Jump to content

vertex

Alpha Team Vanguard
  • Content Count

    620
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Armedwithwings in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  2. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Yezar in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  3. Like
    vertex got a reaction from merihim in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  4. Like
    vertex reacted to Setzar in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    While I do like this idea, it seems like player markets, org wallets, power systems, contract/mission system and player shipyards should have came first.
  5. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Monk_NL in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  6. Like
    vertex reacted to JoeKing in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I'm a pretty new player and spent a few weeks getting to grips with the game and finding my way around.  Its taken a long time and a lot of work to build a ship, lots of money repairing after learning to fly through smashing up on Alioth time and time again, and spent hours looking for T3+ ores, which have been totally unsuccessful. Even after 3+ hours each way flying to other planets to hunt, only to find that theyve been stripped bare.
    Im not interested in joining an org, I want to play the game as an individual, but this step seems to make it even more impossible for new players to get to grips with Dual universe, and I honestly think that it will totally ruin the game for players like me.  Ive worked really hard to build a small factory to produce a Territory Scanner with ores that Ive laboriously mined, which has taken weeks.Without the ability to generate decent income you are effectively stuck, unable to be able to move forward.  It not even possible  to mine for decent ore to generate income as its been completely hoovered up everywhere.  Wouldnt it be better to somehow impose a levvy on larger factories to limit their output or profits rather than punishing small fry like me?
    I still havent been able to afford a warp drive, and building a factory seemed like the only sustainable way to acheive this - so I hope you put things into place to help newbie players, who, by the time they have learned the game will be doomed to a poor, boring life on Alioth & Sanctuary!  And what happens to all the industrial units Ive slowly purchased that I will now need a huge investment to use? I honestly think that I will lose interest, just at a point where I felt I was getting somewhere....... .   .     .        .           .                   .                                             !
     
  7. Like
    vertex got a reaction from le_souriceau in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  8. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Garthokk in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  9. Like
    vertex got a reaction from JoeKing in [Discussion] DevBlog: Rebalancing the Universe   
    I wonder if/when I'll get my skill points back from all the skills I invested in under different pretence. Tho maybe watching my factory becoming a pile of rubbish might just be enough and the last drop for me to drop DU until it's final. I thought beta persistence meant that what we build and learn would mean something - now I feel like I've built the worst gimp character that wasted countless hours running around blindfolded in the dark.
     
    On top of it all having to buy schematics multiple times at "substantial cost" feels like a slap in the face. One might assume that connected/linked industry might be able to link to a schematics hub, but narp... need to make that nerf a fatality and rip the backbone out Sub-Zero style.
     
    At the same time my AGG carrier gets nerfed and is going to crash down - right on my industry junk pile. At least that makes for a good visual representation of what's happening, I guess.
     
     
    This DevBlog kinda sounds like a good bye.
  10. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Underhand Aerial in Macht das wirklich jemanden Spaß?   
    Naja, in den letzen 6 Monaten hatte ich über 950h Spielzeit und ich bin seit dem ersten Tag der Pre-Alpha immer wieder mit dabei.
     
    Mein erstes Ziel in der Pre-Alpha war es einen anderen Planeten zu erreichen und mich dort umzusehen. Videos gab es nicht auf YouTube. Ein anderes Ziel bestand später darin Fracht transportieren zu können, um mir Ressourcen zu beschaffen, die es auf dem aktuellen Planeten nicht gibt - einen ordentlichen Frachter zu bauen ist gar nicht so leicht beim ersten Mal. Irgendwann wurde dann ein Warp-Antrieb das Ziel und hat die Art zu spielen grundlegend geändert. Danach kam der AAG dran und war wieder eine Totalumstellung.
     
    Nichts davon hätte ich alleine auf dem Sanctuary Mond erreichen können. Heute sieht das wohl etwas anders aus, da man im schlimmsten Fall ja auch so lange Steine kloppen, bis man sich die Teile einfach kaufen kann - aber wer auch nur ein mal ein Erzvorkommen ausgebuddelt hat weiss, wie nutzlos diese Oberflächenressourcen sind.
     
    Langfristiges Ziel ist: Häusle baue. Davor gibt es aber noch so viel an Elementen, Scripts und Material zu erkunden, dass ich wohl noch eine Weile bei meiner "Brett mit Zeug drauf"-Industrie bleiben werde... sorry, dass das für meine Nachbarn nicht so ansprechend oder interessant ist  
     
    Die Frage nach dem Wieso und Wofür kann nur jeder für sich selbst beantworten. Manche würden eben diese Frage bei allen Spielen ohne Multiplayer stellen - da fällt irgendwann der Endgegner tot um oder man hat die ganze Welt erobert... und wofür? Interessiert ja niemanden und das Spiel ist vorbei als wäre nie etwas passiert. Manche suchen halt einfach nur Unterhaltung und schauen sich nen Film oder ne Serie an - andere wollen interaktive Unterhaltung und spielen lieber ein Singleplayer-Spiel - wieder andere basteln zudem gern und suchen sich eine Sandbox aus und manche davon möchten das halt mit tausenden anderen Spielern in nem MMO machen. Der Schlüssel liegt darin zu wissen wer man ist und was welches Angebot impliziert, dann ist das ganze Thema relativ einfach.
     
    Nachdem ich deinen Beitrag gelesen hab würd ich dir mal Horizon Zero Dawn empfehlen - das macht Spass, ist unterhaltsam, gibt einem immer das Gefühl man würde etwas erreichen und das Wofür ist auch ganz klar definiert. Ist im Prinzip eine Light-Version von Skyrim mit mehr Fokus auf ein cooles Kampfsystem und ein wenig Illusion von freier Entscheidung. Beim Tiefgang ist es verglichen mit der TES-Reihe zwar nur eine Pfütze neben dem Mariannengraben, aber dafür wird man sehr gut geführt und unterhalten und muss keinerlei eigene Ambition mitbringen. Klingt negativ, ist aber positiv gemeint - ich mag beide Spiele total gern  
     
    Wenn's was im Weltraum sein soll: Starpoint Gemini 3 als Repräsentant der unterhaltsamen Pfütze, oder X4 Foundations als Mariannengraben-Äquivalent. Auch hier kann man in der Pfütze planschen oder versuchen sich 10km tief unter dem Meeresspiegel in völliger Dunkelheit selbst zu orientieren. Da fragt man vor dem Kauf am besten Freunde oder schaut ein Let's Play an, dann wird es recht schnell klar zu welcher Kategorie der Titel gehört und ob er dem eigenen Gusto entspricht.
     
     
      
    Danke! Aber wie sinnlos ist es denn sich dann im Anschluss noch im Forum des abgewählten Titels zu registrieren, nur um anderen zu sagen, wie sinnlos man ihre Präferenzen findet? Etwas hypokritisch, find ich. Da frag ich mich allerdings auch: Wieso und wofür?  
  11. Like
    vertex reacted to NQ-Naunet in Starting a Christian Organization.   
    I spoke out of turn, folks! JC bot remains.

    I will proudly wear the egg that's now on my face - yes we're doing an audit of our Discord server, and yes bots are part of that, but I misunderstood which bot was being looked at!!

    Forgive me - in my rush to be responsive, I was too hasty.
  12. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Heidenherz in Macht das wirklich jemanden Spaß?   
    Naja, in den letzen 6 Monaten hatte ich über 950h Spielzeit und ich bin seit dem ersten Tag der Pre-Alpha immer wieder mit dabei.
     
    Mein erstes Ziel in der Pre-Alpha war es einen anderen Planeten zu erreichen und mich dort umzusehen. Videos gab es nicht auf YouTube. Ein anderes Ziel bestand später darin Fracht transportieren zu können, um mir Ressourcen zu beschaffen, die es auf dem aktuellen Planeten nicht gibt - einen ordentlichen Frachter zu bauen ist gar nicht so leicht beim ersten Mal. Irgendwann wurde dann ein Warp-Antrieb das Ziel und hat die Art zu spielen grundlegend geändert. Danach kam der AAG dran und war wieder eine Totalumstellung.
     
    Nichts davon hätte ich alleine auf dem Sanctuary Mond erreichen können. Heute sieht das wohl etwas anders aus, da man im schlimmsten Fall ja auch so lange Steine kloppen, bis man sich die Teile einfach kaufen kann - aber wer auch nur ein mal ein Erzvorkommen ausgebuddelt hat weiss, wie nutzlos diese Oberflächenressourcen sind.
     
    Langfristiges Ziel ist: Häusle baue. Davor gibt es aber noch so viel an Elementen, Scripts und Material zu erkunden, dass ich wohl noch eine Weile bei meiner "Brett mit Zeug drauf"-Industrie bleiben werde... sorry, dass das für meine Nachbarn nicht so ansprechend oder interessant ist  
     
    Die Frage nach dem Wieso und Wofür kann nur jeder für sich selbst beantworten. Manche würden eben diese Frage bei allen Spielen ohne Multiplayer stellen - da fällt irgendwann der Endgegner tot um oder man hat die ganze Welt erobert... und wofür? Interessiert ja niemanden und das Spiel ist vorbei als wäre nie etwas passiert. Manche suchen halt einfach nur Unterhaltung und schauen sich nen Film oder ne Serie an - andere wollen interaktive Unterhaltung und spielen lieber ein Singleplayer-Spiel - wieder andere basteln zudem gern und suchen sich eine Sandbox aus und manche davon möchten das halt mit tausenden anderen Spielern in nem MMO machen. Der Schlüssel liegt darin zu wissen wer man ist und was welches Angebot impliziert, dann ist das ganze Thema relativ einfach.
     
    Nachdem ich deinen Beitrag gelesen hab würd ich dir mal Horizon Zero Dawn empfehlen - das macht Spass, ist unterhaltsam, gibt einem immer das Gefühl man würde etwas erreichen und das Wofür ist auch ganz klar definiert. Ist im Prinzip eine Light-Version von Skyrim mit mehr Fokus auf ein cooles Kampfsystem und ein wenig Illusion von freier Entscheidung. Beim Tiefgang ist es verglichen mit der TES-Reihe zwar nur eine Pfütze neben dem Mariannengraben, aber dafür wird man sehr gut geführt und unterhalten und muss keinerlei eigene Ambition mitbringen. Klingt negativ, ist aber positiv gemeint - ich mag beide Spiele total gern  
     
    Wenn's was im Weltraum sein soll: Starpoint Gemini 3 als Repräsentant der unterhaltsamen Pfütze, oder X4 Foundations als Mariannengraben-Äquivalent. Auch hier kann man in der Pfütze planschen oder versuchen sich 10km tief unter dem Meeresspiegel in völliger Dunkelheit selbst zu orientieren. Da fragt man vor dem Kauf am besten Freunde oder schaut ein Let's Play an, dann wird es recht schnell klar zu welcher Kategorie der Titel gehört und ob er dem eigenen Gusto entspricht.
     
     
      
    Danke! Aber wie sinnlos ist es denn sich dann im Anschluss noch im Forum des abgewählten Titels zu registrieren, nur um anderen zu sagen, wie sinnlos man ihre Präferenzen findet? Etwas hypokritisch, find ich. Da frag ich mich allerdings auch: Wieso und wofür?  
  13. Like
    vertex reacted to NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Happy Friday, Noveans!

    I'm coming to you with a few more answers/clarifications for your reading pleasure.  I really appreciated everyone's patience while I rode the merry-go-round of feedback handling.
     
    Alright, let's dive in!
     
    To start, I think it's prudent to address the question of "why did you make a tool change without fixing [insert bug description here] first?"
    As predictable/banal as this may sound to some, it's worth saying; while we are forever working hard to fix *all* current bugs, certain issues will be looked at before others. We deeply respect your opinions about our priorities (NQ is especially fortunate to have a community full of game-dev-savvy people), but we simply won't be able to please everyone no matter what direction we take. We ask that you continue to trust in the internal knowledge we have (combined with your feedback) when it comes to bug fixes paralleling feature development and/or changes. Alt+F4:
    As many of you are relieved to see, we fixed a longstanding limitation to the feeling of continuity in DU; quitting the game should never stop a ship! The recent changes we've made ensure that as soon as any player sees a construct, that construct will remain visible to everyone in the vicinity. So, using Alt+F4 during a fight will no longer 'freeze' your ship. Instead, she'll still be simulated for any other player who is still there. (And if nobody is around you, you won't have to worry about a thing!) By making this change, we hope to prevent players from "gaming the system" using Alt+F4. Of course, we'll be keeping a close eye on your feedback and will rebalance things accordingly to make sure this gameplay pillar keeps retains its depth! Regarding the 50m restriction:
    Based on feedback from all of you, this has been increased to 128m, which is the size of the largest build zone! As for concerns about moving unwanted constructs from player-owned tiles go (@casegard):
    We've seen some solid points raised about how the maneuver tool was being used to clear away constructs - the scenario quoted above being a great example. We're currently thinking hard about a viable solution for this! AGG:
     As mentioned previously in this thread, the intended meta for AGG will reveal itself in 'atmo PvP'. We acknowledge that it currently functions as a temporary solution for hauling heavy loads from the ground into space, and that players like to leave their ships hovering above their base. We will consider formally implementing an “anchoring” at high altitude feature in the future!   I sincerely hope this has been helpful to everyone, but please continue to deliver your (welcome) feedback here.

    Have an excellent weekend!!



     
  14. Like
    vertex got a reaction from NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Hmm... I wanna say I strongly disagree, because I feel that having to build another construct and carry it around all the time just to go up and down 1km from surface to carrier is a very interesting trade off for not having to carry around too many atmospheric elements on a ship that's mainly designed to travel through space. But I'm curious why you'd think otherwise?
     
    YES! Definitely.
     
    Thanks a million for that follow-up ❤️ 
     
    Even tho I'm really sad about losing this since I kinda loved my carrier hovering over of me. But parked in geostationary orbit doesn't work, as that's still within the gravity well of the planet and planets don't spin - even if they did, that orbit would be considered movement, which stops when I log out and... I kinda fail to align this part of the response with DU physics..? So I guess orbit must refer to "far far away where there's no gravity anymore" (meaning not in orbit) which translates to "Dock at a space station!" and "Forget about docking an L core at all, btw." and I feel ships like that don't need an AGG in the first place.
     
    Leaves only surface landing AGG ships and for these I don't understand what "missions that require altitude consideration" means. I'm sorry, but after reading this it feels like I can kick my AGG in the bukkit and forget about that technology, as I don't see any real advantage of carrying that weight around anymore  
     
    I'm trying to find an application for it, but..
    Vertical engines don't work properly to jump to 1km altitude and go down again in a comfortable way. (at least not vanilla (meaning without some serious Lua scripting)) If my ship got enough airfoil and is powerfull enough to lift with a full haul, I'm not going to wait an hour for the AGG to climb to 15 or 20 kilometers altitude and just use those engines to get away. If my ship is parked so far away that I need several hours to either take it down to fill the cargo, or need even more hours to load it going back and forth with a smaller hauler, I can just as well do multiple jumps between planets and not use a big hauler in the first place. It already hits diminishing returns when going big on a hybrid and the only thing that makes large AGG haulers a good investment is dropping the hybrid tag and going for the fact that you can skip the weight of most atmospheric elements to reduce the hours long chore of "hauling up and down" to one trip that takes approximately 1 hour down, park, load and then 1 hour up again.
     
    I guess I may go for option 1 above.. add some vertical engines, sweat through the awful period where your binary inputs shut down the engines completely, so they need to spin up first before braking your fall, carry 10L containers as dead weight with me to mine into them, then launch empty and vertically to 1km to transfer cargo once AGG kicked in and then use my elevator 10 times to get all the dead weight L containers back into my carrier.
     
    ...
     
    Wait a second... that doesn't sound fun at all. Especially considering the price I paid for the AGG, I think I should sell it while at least some people remain who think that element is worth anything?  
     
    ...
     
    Okay, given some more minutes of pumping crocodile tears... maybe it just means that we need to establish a base of operations on every planet and have atmospheric mining carriers ready while the AGG carrier only comes down for a short period to load up and be gone again. Okay, I guess that might work out too.
     
    Still, I will dearly miss that carrier hovering over me, making me feel like "YES! You did it!" all the time - and the amazing feel of using my own elevator platform that worked so incredibly well in tandem, taking visitors up, talking about tech, just having everything working perfectly and showing off while inspiring, explaining and giving advice how to do it.
     
    To me this decision takes away much of the awe that the AGG brought us and leaves a rather shallow feeling. Sure it might clear up the sky a bit - but I always loved the sight of massive carriers up there, dreaming about being one of those captains once. Luckily I did it and was able to experience this time before that bubble got popped  
  15. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Heidenherz in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Hmm... I wanna say I strongly disagree, because I feel that having to build another construct and carry it around all the time just to go up and down 1km from surface to carrier is a very interesting trade off for not having to carry around too many atmospheric elements on a ship that's mainly designed to travel through space. But I'm curious why you'd think otherwise?
     
    YES! Definitely.
     
    Thanks a million for that follow-up ❤️ 
     
    Even tho I'm really sad about losing this since I kinda loved my carrier hovering over of me. But parked in geostationary orbit doesn't work, as that's still within the gravity well of the planet and planets don't spin - even if they did, that orbit would be considered movement, which stops when I log out and... I kinda fail to align this part of the response with DU physics..? So I guess orbit must refer to "far far away where there's no gravity anymore" (meaning not in orbit) which translates to "Dock at a space station!" and "Forget about docking an L core at all, btw." and I feel ships like that don't need an AGG in the first place.
     
    Leaves only surface landing AGG ships and for these I don't understand what "missions that require altitude consideration" means. I'm sorry, but after reading this it feels like I can kick my AGG in the bukkit and forget about that technology, as I don't see any real advantage of carrying that weight around anymore  
     
    I'm trying to find an application for it, but..
    Vertical engines don't work properly to jump to 1km altitude and go down again in a comfortable way. (at least not vanilla (meaning without some serious Lua scripting)) If my ship got enough airfoil and is powerfull enough to lift with a full haul, I'm not going to wait an hour for the AGG to climb to 15 or 20 kilometers altitude and just use those engines to get away. If my ship is parked so far away that I need several hours to either take it down to fill the cargo, or need even more hours to load it going back and forth with a smaller hauler, I can just as well do multiple jumps between planets and not use a big hauler in the first place. It already hits diminishing returns when going big on a hybrid and the only thing that makes large AGG haulers a good investment is dropping the hybrid tag and going for the fact that you can skip the weight of most atmospheric elements to reduce the hours long chore of "hauling up and down" to one trip that takes approximately 1 hour down, park, load and then 1 hour up again.
     
    I guess I may go for option 1 above.. add some vertical engines, sweat through the awful period where your binary inputs shut down the engines completely, so they need to spin up first before braking your fall, carry 10L containers as dead weight with me to mine into them, then launch empty and vertically to 1km to transfer cargo once AGG kicked in and then use my elevator 10 times to get all the dead weight L containers back into my carrier.
     
    ...
     
    Wait a second... that doesn't sound fun at all. Especially considering the price I paid for the AGG, I think I should sell it while at least some people remain who think that element is worth anything?  
     
    ...
     
    Okay, given some more minutes of pumping crocodile tears... maybe it just means that we need to establish a base of operations on every planet and have atmospheric mining carriers ready while the AGG carrier only comes down for a short period to load up and be gone again. Okay, I guess that might work out too.
     
    Still, I will dearly miss that carrier hovering over me, making me feel like "YES! You did it!" all the time - and the amazing feel of using my own elevator platform that worked so incredibly well in tandem, taking visitors up, talking about tech, just having everything working perfectly and showing off while inspiring, explaining and giving advice how to do it.
     
    To me this decision takes away much of the awe that the AGG brought us and leaves a rather shallow feeling. Sure it might clear up the sky a bit - but I always loved the sight of massive carriers up there, dreaming about being one of those captains once. Luckily I did it and was able to experience this time before that bubble got popped  
  16. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Emptiness in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    @Rimezx I see, thanks! Seems you got the recent announcement on your side and I'll lose this one, but in that case I still disagree. I think using the AGG for parking is awesome. If that was an option for "just any ship or static construct" I would agree with no-parking, but since you need at least an M core to fit the AGG I feel that's big enough to be something I'd like to see up there as part of the scenery.
     
    However, the new perspective makes me ponder if this could lead to issues... like creating a permanent carpet of ships above an area. I don't think that would happen too often and if it did it would be quite the sight and story. Hrm. I'll probably take some more time thinking about implications before I reach a final conclusion. So far I just feel sad that it's taking this route, but I'll cope  
     
    Regarding the Lua part: yeaah, from dev to dev - welcome to the club! I could do it, that's not the issue. Thing is I kinda don't want to. I feel something like this should be part of any SciFi setting anyways and come "out of the box". I'm leaning more to the arcade side of SciFi and I realized that's not where the road took us long ago. Still I just need a long time to accept things like this and then finally work around it in the end after I lost hope that the stuff I think is cool will come on its own.
  17. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Fembot68 in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    Hmm... I wanna say I strongly disagree, because I feel that having to build another construct and carry it around all the time just to go up and down 1km from surface to carrier is a very interesting trade off for not having to carry around too many atmospheric elements on a ship that's mainly designed to travel through space. But I'm curious why you'd think otherwise?
     
    YES! Definitely.
     
    Thanks a million for that follow-up ❤️ 
     
    Even tho I'm really sad about losing this since I kinda loved my carrier hovering over of me. But parked in geostationary orbit doesn't work, as that's still within the gravity well of the planet and planets don't spin - even if they did, that orbit would be considered movement, which stops when I log out and... I kinda fail to align this part of the response with DU physics..? So I guess orbit must refer to "far far away where there's no gravity anymore" (meaning not in orbit) which translates to "Dock at a space station!" and "Forget about docking an L core at all, btw." and I feel ships like that don't need an AGG in the first place.
     
    Leaves only surface landing AGG ships and for these I don't understand what "missions that require altitude consideration" means. I'm sorry, but after reading this it feels like I can kick my AGG in the bukkit and forget about that technology, as I don't see any real advantage of carrying that weight around anymore  
     
    I'm trying to find an application for it, but..
    Vertical engines don't work properly to jump to 1km altitude and go down again in a comfortable way. (at least not vanilla (meaning without some serious Lua scripting)) If my ship got enough airfoil and is powerfull enough to lift with a full haul, I'm not going to wait an hour for the AGG to climb to 15 or 20 kilometers altitude and just use those engines to get away. If my ship is parked so far away that I need several hours to either take it down to fill the cargo, or need even more hours to load it going back and forth with a smaller hauler, I can just as well do multiple jumps between planets and not use a big hauler in the first place. It already hits diminishing returns when going big on a hybrid and the only thing that makes large AGG haulers a good investment is dropping the hybrid tag and going for the fact that you can skip the weight of most atmospheric elements to reduce the hours long chore of "hauling up and down" to one trip that takes approximately 1 hour down, park, load and then 1 hour up again.
     
    I guess I may go for option 1 above.. add some vertical engines, sweat through the awful period where your binary inputs shut down the engines completely, so they need to spin up first before braking your fall, carry 10L containers as dead weight with me to mine into them, then launch empty and vertically to 1km to transfer cargo once AGG kicked in and then use my elevator 10 times to get all the dead weight L containers back into my carrier.
     
    ...
     
    Wait a second... that doesn't sound fun at all. Especially considering the price I paid for the AGG, I think I should sell it while at least some people remain who think that element is worth anything?  
     
    ...
     
    Okay, given some more minutes of pumping crocodile tears... maybe it just means that we need to establish a base of operations on every planet and have atmospheric mining carriers ready while the AGG carrier only comes down for a short period to load up and be gone again. Okay, I guess that might work out too.
     
    Still, I will dearly miss that carrier hovering over me, making me feel like "YES! You did it!" all the time - and the amazing feel of using my own elevator platform that worked so incredibly well in tandem, taking visitors up, talking about tech, just having everything working perfectly and showing off while inspiring, explaining and giving advice how to do it.
     
    To me this decision takes away much of the awe that the AGG brought us and leaves a rather shallow feeling. Sure it might clear up the sky a bit - but I always loved the sight of massive carriers up there, dreaming about being one of those captains once. Luckily I did it and was able to experience this time before that bubble got popped  
  18. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Atmosph3rik in Sorry, you cannot add any more reactions today.   
    And I need a dislike button for people pushing their own agenda on completely unrelated topics  
     
    But I think dislike buttons don't foster constructivity or lead to good relations - all they do is giving people a way to vent at the expense of the receiver who might not feel welcome anymore, even if there would be plenty of others who share their view. If we want to keep the general spirit of the community on the constructive side and people commenting in a way that's adding to the topic and kindness and prospering conversation instead of flame wars and trolling, a dislike button is out of the question. If someone wants to disagree, like I do with the request for a dislike button and thereby give somewhat negative feedback, they should be willing to take the effort and extra step to address it and provide a reason, as I feel I'm doing right now.
     
    Someone I don't remember once said that it takes 10 positive interactions to make up for 1 negative one. Yet I feel that some frustrated or vexed people are more likely to vent by smacking a dislike button than people who are satisfied are likely to remember to like something before moving on. Speaking for myself only, but if I encounter something I strongly disagree with, it makes me slow down and try to fix it, while something I like makes me want more and carry on, getting in the flow and being more likely to forget about giving feedback. The like button enables me to give that feedback, even if I have nothing to add, which is fine in that situation. The dislike button on the other hand enables me to give feedback too, but leaves the reasoning behind it completely in the open - just saying "that's wrong" doesn't help anyone improve. "How do you like my new ice cream flavor?" - "I don't!" - "Why, what's wrong, too sweet?" - "I just don't like it." - "Too fruity? Too sour? Too soft? What shall I do?" - "Search for another job!" ... there will be some grinning but it doesn't help the producer move forward and improve.
     
    Some people would hit the dislike button for bad grammar or errors in spelling, targeting a non-native language writer, while some would hit the like button for a violation of etiquette or trolling. In my opinion both is wrong, but the dislike does more bad to the non-native writer than it would do good on the troll, while a like on the writer could encourage him to overcome his reluctance to continue to write in that foreign language he's learning, boost his confidence and in time he might improve on his language skills, whereas the troll may experience positive reinforcement too, but be handled by forum staff sooner or later. A constructive member that turned away is harder to be reached out to.
     
    A "disagree" button maybe, but again, if people want to disagree they should do so by writing a reply and provide a better idea or at least explain what they think is wrong with it.
     
    However, I think we could do with a "please don't quote like that" button... shamelessly pushing my own agenda here after I feel I wrote enough to make up for it above 😇
  19. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Emptiness in Sorry, you cannot add any more reactions today.   
    Touché.
     
     
     
     
    Yeah, I feel I'd like to have it sometimes, but I don't want one... 🙄
  20. Like
    vertex got a reaction from GraXXoR in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    First of all: awesome! I really like the idea of stored momentum and wished for it quite some time. But I see huge issues with it that at first feel worse than not fixing it right away. Sorry, I didn't read all of the non-NQ replies here, but I want to add to the list of concerns and apologize if they've already been mentioned.
     
    Most of the time I got my AGG ship parked at 1050m above my base at Sanctuary (using the fact that logging out will freeze it in place because the AGG wouldn't keep it there when I'm gone as I understand it). I use an elevator platform (sometimes called magic carpet) to reach it and go down again. The AGG ship can maneuver in atmosphere but not lift without AGG support. Will my design be invalidated by this change? @NQ-Naunet could you please put child gloves on for us AGG captains and explain exactly how we need to prepare and what to expect?
      If I get disconnected while piloting, along with restoring my momentum, logging in should also restore me in the pilot seat. Otherwise I might crash for not reaching the seat fast enough.
      The position from where the player entered a seat should always be persistent. Currently you can get trapped in your own construct when you log out while seated, because it resets the position from where you entered the seat originally and the "default position after login" can place you inside the ship's structure, effectively trapping you. If your ship is stationary and frozen that's ok and you can enter build mode to free yourself - but if momentum is restored you might end up trapped, racing against time to get out of the structure before you hit something. You could argue bad ship design, but I feel that would be unfair, as placing a seat in a spot with a low ceiling for example or between flat elements would be a perfectly fine design in reality, but gets you trapped in DU.
      Remember to restore thrust settings and engine states as well. If you are floating on vertical engines (like elevator platform / magic carpet or heavy hauler with slow starting XL space engines) and need to set thrust and spin up these engines first, it could be enough to get you into a non-recoverable position.
      Make 100% sure that all game assets have been loaded before you restore momentum. Right after login I remember to experience heavy lag before the game runs fluently after everything loaded. Stuff like that made me fall through the ground and get a "Back to the surface..." screen - or fall through not loaded elements and end up in space (a friend entered another player's construct throug the not yet loaded door and got trapped for thinking there was none). Latter being ok if my ship is stationary - but imagine falling out of your ship when logging in, while the momentum is being restored and your ship shoots away. Ouch. You should freeze players in place until the surface they were standing on has been fully loaded or securely known to have be removed.
      When I first tried the radar in orbit to lock onto a ship out of curiosity DU dived into some kind of memory leak and made the game unplayable. Other times I was on a perfect approach vector, but the loading of planetary assets (or something else) killed my framerate. In both situations I had to use the emergency exit brake to avoid fatality. Same happened on markets where we already made a habit of landing 1km away and walking the distance to avoid crashing due to market lag.
      There seems to be a loop that constantly reinitializes all elements on a construct. This loop has a flaw and sometimes skips an element or takes minutes to find and enable it (at launch or mid flight). Just yesterday I was unable to turn right with my elevator platform and kept spinning left until 1-ish minute later DU realized that I had adjustors to turn right too. In the past this often led to situations where the emergency exit brake was the only thing that could rescue me.  
    Given some time I think I could come up with more situation where a logout is the only thing able to rescue me from bad situations that I didn't cause myself. I'm all in on the idea that it should be in the player's control to live or die by being careful and planning ahead - but right now I feel like freezing my ship using logout to brake does more good than it does bad.
     
    Further I'd like to know if freezing a ship will be completely gone and if not I'd like to know if an approaching player or running around on your ship will initialize physics, or if that only happens when you enter the pilot seat?
     
    Regarding the maneuver tool: 50m is not enough and I feel this should scale with core size. If your ship is 128m, moving it by 50m doesn't suffice, while at the same time it's enough for an XS sized ship. Imagine your L sized ship laying on its back and you can't get it high enough to spin around? Errr... nope. Ok, takes only 3 Minutes to reset, but still rather uncomfortable to stand around watching the clock tick. Maneuver distance should always at least be a tad more than the edge length of your ship's building zone - best make it the distance between the upper left front and lower right back corner (I'm sure there's a term for the diagonal line in 3D space in English, but I don't know it). The constraints about standing on a planet or static construct should be enough to prevent platform-climbing and I don't see any benefit in limiting L cores (or XL later?) to 50m. Also, what happens when I stand on my carrier and maneuver a small ship around on it? Will it initialize physics after maneuvering and fall down on the carrier, meaning no more "docked at the side using clamp-ish force fields to walk over"? Maybe implement docking clamps first before removing the option to use the maneuver tool to simulate the effect.. but I'm not sure if that was even implied. Some clarification would be welcome, but either way it's not that crucial as the removal of the emergency brake  
  21. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Scavenger in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    First of all: awesome! I really like the idea of stored momentum and wished for it quite some time. But I see huge issues with it that at first feel worse than not fixing it right away. Sorry, I didn't read all of the non-NQ replies here, but I want to add to the list of concerns and apologize if they've already been mentioned.
     
    Most of the time I got my AGG ship parked at 1050m above my base at Sanctuary (using the fact that logging out will freeze it in place because the AGG wouldn't keep it there when I'm gone as I understand it). I use an elevator platform (sometimes called magic carpet) to reach it and go down again. The AGG ship can maneuver in atmosphere but not lift without AGG support. Will my design be invalidated by this change? @NQ-Naunet could you please put child gloves on for us AGG captains and explain exactly how we need to prepare and what to expect?
      If I get disconnected while piloting, along with restoring my momentum, logging in should also restore me in the pilot seat. Otherwise I might crash for not reaching the seat fast enough.
      The position from where the player entered a seat should always be persistent. Currently you can get trapped in your own construct when you log out while seated, because it resets the position from where you entered the seat originally and the "default position after login" can place you inside the ship's structure, effectively trapping you. If your ship is stationary and frozen that's ok and you can enter build mode to free yourself - but if momentum is restored you might end up trapped, racing against time to get out of the structure before you hit something. You could argue bad ship design, but I feel that would be unfair, as placing a seat in a spot with a low ceiling for example or between flat elements would be a perfectly fine design in reality, but gets you trapped in DU.
      Remember to restore thrust settings and engine states as well. If you are floating on vertical engines (like elevator platform / magic carpet or heavy hauler with slow starting XL space engines) and need to set thrust and spin up these engines first, it could be enough to get you into a non-recoverable position.
      Make 100% sure that all game assets have been loaded before you restore momentum. Right after login I remember to experience heavy lag before the game runs fluently after everything loaded. Stuff like that made me fall through the ground and get a "Back to the surface..." screen - or fall through not loaded elements and end up in space (a friend entered another player's construct throug the not yet loaded door and got trapped for thinking there was none). Latter being ok if my ship is stationary - but imagine falling out of your ship when logging in, while the momentum is being restored and your ship shoots away. Ouch. You should freeze players in place until the surface they were standing on has been fully loaded or securely known to have be removed.
      When I first tried the radar in orbit to lock onto a ship out of curiosity DU dived into some kind of memory leak and made the game unplayable. Other times I was on a perfect approach vector, but the loading of planetary assets (or something else) killed my framerate. In both situations I had to use the emergency exit brake to avoid fatality. Same happened on markets where we already made a habit of landing 1km away and walking the distance to avoid crashing due to market lag.
      There seems to be a loop that constantly reinitializes all elements on a construct. This loop has a flaw and sometimes skips an element or takes minutes to find and enable it (at launch or mid flight). Just yesterday I was unable to turn right with my elevator platform and kept spinning left until 1-ish minute later DU realized that I had adjustors to turn right too. In the past this often led to situations where the emergency exit brake was the only thing that could rescue me.  
    Given some time I think I could come up with more situation where a logout is the only thing able to rescue me from bad situations that I didn't cause myself. I'm all in on the idea that it should be in the player's control to live or die by being careful and planning ahead - but right now I feel like freezing my ship using logout to brake does more good than it does bad.
     
    Further I'd like to know if freezing a ship will be completely gone and if not I'd like to know if an approaching player or running around on your ship will initialize physics, or if that only happens when you enter the pilot seat?
     
    Regarding the maneuver tool: 50m is not enough and I feel this should scale with core size. If your ship is 128m, moving it by 50m doesn't suffice, while at the same time it's enough for an XS sized ship. Imagine your L sized ship laying on its back and you can't get it high enough to spin around? Errr... nope. Ok, takes only 3 Minutes to reset, but still rather uncomfortable to stand around watching the clock tick. Maneuver distance should always at least be a tad more than the edge length of your ship's building zone - best make it the distance between the upper left front and lower right back corner (I'm sure there's a term for the diagonal line in 3D space in English, but I don't know it). The constraints about standing on a planet or static construct should be enough to prevent platform-climbing and I don't see any benefit in limiting L cores (or XL later?) to 50m. Also, what happens when I stand on my carrier and maneuver a small ship around on it? Will it initialize physics after maneuvering and fall down on the carrier, meaning no more "docked at the side using clamp-ish force fields to walk over"? Maybe implement docking clamps first before removing the option to use the maneuver tool to simulate the effect.. but I'm not sure if that was even implied. Some clarification would be welcome, but either way it's not that crucial as the removal of the emergency brake  
  22. Like
    vertex got a reaction from Deintus in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    First of all: awesome! I really like the idea of stored momentum and wished for it quite some time. But I see huge issues with it that at first feel worse than not fixing it right away. Sorry, I didn't read all of the non-NQ replies here, but I want to add to the list of concerns and apologize if they've already been mentioned.
     
    Most of the time I got my AGG ship parked at 1050m above my base at Sanctuary (using the fact that logging out will freeze it in place because the AGG wouldn't keep it there when I'm gone as I understand it). I use an elevator platform (sometimes called magic carpet) to reach it and go down again. The AGG ship can maneuver in atmosphere but not lift without AGG support. Will my design be invalidated by this change? @NQ-Naunet could you please put child gloves on for us AGG captains and explain exactly how we need to prepare and what to expect?
      If I get disconnected while piloting, along with restoring my momentum, logging in should also restore me in the pilot seat. Otherwise I might crash for not reaching the seat fast enough.
      The position from where the player entered a seat should always be persistent. Currently you can get trapped in your own construct when you log out while seated, because it resets the position from where you entered the seat originally and the "default position after login" can place you inside the ship's structure, effectively trapping you. If your ship is stationary and frozen that's ok and you can enter build mode to free yourself - but if momentum is restored you might end up trapped, racing against time to get out of the structure before you hit something. You could argue bad ship design, but I feel that would be unfair, as placing a seat in a spot with a low ceiling for example or between flat elements would be a perfectly fine design in reality, but gets you trapped in DU.
      Remember to restore thrust settings and engine states as well. If you are floating on vertical engines (like elevator platform / magic carpet or heavy hauler with slow starting XL space engines) and need to set thrust and spin up these engines first, it could be enough to get you into a non-recoverable position.
      Make 100% sure that all game assets have been loaded before you restore momentum. Right after login I remember to experience heavy lag before the game runs fluently after everything loaded. Stuff like that made me fall through the ground and get a "Back to the surface..." screen - or fall through not loaded elements and end up in space (a friend entered another player's construct throug the not yet loaded door and got trapped for thinking there was none). Latter being ok if my ship is stationary - but imagine falling out of your ship when logging in, while the momentum is being restored and your ship shoots away. Ouch. You should freeze players in place until the surface they were standing on has been fully loaded or securely known to have be removed.
      When I first tried the radar in orbit to lock onto a ship out of curiosity DU dived into some kind of memory leak and made the game unplayable. Other times I was on a perfect approach vector, but the loading of planetary assets (or something else) killed my framerate. In both situations I had to use the emergency exit brake to avoid fatality. Same happened on markets where we already made a habit of landing 1km away and walking the distance to avoid crashing due to market lag.
      There seems to be a loop that constantly reinitializes all elements on a construct. This loop has a flaw and sometimes skips an element or takes minutes to find and enable it (at launch or mid flight). Just yesterday I was unable to turn right with my elevator platform and kept spinning left until 1-ish minute later DU realized that I had adjustors to turn right too. In the past this often led to situations where the emergency exit brake was the only thing that could rescue me.  
    Given some time I think I could come up with more situation where a logout is the only thing able to rescue me from bad situations that I didn't cause myself. I'm all in on the idea that it should be in the player's control to live or die by being careful and planning ahead - but right now I feel like freezing my ship using logout to brake does more good than it does bad.
     
    Further I'd like to know if freezing a ship will be completely gone and if not I'd like to know if an approaching player or running around on your ship will initialize physics, or if that only happens when you enter the pilot seat?
     
    Regarding the maneuver tool: 50m is not enough and I feel this should scale with core size. If your ship is 128m, moving it by 50m doesn't suffice, while at the same time it's enough for an XS sized ship. Imagine your L sized ship laying on its back and you can't get it high enough to spin around? Errr... nope. Ok, takes only 3 Minutes to reset, but still rather uncomfortable to stand around watching the clock tick. Maneuver distance should always at least be a tad more than the edge length of your ship's building zone - best make it the distance between the upper left front and lower right back corner (I'm sure there's a term for the diagonal line in 3D space in English, but I don't know it). The constraints about standing on a planet or static construct should be enough to prevent platform-climbing and I don't see any benefit in limiting L cores (or XL later?) to 50m. Also, what happens when I stand on my carrier and maneuver a small ship around on it? Will it initialize physics after maneuvering and fall down on the carrier, meaning no more "docked at the side using clamp-ish force fields to walk over"? Maybe implement docking clamps first before removing the option to use the maneuver tool to simulate the effect.. but I'm not sure if that was even implied. Some clarification would be welcome, but either way it's not that crucial as the removal of the emergency brake  
  23. Like
    vertex got a reaction from le_souriceau in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    First of all: awesome! I really like the idea of stored momentum and wished for it quite some time. But I see huge issues with it that at first feel worse than not fixing it right away. Sorry, I didn't read all of the non-NQ replies here, but I want to add to the list of concerns and apologize if they've already been mentioned.
     
    Most of the time I got my AGG ship parked at 1050m above my base at Sanctuary (using the fact that logging out will freeze it in place because the AGG wouldn't keep it there when I'm gone as I understand it). I use an elevator platform (sometimes called magic carpet) to reach it and go down again. The AGG ship can maneuver in atmosphere but not lift without AGG support. Will my design be invalidated by this change? @NQ-Naunet could you please put child gloves on for us AGG captains and explain exactly how we need to prepare and what to expect?
      If I get disconnected while piloting, along with restoring my momentum, logging in should also restore me in the pilot seat. Otherwise I might crash for not reaching the seat fast enough.
      The position from where the player entered a seat should always be persistent. Currently you can get trapped in your own construct when you log out while seated, because it resets the position from where you entered the seat originally and the "default position after login" can place you inside the ship's structure, effectively trapping you. If your ship is stationary and frozen that's ok and you can enter build mode to free yourself - but if momentum is restored you might end up trapped, racing against time to get out of the structure before you hit something. You could argue bad ship design, but I feel that would be unfair, as placing a seat in a spot with a low ceiling for example or between flat elements would be a perfectly fine design in reality, but gets you trapped in DU.
      Remember to restore thrust settings and engine states as well. If you are floating on vertical engines (like elevator platform / magic carpet or heavy hauler with slow starting XL space engines) and need to set thrust and spin up these engines first, it could be enough to get you into a non-recoverable position.
      Make 100% sure that all game assets have been loaded before you restore momentum. Right after login I remember to experience heavy lag before the game runs fluently after everything loaded. Stuff like that made me fall through the ground and get a "Back to the surface..." screen - or fall through not loaded elements and end up in space (a friend entered another player's construct throug the not yet loaded door and got trapped for thinking there was none). Latter being ok if my ship is stationary - but imagine falling out of your ship when logging in, while the momentum is being restored and your ship shoots away. Ouch. You should freeze players in place until the surface they were standing on has been fully loaded or securely known to have be removed.
      When I first tried the radar in orbit to lock onto a ship out of curiosity DU dived into some kind of memory leak and made the game unplayable. Other times I was on a perfect approach vector, but the loading of planetary assets (or something else) killed my framerate. In both situations I had to use the emergency exit brake to avoid fatality. Same happened on markets where we already made a habit of landing 1km away and walking the distance to avoid crashing due to market lag.
      There seems to be a loop that constantly reinitializes all elements on a construct. This loop has a flaw and sometimes skips an element or takes minutes to find and enable it (at launch or mid flight). Just yesterday I was unable to turn right with my elevator platform and kept spinning left until 1-ish minute later DU realized that I had adjustors to turn right too. In the past this often led to situations where the emergency exit brake was the only thing that could rescue me.  
    Given some time I think I could come up with more situation where a logout is the only thing able to rescue me from bad situations that I didn't cause myself. I'm all in on the idea that it should be in the player's control to live or die by being careful and planning ahead - but right now I feel like freezing my ship using logout to brake does more good than it does bad.
     
    Further I'd like to know if freezing a ship will be completely gone and if not I'd like to know if an approaching player or running around on your ship will initialize physics, or if that only happens when you enter the pilot seat?
     
    Regarding the maneuver tool: 50m is not enough and I feel this should scale with core size. If your ship is 128m, moving it by 50m doesn't suffice, while at the same time it's enough for an XS sized ship. Imagine your L sized ship laying on its back and you can't get it high enough to spin around? Errr... nope. Ok, takes only 3 Minutes to reset, but still rather uncomfortable to stand around watching the clock tick. Maneuver distance should always at least be a tad more than the edge length of your ship's building zone - best make it the distance between the upper left front and lower right back corner (I'm sure there's a term for the diagonal line in 3D space in English, but I don't know it). The constraints about standing on a planet or static construct should be enough to prevent platform-climbing and I don't see any benefit in limiting L cores (or XL later?) to 50m. Also, what happens when I stand on my carrier and maneuver a small ship around on it? Will it initialize physics after maneuvering and fall down on the carrier, meaning no more "docked at the side using clamp-ish force fields to walk over"? Maybe implement docking clamps first before removing the option to use the maneuver tool to simulate the effect.. but I'm not sure if that was even implied. Some clarification would be welcome, but either way it's not that crucial as the removal of the emergency brake  
  24. Like
    vertex reacted to NQ-Naunet in DevBlog: The Maneuver Tool and Disconnecting Ships - DUscussion thread   
    My shift is coming to a close, but I'm not going to forget to reply to this!  Stay tuned.
  25. Like
    vertex reacted to Emptiness in Sorry, you cannot add any more reactions today.   
    I 'liked' the post above yours emotionally, then after reading your post, realized it wasn't quite logical and un-liked it and liked yours. A lot of good points there...
×
×
  • Create New...