Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Alpha

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

TobiwanKenobi's Achievements

  1. Nice update. A lot of great changes. PvP desync seems to have been fixed. I did a brief test today with a friend and saw zero problems. Hopefully it holds up in large scale fights. If NQ has actually completely solved the problem, then PvP is going to be so much more fun for me. Thanks NQ. Build box grid hiding is the cherry on top.
  2. The core explosion is cute and all, but I feel you guys should make the effect so large that it can be seen from far, far away - up to 2su. It would be cool if you could see someone's core explode after you kill them in pvp. As it is, no one is going to see that effect - not the aggressor, and of course not the person who got destroyed. If NQ wants to really improve the visuals of a battle, you guys need to render all weapon effects for everyone on the battlefield. It would make things so much cooler and interactive if we could see crisscrossing lasers and railguns everywhere. I'm looking forward to the SSGI/SSAO. Ship interiors have long been too dark, even with many lights placed. Hopefully it works as advertised in those infographics. It didn't seem to do much on the PTS.
  3. Thanks for the exhaustive reply Entropy. To weigh in, I think the major changes implemented in Athena are so extensive that it's too early to start making claims about the new balance and meta. We should probably let the dust settle before advocating for any further rebalancing. That said, considering shields were so heavily nerfed, it might turn out that heavier, more expensive voxels could use a buff. If someone is willing to spend more quanta and sacrifice max speed and acceleration to achieve a very tanky ship, I would hope that it would be a viable option. At the same time I hope voxel buffs wouldn't increase effective hp/time-to-kill of armored ships to such an extent that it becomes an issue of "did I bring enough ammo/do I have enough time to actually kill this guy?" Because that's a pretty boring meta. Rather than directly buff the hp values and resistances of voxel armor, I think it would be more fun to add a different mechanic that brings value to armor. For example to add a deflection chance based on angle-of-impact to voxel slopes. In this way, armored ships could build with the design philosophy of modern tanks, which rely on both thickness and angle-of-impact to deflect the energy of shots rather than absorbing all of the force directly. A successful deflection could reduce the damage from a hit by half or something. The game could even take into account the damage type of the attack, with different voxel types being more likely to deflect different damage types. This system could lend more complexity to armored ship design, while at the same time requiring skill from pvp pilots to use their armor effectively by presenting the best face of their ship to an attacking enemy. Victory through design, knowledge, and skill rather than just having more stats than the enemy. It would even be helpful in discouraging the ugly shoe-box ship designs that we're used to seeing. It would also leave room to outplay your enemy with a smaller ship by outmaneuvering them to achieve a better attack angle. But I have no idea if such a complicated system could be implemented without causing server issues.
  4. I've long wanted something like this, but also a step further - a docking element that snaps a construct to another construct in a specific position. Like a magnetic docking clamp. Using this, you could more easily dock to specific spots on stations, carriers, etc., without having to use the awkward maneuver tool. Or you could use it to pick up/detach cargo pods without even getting out of your pilot seat.
  5. With Athena, NQ attempted to rebalance the engine types. There was a lot of flip-flopping of stat values between the different PTS patches. And what we arrived at is, in my opinion, still not where it should be. Partly because the changes still don't give balanced value to each engine type, but also because the current stats don't assign a unique identity to some of the types. I hope NQ will give these suggestions some consideration soon, because I feel DU launch is the last chance to make big changes to engine balance without angering a lot of players. --- I THINK THE ENGINE BONUSES SHOULD BE: (values are multipliers, applied at every tier step, stacking multiplicatively) Military - same values as current. Trade fuel efficiency for power. Thrust 1.2 Mass 1 Fuel/hour 1.44 Warmup 1 Resistances Excellent --- Maneuver - they currently lack identity. Instead of freights getting reduced mass, give that to maneuvers. Give them comparable thrust:mass as military engines. No fuel or thrust bonuses. They would have better acceleration than military engines for short burns, but military engines would win out for long-duration burns. This would make maneuver valuable for close range fights and races, but not as good as military engines for long accelerations. Maneuver loses the advantage as soon as the military engine warms up. The mass reduction would also allow slightly higher max speeds, which would be good for space racing. Thrust 1 Mass 0.75 Fuel/hour 1 Warmup 0.5 Resistances Poor --- Freight - really drive in the 'for haulers' message. Give them thrust bonuses AND great fuel efficiency. This makes them a highly desirable engine. But give them penalties which discourage their use in pvp. Keep the very high warmup penalties, but also give them a significant mass penalty. Haulers don't care much about the extra mass and warmup. But pvpers will be very limited by it. Thrust 1.15 Mass 1.15 Fuel/hour 0.75 Warmup 1.75 Resistances Average --- Safe - the long-standing worst engine in DU! I have an idea to give it value and identity(not steal maneuver's identity like it currently has). Instead of a bonuses and penalties approach, just give it all bonuses, but small ones. A jack-of-all-trades choice; the safe choice. Thrust 1.05 Mass 0.9 Fuel/hour 0.9 Warmup 0.9 Resistances Good
  6. Exactly. Can't warp stop on someone if you can't warp past them.
  7. Future space magic. Also, gathering of trace particles and nano-engineering them down to their atomic constituents, then reassembling into different elements. It's a space magic thing, you wouldn't understand.
  8. With today's Athena patch, I finally got to test a small core cannon corvette I've been working on in prep for the changes to max speed and adjustor maneuverability. It worked great! The L-core meta definitely seems to have been disrupted. But now that some people will be trying to fight at very close ranges, it's vital that positional desync be addressed. When your target is teleporting around, it's impossible to try to stay in close ranges. If this constant desync isn't improved before launch, I fear many new players will see the jankiness of pvp and just leave the game. Here's an example video of how difficult it can be to fight at ranges of about 50km. NQ, I hope you can find a solution. You're on to something with the new pvp balance. It feels fun. This fight was conducted on April 26 at 22:13 to 22:27 UTC, at the edge of the safe zone in the vicinity of coords ::pos{0,0,-2614807.8509,610839.4670,-2685631.4847} if NQ wants to check server logs or whatever you might need to identify issues.
  9. Ok, Aegis is cool. The first space market. I love it. But what if there was a XL market 'ship' (it would of course have to be a space core made to look like a ship) that 'warped' to a different and random planet once a week during maintenance? Players could bring their ore and elements up to this market and list them for sale. Eventually, once a month or so, the ship returns to Aegis for a week and players are afforded the opportunity to buy outer planet ore without having to travel for it. Vice versa, as the ship travels from Aegis to outer planets, players operating on those outer planets have a chance to buy goods without having to transport them from the safe zone. This provides a low-risk but very slow and delayed way of transporting resources around the system. With the randomness of the ship market's destinations, players wouldn't be able to easily exploit it to avoid transporting goods entirely. Moreover, goods stored and listed on this market could be taxed, once per week, so that players can't just use it as a permanent mobile storage of material. Just a random idea I had. There may be more problems with it, but I thought it could be a fun thing to have in DU.
  10. Love it. We've needed this for so long. This is going to make space travel much more enjoyable. One map feature that I want is to be able to see the positions of ships that you have have a transponder match with. This would help a lot with pvp fleet organization - the ability to visualize the disposition of your allies. Positions for contacts that are online would also be nice.
  11. I'll keep my opinions about a wipe brief: I don't like the idea of a full wipe. I've put thousands of hours into building my ship-selling operation. But I understand how a wipe could help. I'm resigned to the inevitability of it. I can deal with losing my money and my ship factory. HOWEVER, don't take our talent points! We paid for those. They aren't resources. Taking them is basically deleting our character/account. Whatever advantage they provide, we're owed it. If talent points go, I'll go. And I think removing schematics would be a bad idea. Every player could manufacture everything they need again, and the market would be pointless.
  12. Good info, thanks for the devblog. But how exactly do the stasis weapons work? Do they decrease the max speed of the target by a flat amount? Or do they reduce engine/retro/adjustor thrust? Or do they increase the the effective mass of the ship, sort of like ships currently behave when approaching max speed? Does this affect the target's adjustor maneuverability? EDIT: Also, could you give us the formula for the ship speed changes, so we can get some expectations of how fast ships might be?
  13. @NQ-Deckard I have one more suggestion for the vertex editor. It's a difficult one but would be very helpful: I would like the ability to move multiple vertices at once, all linked. To be able to shift-select multiple vertices and move them in sync. I understand this would present problems with the displayed coordinates of the vertex and cursor - you can't display coords for multiple vertices of course.
  14. Oh wow. I never would have known. That should do nicely. Thanks very much for your responses to those four issues.
  15. But it's not practical at all when you're trying to modify a voxel normally, which is the typical situation. Copy paste is what we use when we want to modify a bunch of voxels in succession. Imagine if every time you tried to copy a voxel, it instead copied the previous voxel that you pasted unless you specifically told it not to. That would be awkward. I clicked on the vertex to edit that vertex, not to edit the last vertex I edited.
  • Create New...