Jump to content

Lucjan

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    22
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lucjan

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • backer_title
    Sponsor
  • Alpha
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I think that the game lacks a lot of content and what we have at the moment is only the foundations and the developers plan to expand with the above-described elements (or similar). Which does not change the fact that the described concept is also worth considering.
  2. Lucjan

    VR Support

    It would be great but it would require a much better optimization, because for VR (IMO) You need at least a stable 60fps and preferably 90fps, which would additionally burden the already heavily used CPU (good GPU should not be a problem with reasonable graphics settings)
  3. (IMO) Scanning the territory is far too easy. Especially if You can have 3 scanners at the same time on a dynamic construct parked in the knuckle of three hexes. Therefore, I believe that this aspect is worth making it a bit more difficult and realistic. Of course, I realize that most may not like the vision of making anything more difficult, because essentially human nature likes to take the easy way, but: The first idea is to counterbalance the use of 3 scanners (which is currently the only correct solution, if you can afford them), e.g. by introducing a scan time modifier depending on the distance from the hex center - then there would be two choices: a) fast single scan in the center (15min; fast but needs more moving between scans); b) 3 simultaneous but long scans far from the hex centers (say 50min; less moving but longer scans) The modifier curve should grow exponentially from center to corners. Second idea (definitely worse, but easier to implement): setting the limit of scanners on a dynamic construct: XL - 3; L - 2; M - 1; S/XS - 0. No limit for static constructs. Third idea: After the introduction of the mechanics of energy management (I hope it will be so, and quite soon), the modifier described in the first idea can be applied not to the time, but to the level of energy consumed. Of course, if this mechanic will also be introduced for dynamic constructs (the core unit may provide a certain amount of energy / large enough for most standard applications / while the player may develop this aspect through additional elements).
  4. Multiple outputs would be to easy. Recipe (maybe in recycler unit) for destroying the excess amount of so easily obtainable materials like hydro and oxy should be enough to properly manage production lines without regular checks of refinery containers
  5. But basic power systems (which are included in industrial units) are made of simple materials like Iron, Carbon, Aluminium and Silicon which can't provide infinite source of power (or maybe they can and I'm too stupid to imagine that? xp). I think I've read somewher that devs have such thing (like power sources) in their developing plans, but maybe it wasn't official statement. For dynamic cores (ships) we can assume, that there is some sort of infinite source of power, but for factories it's so unreal to run them costless. It will also give more ways to develop the game and diversify the industrial part of gameplay.
  6. I think, moving constructs to instance isn't good idea for this type of game (EVE can be compared but it's a different game), using included containers could be problematic, but leaving it this way isn't good either. So, IMO, I think the better way will be "towing" a forgoten constructs if they were not moved from the entire marketplace/district tile for a specified amount of time (maybe 48h, or 72h, or 1 week at most with proper alert message for logged owner or email notification for not logged owner). One is for sure - something must be done with that because in long term this will turn in a total chaos in such places.
  7. Agree, but I've already mentioned about it
  8. Lucjan

    HOTAS support

    I agree in most with You, but it's not most important thing right now.
  9. If You mean instant craft, then the answer is big NO, because it will ruin the industrial part of gameplay. I know that words like cheap and expensive are relative, but $7 for a month - give me a break. I see that NQ are making everything they could to give us best possible product at this stage of development (frequent updates with observed improvements in gameplay /in my case/) and things like loading times aren't bad (maybe your hardware is reason that You feel it differently), ofc they are not ideal but this will be sorted out sooner or later. Be patient.
  10. Lucjan

    HOTAS support

    It's not directly space flying sim game (something more than this I think) so hotas support is not so important as some think, but generally I agree, I want HOTAS support too because it's way more convenient than simple keyboard control when flying (maybe even better, with 2 sticks without trhrottle). I hope there is such thing in development plan in longer perspective.
  11. I think it's mandatory for this type of game. Without it I can produce stuff without any cost and sell them with 100% profit (without considering transactions fees). In long term it will be very booring (and unrealistic) if entire industrial facility will be running costless. More power sources abilities will give more fun for industrial players. Also, I expect more industrial units sizes for different products (like assembly lines work) and with different efficiency level (refiners/smelters?) etc. Overall, there are plenty room for improvements and development of gameplay - use it devs.
  12. Bots "for all items" don't left a room for a "player driven economy".
  13. I think you don't understand what intervention means. Developing isn't an intervention, but i.e. putting market bots into action is intervention (to satisfy enormous demand, stabilize prices etc.).
  14. hmm, maybe because there is no Santa, and every NQ intervention destroys beauty of creation? As I write from beginning - it's simple. You are part of the market, create demand with proper price and there will be supply (in reasonable time and quantity). Even if you are in a strict pvp org (piracy), maybe you should gather some alone industrialists who will run a factory to satisfy your demand.
  15. Yes, ppl will have a choice (later, becouse this is just a beginning, not release), but now it is quite obvious - we need to build and craft stuff - that is "player driven economy". If you don't want to participate in this process then simple take a break till market will evolve to balanced state or put expansive buy order to encurage manufacturers to sell their stuff. That's how free market works. For now, this might be perceived as a problem for pvp'ers but later maybe I will be complaining about inevitable pvp encounters (I was always a pure pve player), and then should I ask NQ for disabling pvp? it's obvious I will not, becouse with wide pvp the game is better. Same with market - in longer run free is better (IMO but RL proves it either, ofc there could be some bots with essential stuff but less=better) I don't want to change your opinion, it's just my feedback.
×
×
  • Create New...