Novean-32184
-
Posts
595 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Novean-32184
-
-
31 minutes ago, Honvik said:
Just wondered on this as I'm not overly for nor against it but in many games items are usually slapped into Escrow if you go inactive and can pull it out again. I'm talking here long term people who quite a while ago. So why are not they not doing it here? Wont the fact people may rejoin only to find everything 'gone' just put them off and therefore hitting your audience ?
Seems a double whammy
People should have dropped their stuff on Sanctuary when they left if they wanted to keep their stuff. It has always been clear the _only_ place where your stuff is truly safe is on Sanctuary.
-
4 minutes ago, Msoul said:
Sorry Jake but am having trouble seeing how the new tax system makes territory ownership more lucrative for land hoarders. Could you elaborate on this further?
Let's review my comment in context once more..
I very much doubt this played into the consideration as those who "land hoard" do so in many cases because they have vast amounts of quanta they can throw around. And this new taxation actually makes it more lucrative for them to do exactly that.
They have massive amounts of money, they can send out scanners in numbers and round up any tiles that have value, gaining unlimited resources in the proces. There is a good few who sit on HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS, often aquired from exploits, and they can afford to pay the million a week without even looking.. many times over.. Many of these exploiters also can now start farming ores in unlimited numbers and sell the ore to then sell the quanta they make from it for RL $$. -
For me, on Alioth literally all tiles at 180-430/h+ for Coal and 40-80L/h for the other three T1 ores and I have yet to find any highr tier ores
I'm actually putting the results in a spreadsheet and it's amazing how close all results per ore are.. It's almost like someone did not properly set the RNG calculation for ores..
But NQ would check these results before pushing a patch now would they.. right?? they would right??
-
43 minutes ago, Msoul said:
The devs knew that players were going to hate taxes but determined that it was a necessary evil to prevent land hording.
I very much doubt this played into the consideration as those who "land hoard" do so in many cases because they have vast amounts of quanta they can throw around. And this new taxation actually makes it more lucrative for them to do exactly that.
It's still entirely unclear what the reaons for the taxes is/was. It makes no sense at all in the current limited game play and really only detracts and reduces opportunity for players ingeneral.
Taxes generally come with a flipside, they are acollective payment to have a governement oversee and execute maintenance and construction of public spaces and services. Here it really just is a quanta sink, in many cases just taking half of whatever players can extract from a tile with nothing to show for it.
The taxes as introduces in Demeter simply do not make any sense from a gameplay perspective and NQ has yet to provide a single good reason why they needed to implement this. But expecting NQ to step up and actually enagge in this conversation is idle hope as they won't.
- Zarcata and apollo0510
-
2
-
Was NQ not going to "handle" this as per their latest "solution" posted HERE .. /s
-
Hmm.. so I created separate constructs for the three characters and 2 of them have none of the miners output anything despite being well calibrated..
Seems very, very broken
-
Looks like the actual location of the mining units is irrelevant and the location of the construct core will determine which tile you mine on. In this case the core is pretty much smack in the center where the three tiles meet but it is slightly off to one of the tiles and it is applying that tile's values to all three groups of miners, 2 groups being on a different tile alltogether..
This is odd since for scanners for instance this works fine, you can have a triple scanner on one construct and eeach will scan the tile it is actually on/in/over
-
So I figured I'd go and set up mining on Sanctuary for me and my alts. We have connected tiles thers so a nice central construct with a group of four L mineing units on each corner in different tiles..
Rights for me to mine are set on all tiles
THIS DOES NOT WORK, you CANNOT mine different tiles from the same construct which really is broken, as long as I have rights on each tile I should be able to mine any of the tiles from the same construct.
As I set up the second group of mining units is shows the results from the first tile, not hte one from the tile the units are on.
This is a broken mechanic that needs to get fixed ..
-
Some time ago, NQ broke using the lua parameters option again and have yet to fix it..
In the process they prevent players who do not want to break DRM (or can't) from changing settings in Lua scripts
NQ, can we get this fixed with some urgency please?
-
11 hours ago, VandelayIndustries said:
Imagine in EvE if you could get to any system in the game in 1min. It would become unplayable.
Actually, you pretty much can.. Maybe not 1 minute, but you can travel massive distances (way further than in DU) very quickly in EVE
There are several systems in EVE which wil lallow fast travel, including jump drives, Thera and filaments. And Wormholes are actually a pretty good way to get across the entire New Eden system fast, provided you have the right tools and information.
-
DU has not been a player run game ever since the core components needed for that are yet to be put in place. and NQ pretty much removes/changees/blocks any mechanics that might potentially drive that.
-
I actually have a beta key alt sitting on a tile currently still owned by another alt who's sub ran out and will not be renewed. As a result from this change, he will not be able to take ownership of the tile and will not be able to run the industry on the tile. The scan from the tile is actually interesting but as a result will go unused.
-
2 minutes ago, Underhook said:
I dont get it. If they were going to wipe (which up until now I thought they would), why would they bother protecting players stuff its its just going to be wiped anyway. To me, there actions are saying they have decided not to wipe. Then again, give them a week and they could change their mind again.
There is a big difference between "you let other players take my stuff" and "I lost my stuff due to a wipe"
-
30 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:
Whats the difference between accusing one single person of ill intentions or accusing a group of people?
We really can't hold any one person working at NQ to account for some of the blunders the have made and will make. That is for them internally to sort out.
We can say that NQ has made these blunders as a company without indicating anyone in person, I see nothing wrong with that.
Also, no one is saying anyone has "ill intentions" at NQ. Making mistakes, even repeatedly, is not having "ill intentions".
-
48 minutes ago, Maxim Kammerer said:
Well, that makes no sense at all - unless NQ already decided to wipe with release.
That, and will take bets on it, I am sure they have.
-
14 minutes ago, Ninator said:
Guys, the problem is a technical one and quite simple :
Worded very well and pretty much in line with whay i'd expect to be the case, including this really not being much of an issue14 minutes ago, Ninator said:What is really surprising is the fact, that the developer who designed that , did not think about it. Its a classic problem ...
Again true, it's somewhat interesting that this was not considered ahead of time, especially since NQ ran into bumps like this several times in the past year allready.
-
52 minutes ago, Maxim Kammerer said:
That depends on the definition of "players". If it is limited to active subs only than it is actually the best solution. It is the very purpose of HQ tiles to protect property of inactive players. But it would be fools play to include canceled subs.
Deckard said in DUscord that this applies across all accounts, active and inactive
-
Sure, and you can argue that but IMO this is another case of moving the goalposts after the fact and while the game is on.
-
Quote
• For players who haven’t set any headquarters, five headquarters have been automatically assigned based on the highest number of static constructs on the territory.
Is NQ saying that they just decided to remove the option to claim territories from inactive players by automatically assigning the tiles withe most constructs as HQ without any interaction by the said player?
That's bascially removing a core argument they hav eused as to why taxation of tiles is a thing that is good.
Would be nice to hear some clarification on this one too
-
This post makes no sense to me.. would be nice to get some clarification on this.
NQ is staggering upkeep why? What subsystems are affected? Is this because too many transactions in game is actually causing NQ to run out of server capacity? And how was this (if the case) not know to happen in advance? I mean, I obviously do not know i fthis is hte case or not, but it reads as such..
It's a very cryptic message which can be interpreted in a number of ways. It would be good if NQ could be more clear on this.
-
5 hours ago, Creator said:
I do think we need to do something about build height. That is my feedback on this thread.
Agreed, simple solution here is to limit build height to 1500 meters max which allows for AGG use with some margin and would provide safe passage above this.
I also feel dynamic constructs should not be allowed to "hover" when not under power or without active engines. Let gravity do what gravity does.
Static constructs without at leat some reasonable amount of support should also crumble. This may be a tough one but the 1 voxel needle towers are really silly and a nuisance.
- Captain Hills and Feriniya
-
2
-
2 hours ago, CptLoRes said:
Same with the construct boarding shields as a more resent example of a quick fix. There are SOOOO many better ways to solve that problem, that dosn't come with all the problems and visual pollution that the shields cause.
Yeah fixing the extremely short spawn distance on doors, forcefields and landing gear, so that players can't just run into any construct very quickly (before the door actually spawns in), woudl be .. well an actual fix.
-
On 12/3/2021 at 11:33 PM, joaocordeiro said:
I still think the solution is to allow players to build and mine in unowned territories.
Originally it was possible to place static constructs on unclaimed tiles
NQ changed this to require the tile first be claimed because some woudl grief others by basically digging under and around such constructs and so NQ did what NQ does and took the easy way out by implementing a generally restrictive condition.
Being able to put down a static on unclaimed territory post Demeter would resolve a number of issues and so IMO should be at least reconsidered by NQ ..
@NQ-Deckard - any thoughts?
-
18 hours ago, NQ-Deckard said:
You would indeed be correct in that it is an edge case,
In my opinion it is an edge case only because NQ allows it to be.
Players should not be allowed to leave constructs around markets beyond a reasonable time needed to be there. And in that respect 24 hours seems more than reasonable.
SO:
- If a construct is stationary on or over a market tile for more than 24 hours, despawn the construct and store a magic blueprint of it at the "Aphalia Impound Office" which could be set up at the tutorial building at the ARK ship.
- A fee is charged for retrieval, this fee is incremental both related to the number of times a player leaves constructs at markets and the duration it is left in impound
- After a reasonable amount of time, say 14 days, the magic blueprint is either destroyed or offered up for sale on an "Impound Auction"
Simple, clear rules using existing system in game so little dev resource cost.
The above, or similar, has been suggested way back to before "Beta". NQ has not ever provided any sort of arguments why this woudl not be feasible. Instead NQ has takes a number of actiosn which will have been far more costly in dev time and resourcees, none of which have really had a significant effect. Following the last set of "rules" it's quite clear players do not follow them an dthey are not enforced in any way. The passive and inconsistent behaviour by NQ in this regard is what creates the "egde cases".
Will it not deter people re-subbing if everything is salvaged?
in General Discussions
Posted
It has always been known that upkeep would come. By definition that would impliy if you do not maintain upkeep you lose ownershipo and this may mean you lose your stuff
I get that point, effectively NQ threw out their entire plan by creating the permanent safezone to appease the Landmark players who started crying about losing their stuff the moment they came in and had been lobbying with NQ to "hear them".