Ashford

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.

After all the things. actually i'd just leave if there was a wipe. seriously, look at teh mega factories. The investments in the schematics. The time and faith of the community to provide content.
 
Resounding naw, Im out. Gimme monies back pls.
 
The billionaire things was fixed with athena I think and the new "way" for more schematics and rarity of plas.
 
anyway. pick right.
 

Most important PRO's missed... 
 
Hundreds of paid accounts no longer paying.  Less money for NQ
Empty worlds with no constructs... sounds fun.
Many existing players offer help to new players in financial and advice... gone.

Thank you.  This I can deal with.  I appreciate you all being relatively quick at responding to the feedback.  I can breathe a lot easier now without having to panic and worry about losing my ship collection or mining fields.

Ooof tips might actualy be the first time I dislike the choice made!
 
As a single player I use 34 slots for myself that I actualy use... 
my personal space station with industry (8 L cores) 
7 for ships:
3 warp shuttles
1 atmo L hauler
1 atmo M hauler
1 L core fighter
1 L core space hauler
Plus 4 flying carpets
And 15 for MUs
 
Plus I would like to colect ships and build a bigger stationto expand my industry in the next couple of years. 
 
Mabey have a wayyy bigget limit but add taxes like with terriories? Do the more you own the more you must be able to pay and earn? 
 
 

English (deepl used)
I think changing the core boundaries is the ultimate solidarity test.
Will we pass this challenge?
I will donate 2 cores for Hagbard the megalomaniac.
 
 
Die Waldfee
 

Several thoughts:

1) Using personal orgs to bypass personal limits was never intended.
This change seems like a huge step in the right direction. The general thought is that this is the direction that was intended from the very beginning. However...

2) Mining Units significantly increased the required core counts.
I am primarily a solo player. I would consider myself very conservative with my core count usage:
2 static core for my base (1 factory, 1 parking lot) 1 pocket ship 1 warp shuttle 2 haulers 1 available core slot for setting down blueprints for sale With the addition of Mining Units, I had to either spend lots of talent points or use an org to hold all the extra cores needed for those.
 
3) Large projects, ship builders, etc.
While I currently do not have a large runway, museum, or elaborate headquarters, I do know several people that do. The proposed changes would effectively destroy most of the ship displays and decorative builds that so many people use to sell their constructs. It would eliminate a lot of the places that people enjoy visiting.

Final Thoughts...
At it's heart, this is good idea.
But in its current proposal, it's far too restrictive and does not account for the dramatic increase in required cores brought on by the mining update. Could this increase have caused the need for adjusting the limitations?

Please, either significantly increase the counts provided and/or increase personal limits.
Not doing so would seriously harm the players who have put time and effort into this game and make this world feel alive.

I think the core count changes really make sense if you look at them objectively.
 
The very stream of comments shows why, players have massively used what was intended to be ORG based cores for personal use. One player should NOT have access to or need hundreds of cores.
 
Yes, I certainly lay blame with NQ for the way they have let this get out of control and only now act. This should have been done years ago, but NQ seems to never have even considered this scenario which must be a big part in their operating cost.
 
That said, I also see how some recent changes, mainly MU and the requirement to run them from a static core has caused an increase in core use.

As they are, a player has 42 core slots, 17 personal and 25 assignable to an org at max skill
 
I'd say that the peronal core sount shoudl be more like 30 or so and the "reserved for org" cores could be more like 50 at max talents
 
Players start with 5 personal and 5 org cores
Personal core talents add 2 each level for the basic talent and 3 each level for the advanced which can be trained after L5 on the basic, total personal cores which mean 5+10+15 = 30 personal cores Org core slots add 3 each level on basic, advcanced and expert talents for 5+15+15+15 for 50 cores The basic org core talent (for 20 cores) will also allow these 20 cores an dthe 5 base cores to be assigned to an org the player is super-legate for. advanced and expert can only be assigned to an org that has 5 or more members So players can have 50 cores on a personal org and can still assign 25 cores to an org of their choice

I believe NQ has no real choice in this and will push it though but I also feel the number are a bit too tight and need to be loosened up. But generally, while it will hurst  for some, I feel it's not unreasonable for them to push this.

I welcome the try to scale the org constructs in some way. the core limitation of 275 was really not bearable for larger organisations. We had to split up in several sub-orgs for all our constructs and the managing of this was a nightmare, because of the 5 orgs per player limit.
 
BUT:
If I have with all talents just 25 org construct slots, this is quite an issue.
I mean, you have just a few personal construct slots.
- Most of them are already occupied with the cores for the mining units.
- So if you want to build a fancy building and more than 1 single ship, you already need several of your org construct slots for yourself
- Preparations on a larger scale will be nearly impossible

In my case I currently build a city layout so that other players and I can build a realistic (still small) city later. A project like this needs a layout and a structure before it really starts, or it ends in chaos. Currently I have already ~150 cores placed and filled. But projects like this, that need a massive amount of cores for preparation before others can benefit from it, will be nearly impossible. Because everyone have to be in your org (remember the 5 org limit) and has to give you some of their org construct slots before they get anything in return (and be honest: how many will do this?). And even if I get enough slots from people beforehand and I spend massive ressources and time - it can be all lost if just a few players leave the org/ reassign their slots/ cancel their payment. Then the core limit drops and the already placed cores will be abandoned...
 
This will really kill many larger projects.
With this system, you can only start big projects, if you are already big. Big projects from small groups that form a larger organization later will be nearly impossible. So this may be okay for large orgs, but will make it way more difficult for smaller orgs to rise even if they are really active.
Better invent some milestones.
For example: You start with 50 Cores for your org, and with achieving several goals (spend massive ressources/quanta) you can scale up this limit and it remains permanent. So even a small group can get to a decent amount of org cores with the time if they are active (this idea is absolutely not perfect, it shall show just another direction).
 
A system like the announced one that is so fragile that a few leaving/reassigning/inactive members can destroy your organization with the reduced core limit - that is not really thought to the end.
 
I understand the reason and I appreciate that you are try so solving this.
But this is the wrong way NQ.

Since the log function has been removed, there is no longer a way to copy text from within the game. So it would be nice if there was another possibility, e.g. to copy and paste in the LUA chat window or a edit contant button for the database in order to use this item to get text in and out.

I really hope there will be a good solution for data export.
Several projects in the community depend on that.
 
We in our org built in months of work a whole own economy system.
Members can store their ores in our ore deposit, they get "HC" (our own currency) in exchange, and can use these HC in the fully automated shopping center to buy nearly any item for a cheap and steady price (what is important especially for new players). Our players can transfer their HC to other members, or can use them to order something from our industry department (if its not in the shopping center, or a really large order). This system works well and is a great addition and an advanced community creation. (If you are interested, check this video: Hyperion Warehouse and HC-System it's German and not 100% up to date, but you can understand most of the content just with the visuals)
 
And there are many more complex systems like this from other orgs and players, that rely on sync with external databases, because the DBs in the game are too small to handle this.
 
All of these advanced scripted community creations would be lost if there is no proper and easy way to export the data anymore.
If we are restricted to just the ingame DBs, this will kill massive creativity in scripting because of the limitations.

Since the log function has been removed, there is no longer a way to copy text from within the game. So it would be nice if there was another possibility, e.g. to copy and paste in the LUA chat window or a edit contant button for the database in order to use this item to get text in and out.

Since the log function has been removed, there is no longer a way to copy text from within the game. So it would be nice if there was another possibility, e.g. to copy and paste in the LUA chat window or a edit contant button for the database in order to use this item to get text in and out.

Since the log function has been removed, there is no longer a way to copy text from within the game. So it would be nice if there was another possibility, e.g. to copy and paste in the LUA chat window or a edit contant button for the database in order to use this item to get text in and out.

Since the log function has been removed, there is no longer a way to copy text from within the game. So it would be nice if there was another possibility, e.g. to copy and paste in the LUA chat window or a edit contant button for the database in order to use this item to get text in and out.

This will lead to so much looting, much more than a single player can ever make with Minung Units.

This will lead to so much looting, much more than a single player can ever make with Minung Units.

Can you please do the same for PVP? You change all time our voxel tanking, our weapon, capacity cost, the meta itself... Don't listen only PVE players plz, thanks.