Knight-Sevy

It's a non-event that should never have happened in the game.
The stuff should not have been put back into circulation on the server: at best deleted or at worst put back in the owner player's inventory with a timer before allowing reuse.
 
NQ acts as if it were the major feature of the beginning of the year for Dual Universe.
 
"Look we do everything we can to destroy and prevent groups of fairplay players from PvP but we allow all PvE to grief for free and steal things from people who can't defend themselves. Lots of fun "
 
I was happy with the new VPT tool but again I feel like throwing up.
Damn though I love this game, I'm not complaining usual with all the latest nerf to save the servers.
 
But I have the impression that NQ are really laughing at us.

It's a non-event that should never have happened in the game.
The stuff should not have been put back into circulation on the server: at best deleted or at worst put back in the owner player's inventory with a timer before allowing reuse.
 
NQ acts as if it were the major feature of the beginning of the year for Dual Universe.
 
"Look we do everything we can to destroy and prevent groups of fairplay players from PvP but we allow all PvE to grief for free and steal things from people who can't defend themselves. Lots of fun "
 
I was happy with the new VPT tool but again I feel like throwing up.
Damn though I love this game, I'm not complaining usual with all the latest nerf to save the servers.
 
But I have the impression that NQ are really laughing at us.

No matter the means. They have to manage to make a game out of it. They have to keep what they want and can keep. But having zero gameplay because it corresponds to IRL is not a solution.

I think we can lock this topic

I think we can lock this topic

The problem is that we quickly know when a player makes proposals for PvP when he hasn't made an effort in the current game system.
 
For example when a player asks what we can pilot and use weapons at the same time.
This is what players who are doing PvP today are already doing every day.
So imagine a little frustration when NQ does nothing and the forums are flooded with delusional proposals without any basis and connection with the reality of the game in its current state.
 
On a personal note, I try to remain cordial, but we quickly become acid from reading opinions every day from players wanting to revolutionize the PvP of the game when they really don't know what they're talking about.
Especially when NQ has been ignoring some or all of the PvP community for several years.
 
(and the worst part is when those same players accuse PvP of using all the NQ development time for their stuff)

The problem is that we quickly know when a player makes proposals for PvP when he hasn't made an effort in the current game system.
 
For example when a player asks what we can pilot and use weapons at the same time.
This is what players who are doing PvP today are already doing every day.
So imagine a little frustration when NQ does nothing and the forums are flooded with delusional proposals without any basis and connection with the reality of the game in its current state.
 
On a personal note, I try to remain cordial, but we quickly become acid from reading opinions every day from players wanting to revolutionize the PvP of the game when they really don't know what they're talking about.
Especially when NQ has been ignoring some or all of the PvP community for several years.
 
(and the worst part is when those same players accuse PvP of using all the NQ development time for their stuff)

Prived of ore?
Nice joke once again. You can have up to T4 on roids in safe zone and even T5 in total safety with MU.
There is nothing for PvP players in the game and you still complain about it.

The plan is to keep only the safe zone of Alioth Madis and Thades.
The other planets will one day become fully PvP (if the game survives).
 
There is no reason to allow the unarmed carrier to escape attack.
A PvP player is first and foremost a PvE player, and they probably do a lot more and better than the average PvE player.
 
Destroying undefended supply convoys is a war strategy. Protecting or destroying supply lines is strategically very interesting and important.
 
Games like Foxhole represent this very well for example and it is very entertaining.
 
Otherwise, as an IRL example, we can rely on the Second World War.
On the German side, U-boat fleets in the Atlantic sank hundreds of unprotected transports.
They were defeated only when the convoys organized to travel in groups and under escort.
 
This is what is missing on DU. PvE players are often solo and play in a very selfish or capitalist way.
 
On Ion dozens of freighters have been destroyed by only 1 or at most 2 combat ships of SNS (Legion).
Can't complain about massive gank.

There are several freighters leaving every day, but none are teaming up to defend themselves.

It would take resources unique to the PvP area.
Non-PvPers can buy it or take the risk of mining.
 
Of course the game has consequent problems.
Lose 30 minutes to 1 hour of play to go to an asteroid and die there because bad luck there is someone on it. This is not a good gameplay loop. The game needs to be faster.
 
Also the balance It's profoundly stupid that in a creative game like Dual Universe you can't do anything with an S ship if an L attacks you.
The L should be slower and able to hit you only with secondary weapons (because no chance of hitting you with its main weapons).
Your S ship should only be able to fall against an M or an S equivalent (see several XS in numerical advantage).
Personally I don't understand why it's not already balanced like that in game.
 
Oh while I'm at it, blow up the cross section too. We are on a game where the voxel and the creation is the central point.

Dual Universe’s Panacea update is right around the corner, bringing with it a sizable variety of changes based on feedback from our community. 
Ahead of the update, however, we are immediately introducing revisions to territory upkeep and mining units. 
 
Read on for the full scoop! 
 
GOING INTO EFFECT ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 25th
 
Taxes will be effective again starting Wednesday, January 26th.
The day before, we are going to deploy three adjustments to address the issues mentioned in the Community Feedback regarding Territory Upkeep.
 
Territory Upkeep Reduction: 1 MM --> 500k.

Territory Upkeep was first introduced in the November 2021 Demeter update. After reviewing community feedback, we announced that territory upkeep payments would be postponed for two weeks to allow the Design team time to dig deep into the metrics and fine-tune the system accordingly. 

The upkeep rate per territory will be reduced by 50%, from 1MM to 500k quanta. Player feedback indicated that people felt they were having to sell ore too frequently to generate the funds needed to pay upkeep. In halving the upkeep costs, we will relieve the pressure to make frequent trips to the market as well as the need to sell large quantities of ore.
  Calibrations Charges:
Base calibration charge slots increase : 5 --> 25.
Talent calibration charge slots increase : 1/level --> 5/level.

Also introduced in the Demeter update, mining units were designed as an alternative to digging endless tunnels underground for ore. To keep them producing at their peak capacity requires occasional calibration; however, initial feedback from the community told us that further tweaks were needed for the calibration process. To this end, we’ve made the two changes mentioned above.

This will change the total amount of stored charges from 10 (5 base + 5 max talents) to 50 (25 base + 25 max talents).

The intention behind the charge cap was not to force a behavior in which you felt like you needed to spend charges in order not to “lose out” on charges by hitting the cap and wasting your recharge. 

In view of that, both the base and the talent bonus are drastically going up. This will not only allow you to store more charges in general, but specifically allow you to store a much longer period of time in charge recharge time, giving you much more breathing room to store charges and not waste charge recharge time.
  Calibration grace period: 48h --> 72h
  The calibration grace period is the amount of time during which a mining unit does not lose calibration. Similarly to charge slots, the intention was not to aggressively require you to calibrate mining units every 2-3 days. In our initial calculations our goal was more to hit the 5 to 6 day mark depending on what efficiency curve the player selected, and how many mining units the player was trying to maintain.
 
We are changing the calibration grace period from 48-hours to 72-hours. 
 
This change should bring us closer to the initial values we were looking for and give players more breathing room to calibrate when their mining units seem to be producing less than usual, indicating that calibration is needed.
 
CHANGES COMING WITH PANACEA UPATE (0.28) LAUNCH
 
Using industry units on offline tiles

The intention of requiring online territories for industry units was not to negatively impact industry units on planets. We initially saw it as further incentive to pay for taxes, but it was not a core requirement. This is also why industry units on Ssanctuary and space cores were left untouched.

We understand from player feedback that requiring you to operate mining units on a territory in order to not run industry units at a loss on that territory was an annoyance and many players did not want to run their industry units on the same territories as their mining units.

In view of the preferences expressed, we have decided to allow the operation of industry units on all offline territories. In combination with HQ territories, this will allow you to effectively run industry units on offline territories for extended periods of time.
  Faster extraction animations
  We are also addressing the feedback we’ve received regarding the time it takes to complete a calibration minigame, specifically the frustration from the long loading animations when calibrating a number of mining units.
 
An option has been added in the mining unit UI (tick box) that will let you significantly reduce the time these animations take, drastically reducing the period of time the animations run.
 
Additionally, a number of mining unit mini-game animations have been slightly reduced in duration, thus allowing a faster minigame completion.
 
New talents for surface harvesting
  In order to further incentivize harvesting surface rocks, and to be able to specialize in it, we are adding four talents linked to surface harvesting that will touch on harvesting speed and output.
 
The main goal is to create some surface harvesting specialization for those players who enjoy it, giving them the capability to harvest better and faster, and for longer periods of time.
 
CHANGES COMING POST-PANACEA
 
New surface harvesting controls
  To further address surface harvesting issues, we are working on quality of life-type improvements that will allow a degree of auto-harvesting similar to normal mining as well as other changes to reduce control and UX-based frustrations during surface harvesting. 
Watch for additional details as we refine our plans!
 
 New mining unit surface harvesting, rocks spawning behavior
 
Lastly, we are looking for a solution to simplify the process of gathering rocks. This is in direct response to player requests to eliminate the hassle of having to comb their territories after calibrating a number of mining units. 
 
While this is still in relatively early stages, the solution we are looking at is to spawn the rocks right under the mining unit beam, where the beam hits the ground. Players would then be able to rapidly harvest surface rocks. 
 
BUT WAIT! THERE'S MORE
 
Don’t forget that there’s a lot more to Panacea than the changes and tweaks discussed above. It’s also got some cool new stuff, like the Vertex Precision Tool which we’ll be talking about in the next devblog! 
 
Meanwhile, please join the conversation on the forum here to tell us what you think about revisions we’ve presented in this Devblog.
We’d love to hear from you! 
 
---

The Novaquark team

I wonder :

- NQ say that there won't be a core XL for several years because it will be too expensive and that we will use XL instead of L.
What I understand is that the bigger a core unit is, the less NQ likes it because it costs more to maintain.

- Now we're going to have a pretty hard limit of X core per player. This will therefore push people to have mostly L cores to optimize large constructions.
 
So what is it really? Is the number of cores the problem or is their size?

If that's the number, you have to quickly unlock the XL cores.
If it is the size of the cores, then it must be integrated into the counter and let the player choose what he uses.
(Example: Core XS: 1 pts / Core S: 8 pts / Core M: 64 pts / Core L: 512 pts)

I wonder :

- NQ say that there won't be a core XL for several years because it will be too expensive and that we will use XL instead of L.
What I understand is that the bigger a core unit is, the less NQ likes it because it costs more to maintain.

- Now we're going to have a pretty hard limit of X core per player. This will therefore push people to have mostly L cores to optimize large constructions.
 
So what is it really? Is the number of cores the problem or is their size?

If that's the number, you have to quickly unlock the XL cores.
If it is the size of the cores, then it must be integrated into the counter and let the player choose what he uses.
(Example: Core XS: 1 pts / Core S: 8 pts / Core M: 64 pts / Core L: 512 pts)

So this is an interesting question which I will attempt to answer to the best of my ability...
 
I'm really fighting the urge to make the "It never was" meme here, but I'm sure one of you will do that for me soon enough.
The reality here is that you never actually were making 1/8th or 1/16th slopes, you've been creating what is the closest approximation of that.
 
In the old system, we used 253 points. In the new system, we use 252 points. This means that in the old system, a single voxel was: 84.3333333333333 (recurring) points.
84.333 also does not divide by 8, 16, 32, or 64.

In fact, in the old system you couldn't really reliably cut a voxel in half to an exact precision, and even a single voxel was not precise. As for example:
84.333 / 2 = 42.166 (in reality this would have been 42 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 4 = 21.083 (in reality this would have been 21 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 8 = 10.541 (in reality this would have been 11 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 16 = 5.270 (in reality this would have been 5 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 32 = 2.635 (in reality this would have been 3 because we don't store decimals) 84.333 / 64 = 1.317 (in reality this would have been 1 because we don't store decimals) Sure, the difference is so negligible that you can't see it by eye. But that's essentially the same in the new system as the new pattern looks like this:
84 / 2 = 42 exactly 84 / 4 = 21 exactly 84 / 8 = 10.5 (in reality this would be either 10 or 11 again because we don't store decimals) 84 / 16 = 5.25 (in reality this would be 5 again because we don't store decimals) 84 / 32 = 2.625 (in reality this would be 3 again because we don't store decimals) 84 / 64 = 1.315 (in reality this would be 1 again because we don't store decimals) Now, if we had changed the division to 64 instead of 84.333 you could expect the following to happen to all currently existing constructs:
A loss of precision around 25% Every existing voxel would have lost around 25% of its available detail. You would see huge changes in your designs and most existing designs would likely loose a lot of their detail. Curves would be less curvy, more blocky. But you would have access to a 1/8 slope. With the new division of 84 instead of 84.333, you can expect the following:
The precision loss is only 0.395% Every voxel will look near enough exactly the same, except for a few edge case ones. You likely not see any noticeable change in your existing designs. Curves are still curvy. But your 1/8 slope might be a bit wonky, and its probably better to adjust to 1/7.  In short, the precision cost of changing to 1/64 is not worth it. It really isn't. Trust me, we've looked. It's ugly.

I can already see the new question brewing in your minds: Why didn't you increase it to 128 per voxel?
Sure, this could increase the detail and be more divisible, however it also doesn't fit inside a single byte. So now we are talking about every single construct in the game taking up twice as much in terms of data. And if you feel your cache is big now, you really don't want to know what its like with double the resolution of voxels.  

We could perhaps consider introducing a pseudo 1/64 grid mode further down the road, which would give you a 1/64 grid. However it will still not actually place a vertex at a 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64 position. It would place it at its closest available position.

Also, to answer the question about the scale at which the tool works. No, it will always be 1.5vx in each direction from the vertices point of origin.
I thought maximum adjustment range on this image made that quite clear, but perhaps that was an error on my part:


I highly recommend you try it before you cast to much judgement on it, as someone who's tinkered with voxels for a long time. I absolutely love using the tool.
I find myself mostly using Grid 2 and Grid 7, using the control key to make bigger jumps.
 
I hope this answers some of the burning questions you all have.
I wish you all a wonderful day, and look forward to seeing what you will all create with it.
- Deckard

Heat from engines being linked to radar range would be a nice addition to the game.  We would also need an extended radar range over 2su for that to be become a fun hunting mechanic.  So I mean the hotter you are, the further you are seen, would make for some interesting gameplay!

Completely remove the visual design of the ship from the equation and balance it using what was put into it instead. This leaves players with a free range of visual designs but still allows for balancing acts both from NQs side were they can add/remove points from elements that affects hit probability etc, and also allows the designer of the ship to balance  offense and defense points as well as maneuverability and other ship properties.
 

Oh yes NQ, Move the spawn area back as requested here.
 
Or maybe surprise us with another game mechanic. Maybe like being able to shoot XS weapons at a player who is not in a ship.
 
Bring us some comfort.
 
Also think of PvE players who bothered to scan, claim, buy exotic MU and who want to sell this ore. They are in unfair competition.

I'm not a fan of this kind of system.
Let's wait to see the addition of Territory Wars. Let the destruction of elements be the result of a voluntary commitment in PvP zone.
It also takes more tools to be able to use / replace broken elements.
In reality, I think it is necessary to speed up the gameplay of the game:
- Limit the maximum number of elements you can put on a ship (which reduces the price of a ship).
- Reduce warp price but implement interception mechanics
=>
If the game is faster, the ships less imposing and less expensive. People will be more able to take risks in PvP zone.

The asteroid spawning is entirely automated. It got interrupted by a situation which was supposedly impossible but is not. We will sneak in a patch at next minor release to prevent this from happening again. Meanwhile this was manually fixed and asteroids are spawning again, yay.

How to ruin the game and finish destroying it:
- Keep the cross section
- Do not rework the shields
- Add speed limit based on weight.
Congratulations, you will never again be able to make a ship bigger than 5% of the construction box. Except beautiful haulers with engine wall.

Yes you are right, the haulers are no longer with 20 L container.

But with 20 expended container XL now.

This is one of the changes that players cry much and get reverted. But listen I first was overwhelmed by all my ship's red messages and thought the same, why on earth? If I did no stacking it is like this now. Then I figured out that once you fly the cursor to the marked element that seems stacked it shows red on the ship in build mode where it is and you just move it a bit and then it's ok. So it is not the big deal and I think as a player base we should just fix our constructs for benefit of the game.

Hi everyone!

As you were quite a few to wonder what was the reasons behind "it's more complex than it seems" regarding the tax rates, here is an explanation frome the Game Design team: 

"It's all about faucets and sinks. When implementing a major system like taxes (which should have been there from the beginning),  "more complex than it seems" refers indeed the interconnection of several systems: Tax rate/Upkeep of course, but also resources generation through Calibration and Asteroid Mining. Another important factor quite difficult to anticipate is "Player habits". When taking into account all these factors, it's extremely difficult to make it right on first try. When balance issues occur, the best way to find a long-term solution (and to be sure to have identified the right issues) is to analyze at least a few weeks (if not one or two months) of data. Fixing a balancing issue too hastily has a high risk to backfire, as it might generate other unbalance issues if not handled properly.

Now to explain a bit what was the original plan:
It was about to provide enough Tier 1 resources (through calibration and asteroid mining) to pay the taxes and have a comfortable margin of T1 resources for building.
Unfortunately it seems that players got a lot less Tier 1 resources than we expected, which generated this feeling of "struggling" for many of you. It was not intended.
The Game Design team is actively working on tweaking the balance of various systems (not just one) so the global player experience improves again. Still, we know that it will never satisfy everyone: some will find that it's still not enough, some others will think it's too generous. Just keep in mind that we will have to find an acceptable middleground for the majority."

Best Regards,
Nyzaltar.

There is no fleet combat because a majority of hauleurs leave unarmed and unescorted.
 
Why blame the hunters when their prey is making NO [filtered]ING EFFORT to defend itself?
 
The only armed cargos I've seen are ours, the only ones I've seen with an escort are ours.
Do PVE peoples make no effort to provide content for the game and the problem will come from those who try to pull the game up?
 
Really stop saying nonsense.
 
No one is forcing you to be the sheep, but if out of laziness this is your chosen path, then don't complain about the wolves.

There is no fleet combat because a majority of hauleurs leave unarmed and unescorted.
 
Why blame the hunters when their prey is making NO [filtered]ING EFFORT to defend itself?
 
The only armed cargos I've seen are ours, the only ones I've seen with an escort are ours.
Do PVE peoples make no effort to provide content for the game and the problem will come from those who try to pull the game up?
 
Really stop saying nonsense.
 
No one is forcing you to be the sheep, but if out of laziness this is your chosen path, then don't complain about the wolves.