Jump to content

Monk_NL

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Pleione in UPDATE 1.2 ARRIVES ON DECEMBER 13TH - TACTICAL MAP, REVAMPED ASTEROIDS AND MORE   
    Yeah... stay 30 minutes after spending 4-6 hours finding the rock.  That was NOT a reward, it was Ganker fodder design.
     
    Personally I'm thrilled they have recognized Solo players exist.  Can't recall the last time over the past 5 years when they have tried to balance for us a bit.  Maybe because they never really did?
  2. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to psyKodad in UPDATE 1.2 ARRIVES ON DECEMBER 13TH - TACTICAL MAP, REVAMPED ASTEROIDS AND MORE   
    Well, experienced that..from the other side. And you're right.. it's easy enough to 'dodge a gank' by just tapping or stay max 30 mins..and that's the exact reason why this gameplay was bad. There was no risk..you exactly knew whats coming.
    What we will get now is real risk vs reward..where you might risk to stay longer..with the increasing risk of encounter a random patrol.

    But i understand why you're pissed...you're used to a broken game mechanic that allowed pvpers to gank and controll 99% of pvp space resources from a gui list, and i assume you liked that a lot.
    It can hurt getting something taken away..get over it and see it as what it is, a fix to improve the game..even if it comes very late
  3. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to psyKodad in UPDATE 1.2 ARRIVES ON DECEMBER 13TH - TACTICAL MAP, REVAMPED ASTEROIDS AND MORE   
    Because a crosshair on your ass as soon as you touch an asteroid is nowhere close to 'risk vs reward'.
    That mechanic was purely designed to cater gankers with quick nobrainer prey..and it's good and healthy for the game that this crap will be gone soon.
     
    Wan't to gank or controll all pvp space resources?..work for it..
  4. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to NQ-Deckard in Static Construct Altitude Limit   
    Hello Noveans,

    It has recently come to our attention that a number of static constructs have been deployed at an altitude above what we previously had defined as the vertical limit of around 1000m.  At this time we are unsure why this limit is not being applied as intended, and we are currently investigating this issue in order to resolve this.

    As we are revisiting this limit while it is not currently functioning, we will be exploring our options to implement a more adjustable approach in order to have different limits for different planets. If successful we will also eventually be including this value at a later date in the shipped atlas.lua file, allowing Lua control units to also read this value for each planet and use it to fly above static constructs.

    Why are you stifling my dream of building a tower that connects a moon to a planet!?
    We also want to be clear about the reason for this limit, it is not here to stifle your dreams of building large towers and structures made of multiple static constructs. It is here, so we can ensure a reasonably safe boundary layer for atmospheric flight by all our players without the concern of encountering a random building in your flightpath while flying at high speeds. Chances are, the build limits will likely be slightly more accommodating than the previous system and allow for slightly more building height in the end, this however remains to be seen.

    So what about the existing constructs that are not adhering to this restriction?
    Well, as we are unsure why this build limit suddenly deactivated and we are refining it anyway. We will allow these constructs to remain for two weeks beyond the implementation of the new height restriction system. Two weeks after the new restrictions are in place, we will begin removing  or moving any static constructs beyond the defined altitude limit of each planet to ensure they are not inside the boundary layer. Keep an eye on the upcoming change logs for a list of the altitudes for each planet.

    I hope this clears up any and all confusion on the topic, and thank you all for reading.
    - NQ-Deckard
  5. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Underhand Aerial in So Long - And thanks for all the fish (UPDATED)   
    GJ NQ  
     
    Another great wellknown person who's leaving after years of supporting. But hey they dont care about older players.. What was Kickstarter? Founders? Who cares. 
     
    Ty for your work @Archaegeo at Hyperion many members used your hud on PVE Ships. Currently all ships have 2 seats, one always with ArchHud xD
     
    Cya~
  6. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from hdparm in Why the hate on Solo Builders?   
    NQ advertised that this game would be for anyone and everyone. It seems they changed direction on this.
  7. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Virtualburn in DU crashes on Shadow PC since 0.24   
    Thanks CM we know it's not a priority.  It should be.

    Doesn't matter how many updates and extras you release for a game that doesn't work for part of your player base.  I read one excuse that an issue for testing is because there's a year waiting list for a shadow account, I can believe it.  Another Cloud gaming company is also sold out completley.  https://maximumsettings.com/
     
    This should tell you where your player base will be, cloud based.  I appreciate you have nothing to offer but this should be a "hotspot" for NQ; do you have any idea how patronising that sounds?  I've put part of my life into this game since 2016, been an advocate and banner waver, tutor and experimenter breaking boundaries with voxels and LUA.  "Frustrating"? HA!  This whole response from the beginning has been a gut punch.
  8. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to NQ-Deckard in DEVBLOG: DOCKING AND BOARDING REVAMP   
    Space can be lonely, and, if some adages are to be believed, no one can hear you scream out there. You may want to bring along some friends, maybe not so much for the screaming but for sharing fuel and good times. That’s where docking and boarding comes in. 
     
    Previously referred to with the blanket term “parenting”, breaking them off as boarding and docking clarifies what they are and what they do. Just as the name implies, boarding allows passengers to come aboard your ship. Docking makes it possible to have ships connected to other ships, even when both are moving. This boarding/docking relationship basically has the same functionality and behaviour as before but with the added benefit of rights management.
     
    In its original design, boarding or docking a construct was not consensual. Neither the player who owned the construct being boarded/docked nor the player whose construct was being attached to another could decline. They may not have even been aware it had happened in some cases, it simply occurred due to their proximity. 
     
    This was a problem for a few reasons, most notably that it opened the door for bugs and exploits. In addition to negating those, revisiting the feature also gives us the opportunity to make it more intuitive and purposeful. 
     
    ASSIGNING RIGHTS
    Owners can use the Rights & Duties Management System (RDMS) to assign Right to Board or Right to Dock to their constructs that will let others board or dock, or to forbid such requests. 
     
    Dynamic constructs have the ability to move, as opposed to static constructs - like buildings - that are immobile. With the necessary rights, avatars will be able to board dynamic constructs, and smaller dynamic constructs (let’s call them shuttles) will be able to dock with bigger ones (aka carriers). When boarded or docked, the player or the shuttle moves with the carrier, and their mass is added to the carrier’s physics. 
     
    A player or a shuttle will need to be near the carrier in order to board or dock, it can’t be done from a distance. The distance is commiserate with the size of the target vessel, the minimum distance being 32m and 128m being the maximum. 
     
    BOARDING
    Players are able to board any inactive dynamic construct. This makes it possible for them to tour constructs on display in a marketplace or the like. The construct will go into the “active” state when the owner or someone else with piloting rights jumps into the driver’s seat, and unauthorized passengers will be automatically ejected.
     
    If a player enters a dynamic construct with the proper rights or when the construct is inactive, they will become boarded and can move freely around the construct. 
     
    The UI display may look something like this: 

    This is a sample of the UI that is still in progress 
     
    If the construct is active and the player attempting to board does not have the necessary right to board, they will be repulsed. The effect is similar to hitting an impassable barrier with no damage taken. The UI display may look something like this:

     
    DOCKING
    Once shuttle pilots with the necessary rights are within range, they can manually dock to a carrier. This is done through a contextual menu that is accessed via right-click. The shuttle will then be invisibly tethered to the exterior of the carrier. 

     
    Without that clearance, the shuttle will be repulsed.

     
    Authorized shuttle pilots will receive an opt-in confirmation to signal when they are within docking range. 

     
    The “Docking” widget in the piloting UI informs the pilot of the shuttle when they are in docking range through this small open chain link icon.
     

    This is a sample of the UI report to show a shuttle’s docking status.
     
    PARENTING ADVICE
    The owner of the carrier is considered the parent, and those who are granted boarding or docking rights are children.   
    Just as real-world moms and dads, construct owners can give their “kids” the old heave-ho when it’s time for them to leave the nest and fly solo. This is done in a Build Helper’s submenu where all boarded players and docked shuttles are listed.
     

     
    Buh-bye! Boarded avatars can be ejected at any time directly through the carrier’s Build Helper interface. 
     
    This results in ejected players suddenly finding themselves adrift, possibly in deep space. Here, they have two options. Jetpack to a safe place. Depending on the distance, this could take quite a while; however, it’s safe (they can’t be attacked) and they will arrive with the inventory in their nanopack. The second option, suicide, will get them on terra firma faster, but they will lose whatever they were carrying. Probably a good idea to stay on the good side of the carrier captain to avoid being in this predicament. 
     

     
    With a few simple clicks, the carrier pilot can easily de-dock shuttles, too. 
     

     
    TAKE IT FOR A SPIN
    These changes will be featured in an upcoming release on the public test server (PTS). We highly encourage our community to explore it when it’s available, then let us know what you think about the ease of use and convenience. Until then, feel free to join the discussion on our forums.
     
  9. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to NQ-Nyzaltar in [Announcement] Support transitions fully to ticket system.   
    To provide better support for our community, effective today (Feb 12) there will no longer be a GM presence on Discord or in-game. All bug reports and customer service requests must be submitted through the ticketing system. 
     
    In recent months, the Customer Support team has made great efforts to improve their processes, resulting in a significant upswing on ticket turnaround times and resolution. A major component in this success has been to put more focus on the ticket system. 
     
    Exclusively using support tickets enables the team to be more efficient in tracking issues and eliminates the duplication of requests that often happened when community members contacted Support staffers directly. The ticket system also provides a streamlined way for information to quickly reach members of the team who need to be involved in addressing and resolving issues as they are reported. 
     
    Tickets will be addressed between Monday and Friday. A triage system is in place to bring highest priority tickets, such as when someone is entirely unable to play, to the forefront. 
     
    We know that changes can initially be challenging, but we’re confident that this is a move in the right direction. We appreciate the support of our community and want to be sure we’re giving them the support they deserve in turn. 
     
    Best Regards,
    The Novaquark Team.
  10. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Microwave in Why the hate on Solo Builders?   
    NQ advertised that this game would be for anyone and everyone. It seems they changed direction on this.
  11. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from CptLoRes in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    Before introducing (weird) new updates, first fix the essential mechanics. Also the gap between each game component is to big, which will not allow immersive gampeplay. Smooth this out, and then add stuff. Just a tip
  12. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Lethys in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    Before introducing (weird) new updates, first fix the essential mechanics. Also the gap between each game component is to big, which will not allow immersive gampeplay. Smooth this out, and then add stuff. Just a tip
  13. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from blazemonger in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    Before introducing (weird) new updates, first fix the essential mechanics. Also the gap between each game component is to big, which will not allow immersive gampeplay. Smooth this out, and then add stuff. Just a tip
  14. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Morndenkainen in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    Well, you heard SOME of us, after we decided to speak with our wallets at least... All of these steps are quite acceptable... Yet I notice you guys have completely ignored the RDMS issues and aspect of the game. There are still dozens of shipbuilders out there who have had their blueprints stolen because the RDMS system opened up and allowed people who'd previously bought said ships, which were previously locked (No blueprinting) and unlocked them so dozens of BP's could be made...

    And stranding players with unannounced updates to the seat controllers.... Not cool. Not cool at all...

    Also, a quick fix to the market... Introduce NPC shipping.. You can't find something locally? Hire an NPC ship to bring it to your local market from ANY market for X quantas per SU of distance....

    The test server is something that should have happened ages ago... 

    Still, after you guys removed the unsubscribe button from the "my products" page, it's going to be a bit before I can trust you again.
  15. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Arkadeus in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    locking everything in industry behind schematics is dumb  id be okay with locking special schematics behind currency but in its current state im done 
  16. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Volkier in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    I don't think the durability changes go far enough to be honest - though it's a major step in the right direction. You are still discouraging player interaction as any element with less than 3 lives is worthless as an element to the victor of pvp. While at the very least they get some sort of compensation - like schematics back - it's still a matter of diminishing returns and a discentive to take your ship out.
     
    Needless to say, you still - under the proposed changes -
     - Have the issue of decorative elements being completely discouraged, opting the pvp meta to be empty box shells of ships
     - Player interaction for pvp is still discouraged
     - Moving further into the future, expanding gameplay options for salvaging and exploration are limited and discouraged

    I sincerely urge NQ to scrap the "limited lives" durability model and re-evaluate better alternatives to how element destruction and the need for new elements from the market is handled. There are a multitude of better alternatives suggested across forums - I won't do a self promotion plug again since I don't care what it is to be honest, as long as it's not the restrictive and gameplay penalising system that exists at present. Once again, to re-iterate - the present choice of limited lives of elements has been universally the least popular mechanic for durability in every multiplayer game that has tried it since the 90s. And for very good reasons.

    EDIT: The DRM introduction also makes capturing ships not feel like... captured ships. Half of the appeal of pirates to capture ships was for underground lua script market. If you want player interaction, you need to want player interaction - not attempt to socially engineer what kind of interaction you want the players to have. Can't have it both ways.
  17. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Raker1 in [Discuss] We've Heard You!   
    Have your devs play the game , from the start with no god mode 
     
    They will learn more from that than any hand picked forum
  18. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Shulace in Roll Back   
    Guys, don't be so salty. This is just one of the many patches that NQ will mess the game up with. Downwards we go!

    No banana for NQ!
  19. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to CptLoRes in Roll Back   
    This game used to have a steep learning curve for new players. Now it has become a wall with barb wire on the top..
  20. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Lavayar in Roll Back   
    Guys, don't be so salty. This is just one of the many patches that NQ will mess the game up with. Downwards we go!

    No banana for NQ!
  21. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Lethys in Why the hate on Solo Builders?   
    NQ advertised that this game would be for anyone and everyone. It seems they changed direction on this.
  22. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from malteins in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    NQ is losing it's vision on what they promised the game would be...
    Not just these changes, but everything i saw during the last few years...
    They are taking the fun out of it, i do more work in DU then my actual RL work...
     
    No banana for NQ!
  23. Like
    Monk_NL reacted to Mordgier in NQ - You're doing it wrong.   
    You're well on the path of going the way of Worlds Adrift.
     
    You want to nerf industry because everyone is building their own 'Iphone' - fine - what are they going to do instead? What else is there to do instead? 
     
    You want to add element destruction? Great - I'm with you. It needs to happen. But maybe just maybe pairing it with the removal of the Alt-F4 mechanic, removal of Discord support and on top of that nerfing production isn't the best idea? 
     
    You think mining is too easy? Grea.....wait what....what? WHAT?! Have you mined in DU? How much? Look, ask anyone who has filled a 10L hub every two nights, there is nothing 'easy' about mining. It's boring. It's tedious. It's concentrated drudgery and one of the primary reasons I don't play DU anymore - but what it is not is 'easy' and never even in my most drunken state (and I admit I sure didn't mine sober) did I think that "Hey maybe if I couldn't link to my 10L hub mining would be better!" . In fact, when linking was broken, I just didn't play the game. 
     
    Just the fact that JC thinks that linking is the issue with mining - not literally everything else - makes me lose all faith in his judgment. Of all the things wrong with mining - linking isn't  one of them. Nor is the lack  of "mining hazards"...
     
    The community has over and over and over asked for constructs that can mine - empyrion style - give us drills we can put on hovers - give even bigger giant drills we can put on stationary constructs. Give us anything besides handmining because 'easy' it's not - it's at least 7th level of hell grade tedium - and 9th if you have to deal with phantom nodes and pending operations. Unless of course you take my approach, get drunk and watch netflix so that the next day you forget about how hellish mining for 6 hours straight was.
     
    Unfortunately I've remembered enough of those nights over time to stop logging in to DU...and the upcoming changes and theroycrafting about the future of mining have made it extremely clear that JC does not play DU either...he may goof around in his castle - but he sure hasn't built a mega factory nor has he mined the ore to get the resources to build his giant fortress if he thinks all those things are too easy...
     
    Seriously - JC just logs in - looks at all the stuff others built and his take away is that mining and mega factories are too easy? It took us weeks of drudgery......I can't even...
     
    Edit: Also - cores not repairable?! Masterstroke....
  24. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Istanicas in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    NQ is losing it's vision on what they promised the game would be...
    Not just these changes, but everything i saw during the last few years...
    They are taking the fun out of it, i do more work in DU then my actual RL work...
     
    No banana for NQ!
  25. Like
    Monk_NL got a reaction from Lethys in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    NQ is losing it's vision on what they promised the game would be...
    Not just these changes, but everything i saw during the last few years...
    They are taking the fun out of it, i do more work in DU then my actual RL work...
     
    No banana for NQ!
×
×
  • Create New...