Jump to content

New obstruction is too extreme


Hachiro
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, I appreciate the try to change the mechanics so glitching Elements together is not just forbidden, but not really possible anymore. 

 

But however, this is too much.

At first I thought it is only a problem for me, because I like to build small ships and shuttles where all elements are close together to get a nice look. 

 

But now I hear from nearly every player I know that there is massive obstruction on their ships, even when they made sure to build without glitching or stuff like this.

So even if you followed the rules and build your ship the "correct" way, many players get punished now.

 

Please check on this again, NQ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it does seem a bit over the top.  I get that NQ wants to tweak the bounding boxes for these things and make improvements, but I don't really want to have to redesign my ships to accommodate this sort of tiny change because doing so is time consuming and unrewarding.

 

I think banning actual stacked elements like engines, containers, etc on top of one another is a good change (where players knew what they were doing and it was obviously broken).  But what we have now has, IMO, gone way too far.  Tiny changes to bounding boxes now mean that legitimate ship designs which were allowed at the time of making now need a fair amount of work.

 

With the exception of 3 ships (2 of which were build in January) every single ship I have ever built or bought is now broken in some way!  Many will need significant changes to make them work again because the voxel shells were designed around the element placements.  None of these ships are gaining any real advantage from the overlaps.  They don't perform better, have smaller cross sections or whatever, they are just the way they are because that's the way they were built at the time.  I can't think of a good reason for breaking all these ships.

 

Why can't we have the checker check ships using a subset of the new and old element shapes?  Then ships with actual stacking would break (they were never correct designs) but ships which were OK when built will still be valid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I support the banning of stacked elements and in general welcome the change, I think it will be good for the game in the long run.

Out of all the ships I built since joining DU during the first week of Beta, only one had some issues with element clipping which I was able to quickly fix. That's a 1/15 ratio or so, which is great imo.

I think it had something to do with the fact that when placing elements against each other they can be moved in increments less than 0.5 blocks, which is the default. As my tip I'd say always place elements on voxels first, then move them into place with arrow keys.

Hopefully we get a tidying-up of the element hitboxes in the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you might be lucky.  The way I built ships was to start with elements and add voxel at the end.  Most of my elements were placed against one another directly (not stacked).

 

I don't think this was a bad thing to do though and isn't, IMO, a good reason for breaking ships.  Also I have bought ships from Captains Customs and Aerogics, both of which told me no stacking was used.   Every single ship I bought from someone else is now reporting stacked elements, including the one I got from NQ's ship shop!

 

This is really silly and doesn't benefit anyone.  I also support fixing of actual stacked elements, just not genuine cases of elements with an insignificant overlap.  It should be fairly easy to disable elements in one case but not the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issue here seems to be that NQ is taking this way beyond "stacking" elements and pretty much punishes anyone who puts elements down in a way tha they even slight ly touch. The hitboxes being off in many cases and also the snap points seem to be all over the place.

The level of feedback already seen wil lbe an interesting testcase for NQ's commitment to better listen to their community through the feedback and frankly, they wil lneed to do quite a bit of work before they can follow through on the planned changes in Panacea unless they choose to take the fallout of ships no longer flying and/or suddenly behaving very different as it comes in.

Just talking to DUscord and forums will not suffice here as it is well knowsn many players do not frequent either.

We'll see how this plays out but I'd really like DU to take a step back here and first make sure they will not cause major issues in game form something they hav eallowed and are not taking with way stricter boundries than previously understood or expected.

This was never about designers placing elemnst close together to have a good base to then voxel a nice looking ship together, it was about ships having multiple engines in the same place and so gaining massive advantages and performance while there was a very small footprint.

This seem to be another carpet bombing action where a surgical strike is really needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one of the changes that players cry much and get reverted. But listen I first was overwhelmed by all my ship's red messages and thought the same, why on earth? If I did no stacking it is like this now. Then I figured out that once you fly the cursor to the marked element that seems stacked it shows red on the ship in build mode where it is and you just move it a bit and then it's ok. So it is not the big deal and I think as a player base we should just fix our constructs for benefit of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Walter said:

Then I figured out that once you fly the cursor to the marked element that seems stacked it shows red on the ship in build mode where it is and you just move it a bit and then it's ok. So it is not the big deal and I think as a player base we should just fix our constructs for benefit of the game.

That is greatly simplifying the problem. Many constructs, especially the fancy ones for sale do not provide easy access to elements or even allow you to move them in any meaningful way,  since every element has been carefully placed to maximize (legally) the build and increase sales value.

 

So I will reiterate my point. If NQ starts breaking legal builds, then it is 100% their obligation to fix it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had a talk with some buidlers I own ships from and generally they are adamant none of the elemnts they use are glitched or stacked in anyway and so there should not be an issue. But the report seems to indicate there is.

 

It will be very interesting to see how NQ will try and spin their way out of this, frankly, I can only see this getting pulled form the patch until it is properly investigated and working as it should, prevent glitched or stacked elements and not punish buildiers due to lazy hitboxes and generally silly behavior that whould not be a problem.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Especially if you have built fancy ships with voxelmancy that took days of work to be finished. There is not an option like "just move every element 0.5 voxels away from each other". because then the whole design gets visually broken.

 

Like I've said: I like the fact that they are working on this problem. Strict in-game rules are better than just to say "Don't do that". I don't want NQ to revert this change completely. But they really have to work on the hitboxes in detail again. If so many fancy ships that were built the legal way are broken now because of messy hitboxes, this is really an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Walter said:

This is one of the changes that players cry much and get reverted. But listen I first was overwhelmed by all my ship's red messages and thought the same, why on earth? If I did no stacking it is like this now. Then I figured out that once you fly the cursor to the marked element that seems stacked it shows red on the ship in build mode where it is and you just move it a bit and then it's ok. So it is not the big deal and I think as a player base we should just fix our constructs for benefit of the game.


This

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Walter said:

This is one of the changes that players cry much and get reverted. But listen I first was overwhelmed by all my ship's red messages and thought the same, why on earth? If I did no stacking it is like this now. Then I figured out that once you fly the cursor to the marked element that seems stacked it shows red on the ship in build mode where it is and you just move it a bit and then it's ok. So it is not the big deal and I think as a player base we should just fix our constructs for benefit of the game.

If that works on your constructs then more power to you.  Sometimes it will and sometimes it won't.  I have a warp shuttle design I made by putting down a warp drive, then arranging elements around it in an optimal (for cross section) way and then finally I built voxel around the edges (some of it from custom stretched voxels, etc).  The warp drive is showing as overlapping, as are about 1/2 the elements around it.  I can't just 'move it a bit', I will have to shunt a lot of things around and then perhaps re-make the voxels.  There is no stacking here, I just built a ship in the normal way.  

 

I also have another ship which has 30 engines, all of which are now overlapping.  Moving them all 'a little bit' is going to mean fewer engines fit onto the ship.

 

Just because it isn't a big deal to you doesn't mean the same is true for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Zeddrick said:

Just because it isn't a big deal to you doesn't mean the same is true for everyone.

Yes for some it might be a big deal, even I have a few ships with the problem you describe but we can not always ask NQ to revert development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is an example (and yes, I know atmo brakes have some other problems but this is a good enough example of the problems here for now).  I have a ship like this:
image.png.9a9d02a3e59e483670bbf5d3194d1090.png

That's a set of atmospheric brakes.  Some of them are OK and the others aren't.  I didn't build this ship but it's fairly obvious that the intention here was to put a block of brakes next to each other.  None are overlapping and there isn't any obvious difference between the ones which are working and the ones which aren't.  This isn't a 'janko' ship or anything, just one in which some glitch in the game caused the elements to end up in a position that the game doesn't like now.  I can't see how disabling these elements is in anybody's interest at all.  It won't make my ship behave differently, it just creates work for me to have to shunt the elements off and then back to where they were to get them all to be OK.

 

And I have quite a few ships like this.  This ship alone has well over 150 red elements which need this treatment.

 

Surely we could de-sensitise the check so that examples of truly overlapping elements are disabled but ones like this, which may overlap on paper but which don't actually really overlap, get allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Walter said:

Yes for some it might be a big deal, even I have a few ships with the problem you describe but we can not always ask NQ to revert development.

We can expect NQ to be respectful of our hard work and not needlessly break things that took hours of time to create though.  Given that *every single ship I purchased from someone else including the NQ ship shop* has the problem I think this will be *very* common.  This type of thing is not rocket science though, it's trivial to make a check which accounts for tiny adjustments like this and it's not unreasonable to ask for that.  IMO It's also reasonable to expect that NQ might have run some trials on this before pushing it out in order to estimate the percentage of dynamic constructs in the game which will be broken by this and to keep iterating on the feature until only a small number get hit by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Zeddrick said:

Here is an example (and yes, I know atmo brakes have some other problems but this is a good enough example of the problems here for now).  I have a ship like this:
image.png.9a9d02a3e59e483670bbf5d3194d1090.png

That's a set of atmospheric brakes.  Some of them are OK and the others aren't.  I didn't build this ship but it's fairly obvious that the intention here was to put a block of brakes next to each other.  None are overlapping and there isn't any obvious difference between the ones which are working and the ones which aren't.  This isn't a 'janko' ship or anything, just one in which some glitch in the game caused the elements to end up in a position that the game doesn't like now.  I can't see how disabling these elements is in anybody's interest at all.  It won't make my ship behave differently, it just creates work for me to have to shunt the elements off and then back to where they were to get them all to be OK.

 

And I have quite a few ships like this.  This ship alone has well over 150 red elements which need this treatment.

 

Surely we could de-sensitise the check so that examples of truly overlapping elements are disabled but ones like this, which may overlap on paper but which don't actually really overlap, get allowed.

 

We need to change such setups of airbrakes anyway soon, they will be obstructed otherwise the top side of them must be clear

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Walter said:

 

We need to change such setups of airbrakes anyway soon, they will be obstructed otherwise the top side of them must be clear

Yes, as I said above, " I know atmo brakes have some other problems but this is a good enough example of the problems here for now".  This is simply the most convenient screenshot.  Atmo engines, vertical boosters and wings are having the same issues.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah.. It's bad.. I just did some tests and it is very simple to get false triggers just by normal placement of elements in certain ways that cause slight intersection of elements. And in many cases the alternative to avoid the trigger is elements that looks like they are floating in air and not touching anything.

 

And it's not even consistent, I have no problem getting the solution to accept the exact same placement without an error just by tweaking the order of operation.

 

false_trigger_small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ships in the UEF store are all jacked up too. Even after they supposedly fixed them for V.2   Not that you should buy those.

 

But it proves they weren't even prepared the collision system they implemented. With the foreknowledge of what they were doing to element collision. I mean really they can't even get their own stuff built right lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FatRillos said:

The ships in the UEF store are all jacked up too. Even after they supposedly fixed them for V.2

This is just gold, and highlight just how little QA that goes into this stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, CptLoRes said:

This is just gold, and highlight just how little QA that goes into this stuff.

Almost feels like I'm paying a sub to test a game, then be ignored by the devs. Just to have them revisit the issue and do what we said originally lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main reason behind the unintentional stacking was that when people made their ships, they placed them AGAINST other elements (blue magnet thing showed up). However, the hitboxes weren't set up properly by NQ or they were buggy, which resulted in people unintentionally stacking their elements 0.1 or 0.05 blocks into the other block (as opposed to the default 0.5 block move with arrrow-keys). 

It was a big and NQ fixed it. The fact that some ships have the red of them is a side-effect of that fix. What would you rather they do? Allow stacking for all ships build before yesterday? Case-by-case basis? Allow a 'little' stacking? How much is "a little"?

Yes it may be their fault but at the same time, what is your alternative solution to the problem? I think this is just one of those updates people need to suck up, just like the upcoming brake changes. So many ships will be made obsolete with the brake changes as have been made obsolete now...

As a ship builder, I don't mind. As long as I can't accidentally stack elements again, its a good update. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I tool the voxels off of one of my  favorite ships to check where the "stacking" issue was and turns out nowhere is anything stacked. Some elements just slightly clip into others due to inaccurate hitboxes and/or allowances NQ left in. some elements are blue when repositioning and stay blue when put back to snap in place just fine but are reported as "clipping/stacked".

 

The ship in no way would qualify for any of the reasons why al this is being implemented and pretty much is proof that NQ ia grossly overhsooting in their efforts and dare I say is wasting everyone's time (includingtheir own) with trivial situations.
 

@NQ-Deckard you are wlecome to come have a look

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have two ships that say elements are clipping and will be disabled in the future. 
 

 But int typical NQ flash ion it doesn’t give ANY indication as to which element is clipping with which.

 

This game has shockingly bad UX even for a Balpha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Deleted said:

I have two ships that say elements are clipping and will be disabled in the future. 
 

 But int typical NQ flash ion it doesn’t give ANY indication as to which element is clipping with which.

 

This game has shockingly bad UX even for a Balpha.

When you enter build mode in the first tab is an element list put the cursor on the stacked element that will light up red on the ship and you can go move it a bit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...