Jump to content

Felonu

Pre-Alpha Tester
  • Content count

    319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Felonu

  • Rank
    Novark Citizen

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • backer_title
    Gold Founder
  1. FTL Hyper drive LUDICROUS speed and gates

    Remember not to take everything said on the forums as fact. People regularly treat their expectations and interpretations of NQs statements as fact, but that doesn't make it true. I'm not speaking to the limitations of FTL. I don't remember any specific details about the rarity of them, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
  2. Cloaking Tech

    Not enough options
  3. Linux crowdfund please

    You are turning your post away from DU Ports, and toward Win vs Linux debate. There are plenty of places that debate can be made, but this game forum probably isn't the best place.
  4. Linux crowdfund please

    Please be careful of NDA conversations about your gameplay experiences in the game. Your experience with using WINE could be considered covered by NDA.
  5. I don't think that's the general opinion. Some people seem to think that, but according to NQ force-fields are intended to protect items while players are offline. Big organizations aren't going to need these defenses as much because they're likely to have people online more often, and better defensive abilities.
  6. There was already a way to counter it. Attack the base.
  7. One reason to build would be to compete. If another org wants to hurt this orgs bottom line ( and hopefully there will be enough competition that this will always be true). They’ll set up a competitive market across the street. Or if there isn’t as much business there a smaller outfit could build a smaller market base with less overhead to compete by having less expensive trade fees.
  8. Question on losing inventory upon death

    Actually everyone who buys them is profiting. The people that are hurt are the other dac hoarders that have to sell dacs at the lower price. This is basic market economics, and I don't think is a problem.
  9. old subscribers treated worse

    Not yet, but possibly in the future.
  10. Feature Idea: "Television" Networks

    This sounds like something that could be built by players. I don’t know that we would need anything special for this purpose.
  11. Physics 'n stuff

    Actually it seems like the antigravity units will be needed by the new flight mechanisms they mentioned in the recent news release . Also, if static constructs by definition don’t have velocity, then gravity can’t move the construct. This would mean that antigravity units would be more of a rp device on these structures than a necessity.
  12. Send messages via LUA script

    I don’t think your questions can be answered without breaking the NDA.
  13. What would be the problem with that? I don't see any issues with the land not being a viable defense. As long as it doesn't destroy any faster than mining would in an unprotected area it wouldn't change anything significant. The don't "dig", but they have a delayed blast so they don't go off until they are underground. They penetrate much further than the blast pattern. This was only an example using what we have today that makes sense for the way the real world works though. A weapon that is even more effective could exist in the game. We'll have to see where it goes for this. I would expect that the physics of preserving the matter would be too complex to have, and invulnerable terrain would be even worse than disappearing terrain for realism in my opinion.
  14. @CalenLoki I think you are making a couple of assumptions about weapons that I think keeps you from accepting how they will likely solve the deep base problem. The main assumption is that if a weapon is strong enough to dig easily then it must go through all built structures easily as well. I don't think you will be right about this. This goes back to the idea that if a nanoformer can mine hard materials quickly, then it should be able to atomize other people immediately. It makes no sense to allow that for gameplay, and so won't likely be the way it works. Sometimes reality would impede gameplay and you need to separate the game to make it more fun. 2 easy solutions are giving dirt and low value rock less armor values than basic building materials so that it can be easily removed by weapons, or making weapons designed for this purpose. A weapon example would be an explosive that when placed are positioned some distance underground before exploding (again would go through natural resources easily, but would be stopped by man-made defenses). I mentioned before bunker buster missiles that exist today as an example of this second option before. No weapon used in these examples should drop collectible resources however, so that mining is not affected. Redesigning the protection systems seems like a much more dramatic change to solve a problem that could easily be solved in simple ways.
  15. Well, it's all speculative currently. I don't think having underground bases will make you invulnerable, and stated my reason why. You think they would be and stated your reasons. When we have more information about the mechanics of these things the debate will actually have some level of accuracy.
×