Absolutely. Only it wouldn't help to just have a local option to disable this if others in the same channel use it. I don't want Big G to watch, analyse, digest, and translate any conversation of mine, however insignificant the content may appear to be.
Actually you bring up a point there: Hull farming. Create once, and have free hull for the rest of your life...
Unless the regeneration takes up the same resources that replacing it traditionally would, I can't agree.
Of course there could be a requirement to link it up to storage containing...
NP, I just wanted to point you to that thread since it referred to your "also..." problem.
Good to hear you found a solution; mind if I ask specifically which suggestions you're referring to? I'm still at a loss regarding the ambient lighting...
Map bug was gone (for me at least) in today's dev...
I guess there are just different ideas of what "mobile" means. For me, this would be the equivalent of a mobile shipyard ("only" a mobile powerplant actually, but scaled up, that's what I see when hearing mobile shipyard/factory). It would be towed (or moved under own propulsion for gameplay...
You've seen this, right?
The observation regarding the ambient light level is interesting in this context, as I have the same issue - I noticed the inside of ships and caves being too bright, but didn't know it was a local issue because I have no control group of other PCs. I wonder if that too...
I think the problem is known by now EDIT: and apparently fixed in the next update.
What might be interesting additional information is whether it affects other GPUs besides Nvidia's as well, and there might be a connection to this issue, too.
If you built a station, you'd be eligible for invulnerability, but couldn't move it. Ever. Plus you'd need to build it in place, which may or may not be an option. With the proposed system, you'd get no invulnerability, but would not be permanently restricted to one location, and could prepare...
Unless of course you enjoy mining all day. Not so sure about exploiting newbies though... ; )
Anyway, should the default mining factors get changed, there's always server.cfg
(Not sure where to post this... Moderators, please feel free to move if you deem it more appropriate elsewhere.)
I'm trying to make the ice->water conversion process reversible, but it seems some part of the engine doesn't like it.
I have the following BlockConfigImport.xml:
<Config>...
I think (my guess only) the idea behind that is that it should take time to recreate a ship's design, and the deconstruction (and subsequent reconstruction) serve as visual indicators for that. Just think 'reverse engineering'.
I think this has potential.
I'm not entirely certain about the scanning part - I like the idea of the scanner having a use beyond revealing cloaked entities, but I don't yet see how this might work well.
If you travel to a region, you can see the planets around neighbouring stars with the naked...
Probably been busy all the time writing that wall of text... would have taken me almost a year, too... ; )
Then how about please heeding your own advice?
I don't like the concept of threads being"dead" at all - if there is a thread for something, then goddam use it, instead of making dozens of...
The half-a-dozen-and-oneth safeguard would be to rebind your exit key from something right next to your movement keys (seriously...?) to something not right next to your movement keys, and not "lose" a ship in the first place. I suggest using NUMPADENTER, a bit akin to Windows' START menu to...
With a bit of buffering I think it could be taken even further, to the point where factories produce on demand; of course you'd still need one factory per block type though, since there is no way of changing a factory's recipe programmatically.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.