improve their circumstances as a new player. More established players could use them, in the short-term, to ever so slightly buff their current production capabilities following the trauma of the patch's power-down switch. 3) Game events that give all players the chance to discover a small cache of schematics or purchase rare schematics that are one-use. I can see a a lucky event participant coming across a rare t5 weapon schematic, trying to decide whether to sell it for an easy 200million or holding on to it for when creating a pvp purposed ship.

Yes, it does, otherwise it would be EVE. For every action, there is a counter, or should be/needs to be. Avoidance of combat is even more effective than any armor ever devised, as a means to survive. The game is not designed or intended to funnel every hauler into the pathway of people whose sole intent is to take and destroy the fruits of their labors.

Well, they are taking care of that talent reset right now, so that is a step forward. The other buffs, although temporary, to selling ore will also be helpful. As I've posted elsewhere, we should expect tweaks and adjustments, some that we like and probably some we won't, to the industry and market systems. In looking at the meganodes, I am not so sure it is truly a nerf. Unless those nodes were confirmed to be physically there, it may be that the scans were misreporting based on the bug associated with the structure of the node. I know of people who were chasing after meganodes that they never found, not even a small part of it left over. So, I am holding out the possibility that many of the nodes that the scans showed us, were not actually present at all. I am not saying in every case, but from talking with a few others, it seems that this may be the case for at least a good number of them. Also, they have, in the road map, a planned new distribution of ore, so it may be that ores get an overhaul across the board. It should happen, in my opinion, because the scattered t2s don't make any sense to me. I think that plantes should all have t1 and t2 ores present, just in varying degrees. t3 and t4 should be found on certain types of planets only, but also in varying degrees, both should be present. t5 (and perhaps if they go t6 and above) should be very rare and only on specific types of planets. Where large concentrations (meganodes) of t3-t5 should guaranteed is in the asteroids. So, most everywhere else, you find at least most of the tiers present in at least small amounts, with a very rare chance of a larger or meganode, with guaranteed large and meganodes in the asteroid fields. Doing this will cause a lot more people and pvpers to have reason to be out there in some numbers, which would expand game opportunities and possibilities.

As a former Goon, your search and loot system is of more benefit to a large org, than it would be to small orgs and solo players. If the schematics were closed, except to those lucky enough to discover them, then there would still be an outcry, probably on a much wider scale. The real issue is the balance between the cost to starting industry vs time invested in the game. If industry were viewed in the way it should be, in my opinion, it would be seen as mid-game to late-game, instead of early-game. Which is the heart of the problem, because of the perception that the only true means to personal progression and success is producing for your own needs in order to have the cash to spend on things you do not want to produce or cannot (like paying for the cost of claimsed hexes). This perception is largely supported by systems and activities that are currently absent or non-functioning, but of which some are promised and/or talked about (such as in this last stream from JC). This game is a WIP, not the final result. Some take issue with its status as a beta vs alpha, but honestly, I think this really is an indication of the situation in the computer game industry, not solely of NQ's decision path. We are seeing a lot more early release or closed beta games, which often have very significant changes prior to release...if they ever get released. Someone unhappy with the game now, may love it later; someone enjoying it now, may well be unhappy at full release. This is a given. The core concepts of building ground facilities and spaceships/stations, using a voxel-based system, with players producing the elements and materials for this, is a sound one, most certainly. It needs to be supported by a viable industry and market economy that promote player interaction and not solo play, which to be honest, the pre-patch industry was fully supportive of solo play and had little regard for player interaction. While this may seem to be tangential to your post, it's actually a central argument as to why the schematic system is far better a means to achieve the industrial ends than what we had previously. Now, the issue is cost. What should the initial foray into industry cost vs the long-term cost of schematics and fully-realized production lines. I think the initial cost may be a little too high, by about 25-33%, but from looking at many of the higher end elements, I think most of those are in line with what I'd expect, apart from some engine schematics that seem to be far too costly. Luckily, many of the t1 elements can be easily produced right out of the nanopack, and I do think that is where more attention should be paid, both in terms of what can be produced, but also I think the devs should really emphasize nanopack production as a quick-start method for new players. They do give it a little attention, but more emphasis is needed. And that it does not require any schematics, is a very good thing.

I never did think you were a bad person, but I will leave it at that. We are in agreement here, as I did suggest a few minigame type events for this upcoming holiday period, one even provides participation for miners, industrialist, haulers, ship builders, and pvpers, but I do not want to leave this with my tooting my own horn. Instead, I'd like to have confirmation that some content is pending within the next month to month and a half, that will add to gameplay options, which does not have to be significant, just entertaining, with a small reward, and open to everyone, instead of only those who spend a lot of time off-planet.

TBH, my first thought upon seeing this post was "how many threads is he going to create about this." However, my initial reaction was wrong as I see you really do have a reasoned post and a great hope for what DU has long promised to be. FWIW, I did not see that of the BPs I have from others were made core. I'll have to check again, but I am certain that some were and some were not. It may be just a glitch in the matrix. I am against a wipe, for many reasons, but a talent rest across the board would not have hurt a soul, if our talent points were all refunded. Core destruction is not a bad thing, as it adds a real consequence to PVP, and also drunk/stoned flying. On the other hand, there needs to be an accounting for lag (much of it caused our allowed by NQ) and it is vastly unfair to create a situation that a player cannot survive merely because it is inconvenient to resolve the problem. Yes, certain things were broken with the patch and I honestly expected that we'd see a server restart by now, but perhaps they were too exhausted from their earlier efforts. Where they do need to take some quick action, also, is fixing the names of similar items, so they are more easily understood. This will be a problem with the purchase of schematics and I doubt any of those purchases will ever be refunded. Like you, I would like to see more improvement before the end of this year and with that view, I posted my own thread with some suggestions that would be very nice to see, in some form or another, as a means to build bridges between NQ and the players. While not huge, they also do not require a large expenditure of resources or effort, just a minimal amount to signify "we're aware and listening."

With any such large change, the markets are going to be a mess for a few weeks, until things settle down. Were it my concern, I'd just do what I want to do, like build my base, for a couple of weeks and see how things sort out. It is possible, as far as that goes, that NQ will tweak things or react to player responses and needs in a positive fashion. While people claim this should have happened in Alpha, well , it has happened now and better now than shortly after release or even a year after. The developers are not idiots, no matter what the naysayers might claim. They are ultimately in this to make money, but do so with a design philosophy and an idea that they hope will bear fruit and profitability. Thus, I do expect that we'll see some changes and tweaks, here and there, between next week and the next couple of update patches, that will help resolve some, if not many of the concerns that are being expressed. Not that I expect them to respond positively to demands from the disgruntled, but rather to look at player trends, gauge the player experience and determine where the target experience falls short. Hopefully, you do not choose to pull the plug, but it is all up to you.

After 5 weeks of daily playing, I've spent less than 10 hours actively mining. I know because I kept track as I was doing it during work (online work is fun work). I made virtually everything I have, with the exception of the first ship (Mule) that I bought and the speeder that was free, and some elevators. Everything else I own came out of my nanopack or off my assemblers, of which I have several (well, dozens). I spent a hell of a lot more hours mining in Eve, during my first week. It's all relative and making such claims as "forces you" is not helpful.

My son, who plays on a computer a few feet away, had massive lag, everywhere. It turned out to be his drivers. Once he updated all of those, the lag is limited to markets, for him. Not saying you have not done so, btw. But, I do agree with you. Visiting certain markets are like playing Russian Roulette, with a far more significant level of risk than 1 in 6. I've already suggested, in these forums, that dynamic cores be unloaded and tokenized after two hours in a market hex, with ship and cargo put into that market container. The tokenized ship can only be deployed in that same market hex. Deploying can happen once every 24 hours, to help limit the abuse from those who love to scam, I mean park their "ships" in the way of everyone else, lagging the hell out of the area, up to 30km or more. Also, reducing the stations around the Ark, to a single one, with shuttle to Sanctuary (from there they can use teleporters to the different stations), would also help reduce clutter and lag. We do not need several ship stores , either. A waste of resources and a zone of death and despair for those unlucky enough to have an elevator draw at the wrong time.

Well, it would certainly be 4-5 days of learning the ropes, which should include mining to an extent. This is where I think it essential that the tutorials be finished/fixed, allowing new players a better starting experience. It was very disappointing for me to see that most were unavailable, when I first started playing. A leg up, but not a handout, is in order.

I do think it is also important, in the vein of my post at the top, that we ask for things that are doable and reasonable, instead of demanding that the river change its course, with regard to game development. Ask for tweaks and adjustments on our end, than expect them to spend hundreds/thousands of man-hours rewriting code. Years ago, when I worked in the industry (before Hasbro bought the company and fired us all) I had several programmers far more willing to consider requests that did not make unreasonable demands on them or their time. But, it is what it is and things will turn out either for good or ill.

There are multiple items that can use some renaming to clarify what they are. Container L, Container L, and Container L, all of which have different volumes, for example.

Yes, JC did specifically state that talents effected by this patch would be reset, but that did not happen, at least for me. Not that it was a huge deal to train the new talents. However, I do see that a reset across all talents for all players would be beneficial, as some/many would respect out of most or all industry and into something else. We can already craft out of our nanopack and I think that doing so without schematics is a good thing. Yet, I do believe that advancing from the small scale to industry really is deserving of schematics. Instead of unlocking them, I'd rather see an "introductory pack" for industry (in the future as a reward for doing industry tutorials) which provides schematics for certain things, free of charge. So, for example, a set of schematics that allows players to craft XS boxes from an Assembler S, would be a nice start/introduction to what a future in industry might hold. Such a thing would not unbalance the newly "balanced" industry, and go a long way towards allowing people to start from that point, being that hydraulics and frames are useful for other things, too. It might also be that an "advanced" schematic be made available, which does allow players to craft XS-S engines, and other items useful for turning an atmospheric speeder into a space capable one. Again, one set of schematics that allow one to reach that result, would be very useful. This one, however, could have a cost associated with it, perhaps 100k (but provide several schematics that currently cost 75k each.