Torsten
-
Posts
26 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Torsten
-
-
Feedback? I'll give you feedback...
The Demiter patch drove away the miners and others who remember grinding WoW's daily quests and didn't want to play that stupid calibration minigame all the time. The builders and ship collectors stayed because they could still build and collect.
Now this? This will drive them away as well.
Now... there are two aspects to this change. One is from a game design perspective and one is from a server cost perspective.
If you're doing this for a cost saving perspective, you're literally shooting yourself in the foot. I'm certain this will lose you a good chunk of paying subscribers. I doubt you're going to attract anyone who has already left to come back. And people looking for a new game to play generally consider a declining playerbase as a bit of a red flag.
From a game design perspective, I can somewhat understand the change. There is too much junk everywhere. Maybe you want there to be more players involved in massive construction projects? Whatever the reason, this change is too much too fast. (non-ship) Builders don't just want to build stuff and tear it down. They want to see that they have made a lasting mark on the world. Currently this requires cores. Oh so many cores. This change shrinks the possibilities from virtually infinite to finite. You can only do so much before you're "done". Then what?
Ship builders want to build ships. They might have several in progress at any one time and work on whichever one strikes their fancy at the time. They might be working in parallel on multiple commissions? They probably want to put their ships up for display. Not that it's going to matter much because:
Collectors. I'd guess that collectors are the only real driving elements of the current economy. They are the ones that buys ships form the ship builders. They are the ones that like to keep their collections around so that they may enjoy the view. This keeps ship elements out of circulation and creates demand for new ones. I think this is the category that will be hit hardest by this change. They can't blueprint their collections because DRM. That leaves selling them or stripping them down for parts (or just up and quit, I guess). This will flood the market for ships and parts. Since collectors won't be able to buy stuff ship and part sales will go down -my guess- drastically.
So... my suggestions:
1) Increase the number of slots. Roughly keep what you are currently suggesting per player for org slots, but with the following addition
- a PLAYER legate or super legate adds 20 slots
- a PLAYER member adds 5 slots
- an ORG legate or member adds 0 slots
This is in addition to what has already been proposed. I do like the idea of giving players the option to support projects they like or boost their org's ability to field cores, but I feel this will be extremely rare if players feel they need their org cores for themselves
2) Hold off with the initial abandonment of constructs for longer. 30 days is not enough. Save it for next patch, if it is still needed
3a) For dynamic constructs, give us the option to "park" it. Making it non-interactable, but also not requiring a slot. This could be a solution for collectors and ship builders to still have a display without needing to spend excessive cores on it
3b) For dynamic constructs, give us a "limited" unrestricted ability to "pocket" a construct. By limited I mean that it could be done with a industry machine, only placeable on a static construct and the resulting "blueprint" could be a non-item that resides in the machine until it is redeployed. Key point is being able to pack/store/archive a ship without tearing it apart
Random rant questions:
What in the name of your deity of choice was the reasoning behind requiring 3 cores to be placed to auto mine 3 territories when a single larger one would do? How well do you feel this synergies with the new proposed changes?
There seems to be a disconnect between devs and players on how many cores is reasonable per player. How many cores with mining units do NQ expect players to have? How many ships? How big bases?
-
17 minutes ago, rubachet said:
Will we able to calibrate mining units in VR?
On the PTS we were able to calibrate in VR, however the talents related to calibration boost and amount of rocks that spawn are not working. At max talents that is 30% less bonus to calibration when you recalibrate.
Imo it's a fair trade-off. Making it possible to calibrate in VR, but not give you the benefit of some talents by doing so. This means that for "optimal output" you need to visit each mining unit in person, but it's still possible in VR if you're short on time (or have a billion alts)
-
From the post (emphasis is mine)
"Requisitioning will start a two-week window where the new territory owner must allow access to the static construct for the former owner and where the former owner of the static construct is able to remove that static construct by dismantling and removing it from the territory"
I'm thinking this is not going to be enforced in the game. But like other things, if you don't abide by it, your account could be sanctioned. Just my guess
-
23 minutes ago, Jake Arver said:
Yes, and unless they exclude orgs from getting access rights set on HQ tiles, what NQ says they wanted to prevent is precisely what will happen.
The reason they don't have it available to orgs is because how you can get infinite orgs. I remember in one of their videos they said that a single player had over 300 orgs. If HQ tiles would be available to orgs, that player alone could have 1500 tax free tiles. With tiles tied to players, there can never be more than [number players] x 5 HQ tiles in the game and it is up to the player how to utilize them. I still believe that NQ want HQ tiles (hence the name) to be accessible to orgs, but to prevent exploits, they are tied to players. For now.
-
I would expect scan range to be irrelevant as there is no longer any actual ore underground. You technically don't even need to scan a tile. If you own the tile you can plonk down a mining unit and it will tell you how much is there (for the specific tier of the mining unit)
-
4 minutes ago, Jake Arver said:
You are saying that it's fine if orgs can amass or at aleast have full access to hundreds of tiles where they only need to pay tax when the situation calls for it, including locking down tiles with specific ores or quantities of ores and only pay the tax if they need to mine these?
IC could run their massive spaceport and never have to pay a cent in tax for the tile(s) they occupy with it and that goes for any large org infrastructure..
I'd like to quote myself from way back when on the Demeter Q/A thread
On 11/10/2021 at 10:49 PM, Torsten said:Some thoughts and concerns regarding HQ tiles
1) Don't make it per org, then we'll just end up with the creating multiple orgs to claim land scenario all over again. Maybe even restrict HQ tiles to player owned tiles only?
2) HQ tiles should probably be reduced to 0 L/h for all ores. No taxes, no ore
3) There should probably be some system in place to hinder using HQ tiles for strategic gains. I'm thinking claiming tax free HQ tiles for the purpose of selling them/renting them out etc. Maybe HQ tiles should have a much longer release cooldown or something along those lines.
4) Personally I would currently rather have fewer HQ tiles per planet instead of more global HQ tiles. Or a compromise of, lets say 5, tiles on a planet/moon of your choice plus 1 tile per planet for outposts
But on the topic of orgs using them for infrastructure, yes I think that is actually one of the primary purpose for them. Not many single players would require 5 tax free safe tiles all by themselves.. And the primary reason for making them per player is to prevent org spamming. But I do wish they had an answer for the strategic use for them though. I'm perfectly fine with infrastructure. Orgs won't be able to run any tax-free industry on them anyways
-
Just now, Jake Arver said:
The HQ tiles will do the exact same thing unless these tiles can't have rights for orgs assigned to them
The big difference is that a player can only have 5. If players want to contribute to org territory, why stop them?
-
-
17 minutes ago, decom70 said:
Even the mere likes on the posts in this thread, approving of the removal of scans, show that more people that peruse these spicy threads agree with the removal of scans, then disagree. Besides, you first claimed that most people disagree with this change, so the burden of proof lies on with you.
There were sufficient discussions about the removal of scans here on the Forum, and that it should be done. More players wanted them gone, and also brought better arguments, at least in NQ's Opinion (and mine obviously). If you suddenly stop partaking in the forum, aka don't voice your opinion on it, and other peoples opinions, that is a you problem.
Your first problem is that you're trying to extrapolate what is said on the forums to be the views of the general playerbase. That has never worked in any game. Ever. Have you ever herd the term "the silent majority"? That's because most players don't partake in forums they just play the game. You're behaving like the 20 to 50 people on the forums are the entire playerbase, but if that was true NQ would be bankrupt a long time ago.
The way this was originally presented, as in "Confirmed: Old scans will still be valid" makes any kind of forum discussion on the matter completely biased against that. Players who agree have no reason to come to the forums to voice their anger because they are not angry. This is the root cause. NQ should never have confirmed something this controversial that they might change. If something is controversial and require feedback it needs to be presented as such
I have never claimed that most people were against removal of scans. I did say that most people that were angry were angry because NQ first said one thing and then did another. But I'll give you that I don't have proof of that either, only the impression I've gathered talking to people and reading the forums. That however does not relive you of the "burden of proof" to your claim that a "MAJORITY" of players wanted the scans gone and I look forward to reading that
-
44 minutes ago, decom70 said:
NQ did the one thing that we, as players, kept asking them to do. Listen to our Feedback and implement it.
After the MAJORITY of players wanted them to remove old scans, they listened to our Feedback, and now you are complaining about them listening to the majority feedback of the community, and even lying that the majority did not want scans to have to be redone.
Hypocrisy?
Majority? You have no data to back it up. All you got is a lot of unhappy people giving feedback that they didn't like their decision. Anyone happy with keeping the old scans went on happily with their day knowing that NQ said "Confirmed: Old scans will still be valid" There was no reason to try give feedback on that since it was a "done deal". Feedback like this will always be biased towards the negative
-
6 minutes ago, Jake Arver said:
Now, If current scans magically show the new L/H values after demeter without a rescan, besides being a very bad thing and if so, in itself a prime reason to remove the scans as it would IMO be an exploit.
This is exactly how it was on the PTS. Old scans showed the new L/h values. This is how they intended for it to be up until today
People are not outraged because the scan items will be deleted. People are mostly upset that they were told that existing scans would be "magically" updated in Demeter and have spent the last few weeks preparing for that, only to be now be told "no, that's not going to happen". Personally I'm that category. And then you also have the people who are upset that their thousands of scans they were told would be useful are now useless
-
7 minutes ago, space_man said:
On the PTS the recalibration cool down was 48 hours. In the post you said 24 hours
IIRC 1st round PTS it was 48h, 2nd round PTS it was 24h. I did note that it was changed
Imo it doesn't really matter either way as in both rounds of the PTS (and the post) the calibration lasts 48h before it starts to drop. Only thing cooldown affects is how often you can get the above-ground ore rocks and how fast you can bring a mining unit up to 100% calibration
-
Erhm. They are not saying what you claim them to be saying.
Deckard is explaining that the current scans UNDERGROUND portion has no value in demeter as the ore will no longer be there. Imagine now in pre-demeter someone going to town on a tile and mined every single piece of ore out of there. The scan would still have the old values, but there would not be a single liter of ore in there. Same with demeter. Old scans would still show what used to be in the ground, but it won't be there.
The seed they are referring to is the seed for the random number generator used to generate the noise for the ore distribution. This is unrelated to current pre-demeter ore distribution as a tile currently full of coal can have 0 L/h after demeter. That the seed will be different on the live servers compared to the PTS. This was already well known and uncontested and needed so people couldn't scan on PTS to know where the good tile in Live would be. Also completely unrelated to old scans.
-
2 hours ago, Doombad said:
NQ listened to feedback and changed their minds. That’s life. That’s work. That’s how it goes. I am glad they listened.
Not exactly true. They said they would to it one way over the other. The people wanting it that way was happy and went about their day. The ones that wasn't happy made a huge stink about it. To NQ that sounded like everyone was protesting their decision, but the "keep scans" crowd didn't have a reason to get involved because they had seen the "Confirmed: Old scans will be valid" text in the Demeter QA video. Thus feedback was biased, as it always is, when one side has a reason to speak up and the other one doesn't.
For NQs sake I hope they don't push an ingame NPS survey (how likely are you to blah blah) anytime soon. On second thought. I hope they do. They'll get five big fat 1s from me
-
19 minutes ago, tomasco said:
You can calibrate via VR.
And if megacorp have 10k scans, it also have 10+ members to check them.
Unless they changed it from the PTS, yes you can calibrate from VR but the calibration bonus talent won't be applied. That's 30% calibration (PTS max talents) not gained every time you calibrate. This will require you to recalibrate each mining unit 48h earlier than you would if you recalibrated it in person. This would require recalibration aprox every 112h instead of every 160h to keep it optimal. At 3.5h (pts max talents) per charge this means a character can "only" keep 32 mining units running instead of 45
-
6 minutes ago, CaptainBlack said:
2: Tier 2 mining units needing Tier 2 parts to build, Tier 3 mining units needing Tier 3 parts to build, etc.
- Should be like Manufacturing, you don't need uncommon parts to build uncommon elements, you use uncommon parts to build advanced elements.
This is incorrect. If you're making a Tier 2 element you need tier 2 parts. Tier 3 parts for tier 3 elements. You can however assemble the part in a machine that is one tier below. The equivalent for mining units would be to allow T2 mining units to mine T3 ore
-
This pisses me off. Not so much because of the scan wipe, I'd be happy either way. I'm pissed because less than a month ago (Oct 20th to be precise) you said that old scans would still be good. Then you turn 180 LESS THAN A MONTH LATER and say they wont
If you haven't decided, let us know you haven't decided. That's fine. Some things need careful consideration and feedback before making a decision. Don't plaster a big "Confirmation: Old scans will still be valid" and then double back on it as soon as you get a bit of push-back. Stick to your decision. I even made a suggestion that you could keep current good for a while and THEN do a scan wipe with a new seed.
People are not angry because you're wiping the scans, people are angry because you said you wouldn't
(just to be clear, the below info is no longer accurate)
(from)
-
Meh. If it comes to it, all NQ has to do is to change the seed for the ore distribution while not updating old scans and the pools of all the tiles would be different.
And clearly you have little to no experience in real-world software development as a "a full rebuild from the ground up" is among the most foolish things a company can do. Over time you cut out pieces that doesn't work and add pieces that hopefully does. The whole ignorant "just rewrite it" mentality it the only reason I even bothered replying to this post.
-
Additionally, I'd like to propose a compromise to the pre-demeter scans are useful vs useless issue. Keep with what you're currently doing i.e. old scans will be updated to include the new ore pool. However in X time, say 6 months, reshuffle the seed for the ore generation on live servers (while giving us plenty of notice ofc). This way the hard work of scanning will have paid off but soon will come a time where everyone will be on somewhat equal footing
Tbh, that could honestly be a regular thing. I remember back in Star Wars galaxies the ore constantly moved around and you had to follow it for the most profit. Now that was a bit too often IIRC, but with a permanent seed you risk a fully scanned system where there are no chance for a new player to strike gold
Regardless, I'd try to be very careful how you communicate "permanent" and "forever" regarding current tile contents. Just to keep your options open going forward
-
Some thoughts and concerns regarding HQ tiles
1) Don't make it per org, then we'll just end up with the creating multiple orgs to claim land scenario all over again. Maybe even restrict HQ tiles to player owned tiles only?
2) HQ tiles should probably be reduced to 0 L/h for all ores. No taxes, no ore
3) There should probably be some system in place to hinder using HQ tiles for strategic gains. I'm thinking claiming tax free HQ tiles for the purpose of selling them/renting them out etc. Maybe HQ tiles should have a much longer release cooldown or something along those lines.
4) Personally I would currently rather have fewer HQ tiles per planet instead of more global HQ tiles. Or a compromise of, lets say 5, tiles on a planet/moon of your choice plus 1 tile per planet for outposts
I appreciate the additional safe space asteroids so I can get out there and get my occasional mining fix. I do wish that they were a bit more enjoyable to mine though. Last time I did one it didn't really feel like it was worth my time. At least not for T1 ore. Would it be possible to maybe keep the total ore count but make the nodes fewer and bigger?
With the prospect of (hopefully cheaper) T2 DSATs I might almost consider throwing a scrappy ship together and go try my luck on some PVP space asteroids
Other than that I want to thank you for making this video, please keep doing these QA videos ?
-
7 minutes ago, Mucus said:
- The time for claiming a static construct should be longer when a territory is lost and should send an email notification to the previous owning player. If you just can't or don't login how will you know. If someone goes on holiday for 2 weeks which is quite normal they have to login while they are on vacation . Think this through more. make it 18 days or something allowing people to take holidays .
- What happens if i have to go somewhere to work for a longer period, say 6 weeks, and i am a single player. Your basically saying don't play dual universe.
On PTS you could put up to 13 weeks of quanta into the tile wallets, so you can at least take 13 weeks off from the game at no risk. After that it is unknown (at least I don't know) how long time the tile will be "inactive" (no mining or industry working) before it's actually lost. And only after that can another player claim the tile and start the two week requisition countdown. TBH I don't see a problem with the time frames
-
22 minutes ago, Tional said:
"allowing players to use them from VR" would suggest using the charges in question, which you could only do while calibrating a mining unit.
I believe that "them" refers to the talents in question, not the charges themselves. But I agree, it's going to be interesting to test
-
Instead of having a fixed warp speed for all ships I suggest adjusting the maximum warp speed based on the core of the ship. Smaller cores aligns, spools and warps faster than larger cores. Maybe have XS cores use the old speeds, S cores a bit faster than currently, M cores about what it is now and L cores a bit slower.
-
1 hour ago, Fyrestrider said:
You mean this part. That says nothing about the skills that increase efficiency and output. The talents that give you increased surface node spawn.
- Introduced exception for calibration charge maximum count and calibration charge cooldown talents; those talents are functional even in surrogate, allowing players to use them from VR.
PTS patch notes mean nothing regarding PTU till its released on PTU
More than likely this is to let players keep their extra charges and better recharge time. It would be sad to enter VR with 10 charges and come out with 5. I agree that nothing in the notes suggest that you'll be able to calibrate through VR
SHEDDING LIGHT ON A NOVAQUARK INTERNAL DISCUSSION - discussion thread
in General Discussions
Posted
I haven't been playing much recently since the removal of planet mining as there hasn't really been anything interesting for me to do, but here are some of my thoughts:
If you remove schematics, what do you intended to replace it with? You added schematics to prevent players from easily making mega factories. If you remove them, how would you intend to do that? What would prevent every player/org from making everything themselves? And if they do, what would be bought/sold on the market? I never played this game to build fancy stuff. I played it for the mining and industry aspects. I'm one of the guys that wants to make mega factories
Actually, let me flip this around. Let me tell you what would help keeping me as a subscriber in a post wipe scenario.
Now lets talk about things that would make me finally quit for good
MAYBE if I got to keep every single current point in a pool that is returned to me as bonus XP along with normal XP I could be swayed. Maybe.
To summarize, what would be important to me in a wipe scenario:
Talent points >>>> Economy/Wallet/Territory > Blueprints