Mncdk1

The core unit is an element, I think he's just specifying that you need to spend a new core unit, to replace the old/broken/dead core unit.

NQ please address the lag and the slowdown people are seeing since Panacea. Some are seeing up to 80% slowdown in atmosphere, where you'll be cruising along at 1000 km/h according to the UI, but if you make a lua script that compares position versus time, then it shows you're moving at downwards of 200 km/h (while cruising)... Also my fans spin up whenever I'm piloting my hauler, and my FPS tanks. In addition to the slowdown mentioned above... I used to only see this slowdown/lag on Thades, but now I see it on Alioth too, and I am not alone. People have been reporting it on the Discord for a day or two now, but there's radio silence from the NQ staff that typically hang out and keep an eye on us.

What about letting some number of cores be designated as important, akin to setting a Territory as Headquarters. So if leadership of an organization is taking a break, and people leave (and take their core slots with them), then the org isn't punished by potentially/randomly losing some of their most important assets. For instance a huge factory, or something like that. The limit could be set really low, like 10 cores.

I was gonna reply to something you wrote on discord, but it became longer than I thought it would, so I'll put it here instead. Seems pretty odd. If I fail to maintain my car, its engine doesn't just poof out of existence. Rather than delete items if they are not maintained for long enough, it would make more sense with a decay. Similar to mining units. You could have a grace period of, say, a week, and then after that, you would lose 5% thrust on your engines per week (etc.), up to some cap. For instance, up to 75% loss of effectiveness. That way, your old beater would still get you from A to B, if you just run it on its dry weight, but if you need to actually use it for anything, you will need to bring it back up to spec. I don't like the idea of just deleting things that haven't been used for a while, and I also don't like the idea of having to maintain a fleet of ships too often. It'll end up being as tedious as calibrating miners. Edit: I agree with Taelessael too, it could be a lot of extra unnecessary strain on the servers.

The dev blog says you can reinvest up to ~80 slots, but then how long will it take to max out? 30 days? If it's more, then you should increase the grace period to match, to at least give those who need the max number of cores, a chance to train for it. Another thing, something that blows my mind, is that NQ is introducing the UI to see how many core slots you use, at the same time as they are introducing the limitation, instead of thinking just a tiny bit ahead, and giving players that tool in advance. It feels like someone is deciding "we need to limit X, do it now", and then devs are having to rush, to (finally) build a "minimally viable" helpful UI to deal with that. Instead of deciding to limit a thing, then giving players the tool to deal with a coming change first, and then changing it later. "We need to change X, here's a tool to help you deal with that, the change will happen Soon™" would have been useful, instead of just "We need to limit X, when the limit is introduced, we will also introduce a tool to help with that", and then leaving players to guess until then, and scramble to figure things out after the change is implemented. I understand that this change will probably be fine for most, but I'm talking about the way NQ is making decisions, and using this change as an example. I think this way of introducing changes, is what's making them (even this revised version) feel so terrible. We are having to figure things out after the change, and then hope that the grace period is enough time to deal with it. It is stressful. And it is unnecessary. NQ... In the future (or now, now would also be good)... Give us these tools, before you introduce the limitation they're helping us to deal with.

The art of the deal. Propose something so outlandish and gamebreaking, that the "nerfed nerf" will seem awesome in comparison.

I really like that idea, but I would like it to be implemented such that you link up to 1 core to your TU. Otherwise I would have to tear down and redeploy literally all but one of my tiles in the game, in order to control where the MU are located. If the TU got a build box, like a normal core, I would have to move everything. If you could link up to 1 core to the TU, most mining setups just need to be linked, and job done.

People have personal orgs for a reason. There are not even remotely enough personal core slots. We need a bump in personal cores. Something like +5 per level of Core Unit Upgrades and +2 per level of Advanced Core Unit Upgrades. Then I would happily wave goodbye to personal org stacking. Regarding element stacking, please allow us to place elements precisely somehow. Currently, elements on my ships are often out of alignment by something like 1/8 voxel or 1/16 voxel. And I can't figure out how to get them to stop, when I'm trying to, for instance, sink ailerons into voxels. Also, just generally, moving elements with the arrows often make them move a little vertically (for instance), when trying to shift them sideways to see how close they can get, in a way that looks like it ends up soft-overlapping other elements, Being able to enable/disable some kind of "strict placement" would really help with building.