Jump to content

Atmosph3rik

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Posts

    860
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Atmosph3rik

  1. Honestly element stacking has no real use in anything other then PVP as far as i know. I have no idea how effective it is in PVP, but i assume it must be making a difference otherwise NQ wouldn't be doing all of this. But for hauling weight, if you need more room for elements you can always use a larger core. So unless you are running out of room for engines and containers on a Large core, then you have no reason to stack elements. The exploit needed to be fixed. But the answer to your question is that no one was getting rich running missions because of element stacking. They could have made just as much Quanta running missions in a giant cube shaped pile of elements.
  2. No i'm saying all the hitboxes are colliding. Because the normal placement rules allowed it in a lot of situations that had nothing to do with the exploit. That won't work as a way of separating exploited ships from non-exploited ships. What i'm hoping is that they make functional elements become non-functional depending on what % the hitboxes are colliding. So a slight overlap like an adjuster on the side of an engine wouldn't do anything. But two engines both in the same spot become totally non-functional. That way they can still allow some freedom in element placement, but all the old stacked blueprints will be useless.
  3. If you place an engine or another large element, and then place an adjuster or another small element on the surface of the engine, the hitboxes overlap and the engine turns red if you try to reposition it. As long as you place the engine first, and the adjuster second, this has always been allowed. And can be accomplished without any exploits. So you would be blowing up 99% of the ships in the game. The current system and rules for element placement worked pretty well, and were lenient enough to allow a little creative freedom, but didn't allow you to simply stack 20 engines. The exploit allowed you to totally ignore those rules. Obviously they needed to fix the exploit. I just don't want them to completely ruin how element placement has always worked. Or render 99% of preexisting ships unflyable.
  4. Expecting people to follow the rules rather then designing rules that enforce themselves is never the best solution. But what if there is literally no way to automatically identify an exploited "stacked" element, from an element that just has another smaller element placed near it. If there is no way to accomplish this automatically, then NQ has two choices. Do it automatically anyway, and piss off 99% of the player base, who have never used the exploit. Or they can close the loophole, announce that it's against the rules, and basically do nothing else, because there's nothing else they can do that won't break everyone's ships. The idea of dishonest players still flying stacked ships around until someone reports them is unsavory. But it's better then having all my ships deleted when i've done nothing wrong. Everyone loves to evaluate all of NQ's decisions in a vacuum, as if NQ doesn't have to weigh the cost/benefit of everything they do. Sometimes you have to make a shitty decision, because all the other decisions are shittier.
  5. I feel like maybe you didn't read the OP, or misunderstood it? But they made it clear they didn't use any exploits to position the adjuster. That was the entire point of the post.
  6. Just tested with a XS Dynamic core and DRM was OFF after i placed it. I wonder when this happened? I guess i'll have to check every core i've placed recently. pssst hey @NQ i think someone made a boo boo
  7. Are you serious? lol Where's the exploit? Are you really so mad/jealous that you want NQ to delete people's ships who did nothing but place an adjuster on their ship, in the most astatically pleasing position, using no exploits at all? That seems petty.
  8. Oh that's what i meant, i think that's exactly what they're doing. And the "or else" is good too. I'm just saying they don't need an automated system, "or else" is good enough. But i don't think anyone should be getting banned over this. I mean right now no one has done anything against the rules at all. NQ basically promoted it by announcing that it was possible and that they weren't considering it an exploit. They also announced that it wouldn't always be possible and that ships with stacked elements wouldn't work eventually, so i have no idea why anyone was buying or selling ships like that. But that's just poor judgment, not exploiting. The only thing that would be considered an exploit here would be knowingly keeping a ship or a blueprint, after Ares, with elements that were stacked using the exploit.
  9. I don't think it would be possible for them to automate something like this, without deleting 90% of the ships in the game in the process. Would it really be so bad if they simply stopped the exploit and firmly asked everyone to get rid of their stacked ships if they have any? If the choices are losing/rebuilding 90% of the legitimate ships in the game, or a few nerds flying around stacked ships until someone eventually reports them. I'll take the second option.
  10. I disagree with the "realism" argument. This is science fiction, and the technology you're describing, cameras and screens, comes standard on most minivans right now. I'm sure someone will have come up with something better then that by whatever year it's supposed to be in DU. Call it a "3d virtual composite view" if the fictional technology needs a name. But more importantly the 3rd person view is just more enjoyable for me to play the game. It's easy enough to switch back to first person if that's what you prefer. I do think it would be interesting if it was possible to disable someone's 3rd person view in PVP.
  11. I'm saying that there is a clear way of determining what is a "slight overlap" and should be fine, and what is "stacking", and that is the method used to achieve the placement. There's no reason to think NQ would have any issue with anything that didn't require an exploit to achieve. It would be nice if they would clarify how they plan to enforce this, but i don't think they will, because that would only help people trying to keep doing it.
  12. It seems pretty straight forward to me. None of that is "element stacking" unless you used an exploit to do it. If the element can be placed in the position that it is in, using the standard method, as in the element is blue, and you click, and it is placed, then that is ok. If other methods were used to place the element, methods that completely sidestep all the placement rules, even if you only used the method to slightly overlap an element, that's not ok.
  13. "Offenders will be teleported away; repeat offenders may be subject to more serious repercussions." So probably no.
  14. It's all a simulation. Nothing is actually casting light. Both of them make surfaces look lit up. Light elements simulate a beam of light. It looks cool, but lighting huge areas with them is inefficient. Luminescent voxels brighten everything in your view. It might not be realistic, but it works.
  15. Luminescent voxels don't exactly cast light, but they actually work really well to light spaces. If you're far away from them, they don't produce any light at all. But the closer you are to them the brighter everything in your view gets. If your standing directly on top of luminescent voxels it's almost too bright. Using blocks of luminescent voxels as lights on the ceiling will light a space as long as you're inside it though.
  16. i think originally they had hoped they wouldn't need to enforce a rule like this. They wanted to allow people to advertise at the markets. It was supposed to make the markets feel busy and alive. And it was almost a good idea in some ways. If there were no such thing as technical limitations the only down side would be some people's poor taste in advertising style and placement. But they realized that performance at the markets was more important then allowing people to do whatever they want. They aren't telling you how to play. They are asking you to stop doing things that were breaking the game.
  17. The comparison is that both games had/have a very rough simple UI. Everquest chose to spend the next several years developing features and content, before they put time into designing a new UI. Do you think that was a mistake? This is a question about what NQ needs to do moving forwards. If you think the game should already have a better UI, cool, but it doesn't.
  18. Do you think it would have improved Everquest if they had poured their development time into designing a flashy UI instead of focusing on new features and content?
  19. I mean i guess technically that is true. As long as you don't mind being required to spend $10,000 on a new computer that can actually run the game. Choices.
  20. It has everything to do with your post though. It's not technically possible for them to make a game that's a 10/10 in every area. So they made choices. You can have a game that's visually a 10/10 if you want. Just not this game.
  21. DU has a larger game world then any of those games. 100% of the world is editable. Everyone plays in the same world. Seamless travel from any point to any point in the world with no loading screens. And you can build stuff and then make it fly. As far as i know there are no other games that have even two of those features in the same game. Let alone all five.
  22. "This game is nothing like all the failed MMO clones that i've played, and not enjoyed, over the last ten years. Why don't you make it more like those games?" I'm sure there's someone developing another "Next-gen MMORPG first person shooter zombie sandbox battle royale, with skill-based whack-a-mole combat, and a ground breaking new progression system where you just start out with everything." If that's what you're into
  23. Make sure you have the Deploy Construct tool equipped. Then open your inventory and drag the Speeder Blueprint over to the Hotbar on the right side of the screen, then using the mouse wheel make sure the Blueprint is highlighted on the Hotbar. That should bring up a large transparent blue box floating in front of you. If the box is blue then you should be able to click to deploy the speeder. If the box is red, then you are either missing components for the speeder, or you don't have permission to deploy the speeder in your current location. Red text should pop up on the screen telling you why you can't deploy it, when you click.
  24. I don't think they botched asteroids. I think the idea just got borrowed and used to solve another problem. The game really needed a reason for people to go out and take risks. And this seems like a good solution to me. It didn't need to be asteroids, maybe they should have called them comets, or alien artifacts, or something like that instead. I do hope they add asteroid belts eventually too. Not like these randomly generated asteroids, just huge permanent fields of asteroids, full of ore. Big enough that even if they're in PVP space you would have a chance of doing some mining without anyone finding you.
×
×
  • Create New...