Jump to content

EasternGamer

Alpha Tester
  • Posts

    141
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • backer_title
    Sponsor
  • Gender
    Male
  • Alpha
    Yes

Recent Profile Visitors

1479 profile views

EasternGamer's Achievements

  1. You don't need to remove your buildings entirely, just don't abuse your position right at the market by making anything within element range that can make a large amount of lag (such as a large amount of industry) and I'll have no complaints. Don't need to build 500 meter structures right beside the markets. Just build them within reason. In fact, if you use those tiles responsibly, you'll be doing the community a favour by not allowing someone who doesn't build there.
  2. It's not ridiculous in context. It's just the straw that broke the camel's back. A snarky reply ignoring the actual concern. Like others have pointed out, if they're allowed to do it, so can you and have no fear of breaking the rules, you could surround the markets with "legitimate" buildings for whatever reason, or multiple players could do it for different reasons, and NQ would be unable to take action by their rules. It isn't about autopilot either, Arch said himself that his script shouldn't encounter an issue because of the auto-avoidance stuff he has built in. It's the principle of changing the rule to avoid them taking action against the clearly offending construct. Until NQ remembers why they put in that rule in the first place (for performance and playability considerations) likely nothing will be done.
  3. Think this in particular was what really got him here: Snarky reply that has no reason for existing.
  4. @NQ-Ligo Elias suggested that someone should tag you, hope you don't mind.
  5. @blundertwink, @Zarcata, @Aaron Cain, @Ravenis, you're all necroposting this post from over a year ago. And Blaze won't be responding. I suppose now I'm joining you, but whatever xD
  6. Ultimately, NQ can make *everyone* happy by adding it as a setting. If people want to have the effect, it's their choice.
  7. This is how lumi voxel should be, a bit bright, but it doesn't hold a candle to actual lights. Not some lighting multiplier. In the above picture, there are zero light elements, and it was plenty bright. All NQ needed to do was ensure that it was consistent with distance. It appears that in the PTS update, they either limited it or had a distance limiter making stuff look bad for longer corridors. In the end, you had people who had some advanced form of Stockholm syndrome with the terrible perception that multiplying lighting was a great idea. For those wondering what I mean by Stockholm syndrome, it's basically where you come to phycological dependance your captive, to put it basically. The captive here is the poor lighting effect that persisted for ages, and now people have become attached to it. Now, when a new player sees this, I can't say for sure, but man, I doubt a new player will look at this and say "working as intended!" Dual_Universe_2022-06-28_12-38-04.mp4 (Repost of Zer0Krypt's video for emphasis on my last statement) As in, when a new player sees this, they will definitely say "working as intended!" (This is sarcasm)
  8. I utterly distain such effects. I'm not sure how to describe this seething hate for utterly disgusting effects like this. Additionally, if you wanted to have terrible lighting, as you clearly seem to want, lower your settings to the lowest possible for shadows, then you'll have exactly what you're looking for. Please leave everyone else that wants a consistent lighting experience when they're moving through their ship out of it. HECK! NQ, just make the bloody thing a setting in the settings menu, if you like disgusting lighting effects, then have that option there. If you want to be civil about the title "Ambient Lumination"
  9. Hello there. I'll try be civil about this, as civil as possible, but understand I'm infuriated. You perfected lumi-voxel in the PTS, absolute chef's kiss, but I come onto the update today and it's been ruined once again by that super jarring lighting multiplier effect. Lighting was finally quite consistent and positionally consistent in the PTS, now it isn't. It is, quite frankly, a mess. For those reading this thinking: "I need lumi voxel for cheap lighting", let me tell you, they added a very simple thing in the PTS and now in live to be the solution, HDR for lights. You can now increase brightness of lights by more than 100%, and it makes a huge difference at no FPS cost compared to normal brightness lights. Example of just one L light set to max brightness. Maybe you don't understand the issue, I don't blame you if you weren't in the PTS, let me show you an extreme but common example: (Courtesy of Zer0Krypt) Dual_Universe_2022-06-28_12-38-04.mp4 In this video, you see him standing right underneath the lumi-voxel, then he stands off from it and the whole room becomes dark. What should have happened is nothing, he should have seen zero light change, as in, there should have been no light no matter where he stood, or very little. Not this extremely lit to absolute darkness nonsense. Please, I beg you NQ, fix this horrible effect by removing it. You removed it for the PTS, time to remove it forever.
  10. Hmm. I haven't personally felt anything. Idk, maybe report it? Are you running any scripts or have any ships with high complexity on the voxel side of things? Maybe your logs are getting spammed? Do you have voxel logs enabled?
  11. I wanna give my take on player-markets: they're a great concept but likely terrible in practice. You're right, a player run economy is one the game's main pillars. However, much like usual, almost all trade is done in the main market, though now that NQ has added space market, it's more like 70% of trade is done in one market. Having player markets won't change that, you're just adding more clutter most of the time, the market system is only the interface to allow the player to sell and buy stuff. As long as the interface exists, you have the ability and agency to sell and buy stuff. Player markets really are just like artificial coloring added to your jellybeans, it isn't somehow required for a player-run economy. (Ignoring the fact that markets act as an intermediary for storage) Secondly, player markets only make sense when the scale of your operation kicks off, when you can reasonably produce enough to make a dent in the trade volume, and in that sense you're late mid-game to late game. Also, being beholden to a 6-year-old post is just simply dumb. "Oh hey, please read and implement exactly what you thought up and talked about 6 years ago even though it doesn't make sense anymore because you said it." It's like that meme, just replacing "standard" with "market". My drawing sucks. But you get the point, hopefully.
  12. They said so, an internal change to their systems. It's a little vague, but I think it gets the idea across.
  13. All great stuff to see. Those graphical improvements look amazing as well. Can't wait to see how it affects constructs. Lua -- I just wanna say that I think this update will be very important for new coders, especially less-reliance on JSON. I like the idea of event-driven data as well, and can't wait to see what those nice-to-haves are... maybe if it's not too late we can ask for a few here. @Mncdk1, global illumination is a graphically intensive feature from what I know, likely will be a setting. However, not personally aware what Athena brough that had quite a performance hit... could you elaborate on that xD.
  14. I never said that exact thing should become the norm. I said in some way, shape or form. Like a targeted jammer that can jam a ships ability to see friend or foe. It would be useless to anyone coordinated, but for someone uncoordinated it is dangerous. And you do have, currently a way to tell. You lock onto the target and if you aren't some random, you should know roughly what ships are in your group... and even can distinguish that this XS core that just appeared is most definitely not yours because no one in your fleet uses XS cores or they were all blown up... xD You actually have to think a bit, you know. And it works both ways, you can use the same strategy on attackers. The alien core can be fitted with jammers and you have a couple of people there just jamming whatever gets on grid unannounced. And your point also somewhat would fall apart if they added any kind of voice communication. These here are just ideas. Not something they should or shouldn't add. My ideas tend to not be that great, but it doesn't mean it can't work if you actually think of a balanced way to implement such a thing. And, again, I didn't even get to participate much because of local power company issues. So I didn't use this strat then, when it would have been most effective. It was only at the end when my power came back on that I could head there and effectively under the radar get some of my ship back. If the guy that visited me while I was at my wreck stopped to even look at my ship for more than 5 seconds, they would have immediately recognized it was an Empire ship. It even had empire branding on it! XD There are so many possible counter plays to transponder jamming and using the same names, so when you weave through those with pure luck it's an incredible feeling. It really was. It made an afternoon where I could hardly do anything and lost my only PVP ship due to my power cutting off into an enjoyable evening, even after slow-boating back at 20,000 km/h for 130~ SU, because it actually paid off in recovering some parts of the wreck against all the odds.
  15. Other than it was a great fight, I'd like to say it is your choice for you to monopolize as many alien cores as you do. Also, it's significantly more difficult for everyone else to get to these cores than you do. (Because of the apparent warp beacons of some form allowing travelling to be much quicker there) So if it's a chore, it's your choice for it to be like that due to the number you have to defend. I don't see the problem. Though, if it's a chore to you, maybe a good idea is to give an idea on how it can no longer be a chore, so that if the devs care or not, they can actually get an idea of solutions from the player perspective. Other than that point, where you complained about a choice you as a group decided on, it was a great fight. I actually enjoyed the no-transponder gameplay even though I never really got to use it. It allowed more thorough preparation (making a list of friendly IDs) before the battle a logistical advantage and I wouldn't mind for EWAR in some way to incorporate this, disabling transponders, periscopes or other means of identification, along with improved stasis weapons.
×
×
  • Create New...