New core sizes

[Sabretooth]

A core in size is about:

XS: 64x64x64 (HxWxL) voxels

S: 128x128x128 (HxWxL) voxels

M: 256x256x256 (HxWxL) voxels

L: 512x512x512 ()HxWxL) voxels

 

But as I look at most ships (fun ships excluded of course), they are designed like rockets or watercrafts. Buildings want to be towers etc..

And replicas are confined to the dimensions of the core

So, as Tuvok would say: "wouldnt it be logical to have core sizes extended, next to the ones we have?"

(Continuing as myself) Like an M extended core, 256x256x512 voxels?

Or S extended max core 192x192x320 voxels?

They heave done it with the containers, so I mean.... you know....

 

So, whadda ya all think?

[Physics]

Your core sizes are off but I agree it would be nice to be able to adjust build boxes or have core variant’s with different set box shapes

[Sabretooth]

6 minutes ago, Physics said:

Your core sizes are off but I agree it would be nice to be able to adjust build boxes or have core variant’s with different set box shapes

Yes they are off, but i wrote 'about', but calculating in bits is easier for us (I think)

When u place a voxel it never is on the 0 coördinate, always 0.5 or -0.5, but elements can be placed on the 0 coördinate.

[Knight-Sevy]

You place a voxel relative to its center. So at 0.5.

 

We had seen on old video cores in 256-512-1024-2048 and up to 4096!
But of course, these were definitely NQ tests.
They admitted to having trouble getting the L cores to work properly at the moment.

I really hope to have a minimum of 256m in the future. It would do things equivalent to good tonnage irl cruisers. The minimum for a space game.

[blazemonger]

JC has said several time this would technically be possible. The idea has also been floated many times so there is a clear interest for the option.

 

Due to the above, I'd say it is not likely NQ will spend time making this happen. If we're lucky maybe some time after "release"

 

[joaocordeiro]

I fully agree with you. 

 

I sugest that there is a menu, when placing a core, where you choose out of 3 forms:

1 - cube - current cube with 100%x100%x100%

2 - square box with 140%x140%x50% (usefull for winged planes) 

3- pole with 200%x70%x70%

[CoyoteNZ]

I would like it if you could add extra cores to an existing one, but have them act as one logical core rather than seperate. Then we could have interesting shapes. 

[Cheith]

51 minutes ago, CoyoteNZ said:

I would like it if you could add extra cores to an existing one, but have them act as one logical core rather than seperate. Then we could have interesting shapes. 

this - and join up static cores so we can move industry stuff between them!!

[GraXXoR]

Fully agreed. 

On 5/13/2021 at 6:23 AM, joaocordeiro said:

I fully agree with you. 

 

I sugest that there is a menu, when placing a core, where you choose out of 3 forms:

1 - cube - current cube with 100%x100%x100%

2 - square box with 140%x140%x50% (usefull for winged planes) 

3- pole with 200%x70%x70%

yes. 100%. If they can’t/won’t get core merging to work, these 3 configurations would be a good compromise. 
 

cube / pizza box / pole. 
 

If they made bigger build cubes, they need better elevators, too. We already need five elevators instead of just two to go from corner to furthest corner on a large cube. 

[Lethys]

"Maybe after release"

 

Has been asked for many times, so keep asking. Perhaps they then do it

[NQ-Naerais]

As above, possibly after release  

[Hazard0814]

Why not just have static planetary cores have no ceiling aside from planetwide build height O_o

-Several less entries in DB for server ( if its setup the way im thinking )

-Would require adjusting the render distance to accommodate for the height or depth of static on planets

[Shulace]

44 minutes ago, Haku0814 said:

Why not just have static planetary cores have no ceiling aside from planetwide build height O_o

-Several less entries in DB for server ( if its setup the way im thinking )

-Would require adjusting the render distance to accommodate for the height or depth of static on planets

 

People don't like space elevator towers apparently. Because that's what they are going to build with that. I personally would like to see the planet look like a sea urchin, would mean the players actually made a mark in the verse lol. 

[Hazard0814]

It's the load time, not the structures themselves. I'd love to see Alioth turn into a Coescant ( I think I spelled that right lol ). Getting them to load so you don't have 1s to not crash would be a boon, in and of itself.

[CoyoteNZ]

21 hours ago, FuriousPuppy said:

release is 2 years late lol. when is the new release?

Mid 2022 was last I heard; me I’m hopping for a beta by then and release 2024. 

[ELX987]

On 5/31/2021 at 12:58 PM, FuriousPuppy said:

release is 2 years late lol. when is the new release?

 patience

[sHuRuLuNi]

On 6/1/2021 at 8:58 PM, CoyoteNZ said:

Mid 2022 was last I heard; me I’m hopping for a beta (alpha 4) by then and release 2024. 

 

[GraXXoR]

TBH. I don’t care when their “real” release is. So long as the game keeps moving forward at a reasonable pace. 
 

that is really the only thing I care about: visible and palpable improvements coming regularly (I mean regularly in the colloquial, non-scientific sense) giving the player base a sense of progression and hope for the future. 
 

A gaming audience can suffer either a relative lack of communication or a relative lack of progress without too much pushback . The trouble starts when the gamiers suffers both of the above simultaneously. 
 

look at NMS as a shining example. Shoddy af on release and has just released ANOTHER massive patch. 3.50 Prisms, addressing some of the criticism thrown at the somewhat aged rendering and iffy art style (which I personally like, but hey ho). Finally the game will use some of the modern horsepower of those beastly PC graphics cards that some lucky folks were able to buy before the stupid-assed crypto bubble.