antanox
-
Posts
29 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by antanox
-
-
1-2 times a week:
- check market sales
- pay territories
- calibrate and ferry the ore to market
- if i have time and motivation i build a bit on any of my never ending projects
-
awesome feature.
sidenote:
amount of quanta is not in line with the news
got only 500.000 instead of 5.000.000
-
9 hours ago, NQ-Deckard said:
So this is an interesting question which I will attempt to answer to the best of my ability...
I'm really fighting the urge to make the "It never was" meme here, but I'm sure one of you will do that for me soon enough.
The reality here is that you never actually were making 1/8th or 1/16th slopes, you've been creating what is the closest approximation of that.- In the old system, we used 253 points.
- In the new system, we use 252 points.
This means that in the old system, a single voxel was: 84.3333333333333 (recurring) points.
84.333 also does not divide by 8, 16, 32, or 64.
In fact, in the old system you couldn't really reliably cut a voxel in half to an exact precision, and even a single voxel was not precise. As for example:- 84.333 / 2 = 42.166 (in reality this would have been 42 because we don't store decimals)
- 84.333 / 4 = 21.083 (in reality this would have been 21 because we don't store decimals)
- 84.333 / 8 = 10.541 (in reality this would have been 11 because we don't store decimals)
- 84.333 / 16 = 5.270 (in reality this would have been 5 because we don't store decimals)
- 84.333 / 32 = 2.635 (in reality this would have been 3 because we don't store decimals)
- 84.333 / 64 = 1.317 (in reality this would have been 1 because we don't store decimals)
Sure, the difference is so negligible that you can't see it by eye. But that's essentially the same in the new system as the new pattern looks like this:
- 84 / 2 = 42 exactly
- 84 / 4 = 21 exactly
- 84 / 8 = 10.5 (in reality this would be either 10 or 11 again because we don't store decimals)
- 84 / 16 = 5.25 (in reality this would be 5 again because we don't store decimals)
- 84 / 32 = 2.625 (in reality this would be 3 again because we don't store decimals)
- 84 / 64 = 1.315 (in reality this would be 1 again because we don't store decimals)
Now, if we had changed the division to 64 instead of 84.333 you could expect the following to happen to all currently existing constructs:
- A loss of precision around 25%
- Every existing voxel would have lost around 25% of its available detail.
- You would see huge changes in your designs and most existing designs would likely loose a lot of their detail.
- Curves would be less curvy, more blocky.
- But you would have access to a 1/8 slope.
With the new division of 84 instead of 84.333, you can expect the following:
- The precision loss is only 0.395%
- Every voxel will look near enough exactly the same, except for a few edge case ones.
- You likely not see any noticeable change in your existing designs.
- Curves are still curvy.
- But your 1/8 slope might be a bit wonky, and its probably better to adjust to 1/7.
In short, the precision cost of changing to 1/64 is not worth it. It really isn't. Trust me, we've looked. It's ugly.
I can already see the new question brewing in your minds: Why didn't you increase it to 128 per voxel?
Sure, this could increase the detail and be more divisible, however it also doesn't fit inside a single byte. So now we are talking about every single construct in the game taking up twice as much in terms of data. And if you feel your cache is big now, you really don't want to know what its like with double the resolution of voxels.
We could perhaps consider introducing a pseudo 1/64 grid mode further down the road, which would give you a 1/64 grid. However it will still not actually place a vertex at a 1/8, 1/16, 1/32, 1/64 position. It would place it at its closest available position.
Also, to answer the question about the scale at which the tool works. No, it will always be 1.5vx in each direction from the vertices point of origin.
I thought maximum adjustment range on this image made that quite clear, but perhaps that was an error on my part:
I highly recommend you try it before you cast to much judgement on it, as someone who's tinkered with voxels for a long time. I absolutely love using the tool.I find myself mostly using Grid 2 and Grid 7, using the control key to make bigger jumps.
I hope this answers some of the burning questions you all have.
I wish you all a wonderful day, and look forward to seeing what you will all create with it.
- Deckardthanks for that detailed reply, i was always wondering why my carefully calculated edges weren´t as strait as expected.
im absolutely fine with the new divisions, since we only thought we would have 1/8 1/16 /32 1/64 1/128 precision i dont se the difference where this actually matters.
most people wont calculate ther vertex points and just shape by the eye. everyone else can get almost as close to the expected points as possible just like before with the difference of knowing they aren´t... ?
only thing im wondering is if a 0.5 result in a grid calculation would end up rounded up or down.
-
-
very nice changes
as already mentioned please center camera position on command seats to allow easier and symetrical custom user interfaces ( huds) - probably easier to push this to the 3d design team responsible for the character animations.
also very much appreciate the removal of log writing per ingame LUA
any player controllable ingame feature should never be allowed to write data to the physical ( real world) drives, especially if these can be invoked by other players without notice! -> security first!
the issues to read game data from screen instead of file for exploiting are not really relevant for this decision as the intention is ( as i understand) to protect the computer system running the game and not prevent cheating, the exploiter will alway find a way...
that beeing said, non harming content created with this will need replacecement features and you already started adding these regarding the sound, please continue to do so with the other cases mentioned here!
also nice to see you interact with us in this thread more. keep it up and work with the feedback in a transparent way!
-
5 minutes ago, Warlander said:
Gotta love that they dont even know their own mechanics.
well to be fair, i asume they do, but its kind of an edge case, is asume landing on a construct to use the popup menu might have been an overlooked test case
reporting might be possible sacrificing the ship used to fly up there and jumping over.....
-
1 hour ago, NQ-Deckard said:
Hello everyone,
To be very clear, this is not the right place to report constructs.
We have a new in-game reporting feature which you can use to simply right-click on a construct and report it, that goes directly to the GM's.
I hope this clear this up.
- Deckard
as cptLoRes stated its not possible to report, since the boarding rejection is preventing to get close enough to do so
-
i am very concerned about those limitations and would like to know more about how this will effect our builds.
atm iss very easy even without vertex manipulation to reach the complexity limits, this does not make sense especially with the vertex editor on the far roadmap
-
-
wrong thread for this diskussion...
-
i hope you are wrong, i realy dislike free to play games and their mechanics of pulling you into the game like amazon trying to sell you stuff you dont need.
i prefer the honest subscription model.
-
-
On 11/27/2021 at 3:28 AM, Aviator1280 said:
@NQ you really need to review some mechanics here to let single players be competitive.
You need to have a progressive taxation that is very small for few territories and grows for each territory someone gets on a planet/moon. Only in this way you can achieve what you said was the purpose to avoid players or orgs to have too many Territories because only in this way a territory can't (as you declared) repay itself just mining it.
You need to review the asteroid mining. The asteroids cannot spawn all together on weekend, you penalize who can't play on weekend, they need to spawn randomly at any time in any day.
You can't reveal an asteroid as soon as a player approaches it, you don't give chance to this player to get anything since someone else will arrive in short time to the asteroid. Single players again are screwed.
You cannot deny a player to warp away if has been attacked by someone it is unrealistic and a clear intention from your side to give "food" to those play just for pvp... sorry I'm not interested in it, the pvp in this game is just horrible plus with all connection problems I'm not going to risk all I've for nothing because yes it is just nothing for a single player go to an asteroid out of e safe zone and not having the time to get anything.
Said so I think the performances increase a bit but not because of the terrain but because now I can set max 30 construct, in fact at the market there was no digging stuff but many constructs and while before i almost couldn't move on them now I get less freezing time.
Hope you listen what I wrote because I think can really make the difference in having players keep playing or having them gone.
In the past year I worked a lot to have an industry and now with this mechanic I may not be able to run it for the type of material I need and can't get anymore. Buying all of them it doesn't make sense.
fully agreeed
-
Q: is NQ still considering single ( non Org) gameplay feasable beyond sancturary and are you planning anything to make this gameplay stile worth while again?
- CptLoRes, Metallical, Novean-32184 and 2 others
-
5
-
6 hours ago, SMALLVILLE said:
The 1 million quanta territory tax a week has made this game no fun. Who wants to run T1 Mining units just to pay territory tax for that tile. Can we get bigger pools on T1 and have the basic mining unit L pull more l/h? I have waited to post anything to this thread until I had T1-T3 mining units working in the field. With the ore amounts those mu pull it should be easy to pay territory tax and have ore for my factor. The T1s are just insufficient and made this game go from fun to work. Can we please store more calibration charges, have the MU maintain efficiency longer, and T1 pools bigger and T1 mu pool more ore? Other wise this game turns into a job instead of something fun to do.
just exactly that.
are you planning to make this new mining system less a "work" instead of a game?
with the current system we need to loging regulary to not waste charges, calibratio, profit
this is not fun!
if you still want this to be a sandbox, give us back control over mining and remove the timer based, daily login need, based gameplay!
- Ving, Metallical and laberet
-
3
-
i was scanning with two seperate ships yesterday and had no issues with the distance. could get more than 5km away and was further away in the past and the scanner still ran when i came back -> running the first and only intel ( i7 6700k) of my live
-
i can only agree on the point that i would prefer the old mining gameplay style alot more over this, the income is too low an limiting for a single player.
the suggested tile restauration / reset would be the best way to avoid the cheese hole effect which increased costs so much.
if they had that option i hope they still think about it with the new voxel system, storing a hash for each tile ( if the planet surface and the tile is bound together at all)
- terraforming should reset after a given time, if necessary with a maintenance downtime
- keeping alterations to terrain could use a new item which disables terrains reset in its area of effect using some kind of fuel so its not infinite for inactive accounts
this of course would need alot of dev time, i doubt the have a seed for every tile, they would have to create that, if its even possible
generating new planet hashes every month or so to keep the terrain alteration data small is probably also too expensive
suggenstion:
maybe underground mining could return as a local client based activity. with some kind of drilling machine ( vr) that you connect to and all changes to the terrain below the surface are only visible to that "drill" while drilling and are instantly forgoten when leaving the drilling session.
this would result in no data transfer to other players, not to the server ( or very small for tracking the ore nodes) and not eat any memory in the database.
-
if you want to keep the mining unit charges and scheduled calibration it could also be a nice idea to be able to generate missions for this for other players
+ generates interactive mission gameplay aside from transport from a to b
+ payment based on calibration result
+ players with exces charges could make money from that
+ partial specialisation in mining skill just for calibration
- rdms would need to be set up for this
- dev time
--------
a similar solution generating missions and trade could be to have a physical object ingame that takes money for the tile tax.
the idea is to sell ore from that tax through a dispenser that puts the money generated directly on the tile account.
+ generates interactive mission gameplay aside from transport from a to b
+ players without management access to a tile could support the upkeep
+ lots of small trading and collecting spots for people to bring ore to markets
-
1.000.000 per tile per week is just to much for me.
besides the daily 150k i´m making almost no money in this game.
the ore i mined ist used for building and makig fuel
the money i make is used to set up the industry
it would be nice to see some acutal calculations from nq on this. what ore prices did they calculate with ( i thought bots are on their way out)
the whole concept of tax is ok to me, its just the numbers that look wrong for the single building casual player....
although repeating myself i dont want to feel like working in this game just to keep up my territories that i want to build on.
login regular to get daily money = work ( expecting it to be removed anyway)
login regular to care for the mining units to even generate money = work
yes we do not have the "tedious" mining anymore, the advantage this had was the we where independent of tile ownership and schedules to generate material and money.
demeter removes that independency and makes this a daily login game to "get your reward" -> bad mechanic.
i dont see the point in the calibration running out it doesnt generate interactive gameplay -> remove it and have the player only calibrate when change the ore on the unit or it stops for whatever reason.
i dont see the point in having charges for the calibration it also does not generate interactive gameplay but introduces work like schedules with no value to the game
if you want us to mange mining units and not have them running for ever unattended make them consume fuel or energy or something else that we can craft so we can control the time they are running without interaction.
you could make it so the the fuel limit is a hard cap to total unattended mining unit runtime
in order to make mining not more expensive with this the tax has to be adjusted accordingly. if possible even with regard to the maximum output of ore/h and tier.
-
although i really like the idea of asteroid mining in DU i cannot see how the current implementation could create interesting gameplay besides very basic risk vs reward.
- please replace fixed spawn times of asteroids by random ones for singe asteroids until maybe a max number is spawned in the system
- please replace the scanning system by something that involves player skill ( the real one)
- scan results should only give a rough estimate of direction to asteroirs ( or other objects) forcing miners and pirate to triangulate asteroids by moving their ship and scanning again,
maybe implement a tool to display scan results inside an ingame 3d map of the system
- distances of scanned asteroids should only be roughly available when the scanned object is close and the signal is good
- please remove the broadcast and centralised access to an asteroids database
- asteroid positions can be really valueable trading goods
- you never know if the asteroid you are just scanning is already empty or just beeing mined
- despawn asteroids either by total living time or by them beeing empty for a certain time to make place for new ones
- if a pvp hotspot is needed add an area where its more likely to find asteroids like an asteroird belt ( no need for a artificial density in asteroirs, they can be out of sight of each other)
-
broad casting asteroids sounds like a bad idea in general
scanning system with a mix of real live skills ( know how to) and ingame character skills would be great to get a hint on an asteroids position.
maybe even with deviation, so that finding them could lead to an actual challenge for both miners and hunters, where the hunters have no guarantee that there is something to shoot and loot.
- DrDerp and JohnnyTazer
-
2
A LETTER FROM OUR CREATIVE DIRECTOR - discussion thread
in General Discussions
Posted
eventually energy manament!! awesome!
really looking forward to this. its so ridiculus to be able to put everything on a construct that fits in its buildspace.
balancing will be a thing though but i hope we will see the first iteration before launch.
also @NQ please keep in mind that exisitng ships will need an "easy" way to be adopted to energy management without making them completely useless and the earlier we know how this will look, the better.
also as expected BPC are going to be kept, just like before. thanks for confirming! i dont care about the rest and since this is beta and i expected wipe anyway i´m completly fine with that.