Atmosph3rik
-
Posts
1187 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Atmosph3rik
-
-
An eye dropper tool would be incredibly useful. I would love to have it.
I usually copy a single voxel, or a chunk of voxels, of the material i want to use, and then paste without dominance, to use it as a sort of paintbrush. Saves the step of actually equipping the material.
Not to derail the thread too much. But what i would REALLY like, is for Honeycomb to be simplified into just the basic materials. So when you want to use Steel Honeycomb for example, you would just equip "Steel Honeycomb" and then choose a color/pattern from a palette, and then deploy it. And when you delete it, you get back the same base honeycomb material. That way i wouldn't have to store 5000 different types of honeycomb.
I know NQ has mentioned that they would like to do this. But i really hope they make it a priority.
It would make Blueprints much easier to deploy.
It would encourage players to experiment with more of the available colors and patterns.
And i think most importantly it would make the base Honeycomb materials into a commodity that could actually be bought and sold successfully on the markets.
- GraXXoR, Yoarii and fiddlybits
-
3
-
I've just been piling up T1 on Alioth waiting for this to be sorted out.
But i just went to a market on Madis, and the buy orders are starting to run out at the markets there too.
Has there been zero communication on this, other than telling us how it's supposed to work?
This is slightly annoying to me. But if i was a new player, who claimed a territory on Alioth, and needed to be able to sell T1 to pay the tax. This would really suck.
-
4 minutes ago, Wyndle said:
and a sincere apology.
Honestly i think a sincere apology would have meant more to me then the STU at this point lol
I got the STU on Wednesday though.
-
Yesterday i noticed that, in the Market UI, when i tried to drag an item from my linked container to the market container, to create a sell order. The item that i was trying to sell, was not the same item that i had clicked and dragged. It was actually one of the tools from my Nanopack. I had dragged a stack of Ore that was in my linked container, but i was actually trying to sell my Flattening Tool. Which isn't possibly luckily.
I tried closing the window and opening it again, switching back and forth between the Nanopack and Linked container and i still had the same issue. I tried dragging other items from the linked container and got other Tools from my Nanopack instead.
I was eventually able to sell the Ore by right clicking it and choosing Create Sell Order.
-
3 hours ago, Kezzle said:
You can? Put a BP in a container (or sumfink) and the factory configures itself to build the right elements and voxels to deploy the ship once it's all collected together in the output?
No, you would have to design and build the factory yourself. That's kind of the whole point though, isn't it? That's the fun part, for some people at least.
You could build a factory that would continually produce everything needed to build a specific ship. And use transfer units to put all the right parts and honeycomb into one container. Then all you would need to do is link to that container and deploy a ship, whenever you wanted one.
The only part of the process that can't be automated is basically clicking somewhere in the game to tell it where you want to put each ship.
I can't really imagine how that last step would be automated anyway. Although the idea of ships just piling up at the end of a conveyor belt does sound funny.
-
2 hours ago, Aaron Cain said:
well maybe its not cancelled yet but postponed, its one of the kickstarter things
there are a lot of “cool ideas” that were considered early on that just don’t make sense in the context of the game we have now.
You can already fully automate that process. The only thing that you would need to do manually is link to the final container and then deploy each BP.
would automating that final step improve the game at all?
or was it just a cool sounding idea that doesn’t really make sense to pursue any further?
-
24 minutes ago, ColonkinYT said:
So I just rely on the fact. The fact that these cores are in the public domain (we see them). The game engine processes them (there are no problems for players with falling through, displaying, etc.). All.
Everything else, as you correctly noted, is speculation. Including yours. And they look like an attempt to justify why this is not possible (just kidding).😉
The problem is when NQ has access to something, and they do something with it that breaks the game. They can simply stop doing it.
When they give us access to something. We're supposed to be able to do whatever we want with it.
Giving us access to something like XL cores, prematurely, might end up with all kinds of unpleasant rules needing to be hard coded into the game. More limits on what can be built on a core, like increasing voxel complexity limits. They could be forced to lower the number of elements that can be placed on a core. Or decrease how many constructs can be loaded at one time.
Those are all things that they are already balancing to make the game as fun, and as functional as possible.
Would XL cores be worth it, if they also required a bunch of other sacrifices to make them work?
-
-
8 hours ago, Aaron Cain said:
Nice post, now just take in mind that in the past it was told that you would get 3 chars per account. Dont ask where that info is as in general "some" info is lost or deleted along the way, was in JC times
In the past, in most MMO type games that i've played there was a distinct difference between having multiple characters, and multiple accounts.
The intent was really to allow people to play different types of characters and roles in the game. Not to hand out power or wealth.
So, you might be able to have several characters, but they were all on the same account. And most of the benefits that are attached to your account, were still limited by the fact that you had only one account. And you could still only play one character at a time.
There really wasn't a huge advantage to having multiple characters, other than simply having the option to play a different class/roll. The real advantage was only if you were able to play multiple characters at the same time, which required multiple accounts.
I think when NQ mentioned the idea of multiple characters per account, it was in the context of talking about other games, before they really understood how this game was going to work. So i wouldn't be surprised if they had to reconsider.
It wouldn't make sense to suddenly hand out 3x all the benefits of an account to everyone in the game. And there really isn't any reason to do it otherwise.
If you want to try out training some piloting talents, you can just do that on your main character. There's no need for an ALT for that.
-
Most of the territories that i claimed with T2 on them, have empty tiles nearby that i'm sure also have some T2 on them. They might not be the highest yield, but it's still there, waiting to be claimed.
The two territories with Limestone that i claimed on Alioth, i found just by looking at the map until a found a territory with Limestone in the name, and i just went and grabbed two adjacent tiles.
If you're only scanning in totally unclaimed areas, only looking for the undiscovered T2 fields, so you can get the highest yield, that's going to be a lot harder to find.
-
When are we getting a 3rd person view though?
C'mon NQ this is a role-playing game. Lemme see how cool i look.
- JonnyDeppy, JoeRogan, GEEKsogen and 1 other
-
4
-
19 minutes ago, Anderson Williams said:
No im dismissing what I believe to be the pessimistic bitter vets. The naysayers with no solution that merely shoot all ideas down because, and I will paraphrase 'NQ is bad', 'DU is doomed'..... ' let me log in about it.'
Nah dude. They said your idea was bad.
-
On 10/27/2022 at 7:02 PM, Anderson Williams said:
You guys have given up on this game, thats fine, I appreciate your perspective.. but being thats the case just let us who remain work on it kthanks.
This post right here is a perfect example of why this is a bad idea. You basically just said that anyone who disagrees with YOU doesn't have the game's best interest in mind. That's just dishonest and manipulative.
If you couldn't even pretend to be impartial for 5mins why would anyone want to trust you with insider info, or a more direct line to NQ?
This is an awful idea for a million reasons.
-
8 hours ago, Ninator said:
I tried to submit several bug tickets. They more or less rejected them, closed them, although I was clearly pointing out bugs that need to be fixed.
Like the "gray" screens bug. We had that one during the beta, and it is back.
Looks like there is one guy who's job is to simply close bug tickets.
No dev team available that really looks into something.
Support feels strange these days...
Bug reports are a one-way kind of thing.
You just fire it off into the void, and hope it helps. I wouldn't expect any type of direct feedback, unless they have specific questions for you.
It really wouldn't make sense for them to take the time to write out a response to every bug report, describing how they did (or didn't) fix the issue.
-
13 hours ago, Wolfram said:
You don't need schematics for T1 pures, only for the products and end products.
As for the whole schematic discussion, my biggest complaint is having to manually put schematics on every machine to keep them running, instead of having a central schematic bank on the Core Unit instead. That's probably the most annoying part. Copying the schematics honestly isn't a big deal, specially when you can do it overnight, just need to plan yourself first.
The costs are a problem for larger elements, though, and sometimes I feel NQ should've made a few elements into separate categories, like decorative elements. Having the same schematic for a T2 Container/Engine L and a Vertical Light L makes no sense, makes the lamps ridiculously expensive for what they are.
It's the T1 Products though. I finally had to set up some Smelters, but i feel like i spend half my time queuing up T1 product schematics now. For Steel, Silumin, AlFe, Polycarb, Glass. It's rough.
The thing that has really been frustrating me lately is the odd number of schematics that it requires to produce some things. Why do i need 15 schematics to run a batch of Scrap? Or 18 to run a batch of Honeycomb? Why not just make the schematics more expensive, or take longer to produce, or both?
Why does one batch produce 25 T2 scrap schematics and then it requires 15 of them to run one batch of scrap?
Why does scrap require schematics in the first place?
I think the idea of needing schematics to produce actual elements is great, if you want to make one element, you need one schematic first. That makes sense. I can plan for that in my head without my brain melting. But i don't think we should need schematics to process things like ore, product materials, honeycomb, scrap, or fuel.
- Wolfram, GraXXoR and EdmundBlack
-
3
-
-
8 minutes ago, Kezzle said:
Me too!
If I should even have one. I just assumed I wasn't due one, though I got one at Beta-start due to having rushed to sub before the end of Alpha. Should I have been feeling hard-done-by this last couple of weeks?
This post has info on which founder/supporter packs were supposed to receive STU.
QuoteTo know how many STUs you should have, here's a quick recap:
Number of STUs per Founder Pack:
- Iron Founder Pack: 0
- Bronze Founder Pack: 0
- Silver Founder Pack: 1 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
- Gold Founder Pack: 1 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
- Sapphire Founder Pack: 2 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
- Ruby Founder Pack: 2 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
- Emerald Founder Pack: 2 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
- Diamond Founder Pack: 2 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
- Kyrium Founder Pack: 2 (gift granted at Supporter Packs launch)
Number of STUs per Supporter Pack:
- Contributor Pack: 1
- Sponsor Pack: 1
- Patron Pack: 2 -
At this point there's really not anything NQ can do to make up for the lost progress that having a sanctuary tile would have provided during the bottleneck of the first few days.
It wouldn't have made a huge difference. But it would have been nice to have it.
-
Schematics for end products seems fine.
But with the system as it is, using schematics for producing Pures and Products kind of sucks.
I'm still processing huge amounts of T1 in my Nanopack because it doesn't really feel like it would be any faster or more convenient to use a Refiner when i have to constantly produce more schematics and resupply them.
One complaint i do have in general, is that it seems like in some cases Schematics were used to add an additional layer of rebalancing on top of recipe cost, that just feels weird. When i go to craft Medium Fuel Tanks, and the Atmo and Space variants both have the exact same recipe, it's a little weird to discover that the schematic for the space version costs twice as much. And takes twice as long to produce.
There are also recipes, like the Territory Unit, where it just feels like the time and cost of the schematic was over inflated to compensate for the recipe itself being easier to produce. Which makes it an unpleasant surprise when you decide to craft something yourself, only to discover that it's actually a lot more expensive to craft then the recipe alone would lead you to believe.
-
4 hours ago, wuselfuzz said:
In theory, better scrap should repair faster, and better scrap could be bought with quanta, no?
I'm a mechanic, I want to repair the ship myself, instead of hauling ore to an NPC to make quanta to pay.
The problem is as the elements get larger, higher tier scrap becomes more of a necessity then a shortcut. It would take hours to repair some L or XL elements with T1 scrap.
The idea that paying more for higher tier scrap makes it faster is good. But even when i've paid to speed the process up, there's still an incredible amount of manual clicking involved.
With a smaller ship, being a mechanic might be fun, going around and repairing a few adjusters before takeoff. But on a massive ship were talking about repairing stacks of 100 wings. If Large ships are going to have 1000+ elements on them. There needs to be a way to repair them without clicking every single element one at a time.
Unless NQ can find a way to make repair a fun/popular gameplay loop, and there's going to be player run garages everywhere, where i can pay a team of 20 players repair my ship in under an hour.
-
I really think more balance needs to be done before the repair process is made any more punishing.
People are going to buy a L core ship, crash it once, and just quit playing rather than spend 12 hours repairing it. And that's just after the 1st time they crash.
I'm not at all against there being a steep cost when you crash an expensive ship. But the cost in time and manual labor is way too high right now as it is.
It should be a cost in Quanta, not in clicks.
-
These "Lern to fly!" comments are funny. It's totally irrelevant to the discussion. Just low hanging fruit.
Whether someone crashes into the building or not doesn't really change the fact that it was in the direct flight path of an incredibly popular mission. People are running this mission repeatedly and it's in the way every time.
I ran the mission a few times with the building there. And again, last night without it. And it sure was nice not having it in the way.
There's no reason they can't build an awesome building there, that doesn't block the flight path.
If their intent wasn't to piss people off, then it sounds like they made the right decision, and now we can all move on.
-
I always assumed that the 2km limit was referring to parking AGG ships. But the wording is pretty vague.
I think however NQ wants to handle this kind of thing; it needs to be built into the game. Tiles shouldn't be claimable if you aren't supposed to build on them.
And it can't be on NQ to make individual calls as to what is considered a legitimate building verses someone intentionally blocking a flight path.
It's true that the markets in the purple zone on Alioth will always have a clear flight path on one side. But there are a lot of other markets that could eventually have an entire city built around them. And it would probably be a good idea to decide how to handle this now, rather than later.
-
Imagine escaping the destruction of your planet, traveling millions of miles through space to find a new home. Only to end up as a Door Dash delivery driver, desperately trying to make enough money to pay rent, or you'll be evicted by an AI who lives in an Ivory Tower.
I needs that money NQ, I'm space poor!
Gold Member Game Time?
in General Discussions
Posted
The answer is Yes.
You would receive 20 DAC (Dual Access Coupon) with your Gold Founders Pack. Which would give you 20 months of game time. You just have to log into the official DU site and redeem one of your DAC.
You also had several years of free game time during Pre-Alpha, Alpha, and Beta.