Jump to content

le_souriceau

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    974
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to NQ-Naunet in Save the Date: Official Dual Universe Livestream Dec. 7!   
    Greetings, friends!

    Buckle up and get ready for lots of juicy new information about Dual Universe directly from Creative Director J.C. Baillie in our livestream at 6 pm UTC/1 pm EDT on Monday, December 7, 2020. 
     
    JC will talk about the changes introduced in the 0.23 update and what future changes are in store before opening the floor to take your questions. 

    Head over to the Dual Universe Twitch channel now to hit those Follow and Notification buttons so you won’t miss it! 

    In the meanwhile, you may want to read these recent dev blogs to learn more about additional changes coming in the 0.23 update:
     
    Dev Blog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships Dev Blog: Element Destruction Dev Blog: Construct Intellectual Property Protection and Blueprints Duplication
      We invite you now to discuss some of the hot topics you’re looking forward to talking about with J.C. ✨

    JOIN THE CONVERSATION HERE!
     
  2. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to XKentX in Let's talk DU events   
    If that ship would be in deep PvP zone that would be fun. Some stuff would definitely go down around there.
    Now, it's a flying circus with base64 enthusiasts.
     
    Event idea:
    NQ staff takes a ship on a weekend, some L badass battleship. Arkship announces rogue admiral and provides coords of it (in PVP or PVE space) + puts a bounty on his head.
    Players go there, for each damage dealt you get quanta. That battleship randomly shoots at approaching players so you can't just grind it and should maneuver/disengage if damaged.
    At least some action...
     
  3. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to SpiceRub in EVENT - TOTAL PARTICIPATION - PVP - END OF THE WORLD   
    Clean the tubes, dust off your seats, and warm up your engines!

    Your presence has been demanded by the powers that may be, to participate in the END OF THE WORLD, PVP BONANZA!

    This is a call to EVERY NOVEAN with a weapon. Soon the update will arrive, the time to leave the womb is upon us!
    Only the strongest Noveans will birth into a new age of Dual Universe, so sharpen your resolve and under Helios you shall Triumph or PERISH.

    Before the update arrives, we shall battle under the sun on the 6th of December, 4PM EST.

    This is a PUBLIC event! Open to anyone willing to send off with one last triumphant Hurrah!

    Come one, come all, and witness the Greatness and fall of our Empires!

    Event details.
    Time: 4 PM EST
    Date: 6th december
    Location: in PVP space, few SU out of the Edge of the Alioth safezone, toward ION.

    The original idea was to do this while JC's live AMA was on, however it will likely be on a weekday, so it's been decided that a Sunday will allow for greater participation.
    The reason for this whole debacle is due to a rumoured update, that could come like a thief in the night at any time very soon and clip our wings due to a rumoured massive overhaul of DU's mechanics. So we shall pull everyone out for some fun and MASS PVP action while we can! 
     
    It's very possible that the servers will break, but I'm certain 98% of DU's population haven't participated in a mass fleet battle, so this shall be an exciting experience for everyone to look forward to.

    PLEASE NOTE:
    Considering people may not wish to join the event, wanting to save their assets for the great update, Band of Outlaws will relinquish ANY ships that may be captured by Band of Outlaws in the event, thus alleviating any pains of loss, without taking away from the core experience of the event. 

    Apologies for coming up with this event fairly close to its date, there is no announced date to the new update which could come as soon as early next week (Official notice is quite likely to be a few days at most). Looking forward to seeing everyone out in force, lets burn down the Amazon servers together! ?
     
     

  4. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Underhook in Let's talk DU events   
    First -- great thanks for detailed answers!
     
    About 4).
     
    I perfectly understand difficulties -- I was doing same (on obviously more amateurish level) leading MC server event team. One powerful solution -- adding layers to event, aimed for different types of players. Let me explain on example of your last event.
     
    1) Race part. Fun/competition for organized/pvp oriented people, some daring solo explorers. You can keep it completly same. Its ok. 
     
    Yet once it over, serious chunk of players felt completly "late to the party" and, considering all valuable content was copied/shown in screenshots and videous -- without much of reason to even visit event location. So let's do 2 easy things (I think they pretty much within powers of your event team toolset):
     
    2) Add despenser or two, so every player in game can get some memo item, like UEF flag or poster, or other "devs only" minor decorative asset. Leave it acceccable for week.
     
    It gives solo/late players "collector" reason to actualy visit wreck and get their little thing and be participant of grand story (even if humble one). 
     
    3) Then ask art team to make several very quick, utlra rough stetches of 2-3  "UEF ships". Lets assume its by lore -- personal sketch albom of second leutenent LaBarr, found on wreck. Publish it. Make it building contest -- ask players to build ships based on this sketches. Builders (who may never even be remotly interested in "race" part) will be delighted too and become involved in content.
     
    So now, with very little added trouble (I hope) we have generaly same, but more memorable event with much larger player base covered/busy/happy/not salty.
     
     
     
     
     
  5. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Ochiniwa in Let's talk DU events   
    First -- great thanks for detailed answers!
     
    About 4).
     
    I perfectly understand difficulties -- I was doing same (on obviously more amateurish level) leading MC server event team. One powerful solution -- adding layers to event, aimed for different types of players. Let me explain on example of your last event.
     
    1) Race part. Fun/competition for organized/pvp oriented people, some daring solo explorers. You can keep it completly same. Its ok. 
     
    Yet once it over, serious chunk of players felt completly "late to the party" and, considering all valuable content was copied/shown in screenshots and videous -- without much of reason to even visit event location. So let's do 2 easy things (I think they pretty much within powers of your event team toolset):
     
    2) Add despenser or two, so every player in game can get some memo item, like UEF flag or poster, or other "devs only" minor decorative asset. Leave it acceccable for week.
     
    It gives solo/late players "collector" reason to actualy visit wreck and get their little thing and be participant of grand story (even if humble one). 
     
    3) Then ask art team to make several very quick, utlra rough stetches of 2-3  "UEF ships". Lets assume its by lore -- personal sketch albom of second leutenent LaBarr, found on wreck. Publish it. Make it building contest -- ask players to build ships based on this sketches. Builders (who may never even be remotly interested in "race" part) will be delighted too and become involved in content.
     
    So now, with very little added trouble (I hope) we have generaly same, but more memorable event with much larger player base covered/busy/happy/not salty.
     
     
     
     
     
  6. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Heidenherz in Let's talk DU events   
    First -- great thanks for detailed answers!
     
    About 4).
     
    I perfectly understand difficulties -- I was doing same (on obviously more amateurish level) leading MC server event team. One powerful solution -- adding layers to event, aimed for different types of players. Let me explain on example of your last event.
     
    1) Race part. Fun/competition for organized/pvp oriented people, some daring solo explorers. You can keep it completly same. Its ok. 
     
    Yet once it over, serious chunk of players felt completly "late to the party" and, considering all valuable content was copied/shown in screenshots and videous -- without much of reason to even visit event location. So let's do 2 easy things (I think they pretty much within powers of your event team toolset):
     
    2) Add despenser or two, so every player in game can get some memo item, like UEF flag or poster, or other "devs only" minor decorative asset. Leave it acceccable for week.
     
    It gives solo/late players "collector" reason to actualy visit wreck and get their little thing and be participant of grand story (even if humble one). 
     
    3) Then ask art team to make several very quick, utlra rough stetches of 2-3  "UEF ships". Lets assume its by lore -- personal sketch albom of second leutenent LaBarr, found on wreck. Publish it. Make it building contest -- ask players to build ships based on this sketches. Builders (who may never even be remotly interested in "race" part) will be delighted too and become involved in content.
     
    So now, with very little added trouble (I hope) we have generaly same, but more memorable event with much larger player base covered/busy/happy/not salty.
     
     
     
     
     
  7. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to NQ-Naunet in Let's talk DU events   
    Excellent questions, @le_souriceau ❤️ I passed this feedback along to the team this morning, and have returned with some answers.

    1) You're right, and this is a goal we're actively striving to meet.  (As the NQ team and game grow, so to does our ability to develop better processes/alignment between Community, Marketing and Game Design; the trifecta of event-related departments.) Put plainly, we're getting organized and finding our rhythm. The earlier events are announced, the better. (Unless of course we purposely want to sew the seeds of mystery & surprise.)

    2) This one is tougher to do at present, but it's not out of the question in the future! Running events in/for DU is obviously a newer experience for us, so the first handful we run are not indicative of what will happen down the road. We'd love to try some weekend events eventually, we just have to do some serious finessing on our current iteration of events. Once we've hit an events 'sweet spot' as it were, we can staff for weekend coverage and go to town. Right now however, we want to stick to weekdays so everyone at NQ is at their desk and ready to jump in should anything happen.

    3) We're heading in this direction! It's always been our desire to hold events that last for long stretches of time. This particular event was obviously limited in some ways, but again - that's not indicative of what you can expect for every future event. We're just getting started.

    (If I may add a little comparison for point 3: we've seen the community ask us to please prioritize the fixing of bugs before the implementation of feature changes. This is the philosophy we're applying to events, essentially. Fix any issues with events first, THEN upgrade to weekend event 'features'.)

    4) Noted!! One team member raised a good point that I'd like to volley back to all of you: "right now, it's tough to design an event that works for solo/new players that also can't be overwhelmed/overrun with more experienced folks". What say all of you? What kinds of solo events would you like to see during Beta that can't be taken over by groups/experienced players?
  8. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Istanicas in Let's talk DU events   
    I wanted to talk not about any particular, concluded NQ-made events, but more about their overall direction and organization in future.
     
    Can we expect?..
     
    1) Prior anouncement (at least week before start, better - two).
    2) Scheduling on week-end. 
    3) Inclusion of long-term events, where players can meaningfully participate in active stage in duration of several days or even week.
    4) Inclusion of more solo/new players friendly events, where they doing more individual goals, not being clearly pitted against groups of veterans.
     
    What else do people want?
     
    Fire away, we now have CMs that like to read our ideas and feedback ?
     
     
     
     
     
  9. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Daphne Jones in Let's talk DU events   
    I wanted to talk not about any particular, concluded NQ-made events, but more about their overall direction and organization in future.
     
    Can we expect?..
     
    1) Prior anouncement (at least week before start, better - two).
    2) Scheduling on week-end. 
    3) Inclusion of long-term events, where players can meaningfully participate in active stage in duration of several days or even week.
    4) Inclusion of more solo/new players friendly events, where they doing more individual goals, not being clearly pitted against groups of veterans.
     
    What else do people want?
     
    Fire away, we now have CMs that like to read our ideas and feedback ?
     
     
     
     
     
  10. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from CptLoRes in Let's talk DU events   
    I wanted to talk not about any particular, concluded NQ-made events, but more about their overall direction and organization in future.
     
    Can we expect?..
     
    1) Prior anouncement (at least week before start, better - two).
    2) Scheduling on week-end. 
    3) Inclusion of long-term events, where players can meaningfully participate in active stage in duration of several days or even week.
    4) Inclusion of more solo/new players friendly events, where they doing more individual goals, not being clearly pitted against groups of veterans.
     
    What else do people want?
     
    Fire away, we now have CMs that like to read our ideas and feedback ?
     
     
     
     
     
  11. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Underhook in Let's talk DU events   
    I wanted to talk not about any particular, concluded NQ-made events, but more about their overall direction and organization in future.
     
    Can we expect?..
     
    1) Prior anouncement (at least week before start, better - two).
    2) Scheduling on week-end. 
    3) Inclusion of long-term events, where players can meaningfully participate in active stage in duration of several days or even week.
    4) Inclusion of more solo/new players friendly events, where they doing more individual goals, not being clearly pitted against groups of veterans.
     
    What else do people want?
     
    Fire away, we now have CMs that like to read our ideas and feedback ?
     
     
     
     
     
  12. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Emptiness in Let's talk DU events   
    I wanted to talk not about any particular, concluded NQ-made events, but more about their overall direction and organization in future.
     
    Can we expect?..
     
    1) Prior anouncement (at least week before start, better - two).
    2) Scheduling on week-end. 
    3) Inclusion of long-term events, where players can meaningfully participate in active stage in duration of several days or even week.
    4) Inclusion of more solo/new players friendly events, where they doing more individual goals, not being clearly pitted against groups of veterans.
     
    What else do people want?
     
    Fire away, we now have CMs that like to read our ideas and feedback ?
     
     
     
     
     
  13. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Daphne Jones in Territory defense?   
    Because there is probably none right now -- beyond some whiteboards and, I hope, ultra-early stage internal prototypes.
     
    Root of all our problems, generaly, that NQ spend so much time on making game tech stapples to actualy work (stuggle is still ungoing, with PvP desyncs and other painful issues), that they simply were left with very little time and resources for balance/features things we so hungry for. This why their interest in communication with us always... was kinda compomised: like there is no sense to listen people ordering you fancy pizza, when you have realisticly only 1$ frozen (4 years ago) one and microwave. Like they probably glad to make us happy, but they can't. At least right now.
     
    Its honestly aways conflict point for me. Intellectualy I understand (or guess) NQ realities and probably they doing OK in them, in terms of survival and slow growth. Even good in some cases. But passionate, player part of me, often is in pissed-off volatile trigger state.
  14. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from BlueDevila in In-Game Event: Search For The GO_D ST__   
    I direly hope it will be much more inсlusive event this time, not nonsense like with thoramine. Lessons learned?
  15. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Astrodisiac in In-Game Event: Search For The GO_D ST__   
    I direly hope it will be much more inсlusive event this time, not nonsense like with thoramine. Lessons learned?
  16. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to Mordgier in Territory defense?   
    Speculating: NQ doesn't know how it'll work either.
  17. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to blazemonger in Promises, Promises (referral program and backer pack devaluation)   
    Except the value of the packs is based on their DAC count which was valued at around $15 up until the announcement NQ cut that to $7
    Beta keys were also always part of the package so there is no (added) value there for backers.
     
    Unless NQ jacks the price back up to $15 at release, which they may do as they have not actually committed to staying at $7 past release, the pitch for the packs would be overvalued by pretty much 100% at the current sub prices and NQ promised they would provide more detail and an update on this several times now.
     
    While I can understand that NQ may not want to release their pricing plans going forward, IMO they have a responsibility to their backers to be open and transparent about this especially as that was another promise made during kickstarter and beyond.
  18. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    We've got a Q&A scheduled with JC very soon (that I'll be part of!) - I will bring this set of questions to him. If he can't answer on-air, I will try to at least get his thoughts and bring them back here.  
  19. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to XKentX in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    If all you want is mine some, build some, explore some, quest or mission - do that (once the later is implemented) why do you care about other people fighting each other somewhere ? They fight there for high tech resources and risking high amount of their resources to get it. You can still use your "safe space engine" and mine all you need for it by harvesting rocks on sanct.
     
    No you don't need any higher tier items, what's the point of higher tier items if they don't have any challenge to get them ? Imagine that your basic engine is the highest tier and stop caring about others.
     
    For those who don't want to cooperate or fight with others, can I ask why are you playing MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER online game ?
  20. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to Peregrin in Dual Universe Lexikon   
    There's an art gallery and a reading promenade now, both under construction.
     
    All contributions (writings, voxel arts, uploaded images) welcome !
  21. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to Olmeca_Gold in Survivor Bias In DU's Development   
    Their feedback will never be elaborate as ours. NQ needs to just better assert their own critical thinking when absorbing player feedback into their game development and not let survivors take full reins of development.
     
    My claim isn't that some existing development schedule is taken off track. It is that "surviving player feedback" takes more priority than it should. The schedule will say "more iteration on PvP". Details dictate how that develops. I already gave many examples in my OP.
     
    1) PvP priorities have been focused on the construct building aspect. Borg cubes are a big issue, but truly they not the biggest issue with PvP. Lack of commitment mechanics is the biggest issue with PvP consensual PvP (PvP among PvP'ers). Lack o af risk/reward spread for non-consensual PvP (piracy etc) is the second biggest issue with it.
    2) Many features in the feature upvote page are builder-grounded features. Mining units are favored by construct builders who don't want to mine. Focusing on that request instead of a better mining experience fits the survivor bias pattern. Similarly, voxel vertices editor is something they should work perhaps 2 years later, not now. Because shipbuilding is already super interesting without that, but PvP and other areas aren't.
    3) I heard JC speaking significantly against API because surviving players prioritize "immersion". Organizations in single shard sandboxes lose 200% of depth without API. Without the API there is no security checks. Meaning we as organizations can't provide new players (or even players we've known for months) with organization assets to help them. It's free lunch for RDMS thieves. Without the API there is no in-depth market PvP.  We could do so much with it. RDMS management, organization membership management, organization role management. They could target doing all these tools ingame, but that's not a realistic target. API is a great way to outsource most needs of a single shard sandbox.
    4) They just released the game at the current state into the beta believing "the basics are there". The basics to start the sandbox were there only for construct builders. Not for PvPers, explorers, RP'ers, empire builders. Even mining needs large revamps.
    5) Just look at their social media. 80% of the posts are slick constructs, LUA, ship expos, ship promo videos. Those people and organizations get official promotion. People had big PvP battles. No promotion. We created an org with 30 paid careers just to get people interested. No promotion.
     
    Anyways, I can think of more examples but I'm not claiming I can find 100 ways NQ submits into survivor bias. There are just enough samples to begin seeing a pattern. I'm not pessimistic about the game. Just wanted to provide a constructive early-warning.
     
     
    A conversation around this is  tangential. We can agree to disagree with this statement. We could debate it if NPCs were currently financially viable for NQ. In essence, the game would have been way deeper with missions, or NPCs to grind; instead of a superficial daily allowance. It would take nothing from your experience either.
  22. Like
    le_souriceau got a reaction from Jinxed in Why this game is not what I expected ...   
    Well, semi because:
     
    1) We have rocks (while its minimal ammout), its regeneration still on paper.
    2) Obviously some sort of regenerating ores incoming (when and how is another question). So state of fineteness is temporary.
     
    But I agree and expect "ore topics" to pop up more and more starting by Chirstmas/New Year. Initialy T4-T5 only, tho.
  23. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to vertex in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    First of all: awesome! I really like the idea of stored momentum and wished for it quite some time. But I see huge issues with it that at first feel worse than not fixing it right away. Sorry, I didn't read all of the non-NQ replies here, but I want to add to the list of concerns and apologize if they've already been mentioned.
     
    Most of the time I got my AGG ship parked at 1050m above my base at Sanctuary (using the fact that logging out will freeze it in place because the AGG wouldn't keep it there when I'm gone as I understand it). I use an elevator platform (sometimes called magic carpet) to reach it and go down again. The AGG ship can maneuver in atmosphere but not lift without AGG support. Will my design be invalidated by this change? @NQ-Naunet could you please put child gloves on for us AGG captains and explain exactly how we need to prepare and what to expect?
      If I get disconnected while piloting, along with restoring my momentum, logging in should also restore me in the pilot seat. Otherwise I might crash for not reaching the seat fast enough.
      The position from where the player entered a seat should always be persistent. Currently you can get trapped in your own construct when you log out while seated, because it resets the position from where you entered the seat originally and the "default position after login" can place you inside the ship's structure, effectively trapping you. If your ship is stationary and frozen that's ok and you can enter build mode to free yourself - but if momentum is restored you might end up trapped, racing against time to get out of the structure before you hit something. You could argue bad ship design, but I feel that would be unfair, as placing a seat in a spot with a low ceiling for example or between flat elements would be a perfectly fine design in reality, but gets you trapped in DU.
      Remember to restore thrust settings and engine states as well. If you are floating on vertical engines (like elevator platform / magic carpet or heavy hauler with slow starting XL space engines) and need to set thrust and spin up these engines first, it could be enough to get you into a non-recoverable position.
      Make 100% sure that all game assets have been loaded before you restore momentum. Right after login I remember to experience heavy lag before the game runs fluently after everything loaded. Stuff like that made me fall through the ground and get a "Back to the surface..." screen - or fall through not loaded elements and end up in space (a friend entered another player's construct throug the not yet loaded door and got trapped for thinking there was none). Latter being ok if my ship is stationary - but imagine falling out of your ship when logging in, while the momentum is being restored and your ship shoots away. Ouch. You should freeze players in place until the surface they were standing on has been fully loaded or securely known to have be removed.
      When I first tried the radar in orbit to lock onto a ship out of curiosity DU dived into some kind of memory leak and made the game unplayable. Other times I was on a perfect approach vector, but the loading of planetary assets (or something else) killed my framerate. In both situations I had to use the emergency exit brake to avoid fatality. Same happened on markets where we already made a habit of landing 1km away and walking the distance to avoid crashing due to market lag.
      There seems to be a loop that constantly reinitializes all elements on a construct. This loop has a flaw and sometimes skips an element or takes minutes to find and enable it (at launch or mid flight). Just yesterday I was unable to turn right with my elevator platform and kept spinning left until 1-ish minute later DU realized that I had adjustors to turn right too. In the past this often led to situations where the emergency exit brake was the only thing that could rescue me.  
    Given some time I think I could come up with more situation where a logout is the only thing able to rescue me from bad situations that I didn't cause myself. I'm all in on the idea that it should be in the player's control to live or die by being careful and planning ahead - but right now I feel like freezing my ship using logout to brake does more good than it does bad.
     
    Further I'd like to know if freezing a ship will be completely gone and if not I'd like to know if an approaching player or running around on your ship will initialize physics, or if that only happens when you enter the pilot seat?
     
    Regarding the maneuver tool: 50m is not enough and I feel this should scale with core size. If your ship is 128m, moving it by 50m doesn't suffice, while at the same time it's enough for an XS sized ship. Imagine your L sized ship laying on its back and you can't get it high enough to spin around? Errr... nope. Ok, takes only 3 Minutes to reset, but still rather uncomfortable to stand around watching the clock tick. Maneuver distance should always at least be a tad more than the edge length of your ship's building zone - best make it the distance between the upper left front and lower right back corner (I'm sure there's a term for the diagonal line in 3D space in English, but I don't know it). The constraints about standing on a planet or static construct should be enough to prevent platform-climbing and I don't see any benefit in limiting L cores (or XL later?) to 50m. Also, what happens when I stand on my carrier and maneuver a small ship around on it? Will it initialize physics after maneuvering and fall down on the carrier, meaning no more "docked at the side using clamp-ish force fields to walk over"? Maybe implement docking clamps first before removing the option to use the maneuver tool to simulate the effect.. but I'm not sure if that was even implied. Some clarification would be welcome, but either way it's not that crucial as the removal of the emergency brake  
  24. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    I'm going to take a crack at summarizing the feedback I've received so far - I invite everyone to pile on and let me know if I've missed anything! Hang tight... it's-a-comin'...!
  25. Like
    le_souriceau reacted to blazemonger in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Can I take a moment to say it's very nice to see NQ in here actually engaging in the conversation.. what's this I feel? A breath of fresh air?
     

×
×
  • Create New...