Jump to content

DEVBLOG: REVISITING CONSTRUCT SLOT CHANGES - Discussion Thread


NQ-Deckard
 Share

Recommended Posts

If a player gives away his 100 Org seats to an organisation, then later his subscription expires because he no longer wants to play, does the Org then have to somehow beg for new 100 Core seats?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the 100 core count does really open the door for malicious usage of core counts against an org. I like the idea, but with the possibility (and in fact, certainty) of losing a massive amount of possible cores across the game, and the hours upon hours of effort it takes to tear down those cores, people are going to lose constructs because they literally do not have the person-power to dismantle them fast enough after a massive shift. A small group of infiltrators could boost an orgs core limit by a few hundred, and then remove them on the day before a two week period begins, leaving an org to scramble to dismantle literally hundreds of constructs in 14 days.

 

I'm gonna get on my soap box again and reiterate that the ability to compactify constructs, and/or the ability to dismantle them with a single click (even if it takes a few minutes on a large many element core) would do a *lot* to alleviate this risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Briggenti said:

"Organization Construct Management

Organization Construct Management Specialization

Advanced Organization Construct Management Specialization

These talents will be buffed to collectively increase the maximum ceiling for the organization's construct limit to 1625."

 

I'm still confused on the mechanics of how we get can get to that number?

 

Get 170 people to give 10 cores to the org. For instance, Empire could ask for just 1 from each member, and hit that cap.

Edited by Koruzarius
Adding an example.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This uptick in core count feels like a placation that was pre-planned.

 

AND - It still doesn't address the fundamental issues raised in the other forum thread, namely nested orgs that allow access to potentially unlimited core.

By removing nested orgs, then the original org core limit will be effective - Then NQ can look at the core number limits legitimately.

 

Additionally, the proposed system is WIDE OPEN to exploitation by malicious groups to control and attack orgs core infrastructure. I simply cannot believe this was not envisioned by the devs when this system was being structured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great revision!  I'm still concerned about players using construct assignment as a game meta to sabotage an organization prior to an attack.  Guess that's more a issue for territorial warfare and I hope it get's addressed then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Math is quite simple:

  • You as a individual player have up to 100 Core-Slots (if skill maxed)
  • You have additional to this 100 Org-Core slots (if skill maxed) that you can contribute to any org
  • The org leader has to level an additional skill, to expand the maximum limit of org slots (so more players can contribute their slots to the org) to a maximum of 1625.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 8driver said:

Great revision!  I'm still concerned about players using construct assignment as a game meta to sabotage an organization prior to an attack.  Guess that's more a issue for territorial warfare and I hope it get's addressed then.

That sounds like interesting emergent gameplay to me.  There is counter-play possible because you can see a list of who donates which core counts and you can also hide your capacity by keeping unused and un-donated counts secret (or you can do it back to your enemy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Dracostan said:

This uptick in core count feels like a placation that was pre-planned.

 

AND - It still doesn't address the fundamental issues raised in the other forum thread, namely nested orgs that allow access to potentially unlimited core.

By removing nested orgs, then the original org core limit will be effective - Then NQ can look at the core number limits legitimately.

 

Additionally, the proposed system is WIDE OPEN to exploitation by malicious groups to control and attack orgs core infrastructure. I simply cannot believe this was not envisioned by the devs when this system was being structured.

It's an MMO.  It's all part of the Fun.  Nobody is forcing you to accept people that you dont thrust in your Corp.  Nobody is forcing you either to use all of the Slots that are donated.  You can build a buffer of unused cores for cases like this.  Yep sometimes people will remove their support and move their slot to other group/ better causes.  You still have 14 days to fix you lack of cores.   You can always take some building / dynamic cores away.    

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thx. 

Just 1 Point: 
>>"Following internal research, we determined that currently per active player there are approximately 25 constructs in the game at the present time."<<

That's because it is much easier to push the org core limit (atm) as the players core limit. Thats the point why most (active) player got less than 25 constructs - there are all in a own org with 1 shared character with feats for the org core cap. 

 

Rest: good trade. First a pure no-go and now a downgrade that dont feel like that ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can we please address the notification system? 

 

A super legate gets a notification for every calibration. This alone cloggs your feed to the point where you can miss important things like cores being abandoned. This applies to the super legates' own cores because its all the same feed. 

 

The new mechanics will add to this. Please Introduce sorting and/or ignore to types of notifications so we don't have to spend so much time going through it or risk losing constructs. Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LosNopales said:

It's an MMO.  It's all part of the Fun.  Nobody is forcing you to accept people that you dont thrust in your Corp.  Nobody is forcing you either to use all of the Slots that are donated.  You can build a buffer of unused cores for cases like this.  Yep sometimes people will remove their support and move their slot to other group/ better causes.  You still have 14 days to fix you lack of cores.   You can always take some building / dynamic cores away.    

 

 

Question though: can you dismantle 400 ships in 14 days? A well coordinated attack could lead to a situation where it is this or start losing things randomly, with little ability to defend against it. We really do need a quick method to get rid of our constructs without losing the contents on them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, B4nd1t said:

Thx. 

Just 1 Point: 
>>"Following internal research, we determined that currently per active player there are approximately 25 constructs in the game at the present time."<<

That's because it is much easier to push the org core limit (atm) as the players core limit. Thats the point why most (active) player got less than 25 constructs - there are all in a own org with 1 shared character with feats for the org core cap. 

 

Rest: good trade. First a pure no-go and now a downgrade that dont feel like that ;)

It was a total cores in game / total active players count. Who owns what core, person or org, doesn't play into that math. It's mostly a fair analysis, though I personally think that anyone with only 1 or 2 cores who isn't a legate of an org should not have been counted as "active".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, LosNopales said:

Nobody is forcing you to accept people that you dont thrust in your Corp.  Nobody is forcing you either to use all of the Slots that are donated.  You can build a buffer of unused cores for cases like this.  Yep sometimes people will remove their support and move their slot to other group/ better causes.  You still have 14 days to fix you lack of cores.   You can always take some building / dynamic cores away.    

 

Ppl don't need to joint your org to donate core allocation to it - they could be players in a completely antagonistic org, using the core allocation as a weapon to destabilise the orgs infrastructure.

Having org core count limit controlled by players, rather than the specific org legates, is a fundamental breach in org stability that will punish ALL orgs.

Edited by Dracostan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's an idea on-top of the proposed changes that would make things much smoother with regards to Org cores:

Have a "Slot Exchange Market" where buy/sell orders of "1 slot/mo" can be traded.

That way players can put up their unused Org slots for a nice monthly income, and Orgs can quickly buy emergency slots.

Maybe even allow Org Legates to set a rule to auto-purchase "market slots" @ "set price" if Org is running short on the next core check.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Dracostan said:

This uptick in core count feels like a placation that was pre-planned.

Who cares. Focus on the outcome. This is far better then what was proposed and workable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dracostan said:

Ppl don't need to joint your org to donate core allocation to it - they could be players in a completely antagonistic org, using the core allocation as a weapon to destabilise the orgs infrastructure.

Having org core count limit controlled by players, rather than the specific org legates, is a fundamental breach in org stability that will punish ALL orgs.

Sorry I really dont see the issue.  I look at donated cores.  Look at who gave ,  I see 200 coming from people that I know/thrust.  I see another 400 from people that are dubious ,  unknown, etc..   I now know that I better not go over 200.  Kind of like a bank that gives you a 500$ overdraft,  it does not mean you should use it,  it's always going to hand up costing you.  Leave within your means applies to the cores.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Koruzarius said:

Also, the 100 core count does really open the door for malicious usage of core counts against an org. I like the idea, but with the possibility (and in fact, certainty) of losing a massive amount of possible cores across the game, and the hours upon hours of effort it takes to tear down those cores, people are going to lose constructs because they literally do not have the person-power to dismantle them fast enough after a massive shift. A small group of infiltrators could boost an orgs core limit by a few hundred, and then remove them on the day before a two week period begins, leaving an org to scramble to dismantle literally hundreds of constructs in 14 days.

 

I'm gonna get on my soap box again and reiterate that the ability to compactify constructs, and/or the ability to dismantle them with a single click (even if it takes a few minutes on a large many element core) would do a *lot* to alleviate this risk.

 

Yes, deconstruction is incredibly tedious we do need a remove all command like remove all elements and remove all honeycomb that would be a welcome change and it eliminate the need for support to help with lost/buried honeycomb. and it would make deconstruction much faster and less of a burden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Accepting core slots into an org should be much like inviting and accepting members - when a player chooses to donate cores slots to an org they go into a queue to be approved/accepted by the Super Legate. This really has to be a feature, unless NQ actively wanta org core slots to be weaponised?

 

(especially in beta, when no doubt many ppl currently have numerous beta accounts that could be used in this way)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's a really good number.
 

If you want cores you have to put the means up to your ambitions and that's a good thing.
 

If NQ finds itself there in economic viability and that finally the first announcement was just a small game design error and not a reduction vital for the survival of the game.
So we're all really happy about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will partial talent point refunds be done for partially trained org construct management skills during the upgrade?  So if I have Advanced Org Construct Management Specialization trained halfway to 5 will I get the 2 million TPs back for that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a very reasonable compromise and I thank all of you at NQ for listening to us.

 

Another good idea that came up last night in the roundtable discussion hosted by Seripis was being able to deconstruct small, medium and large dynamic constructs for storage, similar to how a pocket ship is compacted.  Perhaps an option to deconstruct a ship into a package that could be reconstituted later.  This would remove active cores from the game, while not forcing us to get rid of them.  If the goal is to increase performance of the server, this must surely be a helpful measure and one that I hope will be considered and explored at some point in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • NQ-Nyzaltar changed the title to DEVBLOG: REVISITING CONSTRUCT SLOT CHAhttps://board.dualthegame.com/index.php?/topic/24304-devblog-revisiting-construct-slot-changes-discussion-thread/NGES - Discussion Thread
  • NQ-Deckard changed the title to DEVBLOG: REVISITING CONSTRUCT SLOT CHANGES - Discussion Thread
  • NQ-Nyzaltar unpinned this topic

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...