CptLoRes

I want this game (the one promised initially) to make it so bad. But rationally/cynically I know we are still here to mostly look at the dying beast, trying get some entertainment out of it.. But don't misunderstand me. I want NQ to prove me wrong, it is just that all the historical evidence points to the contrary.

[removed image to free up space]

In that case I would strongly suggest you use the autoconf system (%GAMEFOLDER%\Game\data\lua\autoconf) and store the script as a .conf file there next time. Look at the default scripts in ..\lua\default for examples on the syntax. The advantages are.. many..

The only way to divert collision damage away from elements atm, is distance from the crash point. So you have to make a rather large sacrificial buffer with voxels only at the front. Typically a spear if you want to save voxels and game the game. Which I personally have no problem doing, since the game has such rudimentary mechanics for dealing with designs in general.

Yeah, that's a big nope.. Nobody with the skill set to make a one of a kind "Augmented Reality GUI" whatever would make that script using the built in LUA editor only, never ever having versions of the script exist outside the game and/or in multiple cores. Making a complex script using the built in LUA editor in DU, is like painting a house with a toothbrush. Technically possible, but wrong tool for the job.

Agreed. As a builder I am generally against a wipe. But if they have to do it, then the bare minimum would be that before the wipe NQ first fix the reasons for needing a wipe in the first place.

A couple more of those 'pointless' suggestions ignored by NQ, and you will also become 'toxic' in no time..

IRL you have to collect something that is impounded and pay a fee, it's not magically transported back to your garage or something like that. And that's the idea here also. Ie. there will be a stand at the same market where the constructs was impounded, and this will be the only place you can get the blueprint back (fee or not). And.. this magic blueprint would have some mechanics to prevent exploits. For example the blueprint would be the same weight as the construct, and/or have a very limited range (similar to the the container link range functionality) outside the impound retrieval pod where it can be deployed. Anyways, the point is that the mechanics for this are already largely there in the game with blueprints, market pods, weight restrictions and container link range. So the dev time would be orders of magnitude less then for example a completely new hangar docking feature. And it solves more then one problem, since the same mechanics could be used for setting parking rights and dealing with construct greifing on player tiles, space stations etc.

But the thing is, 0.23 also pretty much killed your ability to 'make your own stuff and have fun' without having to play mining simulator 95% of the time. So 0.23 was a lose-lose scenario all around. Edit. Just realized I misread youe comment, saying the same thing I just said...

Hangars sure, but why not the simple parking impound system we have suggested over and over again? It would require minimal dev time (Heck, they even had a version of it in-game for a short while), and also solve future problems with unwanted crowding on player driven markets and tiles in general.

Same boat, cant login to the test server. But why should I bother, when they can't be bothered to actually test in the PTS before releasing (as demonstrated with 0.24)? Or alternatively from what I read in the comments, just ignore problems in PTS and release anyways..

Logged in and gave a low score. Noticed they have fixed the MIP mapping for more details in ground textures close to the player, but at the same messed up the long distance texture filtering. So now you have aliasing and 'ant-crawling' artifacts in textures all over the place. Logged out..

In general you can't mess with time since it is a MMO. But gravity on the other hand (including Newtonian physics) is one of the few well implemented features in this game, so why not have some fun with it?

And the 'toxicity' you see comes from having asked questions like those above, over and over again for years without ever getting reasonable answers. And worse having to watch NQ do the same types of mistakes over and over again, despite being told beforehand what would happen.

The general tone on forums and discord are usually a reflection of the community as a while, so show me some metrics that the majority of players are happy with the current game. And if so then I might start to consider the toxic argument.

It is sadly not only you. The emergent gameplay vision of DU has slowly been shrinking over the years, as the inability of NQ to execute becomes more apparent.

At this point it would not surprise me if this is all just matter of optics, so that NQ can point to districts and say "look at all those constructs, this game is thriving and has stock available hint, hint". On the other hand if the parking impound feature was implemented, it would quickly become apparent in a very visible way if there are any active players left..

oh boy..

[removed image to free up space]

That is your version of the truth. Mine is that the kickstarter promised a "be whatever you want" open world building game with voxels and scripting.

More landing pads = more constructs = more lag = not solution Why is it so hard for NQ to acknowledge that their have serious performance issues, and introduce solutions that address this problem? I mean it is obvious to anyone playing the game.

Not sure why this there is a discussion here. By definition if something is brighter then ambient light levels, then it will illuminate close by objects.

[removed image to free up space]

First impression. We now suddenly have patch release phases? What does that mean? Are you afraid you will run out of patch versions before 1.0? (there is about 12 years worth of patch versioning left before 1.0 at the current pace). How many phases are there in a patch, and how do they work together with the normal patch sub versions?

Assuming for arguments sake that this forum is toxic (outspoken in a mostly mature and polite way for sure), then realistically only NQ would be in a position to turn this around. The early pre-alpha days of this forum had a very, very different mood from what you see now. And it is NQ's actions (or lack of such) over the years that has changed the community into what it currently is. And the same thing is or has already happened on the discord channels with a newer beta crowd, that is now starting to catch up to the reality of this game and NQ as a company.