Daphne Jones

There won't be a future financial wipe unless they absolutely have to do it. And if they do, it will probably be a trim off the top, like when they limited everyone to a max of 50m at the official start of beta.

Fixing an exploit is not a nerf. Just because they didn't ban you for the exploit doesn't mean it wasn't cheating. The devs also asked Dimencia to stop using the exploit and afaik, it was removed from the next version.

There was no nerf. That was the design from the beginning. Dimencia just found a clever exploit to work around the speed limit. If you didn't use the exploit it was always limited to 4mps.

Even if I'd heard of it, I probably wouldn't recognize the abbreviation because i usually don't except for games I play a lot. I guess the problem with DU is that creativity is expensive, so just the existence of combat that can destroy your creative work, is a pressure not to do the work. It also makes any features of a build that don't contribute to winning a fight to risky... so we get borg cubes. ?‍♀️

Q1: I really doubt open PVP combat will ever work in a game with a creative component. Q2: I do think the risk of high stakes combat interferes with creativity... you really can't design and build far off the combat meta if you're likely to have to fight. So building isn't much fun any more. That would be less of an issue on a PVE server. Q3: I am definitely wondering about the wisdom of non-respawning resources as I see ore deposits disappearing. With the market completely dysfunctional now, it doesn't matter at the moment. No credible revenue stream is the main thing that's keeping me out of the game atm.

Completely agree, but not holding my breath and not coming in game except to pick up my welfare check in case the game ever gets back to playability.

As I understand it, NQ intentionally nerfed docking so that it can only be done with the maneuver tool and only by a player standing on the ground, a static construct, or (maybe) a space construct. This was apparently done in a misguided attempt to prevent players from bootstrapping up to space (which can still be done by using static cores and picking up each static core when the next is placed. This completely rules out carriers. NQ has also been trying very hard to make freighters that fly surface to surface unfeasible.. that would make space-bound freighters that can carry a shuttle on board necessary... but the docking nerf completely rules that out. @NQ, will this be fixed? You could allow docking by flying the parasite ship onto the host ship. It would not allow maneuver tool bootstrapping (with dynamics) and would allow carriers.

I was logging in every day to collect my welfare check, but I've even stopped doing that. The market is so crippled now that I can't make enough money to afford to fly my ship.

Apparently NQ's idea for AGG was to have floating gun platforms for territory warfare and they were shocked.... shocked when we took advantage of their unlimited weight capacity to make super cargo ships, lol. If they really want floating gun platforms, they need to replace AGG with vertical engines optimized for high altitude hovering, i.e., helicopter rotors. Those would work fine for gun platforms. And sure, we'd still use them for cargo ships too, but it wouldn't be the freeby that AGG is.

If orgs aren't doing that, they need smarter people running the orgs. The economy is so dysfunctional now, that I'm out. Finally getting a chance to fly my new ships in SC. I'm entering a ship in a contest this week and if the expo ever happens I'll bring at least two of the ships I have registered to it, but otherwise, I'm waiting for the economy to offer some means of funding my operation... and not holding my breath. Not sure I see how DU can recover from 0.23. I think a lot of players are with me on this, so those of you who are staying should see a lot less lag.

Cost and unreliability would be enough balance to make me prefer wings and engines. The current situation is making all of us who aren't using it pay the cost of it by crashing our ships into invisible towers.

Since the 0.23 nerf of AGG, everyone is putting up a 1000m tower to build a landing platform for their AGG ships. It's getting damned hard to fly at low altitude on Alioth because of all of the single voxel wide spikes that render right in front of you and kill you ship. I have a solution... let the AGG work all the way to ground. There really isn't any conceivable justification (in lore) for AGG magically not working under 1000m above an arbitrary reference altitude. How does the AGG know that it's OK to land on Thades and Feli but it insists on hovering above all other planets? Considering that AGG can land on those two planets, I doubt there's any compelling game design reason for this restriction either... it just makes the planet hairy - which JC said he didn't want. Please let AGG fly to the ground so I don't have to move my 1100m long runway up to 1200m altitude to have clear access to it.

The way engine control works now, it's possible for the Nav object to only fire 3 of 4 engines if that gives it all the thrust it needs at the moment - so that may be normal behavior. But do make sure you linked a tank to the engine and the tank has fuel. You can almost directly control an engine by giving it a unique tag and using core.setEngineCommand with that tag, but you probably won't ever need to do that. You also probably won't ever need to link to the engine and exercise real direct control over it, although that can be done either from the control seat or with a PB. You can either communicate with the PB from the control seat through a DB or just start the PB separately before you sit (I do the latter with my AGG control PB).

NQ published a pretty PB/lua tutorial on youtube. It's a little out of date, but iirc correctly, the only updates needed are that timer ticks now have a name (character string) rather than a number and are located in unit instead of system. To answer your title, you don't need all elements connected to your control unit (so you don't need a PB for this purpose unless your ship is huge or you're using a cockpit and want to see the HUD in third person. Core, fuel tanks, gyro, warp drive, and antigravity need to be linked to your control unit. (And you can link the AGG to a PB instead if you prefer - I usually do, so I don't need to add support for the AGG to my flight script.) Engines, hovers, wings, and adjustors do not need to be linked - they are accessed through methods in the core.

It's a launch/landing pad for a vertical ship adjacent to a runway. The taxiway segment on each core has to align exactly with the taxiway segment on the other. As far as I can tell, it will be faster to just build the landing pad from scratch than to deploy from the BP. And cost a helluva lot less quanta.

The one thing I've never seen a game dev fail at is underestimating the players.

Is this possible? I spent 125K to make a BP from my core BP. I got it line up pretty well the first time, but it was two voxels too high and turned 90 degrees. I'm having trouble even it lining it up the second time. 1. Is there a way to line it up? 2. Is there a way to make sure the orientation is as intended? 3. Is there a way to get the height right? 4. Is that a way to undo the deployment that returns the working BP so I don't have to spend millions of quanta in multiple attempts to deploy a copy of my own build? Even picking the GD thing up after it deploys incorrectly is too tedious.

What did they do to docking in 0.23? Pretty sure there was nothing about it in the patch notes except something vague about preventing stealing ships to drop them in the PVP zone and blow them up. As far as I can tell, it doesn't work at all. Others seem to be doing it but no one can explain how to do it.

Yeah. In a game full of bad people, parking your ship in space is not such a good idea.

Ah. There's the official statement I was looking for. Thanks all.

Is multiboxing permitted? I remember NQ said something about it, but I can't find it now. I just got a new laptop for Xmas so I could actually do it now if it's allowed.

Don't load your player into a no-win situation without giving her a chance to catch her f...ing breath before the action starts. How about not starting the GD physics on a reload until the pilot sits in the MF seat. Can't do that? Your programmers must be as bad as your game designers. BTW... I spent an hour staring at the GD loading screen this morning because I knew I would loading into a low and slow airplane in a steep bank and it would be hard to get into the fing seat before I hit the ground, much less get the throttle up.

Mass in tons x distance in SU / 4000

If your ship ends up at 100 tons, 40 cells will take you 1600 su. That's plenty.

Well, I don't know what the OP is doing, but I've certainly done both of those things. Currently, I would use be inclined to use an ECU for either scenario to avoid the risk of collision.