Varsolc

very disappointed

If you can read between the lines than NQ has already announced it's final decision, it will be a wipe for sure (unless community outrage is so huge that they have to backtrack) They are probably not announcing it officially so player base wont go down to zero before launch

It would be unfair that you get your blueprint back and everyone else looses they assets like Ore/elements/mining setup aso....

I can imagine it's hard to sell a wipe to the community and reading the lines about NQ's explanations it's clear that you are going for a wipe, there was no real debate, it was focused on arguing the wipe. Having reached this point i would like to add my opinion to this: Only a FULL WIPE is acceptable, nothing remains and block anything that is from the old game including blueprints and i don't know how you can manage this but it's not my job to know, so you figure it out, block all existing lua scripts from working. You are talking about resetting the economy, then it's not really fair to maintain anything from the old game Delete all LUA with the possibility that it won't be copied over to the new game: WHY: Why some people spent they game-time making LUA for ships/PVP/industry/aso others spent they game-time mining. If resource like ore's will be deleted then LUA should be to! Blueprint: same here, dont carry them over. While other are building ships and having they quanta from from selling ships others mined ore, why should they keep they blueprints and others will loose they ore ? (ore/industrie units/anything else) Any physically localized game asset (like ore, processed ores, elements, aso): You already stated that you want to wipe this Quanta: You already said that this to will be wiped to reset the economy. SP: Skill points would certainly be wiped, as you said Anything else that i have not mentioned: If it's a wipe it should be an FULL WIPE, everything, no one should have any advantage in carrying over they resource (LUA/Blueprint/Ore/Element/Quanta) to the new game, dont make exception and favorize some groups over the others My final thoughts are this. Why dont keep eveything and Discover a new solar system with new resources with alien currency instead of quanta, aso .... The reason that the game should be more appealing to new players stands for 2-4 week only. In that time all good spots on every planet will be claimed already...

Hello It seems reasonable enough, might i also ask to to maybe revisit some other options that might solve issues regarding construct slots such as the possibility to have miners on 1 construct but different territories, having the possibility to rent/or everybody can have (i would go for some kind of rend maybe) personal/org RDMS enable storage on Market / Mission givers so we dont have to keep containers around this locations, and such other options keep up the good work and burn some incents to keep away the bad idea spirits

The question: is the a DU or DIE thing for the game? Truth is there could have been different design choices that could be applied before reducing the core count drastically a) Why not make miners be able to be placed on same core but different territory? b) Why not make a score system for cores, and lets say you can have 25 heavy loads, 50 medium and 100 light. It not the same having 1 core with miner + container as having 1 S hauler as having 1 LCore 1800 element industry c) Why not give us options do dismantle with right-click and 1 option, rather then having to do it slowly manually, this would help us free older constructs d) Let us first have an option to dismantle abandoned constructs. I have for months someone crashed ship near my base, nothing i can do about it e) I'm sure there are other options to EDIT: Give us storage space inside Aphelia location (Markets, Mission givers, aso) that we can manage with RDMS to give access to specific people. Let us store items there so we dont have to clutter the locations with container constructs

Dear NQ I would like to express my opposition to the proposed changes to the available cores to an organization . With this changes you are punishing smaller organizations who have ambitious projects to bring content to the game also make them loose they already existing work just because they are smaller and can't afford the number of "votes" from a limited resource Basically what you are saying is that if you cant afford 100 alts you should not have ambitions in this game. make 100 alts and we you can assign yourself construction slots. I understand that you want to limit the maximum number of constructs / organization, they why not limit nested orgs maximum limit to zero, so that and org need a player as super legate to have construction rights and keep the current system as it is. Also with the current system where you need core slots for mining 25 core slots for a single player is almost equal to zero. Consider this, you are mining resources (high end where 1 miner is usually enough, maximum 2 if its T3) and have 50 calibration charges, but having only 1 miner/core you get limited to 25 cores every 72+ hours, am i missing something obvious here ? Please do find some way to reconsider this changes that limits someone's ambition of civilization building to having a campfire out in the middle of nowhere

Hello. First of all thank you for creating an article about the mining mechanics, to clear things up. Now, Communication from NQ should be definitely more consistent. I would have not had an issue with NQ removing old scan data, but once you stated you would not remove them myself and probably many other players spent countless hours and days preparing for the update and scanning territories. Much time was spent on this. Continuing, since i feel NQ mostly listens to people complaining, not taking into consideration that people not complaining actually like the proposed modification to the game i would like to state the following: a) I absolutly like the idea that any territory outside of Sancturary should be Taxed regardless if any mining activity/industry/ leisure / holyday apartments or whatever activity there is. There should be no exception to this rule. b) If any territory is not payed for in taxes the rights to that territory should be lost, no crying about it. c) Please dont increase the T3+ abundance on planets. I like the idea that T1&T2 ore is enough to mine on planets and you can build and have basic elements with this ores, for higher tier ores you need to go into space / PVP space (risk reward ) d) Please dont decrease T1 and T2 abundance on planets. There should be enough for people to swim in this low tier ores Thanks

Yes, this addition it's good. The efficiency of the part should fall while it has damaged components (works with engines, airfoils, aso) but for other elements like container, command seat, hub, fuel tank, aso there needs to be some other mechanic, maybe adding random "not functioning" temporarily, like you want to open the container, or seat in the chair it would give some error, (of course once in the chair it should function normal) or fuel tanks loosing fuel . This way it would require a higher development cost since each type of element would require a different effect

I would like to suggest a change to the repairing of elements. Instead of using scraps to repair damaged elements implement the need to use parts that the element is made from.For example, any element can be repaired with scraps when the sustained damage is below 30% (so elements health above 70%) and if the damage sustained is more than 30% it would also require parts to repair it. The above % are just examples, this can be balanced with lower or higher % or by a random chance that by receiving damage there is a random chance that some parts are broken and need to be replaced. As an extension to this, a new functionality should be present also, the possibility to dismantle elements for parts. Let's say someone crashes and has 3 damaged elements and it will dismantle 1 to repair the other 2