Jump to content

DEVBLOG: CONSTRUCTION SLOTS AND STACKED ELEMENTS - discussion thread


 Share

Recommended Posts

yes org nesting is an issue and could use some attention.. but im gonna be honest the proposed Limit is not near enough, now if you did say 100 Personal Cores and 25-50 org cores that would be significantly better but as it stands the limit is under 50 if you apply your org slots to a personal org... take Me for example i got 3 HQ tiles on alioth.. 6 mining tiles in edition to what i mine on the hq tile and the stuff on my sanctuary tile.  in the hq tiles alone i have

18 dedicated to runways/ship storage platforms
3 structures for factories or under construction. with more on the way as i get my factories established
3 autominer cores
5 workhorse ships i bought from various vendors
2 vanity ships

3 pocket ships purchased
5  ships i've designed 2 of which are still being built and that's just in the hq alioth tiles
additionally i have
and an Additional 8 plus cores for mining or on sanctuary
so not counting mining cores that is 37 cores right there. add in the additional mining cores and you 45 total and i was planning to grab a couple more mining cores with the recent calibration deterioration change..
i want to build but the only way i could do that now is sacrifice some of my static structure ideas or invest in alt accounts that wont be a huge immediate benefit since it takes time to get those talents up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you're going to implement this then you really need to fix the rubbish situation where players need to use a core just to put down some flooring to connect constructs.

My base has 8 constructs yet I need to use 10 additional cores just so I can have flooring to walk nicely between those 8 constructs. This is insane. You shouldn't need to use cores to place flooring. Flooring should be free on a territory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the feeling there's two sides to the dev team. One side that thinks this is a good idea and one side who knows this is a horrible idea. Fire the side that thinks this is a good idea ?. Game development is no place for political "visionaries" 

 

If there's devision in the team over this. Fire the team that thinks it's a good idea. They're... well I won't go there. But they need to go. Hire proper game devs. Get your stuff together. 

Edited by LeeRoyINC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an advid player since Alpha, I really love the idea of this game. With that said, there has been a ton of changes for orgs and thats great and all but it seems like your making it harder for solo players. I have joined orgs multiple times and they all left the game. I don't want to join a big org again as I don't want to be left with the mess. Im sure im not alone on this. Please don't forget about us little guys. We have a voice as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NQ-Nyzaltar said:

Hi everyone.

Thanks a lot for all your feedback on the topic.

We understand the slot limitation described in the devblog is quite frustrating and we're transmitting all your feedback to the Game Design team.

We'll try to come back ASAP with a reply from the team. Please be patient.

 

Edit: "current slot limitation" changed by "slot limitation described in the devblog".

 

Best Regards,

Nyzaltar.

0.28 will be worse than 0.23. Hope that warning goes loud and clear to the design team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear NQ

I would like to express my opposition to the proposed changes to the available cores to an organization . With this changes you are punishing smaller organizations who have ambitious projects to bring content to the game also make them loose they already existing work just because they are smaller and can't afford the number of "votes" from a limited resource

Basically what you are saying is that if you cant afford 100 alts you should not have ambitions in this game. make 100 alts and we you can assign yourself construction slots. 

I understand that you want to limit the maximum number of constructs / organization, they why not limit nested orgs maximum limit to zero, so that and org need a player as super legate to have construction rights and keep the current system as it is. 
Also with the current system where you need core slots for mining 25 core slots for a single player is almost equal to zero. 

Consider this, you are mining resources (high end where 1 miner is usually enough, maximum 2 if its T3) and have 50 calibration charges, but having only 1 miner/core you get limited to 25 cores every 72+ hours, am i missing something obvious here ? 
Please do find some way to reconsider this changes that limits someone's ambition of civilization building to having a campfire out in the middle of nowhere 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Players here keep talking about other players selling their cores to Orgs, this begs the question why would they do that like most here have said. There are some Orgs out there that will expect players within its ranks to just give up the cores to be a part of that Org. I hear noting on this but we all know its true and will happen, Orgs have wealth sure but this quanta has earmarks for projects, expansion, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh boy, I have literally just come back to the game and so far was enjoying setting up MU's and and getting into that game play but this will really hurt the game in my opinion Im a ship builder like many others, our show room is very modest in comparison to some  how ever the outer building alone comprises of 18 cores there are 62 ships on sale ranging from XS to L each ship has plinth that can be mover if we rearrange the show room that's 142 cores just for a small show room, now add to that a factory on another site and 2 smaller show rooms at other major installation's and then the support for that factory comprising of numerus out posts on other planets to collect the ore from the mining farms we have had to set up after you stopped the hand mining then take into account the all the ships we need to run the operation and bring the materials back to Alioth space stations fuel refineries' etc when we are a 15 man org the proposed changes will cripple us the show rooms will have to go the ships on show for sales will have to go then what are we supposed to do as a ship building and selling org ?

I understand where you are coming from on the resources front I do but the proposed method and core count just will not work, I really really hope you listen to the active player base on this one 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The core limits of this change are due to 1 of 2 things:

 

1) NQ wants to monetize the core limits at some point in the future. So making this feature in a rational way goes out the window since it's only about the $$.

 

2) The decision makers are woefully uninformed by the number of cores the average player needs; let alone the serious players and content creators.

 

------------------------

 

I consider myself a power gamer - i'm playing constantly.... let me catalogue quickly how many cores I use:

  • Ships, not a lot - maybe 12 - dramatically lower than most people i'd say
  • A factory - 4 cores
  • A landing pad - 12 cores
  • Space station - 1 core
  • Mining Units - around 100 cores

All of these cores are in an org so that my accounts don't to deal with the nightmare that would be RDMS and personal cores.

 

These I feel are the VERY light side of things compared to many others and already at 129 cores.

 

---------------------

 

If this feature goes ahead we need a few things:

 

1) People need a way to compact their cores so they can retain constructs they paid considerable sums for, or a means of retaining a blueprint copy they can deploy again in the future.

 

2) We need to be able to SEE what our current core count is and what our max core count is. Getting yet another garbled and poorly worded notification *after* the limit is already reached isn't sufficient.

 

3) Picking a construct at RANDOM if the core limit is exceeded is a terrible, terrible idea. Oops, the random core was your main factory.

 

4) What will happen if you're donated cores but then people decide to rescind those cores? And you're on vacation for a few weeks. Too bad, you lose a bunch of random cores. Or worse, yet, nefarious players could game people using this system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My primary feedback is that it's unfair to refund only skill points that were already invested in construct management - when, realistically, if this had existed months or years ago, players would likely have already took these skills instead of others that they are now locked into

 

 

This is a common theme that NQ keeps doing; adding mining units?  Reset mining talents!

But that doesn't help people that didn't previously have mining talents, but now want them in their new form.  Just like resetting construct capacity talents from before, doesn't help anyone who wants the new talents and would have invested in them if they had always been like this

 

 

Big talent tree changes should involve full talent tree refunds

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While nesting orgs may not have been intended as a means to increase the cores a player can have, it has become a feature; gameplay has evolved around it.
 

My newb self can adapt to this but how will the major shipwrights and builders take it if they have to strip down their operations?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, LeeRoyINC said:

I get the feeling there's two sides to the dev team. One side that thinks this is a good idea and one side who knows this is a horrible idea. Fire the side that thinks this is a good idea ?. Game development is no place for political "visionaries" 

 

If there's devision in the team over this. Fire the team that thinks it's a good idea. They're... well I won't go there. But they need to go. Hire proper game devs. Get your stuff together. 

You're the dork trying to make it political. Go play with your monkey cartoons

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Zeddrick said:

But you will likely need at least 150 players to donate slots to get that!

So you don't even know if this is the case and yet everyone is losing their mind? Absolutely ridiculous playerbase.

 

Please NQ do not listen to these 1%ers who somehow can't get along with 1600 cores

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NQ-Wanderer said:

Greetings! We would like to read your feedback on our latest DEVBLOG: CONSTRUCTION SLOTS AND STACKED ELEMENTS.

There'd be no need to stack the wings like that are if the wings in the game were more powerful to lift. If you don't stack, how do you expect to get multi-ton cargo on L cores off the ground and to fly then? 

 

Increase the power of wings in the game and you can solve this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, choxie said:

So you don't even know if this is the case and yet everyone is losing their mind? Absolutely ridiculous playerbase.

 

Please NQ do not listen to these 1%ers who somehow can't get along with 1600 cores

We *do* know that this is the case.  It says so in the blog post.  You need 65 max talent players to get your precious 1625 cores, and all of those players need to give all 100% of their cores to your org.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, fridaywitch said:

We *do* know that this is the case.  It says so in the blog post.  You need 65 max talent players to get your precious 1625 cores, and all of those players need to give all 100% of their cores to your org.

How long has your personal core slots lasted? That how long it will take to claim what scraps of core slots you lent to the org you joined back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Physics said:

How long has your personal core slots lasted? That how long it will take to claim what scraps of core slots you lent to the org you joined back.

I'm not trying to argue a point, I'm just pointing out the flaw on choxie's post.  They claim that we don't even know it's gonna take that many people to get the full 1625 cores.  I'm saying that we DO know because Nq literally gave us the numbers.

Also, I don't understand what point you're trying to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a few points I'd like to add and reinforce.

 

First and foremost: We NEED a better RDMS system for this to fly. I have a few alts and I just don't use their personal slots at all because it is too much of a pain. I made them all legates of my personal org, and just put every construct on that. We need to be able to make a blanket "share everything" policy to enable the ability to have personal slots used for collective projects.

 

Second: As Dimencia stated: we need a full talent reset. I understand the idea that you only want to reset related talents, but the fact of the matter is you have changed the meta for the whole game. I'm a ship-builder, that is my main goal, and I use Mining Units to support that. I have invested millions of talent points across multiple characters to that goal, but with this change, I will probably not be able to support the mining empire that I have built. One consolation there is I could decide that given the changing meta, it might be time to try something else, maybe do some PvP? But I don't want to wait months to train up a whole second skill set because the changes have ruined the practicality of my current skill-set...

 

Third: We need a one-button "deconstruct this construct into a container" button. I have 4 cores that I have salvaged that have nothing on them, and have gotten GM help to reclaim 6 more in the past 2 months. I am planning on getting help with the other ones too, but it is a waste of GM time, and if I have to tear down hundred's of cores, it will be a serious problem for me if I have to spend hours upon hours tearing them all down. And if I don't and we end up with a solar system full of abandoned cores that have nothing on them, it wastes a ton of player time investigating cores that have nothing on them.

 

Other points to consider:
- The obvious: increase the number. Even double would be a huge difference and make a lot more viable for me and I presume many like me.

- Let me mine multiple tiles off of one core. That would make a huge difference in my core count.

- Give us larger, and more importantly differently shaped cores. If we could have an XL static core that is the same height as an L, but waaaaaaay wider. This would allow for large show-rooms or factories on one core only.

- Let us copy a whole construct into another one. If I could have one XL static core, and paste copies of my ships for the showroom into that static core, I could have the show-room models for dozens of ships all in one core.

 

Edited to add: Give me an RDMS to let others see the location of my constructs on their map please. If someone else is the primary user of one of my personal cores, I want them to be able to find it easier.

 

And lastly, I don't know how to handle major community projects like race-ways and cities... They are a major driver for player engagement and I simply don't see how they will be viable short of NQ granted exemptions, and at that point it's not really player driven anymore.

Edited by Koruzarius
Thought of an additional minor point
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, choxie said:

So you don't even know if this is the case and yet everyone is losing their mind? Absolutely ridiculous playerbase.

 

Please NQ do not listen to these 1%ers who somehow can't get along with 1600 cores

 

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that now each player can be responsible for 17 constructs base, with up to 25 more with training, distributed between personal slots and orgs. So if this goes through as is, each sub will be able to support <= 42 constructs. 1600 is a pipe dream only the biggest of orgs will be able to manage. As stated that would require 64 players to give all of their org slots to attain. Or to put it more economically $640/month of subscriptions, absolute best case.

 

If you still think we are blowing this out of proportion, I respect your opinion, but I want to make sure it is grounded in the actual facts, and from that comment I don't think it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, OrionSteed said:

SWG folks, remember when NGE killed that game?  This core decision would be the same.  Please don't do it NQ....

I try to avoid being a doom-sayer, and haven't made that claim of any of the changes made before now, but this one... I'm not sure. I think it will force the closure of many of the things that actually draw people to the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...