Search results

Maybe that should be another option.

You could replace that with a bonding box like the old docking boxes. That would minimize graphics resource usage and be easier to implement than picking specific blocks out of a structure to render.

Esarai's at it again! I need to tour the upgraded ships in-game sometime in the near future.

It'd be nice if we didn't get eaten by computers when we used them. Keeping the body visible and in place would greatly aid immersion. On the other hand, leaving a physical astronaut body sitting out there during battle also leaves an HUD blip that screams "KILL ME WITH RAILGUNS!!!" What I...

This is definitely on the right track. I would be happy with implementing these GUIs exactly as described in the OP. After further thought I came up with some additional feature ideas. I suppose some of these could be added later, but they'd be really nice to have. For the Scanner: Graphical...

I think it would be. The current one is a glorified change_sector command as Ithirahad said.

IDK. I honestly don't think that would work out as well as what has been described in this thread.

Theoretical scenario: Your friend gives you a ship design and tells you the dimensions of the ship, so you put it in a shipyard of the right size, but can't figure out how to position the core anchor to make it work! Talk about frustrating! Solution: Add a feature to position the core anchor...

There are two bridges on the Enterprise in STNG. The main bridge is the one you see most of the time. The battle bridge is located beneath the saucer and is used to fly that portion of the ship when the saucer is detached. In one episode they were about to go into battle with a good possibility...

Ever have one of those days when you're just trying to design a ship in your shiny new shipyard, but there's so much stuff in the background for your base that you can't get any frame rate to speak of? If so, then this is for you! In advanced build mode, you'll find an option labeled "Hide...

Actually, that thread does not include people staying visible while using the cockpit. It only mentions that that feature would compliment cockpits well. Also this is not good.

I'd also like to see a 2D fill for each plane (XY, XZ, YZ) for filling in walls, floors, etc. from wireframes.

This paragraph is difficult to understand and I'd leave out the space cutters, but overall I like this suggestion. I think Schema wants to avoid having an extra dimension with nothing in it, so this could be handled more like a "warp tunnel" than an alternate dimension. The current jump...

If we were to go that route, I'd say there are two options: Make all full "blocks" (like hulls, shield caps, power reactors) 1 cubic meter, make hull shapes use their actual volume, etc. I don't think we would want any goofy stuff like making advanced armor take up twice as much volume as hull...

A name would act as a stand-in for the number, not a replacement. Naming each block would be optional. All names can be kept in a list and the list checked when someone tries to name a block. If multiple people naming things the same way becomes an issue, add an optional feature to automatically...

Schema could also add the ability to name your logic blocks, which would make things easier to remember.

No. Astronauts are already vulnerable enough without super weapons zeroing in on them. In the interest of game balance, the ability for ANY ship-mounted missile to lock onto an astronaut should be removed.

Fixing the build helpers. They've been a pain for a long time. Your sphere just had me confused for a minute because I didn't notice the mismatched blocks.

...Huh? All I see is a sphere.

Scratch that. It's bigger than shipboard spawning. I showed this thread to everyone on my server's site chat and everyone's freaking out. The hype is over 8000!