Jump to content


Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About DarkbutGood

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • backer_title
  • Alpha

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to place videos without a core as I Devs already showed that you can do just that. Maybe they will drop it due to technical limitations but based purely on the publicly released videos you can place voxels without cores. However, I would like to see some limitations placed on your ability to make constructs without cores. Firstly, I would like it to be that you can only place coreless voxels on tiles you own. Second, you should not be able to place elements like doors and containers, you should only be able to place voxels. Why do I want these features and limitations because I have a soft spot for those trying to make trains and roads. Train to be a particularly difficult to make because you would have to make the rails from scratch out of voxels rather than elements. Anyone who try to make a train in space engineers can tell you that trying to make a set of rails that curve with the planet is a pain to do as you have to line up each static grid that acts as your rails with each other. Being able to place voxels down without a core would make this process a lot easier, the same applies for road building. However, in order to stop this feature from being abused I do not want there to be any elements to be placed without a core. If that were allowed it would be far too easy to abuse. You should not be able to make a fully functioning base without having to invest in the appropriately sized core. Neither should you be able to just build whatever you want. If you want to build a set of tracks or road or a monument of some kind then be on land you own. It would be far too easy for griefers to ruin your work otherwise.
  2. The Devs have already said no to automated constructs as it directly contradicts their vision for the game. You should be able to make a train that runs on tracks using hover engines to float on the track but you will have to be when driving.
  3. discordauth:rEqPti90hbW-BlCcsGDtVFGkhSMglbB9Y6k1qt-nE0c=

  4. This idea is a must if we are to have apartment blocks in the game, it would suck to buy an apartment and not be able to add your own furniture into your own apartment.
  5. That will only work if cargo containers should separate dynamic elements separate from other constructs which that is a bad idea for many reasons, most importantly the effect of having many dynamic elements being plugged into a larger dynamic construct could be devastating for game performance as the game would have to calculate for at least dozens of elements for a fairly big cargo ship. Having many parts that are able to be connected and disconnected would be too great a risk on game performance for me to be happy with. I fail to see how a mechanical arm would be user-friendly. I couldn't be bothered to have to go through that everytime that wanted to get cargo, and if I had a ship that was made solely to transport goods and cargo the time and energy to put in place a large number of cargo containers in my ship manually would kill me. Also, you are getting very close to having mechanical rotors which the devs flat out rejected. All of this gets us to the point which Nanoman it's just simpler to have one big dumb solution that can be used in all situations rather then have a toolbox of limited solutions which all have specific uses.
  6. The cargo socket you describe is basically just a docking ring without the ability to let people though it. Coding wise I think the container socket you described will have most of the same problems as a docking ring and the same need for user friendliness like a magnetic force to aid alignment with the socket and will be exploited to be used like docking ring to connect constructs together. In my view a cargo socket would just be a docking ring.
  7. Sorry to necro, assuming this topic was dead, but laser weapons are not overrated, in fact there many ways that DU could use lasers and not all of them are as a form of weapons. In the form of weaponry, lasers can be used to create a plasma chanal to guide lightning to a target. Using lightning on its own is a poor weapon as it will go through the path of least resistance not where you aim, but using lasers to for,m and maintain an area of plasma a new, less resistant path can be formed to aim the lightning. This would be a good mid to late game weapon and would allow for modular weapon construction as you add more powerful lasers and Tesla coils or different material for the creation of the plasma carrier. Here are some links to a video and an article explaining more about this concept. (Hacking The Planet: Laser Guided Lightning: Lightning laser weapon developed by US Army : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18630622)
  8. I think that docking mechanics are absolutely necessary for DU to work as intended. Without the ability to dock in order to transfer items cargo hauling will be incredibly unrewarding to players, removing an entire ship's worth of cargo by hand would be such a pain. I had to move ore by hand out of a miner on Space Engineers many times, completely mind-numbing. I would refuse to empty a whole cargo ship by hand, not for love nor money will I ever put my self through that again. This must be a thing to keep players happy.
  9. great source for ship ideas thank you.
  10. Perhaps but I know that it can be done due to Meglev engines being added to Space Engineers by their modding community. Never the less it can't be harder than making contacting rails. There is a real world concept that similar to what you just suggested. Hovertrain's where a concept that was primarily developed in the 60's to 70's as a means to replace tracked trains as the traditional steel rails seemed to unable to meet the demand for higher speeds due to rolling resistance. To solve this, French and British engineers started using hovercraft engines to levitate the train from the track and as a result was also able to simplify the construction of new track as concrete was the only material needed. If anyone wants to develop this in DU here's a link to the Wikipedia page on Hovertrain's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hovertrain).
  11. I have seen that mechanical assets have been rejected by the devs Trello page this is understandable but disappointing for numerous reasons but I have a way around the need for traditional rails for trains maglev technology. This would allow players to make constructs that are powered only by batteries which would allow for simple transportation that are recharged by renewable energy if the DU devs decided to include that form of power generation but more importantly will be a way to move constructs on a track without having the construct physically touch the building it rests on, which would be much lighter on our computers as there would be no need for collision simulation. The use for Maglev engines would not just be limited to trains but also elevators that can move sideways, space elevators, ship catapults to launch ships like in Battlestar Galactica and large mobile launch platforms like that used by NASA for their spacecraft. In summary, Maglev engines could serve as a compromise between the players need for mechanical assets to make moving parts and the devs concerns for game performance by letting players use a contactless rail system. I hope I made my idea clear let me know what you think. Dark_but_Good
  12. Hello DU. I am a Space Engineers vet who is hoping to move to Dual Universe, I am a Star Trek fan who hopes to set up an org in the style of the United Federation of Planets. I also have many ideas on how to develop the game. I hope to play with all of you soon.
  • Create New...