Moosegun
-
Posts
763 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Moosegun
-
-
2 minutes ago, laicheeeee said:
If you think holding a left mousr button for 2 hours is fun, then you are out of your mind buddy
Two hours suggests your repair skills and scrap do not match the ship you are flying......
-
15 minutes ago, Guest laicheeeee said:
I dont have much experience with Dual Universe as I started a week ago, and I have never played a similar game before. Some suggestions to make the game a bit more easy for newbies like me
- when you crash a ship, you should be able to teleport to your ship of your choice with a 30 minutes cooldown. So you crash a ship, in 30 mins, you can go teleport back to it
- repair is very annoying. my suggestion is players having to click the component just once and the repair would start and finish on its own. I dont mind it costing more or taking longer in exchange.
- safe piloting with your ship in a VR without having to be afraid of wrecking it.
- until the player vendors introduced, I dont see why we need to fly over to a distant market to retrieve an item. It makes ppl rather crafting their own stuff rather than going through the painful and long process of travel. I beleive we should just have 1 market and that's it
- if 4 would make things too easy, or too much effort to change, i would suggest an automated transport service that would cost money, so in like 15 minutes the item would appear in the market container where you are. 4 and 5 would both boost the economy.
- If 4 and 5 are not happening, then at least let's get rid of you having to claim the item from the market container if you purchase something locally (in other words items should transfer to your inventory automatically). Also a warning message would be nice like "dummy you are buying something from a 200su distance, pay attention"
- I bought something from another market, and i have no idea where I bought it from. Does anyone know how I can figure this out?
I literally gagged a little bit.....
Just to humour you
1/ Dont crash, if you do it has consquences
2/ See 1, if you dont do 1, you are saved from doing 2, 2 is your penalty for doing 1
3/ ok
4/ live nearer the market or stop moaning you chose to live miles away from the market - probably bought into the weird Rust mentality that it is 'safer' out there
5/ pay another player to do it6/ Pay attention
7/ See 6 but if you go to a market you can check all your market containers -
22 minutes ago, blazemonger said:
PVP needs a lot more work before it can be "released" in full force. Right now, PVP is pretty much "having guns". We need to get countermeasures into the game for one and the damage output of weapons needs at least one major overhaul before IMO it can be considered to be ready for "prime time".
I also agree with those wondering why some seem so eager o get access to more defenseless targets instead of seeking out likeminded players, if only to make sure NQ gets the data and examples of what is goodm and what not, about PVP..
I can't escape the feeling NQ will in fact keep the current safezones intact for at least another 6 months, or until v2 of PVP is ready (which I do expect will include countermeasures for space combat like radar lock breaker/jammer tech and possible shields). As it is now, if the pewpew hungry are let loose, they will kill the game in no time by chasing those not interested away because there is no counter mechanics at all and resists are way to generic to really make choices. The result right now would be flying cubes which no one would want.Lets keep in mind this game is not centered around PVP, it is not the premier game mechanic around which everything else is built (as NQ has stated quite clearly several times).
Totally agree with Blaze here, whilst I am all for open pvp for the reason stated, I am in no hurry for it, nor do I think any safe zone removal should be done now. NQ have made it pretty clear they are not rushing pvp into the game, you can see that from the fact they went with beta with pvp in the state it is in. I also agree we are looking at 3/6 months before there will be many if any changes, look at the roadmap, it is not scheduled until second phase. NQ clearly want us to build a civilisation first, before they really add any conflict. I encourage EVERYONE who values security to group up and ensure it happens. Ironic that I am in agreement with the pirates, whilst trying to rally the 'carebears' (hate the term sorry).
Also another reason why these knicker-wetting threads are all a bit premature........ -
8 minutes ago, Leogradance said:
Naah. I absolutely do not think that soloists come aware that they can then change the game.
I was personally drawn to the creative abilities of the game and that is what attracted a considerable amount of players.
The fact that many are also interested in PvP is because the game's target range is very large. It's a sandbox for that too.The point is, if you let me do indiscriminate PvP everywhere, apart from a small safe zone, it's no longer a sanbox game with PvP elements, but a PvP game with sandbox elements.
And that's what's wrong.People who want PvP will have it. But forcing those who don't want to do it isn't "PvP". It is a "stretch". And whether it is realistic or not is certainly not a problem: the sun is a cartoon in the sky and the planets are stationary! LOL
About poop: it is an Italian saying that means "it causes me a strong performance anxiety". More or less
I dont WANT pvp, I avoid it like the plague, but I 100% want it in the game, I want the RISK of it. My point about 'hermit' solos, people who completely refuse to engage in the community element of the game, is that they ruin it for everyone else. Societies solution to antisocial behaviour is community and law and order. That only works if the community that needs protecting engages in it. We can protect areas of this game space, if the people group together to protect it. But every time I fly over Alioth and see all these tiny 'Rust in Space' outposts miles away from civilisation I just see massive targets. We need to group together to build a stronger world, THAT is the solution to pvp in my opinion, not false safe zones.
I am going out of my way to build bridges and defences to ensure my org are safe when pvp comes....... most of these people havent spoken to a single person since they joined the game, might as well be playing a single player game. -
1 hour ago, Haunty said:
Ejecting/teleporting the ship outside of the market area after some time might be better than deleting. Temporary storing ship in a virtual garage could work, but NQ would have to make some physical thing where you go to manifest your ship again. Magic blueprint wouldn't make sense because then people would just use the districts to create magic blueprints so they can transport things without mass/volume.
This is why I want deleting it is EASY to do, I dont want them spend time doing loads of coding to purely solve some people laziness. 24 hours or it is gone, otherwise park it on the edge. It is a market not a campsite
-
2 hours ago, BaconofWar said:
Uhm.. you just keep a scrap in your inventory, repair said ship's core, "collect" your ship and stick it in your pocket, and fly back to your base in your new ship....
I don't see any "challenge" you speak of by ganking cargo ships and calling it "PvP". Might as well add NPCs since the challenge level will be the same or higher. PvP isn't needed at all in open space unless folks are compensating for something. The only challenging PvP is between two PvP ships and I doubt folks hitting cargo ships have anything around that will get them to attack another purpose built PvP ship.Ergo my suggestion is for NQ to establish a "war" system for orgs to claim and tax planet markets and only allow PvP for those flagged mutually.
And here we have a fine example
- purchased an open world pvp game without actually wanting open world pvp CHECK
- solo / small player, takes 2/3 weeks to build ship CHECK- now wants to completely remove pvp from the game apart from large org CHECK
IF they did your suggestion, my whole org quits..... as will most others I know who bought into this game from the start
- JohnnyTazer and Kezzle
-
2
-
Just now, JohnnyTazer said:
Maybe the phrasing is wrong, but more valued because there is open world pvp. And this may be anecdotal, but I've known lots of highsec carebears who run 4+ accounts. But sub with plex. Where does that plex come from? Me and people like me. From 10 years playing eve, generally speaking, I've noticed the person that is more into pvp buys more plex packs. Which = more money.
So are you saying pirating is less lucrative than trading? now that is an admission, might get you thrown out of the pirates guild.
-
1 minute ago, JohnnyTazer said:
Then this game isnt for you. Same people cry over and over about being ganked in eve. I dont give a fucking shit what their reasons are, because they are wrong. Point blank. Because the DEVELOPERS of eve said high sec isnt safe. The DEVELOPERS of NQ said the majority of the universe will be open pvp. I don't go to carebear games and whine and complain why I can gank someone, instead I just go to a game that let's me (eve). People will argue about money, saying a developer should do whatever brings in the most money but that is just absurd. They are trying to make a game, their game, and a somewhat unique one.
Here is another thing, I'm more valued customer than the solo carebear. There is no denying it. A lot of my pvper friends in eve sub lots of alts with our credit cards, and purchase lots of Plex. Same will happen in DU. Some months me and a buddy would spend over 1k a month on eve. He subs 12 accounts with his CC, I do 6. And we buy plex packs. NQ already knows they if they go back on their promise of freedom and open world and player driven they will lose massive money, because at that point they are backing off on the original vision they sold us on, the reason we even backed the game.
Great post although i dont agree with the last bit, I run four account currently, which I will almost certain sub all four, being a pvper doesnt give you the sole right to be a hardcore player.
-
9 minutes ago, Leogradance said:
That's exactly how it is. Mostly at least.
The point is, it's not wrong.
It is a voice in the choir, who wants to be heard. The same way you make yours heard and express your opinion.It doesn't matter if you can't understand the reasons for playing solo in an MMO. Nobody can understand everything about everyone. What is important is that they recognized the existence of different points of view.
Which is what happens in an MMO, which is basically a social container.And if you accept the risk of pvp and what it entails is your choice. That others may or may not share.
This does not automatically give you wrong or right.
You accept it.
Others don't.Personally: this is a game. I'm here to have fun. If the pvp becomes insiscriminate and everywhere, I will move to the sanctuary moon and greetings. I'll dig there and probably get bored and drop the game.
Do you know why?
Because pvp in a sandbox MMO makes me shit in my hand. I'm honest.
It's not the pixels.
But the comparison. The sense of helplessness and abuse that I would suffer, the idea of being attacked while I'm doing something that has nothing to do with pvp.
I don't have to "be strong". It's a game. I have to have fun. If I don't enjoy it, I cry and quit.This is what happens to non-pvpers.
I don't care if you understand it or not.I care that you understand that if you don't understand or share a thing that isn't automatically wrong.
Great post but you have slightly missed my point, I am not interested in my opinion, I am interested in the DEVS sticking to THEIR opinion, which has been very open and honest from the start, that there will be limited safe spaces (sanc moon) and the rest will be self governed open pvp.
I am interested in large player made governance, I am interesting in building a civilisation and civilisation comes with unified defence. I have no issue with solo hermit players at all, I have an issue when they want to divert the game from the devs stated path. If people do not want open pvp, why did they buy a game which open publicised it would be the case, I will tell you why, because they knew if they complained enough it would change....... and I can see it coming. Solo hermit do nothing to contribute to civilisation, nothing to make the world bigger or better, they just offer soft targets when the fighting does start.
Please note that all of my opinion are solely based on NQ giving us all the tools we need to properly implement player made security / defence. I STRONGLY believe that this includes some sort of robust offline protection, and generally strong defence. NQ have also gone on record that they will strongly favour the defender AND that offence pvp will have to be planned to be successful. Still interested to see who they are going to achieve this.
Did like the shitting in my hand comment lol- JohnnyTazer, SLAINE202 and Dhara
-
3
-
1 minute ago, Hiberix07 said:
This is not the only post of this nature, please sort. Over and out.
When a poster feels so self entitled they even admit it is a duplicated thread...... brilliant
-
26 minutes ago, BaconofWar said:
Planning? I just kind of... drop stuff where there's room and link everything together in an organic and a period specific manner.
I actually do a LOT of this at the moment, finding the market is far too fluid to know where to focus efforts medium long term. I am finding myself building a lot of independant short run machines to test markets, rather than some of the super computers I see built. Still brilliant community tool, I use the software for work so will defo pick up the xml
-
3 hours ago, FryingDoom said:
Hold on didn't you just finish saying that PvP is an integral part of this game? now here you are suggesting PvE fixes to players fighting players over parking spots.
So which is it?Ok then, in 24 hours your ship become open to salvage, then I can send the boys round and clean up the place, no biggy either way. For the record, I would HAPPILY accept NQ removing the NPC markets once player markets are up, then we can run our own parking polices.
Also really not sure what pvp has to do with this, or why my pvp opinions have any relevance to this topic? Is this some personal points scoring thing or are you interested in discussing my solution to the issue.
-
24 minutes ago, Leogradance said:
praise the sun!
lololSeriously.
PVP will reach everywhere. Sooner or later, excluding the promised zones.But whether it helps the economy or not is another matter.
And I'd like those who want pvp to stop justifying it as a useful mechanic to make the game work.
I find more honest people who tell me they want to blow up other people's ships because they find it funny than someone who insists with this nonsense that it will help the economy.
I am an industrialist who NEVER instigates fights at all but I am 100% behind full open pvp. I have a LOT at risk with this attitude, I have territories on 8 planets BUT I do strongly believe that open pvp with only limited safe areas (AS CLEARLY ADVERTISED) is the right solution. I fully accepted the loses that would bring, because it also bring the risk to my endeavours. Sorry for multiple posts but wanted to reply to everyone and the copy paste was doing my head in.
-
1 hour ago, Emptiness said:
Pvp really doesn't make much sense in the ingame lore. Humanity escapes a destroyed home planet and comes to a new solar system to rebuild society. Where does conflict and self destruction help with that? Keep it to VR, if anything.
Sociopathy and psychopathy are mental illnesses that should have been solved and completely removed from such a society.
As Charlie Chaplin in the Great Dictator said, we should try to help each other; not profit from misery and despair.
Complete rubbish, war and conflict are human nature sadly, man has ALWAYS sort conquest through use of arms. YES a lot of people would want to settle in a civilised way but plenty would be happy to do it by force. It should be up to the civilised players to push the evil players from that society, NOT the devs to give them safe spaces to protect their pixels.
100% bet that the majority of players crying about pvp and safe zones are also solo players. EVERY game I go to they do the same thing. join and MMO, play solo (why do they join an MMO in the first place), complain that they can do everything large groups can, complain that they are getting 'zerged' even though they could easily be protected by playing in a bigger group. They have no interesting in being part of 'civilisation' they want to be hermits but they also want the game changed to suit them.]I was sincerely hoping that this game would finally give me what I was looking for, a true MMO sandbox where players police it themselves but sadly looks like it is going to be washed away in pixel tears and safe zones.
This has nothing to do with people being allowed to play 'how they want to play' it should be down to EVERYONE accepting the way the DEVS want you to play. The game cant be made to suit everyone, so go with the devs vision or step aside.
-
3 hours ago, FryingDoom said:
Oh and elites entire economy IS player driven. Just its not forced PvP.
No it isnt, it is bot driven with a player overlay, Elite is a miss mash of several games loosely joined together in a sudo MMO that isnt really an MMO.
2 hours ago, Busterguy said:because this is a pvp game? the end goal of this game is blow shit up and fight each other over territory. Not hold hands planting flowers around your base 24/7
No it isnt a PvP game, sorry but you are 100% wrong there, it is a civilisation building MMO, a pillar of civilisation is war, which means it will be a part of the game, it WILL NOT be the main driving factor, NQ has been very clear about that and it shows in its development plan.
1 hour ago, Emptiness said:No, the end goal of this game is to build a thriving civilization.
Pvpers are the emotionally disturbed and should be rooted out and exterminated with prejudice.
This is actually what I think SHOULD happen, it should be up to the community to protect itself from pirates, the issue as always though will be the solo players, they will refuse to play in larger groups and because of this will be very open to attack, they will cry, seen it in loads of games.
3 hours ago, Iorail said:It doesn’t matter what the PvP’ers want or what the PvE’ers want, it all comes down to what generates the most money for the game so it can continue to exist. If the PvP’ers are getting bored because people are staying in the safe zone, fight each other, stop trying to force everyone to your play style. End of story. Now, just opening a PvP thread every few days is not going to change anything, could have posted in the other 2625 threads about this that already exist that sank to the bottom of the forums for lack of interest.
It actually shouldnt come down to what generates the most money, it should come down to the integrity of the developers to build the game they set out to build, without caving into pressure from either side. If games where just designed to be 'popular' they would all look like fortnight, I LIKE niche games, I DONT like niche games that are turned into mainstream ones due to players forcing their playstyles on other, be that PvP or PvE.
-
3 hours ago, Luukullus said:
Well.. Thats a bit thought too simple i guess...
Whats up when you get an error ingame and cant reconnect because of any crash bug? The your ship and your stuff is gone.... Caused by bugs...
The idea with auto removal is very nice... But shrink the time down to 15 Minutes and like said before... send it in a virtual garage...
Star Citizen made it a bit like that too.
if you are not sure if you are in and out, you park on the edge simples.
-
3 minutes ago, FryingDoom said:
No my answer is if something is so unpopular that they can't get enough people to do it why should it be forced on people.
World of Warcraft learned this when they realised how unpopular PvP servers were and made it opt in, as did Elite Dangerous.Neither WoW or Elite were player driven games though, this is a pretty much 100% player driven game, so the danger HAS to come from players, if you are removing pvp, then you are basically removing any risk at all. The game is then broken, nothing has any value.
Why did you by a game with pvp and then try to get it removed / dumbed down? It has been very clear from the start that it would have pvp pretty much everywhere. Why do people buy games and then complain about well advertised elements of it.
-
1 minute ago, FryingDoom said:
Why does so much space have to be given over to PvP? If most people hate PvP which is apparent because of the lack of it without PvP occurring, if you don't force people to PvP.
As to PvP v PvE, ever seen a PvE pirate harass the same player? post the comments on a third party site? or for that matter complain about players being able to get better defences?
Because the game needs conflict, it needs voxel / money sinks, it does not need EVERYTHING in game to be accessible in safety, which is currently the case. Hell even pvp zone is not even remotely dangerous at the moment.
Your pvp / pve answer isnt really an answer, so your issue is that people post comments? Sorry you have lost me now. The bottom line is there is no difference apart from the fact human players are far harder to beat and it feel a bit more personal. The bottom line is that pvp / pve conflicts are actually very similar.
Although I 100% agree that pvp player WILL moan about us getting more defenses, that are mainly cowards that pray on the weak but that is what pirates should be. It is up to you to not to be weak.
-
On 9/8/2020 at 10:16 AM, Valygaroddik said:
Hi all,
so now i'm at that stage of game that i'll need t3 and better ores to starting making a warp drive. Actually i'm trying to mine Pyrite on Thades, but it seems that is very tought to find it.
I digged an hole 900m depth and digged a 4 tunnels (One going Nord, one south etc) 2km long each, but it seems that it didn't help.
So anyone of you have some suggestion about findind T3 ores or better?
Than k you!
My suggestion, find a niche product, focus on it, sell it, make money, buy warp drive. Solo does not mean self sufficient. Self sufficient is by far the slowest for of progression in this game.
-
1 minute ago, FryingDoom said:
PvE also adds risk and a lot more people seem to enjoy that than they do PvP.
What I find startling is the fact that PvP gamers always talk about how good PvP is but they only ever seem to want to attack non-PvP players in ships that cannot fight back, against players with no interest in learning all of the skills and abilities to PvP. They never seem to form into opposing groups in areas with the aim of attacking other PvP players.
Can you explain to me the difference in fighting a player and fighting AI, never really got why some people get so salty because they are killed by a player but fine it is happens to AI. Similar situation to all the players who want NPC missions, but then label orgs paying players to do jobs as 'slavery'. All seems very odd to me. I like player based pvp because it is more of a challenge. PvE like pve because it is easy and they can 100% mitigate all looses.
Why do you have a ship that cant fight back in pvp space? If you choose to do that it is your fault, not the games. -
Just add a BIG RED SECTION down the centre of each market, if you land in that section you get a warning - SHORT STAY PARKING if your vehicle is left here for more than 4 hours it will be DELETED with all its contents, this leave the edges for longer term parking / marketing but the main section of the landing for proper short term parking.
If some of these scruffy muppets lose some ship then there you go.
Did you really hit a space station at 10km? Was your radar broken or were you afk?
-
The other solution is to remove any alloys T2 from Alioth / Madis / Thades and there moons. So players that are scared of losing pixels can potter about in safe zone, and those of us who dont mind heading out into space can bring back the good stuff from them.
I am an industrialist trader but I am 100% for open pvp in as many areas a possible but ONLY when NQ gives us the tools we need to combat it- RDMS to include shared KOS / Friendly lists of other orgs players
- The ability to store information on player who attacked org assets
16 minutes ago, FryingDoom said:Hold on, if PvP is so highly loved by so many, surely there must be thousands of people feely engaging in PvP, as so many love it.
Why do you need to force people into PvP if it is such a great thing?
PvP is vital as a means to add risk to a game that has none, it add values to products and gameplay. Without any NPC's there needs to be pvp to create a sink for all the wealth being created. NQ are clearly in no rush though, development to date 100% suggests that they are happy for us to keep building up civilisation before we start to knock some of it down and I think that is a good thing. The fact that PvP updates arent even in the first part of the roadmap suggests how important NQ place it in the big scheme of things. Think we are a good 3-6 months of relaxing of safe zones / atmos pvp.
- [BOO] Sylva, BooseOG, borzol and 1 other
-
4
-
Whilst i am not a fan of restrictions on elements, I would like to see a maximum of +1 weapon size to core size (or even +0). So an XS core can field a maximum of S weapons and so on, this will solve part of the issue with min - max pvpers using the best of xs detection and larger weapons.
The problem is that most pvpers dont want fair, they want easy, they will exploit the shit out of anything they can to get an advantage, then most will cry and leave if the game tries to bork that advantage. Anyone flying these 'borg' cubes clearly have no class, no interest in fair, they will simple move onto the next exploit and big ugly ship.They should also remove ALL voxel defence after two layers of peneration, so stop voxel layering abuse.
-
3 hours ago, Treelessrain said:
Right now what else is there to do besides mine build mine- npcs will add more depth to an incredibly hollow gameplay loop. Naturally, they need to be implemented correctly to make the player feel rewarded and that they were engaged in the content as well. Also, no is crying for EZ mode- is asking for more depth easy mode to you? The game I was pitched was a single shard mmo- where you can forge your own way. What I got is mining simulator 2.59 with some flying and markets involved and maybe a few orgs. So no, I don't think it is easy mode to ask for more depth in a game that has barely any depth.
Why do you need an NPC to tell you what to do? The only thing shallow here is your imagination. You have to make you own gameplay loops, you want to start business empire you can do that, you want to start a ship building company, a taxi company, repairs, transportation, security, pirating you can do ALL that, you just do have some NPC telling you what to do. I understand some people dont get that, people are too used to certain types of games, they struggle with something different. Hell you could start a racing team if you want, build a race track.....
I NEVER struggle to find something to do, infact i struggle with not having the time to do everything.
slicker gameplay - teleport / ship repair / etc
in General Discussions
Posted
Ok I was going to leave it with one midly sarcastic comment but you choose to play, so let play. Where do you get off thinking you can walk into a game and suggest MASSIVE fundamental gameplay changes such as products teleporting from a market place. If that is what a 'casual playerbase' requires to satisfy them, then they can job on back to the SIMS4 and enjoy it.
As someone who helps out in help chat a fair bit, I was under the impression that people were getting repairs due to crashing caused by disconnect etc? Which is a completely different thing, unless you are saying it is caused by incompetence and they are using support as a crutch????