Search the Community

Hello, First of all, I would like to thank NQ for making efforts to find new solutions to fight against cheaters. However, following the implementation of the new anti-cheat tool has been drastically impacted the player experience. We are no longer in Beta, the anti-cheat solution should be tested before being deployed in production. Almost every time we log out we have the same problem, which means that it is not a rare bug but a recurrent and frequent problem. In addition to this, there are various other errors. One of Easy-Anti-Cheat's slogans is "Our mission is to keep games fun. Easy Anti-Cheat is non-invasive and trusted industry-wide. Experience your favorite games the way they were meant to be experienced by complementing your security efforts with established technology and practices." I must say that my experience as a player has been degraded since we have EAC and it should be the opposite. In conclusion, the current solution is not viable and only adds one more reason for some players to unfortunately stop playing. Kind regards

The following is a list of player suggestions for minor improvements/modifications to existing gameplay features. If you have ideas that fit within this scope then please reply with them below so they can be added to the list. Just keep in mind that this particular thread is not for requesting new features or major feature reworks, as those are more deserving of their own topics. Now without further ado, here is the current list: General Gameplay Ability to quickly replace/swap existing elements without altering position. (discussion thread) Adjust the appearance of purple voxels to be more purple and/or add purple to the list of available plastic voxels. Holding down a direction key should continually increment element/voxel positioning while in buildmode. User Interface Add option to hide items currently out of stock at the market. (discussion thread) Add icon to indicate the current state of interactable marks ie. the V-key. (discussion thread) Provide a means to distinguish whether a destination's waypoint is on the opposing side of a planetary body. Add a shortcut to view an item's associated market page either via the right click menu or by inspection. Add or associate icons to the various item categories so players can more easily distinguish between them. Change the default quantity for market orders to 1 unit. Allow for keyboard control of commonly used user interfaces ie: market, inventory, organization, barter, and RDMS. Add a button to the territory management screen that allows users to quickly deposit/withdraw from org wallets. Expand VR-Station search functionality to include owner and location categories. Expand Mission search functionality to include issuer and or organization. Player Vs Player Add unique identifier to the default radar widget to allow players to more easily differentiate between targets with the same name. (discussion thread) Lua Scripting Expand lua script access to the whole keyboard. (discussion thread) Launcher & Client Further clarify the various login error messages to give players a better sense of the problem. Add more links/references to important DU resources (Code of Conduct, Keymap, Wiki, Tutorials). Allow players to perform manual integrity checks on their gamefiles outside of client updates.

Since day 1, NQ has talked about cities as a feature of DU: - during the Kickstarter in JC's '10 Minutes of Dual Universe Gameplay', - in the 2018 pre-alpha 'Dual Universe Community-Made Outposts', and - just a year ago, at the 25 second mark in the 'Building Fundamentals Trailer'... So why are there only a handful of 'cities' in DU? As detailed in my YouTube video (link below) it is virtually impossible to align static core blueprints reliably, even when working hard to comply with the baked-in ray cast used to position blueprints. The lack of a snap to grid (as with placement of new cores) is just the beginning of the many problems. Static blueprint placement issues also include: 1) 'Nudge' moves the BP by 2 voxels instead if 1, 2) There is no visualisation of the structure being placed. Combined with placement inverting the direction of the structure by default, it is extremely difficult to predict which direction the blueprint is facing when placed, even moreso when rotation is called for, and 3) The inability to 'undo' a bad placement is especially burdensome on large structures as they have to be torn down in dozens of separate cut selections and the blueprint is effectively lost. For all these reasons, it is completely impractical to try to perform a number of tasks essential to large scale architecture, including: - Relocating an existing multicore structure, - Replicating a multicore structure, - Developing multicore structures for sale, - Selling any static blueprint with DRM (since bad placement consumes the blueprint). Because it is impossible to transact blueprints in a way that allows customers to reliably place their purchase, there is no profit to be made in multicore architecture. And because there is no profit in multicore architecture, there are no multicore architects. In essence, current gameplay mechanics actively inhibit the construction of cities. There are three levels of fix for this essential gameplay element: BASIC: Add snap-to-grid for static core blueprint placement, identical to new core placement. (Even with this basic fix, determined players can workaround the remaining problems.) INTERMEDIATE: Add a direction arrow on the blueprint being placed so players can see which direction the BP is being placed. (Blueprint sellers can then provide instructions to customers on which face of the construct the arrow represents.) ADVANCED: Full function - add a silhouette of the projected blueprint, and add an undo function or teardown with the blueprint recovered. To be fair, there are other problems as well - like the inability to use elevators to travel between cores, or more than half the width of a large core. But with the ability to design and build multicore structures, the largest hurdle would be resolved and the absence of any significant emergent architecture, aside from a small number of very determined players. It is my wish that rather than wait for the available development cycle to properly fix static blueprint placement, the 'basic' option above be implemented ASAP. *

I created this thread so players can submit their ideas for the future AvA mechanics here. This will make it easier for NQ to collect our ideas. My suggestions: I think NQ need to give the players the ability to plant C4 bombs with a remote detonation or a timer on other players ships, so that later they can detonate them in the pvp zone, we also need tracking beacons that will transmit the coordinates of the ship every few minutes that the ships owner can detect and remove from the ship before departure. This will be a good start for the AvA ? These 2 mechanics will be the easiest to do. Another AvA mechanic is the boarding mechanic. How it can work: when 1 ship approaches another at a close distance, for example 20 km, a button appears in the pilot of the ship to send a request for boarding to the pilot of another ship. A boarding request cannot be rejected if your ship has fewer players than the other ship that sent you the request. When boarding starts, the ships stop 100m apart and remain motionless, the boarding timer starts working. While the boarding timer is running, players cannot pilot and fire the ships' guns, these 2 ships cannot be destroyed by other ships, a no-fly impassable zone appears around these ships until the boarding timer stops. If none of the ships was captured during this time, then after the end of the boarding timer, the speed of the ships is restored. Boarding mechanic: https://youtu.be/OFhtWj729Y4

Can we get a transparent periscope like it used to be? I have always used this code, but after the release of the Apollo update, the periscope is no longer transparent. local periscope = [[ <style> img { margin-top: 9vh; margin-left: -4vw; }</style> <img src="gunner_target.liveview" style="width: 40%; max-height: 100%; box-sizing: border-box">]] system.setScreen(periscope) system.showScreen(1)

Hi there, Long time fan and player since the last alpha. Let me start out by saying this game has so much potential and is already in a fairly enjoyable and playable state. I don't want to comment on stuff like performance and bug fixes since many have pointed this out already and I think DU staff have their priorities on getting this on-rails asap. I want to talk about communication mostly, and immersion, and I get the second subject might be a bit further down the line: Communication - critique: One of the things I always think impacts general interest in a game and keeps players peeking for updates, especially alpha/beta or early releases, is clear and open communication and roadmaps. Now, I know there is a roadmap, but I want to be frank about this; it doesn't do a good job of peaking my interest. Its vague, incomplete and simply all over the place. Even the implementation of the poll-system, while a very good addition, isn't cutting it. Communication - solution: I believe the roadmap should be a lot more detailed and divided into short, mid and long term. On the short term there should be details about implementations in the upcoming weeks, with dates!; think of gameplay tweaks, bug fixes, small gameplay additions etc. On the mid-term, say months, there should be a list of upcoming implementations of small to medium systems/gameplay additions/graphical updates. And on the long-term you can keep the descriptions as you have them now in the roadmap, with focus on big changes and implementations, add-ons and serious gameplay changes. All-in-all, there needs to be a better grasp of what the team is focusing on. To take it to another level, if you're working in a scrum kind of way, just share the sprints as short-term roadmaps (just an idea). And all of these need to be realistic, the more you need to push stuff backwards, the more you create a backlog and frustration with the players. Its better to start with small increments and deliver, than vice-versa. Its difficult to assess what you guys/girls are working on back there, while that has many people very excited as well if they knew. Immersion - feedback: I'll keep this one shorter, but after playing the game for a LOT of hours in the past months, it has come to my attention that a lot is missing in the game which should create more immersion. This is mostly small stuff: sound effects mostly, but also visual effects (like the missing animations of industry)... The galaxy and planets feel deserted, even with the amount of players flying around. Its just not... alive. And there should be random stuff happening... nothing major perse. Just my 2 cents that I had in the back of my head and needed to write off. See you in game!

So I've been playing DU for about two weeks now and I would like to live my feedback since its still beta. Overall the game has huge potential, but some concepts needs some good amount of work and planning. I want to point out some topics that in my opinion would greatly improve the game. Remove predictability of ores in planets. As of now the community mapped out, which ore is in which planet at what depth range. That leads to safe zone Moons been mined out of higher tier ores. That makes will eventually make it even less fun for players that come along later, they will be mining only T1 ores. The force respawn needs to have a cooldown mechanic. It is a thing that help makes mining less boring but helps players scan the areas too quickly because of topic above, I went to Madis Moon 1 yesterday to look for petalite and the scadium ore, I started using the scanners, brought 3 with me so I can scan 3 tiles at once. I realized that is faster to go to about the center of each of the tiles and dig straight down until desired depth and respawn on the ship. But to my surprise people already did that, no matter where I went, the whole Moon was mined, after 3 hours of searching I found 1 tile with 5000 L of petalite. Scanners are useful only when there is a possibility of untouched areas, but as stated above, it doesn't make sense for players that join later to use them on safe zones planets for instance because it will be mined out. Ore depletion and extraction control. To slow down orgs and give solos a better chance and make resources take longer to deplet. As you will see bellow, orgs will still benefic greatly from having multiple players, its just not as unbound as it is right now. Make a mining territory unit, that would allow only the owner to extract ore from 3 tiles connected to where placed for X amount a time, (lets say 1 hour). Scanners can be used without it but would take longer (20-30 mins). It would take Y amount of time (10 min) to claim that land for that X amount of time, but once the process starts it would show on the map for everyone. After the land is claimed for mining, the owner can only claim another after the claimed timed plus a V amount of cooldown (maybe 30 min). The temporary claim process can be cancelled in the first Z minutes (lets say 2 mins) without penalties but after that it triggers the cooldown. Add player and org controlled ways of marking the tiles, right now we have bookmarks but its not visual enough, too hard to determined where have you been. For orgs, make players have to send reports for locations (maybe the scan results) so the org liders can add to an Org view of the map. This later could be one of the player driven missions, to pay outside org players to scan tiles for them. The ship building needs an overhaul mainly because of PVP purposes, but for more immersion too. Voxels should be required to connect parts. Voxels should obstruct engine and such. Wings should required a bigger spacing, to avoid wing spam. Wings flow check should be consider from the entire piece not just a point (people are covering them using voxelmancy) Voxels need to be made much stronger so it isnt just a game of hitkills. Maybe add shields and reflectors? The PVP system - If is going to be tab targeting I suggest allowing the pilot to control some guns of his ship, not all. each gunner seat to control some guns not all. greatly reduce the damage the guns are doing, but also make ships reduce speed when hit and when firing. Maybe add a mouse minigame to help increase accuracy and select target. Something like aiming and calibrating the gun. Thank you guys for reading it, hope DU continues to improve.

Even though I haven’t played the game myself yet,I’ve noticed something within the discord server these past days since the release of beta that I would like to bring up,specifically regarding constructive criticism and feedback of DU. I’ll try to keep this as short and as straight to the point as I can. I’ve noticed that a few or couple of alpha backers would dogpile and look down on newcomers who give any sort of constructive criticism and feedback to the game. I won’t name names and point fingers for obvious reasons. This is something I’m highly against as constructive criticism and feedback is how a game gets better. A lot of the time these new players genuinely want the game to improve and grow into something bigger and better and are free to share their thoughts and opinions. Constructive criticism is always welcome in any game regardless of it’s developmental stage,be it alpha,beta or even full release. Don’t view it as slander or insult,they’re both different things and should be treated differently. I get that a you guys really love your game but please don’t defend it for the wrong reasons. Don’t dog pile and shit on any newcomers who give constructive criticism and feedback,it’ll just make them want to leave and I doubt anyone who enjoys the game would want players to leave the game since that accounts to less players. Plus,it gives off bad vibes of the community in general. Second point I wanna make real quick is don’t disguise slander and insult as “constructive criticism and feedback”. This applies to anyone in the community. Most of the time people can see straight through your bs. These are just my opinions,feel free to disagree if you would. They are my perspectives,you may have different perspectives from mine and that’s fine. TL;DR: sike,read the whole thing don’t be lazy

I'm a fan of space games (played Elite Dangerous MMO for over two years now and, personally, think the devs are passionate about the game and care what the players think). I have been looking at Dual Universe (DU) with interest, but have yet to become a backer. My review of the DU website (including this forum) leaves me with mixed feelings, although I would be the first to admit that I know very little about DU. The concept art and trailers look great, but there are some elements that cause me to hesitate getting behind the game. For example: I was underwhelmed by the pledge packages. They didn't seem of great value and are a tad expensive, particularly for alpha access. The subscription model is a disincentive (although it could be OK if gameplay is engaging and the DAC system works). Live game play appears to be limited ATM (i.e. server time is scheduled for short periods). The "tone" of the developers was upbeat, but seemed a bit stand-offish when talking about T & C's and NDA issues. Even the pre approval of posts on the forum suggests some lack of confidence or resistance to player views (but then again you may think it fair). This is not trolling, just my first blush impression based on limited information. DU could be as good or even better than other MMO's. The reason for this thread is to get your comments and feedback as players. All I ask is straight up no BS feedback, good or bad. Why should a "noob" play DU and become part of the DU community? Its a commitment in money and time after all. What do you think about the game content and mechanics so far, development progress, dev commitment and communication to players (thumbs up or down) and of course what is the player community like. As the actual players, your thoughts as players count and will help others like me. And need I say, keep it nice please as all opinions are legitimate.

Regarding the icon layout and functional consistency of these forums... There are these "voice bubble" icons in front of thread titles that look very similar to the voice bubbles in front of forum area titles. Issue: Inconsistent behavior The icon in front of the forum titles marks ALL threads inside that forum read. The icon in front of the thread titles jumps to the first unread posting. Multiple times now I accidentally marked whole forum areas read, because I intuitively clicked on that icon. Possible solutions, ordered by personal preference descending: disable the "Mark forum as read" on the forum area index - the function would still be accessible from inside the forum, where we have a button on top to do the same add a confirmation "You're about to mark the whole forum as read. Continue?" on the forum area index (maybe in combination with 3.) significantly change the design of those two functions that are very different from each other (however still, the similar layout/position would lead to intuitively target that area for the wrong reason...) make the icon in front of thread titles (that now do "Go to first unread post") do "Mark this thread read" instead (but as "mark something read" is a very destructive and afaik irreversible(?) function, I strongly feel against this solution - it's just an "at least it would be consistent" kind of thing...) Thank you for your consideration

Hi, This is rather question to our community manager (I summon @NQ-Nyzaltar !), but you can respond too Community portal is fun and very interesting in terms of community growth, but it lacks some purely technical features - for me two main concerns are: impossibility to edit replies in topic, lack of customize titles for corp members (who is director, who is legate, who is line member and so on...) and "flat" structure of organisations - we already have have powerful coalitions, but they function like "normal" corporations, being different type. I can point few more requests, but I rather would to know where I can address them? To special topic (like this one , PM Nyzaltar, or some other way? If someone can point me to right direction, I will be grateful. PS: In absence of such topic about community website feedback, I think that we can temporally post our propositions here