Jump to content

DEVBLOG: CONSTRUCTION SLOTS AND STACKED ELEMENTS - discussion thread


 Share

Recommended Posts

Several thoughts:


1) Using personal orgs to bypass personal limits was never intended.
This change seems like a huge step in the right direction. The general thought is that this is the direction that was intended from the very beginning. However...

2) Mining Units significantly increased the required core counts.
I am primarily a solo player. I would consider myself very conservative with my core count usage:

  • 2 static core for my base (1 factory, 1 parking lot)
  • 1 pocket ship
  • 1 warp shuttle
  • 2 haulers
  • 1 available core slot for setting down blueprints for sale

With the addition of Mining Units, I had to either spend lots of talent points or use an org to hold all the extra cores needed for those.

 

3) Large projects, ship builders, etc.

While I currently do not have a large runway, museum, or elaborate headquarters, I do know several people that do. The proposed changes would effectively destroy most of the ship displays and decorative builds that so many people use to sell their constructs. It would eliminate a lot of the places that people enjoy visiting.

Final Thoughts...
At it's heart, this is good idea.

But in its current proposal, it's far too restrictive and does not account for the dramatic increase in required cores brought on by the mining update. Could this increase have caused the need for adjusting the limitations?


Please, either significantly increase the counts provided and/or increase personal limits.

Not doing so would seriously harm the players who have put time and effort into this game and make this world feel alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Additional thoughts: Abuse is likely and possible

 

If I happen to know that some org, which is no longer active, will run out of slots, I could donate my own slots to that org.  Then whenever I feel that they won't login for 2 weeks, after the grace period, I revoke the slots I gave them and wait for their constructs to become mine, since only I know when they'll become available

 

Or another example, say I'm the only legate in an org that has some slots given by other players.  I go on vacation, or don't login to DU, for 2 or more weeks - Anyone aware of my vacation could move their slots to another org, then wait around and steal whatever becomes unclaimed (or just reallocate them to grief, and not steal anything)

 

This is giving random players way too much control over whether or not orgs can actually keep the things they built or not

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just piling on: I don't mind helping orgs to slots. But why should my ship collection on sanctuary be at risk? Why would I be limited in my (apparently a little megalomanic) building wishes? I mainly play solo and try to give what I got leftover to my fellow corp mates. But when I can't have fun solo, I'll not give to my org either. I just stop playing the game alltogether.

Limiting constructs this much is a serious downgrade in playstyle.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 Personal Constructs + 25 org assignable constructs=40 max constructs with maxed talents for a solo player.

 

Things I'd like addressed:

Why introduce MU's if you're just going to reduce our core count when they take at least one core per tile?

 

What incentive is there now to design and build ships/statics for sale?  People aren't going to buy them because they have core limits and we can't show them because we also have core limits.  How will I buy more of Tobi's ships if I don't have the core capacity?  Why would I try out Cobqlts PVP ships if I'm max cores?

 

Less builders/designers means less ships available means people will be less likely to risk their current ships to getting blown up at the hands of the PVP folks?

 

Less PVP targets means less PVP for those folks....are they supposed to start running missions?

 

Who's going to design racers for Friday night races now?  Is the Dome going away because AngryDad has to decide between his hauler and the Dome core?

 

A lot of people have bought ships and now are expected to just disassemble all of those ships despite the quanta spent on them?

 

For a game that is strongest as a building game, this seems to be a big slap in the face for the builders.  Whether it's the revenue lost for the sellers or the creativity that's being stifled because we don't have any cores left to build with, this change will have chilling effects on all of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dimencia said:

Additional thoughts: Abuse is likely and possible

 

If I happen to know that some org, which is no longer active, will run out of slots, I could donate my own slots to that org.  Then whenever I feel that they won't login for 2 weeks, after the grace period, I revoke the slots I gave them and wait for their constructs to become mine, since only I know when they'll become available

 

Or another example, say I'm the only legate in an org that has some slots given by other players.  I go on vacation, or don't login to DU, for 2 or more weeks - Anyone aware of my vacation could move their slots to another org, then wait around and steal whatever becomes unclaimed (or just reallocate them to grief, and not steal anything)

 

This is giving random players way too much control over whether or not orgs can actually keep the things they built or not

Everyone going to be stealing Legion ships

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This needs to be re-evaluated.  This game was advertised as a civilization-building game.  If there are extreme limitations on the solo players, you will never attract enough people to the game to even *start* large cooperative groups.  I backed this project because I was sold on JC's vision.  I feel like things have been getting squeezed tighter and tighter and this game is about to lose the majority of its players if this change is implemented as described here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An org mate brought up a good discussion to pose to NQ. How many org projects get completed vs single player? The idea of the city seems pretty impossible with these limits. Not many people will donate the amount of core slots needed to fulfil the current projects. No way are players going to hand their assets over to someone else's control either.

 

Up the limit, once beta keys end the issue gets worse under this system. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good Afternoon!

 

I'm new to Dual Universe as of literally today, so I'm not an expert on anything yet... but from what I've learned so far, I can say that this change to how organization core count works will have a serious effect on mid-size organizations that are big enough to make massive constructs, but dont have the player count to keep their construct under this new rule. It will also limit the options of solo players, who will have a FAR lower core cap. The only groups that will benefit from this are the massive organizations, while everyone else loses out. In fact, many players will likely choose not to give their organization cores to organizations and just keep them for themselves instead, making it harder for organizations to get cores despite the overall cap increase they may receive.

 

In short, this is a decent idea but it's much too aggressive a shift. Dial it back some; give players more personal slots, and either more org slots or slots that can ONLY be given to organizations, not used by oneself. This latter option would force players to supply organizations with slots and they wouldnt benefit from not joining an organization, thus allowing the organizations to gain reliable slots to create their massive projects with. My thought is something along the lines of 50+ personal slots, and then either another 25 org slots as they are now or maybe 25 dedicated org slots only usable through an organization (common pool of org slots?).

 

One last thing: some players think this may be connected to the costs of running the servers- you dont want to charge more, but cant afford to keep letting players create massive-scale projects that eat up the server capacity. If this is the case, JUST CHARGE US MORE. If we want to do this stuff and you guys cant afford to provide it at current rates, we would complain much less about rate increases than about these reductions to our freedom of play. That's why a lot of people are here, and losing it will probably just make a big chunk of the playerbase leave, leaving you guys with less income to run the servers. Cutting corners on costs is fine, but it cannot affect gameplay in major ways like this, or itll have the opposite effect by lowering income.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

English (deepl used)

I think changing the core boundaries is the ultimate solidarity test.

Will we pass this challenge?

I will donate 2 cores for Hagbard the megalomaniac.

 

Quote

 

German (original)

Ich denke die Änderung der Kerngrenzen ist die ultimative Solidaritätsprüfung.

Werden wir diese Herausforderung bestehen?

Ich werde 2 Kerne Hagbard dem Größenwahnsinnigen spenden.

 

 

Die Waldfee
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One big factor making this impractical is relying on players to stay in your org  in order to maintain your core limit. This system will 100% be used to troll orgs. Even a relatively small group of say 3 org members can suddenly pull 75 cores from your core limit by leaving. Even if they just leave on good terms it has to be considered. Now a group can also join you let you use those core slots and then suddenly leave causing your constructs to be abandoned. They wait around and steal your stuff. Also since the cores are chosen randomly it could be your main base with all of your precious materials. This does not work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live in Freeport operated by TTC on Teoma.  For folks in player built "cities", this is just soul crushing.  Do you know how much work and maintenance it takes to maintain these?  There are other "cities" spread throughout the system.  You don't want it to get abused, but maybe allow a super legate of these larger orgs more cores for city functions? You'd probably have to get a little creative on the rules for it, but you have all these tools and game architecture to build, then you just want to hinder creation?  I don't understand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is going to completely backfire and make all players solo. 

 

This limit means no one can afford room for anything extra. No one will want anyone else's constructs taking up their super limited pool. I'm going to have to return or rip down everything I haven't built myself. And no one is getting my core slots but me. And obviously that goes for everyone else as well. NQ, you have made your community game a solo game. 

 

Clearly this game is not the Civ builder we were promised. NQ can't deliver that due to poor decision making and now must salvage that game that we are left with. There is still a game here. Not a civ builder where players make all the content. NQ, you're gunna have to start delivering content or sell this game to someone that can. 

 

I'd recommend starting with race tracks as I'm sure they'll all be ripped down soon enough. AI racers to beat. Then AI enemies to shoot at. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Candoran said:

One last thing: some players think this may be connected to the costs of running the servers- you dont want to charge more, but cant afford to keep letting players create massive-scale projects that eat up the server capacity. If this is the case, JUST CHARGE US MORE. If we want to do this stuff and you guys cant afford to provide it at current rates, we would complain much less about rate increases than about these reductions to our freedom of play. That's why a lot of people are here, and losing it will probably just make a big chunk of the playerbase leave, leaving you guys with less income to run the servers. Cutting corners on costs is fine, but it cannot affect gameplay in major ways like this, or itll have the opposite effect by lowering income.

 

Most of the changes happening recently have been about cost saving:

  • reduce server costs (mining units)
  • reduce server costs (taxes > requisition > fewer constructs)
  • reduce server costs (core limits > fewer constructs)

And after all this is done they can slap the "release" sticker on the game and then start charging a normal monthly subscription fee.

 

/face-palm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ooof tips might actualy be the first time I dislike the choice made!

 

As a single player I use 34 slots for myself that I actualy use... 

my personal space station with industry (8 L cores) 

7 for ships:

3 warp shuttles

1 atmo L hauler

1 atmo M hauler

1 L core fighter

1 L core space hauler

Plus 4 flying carpets

And 15 for MUs

 

Plus I would like to colect ships and build a bigger stationto expand my industry in the next couple of years. 

 

Mabey have a wayyy bigget limit but add taxes like with terriories? Do the more you own the more you must be able to pay and earn? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw please NQ first tell us the plan in a dev post and ask for our feedback. Use the feedback to fine tune the chanhe and only then implement it next time. 

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...