Varsolc
-
Posts
10 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Varsolc
-
-
14 minutes ago, Kurock said:
Regardless, the damage has been done. NQ should announce the final decision so that people can prepare for release (if they can) and if there is nothing to prepare, then expect player counts to drop drastically until after release were a few will check in, see they still don’t like the game and quit again.
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 -
2 hours ago, Corgan7 said:
Like i said before i can life with it when i can get my Core / Blueprints back after a full wipe because there are the most of my Playtime in. ( i don´t need an magical Blueprint set because this would lead to one points of the contras some player would make boxes filled with element to sell them after the wipe)
The Talentpoints i would do like i said before if NQ willing to refund our Talentpoints don´t do it direct after the wipe delay that points by an timer up to 12 or 15 months that the new start will be really start from the beginning and the new players did not feel left behind others but like some other Players said before knowledge is power and if old players know what they are doing they will be fast back on top.
And all which still complaining it was always said there will be maybe a full wipe before release always said in some of the Dev Blog Videos its still in discussing and now they want to let us know that an full wipe or half wipe is still in discussion and want to share the info with us.
And we all Accepted the Beta EULA by clicking Play Beta so stop complaining about if its coming we have to deal with it. So we all can tell our feelings about in this forum that they know what we thinking, and they can find their way how to release the Game after the Beta. This is still NQ´s game we paid for entering a Beta and not a Final Product and they have the full rights i copy this following text out of the EULA :
6. NOVAQUARK reserves the exclusive and final right to review, delete, block, modify, move or disable Generated Content for any reason whatsoever, after prior notice. Under French law, NOVAQUARK has the status of host within the meaning of article 6 of the Loi pour la Confiance dans l’Économie numérique du 21 juin 2004 (Act for trust in the digital economy of June 21, 2004) related to User-Generated Content.
Yes a full wipe would be hard for the community because of many players maybe left the game but perhaps its realy a chance for a fresh start for the game and getting new players. And think of it how many new names getting in the ingame chat last months and making a rage quit after they got killed by trying roid mining with the words that they don´t want to waste their time for that we need a lot more of PVE content in SafeZone like i said before too.
And they not have decided yet they want to discuss it with us whats we are feelings about so pls stop complaining.
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 toEDIT: 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
-
4 hours ago, CoyoteNZ said:
It would be great for the components market, but it would just make the game to complex to manage for players to repair and maintained their ships after damage.
If I may, a slight modification to your idea would be
1. Scrap repairs and gets any element back up and running; basically you jury rigged it with a quick fix.
2. Damaged, but repaired elements would list parts damaged which are lasting. They don’t stop the ship from operating, but they have some sort of effect, maybe less total HP for an element, or maybe it runs less efficiently.
Now you have it so you can still use scrap to get your ship back up and running, but every now and then you are going to want to take it to a mechanic, or have a repair unit. Then all the seperate components can be reapplied to the element to get it back to original stats.
This system would have three advantages over your idea,
1. Still simple to repair your ship, all you have to do is repair your ship with a bulk standard scrap lie, current system rather than having to carry hundreds of special different parts
2. There would be a new game loop for people who want to offer to repair their own or other peoples ships
3. Actually have a market for components and parts, not just finished elements.
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
Ongoing Discussions
in General Discussions
Posted
very disappointed