Jump to content

vertex

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Posts

    630
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    vertex got a reaction from nurocept in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    Watching that stream... slicing the industry chain... rite.
     
    My thoughts in a nutshell: if I wanted a life as a specialized screw producer I'd play Life is Feudal MMO.
  2. Like
    vertex reacted to Vidagild in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    Currently I could not build element cheaper than they were on the market because I don't have the crafting skills required, now I won't be able to build the things that are not on the market and won't be able to afford the parts that are on the market (warp engines just had a 400% increase in price from the announcement, I would see that doubling once the changes are actually implemented, and is is the same story even across essential elements(containers for example)).
     
    This will by intent centralise production exclusively to those who already have the money on hand to buy the required schematics on release and have the specialised manpower already. the result of this will be significant price of production increases and across the board scarcity for elements meaning my game loop of ship production and sale is dead without becoming a miner slave for an org so I can take the money they offer me for my now unusable resources to save what I can to eventually be able to produce again, or buy back off that org taking by resources at a mark up.
     
    that isn't a game, that is a job... really bordering on voluntary slavery with extra steps.
  3. Like
    vertex reacted to JoeKing in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    It's clear that most of the players who have felt compelled to post so passionately about this issue are single players and those who are parts of small orgs, and interesting that theres been very little from players in large orgs, or those who have played for a long time (and have likely benefitted from abundant T2+ ores )except to say they welcome this move.   We are  passionate about this game, we LOVE this game.
    The neccessary evil of mining currently has pay-off in that the more time you invest, the more able you are to open up new possibilities through production.  Ive literally been playing this game for 5+ hours a day for 2 months and have only just got to a point where I have amassed enough industry to feel as though I am on the verge of breaking through into a sustainble strategy where I can make enough stuff to move my gaming experience onto the next level and leave the safe zone.  Im by no means comparable to large factories, but I am able to manufacture basic stuff to either sell or use. 
    But  soon I will have to buy everything from the markets - WITH WHAT EXACTLY? EARNED HOW EXACTLY?
     
    There seems to be absolutely no percpetion from NQ what it is ACTUALLY like for a new player to get to grips with the game. Even learning to fly your precious ship, re-entering the atmosphere without destroying it takes at least 15+ goes, thank god I was able to repair it, otherwise I wouldve run out of money almost immediately, or been doomed to life harvesting rocks on Sanctuary.  If the iterative damage of elements had been active when I was learning to fly, I wouldve stopped playing forver when my money ran out.  This latest proposal is, again, going to disporoportionately penalise inexperienced new players, and those who dont want to be part of an org, and they will be almost immediately turned off once they realise how utterly distant the fun parts of the game will be, whilst the already established, weathy players will be also affected, they will still be able to have fun and play the game as NQ intends. Unlike the rest of us impoverished troglodytes who will be forced into a life of subterranian servitude, or the better option of not renewing our subs.
    I play this game because of the possibilities it presents and the idea sold to me through the marketing; I want to create, build and explore and escape the drudgery of COVID19, not pay for virtual drudgery.
     
    This kind of basic inconsideration for newbie players and the chalenges they face is further compounded by this latest move - its almost like NQ dont WANT new players in their game.
     
    NQ- READ THE ROOM.
    (assuming you actually do read these forums)
     
    EDIT:  Today, after this announcement,  the cheapest warp drive available is Q3,800,000 - so thats 38 daily logins, assuming you do nothing else. GREAT.
  4. Like
    vertex reacted to le_souriceau in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    They done generaly soft wipe (to "deal" with their ealier mistakes) and put price on shoulders of average Joe, simulteneously making big/rich even bigger/richer in short time period.
     
    Reminds me of something.
  5. Like
    vertex reacted to Gottchar in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    Alright, a few things:

    There is little content in this game, even less for new players. You new take another one away.

    -exploring, available for everyone, does not give progress.
    -mining, open for everybody, although far more rewarding if you know what you are doing, especially scanning, far planets and soon multiple dyn core container hubs to "chain" the ore to the surface. You are kind of killing casual mining done by new players.
    -industry, currently something a player can start right after the tutorial, and while it takes time to make money, you may at least save money. You block this for new players.
    -pvp, how long would it take a newish player to go from a base on alioth and an S core hauler until he wins his first skirmish? 40h, 200h? I have no idea.
    -traveling merchant, playing markets, needs initial money and therefore useless for new players.
     
    Instead of introducing something that is actually fun, you add more tedium and kill new player experience.
     
    New players already have a hard time, as plenty of game mechanics that make the game a LOT easier are not learnable by just paying attention and playing.
     
    -Market UI is a convoluted mess, most new players (watch a noob stream) just farm their nanopack full of ore, bring it to the market and sell hematite for 6q/l.
    -Also nice is waiting for your nanocrafter to finish something and being unable to mine as you dont have inventory (just give the STU some inventory space, no way to abuse that for anything. Bonus points for automatically making it linked container on initial placement).
    -New players actually think there is a core limit and may take stuff apart to be able to make something else. BTW, why do you make it look like there is a core limit?
     
    There would be less need for more (buggy) tutorials if the less was more intuitive, less contradicting and didn’t hide a lot of information for no reason.
     
    Market bots
     
    There is no issue with bots buying a variety of item at bad prices. The issue is that if you (or another beta key character of yours) skills hema/coal/steel/steel honeycomb making to five, you can buy hema and coal for 37 and 27 from players and make 112 quanta for every 100 quanta you spent (more if you buy lower). Some few players utilize this to make large amounts of money. I would guess about 30% of all hematite dug out is currently deleted that way every day.

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BL2GJSVaGz0cdTzy-bgDbtlqBBTXCjH5YTqR0IiQciY/edit?usp=sharing

    This is not a way to "inject money into the economy", this is a way to delete massive amount of ore that could be turned into ships, bases and other things at lower price. It just favours players who went a very boring way, helped by multiple accounts, to make large amounts of money while harming the other players. 

    When players want to talk about market bots, the do not mean a way to, if at a small loss, buy/sell things that no players wants at that market at that time, they mean the 10 million litres of ore being deleted every day. Every time a dev is asked about this, including today, it seems they are irritated people dislike them. Unless one of them says "we are aware that multiple million litres hematite each day are sold to bots by a low amount of individuals" I continue to believe the devs are unaware of the scale of the issue.

    Schematics

    Mixed feeling, I, like many others here, think at least t1 stuff, maybe just M assembler and smaller, should be free of schematics or those schematics should be so cheap you already save money if you only make 5 adjustors. Otherwise, see above, you just gatekeep a feature in a game that already doesn’t have a lot of things to do.

    What I dislike more than the cost, is that it will add a lot of tedium again. It already takes quite long to set up industry. 
    -place them
    -link them (which quickly leads to multi-second freezes. Game leaves full screen mode if you hit escape)
    -for every single unit:
         -engage unit and select wanted item
                 -if transfer unit, manually enter name of item, as "only show doable" requires a far higher minimum amount than batch size
         -select mode/amount
         NEW click on schematic, check inventory for schematic item, find the correct one, move to slot, confirm
         -press start
    connect output container to whatever needs the stuff


    This is not "hard" as in "challenging", this is "hard" as in "tedious and boring". The former you want in a game, the latter you do not.

    Imagine you had to fly a ship like that! Activate every single engine, manually type in "main thrust". Check brake fluid on every brake. Set "left/right/up/down/forward/back" on every single adjustor. Set wings to lift. Select keybind for every landing gear. Set altitude for hovers and boosters. Manually link all elements to cockpit. Place relays if number exceeds 10.
    You get the idea? This is not fun. There is not even a way to be good or bad at it, there is no way to fail or be proud if you got it done. What sounds silly for making a ship is reality for industry though.

    Information policy

    Not posting the info of the stream in writing is just rude. Writing is easier to auto translate. People would do it for free if supported. Written is easier to quote or to check. Text can be read half and continued later. Written is easier to understand for us foreigners, especially if accents are involved.

    Any info officially given is super vague and only explains intentions without any details. Some random factory will cost 150B, why even give us the number if we do not know the factory? Is the schematic an actual inventory item? You already have the UI, why not show it? Why mix actually developed and set stuff like schematics with talk about t5 engines which are months away? The game has a lot of problems regarding normal casual gameplay. People usually don’t start the game as part of a team, they start as a solo player, stay if they have fun and maybe join an org if they meet nice players and want to tackle end game goals. You keep on ignoring normal everyday questions and issues and talk about large scale things that do not affect dirty casuals.
     
    The info you dropped today would have been pure gold in the hands of players who get it early and can be sure about it. This kind of insider info must kept secret and made open public for all players at the same time, well ahead of the actual changes. Sharing it with a few random players is just rude. The bad thing the leaks showed was not the info leaked, it was the fact that you share info like this with some select players who can use if for massive profit.


    Sidenote while you are reading this wall anyway
     
    We get it, you can make things really pretty in this game. Very round, lots of smooth tool, look at these shapes and colours. It would be nice if people with a bit more interest in physic or engineering games had something usefull to do. Currently every ship is just a list of parts, placement does not matter above a very low skill floor. It would also be nice if you decided to ever fix the element number bug and a large (winged) ship flying at 500 kilometers per hour would be able to move more than 200 kilometers within an hour.

    Please remember, it is absolutely right that players often do not know the best solution for a problem, but if many people say there is a problem, there is likely a problem.
  6. Like
    vertex reacted to Celestis in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    Why spoil the fun for people who like to be self-sufficient on a small scale?
  7. Like
    vertex reacted to NanoBob in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    Hi first to say, its a nice Game thx for realizing this.
    I played eve for like a decade and see u doing the same mistakes like they did with band of brothers advantages or the "captains quarters" decision  which reduced the playerbase to half of it.
    Mining is the worst part of du, its ugly boring laggy and full of errors "internal server error" and waiting for " computing data", if u force ppl to do much more mining to get to the funpart of the game, theyll quit.
    The markets are a broken fragment in comparison to the eve markets, missing a lot of functions that are already not there, why do u wonder the players dont go there? The lag is killing ships and ppl, dispensers r good for scammers, it isnt even halfway usable crap and u say we need more ppl at the markets. Thats unbelievable.
    like someone mentioned earlier, ill get payed for work, not willing to pay for it. 
    Reducing Container Range to get mining harder will be the next dumb decision...
    if its that way? good luck
  8. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Armedwithwings in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  9. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Yezar in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  10. Like
    vertex got a reaction from merihim in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  11. Like
    vertex reacted to Setzar in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    While I do like this idea, it seems like player markets, org wallets, power systems, contract/mission system and player shipyards should have came first.
  12. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Monk_NL in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  13. Like
    vertex reacted to JoeKing in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I'm a pretty new player and spent a few weeks getting to grips with the game and finding my way around.  Its taken a long time and a lot of work to build a ship, lots of money repairing after learning to fly through smashing up on Alioth time and time again, and spent hours looking for T3+ ores, which have been totally unsuccessful. Even after 3+ hours each way flying to other planets to hunt, only to find that theyve been stripped bare.
    Im not interested in joining an org, I want to play the game as an individual, but this step seems to make it even more impossible for new players to get to grips with Dual universe, and I honestly think that it will totally ruin the game for players like me.  Ive worked really hard to build a small factory to produce a Territory Scanner with ores that Ive laboriously mined, which has taken weeks.Without the ability to generate decent income you are effectively stuck, unable to be able to move forward.  It not even possible  to mine for decent ore to generate income as its been completely hoovered up everywhere.  Wouldnt it be better to somehow impose a levvy on larger factories to limit their output or profits rather than punishing small fry like me?
    I still havent been able to afford a warp drive, and building a factory seemed like the only sustainable way to acheive this - so I hope you put things into place to help newbie players, who, by the time they have learned the game will be doomed to a poor, boring life on Alioth & Sanctuary!  And what happens to all the industrial units Ive slowly purchased that I will now need a huge investment to use? I honestly think that I will lose interest, just at a point where I felt I was getting somewhere....... .   .     .        .           .                   .                                             !
     
  14. Like
    vertex got a reaction from le_souriceau in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  15. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Garthokk in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  16. Like
    vertex got a reaction from JoeKing in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  17. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Underhand Aerial in Macht das wirklich jemanden Spaß?   
    Naja, in den letzen 6 Monaten hatte ich über 950h Spielzeit und ich bin seit dem ersten Tag der Pre-Alpha immer wieder mit dabei.
     
    Mein erstes Ziel in der Pre-Alpha war es einen anderen Planeten zu erreichen und mich dort umzusehen. Videos gab es nicht auf YouTube. Ein anderes Ziel bestand später darin Fracht transportieren zu können, um mir Ressourcen zu beschaffen, die es auf dem aktuellen Planeten nicht gibt - einen ordentlichen Frachter zu bauen ist gar nicht so leicht beim ersten Mal. Irgendwann wurde dann ein Warp-Antrieb das Ziel und hat die Art zu spielen grundlegend geändert. Danach kam der AAG dran und war wieder eine Totalumstellung.
     
    Nichts davon hätte ich alleine auf dem Sanctuary Mond erreichen können. Heute sieht das wohl etwas anders aus, da man im schlimmsten Fall ja auch so lange Steine kloppen, bis man sich die Teile einfach kaufen kann - aber wer auch nur ein mal ein Erzvorkommen ausgebuddelt hat weiss, wie nutzlos diese Oberflächenressourcen sind.
     
    Langfristiges Ziel ist: Häusle baue. Davor gibt es aber noch so viel an Elementen, Scripts und Material zu erkunden, dass ich wohl noch eine Weile bei meiner "Brett mit Zeug drauf"-Industrie bleiben werde... sorry, dass das für meine Nachbarn nicht so ansprechend oder interessant ist  
     
    Die Frage nach dem Wieso und Wofür kann nur jeder für sich selbst beantworten. Manche würden eben diese Frage bei allen Spielen ohne Multiplayer stellen - da fällt irgendwann der Endgegner tot um oder man hat die ganze Welt erobert... und wofür? Interessiert ja niemanden und das Spiel ist vorbei als wäre nie etwas passiert. Manche suchen halt einfach nur Unterhaltung und schauen sich nen Film oder ne Serie an - andere wollen interaktive Unterhaltung und spielen lieber ein Singleplayer-Spiel - wieder andere basteln zudem gern und suchen sich eine Sandbox aus und manche davon möchten das halt mit tausenden anderen Spielern in nem MMO machen. Der Schlüssel liegt darin zu wissen wer man ist und was welches Angebot impliziert, dann ist das ganze Thema relativ einfach.
     
    Nachdem ich deinen Beitrag gelesen hab würd ich dir mal Horizon Zero Dawn empfehlen - das macht Spass, ist unterhaltsam, gibt einem immer das Gefühl man würde etwas erreichen und das Wofür ist auch ganz klar definiert. Ist im Prinzip eine Light-Version von Skyrim mit mehr Fokus auf ein cooles Kampfsystem und ein wenig Illusion von freier Entscheidung. Beim Tiefgang ist es verglichen mit der TES-Reihe zwar nur eine Pfütze neben dem Mariannengraben, aber dafür wird man sehr gut geführt und unterhalten und muss keinerlei eigene Ambition mitbringen. Klingt negativ, ist aber positiv gemeint - ich mag beide Spiele total gern  
     
    Wenn's was im Weltraum sein soll: Starpoint Gemini 3 als Repräsentant der unterhaltsamen Pfütze, oder X4 Foundations als Mariannengraben-Äquivalent. Auch hier kann man in der Pfütze planschen oder versuchen sich 10km tief unter dem Meeresspiegel in völliger Dunkelheit selbst zu orientieren. Da fragt man vor dem Kauf am besten Freunde oder schaut ein Let's Play an, dann wird es recht schnell klar zu welcher Kategorie der Titel gehört und ob er dem eigenen Gusto entspricht.
     
     
      
    Danke! Aber wie sinnlos ist es denn sich dann im Anschluss noch im Forum des abgewählten Titels zu registrieren, nur um anderen zu sagen, wie sinnlos man ihre Präferenzen findet? Etwas hypokritisch, find ich. Da frag ich mich allerdings auch: Wieso und wofür?  
  18. Like
    vertex reacted to NQ-Naunet in Starting a Christian Organization.   
    I spoke out of turn, folks! JC bot remains.

    I will proudly wear the egg that's now on my face - yes we're doing an audit of our Discord server, and yes bots are part of that, but I misunderstood which bot was being looked at!!

    Forgive me - in my rush to be responsive, I was too hasty.
  19. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Heidenherz in Macht das wirklich jemanden Spaß?   
    Naja, in den letzen 6 Monaten hatte ich über 950h Spielzeit und ich bin seit dem ersten Tag der Pre-Alpha immer wieder mit dabei.
     
    Mein erstes Ziel in der Pre-Alpha war es einen anderen Planeten zu erreichen und mich dort umzusehen. Videos gab es nicht auf YouTube. Ein anderes Ziel bestand später darin Fracht transportieren zu können, um mir Ressourcen zu beschaffen, die es auf dem aktuellen Planeten nicht gibt - einen ordentlichen Frachter zu bauen ist gar nicht so leicht beim ersten Mal. Irgendwann wurde dann ein Warp-Antrieb das Ziel und hat die Art zu spielen grundlegend geändert. Danach kam der AAG dran und war wieder eine Totalumstellung.
     
    Nichts davon hätte ich alleine auf dem Sanctuary Mond erreichen können. Heute sieht das wohl etwas anders aus, da man im schlimmsten Fall ja auch so lange Steine kloppen, bis man sich die Teile einfach kaufen kann - aber wer auch nur ein mal ein Erzvorkommen ausgebuddelt hat weiss, wie nutzlos diese Oberflächenressourcen sind.
     
    Langfristiges Ziel ist: Häusle baue. Davor gibt es aber noch so viel an Elementen, Scripts und Material zu erkunden, dass ich wohl noch eine Weile bei meiner "Brett mit Zeug drauf"-Industrie bleiben werde... sorry, dass das für meine Nachbarn nicht so ansprechend oder interessant ist  
     
    Die Frage nach dem Wieso und Wofür kann nur jeder für sich selbst beantworten. Manche würden eben diese Frage bei allen Spielen ohne Multiplayer stellen - da fällt irgendwann der Endgegner tot um oder man hat die ganze Welt erobert... und wofür? Interessiert ja niemanden und das Spiel ist vorbei als wäre nie etwas passiert. Manche suchen halt einfach nur Unterhaltung und schauen sich nen Film oder ne Serie an - andere wollen interaktive Unterhaltung und spielen lieber ein Singleplayer-Spiel - wieder andere basteln zudem gern und suchen sich eine Sandbox aus und manche davon möchten das halt mit tausenden anderen Spielern in nem MMO machen. Der Schlüssel liegt darin zu wissen wer man ist und was welches Angebot impliziert, dann ist das ganze Thema relativ einfach.
     
    Nachdem ich deinen Beitrag gelesen hab würd ich dir mal Horizon Zero Dawn empfehlen - das macht Spass, ist unterhaltsam, gibt einem immer das Gefühl man würde etwas erreichen und das Wofür ist auch ganz klar definiert. Ist im Prinzip eine Light-Version von Skyrim mit mehr Fokus auf ein cooles Kampfsystem und ein wenig Illusion von freier Entscheidung. Beim Tiefgang ist es verglichen mit der TES-Reihe zwar nur eine Pfütze neben dem Mariannengraben, aber dafür wird man sehr gut geführt und unterhalten und muss keinerlei eigene Ambition mitbringen. Klingt negativ, ist aber positiv gemeint - ich mag beide Spiele total gern  
     
    Wenn's was im Weltraum sein soll: Starpoint Gemini 3 als Repräsentant der unterhaltsamen Pfütze, oder X4 Foundations als Mariannengraben-Äquivalent. Auch hier kann man in der Pfütze planschen oder versuchen sich 10km tief unter dem Meeresspiegel in völliger Dunkelheit selbst zu orientieren. Da fragt man vor dem Kauf am besten Freunde oder schaut ein Let's Play an, dann wird es recht schnell klar zu welcher Kategorie der Titel gehört und ob er dem eigenen Gusto entspricht.
     
     
      
    Danke! Aber wie sinnlos ist es denn sich dann im Anschluss noch im Forum des abgewählten Titels zu registrieren, nur um anderen zu sagen, wie sinnlos man ihre Präferenzen findet? Etwas hypokritisch, find ich. Da frag ich mich allerdings auch: Wieso und wofür?  
  20. Like
    vertex reacted to NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Happy Friday, Noveans!

    I'm coming to you with a few more answers/clarifications for your reading pleasure.  I really appreciated everyone's patience while I rode the merry-go-round of feedback handling.
     
    Alright, let's dive in!
     
    To start, I think it's prudent to address the question of "why did you make a tool change without fixing [insert bug description here] first?"
    As predictable/banal as this may sound to some, it's worth saying; while we are forever working hard to fix *all* current bugs, certain issues will be looked at before others. We deeply respect your opinions about our priorities (NQ is especially fortunate to have a community full of game-dev-savvy people), but we simply won't be able to please everyone no matter what direction we take. We ask that you continue to trust in the internal knowledge we have (combined with your feedback) when it comes to bug fixes paralleling feature development and/or changes. Alt+F4:
    As many of you are relieved to see, we fixed a longstanding limitation to the feeling of continuity in DU; quitting the game should never stop a ship! The recent changes we've made ensure that as soon as any player sees a construct, that construct will remain visible to everyone in the vicinity. So, using Alt+F4 during a fight will no longer 'freeze' your ship. Instead, she'll still be simulated for any other player who is still there. (And if nobody is around you, you won't have to worry about a thing!) By making this change, we hope to prevent players from "gaming the system" using Alt+F4. Of course, we'll be keeping a close eye on your feedback and will rebalance things accordingly to make sure this gameplay pillar keeps retains its depth! Regarding the 50m restriction:
    Based on feedback from all of you, this has been increased to 128m, which is the size of the largest build zone! As for concerns about moving unwanted constructs from player-owned tiles go (@casegard):
    We've seen some solid points raised about how the maneuver tool was being used to clear away constructs - the scenario quoted above being a great example. We're currently thinking hard about a viable solution for this! AGG:
     As mentioned previously in this thread, the intended meta for AGG will reveal itself in 'atmo PvP'. We acknowledge that it currently functions as a temporary solution for hauling heavy loads from the ground into space, and that players like to leave their ships hovering above their base. We will consider formally implementing an “anchoring” at high altitude feature in the future!   I sincerely hope this has been helpful to everyone, but please continue to deliver your (welcome) feedback here.

    Have an excellent weekend!!



     
  21. Like
    vertex got a reaction from NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Hmm... I wanna say I strongly disagree, because I feel that having to build another construct and carry it around all the time just to go up and down 1km from surface to carrier is a very interesting trade off for not having to carry around too many atmospheric elements on a ship that's mainly designed to travel through space. But I'm curious why you'd think otherwise?
     
    YES! Definitely.
     
    Thanks a million for that follow-up ❤️ 
     
    Even tho I'm really sad about losing this since I kinda loved my carrier hovering over of me. But parked in geostationary orbit doesn't work, as that's still within the gravity well of the planet and planets don't spin - even if they did, that orbit would be considered movement, which stops when I log out and... I kinda fail to align this part of the response with DU physics..? So I guess orbit must refer to "far far away where there's no gravity anymore" (meaning not in orbit) which translates to "Dock at a space station!" and "Forget about docking an L core at all, btw." and I feel ships like that don't need an AGG in the first place.
     
    Leaves only surface landing AGG ships and for these I don't understand what "missions that require altitude consideration" means. I'm sorry, but after reading this it feels like I can kick my AGG in the bukkit and forget about that technology, as I don't see any real advantage of carrying that weight around anymore  
     
    I'm trying to find an application for it, but..
    Vertical engines don't work properly to jump to 1km altitude and go down again in a comfortable way. (at least not vanilla (meaning without some serious Lua scripting)) If my ship got enough airfoil and is powerfull enough to lift with a full haul, I'm not going to wait an hour for the AGG to climb to 15 or 20 kilometers altitude and just use those engines to get away. If my ship is parked so far away that I need several hours to either take it down to fill the cargo, or need even more hours to load it going back and forth with a smaller hauler, I can just as well do multiple jumps between planets and not use a big hauler in the first place. It already hits diminishing returns when going big on a hybrid and the only thing that makes large AGG haulers a good investment is dropping the hybrid tag and going for the fact that you can skip the weight of most atmospheric elements to reduce the hours long chore of "hauling up and down" to one trip that takes approximately 1 hour down, park, load and then 1 hour up again.
     
    I guess I may go for option 1 above.. add some vertical engines, sweat through the awful period where your binary inputs shut down the engines completely, so they need to spin up first before braking your fall, carry 10L containers as dead weight with me to mine into them, then launch empty and vertically to 1km to transfer cargo once AGG kicked in and then use my elevator 10 times to get all the dead weight L containers back into my carrier.
     
    ...
     
    Wait a second... that doesn't sound fun at all. Especially considering the price I paid for the AGG, I think I should sell it while at least some people remain who think that element is worth anything?  
     
    ...
     
    Okay, given some more minutes of pumping crocodile tears... maybe it just means that we need to establish a base of operations on every planet and have atmospheric mining carriers ready while the AGG carrier only comes down for a short period to load up and be gone again. Okay, I guess that might work out too.
     
    Still, I will dearly miss that carrier hovering over me, making me feel like "YES! You did it!" all the time - and the amazing feel of using my own elevator platform that worked so incredibly well in tandem, taking visitors up, talking about tech, just having everything working perfectly and showing off while inspiring, explaining and giving advice how to do it.
     
    To me this decision takes away much of the awe that the AGG brought us and leaves a rather shallow feeling. Sure it might clear up the sky a bit - but I always loved the sight of massive carriers up there, dreaming about being one of those captains once. Luckily I did it and was able to experience this time before that bubble got popped  
  22. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Heidenherz in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Hmm... I wanna say I strongly disagree, because I feel that having to build another construct and carry it around all the time just to go up and down 1km from surface to carrier is a very interesting trade off for not having to carry around too many atmospheric elements on a ship that's mainly designed to travel through space. But I'm curious why you'd think otherwise?
     
    YES! Definitely.
     
    Thanks a million for that follow-up ❤️ 
     
    Even tho I'm really sad about losing this since I kinda loved my carrier hovering over of me. But parked in geostationary orbit doesn't work, as that's still within the gravity well of the planet and planets don't spin - even if they did, that orbit would be considered movement, which stops when I log out and... I kinda fail to align this part of the response with DU physics..? So I guess orbit must refer to "far far away where there's no gravity anymore" (meaning not in orbit) which translates to "Dock at a space station!" and "Forget about docking an L core at all, btw." and I feel ships like that don't need an AGG in the first place.
     
    Leaves only surface landing AGG ships and for these I don't understand what "missions that require altitude consideration" means. I'm sorry, but after reading this it feels like I can kick my AGG in the bukkit and forget about that technology, as I don't see any real advantage of carrying that weight around anymore  
     
    I'm trying to find an application for it, but..
    Vertical engines don't work properly to jump to 1km altitude and go down again in a comfortable way. (at least not vanilla (meaning without some serious Lua scripting)) If my ship got enough airfoil and is powerfull enough to lift with a full haul, I'm not going to wait an hour for the AGG to climb to 15 or 20 kilometers altitude and just use those engines to get away. If my ship is parked so far away that I need several hours to either take it down to fill the cargo, or need even more hours to load it going back and forth with a smaller hauler, I can just as well do multiple jumps between planets and not use a big hauler in the first place. It already hits diminishing returns when going big on a hybrid and the only thing that makes large AGG haulers a good investment is dropping the hybrid tag and going for the fact that you can skip the weight of most atmospheric elements to reduce the hours long chore of "hauling up and down" to one trip that takes approximately 1 hour down, park, load and then 1 hour up again.
     
    I guess I may go for option 1 above.. add some vertical engines, sweat through the awful period where your binary inputs shut down the engines completely, so they need to spin up first before braking your fall, carry 10L containers as dead weight with me to mine into them, then launch empty and vertically to 1km to transfer cargo once AGG kicked in and then use my elevator 10 times to get all the dead weight L containers back into my carrier.
     
    ...
     
    Wait a second... that doesn't sound fun at all. Especially considering the price I paid for the AGG, I think I should sell it while at least some people remain who think that element is worth anything?  
     
    ...
     
    Okay, given some more minutes of pumping crocodile tears... maybe it just means that we need to establish a base of operations on every planet and have atmospheric mining carriers ready while the AGG carrier only comes down for a short period to load up and be gone again. Okay, I guess that might work out too.
     
    Still, I will dearly miss that carrier hovering over me, making me feel like "YES! You did it!" all the time - and the amazing feel of using my own elevator platform that worked so incredibly well in tandem, taking visitors up, talking about tech, just having everything working perfectly and showing off while inspiring, explaining and giving advice how to do it.
     
    To me this decision takes away much of the awe that the AGG brought us and leaves a rather shallow feeling. Sure it might clear up the sky a bit - but I always loved the sight of massive carriers up there, dreaming about being one of those captains once. Luckily I did it and was able to experience this time before that bubble got popped  
  23. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Emptiness in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    @Rimezx I see, thanks! Seems you got the recent announcement on your side and I'll lose this one, but in that case I still disagree. I think using the AGG for parking is awesome. If that was an option for "just any ship or static construct" I would agree with no-parking, but since you need at least an M core to fit the AGG I feel that's big enough to be something I'd like to see up there as part of the scenery.
     
    However, the new perspective makes me ponder if this could lead to issues... like creating a permanent carpet of ships above an area. I don't think that would happen too often and if it did it would be quite the sight and story. Hrm. I'll probably take some more time thinking about implications before I reach a final conclusion. So far I just feel sad that it's taking this route, but I'll cope  
     
    Regarding the Lua part: yeaah, from dev to dev - welcome to the club! I could do it, that's not the issue. Thing is I kinda don't want to. I feel something like this should be part of any SciFi setting anyways and come "out of the box". I'm leaning more to the arcade side of SciFi and I realized that's not where the road took us long ago. Still I just need a long time to accept things like this and then finally work around it in the end after I lost hope that the stuff I think is cool will come on its own.
  24. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Fembot68 in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Hmm... I wanna say I strongly disagree, because I feel that having to build another construct and carry it around all the time just to go up and down 1km from surface to carrier is a very interesting trade off for not having to carry around too many atmospheric elements on a ship that's mainly designed to travel through space. But I'm curious why you'd think otherwise?
     
    YES! Definitely.
     
    Thanks a million for that follow-up ❤️ 
     
    Even tho I'm really sad about losing this since I kinda loved my carrier hovering over of me. But parked in geostationary orbit doesn't work, as that's still within the gravity well of the planet and planets don't spin - even if they did, that orbit would be considered movement, which stops when I log out and... I kinda fail to align this part of the response with DU physics..? So I guess orbit must refer to "far far away where there's no gravity anymore" (meaning not in orbit) which translates to "Dock at a space station!" and "Forget about docking an L core at all, btw." and I feel ships like that don't need an AGG in the first place.
     
    Leaves only surface landing AGG ships and for these I don't understand what "missions that require altitude consideration" means. I'm sorry, but after reading this it feels like I can kick my AGG in the bukkit and forget about that technology, as I don't see any real advantage of carrying that weight around anymore  
     
    I'm trying to find an application for it, but..
    Vertical engines don't work properly to jump to 1km altitude and go down again in a comfortable way. (at least not vanilla (meaning without some serious Lua scripting)) If my ship got enough airfoil and is powerfull enough to lift with a full haul, I'm not going to wait an hour for the AGG to climb to 15 or 20 kilometers altitude and just use those engines to get away. If my ship is parked so far away that I need several hours to either take it down to fill the cargo, or need even more hours to load it going back and forth with a smaller hauler, I can just as well do multiple jumps between planets and not use a big hauler in the first place. It already hits diminishing returns when going big on a hybrid and the only thing that makes large AGG haulers a good investment is dropping the hybrid tag and going for the fact that you can skip the weight of most atmospheric elements to reduce the hours long chore of "hauling up and down" to one trip that takes approximately 1 hour down, park, load and then 1 hour up again.
     
    I guess I may go for option 1 above.. add some vertical engines, sweat through the awful period where your binary inputs shut down the engines completely, so they need to spin up first before braking your fall, carry 10L containers as dead weight with me to mine into them, then launch empty and vertically to 1km to transfer cargo once AGG kicked in and then use my elevator 10 times to get all the dead weight L containers back into my carrier.
     
    ...
     
    Wait a second... that doesn't sound fun at all. Especially considering the price I paid for the AGG, I think I should sell it while at least some people remain who think that element is worth anything?  
     
    ...
     
    Okay, given some more minutes of pumping crocodile tears... maybe it just means that we need to establish a base of operations on every planet and have atmospheric mining carriers ready while the AGG carrier only comes down for a short period to load up and be gone again. Okay, I guess that might work out too.
     
    Still, I will dearly miss that carrier hovering over me, making me feel like "YES! You did it!" all the time - and the amazing feel of using my own elevator platform that worked so incredibly well in tandem, taking visitors up, talking about tech, just having everything working perfectly and showing off while inspiring, explaining and giving advice how to do it.
     
    To me this decision takes away much of the awe that the AGG brought us and leaves a rather shallow feeling. Sure it might clear up the sky a bit - but I always loved the sight of massive carriers up there, dreaming about being one of those captains once. Luckily I did it and was able to experience this time before that bubble got popped  
  25. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Atmosph3rik in Sorry, you cannot add any more reactions today.   
    And I need a dislike button for people pushing their own agenda on completely unrelated topics  
     
    But I think dislike buttons don't foster constructivity or lead to good relations - all they do is giving people a way to vent at the expense of the receiver who might not feel welcome anymore, even if there would be plenty of others who share their view. If we want to keep the general spirit of the community on the constructive side and people commenting in a way that's adding to the topic and kindness and prospering conversation instead of flame wars and trolling, a dislike button is out of the question. If someone wants to disagree, like I do with the request for a dislike button and thereby give somewhat negative feedback, they should be willing to take the effort and extra step to address it and provide a reason, as I feel I'm doing right now.
     
    Someone I don't remember once said that it takes 10 positive interactions to make up for 1 negative one. Yet I feel that some frustrated or vexed people are more likely to vent by smacking a dislike button than people who are satisfied are likely to remember to like something before moving on. Speaking for myself only, but if I encounter something I strongly disagree with, it makes me slow down and try to fix it, while something I like makes me want more and carry on, getting in the flow and being more likely to forget about giving feedback. The like button enables me to give that feedback, even if I have nothing to add, which is fine in that situation. The dislike button on the other hand enables me to give feedback too, but leaves the reasoning behind it completely in the open - just saying "that's wrong" doesn't help anyone improve. "How do you like my new ice cream flavor?" - "I don't!" - "Why, what's wrong, too sweet?" - "I just don't like it." - "Too fruity? Too sour? Too soft? What shall I do?" - "Search for another job!" ... there will be some grinning but it doesn't help the producer move forward and improve.
     
    Some people would hit the dislike button for bad grammar or errors in spelling, targeting a non-native language writer, while some would hit the like button for a violation of etiquette or trolling. In my opinion both is wrong, but the dislike does more bad to the non-native writer than it would do good on the troll, while a like on the writer could encourage him to overcome his reluctance to continue to write in that foreign language he's learning, boost his confidence and in time he might improve on his language skills, whereas the troll may experience positive reinforcement too, but be handled by forum staff sooner or later. A constructive member that turned away is harder to be reached out to.
     
    A "disagree" button maybe, but again, if people want to disagree they should do so by writing a reply and provide a better idea or at least explain what they think is wrong with it.
     
    However, I think we could do with a "please don't quote like that" button... shamelessly pushing my own agenda here after I feel I wrote enough to make up for it above ?
×
×
  • Create New...