Search results

1: Probably will happen. 2: There will probably be an asteroid or two every time you show up there. 3: Certainly a possibility. 4 + 6: We have plans for real sector "dualing". Setting up fights in a test sector is a probability but we will likely save any sort of betting for real space. 5...

All easier said than done I'm afraid.

I really don't know the technical side of things, but if it doesn't already do that, then it is likely because it is a more taxing convoluted process than you think. Not impossible to be sure, but maybe not worth it in Schemas eyes. Comparing a complete design and broken ship block by block is...

Yes. We have this with scanners. However scanners were intended to work on stations as I heard it when they were first introduced yet they do not. Blocks and their mechanics may have been specifically designed to work or operate a certain way and would break if placed on other entities. That's...

I mentioned warpgates, because you had it in the OP. Which implies I did read past the first line. Everything I said still stands. It's not ready for the game yet.

Shipyards, sure. But warpgates? Maybe not so much. It diminishes their role as a station. It devalues the role of installed infrastructure as well. We would be okay with these changes if there was a balancing factor, but we either don't have the answer, or the answer isn't in the game just yet...

At this point I don't see why not. It would be a nice way to share various designs with people.

Area triggers still cause collision detections. Otherwise the game doesn't know that the two blocks crossed each other paths. Removing physics from a blocks doesn't solve the problem unfortunately.

Not sure I can give tons of input here. I personally see the benefit of using a slower more hard hitting cannon, and have already installed some on in-game assets. I can't say that this suggestion has merit, as pointed out by some players here, or that it will ever be realized in the game.

Yes. This is probably the way a lot of build mode placement things should be handled and I would like for it to operate this way for the build helper. Thanks for the suggestions.

Yeah I bet AndyP has some input here. This would certainly help server owners.

Seems simple to implement too. Will add it to our list of suggestions.

Lancake said it best. It's best to spend time on what could be a new and improved menu than trying to clean up something that will eventually be outdated.

I am going to mark this as planned for a few reasons. 1 - The post is vague enough where this could be interpreted in different ways, and as such we could eventually fullfill the desires outlined in the post. 2 - We have something similar being laid out, but the details aren't there yet, and...

Makes sense to me. I will archive the suggestion. Seems like a minor thing but I think everyone agrees that warheads need to become more practical.

I am personally going to mark this as planned, even if not consulting with other team members (Duke don't fire me plz). Why? Because it makes sense, won't impact server performance, and also makes sense. If we can't have full-er asteroid fields then we should simulate them better. Particles are...

As cool as this is, I imagine it would require collisions. And those are a source of lag. Having some sort of pulse-like effect would be much more effective if tweaked right.

I can't say for certain if this is planned. Carriers will get expanded on in the future, for now all docking commands are limited to the flagship. When this changes I imagine we will take a look at station docking as well.

I am marking this as implemented, even though it isn't technically what you want. We can change build mode speed, but not in game. It's been broken for a while. When it is fixed however you will get your hands on a command that does exactly that.

I agree with this completely. IMO it's mandatory for the final release of the game. Otherwise reverse engineering takes twice as long. This will simplify things.