the problem with this game is. they really assume people who buys this game are a bunch of nerds who always go to forum for information. the multiplayer is not even newbie friendly. the first time i played on multiplayer there is i didn't even know that there is a thing called planet wipes. so i built a base there, just to waste time and gets all ur structures wiped out. this is the most important, but they simply failed. now that i know this. i dont even know what starter planets gets wiped. so u dont waste time going to a planet that is also a starter planet. its really **** tbh. only total nerds will really stay on this game or just desperate. do u guys think this is the only game on steam? and people will have the patience to play again and start from scratch? also for single player. they scrap the tutorial stuff that i read before about base building and making ships, farming etc. they replaced with missions, which is hard specially when ur new to game. wtf when i gift this to my cousin he has no idea what to do and uninstalled. no wonder he did that. there is no tutorial and the wiki is useless. its outdated. u need to have played for some time for u to be able to play this game. that's why im here i have to guide him so my money will not go to waste. i gift him this, since he likes space and basebuilding. thinking the empyrion is better now. turned its even worst. sorry but that's just what i feel now
made a test Spawned a new CV Docked a older than 7 days SV on it Jumped from meldo to trader orbit and undocked the SV (jumped out in less than a second to avoid dying, no idea if this would happen) after around 2 seconds its gone Very bad for a central orbit you (need to pass) will pass on most of your travels Make it necessary to move though pandorra to fly from meldo to valea and impossible to reach the asteroid field with your older Vehicles
Seems to me the planet layout on HWS is not compareable with the scenario here. So I would change the system a bit. The effect should be, that people don't stay on starter systems and therefore the structures/ships of older players prevent that new players can spawn their structures. But Trader Residence (and also Mercenary) have a kind of "special role": the are in a central position, easily reachable from all planets. Traders Residence also has pentaxid asteroid, which is visited frequently. So older players should not be hindered to get there. Technically they arent, but if you don't are extremly careful watching the timers of your ships you will loose stuff. My suggestion would be: upon entering a starter zone with a ship older than 7 days, you get a warning that you should leave this zone within 1 (maybe 2) hours. After that period your ship will be deleted. To ensure that people don't overlook that information it is being repeated (maybe every 30 min). This allows older players to do something there (maybe mine the pentax astro, maybe buy/sell stuff on the market, help new players aso). This way you prevent that they block new players, but also reduce the problems with ships being deleted without giving players a chance to react. Yes this can be exploited to certain extent, by jumping out and back in, but his costs pentax.
@everyone. Ive de-activated the wipe counter on the Merc Orbit and Trader Orbit. The planet it self will still wipe your base/vessel
someone needs to address, the pois on starters that do not regenerate and or astriods in orbit that also do not regenerate, yu want us off starters we will need sath and neo!!! i do not have 100's of hours to kill rock men just to get a decently survivalble ship for pvp! thanks
During the last few days it happened regularly that people lost ships. First when entering the orbit of Traders & Mercenary. Now when enterering the planets. The in game notification that a "Personal wipe counter" has been activated seems to be ignored (or not understood or what ever). Yes maybe players having a loss will learn it "the hard way", but perhaps we could alleviate this by not deleting the ships immediatly. A grace period of maybe 2 minutes perhaps? This way players can turn back and the loss of ships (and complaints and restoration work for admins) could be avoided to a larger extent.
To be fair. Every 15 min the warning is spamed in chat. If they ignore that. They will defenlty ignore any grace periode. The hard way is sometimes the best way
Quoting from the posting above: " they really assume people who buys this game are a bunch of nerds who always go to forum for information". That's the main problem. You must leave the game to understand, what this server message means. For people that go to the forum every day, that is no problem. But other players don't do this or event don't know where to look for that information. Somewhere else you stated, that this server is targetted to "new players" and "casual players". If you look at this from the point of "usability" or "user friendliness", this solution is "below par" and does not really fit to the targetted audience. I can understand, that currently this is your only solution to "push" the players out of starter systems. Just take it as an encouragement for further improvement.
The warning that has been added on entering trader of mercenary orbit is good. - It did make my heart thump the first time it happened as I thought I was under attack and had already lost something while the screen was still white...
Can make it lesser of a warning but afraid people will miss it then. But yes ive done that so ppl actually remember it Might have to ask Jascha to let it wait a bit longer before it spawn the warning Since devs increased the white screen in 8.2
Thanks for improving the in game messages related to the PWC. I think this should have reduced the problem by a large amount. While Taelyn was fixing the POIs last Friday/Saturday, a possible solution using "timers" was discussed again in the global chat. Taelyn said something like this: "Jascha said, that timers are not available through the game API". This seems very strange to me: #1 the PWC is using a timer itself - each ship being on a starter playfield gets deleted if older than 7 days. Maybe the current implementation for this is not using a timer, but effectively it works as a timer. I would say, something similar could be done to achieve a proposal like suggested. #2 the game itself is using timers in many situations: food is spoiling, dead NPC bodies are vanishing, unused bikes are vanishing, aso. So the game has various timers and the also can be association with player created objects (like a bike). Maybe they can not (yet) be associated with player created ships, but if the basic technique is available, this should be an easy task. Maybe for PWC 2.0 coming in A9
The game doesnt count in time as fair i know but in Ticks is something different. As fair i know each is looking at the creating date of your base/vessel then says older then 7 days > delete! Jascha knows how to read the files + think creating date of a BP is something thats logged in the gameAPI EAH is doing this on it own, not the game Shut EAH down nothing gets deleted till started up Anyway he goes on holliday and EAH wont get updated for like 2/3 weeks. After iam willing to ask him to see if he can make it a delay. But in my eyes not needed. As Rex said its beeing used on HWS for 4? years. We can make it very easy for players but why? With all the warnings i honestly see no need. The ones that still dont get it? Well sometimes u have to say "to bad" Its now announced everywhere to stay away from the starter world. Plus is abit of commen sence? Hence why would u go back to a starter world when u have a a big world to explore? Its a survival/exploration game.
Not really. Only difference is, that "real time" is continuous. These ticks are discrete and try to simulate something like "real world time". Yes, BUT when are you doing this check? Probably at each N'th tick. So you could also record the tick number, when a ship entered a starter playfield and if a certain threshold is reached -> delete. Works like a timer, but with a different mechanic. Glad to hear, that you are willing to ask. First rule of a programer: a program is never finished. There is always room for improvement. The world changes, user expectations change. If you look at a program written in the 80th (and it worked maybe several years very successfully) everbody TODAY would complain about it. Did you make a survey on HWS, how people were thinking about it? Yes, players should go out there and explore - that is also my personal motivation for the game. But others think different about this. I think there quite a bunch of people that like playing a kind of mixture of "creative, cooperative with social contact". But they don't want BEING FORCED to play a game driven by technical limitation. Look above, I wrote several suggestions about incentives, how players could be motivated to leave. Why is this tool there: because there is a technical limitation how many structures can be handled by a certain playfield. 1st - this is bad. But we must deal with it. 2nd - if we must deal with it, because changing the game engine, game mechanics whatever is not easily possible/is time consuming, we should create a solution, that is AS LESS INTRUSIVE for players as possible. The solution to delete all the stuff is very crude. Maybe you keep the deletion of bases on starter worlds, but ships entering Traders or Mercs should not be deleted instantly. This way you also prevent people from exploring these worlds. In hardly any other major online game, you will find deletion of player created stuff. I played EVE Online - made a break for several years - came back: everything there. Yes, this game is still alpha, the world in EVE is different, so we cannot quite compare. But I think you got the meaning. I know that admins mostly don't play the game. But if try to think like players, then maybe you can understand them.
Iam actually playing my self just not on the official server. No didnt do the HWS survey. Thing is no matter HOW we do it. Always someone will complain/not agree/not like it And sometimes its better to just ignore it then go against it
Ooh come on. You are in the Q/A team!! You should ensure that players get best playing experience as possible. Maybe you cannot create a perfect world, but 90% is still better than 60%.
@Alatun if the programmer say he cant, then it makes no sense to discuss it. If you think there is a way describe it as you did, but dont try to discuss it. As a modder by myself i know that many people try to discuss issues and decisions. And i know that very often things work not as you imagine before you implement them. So give a experienced programmer the benefit of a doubt. If you need 10 Hours for 60% and 100 Hours for 90% on a singular topic, well then the 60% on 10 Topics are better than 90% on one topic and zero % on 9 topics. Modifications and gamedevelopment are allways a matter of workforce.
