Jump to content

MaximusNerdius

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from philux in New trailer and it looks great!   
    IGN said that, they titled the video - not NQ. I expect no less from IGN these days.
  2. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to Cybrex in What Should DU Citizens Be Called   
    • Citizens
    • Pioneers
     
     
    Or, you know, just call everyone Boobians. It's the only name that has any worth in this community. 
  3. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Dhara in Solar Secure :: Shame On Both Sides   
    Responding negatively to spam doesn't make this a toxic community. It means we want the spam to stop. That's all. Dunno why that's hard to understand.
  4. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Atmosph3rik in Solar Secure :: Shame On Both Sides   
    Responding negatively to spam doesn't make this a toxic community. It means we want the spam to stop. That's all. Dunno why that's hard to understand.
  5. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Warden in Solar Secure :: Shame On Both Sides   
    Responding negatively to spam doesn't make this a toxic community. It means we want the spam to stop. That's all. Dunno why that's hard to understand.
  6. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Saul Retav in The Most Valuable Property in the Galaxy: Safe Zones   
    Um... no. They definitely should not be that involved in deciding who gets land and who doesn't. If they go that route, I would pretty much quit immediately, as that defeats most of what they stated this game is about - player-driven content.
  7. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Astrophil in The Most Valuable Property in the Galaxy: Safe Zones   
    Um... no. They definitely should not be that involved in deciding who gets land and who doesn't. If they go that route, I would pretty much quit immediately, as that defeats most of what they stated this game is about - player-driven content.
  8. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Demonneo in The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]   
    For awhile now, I was on the side of making DACs unlootable - I didn't understand why there was such a big need to make them lootable, I thought it was just another way for people to get their kicks from other's misery. After reading some of the responses here, I've actually changed my vote to option C, as it actually does strike a good compromise.
     
    Unlike some people, I can change my opinions based on well reasoned arguments.
  9. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from SimonVolcanov in The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]   
    For awhile now, I was on the side of making DACs unlootable - I didn't understand why there was such a big need to make them lootable, I thought it was just another way for people to get their kicks from other's misery. After reading some of the responses here, I've actually changed my vote to option C, as it actually does strike a good compromise.
     
    Unlike some people, I can change my opinions based on well reasoned arguments.
  10. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to Dhara in The Great DAC Compromise Poll [Please Read Before Voting]   
    I'm against lootable DACs.  I DO believe the main reason they are in game is to give folks who can't afford to subscribe, a way to still be able to earn their game time. There really isn't a better reason to implement them.
     
    Now don't get me wrong.  I"m not some "make it all safe candy land player".  I'm all for looting.  I'll take your resources, your ship, your house...whatever.  But I don't want to take real money from folks who can't afford to play in the first place.  How awful would that be if it happened to you?   Not only did you get ganked, now you cant even login to try to salvage some of what you lost in the first place! 
     
    IMO, as long as a DAC is still a DAC it should not lootable.  As soon as it's cashed in and used to purchase something in the game, then THAT is what you loot; whatever they bought with it.  Otherwise, you WILL be stealing someone's game time.  And I just don't want people to be able to do that. 
     
    I know a lot of folks take games so seriously that they want to only take game-play into account "for the success of the game" and all that.  But in the end, to me, it's just a game.  And I want everyone who wants to play it to be able to.  Makes it more fun for the rest of us.  If we allow some folks to steal other people's real money - no matter what kind of label you want to put on it -  it's only going to run folks off who would otherwise be playing the game.   It makes makes no sense and goes against the spirit of the type of gamers I like to play with. 
     
    So, my vote is to just wait until someone cashes one in and then steal what they bought, if you must.  Otherwise, let players keep their RL money...sheesh!
  11. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from SegaPhoenix in First Person Shooting   
    Yeah.. this is definitely not a first-person shooter.
  12. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Dygz_Briarthorn in First Person Shooting   
    While I don't normally link to a wiki, this one has sourced info - I didn't see anything about tab targeting specifically, but that it would definitely not be FPS-style.
     
    http://dualuniverse.gamepedia.com/Combat#cite_note-1
  13. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to Majestic in DevBlog: A single-shard continuous universe: one world, no boundaries.   
    'Being fully rested, you shove something invisible out of the way.'...
  14. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to CheshireVee in Unexpected awesome endorsement from RSI   
    You could say the people who back both are...
     
    "Dual Citizens"
  15. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Anaximander in Item Loss Occurence Ratio   
    *carebear rage initiated*
     
    Wtfbbqsauce!!1! I no kan loose my precius stuffs!
     
     
    In all seriousness, interesting idea - and it's also adds some interesting strategy choices.
  16. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Wicpar in Planetary warfare   
    I would certainly hope they have some sort of handheld weapons, otherwise that will mitigate a large part of potential gameplay scenarios.
  17. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from yamamushi in The Tempest Mission   
    The Collective is very interested in doing what we can to sponsor this project. We will contact you soon.
  18. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to Vorengard in Let Us Take Credit For Our Work   
    My argument for why we should be able to put our names on our products.
     
    Blueprints should have Player and/or Organization names for branding purposes
     
    People like being known, and they like showing off when they do something cool. So blueprint designs should retain the name of the person who made them so that people can develop reputations for being excellent ship/station/modual/etc designers. Not only will this inspire people to try hard and reward them for being great, it will favor competition between organizations. Org A will try and destroy Org B because Org B designs better ships, so they cut into the profits of Org A. Alternatively, people will hire Org B to design a cool new ship for them because they've proven they have people who know how to make good ships.
     
    Such a system would also provide the possibility for groups to sell their services to people without the time or inclination to build things themselves. It opens up a whole new world where people can be "that guy who designs the best buildings" or "the woman who plans the best space stations". Then they can use that reputation to sell their services to large, wealthy groups that want something built specially for them, but don't necessarily have the time or expertise to do it themselves. One of my biggest problems with crafting in other games is that you can't really show off if you're good at it. Everyone knows the top pvpers, but nobody's heard of the best crafters. That should change.
     
    I realize it would most likely be unwise to list names on individual market orders, like who is selling what. But I don't see any reason why you would deny people the ability to broadcast their designs, creations, and services. Just include an option to disable the name for people who don't want the publicity.
     
    Thoughts?
     
    Edit: Sorry, no clue how it got double posted. Fixed
  19. Like
  20. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from Ghoster in Price model, SAY NO TO MONTHLY SUBSCRIPTION!   
    I'm in favor of the subscription model myself, but I definitely wouldn't mind a decrease from the normal $15. If it was more along the lines of $5 or even $10, I think you would see less complaints about it. While that may sound like it shouldn't be such a big deal, it honestly can be for those who struggle to have a steady income or have a very tight budget. I definitely do not want to see this game as F2P though, as most F2P game communities are a lot more... caustic.
  21. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from ttcraft0 in Balanced PvP Destruction System   
    I've been playing games a long time and in recent years I've spent a lot of that time playing survival type games that had some sort of construction / building system. Minecraft, DayZ, Space Engineers, Ark Survival Evolved and many others. All of them have the potential for being really great games, until you introduce players that take pleasure in doing nothing more than destroying other people's work and generally griefing other people. I'm one of those players that enjoys both PvE and PvP... but I get tired of PvP devolving into nothing more than offline base raiding and general trolling, instead of actual intense fights.
     
    The thing that I've noticed is that most systems in place in these games tend to favor the attacker over the builder. Take an example from Ark that happened just last night. A group of friend and I spent 4-5 hours working on building up a decently sized base, essentially building a large aviary structure that was going to house our Quetz (very large flying dinosaur). We were still putting the roof on when we were raided by a group flying a Quetz with a ballista mounted on it and several other flying mounts. They managed to take out the lone turret that was set up and then our 2 flying mounts before we could mount an adequate response. I give the credit for a well coordinated attack, they managed to kill all 6 of us when there were only 3 of them. While frustrating, I can enjoy PvP that happens in this way - being a PvP server, they were surely within their right to attack us. It was our fault for not having more defenses set up and a sentry for watch. But what happened next is where the issue arises...
     
    We had just spent 4-5 hours expanding our base that we had already put probably another 6-8 hours into. So a lot of effort was spent on this base. In the 15 minutes after they killed us all, they managed to knock down half the base, destroy every container and every "machine" we had built. 2 days of work destroyed in 15 minutes. As typically happens in this situation, all of us were so frustrated by this that we pretty much agreed to move on to another server. I've seen this type of thing happen in multiple games, especially DayZ (Epoch mod) or Space Engineers.
     
    I would like to ask that the devs for Dual Universe discuss / plan for a system that does not give such a favorable outcome to the attacker. While I understand PvP typically leads to destruction.. it is "war" after all, this is still supposed to be a video game where we come to play and have fun. Where is the fun if a individual or group ends up leaving the game because of this type of situation? I know it isn't something easy to address, as you need to balance the game for PvP overall..  but please don't make something a builder spent 2 weeks or a month building last only seconds or even just a few minutes.
     
    My suggestion is that structures, especially those composed of harder / tougher components, should have a much higher damage resistance. Steel should not crumple at the first blast of laser fire, or leave a big gaping hole when the first missile impacts. Whatever advanced materials we have so many years from now would be even better at resisting damage. I'm not asking for it to take 2 weeks of steady attacks to destroy a single wall... but please make it take a lot more effort to destroy someone's primary base of operations than most current survival games.
     
    Thanks.
  22. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from guttertrash in Dual Universe (DU): Computer Exclusive   
    Why all the hate on here? We are all gamers looking to play good video games, act like it and not children. Unfortunately for the console gamers out there, it is true that the devs have already stated there will be no port to console. You've got a couple years - save for a PC if you really want to play.
  23. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to Kongou in Confusion   
    I've told everyone I know personally several times.
     
    Some are just pessimists and don't like to wait for a game. Dont want to get their hopes up.
     
    Others just dont care, they are burned out on kick starters, green lights and everything.
     
    And MANY MANY "GAMERS" just want to complain about something. They do not want to contribute any ideas, they just want to say something and sound important, but dont actually care about games.
  24. Like
    MaximusNerdius reacted to CanadianKarbon in Balanced PvP Destruction System   
    Personally, I believe that building a good defensive base on the surface of a planet should be less resource intensive than building the ships to attack it. Not because the developers nerfed the attackers, but because the attackers need engines, fuel, and ammunition for each of their ships. The defenders will need ammunition and electricity as well however by its very nature bases should have an abundant supply to defend its self. I agree with the original poster that unless the enemy overwhelmed you with something resembling a Star Destroyer your structures should not be easily destroyed with something like a speeder. (keeping with Starwars references)
     
    Explosives yes, cannons yes ,machine guns your character shoots no. 
     
    With a proper design of walls turrets and other defences, you should be able to stand your own against similarly power entities. As mentioned before, if you attempt to combat much stronger opponents than yourself then nothing should stop other players from destroying what you have built. Unless they try to destroy your reinforced wall with a machine gun.
     
    The only thing that would piss me off is if characters are able to dig at an unreasonably fast rate. Allowing them to tunnel into you base quickly within minutes, passing the defences you laid because they dug 100 units down went under your base and used the mini map to guide them into the heart of the base. 
  25. Like
    MaximusNerdius got a reaction from CanadianKarbon in Balanced PvP Destruction System   
    I'm not asking for protected zones. You're reading it completely wrong. I am a PvPer, I've played Eve, heck I played Ultima Online before the no-PvP Trammel world. I enjoy the heck out of PvP. I'm just asking that something we spend weeks gathering resources for and building not last such a short time. I'm all for base raids - but you shouldn't be able to take down a base in 15 minutes when it took 3 days to build it. That was my overall point. It should take a lot of time and effort to actually destroy a base, especially the upgraded walls.
×
×
  • Create New...