Wyndle

First bullet item here is about DAC:

If we're looking at instanced environments there are other aspects and tools that could benefit as well. For example, this could tie into using an instanced version of in game structures as maps for FPS ladder matches.

I spent a couple of decades working among servers and mainframes in a technical capacity. The majority of the impact would be to database bandwidth and storage costs. A few bytes in a single instance is negligible but add that few bytes for the dozens of BP I alone have and it could cause a little more latency for the servers. There are players with hundreds of Core BPs in their inventory. It adds up faster than it would seem on the surface.

Yes, NQ should answer the question. I don't like answering with absolute terms so I used the word believe in my previous response. I believe there is a 99.99999% chance you will get the same quantity of DAC you agreed to. The only holdout in that belief is the slight chance NQ's lawyer(s) may be forced go with an interpretation the former CEO mentioned off hand.

Many of the features that were scaled-down were too demanding for the current tech. In 5 years it may be an entirely different world.

Well then, I've some some re-re-building to... ah, who am I kidding, it's gonna be from scratch.

It's already in the game. Just keep the space parts/fuel in your pack while compacted.

@loaded I think I'm missing something. I thought brake stacking was taken out a while back. Does stacking still work or are there bad ships on UEF?

I'm certain that one will not happen. Just check to see if that player returned and is willing to sell/trade/give you a BP. I have seen a few builders outright telling their customers to come see them after the reset for free* BP copies (*cover copying cost only), but that is an individual choice. This too will not happen. It would too heavy on server resources to add that to every BP. The compromise is to change/update your construct name before each backup BP. Some change the whole name but it seems more common to see an iterative notation (ex. Mk IV). I have also seen someone put the date in the name of the construct just for the Core BP and then revert the name.

I know you are correct on this. I felt that they were a little more clear on TW outside of safe becoming a thing than they have been on many other features. Markee Dragon has been vocal on this topic as well.

When (if) we get territory warfare then only safe space HQ tiles will be permanent. The non-HQ tiles in safe space will degrade but cannot be forced open early. The rest? Only yours so long as you (and your friends) can hold it. I know that isn't what you were trying to describe, but I believe that is the reason it was set up the way we have it now; to prepare for TW. The ore should not move, at least not without an in-game/in-lore reason for it. I could see meteors being a viable option to supplement surface mining, even if it is just the lore to 'splain respawning until the server and client tech can reasonably handle simulating it.

From the way it was worded on kickstarter I believe the # of DAC was the offer, the Y euro was an estimation of the value at the time the offer was presented. Most contracts and offers have a force majeure clause that would also protect the presenter in a similar circumstance.

And there goes the last of my food...

You did. And I tacked constructive feedback onto my response.

Some of the people in this forum have been dumping cash and attention onto this game since before anyone could even download the pre-Alpha client. Perhaps the "not liking" you are perceiving is frustration from losing a version of the game they did like? Or they could be a troll. I would test the latter but my supply of troll food is running low and it's a long walk back to my ship. Did anyone ask you to be on this forum? I know I wasn't asked, though I've gotten hints that some may want to ask me to leave. FYI: the Plus (+) button next to the quote button is for multi-quoting in a single post.

Tab target is another term for this. When player skill/aiming isn't part of the combat it is the most common form of lock and fire for MMO games. I would be all for instanced FPS levels using the tile(s) and static constructs as the level/map. This would make building skill and static BPs more valuable.

It should not have a negative impact for you to make the "stripped" version of the core bp in addition. Just remember to rename your construct to indicate it is empty or stripped before creating that bp or you'll have to read the details to know which one is loaded with the higher level parts. Then put all of your gear back in place and put your construct name back.

Too soon? Maybe not. Too much salt? No, that isn't it either... Righteous indignation? Perhaps this YouTube video can answer: watch?v=i8ju_10NkGY

Isn't that the same for any game? Players projecting insecurity on the forums that is.

Either way it sounds like weapon damage needs better balancing and variety. The honeycomb changes may be related but something isn't adding up to hear this conversation.

I too have questions: How many entries are being accepted per player? (I suspect unlimited due to high number of players with alts being too difficult to effectively/fairly limit with everything else going on.) What elements not explicitly forbidden would be frowned upon? For example, there is no mention of wings or ailerons (size limitations, semi-functional decorations?). When stated that Stabilizers must be placed vertically does that allow for some angle of offset (ex. 5-30 or 33-45 degree tilt in a given direction) or must it be square and upright? I second the questions about placing from BP vs. live build only and copy/paste from existing constructs.

Including placing in containers and using transfer unit for ease of feeding.

@NQ-Wanderer For clarification on what is meant by T1 honeycomb: Does that mean every honeycomb a player could craft in the nanopack?

The building event starts at 14:00 UTC on Tuesday the 6th of September and runs continuously until 14:00 UTC on September 22nd. That gives a span of just over two weeks the event will be active The PvP event starts at 14:00 UTC on Friday the 16th of September and runs continuously until 14:00 UTC on September 19th. That gives a span of a long weekend where the event will be crushing the server.

@Zeddrick I got your point about transposing systems from one game to another to which I speculated a possible reason for why NQ chose to copy said system. I neither rebuked your point nor gave NQ quarter in having taken that path. The minds (and in some cases the personnel) behind this whole shindig came from Eve Online, craving a similar experience in a more malleable environment. I can't fault them for taking design queues from the game that inspired this one. Entire systems copied whole cloth would be a different story. One of the biggest hurdles that NQ faces is pulling the average Eve player into DU. For this to be possible all of the folks that DU reanimated from EQ Landmark have to be capable of making the player-made content that NQ promised with a sandbox. DU has two disparate groups of players looking for an entirely different experience from one another that must be able to find a middle ground or DU flops. You may be on target regarding DU leaning too heavily on Eve. Instead of trying to plaster over holes with the same stuff CCP used to cobble together their current version of Eve it would be better to get a certified economist on staff to find an array of potential solutions to a problem and then pick the best (or least impacting) of those options. If NQ doesn't have an economist on staff (or actively looking to hire) then it doesn't matter how much we or NQ do, the game will eventually grind to a halt.