VandelayIndustries
-
Posts
357 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by VandelayIndustries
-
-
On 10/30/2020 at 8:30 AM, blazemonger said:
In the interview with Spreeezy today Entropy certainly left the option of a reset on the table, especially in the talk about how exploits and early mistakes by NQ may have left the economy "ruined" and gameplay balance unrepairable without a reset/wipe.
That was a game designer talking who seems to understand, and is not afraid to put the notion out there, that there may be a situation where you just can't get around it and I can appreciate that.
you have a link to that interview?
-
56 minutes ago, Walter said:
NQ we built these big multicrew ships we had much fun with. Then came shields and ccs smaller weapons got buffed and then these ships became obsolete.
Mass to speed is just the final nail in the coffin for Ships that are anyway now just Museum pieces.
Real balance means for me that shields would bleed DMG and a portion of DPS gets past shield at all times so this would force people to build with voxels and not too small,
so your speed changes would have an impact.
As it stands now it would only impact Haulers. Once Aphelia missions for 3 hours now how long will it take?
I also support the idea of ships shields being size locked to have ship classes.
Bleed dmg is the worst thing ever. YOU DONT DICTATE HOW I BUILD MY SHIPS. This is sandbox and I can put as little or no voxels as I want. Anyone who pvps knows that no voxel ships die and arent meta. They think it is, but its not. And those big multi crew ships you talk about should be in a museum. Function over form. How you build your ship to perform is what matters, not whatever stupid window dressing you put on it. Just because you think some certain ship looks "good" doesnt mean other people do. Other people might think it looks like dogshit. You dont balance pvp over "looks". If you cant understand these simple things then I cant help you.
-
For the new people, Thoramine was just a way for JC to LARP he was the dude in ready player one. Nothing more. What he forgot was ready player one is a fiction movie and you can make up whatever you want to make the story worth while. In real life the Dual Universe nerds solved the puzzle instantly. With JC even on record saying he thought it would take "years" to solve. Shocking when real life doesn't pan out like a movie right.
-
-
1 hour ago, Zireaa said:
Two me it’s a building game I could care less about the pvp I could care less if they scraped pvp and focused on building and exploration I only came because it filled the gap a bit that landmark left I would love it if they put old mining back but make planets regenerate over time and made high tier planets dangerous and gave us hand weapons caves two explore so on I think pvp make no sense and it would be much better as a exploring and building city’s type of game
I came here only for the pvp. Which was advertised as a pvp game. With pvp trailers. I could care less if they scraped the building part of the game, which is by far the worst part of the game, Floating voxels? lol come on man its 2022 and cant even get any physics that resemble something real. They need to expand on the pvp or the game will fail like Landmark did. The "building only" crowd isnt big enough to sustain the costs needed to run the servers.
-
22 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
NMS fairly quickly made one of the most impressive comebacks in the industry because they had no direct control over why the game released in the state it did AND were able to overcome the fallout of a botched launch because they both had the skills and the funding to hunker down and get to work on fixing it. THIS YouTube video tells the story very well from both public perception and what actually happened.
NQ started out with a dream, no real experience in making even the basics they needed work and from the start were underfunded and had to battle budgets and technical deficiencies.
Today NQ may have the money to stay afloat as a company, they very clearly lack the funding to actually develop a game and they continue to need to cut corners and cut cost to try and make it to the release of the game. The big problem for NQ is that IF they are to survive post launch, they will need a LOT of money and players to scale up very quickly and quite extensively to where they can accommodate the numbers they need to even continue development. The question is whether they can deliver a game capable of carrying that requirement and grow quick enough to maintain a player base to remain a viable product. It remains a big question mark if they can.
Doubtful. Best word to describe DU is Boring. No political intrigue. No governments or bigger pvp zones or reasons to do stuff. At its heart DU is 3 very crappy single player games hiding in a trench coat pretending to be an MMO.
-
5 minutes ago, Lethys said:
Tell me moar how Well i use homophobic slurs. Which, you know, doesnt mean shit because its just as Bad as griefer to me.
Oh and if you really think that i ever even implied "but mimimimimimimimi some random on some forum did it too" .....you clearly didnt get the irony i implied in that reply nor the sarcasm. Nor what i wanted to show with it.
Pls try harder to paint me the way you think i am. Im really disappointed by this trash Talk. Up your Game Buddy, you can do better!
Carebears are bad at everything.
-
5 minutes ago, i2eilly said:
The hauling does make PvP affordable though, so we could use something that makes a good amount of quanta. Maybe these alien cores could fill that part and then hauling wouldn't be so lucrative.
But I also agree, I want to play DU, not sit at my screen watching an SU counter go down!
Im not disagreeing, but what would also help is if smaller cores became legit viable in pvp. If you dont have to have a M/L full of exotic weapons and rare engines to compete, then it can become more accessible for people.
-
Just now, i2eilly said:
It is a start for sure, we have been needing more than L cores using Precision damn lasers for such a long time.
We will have to wait and see what the dev blogs contain as the moment it is all just a lot of speculation.
I have been seeing some variation in PvP ships lately which is good, this update will for sure mix it all up again now! So can only lead to be better PvP for us all.
As for the hauling that is the same kind of issue of precision weapons, why do/use anything else when nothing else can compete
Agreed. But my contention is, building better pvp can actually legit garner new customers. Advertising the current 4+ hour afk space flight for some space bucks....will not. So I give to shits if hauling gets a huge nerf, thats good imo. Game needs to move foward with things that can actually have a chance to get new customers.
-
1 minute ago, i2eilly said:
Exactly, it is already boring going afk for extended periods of time. Adding more time to that just kills one part of the game to make another more fun.
I agree we need more diversity in PvP, but not sure locking core speeds will really do much. It will really only affect ships that run away.
Most ships I fight want to fight, so we are normally below 10,000kmph until one starts to flee the fight. Maybe pirating haulers is different as most the fight is chasing the hauler at top speeds.
Haulers are always dead regardless unless the PvP pilot makes some huge mistake, a 2-3g Hauler isn't getting away from a 15-19g PvP ship.
I think the hauling needs to go anyway. Just remove it, remove the big rewards. Its terrible gameplay from the ground up. And changing speeds will matter for pvp, A LOT. It matters in EvE as proof. The diversity matters. And the stasis weapons can combat ships also trying to run, and that can add a good mechanic to further improve battles.
-
13 minutes ago, i2eilly said:
I am really hoping these speed changes are during combat lock only as it doesn't make sense to limit top speed by core size. Crates of sand could end up taking 8hours plus to complete? That really doesn't sound fun at all
as opposed to the current fun of 4+ hours? Its bad game design from the get go regardless.
-
1 hour ago, Taelessael said:
Agreed, it is quite unrealistic, and while I appreciate the balance reasons, it still annoys me.
I don't want realism. No one wants realism. We want a video game. People didn't pay into kickstarter for realism, they did for a game. Carebears have no problem with warp, don't complain about realism there do they? Or space breaks? Or AGG, or invisible linked range, or any of that. No we need these speed changes and caps because NQ is making a game, and they need People to play and pay for that game, not to appease a couple nerds.
-
14 minutes ago, blundertwink said:
I don't get how a game of mostly adults...mostly 30+ year old adults...so often devolves into pointless name-calling.
If you feel the need to use the term "carebear" or "butthurt", you don't have anything worth saying.
It's a deep irony that people who accuse others of having thin skin or being too "weak" for PvP so often have their feathers ruffled with the drop of a pin.
Ok Carebear. It always starts like above with people calling other people who are PLAYING THE GAME AS LITERALLY INTENDED....griefers. Its the pvp zone, its meant for.....pvp. Shocking I know.
-
1 hour ago, Daphne Jones said:
I've done it actually. It just takes good piloting and some luck. (and the enemy pilot has to make a wrong guess, but it's easy to lead him to that.) But a lower speed cap than the attacker would have stopped me and completely removed any risk or fun in the conflict - he would have auto-won and I would have auto-lost.
Other people in this forum say in the current state of the game a hauler can never get away, haha. Funny how that is.
-
7 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
mirror, mirror.. But it's OK ..
You've proven you think a plan/pitch == design. The PLAN was for AvA with a stretch goal of CvC.
Thats exactly what I said. Give a [filtered]ing rest. You are repeating exactly what I said. You came in and then said CvC was planned first, in a video 2 years ago, and then I showed you a video proving AvA was the PLAN.
Also, maybe English isn't your first language, if so ill give it a pass, but design can be a synonym for plan.
-
12 minutes ago, bleakcon said:
Largely agree with what you said here, force projection is a difficult thing to balance, we need look no further than eve to see the issues it raises but the issue I see with DU is the time investments currently required to escort being a real burdern, One point to mention is that if we allowed for higher max speeds this would mean a lot more fuel being required, anyhow any changes need to come with radar being made much better, 2su is pathetic.2su is pathetic. But you are right about force protection. If people actually start really pvping and NQ keeps developing pvp and allows for people to control valuable things, or land beyond Alien cores we gonna have real issues. When the whole server can at the push of a button warp to any location this will lead to huge problems. And right now make no mistake, anywhere inside the ring of planets, along with beacons you can create warp vectors to land on or close to any way point. We just don't really see the problems now because there is nothing to hold or fight over. Nobody cares if someone bunches up on an asteroid, there is too many and they respawn.
-
31 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
Whatever.. If you choose to prioritize a fantasy "we dream of doing this" over " here is what will happen" then .. sure..
You seem to lack severe reading comprehension. Ya Avatar combat is fantasy, thats why every other MMO has it....lol ok. And I never said either was better, in my original post I just pondered if things would been different if they chose that development process over switching, in no way I said it would be better.
'
'
That also sounds exactly like JC. Incompetent, and eventually removed for chasing a dream with no reality. The "no red flags guy". JC lived in more fantasy then that guy or anyone else. When asked how big ships could be, he was quoted as say "no technical limit" Yet we are bound by the size of a Dynamic L core because.....of technical limits. Shocking. But as I already proved to you, AvA was the original design. That is fact. Glad I could educate you.
-
14 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
Actually The first public discussion about PVP immediately set up the "CvC first, AvA later" idea and HERE it is..
Bro that is during ALPHA 3. LOOOOOOOOL.
Around the 7:30 mark, he literally days AvA is to start and CvC is a stretch goal. When I talk, you should listen.
-
20 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
When was AvA ever supposed to come first?
AvA has many more factors playing into it than CvC in space. Abd to be honest, seeing how NQ has gutted their server tech in order to be able to keep paying the bills, I doubt they hav ethe headroom to even consider adding it until they will be at a point where the game has showsn to be able to stand oin it's own through sunscriptions and the cash shop.
For AvA to have meaning, TW needs to be in place and with it the defensive mechanics and options that allow it to be viable. That whole loop wil take NQ at least a year to design and get in to the game in a basic form. I really do not see that happen until some time after release, if ever.
I also question how viable and/or functional AvA will be with Lock-Fire mechanics. That seems to not make much sense.Watch the older videos during pre alpha. They literally stated plain as day "we will be developing AvA first and then later will do CvC" this obv changed but there are videos still on YouTube that say this if you want to look. Obviously they changed plans, but the reasoning I don't remember them saying.
-
26 minutes ago, CoyoteNZ said:
Don’t need more shields, they need to limit shields to cores so S cores aren’t using L shields.
That's basically what I meant
Tho I would rebalnce them. M have 15mil, S 10mil, xs 5mil.
-
4 minutes ago, CoyoteNZ said:
T
But what about huge battle ships, they have the same problem.
With CSS they can’t just tank their way through a combat. The large weapons have problems with smaller hitting smaller cores, and now they can’t even chase if they are doing well.
Yes it will mean no S core size ships on L cores, but what about actual large L core battle ships, still no place for them?
Yes there can be a place if NQ balances right and L cores get more CCS, more shields and more resist pool. They will be for holding grid, or sieging, perfect for those alien cores where there is a fixed point to fight over that hopefully has lots of value.
-
8 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
Not wrong and frankly, it supports my argument in more ways then you may think. I fly in EVE with no weapons. I am confident I will not get caught unless I make a mistake or get unlucky. And I fly pretty much in Null and WH space exclusively as that is where my source of income in game is. The risk of getting caught is such that I can venture out and accept that this risk exists as in the long run it is negligible.
Now, if we move to DU, there is no way I will venture out into non safe zone space as anything potentially of value there has the inherent risk of me getting caught or stranded far beyond any possible value of what I may find there and the effort it may take to get it.
And I very much doubt what is coming in Athena wil change that, as from what I see now, this content is purely a conflict driver, designed and meant to create pewpew opportunity. You can argue this all you want, but the facts as we see them are that generally the playerbase ignores asteroids outside of the safezone and I expect the same will be true for these "alien cores".
The thing is, in EVE, sites like this would yield valuables and commodities that in turn feed into a number of possible other gameloops, and whether I, as an explorer, bring them in or a PVPer who happens to catch me, the items still end up on the market and in the hands of those players for whom they form the bases of _their_ gameplay.
Content like this needs to be designed to attract the NON PVP players and in turn give PVP players a chance to find and enage these players. That in itself is something I think NQ wants to achieve for DU (eventually), but they fail to grasp the core concept of this which is obvious by the fact they focus their explanation of this towards the PVP part which really is a sideeffect, or should be.
As it is, this seems designed to atrtract PVP players and so, they will find.. each other. And the content itself gets lost in the middle of it.im more interested in the how than the why of this patch (when combat starts, not why it starts) but I do agree with part of that as I said the DSAT is stupid. It gives no incentives for non-pvpers to go to asteroids, and in turn also hurts the pvpers. If they made a 10su range long range radar that "pinged" a general direction of stuff in space (wreck,roid,ship) would greatly increase exploration. And that radar would take time as to not be spammed. And then you add the mystery of finding an exotic roid that isnt easy to do, now it becomes more valulable. And if you are 120 su from Jago in a random direction, no one knows you are there if u the first to find it. No one may ever rind you, or maybe they do, but it takes time and exploration, which in turn would lead more people to go out because they would have some success rate, but still possible for pvp people to find other people for pew pew content. And its good active gameplay.
-
Just now, OrionSteed said:
Yes, it's evident to me that PvP will be the lifeblood that saves this game. I'm not a PvP player per se, but I fully support PvP players and any changes that help that playstyle. I've said that there has to be a point to it all, and although rudimentary, Athena is on the right path to creating more content. It has a ripple effect with everyone else. More goods will be sold (fuel, warp cells, engines, other elements, etc. etc.), more point to mine ore, ore prices rise and that creates its own opportunities. They always talk about sink and faucets, without destruction or decay, there is no sink. Keep it coming!
Agreed, anytime I go out to pvp or "try to" im always needing to to market at some point to buy cells, and kergon. So it really is all connected.
-
14 minutes ago, OrionSteed said:
I've been saying this forever too. I think the hope was PvP was the sink for parts, but it hasn't panned out (yet). If you're an industrial player, you have to be creative to keep busy. (Btw I seen one of your ships on Teoma a couple days ago =)) Karl something...
PVP and destruction helps the whole game. Look at EvE. There is a ship dying almost every couple seconds in that game. And that ship will need to be replaced. Industry guys are always busy as [filtered] in EvE. We had a group who made our caps back when i lived in lowsec, and they were over-worked. (we liked to yolo dreads, lol) but it gave them great purpose and they were non-agressive and didnt really like to pvp, but they LOVED being important, and knew we needed them for steady supply of caps. Sad NQ doesnt realize this
NQ: Time to answer the question - Will there be a wipe?
in General Discussions
Posted
Ive said this too many times before. If NQ plans to NOT WIPE, it actually benefits them to say that, and dbl down hard. Tell the players your stuff is here, come sub, and release is coming!! If NQ's plan is to wipe, it benefits them to NOT SAY ANYTHING NOW. It just makes sense.