Supermega

It was only so 'important' because of dev incompetence. Nothing more.
 
In a sanely designed game, destroying a market would've had no effect on the market orders, and replacing it and getting it functional again would take maybe 5 to 10 minutes at most.
 
Instead, the devs decided to tie the market orders to the existence of certain elements in the market, and we have this snafu.

"An important aspect we are considering in all cases and investigations is intention. The intention behind this destruction is very clear to us."
 
Yeah, that line also bothered me. Because all I see here is an assumption. And you know the old saying about when you "assume" something.
All this line tells me is that their "investigation" was limited to seeing what happened and straight up casting their verdict. That line pretty much says that they never even bothered getting their side of the story at all. A perma-ban sent out on nothing but preliminairy observations. There was nothing done to get a "clear idea on their intentions". So I'm calling BS on that entire line. Try again NQ.

Counterpoint: Pressing 'b' is not an exploit. Get over yourself and fix your own game.

I've read this thread from top to bottom now (ending at this point, whose to say what's happened in the time I've taken to write this), while my take is nothing special and has been said several times already, I'll offer it anyways:
 
I'm inclined to agree with this statement particularly.
 
Was it in bad taste, I agree, it was. I don't think anyone would disagree with you on that point.
 
The decision to leap straight to a permanent ban has me taken aback. I haven't seen anything personally, but I've heard plenty of reports about people's entire bases being stolen out from under them, even live right in front of them.
 
This blight went on for nary a time before NovaQuark finally gave us some guidance on the subject. People stealing your construct due to misconfigured RDMS is on the construct owner, and that such theft would not result in any action on behalf of NovaQuark.
 
Okay, I can understand pinning the blame on the player tester for misunderstanding the system or handing out permission willy nilly, or even setting perms to 'all', which now has a window advising players testers of the potential hazard. This, to me, is reasonable. The player tester needs to clean up their act and take it as a learning moment no matter how bitter the pill is to swallow.
 
I can even understand NovaQuarks position relating to interference with the game test. One of the marketplaces on Alioth was destroyed, and some player's testers orders were interrupted.
 
What I fail to understand here, is how NovaQuark can tell players testers who had their constructs "stolen" from them on account of faulty RDMS be given no action, only to turn around and permanently ban players testers for taking advantage of faulty RDMS on NovaQuarks own constructs.
 
It was also laid out a few days ago to that theft as a result of bad RDMS will not be actioned on by NovaQuark.
 
Did people's orders at the marketplace get interrupted, yes. 
Did a marketplace get destroyed by some players testers, yes. 
Did stuff get stolen and sold for profit, yes. 
Did some people get inconvenienced, yes.
 
Guess what:
Come atmospheric PVP and player-run markets, this kind of activity will be a daily fact of life which we'd all best get used to it.
 
Maybe for laughs, they even wrote out "Plz don't ban" in voxels when the crime was finally done. All right, perhaps it wasn't a new person that stumbled upon this but someone with experience that knew what they were doing, and the profit-seeking crime is premeditated. Instead of a seven-day ban, make it a thirty day one.
 
Sure, the beta experience got sullied, I agree. And while it was an NQ marketplace that got the wipe, it's not like it's the only marketplace on Alioth.
 
While I do agree the destruction was overboard, I think the response to this from NovaQuark was equally so. I believe NQ should take this as a learning experience, the players testers too, but more so NovaQuark. The players testers learned that no one is immune from bad RDMS, and NovaQuark probably learned a thing or two about marketplaces that should come in handy for the future feature of player-run marketplaces.
 
Dare I say we should celebrate this moment in Beta as "Hey remember that one time in Beta where a bunch of people tore apart a marketplace?" and we can all laugh around our campfire years after release...
 
Instead, what are we watching? A two-tiered justice system; rules for thee but not for me. I don't like it, not one bit.
 
Don't get me wrong, I still think something should be done in the end, but I think the justice served here outweighs the crime. Meanwhile, the justice other testers are seeking for the constructs that got stolen from them is being delayed if not denied entirely. If that was the case, we'd have a month-long backlog by now (to clarify, on that issue alone on top of everything we already have) sadly, NovaQuark is in no way treating equal actions with equal outcomes and consequences as far as this particular topic of theft goes. If we're being honest with ourselves, then scoopers, dupers, and exploiters would have already gotten the boot before this event even happened. No great Quanta reset, no publicly nerfing the ice cream scoops, just bans.
 
The fact that this scenario played out the way it did, it makes me question what is safe. If I'm questioning what is safe, that doesn't exactly make me want to test anything out of fear that I might end up in the same fate. Maybe the only winning move is not to play test?
 
In most circumstances, I can see and understand in NQ's favor on crime and punishment, but this is not one of those times. Sorry to say, but you do not have my support in this, and I've also been given some things to think about as a result of this. I don't think this topic has met its end, which is what I'm waiting for before I come to my definite conclusion. Know that I'm still just a user like anyone else commenting on this thread. I can't sway NQ's opinion in any manner, and that is not my intent with this post.
 
You have my thoughts and I'm curious to see what the future holds.
 
Oh, and I'm not joining anyone's protest or movement on any communication medium. I'm simply offering my opinion on the matter which is what these forums have allowed me to do.

This is ridiculous NQ, so when it happens to you bans are thrown to the accused but when it happens to us who cares right?

Players lose bases? NQ is like .. eh, who cares, not our problem right now.
 
NQ's Aphelia loses a market? PANIC! PERMABAN EVERYONE!

LOL. 
 
The blame should be on the devs that allowed this to be possible. 
 
The "problem" is that NQ has never made a game before...
 
Let's review: 
- They can't optimize the game; don't tell me "it's beta" -- they've had 6 years to develop a solid core and failed. There's almost zero chance this game could support millions of players. Any actual dev will tell you optimization can't be an afterthought. Simply doesn't work like that. 
- They can't develop core features like PvP -- they still have no clue what they will do. It's been 6 years and they are in the design phase. Design comes before alpha, and they don't even have that done. 
- They can't communicate with players -- JC likes to go on streams but only deals with ass-kissers. Why is the CEO spending time on streams, anyway?!
- They can't fix basic bugs and exploits.
- They can't enforce the rules they created because they can't fix basic bugs and exploits...
- They can't create a permissions system -- even NQ can't seem to set this up properly. These are devs. That can't create a permissions system. 
- They can't even be bothered to make a subscription system (which takes a few days and a Stripe account)...Xsolla is for lazy companies that don't care about UX 
 
DU still has so much potential. If I didn't love many aspects of this game, I'd be gone by now. 
 
They can 100% fix the direction of this game...but they need major changes in leadership, which likely won't happen.
 
Hopefully events like this encourage them to quit going on streams and doing stupid easter eggs...and focus on making even one feature in this game actually work. 

This was reported with step by steps on how to reproduce the third day of soft opening, the ticket was looked at but never responded to and still open right now. The sad part is they won’t do anything about it or punish those involved, good luck OP

I would certainly publish the evidence you have on this as I agree it's doubtful NQ will act on this anytime soon, if at all, since they have pretty much ignored any similar previous reports.
 

Novaquark will not address the issue anytime soon, and when they do, they will probably NOT do anything about it. So prepare for that.
 
The best thing you can do is warn people about what happen, because apparently the safezone, is not safe at all.
Post in the Forum, Reddit, Discord, even tag JC and DU on Twitter, Or even contact some game journalist who are covering DU, I'm sure they would be interested in knowing about these issues as well. Their are many people having similar issues, so the more you all speak up, then Novaquark will have no choice but to actually do something.

If this game is supposed to be a community-driven civilization sandbox, making an event that caters to a tiny minority of players (and JC's apparent Halliday-inspired ego) isn't very interesting or useful. It makes me think that the "civilization" they want to create will mirror all the boring issues of RL society where only a select few get to do anything. 
 
Yes, it's a competition, but not a fair one. It seems like it was more engineered for press and to satisfy the CEO's obsessions. 
 
Honestly...I don't care about the easter egg very much. It just isn't that interesting to me. 
 
What is interesting is that they thought this was a good use of anyone's time considering the state of the game.
 
Maybe JC is leading NQ based on his personal whims...he's not interested in what's best for the game, his company/employees, or the community because he can't see the product objectively anymore. It's his oasis and we're all just lucky to live in it. 
 
Happy to change my tune and admit how wrong I was....just need some evidence to make me believe that JC isn't a stereotypical egotistical academic narcissist. ?‍♂️

The creator of the oasis was a power-hungry eccentric that didn't remotely care about humanity. The easter egg was a selfish, irresponsible vanity that was all about Halliday's narcissism and ego.
 
Even on his deathbed, he couldn't summon enough moral fiber to consider how his creation affects others! Instead, he wanted to make a contest that of course favored the powerful players that could afford virtual currencies...people that crave this sort of attention even in death are the worst sort of evil.
 
The point of RPO is not "the oasis is so neat". 
 
Halliday is the villain, not the hero. 
 
If you want to mold a digital society, you should probably be able to understand the theme of a fairly one-dimensional pop-fiction book... ?‍♂️

....and if it were - that would NOT be a good thing!
 
Alright, this is something that's been bothering me for some time from JCs interviews - and yesterday's Easter Egg interview pushed me over the edge to where I really have to say something...
 
First and foremost - lets face the reality that Ready Player One would be a horrible game for most people nor would the events of the book be enjoyable for the majority of the player base.
 
If you're looking at your game and going "Hey look it's just like RPO!" - what I hear is "Look just a handful of no lifers got to have all the fun!". That IS the plot of RPO. A tiny group of players who take the game WAY WAY WAY WAY too seriously get to enjoy the content while the rest may as well not exist.
 
The puzzle fit this perfectly. A tiny group of players with tons of NDA covered information going back to pre-alpha solve a puzzle while the rest of the community doesn't even know it exists. Yup  - very RPO.
 
JC - The takeaway from the puzzle event should not be that "Look it was just like RPO! I did a good job!" - it should be that "The event was a complete failure and did not involve the majority of the community in a meaningful way, and was solved largely due to a bug and alpha knowledge that was not available to the bulk of the community."
 
Please please please for the sake of DU - stop trying to make this game like a fictional book about a fictional game. You need to take a serious look at how other games have done community events and have managed to involve much larger groups of players. Everything from opening the gates of Ahn'Qiraj to the Elite Dangerous Alien events - yes they were flawed in their own ways - but by and large involved more people.
 
 
Finally, this doesn't just cover events. The general game mechanics cannot be based on the mindset "Just like RPO!" - because I repeat - RPO would be a horrible game. In fact, I would go as far as saying if you are looking at any upcoming part of the game like AvA or Territory Warfare or Atmospheric combat and can say "This is just like RPO!" - then it probably needs to be reworked to NOT be like RPO but to be like an actual game that would be fun for more people.
 
Once again - face reality - RPO was a no life simulator where only the no lifers mattered.
 
This means designing things in consideration of players who are not willing to play DU 16 hours a day - and entire teams of such players.
 
Players are not going to want to spend hours waiting for an attack on a territory to man the manual guns because you refuse to consider automatic defenses.
 
Players are not going to want to fly dedicated gunners or escorts for every single hauler just because they may get attacked.
 
Players are not going to want to sit in their ship for hours watching the radar while their orgmates mine out an asteroid.
 
I could go on and on, but the core point is that the game mechanics need to be designed around giving people who do not no life the game a chance to have fun and stand a chance in pvp vs those that do.

Whats with these oversized furniture? 3 meter(12 blocks) long beds, 4 meter wide couch, 1.5 meter wide doors??? A normal chair is 50cm (2 blocks) wide, so why jumping to these "big mom Olin" sizes?
Not  really possible to make normal crew-quarters on your ship now. Or a high building with appartements, or a hotel.
 
There is no reason for NQ to make these mistakes and I think it is really stupid that these elements have these stupid sizes. 

My biggest issue with this type of game play is that it is so easily rewarded and lacks no real means of retribution. 
 
In RL if you did something like this there would be all kinds of retribution which is the deterrent in doing it in the first place and therefore fosters the trust that allows our society to work for the most part. In this game you can virtually be someone else and then loose that identity so you never suffer any consequences of your actions. This is a flaw in game design IMHO. You should be able to trace who did this and so you can mark them in game somehow. Maybe some kind of game registry where you can link players and alts and name changes. With Steam there are services like battlemetrics that allow you to trace players. It would be valuable to have something similar in this game.

Systemic protection for scum bags and extreme censoring, this dev team must be owned by microsoft.  I've literally received warnings on Discord for simply IDing this guy for what he is and trying to create a blacklist to protect other players. Let it be known that NQ clearly wants you to be insided or scammed. 
 

Well, there are some of us who do play solo. Should we be forced to join an organization? The game is about rebuilding civilization. Take a look around, at the current civilization -- is everyone part of some organization? No.

Look, as a simple example: Let's say we could fish in this game. I would build a nice cabin near my Twin Lakes, then I would go out, relax and fish. Then some of the fish I would use to make food for myself, while maybe some I would go to a market and sell.
Now, someone who does not want to fish, or does not know how, but likes fish for dinner, would buy a few fish from me.
And that would be nice.

THEN YOU WALZ UP with your ORGANIZATION, BOMB the bloody fish from the air, kill a million fish with one stroke and overwhelm the market.

See what happened now? Why the hell would I fish anymore, when you with your organizations flood everything with millions of products. There is no more specializations, different skills and tasks different people would do and thus CREATE A CIVILIZATION.

The whole game is turning into a GIANT INDUSTRIALIZED CLUSTERF*CK where there is no place for actual roleplaying, skills and specializations per individuum.
 

 

RDMS is way more complex than it needs to be. Also you should never let programmers design a system or write a manual. They just need to write what someone understanding designing such a system asks them to write. There's too much of devs doing design/UX/UI stuff in DU going on.

There is active and known RMDS exploits which will allow access to containers. Also, by posting this information you pretty much indicate you also used the linked container exploit as this amount of material is near impossible to simply lift off of a planet.. But thanks for the evidence which I have saved and will keep in case it is needed
 
It was only a matter of time before the exploiters in the game would come out as NQ pretty much wrote them a blank check.
 
you are part of the problem here, never forget that.

I suggested an RDMS fix in the long exploit thread... But nope, they have to bludgeon a perfectly working feature of the game into the ground. I swear they did it as a middle finger to the players.... "You guys keep complaining and making noise so f--- you..."

That is why anyone that defends people that use exploits are even more stupid, they ruin the fun not only for themselves (after all if you can have everything in a game instantly you'll soon stop playing) but for the rest of us, imagine how fast game dev would be if there where not all those people capable of doing anything to "win"!

What is authorized or forbidden
Modifying the game files is forbidden, (except for the "Game/data/lua" folder (this is the only location where you can add or modify files). Modifying the game cache is forbidden (by default it is located in the directory C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\NQ\DualUniverse\) ; Reading or modifying the game memory is forbidden. Disabling, modifying, or attempting to evade the anti-cheat in any way is forbidden. Playing at the same time with two or more accounts is forbidden (having several accounts is fine as long as you only play with only one at a time).
  multi boxing is still FORBIDDEN for those who can’t scroll up to the official rules.   Game never intended for solo players to run gunships.  And someone complained about others being antisocial ?. Instead of breaking the rules get a buddy on your gun.

Everyone knows bigger guns are better guns when it comes to DPS and DU is no exception. Currently the mechanics of DU are as follows:
 
- Hoover seats and cockpits can only use XS guns.
- Command seats can't use weapons
- Gunner seats are limited to their size and below. S gunner seats can use S and XS weapons, M gunner seats can use M, S, and XS weapons, etc
 
That being said it is pretty obvious where the pay to win aspect comes into play for PvP. Those who pay extra for an entirely new PC and a sub account can multi-box. Multi-boxing is not banned or discouraged by NQ based on this interview:  
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ai3Kk37ntgg 
 
Essentially anyone who does mult-iboxing can run both the pilot seat and the gunner seat at the same time.  You just need a twisty joystick or pedal setup to do so. MB's don't need to fly all that well - they just need to keep guns facing the target. MB's just need to be able to shoot half way decent and that is it.
 
With the current "it fits, it ships" methodology of DU players can shove as large guns as they can afford onto their ship. With multi-boxing this means a solo player who is there to enjoy the game with his one computer will be out matched by the multi-boxer.  Add in the "fluid" aka safe zone border exploits that allow attackers to shoot at defenseless ships in the safe zone which people who see no issues with the current multiboxing advantage will happily exploit.
 
It's pay to win in the current state of the game - if you consider PvP victories a win state.
 

And a remote control is going to make this work how on a container with no propulsion or adjustors? Even if just adding a remote control would work it would still mean that "we" get the burden of more cost while the exploiting players get away free.
 
There was no need for this change at all, it's another knee jerk and not well thought through response where NQ could have just declared this an exploit which should stop it from occurring especially when it is a change which will need to be reversed  (or becomes void) once safe zones go away. Just restricting the possibility to maneuver another person's construct to those parked on a tile you have already claimed would have been better and more sensible.

The "problem" is that NQ choose the easy/quick way out. IMO the solution here would have been to only allow using the Maneuver tool (to dock) on a construct you do not own if it it parked on a tile you have already claimed and not when you claim it with the construct being parked on it.
 
If you park your construct on a claimed tile.. you really only have yourself to blame, regardless of circumstances.