blazemonger

So what happens if player A withdraws 10 slots, the org gets a warning on the next bi-weekly check, then they adjust and following that between the first and second bi-weekly slot another player withdraws 10 slots? Will the system be able to identify this and so it is not until the third bi-weekly slot that something happens if the org doe snot react to both instances? The quoted part of the devblog really seems to imply that this is not accounted for and so unwarranted sanctions are activated. I also hope the above shows how garbled the messaging from NQ is here. This is not about the community being confused or not understanding, it is about NQ being vague, leaving potential loopholes open and generally not communicating well. I really think this mechanic is overengineerd and will cause a lot of potential confusion and potentially see NQ missing details like this in their implementation. There is no mention of this situiation which is easily expected to occur. I'm also not sure if all this is really needed. I'd like to see NQ be open about he reasons for all of this as I honestly feel there is an oportunity for players to chime in and provide constructive ideas and sugeestions to find a better way to resolve whatever problem NQ is trying to address with this. Frankly, it feels like NQ is stuck in an internal feedback loop on this and is not considering alternatives. Over these past two devblogs, the sense that NQ has no real understanding of what players do, ask for, understand or where NQ needs to improve seems quite obvious. Maybe NQ should start coming to the community sooner, or at least a select few from different walks of life in game, to ask for feedback and suggestions.. You know, like the previous two failed instances of a player council. Maybe NQ needs to dedicate time to that as it really would seem that they can actually win time back if they do. And do not be afraid to ask your critical players, you may just find that they have some useful ideas and feedback on top of not just saying what you want to hear. Knee jerk responses like this tend to mean mistakes will be made an details overlooked.

I do not think this was pre-planned, I think NQ just lacks the skillset to handle these things correctly and has a not so great internal line of communication management which causes this to happen. The second devblog is really showing they have no real idea what is going on in game and just run numbers by averaging a lot, same happened with the taxes. If they actually do not have in depth data on what players are doing in game (or worse, they do but have no way to interpret them correctly), that is a concern. The second point for me was that it seems NQ tends to still go by "you do not understand" or " you seem to be confused", which is really not the case. Then in the end they massively overplay their hand with their second "offer", a typical sign of a weak position and trying to end the discussion/negotiation by offering what you can, not where you'd like to end up. The difference between 42 and 200 is just too much. But I think we should move on. Knowing we will be at a similar point of discussion again (unfortunately).

This seems a bit excessive in the opposite direction and I really hop ethi is not going to bite NQ in the long run. But it covers probably most of the concerns raised previously and so.. fair enough.. Moving on..

While I take it you are exaggerating with 10,000 cores here for demonstartion purposes and not in context fo DU, a solution like HPE Greenlake would offer just that, it's literally pay as you go/need where you can have your max expected capacity on premise ready to be scaled up to when needed. The hardware sits on Premise on the edge between local DC and (private) cloud.

None of this works to benefit the game, it works to benefit the blockhain and the people who are using the game to their benefit in that context. It does _nothing_ for the playerbase nor for the game itself. It's just a parasitic realtionship that only really benefits the parasite. The day DU moves to blockchain and/or introduces NFT is where I get off. Frankly, NQ employing a freelance "Gaming NFT advisor" is a big concern for me in that respect

There is some excellent private cloud solutions which will enable NQ to have far greater flexibility and ability to scale quickly. At the time NQ started their journey, these were really not yet in place. NQ has sofar however not shown an understanding of this nor have they actively engaged in opportunities presented to them that would allow them to take advantage of such options.

If you have three accounts, this means you have 126 cores IF nothing changes in the numbers I still do not get why solo players deploy 100+ mining units. Well I do, it's because you are trying to play a MMO by yourself and guess what, that's not going to work, or at least should not work. If you choose to play alone, you should experience limits in what you can do and as it stands DU pretty much still allows anyone to do everything as NQ has so far mostly dialled back anything they implemented to try and drive the MMO gameplay one should expect to be seen. If players keep playing alone, the game will never go anywhere. You _should not be able to do it all by yourself_ , that is the very fundamental basis on which MMO games are built. Using Org cores for personal use was never intended to be a thing and yes, while you can and should hold NQ accountable for allowing it to happen anyway and not deal with this before they opened the gates of subs. NQ certainly is to blame for this messy situation, but the action they now take is needed. It's very clear from the majority of comments, too many are just running around in their own little bubble, trying to be one man mega companies. That is just not going to work. This action I believe is also quietly intended to counter the looming exploit of hundreds upon hundreds of cores for beta key accounts, stacked under a single main one, all of which will remain in game and active as the beta accounts end on launch. I expect NQ is trying to work towards a point where they will not have to wipe come launch (which I believe they wil need to do anyway) and this is certainly a part of that plan. Lastly, launch is not "far away".. I'm pretty sure we are close to counting down to launch in single digit months.

Your argument is certainly valid in how you sum it up.

2 accounts is 84 cores You mention you play with some friends in certain situations, you all share the burden of the cores needed for that activity I'd say you shoudl have well beyond 90 cores available overall. As I mentioned elsewhere, I do expect NQ will tweak the number and end up somewhere between 50 and 75 cores on one charatcer when combining personal and org core slots I'd say you wil be fine..

And so, the org should accomodate this through the core count they have available. That is part of the point in all this as I see it. A large org would have a lot of core slots if they manage this properly. they can set up constructs for mining which you woudl then "operate" You, as an individual, should not have to do this, the collective (the org) should.

I get the general idea of this and it may be something to consider but as you said, it merely addresses the situation for absent players and in the process creates a number of new problems like territory ownership and still drives storage cost. The problem though is in your last sentence.. why would solo players need "hundreds of cores for hundreds of mining units". I have four 3 tile locations for each of the T1 ores on Alioth (12 cores) and those give me more than enough ore to pay tax on everything, build what I need to build and buy what I need as well. Add in some asteroids over the weekends and I'm more than good.. The cores are owned by my personal org so in the new situation I still have plenty left for my shared ships and bases. 42 cores for a solo player really should be enough, as mentioned, I do expect NQ will bring that number up a bit but not by that much and to less than double that I hope.

So much noise.. In the end, NQ will tweak the number a bit and most of the tears will dry.. This was unavoidable and needed. Sucks for those who took advantage of what is clearly a broken part of the game and I get the frustration, but it needed to be done. I can only hope NQ has enough of a spine to weather this storm of noise. They'll come out stronger and more prepared for launch on the other side, something quite a few seem to not understand. But at the same time, they will just make the same mistakes again when it comes to the eventual power management. Communication is their Achilles heel.

I think just "unreasonable, we will leave" is not at all helpful .. build your case, expain why you would need hundreds of cores. In the end yes, NQ clearly made a great many number of gross miscalculations and have been in the process of correcting that basically since beta started. It also cost JC his company and job I am pretty sure. But I expect these changes are needed if NQ is to enable themselves to bring the game to a launch. If they fail, they fail and that would be on them, but in light of what I expect is the position they are in right now, they have little choice. Besides, the wipe will be the great equalizer allowing players to rethink and restructure their presence in game or leave.. But I expect most will adjust and stay.. Finally, this change was coming, many knew it and most of us who discussed it turned out o be pretty close to what NQ now actually puts on the table. iI just hope they do not do the same thing as with the taxes and undo it before it even gets a a chance to be effective.. Although I expect NQ has much less wiggleroom here.

I think the core count changes really make sense if you look at them objectively. The very stream of comments shows why, players have massively used what was intended to be ORG based cores for personal use. One player should NOT have access to or need hundreds of cores. Yes, I certainly lay blame with NQ for the way they have let this get out of control and only now act. This should have been done years ago, but NQ seems to never have even considered this scenario which must be a big part in their operating cost. That said, I also see how some recent changes, mainly MU and the requirement to run them from a static core has caused an increase in core use. As they are, a player has 42 core slots, 17 personal and 25 assignable to an org at max skill I'd say that the peronal core sount shoudl be more like 30 or so and the "reserved for org" cores could be more like 50 at max talents Players start with 5 personal and 5 org cores Personal core talents add 2 each level for the basic talent and 3 each level for the advanced which can be trained after L5 on the basic, total personal cores which mean 5+10+15 = 30 personal cores Org core slots add 3 each level on basic, advcanced and expert talents for 5+15+15+15 for 50 cores The basic org core talent (for 20 cores) will also allow these 20 cores an dthe 5 base cores to be assigned to an org the player is super-legate for. advanced and expert can only be assigned to an org that has 5 or more members So players can have 50 cores on a personal org and can still assign 25 cores to an org of their choice I believe NQ has no real choice in this and will push it though but I also feel the number are a bit too tight and need to be loosened up. But generally, while it will hurst for some, I feel it's not unreasonable for them to push this.

The exploit at the root of this was fixesd a few patches back, this is just the follow up to prevent constructs using these to fly but it overshoots drastically in its purpose It'd good indeed NQ realised and paused deploying this.

The problem withy more engines is that it will only lead to the same walls of engines but more powerful.. Generally players tend to not build what they need, but build what they can and then adjust their needs accordingly. I still do mnost of my flying with my K-480S and Brute and really do not need more. And I am fairly sure that will be true for many who fly some of the monstrosities I see around the game..

Power management IS game content, having to take the power requirements for your bases and ships into account shoudl be an integral part of design and managing your constructs. Games like Space engineers show how complex and multifacated this can get with fairly simpe means. I posted on this months back here.. And I've seen quite a few good suggestions and idea floating around. Unfortunately none of it even got the attention of NQ as it is increasingly obvious they do not read and/or followup on such posts, eithere with us or internally.

Is the design team aware that players no longer have a need to dig into the ground as NQ removed ore from it? and do they realise that because of this, wreck which are buried are _much_ less likely to be discovered Would he game design team recognise that this is not something that has just come up but has been discussed on the forums by the community and some interesting ideas were floated by the community to make this more interesting, engaging and fun? Things like special equipment like ground radar, creating a gameplay loop where players go out and scan for wrecks. As with asteroids, it appears that none of the discussion happening on this and other topics reaches the design team so they may not even be aware of these issues and/or suggestions. But above all that, how can they not realize that changes that they themselves would have made to the gameplay, specifically mining, would impact this quite seriously and how come that they have not started to consider options to improve this?

It would seem the game design team indeed does not understand... the quite clear suggestion of making asteroids more of a "universal" part of the game and not a "starts on Saturday" event which pretty much means that unless you can play during the time they spawn within the first 24-48 hours you lose out on them. PVP zone asteroids are mostly massive arrows screaming "PEWPEW HERE" pointing to where players are mining and eventually just handing the asteroid position to "pirates" as a freebee.. And to round this off, the community in general has been trying to make NQ aware of this since the introduction of asteroids on PTS and even before that, as the first devblog on it arrived. That the design team "do not understand" here IMO is more a matter of bad communication (or lack thereof) internally as the feedback from our end has been plentiful, consistent and very clear for the better part of a 6 months now. This response really begs the question what NQ is doing with the feedback the community provides, many of which come with good and meaningful suggestions and clear pointers to how this could be done better.

The original suit made the character so much more human.. I still like that one the beest.. But .. off topic ..

Also.. can I get a refund for the charges count talent as I do not need more than 25 .

It's NQ being inconsistent.. they use "offline" and "inactive" for the same thing (tiles that have missed due date for tax)

I get that from a PVP oriented player that may be the case, the majority of players though see this differently I am sure. What we need is content which is worth the risk _without_ being effectively a feeder for PVP players. Asteroids outside safezones have no value to run unless you ar elooking for engagements. There is no rewards in PVP soace that justify the risk for anyone not interested in PVP engagements and what is there is way to easy for PVP players to camp/mark. We need something equivalent to PVE sites in 9yes) EVE, sites that drop loot which is valuable fo rthe economy, play into research, invention and industry and will retain it's value to be brought to market by the PVE player chasing/finding it or the PVP player chasing the PVE player. The game does not need handouts for PVP players as that is not worth it for anyone but the few who seek the engagement.

I doubt that there is 4-5K active players in total, let alone per day. Concurrent player counts I can't see beeing 4 digits with maybe very low 4 digit numbers daily

This.. very much. NQ seems to think for some reason the taxrate was the issue and they seem to have figured that the calibrations were too. Point is that neither really were the problem and the changes meean very little in context of what is actually happening, bigger groups and orgs exploiting their unlimited supply of ore to stack up on cash. All these enew changes really achieve is that bigger players/orgs now have virtually no impact from taxes, they donot need to pay tax for their inducstry to be running and by utilizing their org members HQ tiles they do not hav eto worry about lozing their (industry) complexes. NQ really shows to not understand thei own game or their player base at all still and is just throwing stuff at the wall in the hopes some of it will stick and make people resub without any real thought going in to the impact the changees have. These changes effectively undo the taxes for anyone but the small/solo player. They seem to not be listening to their playerbase at all, they just do what a select few whisper in their ear, a select few who only have their own interest in mind.