Jump to content

Call for Demeter-related questions


NQ-Pann
 Share

Recommended Posts

Question:
With Demeter, they are introducing the first area on Sanktuary as tax-exempt. That's great!
However, there is a problem if players now want to build on this area, because the player who builds on his area first can prevent the adjacent areas from being built on. Depending on how close he builds to a neighbour's border, he prevents the neighbour from building.
->So will there be a corresponding adjustment with Demeter that will limit this protective boundary of building to one's own territory, so that the neighbours can build on their territories unhindered?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zarcata said:

Fortunately, the majority of players voted for a larger safe zone and NQ has implemented this for the players. From a purely lore point of view, we are settlers who -together- want to build a new beginning. There is no reference to PvP as such, except that in a PvP zone (which is not a PvP zone, but simply a zone without rules) there could be warlike actions.
So the overall concept is everything but comparable to Eve. If you want to play Eve, you should play Eve and not DualUniverse to be happy, because they are two different games. (Apples and pears)

 

Eh? When did this vote happen? Only historic polls i can see from the past had a large majority swing in favour of pvp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry @Zarcata, but your comment seems to indicate you just went of on a rant becaue you read the word EVE and have not actually understood the topic being discussed. Your reponse has absolutely zero relevance to the topic at hand.

Also, it is both obvious and confirmed by NQ that much of what is seen in DU is directly "inspired" by EVE. They even went as far to say they were going to take what EVE does to the next level.. well.. we know where that ended up..

There never was a vote on safe zones at all, Initially it was just an area around the ARK ship, then around the markets on Alioth, then came Sanctuary and finally the massive blob around Alioth/Thades/Madis. But as you only joined a year ago, you may possibly not know any of that.

 

NQ seemingly decided that the needed to protect some players who were rather upset and vocal about the possibility of having to deal with combat and lose their stuff or have it taken/destroyed (after they joined a game where that was always the intention). Part of that now seems to also be because they never really knew how or when they would get around to trying to figure out planet side combat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jake Arver said:

There never was a vote on safe zones at all, Initially it was just an area around the ARK ship, then around the markets on Alioth, then came Sanctuary and finally the massive blob around Alioth/Thades/Madis.

Historically, ALL of Helios was safe - no PvP at all. Then a small region of space was defined as PvP Zone. Then PvP zone was extended to what we have now. Thats what happened, but the dream envisioned was PvP everywhere (including on planets) except Sanctuary and an extended region around the Ark ship (which incuded markets before the Ark was moved).

To paraphrase: No dream survives first contact with reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Jake Arver said:

DU has always been "inspired" by EVE and it was always going to be that, outside of Sanctuary, you would lose ownership if you did not provide upkeep for territory. This fact was discussed as far back as the first talk of teritory during alpha and as I recall even before that. 

 

So this is not new, and IMO the mechanic itself is fine. It's the way NQ goes about implementing stuff like this which is the problem, just like it was with schematics. NQ looks at EVE from a top level/player perspective and seems to "reverse engineer" mechanics to only the first layer. They do not seem to consider the underlying/connected mechnics that feed into something which actually make it work at all.

DU differs from EVE in one very important aspect. DU is/was supposed to be a persistent universe with unlimited terraforming and building.

 

And as such, there need to be some mechanism for solo players and small orgs to be able to step away from the game for some time, and NOT lose all the work they have put into building permanent bases etc.

 

As I see it, this is just another chapter in the build vs destroy balance problem, where a PvP'er can destroy in minutes something it took months for a builder to make. I.e the PvP'er wins by default, and the builders leave the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2021 at 3:54 PM, EasternGamer said:

I somewhat disagree with point two. I haven't invested time in scanning, but if NQ made old scans useless, you would have literally thrown away tens of thousands of hours of other people's time who spent the time finding meganodes before. Maybe the best solution would to give a "hint" as to what the tile has, but not the actual values, but no one in NQ would have implemented something like because it's work that is only a temporary compromise.

who said that mega nodes will turn into high output auto mining tiles?  I mean wont they get shuffled? I have my base on a 4.2K/L of hematite right now and Im trying to find out if I should mine it out before the this patch is released. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Riptose said:

who said that mega nodes will turn into high output auto mining tiles?  I mean wont they get shuffled? I have my base on a 4.2K/L of hematite right now and Im trying to find out if I should mine it out before the this patch is released. 

Dig it up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rule number 1 of the DU forum: every thread that exceeds 4 pages eventually becomes a discussion about the merits of PvP. It's been that way for years and years. ?‍♂️

 

Does anyone think NQ will actually answer questions here...?

 

They spent more time scolding us for polluting this thread with "non-questions" than they have engaging. It's just bad PR to claim that this thread being too busy is the reason they can't "process our feedback" and reply. 

 

NQ has a long history of poor communication, which isn't the worst issue tbh, but trying to deflect it onto players is a weird choice. 

 

It's a familiar pattern for them, they had a similar reaction to backlash against 0.23 -- they probably think "these players can't be pleased, they just whine about every change no matter how awesome (we think it is)". 

 

Good luck getting this monster to release! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, blundertwink said:

Rule number 1 of the DU forum: every thread that exceeds 4 pages eventually becomes a discussion about the merits of PvP. It's been that way for years and years. ?‍♂️

 

Does anyone think NQ will actually answer questions here...?

 

They spent more time scolding us for polluting this thread with "non-questions" than they have engaging. It's just bad PR to claim that this thread being too busy is the reason they can't "process our feedback" and reply. 

 

NQ has a long history of poor communication, which isn't the worst issue tbh, but trying to deflect it onto players is a weird choice. 

 

It's a familiar pattern for them, they had a similar reaction to backlash against 0.23 -- they probably think "these players can't be pleased, they just whine about every change no matter how awesome (we think it is)". 

 

Good luck getting this monster to release! 

Come back tomorrow mate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there any other planned changes to atmospheric brakes (adding animation,  thrust cone must be facing the direction of travel,  ect)? If so, please don't  make incremental changes,  change  everything  at one time. I don't want to have to keep  rebuilding the same ship. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it looks like i will probably have to move my buildings which are currently on different territories all to one territory.  Will DU provide better mechanics to be able to move and place static large core structures?  Currently it is a nightmare to position both in rotation and depth.  Also can be difficult to be linked to enough storage compacity to hold all the materials needed to be able to place the large blueprint.

image.thumb.png.71f331c3acfd2e2a29fbfe2fa5f57a8b.png
I have spent alot of time building my structures, i would hate to loose them because i can no longer afford the taxes.  I would prefer to just move them all to sanctuary and build there than to risk the loss.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2021 at 2:46 PM, Dracostan said:

I hope NQ realises the scope of the changes they are proposing and the potential damage to the game that can come from them. It will only take small tweaks to existing gameplay mechanics and the proposed numbers of the Demeter update to ensure the damage is mitigated and we are presented with a well-structured game that fulfils NQs vision and give players a rich and enjoyable universe to explore and build.

So far I have not seen them look that far ahead since launch.  Every single decision seems like a knee jerk reaction and poor decision making skills.  They are determined to make the game they set out to make even if no one wants to play it after they are done. 

Good game devs would make cool things a part of the game even if it was not originally wanted.  Another very popular game comes to mind with bullet jump ;)     For instance engine stacking:  Those look really cool lets make additional addon modules that can be added in to a single engine to make it a feature.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Fembot68 said:

So far I have not seen them look that far ahead since launch.  Every single decision seems like a knee jerk reaction and poor decision making skills.  They are determined to make the game they set out to make even if no one wants to play it after they are done. 

Good game devs would make cool things a part of the game even if it was not originally wanted.  Another very popular game comes to mind with bullet jump ;)     For instance engine stacking:  Those look really cool lets make additional addon modules that can be added in to a single engine to make it a feature.  

No,

The end of stacking is the better of NQ make really 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Knight-Sevy said:

No,

The end of stacking is the better of NQ make really 

Restricting or prohibiting something is not a good solution. Why choose A or B when you can allow both in one game.
Better solution:

All elements come in 2 versions.
-> normal elements with function
-> design elements without function

In the case of engines, the design engines would be purely optical, are also much lighter and can be stacked. However, they also offer no benefit.

Normal engines cannot be stacked and offer the normal boosts.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • NQ-Pann locked and unpinned this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...