Daphne Jones

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. 

If the intended purpose of AGG is only to allow you to hover at a specific altitude,  why not just make it so that's all they do?
 
Turn it on and you stay at whatever altitude you are at.  Wouldn't even need the 1k height limit.  If you want to go up, you need thrust.
 
Am i missing something here?
 
If they create lift, of course people are going to use them to lift stuff.

Fully agree on this, not only because its logic but also because there is no need for all these towers, not only is Alioth full of them also the sanctuary moon is growing hedgehogs
 

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. 

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. 

As far as I can tell, the problem with the markets is supply side. When I need something, half the time, it's not available on any market and even if it is, I have to fly to numerous remote markets to find everything I need.
 
How will this address is problem? I think it's pretty clear that it will exacerbate the problem. If stuff is too expensive to make, orgs will make stuff for their own use, but none of it will get to the markets. Assuming I can still afford to make fuel, I guess I'll fly my existing ships until the elements wear out and then quit the game, cause I won't be able to buy replacement parts. But since I'm just barely breaking even against fuel costs now, I don't really expect to be able to afford fuel.

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. 

Though in all fairness, running many players out of the game will indeed slow down progression, so from JC's perspective, he will have achieved his objective.

Not being able to detect it /= being ok to do. Doesnt mean i or others may or may not do so. Just that a clear answer to satisfy my curiosity would be nice.
 
As for beef my desktop is a 3900X at 4.4 all core, 128GB ram and 2080TI (can also slot in my old 1080TI and set the VM to use it as im pretty sure i have the pcie lanes to spare.....) Just split it to use 1 CCX per "system" split the ram half and half and throw a vid card at each machine. And boom cow computer.

Mass in tons x distance in SU / 4000
 

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.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

I completely disagree. Since most crashes are caused by bugs - at least for me... maybe the rest of you are sloppy pilots - we shouldn't be penalized for that.
 
Overall, the proposed changes look good.
 
I'm also not convinced that feedback from ATV hasn't hurt the game more than helped it.

Sloppy pilots should be penalized, but yea fair call, once the bugs that cause crashes are gone then crash damage should be a thing