Velenka

These sound like physical characteristics to me. But regardless, it seems you meant all of that in a parameter-only sense. I just didn't see the explanation of that until now. I do agree that simple manipulation of the exact parameters is a bit boring, but I was only trying to say that can't be done is different from won't be done. But it seems this is all moot since the devs say this: Elements have fixed stats, defined by the schematics you've have used to build them. There will be a way to improve slightly schematics you use to give small bonuses to Elements you create, but this will require highest level of skills and time to improve such schematics. While this doesn't rule out specific parameter style of upgrade, it doesn't seem likely. Rather just a small boost to all stats.

I would also like to see some kind of system which could allow for both simple and complex systems. I think Minecraft mods got it pretty much right (Industrial Craft, Thermal Expansion, Minefactory Reloaded, etc). On the smallest level each component had a simple function, configurable inputs/outputs, the ability to be controlled, and upgrade-able. These components would interface with an inventory system that was capable of all kinds of logistic functions and storage.

The physically based upgrades that you were advocating. You can have thrust and efficiency sliders, as much as you can have "heater strength" or "propellant pumps" on a slider. And I would propose something like the following, instead of a single stat per slider: Ex basic railgun: <- Higher Damage [--------------------|--------------------] Higher Rate of Fire -> <- Higher Range [--------------------|--------------------] Higher Efficiency -> <- Higher Clip Size [--------------------|--------------------] Faster Clip Reload ->

It doesn't matter to me how it's implemented, as long as it works. The only problem I have with selecting stats in the manner you describe is that it sounds discrete. I don't want to be limited by discrete choices. Perhaps the physically based upgrades should simply allow the slider to work, instead of being stuck at 50% as default. Certain upgrades would allow certain stats to be selected for slidering.

One problem I see is that for example, in a trading hub, your screen might be absolutely filled with streaks. That might be unacceptable. In the same vein, perhaps it could be a subspace streak, where you have to rely on some sensor component to get even more advance warning than normal sensors would detect the ship normally. It would have a large radius, and would ping anytime a streak penetrates the surface. It would be able to show a ray which points back to the FTL ship.

Your example is very close to what I was talking about. You increase x at the cost of decreasing y. It wouldn't matter whether all sliders were on one side or the other in this case since it would be balanced. What isn't balanced is turning muzzle velocity, efficiency, cap banks, damage, small size, etc all to their maximum or minimum individually, since everyone would just choose the best (max or min) for each parameter and leave it there. What might also be interesting is if the player could choose the pairings. Would I want to increase damage and range at the cost of efficiency and rpm? or increase rpm and range at the cost of damage and efficiency?

I like this idea. But what's to prevent players from setting all parameters (damage, rpm, range, efficiency) at the maximum settings? I think that there should be pairings of these parameters, such that when you increase one, another decreases. IE, pair damage and efficiency, range and rpm. Setting the pairs at either 0 or 100% would set one parameter to its max value, and the other to its min value and vice versa. Default would be 50%. Skills/tech research/whatever could increase the max and min values of the parameters.

If ship based cargo transport works the same way the nano pack does, then it actually does negate the mass, or at least greatly decreases it. Here's an excerpt from the short story But ship based cargo transport shouldn't work this way. It's too OP. Lifting off a planet with non-trivial amounts of payload mass should be difficult.

Suggestions for effects: Reduced sensor/comms range in a rainstorm Reduced efficiency of machines/elements in a sandstorm+reduced visibility Severe decrease in temperature in snowstorm+reduced visibility Very small chance of causing machines/elements to shut down for a short time in a thunder storm

It's pretty neat to see the server tech in action! Can't wait to see more!

I agree that the choice you outlined exists. I suggest we do break something: deep space interdiction. There's really no need. And if you did want it, there's other solutions with a "normal" sized sensor range. The other thing that is very much unknown at this point is sensors. What kind of information will sensors give? Will there be different sensors for different things? Will there be different ranges for sensing different things? There's already a limit on freedom of movement. DU is supposed to be focused on emergent, cooperative gameplay. In accordance, FTL speeds are extremely slow relative to the scale of interstellar distances. There's no reason to go out into nothing, except on the rare occasion of a probe (but that's unmanned anyway) since there's literally nothing out there that is reachable in a reasonable amount of time. There may be those who want to break from that mold, but they shouldn't be punished with artificial limits. The core idea of the game is what will limit them.

I would imagine that by the time the arkship safezone's materials were stripped out, the community as a whole would have created some kind of super civilization hub there too. You would be able to look for organizations to join or perhaps get some kind of paying job in the city to buy a ship later on. Long range exploration: ^this After putting a stargate down, you would probably send interplanetary vessels to conduct surveys and such. But long range exploration won't be a trivial task. It will take many months of time to get the tech, then some more time to build the probes, then weeks for the probes to reach another system.

There should definitely be some variety in FTL and stargates. Perhaps different versions use different sources of power, ranging from electricity to fuel to magic space crystals. Some drives might be a little faster/go farther, some might be more efficient. With an upgrade skill or research mechanic, they could be improved upon by the player.

The devs have already stricken down the idea of a jump drive, replacing it with the stargate. And I do get the feeling that stargates will indeed take a very long time to get, months after game launch perhaps. I'll go along with whatever pseudoscience you want to explain FTL. From a gameplay perspective, if it goes faster, the question is: How much faster? If it can reach another star system in 10 minutes (vs, say, 4 weeks), it renders stargates almost useless. I have no idea what kind of costs could be incurred to make up for such a huge benefit. Even complete and utter destruction of the entire ship might not be enough. I could see FTL taking a few weeks or months after launch to get up and running. After that another few months or more for stargates to start appearing.

So something like this? Where two stargates can be connected by other/s? Also reminds me of the way antennas work in SE. As long as you have a proper network laid down, you can access a ship 1000km away. I do like the idea. As far as rights to access stargates go, obviously you need a "can use" tag to use it. But you should need to have a "can use" tag on the dialing and receiving gate, as well as any gate on the network in between. If you do not have access to an intermediate gate, perhaps an alternate route in the network could be found instead. If no alternate routes exist, you cannot dial out.

So the devs have said there will be no jump drives As far as hyperdrive, I agree that there should be some capacity to increase the speed of FTL. I would prefer to see some kind of tech upgrade/research mechanic applied to the normal FTL rather than a different kind of FTL, if it were a choice. I would love to see both research/upgrade mechanic and newer FTL implemented. It would be interesting to see choices involving a new experimental hyperdrive, or the super upgraded FTL. Another important thing is to keep in mind the devs' statement above: "If we were to allow jump drives, or insanely high speed, they would be used to bypass this constraint and deploy stargates much more rapidly. We believe it will give a better overall gameplay if new parts of the universe are discovered with relative efforts..." So it also depends on the balancing of an increased FTL speed too. Is 2x enough? Too much? How much higher should the fastest FTL be able to travel, relative to the earliest FTL available? IMO I think 2x is in the ballpark, while 5-10x is too much. IE a normal interstellar journey of one month would be reduced to 3 days (obviously, but just giving perspective here). I would think that is too fast given that the devs have stated they intend weeks-long journeys (interstellar), not a handful of minutes, hours, or even days.

This seems interesting. Though I would prefer to see no terrestrial plant based narcotics at all. (Cocaine or marijuana or mushrooms) Those probably wouldn't have made in on the arkship. Would like to see new space cocaine instead. Synthetic drugs old or new could work too. As far as buffs go, while there could be some positive effects, there should be more harmful ones also.

1. Yes that is what I meant 2. Well, we will be expected to build ships with thrusters placed to counter both forces and torques in order to get it to fly in a straight line. Not to mention what kind of cargo or inventory mass there will be to deal with dynamically. If we can do that, then "geometry" isn't so difficult. I've also realized that making shield emitters modular with custom geometry would allow for emergency bulkhead seals in the case of a breach.

We're going to have to have multiple types of sensors. There's been discussion mainly on ship detecting sensors. What about stargate probes? We're not going to be blindly sending those out. We'll have to know in advance where to send them with some kind of long range sensor. There's also other things we'd like to scan for. What about different types of ore for mining? Or perhaps an anomalous EM scan to search for alien relics? Scan for lifeforms? I could see the ship detecting and the last paragraph being scannable with a single type of sensor which can use most of the EM spectrum to use. Perhaps the long range sensor could be lumped in too, at the cost of reduced angular range for such long distances.

More possible shield mechanics: As Cornflakes has stated, capacitors are an obvious base for shield tech. IRL it takes longer to charge when closer to full than when closer to empty. The emitters would charge slower and slower as they fill up. And suppose that a power source provides a variable voltage to the shield emitters. In effect, this would enable shield to store energy indefinitely, acting as an energy sink. This might sound OP to be able to just pour energy in like this, but I would respond by saying that absorbing hits should consume charge instead of energy. This way, hits drain shields faster at a higher charge. As a result, shields would be most effective only when they are fuller. A shield with twice the voltage has four times the energy stored. If you have a smaller shield emitter, a hit would reduce the charge, which would reduce the voltage by some amount. With larger shield emitter, a hit would reduce by the same amount of charge, but lose less charge relatively, and would reduce the voltage by some lesser amount. However, larger shield emitters would take longer to charge with a constant power source than a smaller shield emitter. Shields should have user defined field geometry. You could have simple shapes, like a flat plane or a half cylinder or half sphere. The size and relative position and orientation would be user defined too. In order to balance this, charge loss would increase proportional to the amount of area projected.

Yeah I can see two paths for mining logistics: ground and space based. It's certainly more efficient for ground based vehicles to either be small, or use ground based movement (hover engines?). As for space based, yes, that ought to be more efficient outright. I do like the idea of a nanoformer turret, and to add to this, there should be a larger, fixed, forward mounted type too.

I'd be happy with simple weather textures and particle effects. No need to go all apocalypse with earthquakes and volcanoes. Maybe some light or heavy rain. Perhaps clear/lightly cloudy/storm clouds. DU doesn't need to be Weather Simulator 2016.

Now, now now, don't put words in my mouth. I never said anything about alloys or multiple inputs or outputs. I am saying that we should have something more like IC2 from minecraft: Each machine is a single unit, capable of working to change X into Y. A factory is made by piping up those machines together. A single machine isn't comprised of multiple blocks. Simple processes should require only a single element, like turning raw iron ore into steel, or oil into gas. To turn raw ores into fancy components for space ships, that ought to require multiple processes and therefore multiple machines. Perhaps this is exactly what you and others want, but I don't want to see something complex like OP's diagram for something that should have no more than 3 elements to produce fuel from oil, or whatever energy source we'll see.

There is some concept art for a hover engine here We probably need to make our own hover craft. It's probably more fun anyway.

Never heard of factorio till now. But I agree with you. It should be very easy and simple and organic on a small scale but can grow and develop to appear complex. Not something like that diagram in OP where a single unit requires many elements to function.