Anopheles

99% of games have info on forums. It's just off putting for new players to have to do something particular.   Every hurdle prevents engagement.

I think this another good example for the communication from HQ: Unable to login
Reason because the Server is down for maintenance but this was only posted on Discord not their own Forum that how useful their own communication platform is.

Tired of these interviews to be honest...anything important? I started to tune out when he compared DU to Facebook or Twitter talking about how important the community is vs. the tech. 
 
I think JC likes talking about how great DU is a lot more than he likes working on the game or communicating with customers lol. 

Just make ship hit box 3D silhouettes an actual thing...  Job done.

Cube maxes the hitbox.... svelte slivers of ships are much more difficult to hit.
And limit weapon size to core size (or thereabouts).

...the more voxels you have underneath, lets say by percentage of the building space filled, the weaker the protection.
 
This way you aren't forced to make a cube anyway underneath said shield, or you could go voxel-free for a stronger shield, but would be in dire straights should they ever drop. I would like to think with proper balance, most people would be somewhere in the middle.
 
This, of course, doesn't address other glaring issues like targeting distance based purely on core size, and L weapons on XS cores, but it's a start.
Discuss.

Are you seriously comparing duping and hacks with stealing some voxels within the intended game mechanics (unintentionally and accidentally breaking NQs absolute horrible way of data storing)?
No one would defend dupers, no one would defend speed hackers, no one would defend other means of third party use or messing with the game code. Actively trying to break the game by creating programms is something on a completely different layer. No one wouldve bat an eye if they wouldve banned these kind of hackers and actual exploiters. They made a huge mistake and now theyre treating regular players who did not mess with the game in any other way than how it was intended like they hacked into their mainframe and deleted all accounts plus doxing JCs private address. This is out of proportion.

Share on Facebook

I wish there was a minimum IQ requirement here.

NQ only communicates through the media of third party interviews and banhammer.
 
Wish t'weren't so...
 
Put me in the "punish them yes, this punishment no" gang.
 
Also put me in the "nobody is going to do or try anything tricksy or ingenious for fear of banning" gang.

Agreed, but they've had time to make a patch that fixes this exploit...
 
It's hard to patch an exploit when you refuse to even look at the tickets or research the problem.
 
A very simply "we are aware of these problems and looking into it" would help massively, but instead we don't even know if NQ recognizes this as an issue (even after someone stole a whole market lol). 
 
NQ wants people to report exploits and bugs instead of taking advantage of them, but then when people do....they ignore it. So sure, making actual fixes to the code to prevent exploits is 10000x better than manual dev intervention, but we can't even get them to acknowledge issues or read tickets...

That the EULA/TOS is written poorly is true but the biggest problem here is that NQ is inadequately staffed (either in numbers or in quality) to handle a live service game like DU.
 
The total lack of engagement on the forums aside, the "No Ping" policy on Discord is understandable but players should be able to send DMs to NQ staff and expect them to be read in a timely fashion even if by default one should not DM NQ staff. You can set yourself to "do not disturb" if you do not want to be and that should show anyone that DMing that person may fall on deaf ears. Rule #1 for a professional application of a tool like Discord is you use the notification system both ways as it is provided.
 
The players who did this certainly are accountable for their actions and should "suffer" consequences buit NQ is pretty much bypassing their own mistakes and ignorance as when someone DMs you about an issue like this, such is the case here, you either act on it or forward it to someone who can. Even when DM is a no go, this was clearly an exception to the rule.
 
Personally, and recognizing it is their prerogative to handle their business as they see fit, I dislike the overall managing and moderating style NQ uses and for the places I worked, QA of these interactions would generally lead to a fail or a low score due to a lack of empathy, politeness, friendliness and general customer focused approach. Obviously rules need to be set and enforced, but NQ is not in a position to gain the impression of a knee jerk insecure and overly harsh company towards their user base.

I got stuck inside someone's L hover engine today for like 3-4 hours, and the support staff are on break, so I had to wait until someone helped me which thankfully someone did. I couldn't respawn because I got stuff with me. Just be careful of them because apparently you can run inside them and got stuck if they load late
 

Whoever did this is a hero.  NQ needed a wake up call. 

Player: Some jerk stole my ship by using an exploit!
NQ: qq more pleb. This is part of the game.
Also NQ: Some jerk stole our market by using an exploit!
(PERMA BAN)

The devs are continually under estimating players, this time they did not even expect them to hit 'B' .

So basically - what you're saying if players screw up RDMS, it's on them, if NQ screws up RDMS, it's a violation of the EULA?
 
Really guys? It's pretty clear when players are able to get access to other peoples constructs that they were 'not intended' to have access by the owner. Yet when it's players, that's fine.
 
But when YOU screw up - you ban the players?
 
Absurd.

So steal a ship using exploits - no problem. Steal a base using exploits - no problem. Take everything using RDMS? No problem - unless ts market. Not like.
 

Excuse me? Are you saying no blueprints were made of those markets? 'Fixing' it should be as simple as deleting the old construct and replacing it. A task that would take a couple minutes, maximum, with the blueprints.
 
This is a reaction I would expect from children in a sandbox, not mature adults.
 
edit: Apparently the 'quick fix' is a reference to the market orders.
 
To which I have exactly one reply: What?

Market orders should be stored in the database and no removal of market constructs should EVER affect those.

Can we get a dislike button?

Would actually be awesome...
 
Otoh, add a language to the game that isn't based on a real one, and make it the only language in the game for total eeeeeeemersion that the more you know, the better the game is.
 
Like, erm, lua.

No, I think it is solid gameplay, once the safe zone is removed I hope they bring it back.  NQ see it differently, i am cool with that.

Would I ever do it, no, of course not I am trader industrialist, that avoids pvp.  But I want it in the game, I want people to be able to steal the stuff of people who are careless.  I have never left a single ship of mine on anyone else's or an unclaimed tile, because i look after my stuff.  I get it, some other people want the game to look after them, I am fine thanks.

If they are openly advertising actual exploits I 100% agree, but this was not an exploit, it was a use of gameplay mechanics which it was unclear whether they were intended to be used that way.  Like i said, I see the it as a 100% legit thing to do, you dont, it is a grey area.  NQ should have clarified it was seen as a exploit, even if they didnt have a fix for it, if they had done then I agree a ban would be appropriate.  As NQ didnt clarify the situation, there is no way you can sanction the players involved.

If they are openly advertising stuff that is confirmed as an exploit, different story.

For the basis of clarity / bias can you confirm if you lost a ship to these people?

They've yet to prove that it will work in a real-world setting. They've done simulations/benchmarks, which mean very little...
 
Network ops scale exponentially. There's 10 people moving around a room. Each of those 10 clients must sync their position with the server. To show other players moving, each client must synchronize the positions of the other 9 players as well. If another player walks into the room, it requires exponentially more resources. Obviously this is a very simplified example, but shows why massive player interactions are difficult. 
 
There's a reason they split people into 10 different starting cities....their promise of huge battles and big cities shouldn't be taken that seriously IMHO...I've yet to see any evidence for this being realistic (yes even post-beta which is only expected to last a year). 

First and foremost - there is no Wikipedia encyclopedic article page for Griefing - the entry that DOES exist is an essay on conduct policy and is an OPINION piece - and an entirely uncited one - frankly if not for that disclaimer it would be candidate for speedy deletion.
 
Just like your definition of this being 'text book griefing' is an opinion.
 
It was in fact theft of ship. That is what it was. There is no way around THAT definition of it.
 
If that theft of ships was done with intent to grief other players as opposed to just plain old theft is very much up to debate.

"This house we started building 15 minutes ago has no roof!"