Daphne Jones

Generally this looks like good game design to me.
 
I have two concerns about it:
With bots no longer selling basic elements, it's already difficult to put together parts for a ship. It requires flying to 10-20 markets on 2 planets to get everything needed for a M core ship... and some things, elevators, T2+ elements, T2+ honeycomb are often not available at all. Except for honeycomb, element destruction will exacerbate this problem. I am definitely seeing T3+ ore drying up on several planets. It's taking 5 times as many scans to find it now compared to about a month ago. We will need renewable ore sources.

Perhaps make sure that 99% of all cases of an element breaking is not caused by bugs in the game first, before implementing mechanics which will further aggrivate the community?

Generally this looks like good game design to me.
 
I have two concerns about it:
With bots no longer selling basic elements, it's already difficult to put together parts for a ship. It requires flying to 10-20 markets on 2 planets to get everything needed for a M core ship... and some things, elevators, T2+ elements, T2+ honeycomb are often not available at all. Except for honeycomb, element destruction will exacerbate this problem. I am definitely seeing T3+ ore drying up on several planets. It's taking 5 times as many scans to find it now compared to about a month ago. We will need renewable ore sources.

I wouldn't mind at all if these changes only apply to elements destroyed by PVP damage. Otherwise, i imagine many elements will be wasted due to crashes caused by lag spins or other server-side issues currently present in game.
I am however 100% on board for the proposed PVP balance changes.

Well, I haven't quit yet. But there are two reasons I might
 
1. NQ's complete lack of engagement with players. Used to be I could get help when a bug interfered drastically with game play. That's no longer the case.
 
2. Dumbing down of building. I used to build ships with working airlocks; functional engineering stations; bunks; bathrooms - but now I have to build for unwanted combat encounters. I can't afford to have to replace those things to re-deploy from a BP if I get ambushed. I also can't afford the extra mass that could be allocated to either armor or cargo. So instead of cool, fun spaceships, I'm building easy to replace crap. I don't even use doors on most of them. I no longer use windows.
 
Building isn't much fun any more.
 
Hmmm... I guess there's a third reason.
 
3. Lack of progress in Lua - actually regression in Lua, since we can no longer capture info from radar.
 
My big complaint on this is lack of access to orbital parameters. NQ said back in alpha that we would get this and I've been holding off on adding nav to my script set until with have them (rather than adding ad hoc orbital calculations in Lua that will fail as soon as the next star system is added). I'm assumed the game was calculating orbital parameters in C to draw the trajectory lines - but now that I think of it, if the orbital parameters are not really being calculated, that would explain the apparently unstable orbits.

Well, I haven't quit yet. But there are two reasons I might
 
1. NQ's complete lack of engagement with players. Used to be I could get help when a bug interfered drastically with game play. That's no longer the case.
 
2. Dumbing down of building. I used to build ships with working airlocks; functional engineering stations; bunks; bathrooms - but now I have to build for unwanted combat encounters. I can't afford to have to replace those things to re-deploy from a BP if I get ambushed. I also can't afford the extra mass that could be allocated to either armor or cargo. So instead of cool, fun spaceships, I'm building easy to replace crap. I don't even use doors on most of them. I no longer use windows.
 
Building isn't much fun any more.
 
Hmmm... I guess there's a third reason.
 
3. Lack of progress in Lua - actually regression in Lua, since we can no longer capture info from radar.
 
My big complaint on this is lack of access to orbital parameters. NQ said back in alpha that we would get this and I've been holding off on adding nav to my script set until with have them (rather than adding ad hoc orbital calculations in Lua that will fail as soon as the next star system is added). I'm assumed the game was calculating orbital parameters in C to draw the trajectory lines - but now that I think of it, if the orbital parameters are not really being calculated, that would explain the apparently unstable orbits.

Glad to hear you're starting to monitor the in-game channel again. I hope that means the highly toxic environment that developed there as soon as beta was opened up to the public will get moderated a bit.

I keep asking that, but everyone just seems addicted to it. Any other T4 scrap is better. Even lithium scrap (T3) repairs more per kg of scrap I think. (I need to actually test that).
 
Pay your market taxes... much cheaper than getting scammed.

Thing is tho, and this is no offence:
It doesn't really matter if you're here now and start Posting. It's about NQs Attitude as a whole and actually listening to player Input and hearing and acting upon long standing issues. It doesn't matter if you inform the team or whoever and if you know what's going on when NQ as a whole doesn't care or do anything. 

1. CS tickets are just ignored as far as I can tell. I reported a game-blocking bug on day one of beta (dynamic core exploding on deployment) which has yet to get a response. I assumed it had been fixed, but one of my org mates experienced this bug last week. (And you still owe me a Territory Scanner to replace the one taken by a container bug - I doubt anyone in NQ has read that ticket yet.)
 
2. NQ no longer monitors the badly mis-named support channel in game. Support used to actually be available there for critical game stopping bugs. I used to have pretty relationships with several NQ- people, but now they're ghosts.
 
3. Apparrently the only remaining channel for communication with NQ is a discord completely controlled by players who are hostile to me... so not even slightly useful. (And to be fair, I'm hostile to them too, but they started it.)
 
 

I bet it has a rectangular collision box, lol. I've seen some very strange stuff with collision boxes that are too big or the wrong shape.

While both rockets and the AGG can be used to accomplish one type of goal, they don't do the same thing. Rockets can provide thrust in any direction, in any environment.

Well, I haven't quit yet. But there are two reasons I might
 
1. NQ's complete lack of engagement with players. Used to be I could get help when a bug interfered drastically with game play. That's no longer the case.
 
2. Dumbing down of building. I used to build ships with working airlocks; functional engineering stations; bunks; bathrooms - but now I have to build for unwanted combat encounters. I can't afford to have to replace those things to re-deploy from a BP if I get ambushed. I also can't afford the extra mass that could be allocated to either armor or cargo. So instead of cool, fun spaceships, I'm building easy to replace crap. I don't even use doors on most of them. I no longer use windows.
 
Building isn't much fun any more.
 
Hmmm... I guess there's a third reason.
 
3. Lack of progress in Lua - actually regression in Lua, since we can no longer capture info from radar.
 
My big complaint on this is lack of access to orbital parameters. NQ said back in alpha that we would get this and I've been holding off on adding nav to my script set until with have them (rather than adding ad hoc orbital calculations in Lua that will fail as soon as the next star system is added). I'm assumed the game was calculating orbital parameters in C to draw the trajectory lines - but now that I think of it, if the orbital parameters are not really being calculated, that would explain the apparently unstable orbits.

Well, I haven't quit yet. But there are two reasons I might
 
1. NQ's complete lack of engagement with players. Used to be I could get help when a bug interfered drastically with game play. That's no longer the case.
 
2. Dumbing down of building. I used to build ships with working airlocks; functional engineering stations; bunks; bathrooms - but now I have to build for unwanted combat encounters. I can't afford to have to replace those things to re-deploy from a BP if I get ambushed. I also can't afford the extra mass that could be allocated to either armor or cargo. So instead of cool, fun spaceships, I'm building easy to replace crap. I don't even use doors on most of them. I no longer use windows.
 
Building isn't much fun any more.
 
Hmmm... I guess there's a third reason.
 
3. Lack of progress in Lua - actually regression in Lua, since we can no longer capture info from radar.
 
My big complaint on this is lack of access to orbital parameters. NQ said back in alpha that we would get this and I've been holding off on adding nav to my script set until with have them (rather than adding ad hoc orbital calculations in Lua that will fail as soon as the next star system is added). I'm assumed the game was calculating orbital parameters in C to draw the trajectory lines - but now that I think of it, if the orbital parameters are not really being calculated, that would explain the apparently unstable orbits.

I wrote about these a bit ago shortly after beta release, and exactly what I said gonna happen is happening right now so making a 2nd thread here and attaching a video I made about why we all should just stop calling combat PvP, seriously guys
 

 
 
It's a misnomer, it's divisive, it's dumbing down the game

60km? That's really tiny for a planet. I think planets will get mined out pretty quickly. We'll have to abandon Alioth and move on. Just like real humans... Wipe out the environment and move to a new place. Good simulation.

That's an empty camp raid which is the essence of what so called PVPers think is game play. That's why open world PVP doesn't work.

That's an empty camp raid which is the essence of what so called PVPers think is game play. That's why open world PVP doesn't work.

That's an empty camp raid which is the essence of what so called PVPers think is game play. That's why open world PVP doesn't work.

TARGET only works with Thrustmaster. Use Joy2Key for other brands. There are some others too.

Yeah, the MIA not getting it fixed crap is getting old.
 
I'm really glad I'm not paying for this atm. Sorry for you newbies who are. Not inviting my friends.

Yeah, the MIA not getting it fixed crap is getting old.
 
I'm really glad I'm not paying for this atm. Sorry for you newbies who are. Not inviting my friends.

The non-newbie method involves using a territory scanner - or 3 of them - to scan a bunch of hexes and find the ones that have the most of what you want. Then you dig down to the right depth and dig in a pattern that lets you scan the entire hex at that depth. You know exactly how much there is to find (because of the TS scans), so you know when you've found it all.

The two T2 ores on Alioth, Malachite and Limestone, are both about 500 m below the surface.
 
The newbie mining method is 
Dig down 500m. Dig in a spiral so you can get back out. You may be mining to your nano pack so you can't force respawn back up. pick a direction and dig horizontally while scanning. You may have to go a ways (kilometers) to pick anything up. When you see T2 on the scanner, play hot/cold just like you do on the surface. If you started 500m down, the T2 ore will usually be below you when you minimize the distance. It may be above you. I usually dig a tunnel up and run up it a bit to see which way the line goes, but fore committing to going down. For T3 (only acanthite on Alioth) dig down 800 and do the same process.
 
This procedure works on other planets too, but the depths and available ores are different.

I have wonder how I managed without YouTube ( due to NDA) and no tutorials... I have a huge factory and I build my own ships... Mystery... Ohh... By myself too... No orgs. 
 I have no advice except small goals... Make small goals, like  I need a wing... Or an engine..