Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Taelessael

  1. I imagine a computer on a starship capable of managing whatever mathematical gymnastics are required for punting a ship in to FTL would probably be capable of compensating for very easily predictable orbits, but making it so that future planets must be reached manually before they can be warped to could be interesting.
  2. You are a little difficult to understand, so please forgive me if I am not correctly interpreting what you are asking for. -The loss of element lives to crashing in to the ground was removed to avoid penalizing new players who were still learning to fly. EVE was not easy, but as I don't remember being able to lose a ship in a non-combat situation by turning left the wrong way. If crashing is to be altered so it reduces element's remaining lives, it should only apply to ships not in the starting areas (Alioth, Madis, and Thades). -The ability to travel to asteroids that have already been discovered is a good thing, it lets poor miners and pirates fight when they wouldn't otherwise be able to afford the risk of losing such an expensive element. -Moving cargo in VR is useful for other stuff that is just tedious and not hard when you cant use VR, the issues of organizations farming them for money come more from everyone having the same missions all the time. If the game made random missions that were different for everyone then it would help solve the problem.
  3. A ship's core can be moved within the build area using the move element tool in build mode. The ability to shift an entire build volume around to help adjust the locations of everything (say, because you built too far to one side or the other and want to center the construct in the volume again) would be a nice feature to include. As I recall, the game engine does not like non-round numbers (relative to what it thinks are round), so changing the shape of the build-box on the fly such as to poses different lengths and heights and widths while maintaining volume would be tricky (though nice to have). It also has a hard time with single-core dynamic constructs above L size. It would perhaps be simpler to just have cores with alternate geometries to start (such as a "long XS" that is really just a lower cost and smaller S that has its build volume reduced).
  4. This isn't required, but it would be nice if the map opened to the system map rather than "no planet selected" in the planet map if the map is opened in space. It would also be nice if the planets in the system map were moved around to more accurately represent their actual locations (Jago is not that close to Lacobus).
  5. To be fair, there were a lot of relatively tiny M and L cores flying around with what are supposed to be the biggest guns in the game that would have been s-cores were it not for the capping of weapon size to core size. That said, having the giant square at the bottom of all the new models is a bit annoying, not because it exists, but because it is a giant plain square that often doesn't match the color of what it is placed on. would be better as a circular structure with a beveled top edge and with braces or anchors or what have you that extend in to those corners to give it the same footprint.
  6. I should point out that last I looked, mass free money tends to cause inflation. Better to have players actually have to do something to get it. (also, it takes like 10 min to get 300k from the daily challenge in the surrogate pods with no risk to your stuff)
  7. <Translation> -Clean up the markets by turning anything parked there for too long in to a compactified-construct-print stored at the market. -Hold another competition to design a "Fourriere" (foyer?) that shows off ships. </translation> If I remember the last time this was suggested, the person making the suggestion also added the stipulation that the construct can only be re-deployed at that market. I might add to this the additional stipulation that it only happens if the number of constructs near a market exceeds a set number, as having some stuff at markets and mission towers makes the world feel more occupied than it does when I fly to ones without anything nearby.
  8. Yaaaa... No. This wont give good publicity, or good feedback, it will just flood the pts with trolls and hackers (same way it did and still does for other games that get big and then make the pts free).
  9. I agree with the idea, but it wont entirely solve the issue of having to dodge poles and platforms, not that one should try. I can approve of removing the stuff that wouldn't be there if it weren't required by that specific rule to be there, but removing tall/floating stuff entirely would be eliminating too much epic stuff that needs to be tall or float.
  10. An interesting thought... Depending on the ships involved shields are likely to take several minutes to go down once people start getting their hands on the big ones. Given the information provided, your issue seems entirely and immediately fixable, just not in the way you are suggesting. This is a "change in strategy problem", not a "change the rules to make a non-functional strategy viable" problem. Get friends or mercs to scout ahead/fly escort, or fly the route differently. I've flown dozens of missions. All of em' were through pvp space, several were when I'd expect people to be on and waiting to shoot at me (near about all hours through the weekend on more than a few runs), and I've yet to see anyone even make an attempt at chasing me (not that I see all that many people on radar when hauling). PvP in a game that isn't going to just hand all your stuff right back when you respawn is never going to be a "forgiving" experience for people that get themselves shot. Trying to change the rules to better accommodate careless/reckless players will just make conventional piracy a non-viable play style. The idea of dumping cargo to re-collect it later is an interesting idea, but the cargo would need a decay timer to keep people from just flooding space with single liters of dirt. Of note though... pirate players are not storm-troopers, they are not blind and/or stupid because of the dictates of plot. Odds are if you can dump cargo to scan down again later, any experienced group of pirates will know you can do that and will have a ship with the scanner to go look for that cargo. As warp interdiction goes, tis already a planned thing that NQ is supposedly working on, though with the added function of pulling people that try to warp through it out of warp. As for power interacting with things, I could see this as a way to escape interdiction (not enough power left in the system to keep the field going), but I don't see how power could be used in a function similar to the combat timer currently functions.
  11. A nice idea, and one already planned as I recall, but very low priority for the moment.
  12. The first is fiddly. On the one hand it is a thing that would make building stuff easier, on the other builders capable of getting weird stuff to happen more easily tends to help them sell their skills, so I am a bit conflicted there... Definitely want those last two though, they should be both easy to do and would very much improve things.
  13. An interesting thought, and you are not the first to have it, but such usage degradation is a survival-mechanic that a lot of players are generally not interested in having. There are some to be sure, but most people don't want to have to take their starships in to get the oil and filters changed and the tires rotated every 50,000 km.
  14. The game runs quite heavily client-side, it keeps the server load down, so totally unmanned drones would be more than a bit tricky. May be better off just using some manner of auto-piloted ship and paying noobs to stand on them while they fly.
  15. I appreciate the thought, but this is supposed to be an MMO. You may just want to try getting friends or people you pay to watch the radar for you.
  16. Taelessael


    The general idea of some manner of core-cleanup has been posed and shot down in the past as I recall. A rather important part of the game was supposed to be the ability to leave things for a while and come back right where you left off. No mistake, I am very much for having cores parked at the market too long reduced to magic prints that can only be re-deployed at the market they were compacted at, but stuff outside of that kinda needs to stay if we don't want to potentially risk losing a bunch of folk that have to take off for a while (say, because they were in the military and deployed).
  17. You are in fact very much asking for a DRM change. An alteration to allow a player to produce a print of a ship that isn't their own original design would functionally just remove the DRM system. A system that allows a ship to lose DRM protection its because its owner made a change would immediately be used to circumvent DRM entirely, people would just make the required alterations to some floating bits they'd add until DRM broke, then they'd remove it and have an exact copy of the original now DRM free.
  18. Player content can carry a game quite a ways, but there needs to be non-player content for a while until the players get stuff started. It is an MMO, the entire idea is group play, and EVE has been running for almost two decades. It isn't a game for everyone, no game is, but a lot of people love it and have kept it going this long. As for how groups play, you will have small groups of friends that just play for fun and train wherever, and you will have empires built on taxes/slave labor, and you will have large organized groups that divide their skill training optimally and play with militant efficiency. It is multiplayer, it is persistent, someone will come out on top, and as such someone else will be on the bottom, and as a persistent-world MMO this can't be changed. <InigoMontoya>I do not think that word means what you think it means.</InigoMontoya> Crowfall may be an MMO, but now that you mention it you seem to be broadly describing RPG stuff, not mmo stuff. DU isn't an rpg, its a sim. People can like both, and games can include elements of both, but broadly speaking sim and rpg are meant for different audiences, and complaining that a sim isn't an rpg is just silly. I want more people in this game, but I also want to play this game, and not WoW. If this were just another WoW-clone with a few different features and a different skin, most of its player base would probably be somewhere else. I recognize that this game differs from the rpg you are used to quite extremely, and it makes this game seem needlessly hard (same way I felt when I went from WoW to EVE, except gravity and atmo-heating weren't also trying to kill me in EVE like they do in DU), but trying to simplify a simulation down in to an RPG isn't going to get that many more people, and it would cost near all the ones already here.
  19. For the few factory games I've seen, they don't involve quite such potential complexity, aren't mmo, and can be attacked.
  20. Taelessael

    Anchor unit

    I have not seen any such ECU bugs, but if they are there then it would be something to fix.
  21. Taelessael

    Anchor unit

    Ya can't really fix what isn't broken. ECU was meant to be an emergency element for things like your pilot getting dc'd during a landing attempt or blown out of the seat when atmo pvp becomes a thing. If ya want to stop in space keep a spare space core (perhaps with some voxel), if ya want to stop in mid air or right over water... well NQ is debating tweaking things for that, because seeing a massive ship parked in mid air above a base is just cool.
  22. A lot of you seem to be trying to combat predominantly well established completionists and industrial min-maxers in a game by adding more stuff. All this will do is move the goal-posts further for people that want to play industry and are trying to catch up to their more established competitors. You wont break mega-factory play by adding complexity. DU has no limits to how many industry units you can have running, no cap on how much industry you can stuff in to a hex, resources are too abundant, the player-base too small, everyone is working with the same numbers and the same end points, and there's no pvp where people are building them to incentivize not keeping all your stuff in one location. Even if you make things too big for 1 core, the factory-players will just plop a second down right next to it and divide the work between them. At the end of the day the only thing I can think of that might put an end to mega-factories would be to put a cap on how many industry elements you can have in a hex, such as by using the power system and some sort of solar-battery rules where a given hex only allows so much power to be generated. People would of course try to circumvent this by building either at the corner of 3 hexes (with multiple cores if needed), or assuming power can be transferred between constructs via fuel or battery invo items, by building their factory in the middle of a hex and harvesting power from all the near-by hexes to transfer via linked can range.
  23. VR is cool, but it wont carry a game like DU long term. It will be a nice thing to add some day for those of y'all that can make use of it, but for now time would be better spent on improving existing features, or implementing planned ones, or coming up with something else to both hold people's attention and bring in new/old players in large numbers and for extended periods until the player population is high enough to do that on its own (more missions, exploration, npc combat, procedurally generated everything, ect...).
  • Create New...