Knight-Sevy
-
Posts
674 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Knight-Sevy
-
-
I recently shared a few things resembling the developers. Here is what I said :
Start citation
"After a long time chatting about in-game PvP topics with other players.
Here after reflection my feedback on the subject and 2 proposals which combined will I hope be constructive.
1st proposal :
Integration of a speed limit difference * between the different types of core.
2 ways to proceed
- Decrease in max speed
L: 25,5k M 27k S 28,5k XS 30k
Or
- Authorization of a speed boost
L: 30k M: 31,5k S 33k XS 34,5k
(The 2nd version will certainly be more popular with players)
* note: as an example I have used a differential of 5% of the Vmax
2nd proposition:
Incorporated immunity for smaller cores against larger weapons.
L can't shoot XS and S
M can't shoot S
* note: no range means that the opponent has a greater theoretical fire range and can engage you from further away before you can start to retaliate
Benefits:
This suggestion arose out of conversations with other players about what changes could be made to have a significant impact on gameplay without involving significant development resources for the developers.
Our wish is to see more possible "tactics" in play that can lead players to adopt more diverse combat doctrines. "
End citation
I had added some tables as an example to make it clearer. I do not put them back here but the feedback is still understandable.
I hope this feedback will help the devs to make decisions.
-
Hi,
I understand your desire to have additional earthmoving tools.
I respect your opinion on this matter, but let me express mine.I think it is not at all a priority, currently (even if they can be improved) there exist functional tools in the game to do terraforming.
If these tools are not powerful enough to carry out your projects, try to adapt to what the game allows.
I think that the community will welcome better the integration of the energy systems in the ships or the addition of biome and challenges related to the physics or environment of the planets to be explore.
-
Hey,
It's cool to share your urges for change and I think they are valid, but allow me to state my opinion on this as well.
These 2 vanilla interfaces have worked so far. While they might not be the best thing in the game, they do exist and work.
For that of vanilla piloting, you said it, they can be personalized. Our organisation uses scripts for different specialized needs and also still uses the vanilla interface extensively.
We do not want development time to be used for this kind of modification at this time.What works should be left as it is, players want something new and not redesigns of what exists.
I will also say the same for the gunner chair. Even if it's not good, it works. We would like more PvP content before a change like this occurs.
Addition of advanced shield management, electronic warfare and this kind of measure.
Once all of this is in play then NQ can start modifying what is wrong.
Changing the gunner chair will not make the game more interesting to play. -
To participate in the subject, part of my team still occasionally plays the game, another part actively and some have temporarily stopped.
Patience is strained but we are still waiting patiently.And it's true that over the past 3 months we've had more content than we've ever had, so hope is still alive I guess.
Take a break if you're not enjoying the game right now.
For me the black point is still a bit the performance and instability side of the game.
But I have the impression that has been done better (voxel level of constructions) and that more will come (maybe with the end of holes and ores on the planets?)I'm really not sure that the fact that there is not more subscription will slow down the time they have in front of them. On a classic economic model you do not charge a beta. It's certainly more of a bonus for them than anything else at this point.
-
I will have the capacity to help you I will have done it.
But I don't have that power.You can try to connect with the account with which you bought the subscription rather than creating a new one
-
They are making improvements.
But honestly I don't really see what they can do better.
To rate the game 4/10 is either because you take into account display bugs or terrain generation when you rate.
Or you are too demanding.The MMO set to become the most played around the world right now is FF14. And it is not the most beautiful.
-
4/10 for DU?
My god do not watch StarBase which is the "competitor" of Dual Universe because it must be 1/10
If graphics are so important to you, unfortunately (in fact, luckily the last thing we don't need is to invest development time in graphics and not gameplay / stability) you can come back. on StarCitizen for that.
- Atmosph3rik and Metric
-
2
-
Many in my circle of players find it a good thing if the current planet mining is suppressed.
This will help address several issues while retaining existing gameplay elements.
And certainly resetting planet voxels will have performance benefits for players.- Manual mining on asteroids allows you to create hot spots in both PvP and PvE. People will see other players more often and feel in an MMO without complaining about not bumping into anyone (planets are actually too big to bump into other players on a regular basis).
- The addition of automatic mining units will keep the gameplay of scanning to find the best territories. It will also combo very well with the mission system where the freighters will move with packet aphelia and ore produced automatically. The loss of these against pirates would be less painful because not extracted by hand.
- A surface ore buff should certainly be necessary to allow the beginner to obtain resources in a suitable way.
-
Create a support ticket
-
If you want but you have to activate the basic option in the game options: "do not download the personalized textures of the players"
-
46 minutes ago, shadowfyre2 said:
Seems real arrogance and ignorance in the prior post. But they have a right to their opinion. I made a ship, shared it with a friend via blueprints. He couldn't make it because is was no small landing legs for sale at any price. I am working on a heavy hauler. I want to put a large agg on it. There isn't one for sale at any price. Seems to me that's a shortage. Maybe pvpers don't notice it because they don't need it. If it's worthless to mine anymore, why bother improving that aspect of the game at all? As for stockpiling ore, I guess you're happy with the population of the universe and don't want new players in try the game and have the opportunity to build their own wealth. It seems that is true for many pvpers. You maybe able to force people into the pvp zone by locking content there but you can't force people to play the game. If you want more than a few pirates running around, you have to make it enjoyable to play. Not everyone enjoys pvp. I am not saying to take pvp out of the game but there has to be respect for non pvpers in a persistent world to have a thriving ecology. If you want a populated universe you can't be so selfish
Damn we had everything we currently have without the asteroids.
NQ is adding asteroids and you're not happy saying it degrades your gaming experience.
It's more content. It changes NOTHING about what you did before. -
22 hours ago, shadowfyre2 said:
That take quanta, if I had quanta I wouldn't need to mine for quanta. Furthermore without miners going into pvp zone, you won't have t5 for pvp. Although some pvpers mine, it won't be enough to support the fighters long term and non pvp miners won't find it fun dealing with pirates just for t5 ore. Your viewpoint is that pvpers are necessary for buying t5 elements and I say non pvpers are necessary to sell t5 elements. We both are right. So why lock out non pvpers for the sake of pvp pride? We already see a serious shortage of elements in the marketplace because of the ignoring the economy for the sake of pvp. They don't want the pvpers to be self sufficient by making their own elements. They want an economy where fighters buy from merchants. But ignoring nonpvp gameplay and telling us to stay home won't fulfill a thriving economy. If they want to make a pvp game, it's their choice but let me know so I don't waste my time. If they want a real thriving universe then my opinion matters and my gaming experience is as important as a pvper's experience.
"Furthermore without miners going into pvp zone, you won't have t5 for pvp."
=> False we have already harvested hundreds of thousands of liters of T5 and apart from the scraps we have no real use. And we are a PvP team."Although some pvpers mine, it won't be enough to support the fighters long term"
=> False we already have enough to make a fleet of several hundred PvP Meta ships, we don't really need to mine anymore, we just do stock maintenance operations
"and non pvp miners won't find it fun dealing with pirates just for t5 ore."
=> True but not for the reasons you might think, the T5 is useless no one trades for trade with. See our regularly collaborating with PvE players for commerce. Yes we PvP players allow the PvE player to equip themselves with ships and other spare parts. And we are much more efficient and cheaper than the PvE teams offering these services.
"Your viewpoint is that pvpers are necessary for buying t5 elements and I say non pvpers are necessary to sell t5 elements."
=> If the game evolves and these items become interesting yes. But we don't need the non PvPers for that, we already do everything better and much more efficiently than them.
"We already see a serious shortage of elements in the marketplace because of the ignoring the economy for the sake of pvp."
=> A serious shortage of elements? We have almost every current game item in the hundreds of copies ready for sale in our industry. Do not confuse a rise in prices with an element shortage. Things are worth more because we don't need to buy anything. Indeed, non-PvPers players never lose ships.
"They don't want the pvpers to be self sufficient by making their own elements."
=> PvP players are not allowed to do this? You still want to take me out of the gameplay because I say I do PvP, it's wrong. While PvP players shouldn't be self-sufficient, neither should PvE players.
"They want an economy where fighters buy from merchants.
Fighters aren't going to be merchants enough to support pvp only game and non pvpers won't be attracted to the game."
=> Why would PvP players buy things from PvE players when you forbid them to play? Yes, leaving the same resources in PvP as that found in the Safe zone is to prohibit / prevent players from practicing PvP.
For players to play the game there must be economic opportunities and goals. Being able to have it all without risk like gambling until now has driven things this way.We had full PvE in play, watch where it took us.
-
1 hour ago, Haunty said:
I think they should've done something with safe zone asteroids, instead of only having 8 or so, have many more smaller ones. And I hope they change the asteroids from all respawning on the same day every week.
I don't expect much new safe zone content until after release. Some survival mechanics would go a long way I think.
Honestly, I have a hard time seeing what NQ will be able to implement as a PvE feature.
If they do a redesign for the design of the ships with contributions and limitations (to give example de Starbase which on this point really pushed the principle). I think the majority of PvE will be unhappy.
Survival mechanics will also be badly perceived by PvE players because they will complain of already having trouble surviving, so now spending time and resources to have an oxygen management or other ... imagine the drama.
One would also have thought that NQ makes the planets of the outer rim less "liveable", much higher gravity, denser atmosphere, corrosive environment or higher temperature which will degrade the hp of the elements of the ships and the voxels. PvE players would once again be offended not to be able to go to Planet X because it requires a specialized ship.
Imagine that NQ put more rare and special resources in the PvP zone in order to make useful this part of the universe and to boost player interactions and the economy. And we have this kind of topic ...
The only thing I see that is being requested en masse by PvE : that NQ put bots in play so that they can go PvP with them but without the PvP players bothering them. But Dual Universe will certainly never be able to support this kind of in-game AI. It seems like a very unrealistic request to me.
Maybe that before having that it is necessary that the PvP player against player is functional so that possibly a player there is other threat.
Even at the industrial level, if NQ make the gameplay more complex, the PvE will cry of addition of slowing mechanics. If, for example, you have to have a large industrial unit to print your blueprints and you can no longer instantly pop your ship L, I can already see the drama happening.
-
1 hour ago, Daphne Jones said:
Legion? Never heard of 'em. Do they even play DU?
LEGION is certainly an urban legend.
I'm sure you can find a photo of an asteroid without seeing a LEGION ship on it.
This should be enough to prove their non-existence.
I think the government and NQ made up this LEGION story to punish you and keep you from having fun.
If anyone tells you that they have been attacked by LEGION, be suspicious, they are certainly already part of the plot.
-
4 minutes ago, shadowfyre2 said:
Where am I being inconsistent? I never said there shouldn't be pvp. I said that everything shouldn't be about pvp. I pointed out that the only t5 stuff is for pvp. That's not saying they should take it out, but maybe add non pvp t5 stuf. You act like this has always been a pvp game and noone else should have a say. The developers envisioned a universe, not a lawless gankfest. I'm pointing out that with the game as it is and the roadmap that has been released, it makes me feel locked out of most of the game. Isn't that the pont of beta testing? To find these areas and decide to address them or change the focus of the game? Jesse, seems like if I'm not pvp centric in my views, I am to be silent and submissive to the hard-core players. I want to play fun game. To be fodder for griefers isnt fun to me.
And no the T5 is for PvP, you don't want PvP? No T5.
But magic, there is T5 for sale if you wish.
And basically it was planned that there would only be Sanctuary and part of Alioth in non-PvP.
But they gave more (3 planets) and I don't find it fundamentally a bad thing that those who don't want to PvP exposure have a full space zone.
Except that here we are, at the beginning it was announced a doight for PvE, we gave you the hand and voila you want the whole arm.
I say it again finding T5 outside the PvP zone must not happen, let people fight for it.
And really we met players who monitor our fleet movements and who went discreetly to take T5 on the exotic asteroids.
PvE boy gets there, you can also question yourself a bit and look at all the opportunities available to you. -
7 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:
This is selfishness.
He wants to have a opportunity to sell t5, like you do.
But in your head, its your way or the highway.
No one is saying that it has to be effortlessly(just you).
He will have to have a ship. Find the asteroid before others do. Search for hours and grind for hours and travel for hours. This is NOT effortlessly.
He is just not risking his ship to some pirate.
Does he deserve the same amount of t5 that some PVPers does. No.
Does he deserve to be completely bared from the experience. No.
And so ?
Because NQ does not manage to balance its game, it will be necessary in the meantime to deactivate the latter so that everyone can go and recover their T5?
PvP teams are the first to push so that there is more opportunity for everyone.
Except that every time there are complaints about the why of PvP and not the how.
PvP must be present, after 2 years of waiting we finally have a reason why we can fight.
So ok as usual it's broken or poorly executed but out of the question to remove it. -
1 hour ago, joaocordeiro said:
Whats the relevance of this question?
1st you are ignoring t4 and the best scap there is.
2nd he can be storing it for a future need. Its not up to you to question this.
If this is unless you question it, it's not people like you who are going to do it.
He wants to prevent me from playing the game because he doesn't want PvP.
I then ask him what he intends to do with this tier 5? Sell it ? Ok to who?
Apart from PvP players who will need it for exotic weapons, scraps and other endgame items, who needs it and why?
So he wants to sell tier 5 ore effortlessly retrieved to sell to PvP players he wants to ban the game?
Don't you see the inconsistency of these words?
And then you show once again that you just don't play the game at all anymore.
On T2 asteroids in the safe zone you have a chance to get tier 4! In small quantities certainly, but if you do not want to engage in PvP you will have this challenge of the race who will be the first to put his feet on his stones to find it.
And oh if you need more you can buy it from other players.
Unless you are like that other person who only wants to sell HIS ore but will not make an effort to buy it from other players.
Selfishness when you hold us.
-
20 minutes ago, shadowfyre2 said:
In that blog the asteroids were supposed to be for the miners, to give more opportunities to mine. But then anything above t3 is in pvp areas so now they are for pkers to use to draw out non combatants to be killed. This is a mistake if their goal is to make mining more fun.
You did not answer me ?
What the hell are you going to do with T5 ore ?
-
53 minutes ago, Captain Hills said:
this is true my friend, and its a sum everyone can invest if he wants the glossy ore out there !
... but you missed something - you need an Asteroid scanner and *uuuppps* it costs 10 times of what your 3kk vessel costs
if you catch miner, blow em up, take their ship and sell the DSAT on the marked, you will be a very wealthy guy very quickly until the FUBAR-ones don't like to loose their 30-40 Millions ships to the PVP Gameplay constantly. Even though - I fully understand the PVP guys. They didn't play that much but screaming for PVP. Its now time for them to jerk off. I'm glad for them.
I just hope for a good balance and with this I hope for good ideas. And I'm optimistic there because only the optimum can survive in the gaming sector. If there is just PVP left in the game its like Africa with only lions. And the previous chickens (all eaten up by the lions) play the next Landwirtschaftssimulator.
:P
36 minutes ago, shadowfyre2 said:Agreed,
Thought it was more obvious
You do not need to bring your DSAT to the vessel operating the asteroids.
It is an investment that you do not risk "in battle".
Besides, you can mine ateroids already discovered.
You try to explain game mechanics but seem to have only skimmed over them without attempting to delve into them.
-
7 hours ago, MFJONES said:
Schematics "could" be ok, but are currently implemented pretty poorly. Limiting access to the game behind grindy time gates is just not the way to develop a player base.
The doors are not difficult.
You just need to play less than 5 hours to have the quanta to do ALL the Tiers 1 crafts in the game.
-
I think you are taking it the wrong way.
You can always risk a small ship in PvP.
For 3 million quanta you have a small full space cargo ship S.(at this price you can find a token sold by another player) => https://du-creators.org/
In 2 hours of playing on Alioth you can farm for + 10 million quanta.
Pvpers are not on the asteroids 24 hours a day. By playing intelligently you can find some that are not busy. Of course from time to time you will lose a ship.
But now that you mine on asteroids in under an hour you can bring back an Alioth for over 20 million quanta!
The loss of a 3 million ship does not seem like the end of the world.
Otherwise please, the pvpers have nothing on the game.
Asteroids are the first time that we have resources in the PvP area and you already want to take them away from us ...
I am not asking for the end of the safe zone, not asking for non-pvp in the game.Do not dislike what many think, re-read the kikcstarter and the different devblogs from a couple of years ago.
NEVER did he mention all of those safe areas in the game.
It will have to be hard core and full loot.
You have the best chair the PvErs. Let us enjoy our gameplay crumbs ...Otherwise the asteroids of level 1 to 2 allow to have ore from tier 4 to tier 5.
I don't understand why you absolutely want to harvest T5 ore and selfishly destroy the PvP gameplay of hundreds of players.
You don't seem to have time to warp beacon, you don't go to PvP zone to need item T5 (no exotic weapon, no need for scrap for pvp repairs ...)
You complain that you can't do things that you never plan to do anyway ...
-
Little story
I made low cost XS fighters to organize fun fights (visually ships resembling something other than cubes), these things remain functional in PvP (sold maybe more than 250, and the vast majority are dead in combat) .
We organize events for beginner players or players who have not had the opportunity to test PvP (yes NQ! Having to pay for an L-class ship is a barrier to some players being able to consider testing PvP) ).
I fully support the wish of downsizing weapons.
The XS guns had a certain size in the past but we were fine with that. Now they are even bigger than ever and that really destroys all design of prior to this update but also new constructions which must therefore be bigger ...
And I'm not even talking about the shields, I am unable to fit its with dignity on an XS hunter ...
Unfortunately I don't think we'll invest time any time again to revamp an XS fight event.In short, I am only talking about the XS on my example but it is valid for all our vessels from XS to the L range.
My PvP group is quite disgusted by this update say "PvP". -
6 hours ago, DrDerp said:
Maybe because breaking the game-exp for other parts of the community makes them leave, breaks the financial support, and speeds up the decline of the game. Same goes for all other parts/groups that exploit disbalance. I think, though NQ has to take most responsibility, community is also split and scattered in ( partially extreme) interestgroups who only want to see their specific ways of playing to succeed. So they also contribute to the broken state of the game.
And if pvpers overextend they shouldn't be surprised if other playergroups counter by using disbalanced features. That way the game Futher derails and will stay on the constant accusations and nagging between different playergroups. Like in RL it's always someone else's fault if shit gets out of hand?
Are you being ridiculous ?! Breaking the game-exp of other players ? Realy ?
The asteroids of the PvP zone are precisely FOR bringing gameplay to the PvP players.
NOTHING FORCES YOU TO GO IN PVP ZONE IF YOU DON'T WANT PVP !
If you want to farm ore there are asteroids in the PvE zone, there are a dozen 100% safe planets, there are safe missions, there is the economy with the sale of ships or spare parts and the trading.
You come crying here because players in PvP area are doing PvP while this is an update made for those players to do exactly what they are doing !
-
I'm sorry you have such a problem.
But out of curiosity which processor did you have?
I reckon I have a "dinosaur" processor with my old Intel Core i5-4670K, but I can still get the game to run.
the removed radar nerf that would fix the non L-core PvP problem
in General Discussions
Posted
Come on Walter, you're not going to tell me that you won't be able to do anything in your L if a small ship with an XS weapon that has 30 kilometers of range attacks you.
Also if you have big L cannons on your ship, why can't you put some S weapons to destroy this XS ?
The arguments that nothing can be done against a Core Xs are not valid.