Megaddd
-
Posts
287 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Megaddd
-
-
-
I can take tab-targeting, but that made me sad right there. Where did they confirm that there won't be any collision? Cause that leaves a lot out of the LUA scripts, things that make LUA scripts a glorified macro command.
For a moment there I thought I was full of crap, but no, I did in fact catch my eye on this thread right here while going through everything on the forum a few days ago.
Comment excerpt:
In an interview with JC Baille on the XPGamers YouTube Channel, he said that weapon damage an hits will be calculated based on weapons and skills of the user. Hit probabilities will be used, and there won't be actual projectiles. I also read something like that in other posts - this method is said to be a lot less expensive when it comes to server resources.
Having projectiles as separate entities would kill performance in large battles - at least with server technology that's available today.
Plese correct me if I got that wrong, but I think that's how weapons are planned to work at the current state.
Basically a rumor of a rumor, but that's good enough for me.
-
to TL;DR: the Lua dev-blog - You will be able to use custom logic bricks which you will plug different elements into, which will trigger them and/or provide data for the code you'll write on the main 'programmable block' - a.k.a. DPU.
-
Frankly, physical projectiles themselves are confirmed to be 'not a thing' by either one of Nyz' comments or a Dev-blog (can't recall).
There will be no (or very limited) ship-to-ship collision damage, to prevent 'ramming' PvP that is flagrant in Space Engineers, capable of putting a hole clean through medium-sized vessels with a single physical projectile (small purpose-built debris, accelerated to maximum game-engine speed).
The devs spoke out against large, destructive weapons, capable of one-shotting a vessel of comparable strength, so even if they do implement bomb elements, you can expect these to be largely un-viable against ship-to-ship combat, as you would need more armor on the projectile, to protect it from lock-on weapons, than you would gain from detonating it near the target.
However, a recreation of WW2 bombings on ground constructs? Now that would be cool
-
A spaceship with 1% metal content per volume isnt exactly viable :V
Space-ship? Probably not.
Permanent station? Bring it!
I love the concept of building such a station in space and just dropping it from orbit with little concern, because of it's safe buoyancy depth.
-
And I don't seem to grasp on the artificial mass, if someone can explain it to me, it would be great
In Space Engineers you can place 'Artificial Mass' blocks that are influenced by 'Artificial Gravity Generators', so connecting the two creates a "troll drive", where the artificial gravity generator pushes the mass block, that it's connected to, for free.
What I hope to see is intricacies such as fuel mass balancing and different solid/liquid fuels for the early game and electrical engines for atmospheric-only flight, which I think is more what OP implied.
-
-
So a spaceship will have a higher average density than any fluid in a gas giant and thus sink.
From relevant xkcd:
To reach a depth where it could "float" in Jupiter, the submarine would have to go halfway to the center of the planet, where the intense pressure turns the air into a metallic soup that's hotter than the surface of the Sun. The pressure there would be so high that not only would the submarine be crushed, the substances that make it up would probably be converted into new and exciting forms.
Huh, I guess it is quite unlikely for a solid blob of Iron to float. However, gigantic metallic objects with lots of empty space, or even filled with something like helium (a la metal balloons)? Those are much more likely to have a viable depth before it gets too hot to float.
Bring on the floating gas cities!
-
I believe Gas giants could open up a very interesting aspect to planetary gameplay, a planet where one cannot hide from sight and radar underground. Where you can experience the extreme buoyancy as you go further down that at some point requires force to go down instead of up.
But my biggest fantasy involving Gas Giants is perfectly illustrated by a Planetary Interaction item from EVE:
http://img.itemdrop.net/eve/Rhea/Renders/2135.png
Flavour text: "Maintaining control over a section of "territory" above a gas giant requires a very specific type of command facility, one that is able to maintain its own orbit, house administrative personnel, and easily communicate and interact with other nodes. Suspended with equilibrium technology, these nodes are able to maintain altitude with minimal upkeep. If there is one major advantage to colonizing gas giant planets, it is that these facilities can literally be dropped directly from orbit with almost no concern for their descent or deployment."
-
-
I'm hoping it becomes possible to recreate the space-born lifestyle illustrated in Orson ScottCard's formic invasion trilogy - surviving entirely on supplies from space depots where you go to sell your ores and minerals.
- Dhara and guttertrash
-
2
What are you gonna do with your new life?
in General Discussions
Posted
I'm going to use two accounts or more to build up a quick production factory somewhere underground not too far, but not too close to the (a) central starting area.
I'm then going to start a space-taxi service, flying newcomers to nearest planets out of good will, and older toons for a price.
Then when all of my research and autonomous excavation finishes doing all that, I'll retread back into the void of space and start a tight-knit colony of Free Miners, surviving solely in space.