Search results

I think you're thinking too hard about this... Imagine it this way... A magnetic clamp, when active, would create a 1-block collision space in its intended connection direction, which would only detect collisions from other "collision fields". If it detects one, the two stick together according...

Compared to some suggestions, no, it shouldn't actually be that hard to code (Detect collision, calculate relative position, "boop" or maybe smoothly slide into position)... But yeah, I agree with the rest of that.

It's not the chair, it's what's around the chair. :P

Not the issue; I'd respect different design tastes if that's all it was. However, it seems like some people didn't even actually look at the stations besides in the tiny little thumbnails on the topic...

Yeah... evidently. I'm disappointed.

Unfortunately, this IS a problem, and is probably the main reason why we have the "no-building box" currently. The fix/workaround for this is simple, though - Docking should be accomplished with "magnetic clamps" or something similar, which have to actually make contact with one another's...

Not if the faces are square and they line up with each other. Would be kind of like a disco ball.

Wait for bugfixes, AI and quest features, shipyards, and the UI revamp. Then I'l bet we'll be seeing quite a bit of "official news" regarding Steam.

The docking pair o' docks... Which is one of the strange things that result from the current system, and would be resolved by point-to-point clamp docking. Currently I could make a ship or station with a docking module, dock a ship with a dock facing down towards the first docking module, dock a...

The amount of amazing in this update is... well, amazing. While the initial "WHOA" factor for this release has been diminished for me by the fact that I've been busy testing it and watching it develop dev build by dev build, that doesn't change the fact that this is one hell of a good job by...

No meaning, just "spooky."

Remote server; not mine but the test server.

Yeah, I've had this issue as well; If we could get support for (simulated) 3-D rendering of stuff inside blocks this would be one of the two idea applications, the other being viewscreens linked to cameras.

Yeah; we'd need more space for text in logbooks then, but that's needed anyway.

@keptick: While I doubt that @ResonKinetic's suggestion will work, I'm really just trying to say that I have about the same attitude about the current planets as he/she does... They're, in a word, awkward. The edges are messy and disorienting, the design itself is offputting, and the way they're...

Yeah; some kind of mechanic expansion like this would be great. I'd also like to see it be possible to display scan results, in some simplified form, on display blocks.

-1 to you being able to walk through CURRENT water. A new water block can be implemented with proper effects on players, but I like using current water as force fields, and I'm sure that I'm not alone... Besides, what's the point of completely intangible water that doesn't interact with players...

Redundant post is redunant; that's exactly what I meant - Change the generation algorithm to put more space between star systems.

Yeah; as I think I've said before in MP it seems to be vastly improved. However, in singleplayer the generation's slowed to a crawl... hopefully not, but possibly, a threading issue.

Sector size doesn't affect how large orbits are - They'll scale up with the sectors. Adding more in-between sectors is the only way to fix this mess.