Knight-Sevy

This is one of the costs they hope to reduce. In my memory It's said in the video by NQ-Sirg, Technical Director

Hello, I allow myself to re up the discussion on PvP. A while back I commented on the latest PvP balancing (APOLLO + ARES) This post generated a lot of reaction and comment : Basically nothing has been done and nothing has been changed. The PvP in the game is in the foreseeable state for which we alerted you to NQ. There are large fleets of Nano L without a voxel. We're on a building game and people who build non-Nano ships get a PvP penalty. The arrival of the DEMETER Patch will push everyone into PvP Zone ! If nothing is done to improve PvP before it arrives it will be dramatic for a large portion of the player. I allow myself to suggest some "quick" change that can be made that will allow for a healthier game for everyone in PvP : 1) Modification of the cross section mechanics : The chances of a hit should no longer be determined based on the elements / voxels that you put on your ship. => These must be determined by the size of the Core Unit. This will allow people to have fancy design SCFI ships and not be penalized in combat. If you want to have a ship with less chance of getting hit: use a smaller sized core. 2) Modified firing ranges for weapons A weapon larger than the size of the attacked core must not be able to hit that ship. If an XS weapon has 30 kilometers of range. A core L will only be able to start shooting at it at 50 kilometers range. You already have the "CORE UNIT LOCK DISTANCE" feature in the game. You just have to reactivate it. This will give people a chance to try to escape 3) Shield balancing So that there is no new abuse on the shields, they must be limited in use. Shield L only on ship L, shield M only on ship M ect ... You did it for the weapons (offensive means), the defensive means must be balanced the same. ----------------------------------- I will be satisfied with these 3 essential changes for the good health of the PvP in game. It's not perfect, but it give the time for you think and experience better system for 2022. As it stands, you are going to send hundreds of unprepared players to their deaths. And the frustration will be there.

The smell of blood and salt comes with Demeter's announcement. The asteroid war is coming, get ready carebears. Or it will be a massacre.

As long as there is this cross section system, players will not be able to make their ship with the design they like. Because this putting a penalty on their ship. So it is unfortunately mandatory to make a cube or a rectangle as small as possible. On a construction game it really hurts my heart. Dual Universe must be a game, not a simulation ...

However, it is not complicated to balance while allowing the player to have ships with a cool design. Hit chance of different weapons depending on the size of the core. Stop with that cross section bullshit.

We didn't have any talent point reset after NQ changes on the 2 previous updates (which really broke all of PvP). I don't quite understand how to justify a reset for this mining stuff when it has a lower impact than the 2 previous updates. So yeah if talent reset: either everything or nothing.

Ahahah You really do not think that this solution could not be considered without your intervention? In addition, our customer side computers do the calculations. I really don't want to have the lag due to the regeneration calculation of your tunnels.

Very qualitative video ! I can't wait to see this happen. am very impatient to see the changes coming in 2022 with the new way you work now. Really continue on this good path.

They don't, so they're confident about their funding and don't need a user benefit right now. And if not my thought perssonel with the wipe: - Make a good game Talk about wipe when it's done.

By giving so much importance to the question of the wipe. I wonder about NQ's desire to really have active players. Maybe a minority of tester is enough for them to advance in the game. If they really needed thousands of extra players, they should have put an end to these wipe questions because it destroys their business: players stop playing (certainly need to ban / censor all players spamming this topic as well). If they don't clearly say no. It's just that he doesn't need a new player / active player.

From the start, we announced that we would be on asteroids. Not necessarily with great ambition, we thought we were dealing with a few other big organizations and sharing the "possession" of the asteroids. The point is, these large organizations have given up on the game and left Legion alone. Things may change in the future as new groups are formed and organized. But will these new groups kill fewer unarmed ships than Legion ? Let me doubt.

Today Legion Tomorrow another group of players and we will read your same lamentation

Our base PvP Nano ships are worth 120,000,000. With ammunition and fuel. It's a little overkill attack ship, you can get a decent defense L ship for 80,000,000.

If I will be NQ-team I will be really upset to have so little consideration from a player like you. It really is a great disrespect for their work. You are like going to a car manufacturer and telling them that making a vehicle is only 4 wheels and a handlebars ...

Unfortunately I am not sure that NQ will ever have the technical and financial capacity to run NPCs on the game ... Maybe he'll surprise us with that one day. But it certainly remains a utopia.

Bad idea I suggest instead that unarmed ships cannot harvest minerals in PvP zones. So there are no more poor unarmed miners.

Not wanting to use weapons because "it kills innocent people" but promoting suicide to cause damage with a bomb is quite astonishing ... "I am a passiveist but I am ready to commit a suicide bombing to see my ideas through to the end"

No

The first thing NQ did was exactly what you asked for for PvP. We have had a massive nerf in usable number of weapons and also a more than questionable balance of weapon size. Maybe you are right, now NQ needs to take care of all those PvE who are rotting the game? Hybrid cargo ships need to taste of the nerf hammer. It's the time.

Nerve / limit the speed of larger core. Index the chances of the weapons hitting on the different core sizes. Limit shields to cores of the same size (like weapons) And this will make it possible to have 4 classes of ships: XS / S / M / L And the player can create any cool ships they want, not just nano ones. The little ones should be close to the big ones and can catch up with them to do damage. Large ships must be escorted by smaller ones or have different sized weapons to defend themselves. It's a game, we have to create categories of ships, let's stop wanting to mix everything up on the same balancing system.

The deployment of BP is a problem I agree with you. But to the question why there is no city? The answer is quite simple. There is simply no point in having one in the game. There is no mechanic that will make players live close to each other. The only needs are storage / Factory. Markets are NQ installations whereas it could have been up to the player to manage them for example.

Sorry I posted in the wrong subject: Thank you if possible for taking into account my questions posed there as well.

No beacon warps will be an end game item. People will pay organizations to warp on beacons. This will be a big target for a certain group of players. Eventually when there is PvP, using a beacon will allow you to arrive in the area in relative safety before starting to travel to an asteroid or the planet. The game lacks a lot of end game gameplay. This is just a suggestion to create it.

I will focus my observations on anything that can relate only to Apollo (0.26.2) and Ares (0.26.12). I won't go into the details of the bugs, these are things that will most certainly be fixed quickly, I feel like I performed better, but there are still a few crashes. A bug that always occurs is having its seat in the state "used by another entity" for example 1 - Condition of use of the shield When you introduce the S and M size constructs into the fight, how are you going to balance the fact that it is possible to put L shields on them? Aren't you worried that all ships have to equip an item of this size to be viable in PvP? Do we really have to say goodbye to any attempt at Design on an S ship? 2 - Shield vs Voxel The shield is free hp. Voxels require quanta, weight, and volume to be used. They are also impacted by the CCS what the shield ignores. There is an imbalance between these 2 means of defense. How do you plan to solve this problem? 3 - Quality of Voxels Top tier voxels do not reflect in their quality the investment required to use them. The upper thirds are rare, can be found in hostile environments, require more time (harvesting, refining, manufacturing), require higher tier shematic and industry ... Example on “heavy” voxels for relation to T1 T1: Price 100% / HP 100% T2: Price 289% / HP 101% Q3: Price 532% / HP 107% Q4: Price 1193% / HP 122% T5: Price 3228% / HP 128% The CCS is one thing, but we must not neglect the basic gross hp of the constructs. What do you plan to do to enable the player to use the higher quality voxels? 4 - Chance of hit I always kill an XS ship several hundred kilometers away with a few hits. I think it can be very frustrating for a player to die this way so easily and quickly with no escape. Do you think about fixing that and not allowing the XS / S ship to be annihilated from this far? 5 - Maneuverability of L ships With the leverage effect on adjusters and larger build boxes, an L-core is easily far more responsive on its rotations than a smaller vessel. How do you plan to fix this and allow hunters to have a real mobility advantage? 6 - Combat and Vmax Currently during a PvP engagement the adversary in difficulty will seek to reach Vmax as quickly as possible. This brings several problems: 6 A --- Quantum and time investment for PvP - In order to be able to escape or catch up with the runaways, the players must use ships with a very high engine power. This increases fuel consumption and the overall price of ships. This requires players to make a huge investment in order to be able to participate in PvP. How are you going to democratize PvP accessibility to as many people as possible? 6 B --- Disadvantage during combat at 30k km for ships other than L Once ships are at high speed, smaller sizes such as XS / S / M are at a disadvantage due to their lower combat range. If their trajectory varies slightly, they risk losing the possibility of firing on their target. While the ship L can still shoot him. How are you going to allow smaller ships to catch up with larger ships so they can get in touch and use their weapons? 6 C --- High speed combat achievement. It is common for players to log out (intentionally or not) during a PvP engagement. When the player is no longer on board, the ship stops. You are also forced to brake and then re-accelerate when your opponent reconnects. How do you plan to solve this problem? 6 D --- Future mechanics Can you tell us if you think in the near future to introduce a game mechanic that could interfere with the speed / maneuverability of an enemy ship? Ammunition that slows down the enemy, tractor beam, gravitational influence? 7 - Impact of the cross section: The cross section does not influence the time to kill an XS or S fighter in any way, it's really speed. few seconde and it down. On the other hand, it is far too decisive in a fight between an L nano ship and an L ship resembling a large ship. A voxel ship that suffers 100% hit against a nano that suffers 50% is at a huge disadvantage. It takes a huge amount of voxel, which makes the ship twice as expensive, also adds several hundred tons of voxel and slows the ship down by that much. What do you plan to do to remedy this problem?

You would use warps beacons.