StarMade Dev Blog 17 November 2017

[Criss]

it's only hitting hull and making a small hole in it, and the rest of the hull layer is stopping the ion weapon from passing through

So if the damage propagated from the initial impact instead of going in a straight needle-like hole, would that help, at least as far as damaging armor is concerned?

 

[Coyote27]

So if the damage propagated from the initial impact instead of going in a straight needle-like hole, would that help, at least as far as damaging armor is concerned?

If you mean something like an innate explosive effect that could tear up the docked hull faster, then yes it would help quite a bit - not a complete solution if there's multiple separate plates however and an explosive effect only rips a hole in the first one it hits. Or worse, if the docked hull is a honeycomb of hull and empty spaces, or is made of many interlocking checkerboarded entities. Or layers of forcefields that toggle in sequence.

 

[aceface]

There is a reason why every major faction in the past year outfits their ships with frontal docked forcefields, and it is because it has proven itself extremely effective at blocking ion weapons and extending the lifespan of a ship. FCM, Thryn, NFD, Aethi, and Vaygr, just to name a few, have all used these.

Just FYI, vaygr never used docked force fields, they were always of the main entity. They existed to block missile explosions

 

[Zoolimar]

Docked armor is bad because players can dock armor to a ship, such as forcefields, and it soaks up damage without dealing damage to system blocks. Understandable. Honestly, it sounds like what armor should be doing. I have yet to entirely see how shield mechanics play into it or exactly how it becomes unbalanced. What makes docked armor more viable than armor placed on the mothership? Does it prevent a loss of armor HP or structure HP? I feel like I brought this up with Zyrr in the past.

Docked armor is bad not because it protects the ship, but because it ups the amount of docked entities which will be part of a given ship. Even simple brick like ship will want at least 6 plates and anything with more complex shape will probably want more.

The new system removes the need for docked entities, which is good, but also makes building with "armor" layers outside of main shield bubbles more or less mandatory for anyone who wants a proper combat ship.

It also will be interesting to see how satellite shields (with small radius and regen) placed around the main shield will help. If they could have enough capacity to mostly tank an alpha shot it should be pretty good.
[doublepost=1510999947,1510999767][/doublepost]

If you mean something like an innate explosive effect that could tear up the docked hull faster, then yes it would help quite a bit - not a complete solution if there's multiple separate plates however and an explosive effect only rips a hole in the first one it hits. Or worse, if the docked hull is a honeycomb of hull and empty spaces, or is made of many interlocking checkerboarded entities.

The workaround could be a "damage pool" for the weapon attack that depletes by doing damage, instead of what Starmade has now, and vector based spread of the damage tied to the target ship coordinates. This way empty space will lower the damage to single blocks, but overall damage will stay the same.

 

[Jojomo]

Could anyone still complaining about docked armour please go out and build some with shields 2.0, then post the ship here for critique.

The docked hull will have to sit outside the parent shield range bubble. It's going to be huge, and very heavy. It won't be like shields 1.0 docked hull (mass-wise).

 

[Coyote27]

Could anyone still complaining about docked armour please go out and build some with shields 2.0, then post the ship here for critique.

The docked hull will have to sit outside/fully enclose the parent shield range bubble. It's going to be huge, and very heavy. It won't be like shields 1.0 docked hull.

It wouldn't need to be any larger at all than current docked hull, it'd only need to be a little further forward. Same mass, same shape, just moved so it's outside the bubble instead of attached as a docked entity.

 

[Jojomo]

It wouldn't need to be any larger at all than current docked hull, it'd only need to be a little further forward. Same mass, same shape, just moved so it's outside the bubble instead of attached as a docked entity.

Docked hull typically lays up against the hull. Moving it away will make it less effective (cover a smaller incoming angle of fire).
And for a powerful shield you'll have to move it a LONG way away.

 

[Zoolimar]

And for a powerful shield you'll have to move it a LONG way away.

Like put it at the back end (where reactor is) of the barbell ship ? So that it just covers stabilisers ?

 

[RB101]

God some of the players in this forum have a strong sense of false entitlement... stop raging at schema. Unless you can code or develop a game better than him stop shunting your ideas forward as if they are 100% correct or that schema’s are always wrong.

It’s a small development team and you only demotivate them by acting so pompous and toxic. If you want to report on balance or suggest potential changes, then play this update for a while and report on any ACTUAL game experiences (in this update) where the changes have made the game either broken or unbalanced.

This update seems rather interesting , the turret aim mode has me intrigued the most; though some short coverage on youtube would likely go a long way to help players understand how they work

Great job schema, keep on dev’ing

 

[Antikristianos]

#To complaining people (docked hull blabla...):
has any one of you even build a decent sized shield yet?
placing 12K Shield capacitors wich yield 1Mio Shield strenght does not skale the shield bubble up any bit.
but place Rechargers for a decent shield regen... 12K blocks will get you 66K Shield regen. the shield area radius will already be greater than 200m... 30K regen blocks -> shield bubble radius bigger than 300m... 72K regen blocks -> shield bubble radius bigger than 400m
(latest devbuild values)
and these values are still changing during the balancing... (virtually the shield bubble got a lot smaller... shield with 100K regenblocks first time i checked the update had something about more than 1000m radius)

#To Schema and the Shine Team:
it is great work!
the game performance has significantly improved with the new power system.
excample: Power 1.0 Space station with mutiple reacctors 32,000,000 e/s and 1,200,000,000 capacity only showed at 30-40 FPS.
same station stripped of 1.0 and reequipped with power 2.0 now rund on 20,000,000 e/s and shows at set max 60 FPS. (room for double the power available if needed)

 

[GalactusX]

This is a list of the pros and cons of the recent changes in starmade that I have seen:

- 1/ POWER
- 2/ WEAPONS
- 3/ SHIELD
- 4/ ARMOR

1/ Power and its mechanics:
- Currently, the new power system has come with a marked improvement in the "optimization" of many systems, being able to "prioritize" some systems over others, being able to create different "configurations" according to the role of each player, and according to the role that the entity "spaceship / space station" will have.
- In my personal opinion, many changes have come well, but others have created a big gap in the game and the style of playing it; The problem with the old power system is that in order to have a good regeneration of power, astronomical quantities of blocks have to be put together inside a ship, what the new power system proposes is to use fewer blocks, changing the way in which the Different systems distribute / consume energy, for me it is OK ... but ... the new system "does not allow" having more than one core generator running at the same time "which is a design limitation", and if you have more than one generator (possibility of having different configurations of the use of power), the system penalizes the player, not being able to change power cores, losing all the accumulated power if you change it, and having to reload everything again, and this is even worse in the middle of a combat, where the regeneration / accumulation of power is crucial.
- The new system proposes to use less power blocks ... but in reality, it adds another new block to use "the stabilizers", which increase x2 or x4 the final dimension of the generator ... which in the end, ends up being / still using more space than the old power system and does not produce as much energy as the old one.
- Another major drawback of the new power system is that the power core and the stabilizers "must" have a distance between them, leaving an "empty space" between them; We have been told repeatedly that this empty space will be used dedicated to having "crew quarters" and having space for interior details ... and we have nothing new relevant with the crew for years.

2/ Weapons and its mechanics/options:
- Because the power system is going to change, the weapons system is totally "in the air", the players, both RP and PVP, have nothing "solid" to work with, because this system so crucial, is subject to change and adjustments constantly ... you can create / configure one ship/station one week, the following week can not work, or in its absence, and must be completely built again. This frustrates and limits the creativity of all players.

3/ Shield sistem and its mechanics:
- I already knew, that when I read the phrase "bubble shields" ... the new configuration, it could take one way or another ... one well accepted, and another completely painful ... seeing the path that the power system has, I explain.
- In one hand, we have the old system of shield, well balanced and established, covering the entire structure of the ship, distributing the shield with the dock entities in the mother ship, taking into account all the impacts of weapons, as a single factor in descend the shield and its efficiency, it is OK ... in the other hand, we have the new system of shields "bubble", which "create an area of effect" ONLY IN THE MOTHER ENTITY, not distributing its shield to the entities dock (This also affects the dock entities not distributing their shield with the parent entity, pulling over any type of docked shield design).
- Also, like the power system, it does not allow two shield systems to be within the effect area of another "overlap different systems", limiting in an excessive way the freedom of design to defend your ship from the incoming damage.
- Because of this, a ship can not have different systems of shields, one within another, because the first shield system "deactivates" any other that is within its area of action, this can be well seen by a certain sector of players "PVP" ... but in the end, this is counterproductive, because it "forces" the design of the hulls of the ships and the systems within it, to follow a pattern that will eventually produce strange "chimeras" of ships, to take advantage of that design.

4/ Armor and its mechanics:
- Currently, the armor has not been improved for a long time, only some changes and improvements in the "distribution of damage" or in the mitigation of damage to it, but nothing more.
- It has been proposed / asked for a long time, that the system of "repair beams" affected the blocks, not only repairing their HP, but "replacing the lost blocks with new ones in the midle of a battle", in this way, it could give birth, a new class of ship "the support ship", which would repair the ships within reach.

All these changes, are making starmade change the game style 180º, limiting and changing the way of designing the ships and how to play / fight with them. Which is exciting but also frustrating ... a player who has stopped playing for 1 year, and who enters after all these changes are working, will have the sensation of playing a completely different game, design of ships forced to follow a certain pattern, systems not allowed to work together with others because they cancel each other, consumption / distribution of energy to systems that do not have a 100% real logic, game mechanics changed only because players have found ways to use them to play other roles (examples, chain drivers, docked power generators, dock shields, and others).

Goodbye to "borg cube" .. all HAIL the new "borg sphere".

I'm sorry for making a long post, and just in case some phrase is not understood, I've used google translator.

 

[GDPR 302420]

I'm not going to say that you are "wrong" about those games and their success in those areas, but comparing it to StarMade in our current state doesn't match. I can explain more in depth during the livestream, since you've popped up there recently the past few weeks.

I am going to say that you are wrong, the alpha games I mentioned are pretty darn comparable to the current state of StarMade. Alpha is a common excuse used by fanboys of this game to sweep any criticism under the rug, it isnt exclusive to this game but it exists in this game none the less.

I was pointing out even though two of the 3 games I mentioned were in alpha, their products are not nearly as buggy and broken and contain much more content then the current state of StarMade.

Avorion in particular is very comparable because it has almost identical base gameplay (build your ship, roam and do whatever) and has been developed in shorter a period of time then StarMade (Avorion has been in development for about 4 years compared to StarMade's 6 years) with a smaller developer team (3 team members compared to Schine's listing of 12 team members on StarMade wiki) and it is in the same alpha development boat as StarMade. In spite of this Avorion is more optimized, has less gameplay inhibiting bugs and has significantly more content then StarMade.

Avorion and other space voxel alpha games demonstrate that Alpha does not stop developers from making their games run decently and be fun to play.

While I do not like saying this because I want to see this game become successful, StarMade is falling behind in the "Voxel Space Race" and if the trend keeps going as it is this games community will be empty pretty damn soon.

 

[GnomeKing]

RedAlert might have some points, IF Starmade makes the building aspect restrictive and dumb!

Those other games are all so shiny-shiny, BUT they do not have all the core elements that make Starmade special. Logic building for one. Interesting block rules for another ( :/). A heart of Derp for a third .

Starmade sits on its building mechanics as a foundation and as a rewarding process in-itself.

Other games make shiny-shiny and fighty-fighty much more easy-peasy to get at quickly. But honestly, if Machine based combat (esp PvP) is primarily what one is looking for, there are a host of much more suitable games, with much better optimized contexts for competition. Starmade will never be primarily a FPS competition, but rather focused on building 'content' with real function (including the fighty-fighty of course)

I applaud the intentions, work and efforts made by Dev team, but i think some directions taken are work-without-much-reward and others too much taking-the-lowest-common-denominator as a guide for player-base and potential long-term interest in the game.

 

[Drakkart]

i read 9 pages of comments, some heated and some more chilled, and at first i would like to applaud to schema for actually taking the time to listen it is really appreciated. I agree with a lot of the criticism to the new and planned systems and it is frustrating to see changes made going in the "wrong" direction but even then i would hope for a bit less heat sometimes even though i can totally understand the frustration.

I try to play on multiplayer servers under different usernames after and inbetween releases. Saber and chris play regularly. And we do sessions with andy and lancake.

people even though being schine staff still can be horrible at building effective craft in starmade, the pvp community could not care less about their opinions. personally liking a few of the guys still does not make them a reference when it comes to starmade expertise.

As is displayed in this thread it is hard to communicate, when as soon as any of us says something they get accused of wild things.

1) There are several balance options that we can tweak in this new power update, so that we can actually address is accordingly should it be a problem
2) Local shields are mostly not to address docked hull. There are other changes for that. Local shields are just part of it. Local shields, while good for a lot of things, are mainly to combat 2 part ships that are far apart as the power spent to defend both parts can be balanced to outweight the gain
3) My main work is to make things as dynamic as possible to be able to change them should they become a problem by just going into the config.
4) We outlined the motivation for it in the original post. Amongst other things, old power doesn't scale right, and none of the bandages came anywhere close to fixing it. Not only that but also the way weapon worked stood in the way of balancing them correctly.

the old power system was not perfect but it worked with ships extending on all axis allowing to favor one axis. the new system forces design into one axis ergo big fail on the goal to be achieved by the changes to spark different designs. The underlying mechanic is flawed, the only correction would be allowing stabilizers right next to the reactor no matter the size which well... There where plenty of more intuitive and at the same time more advanced suggestions out there and all got ignored in favor for a system with such a catastrophic flaw by design. the rest of the power system changes i totally applaud on just when it comes to generating power it sucks big time.

Even though I like RP PvE, I want a strong PvP in the game. As you can see it's difficult, but I'm not giving up just yet.

it also is way easier to build a living world on a balanced system than an unbalanced system... So please listen to the people when they are trying to point out flaws...

Lecic as said above. you cannot layer shields, and even the attempt would make your shields weaker than they would be in one single module (that is the balance goal). Multiple shields would be something only worthwhile on really big ships where the initial radius is too small to cover it all.

i am building something in the 2 km range - trust me i am really pissed if the shields can not cover the entire surface because of weird shield interaction mechanics eliminating each other...

So if the damage propagated from the initial impact instead of going in a straight needle-like hole, would that help, at least as far as damaging armor is concerned?

now we are talking. Yes that could solve the issue at least partially the thing is as starmade allows for stuff to be part of the same entity without being connected to the "main part" of the entity any damage spead models like the already mentioned robocraft would not solve the issue either. on hit a amc projectile sudenly would have to "rethink" wait there is nothing to destroy here now i am doing aoe damage... to not waste the energy. Such changes though would result in utterly overpowering some weapon types esspecially aainst "normal" sips... So maybe at this point you guys should be heading back to the drawing board and reconsider the entire damage model including waepon types and armor shield alltogether to make it one system that in itself is solid. maybe we should get rid of some weapon effects alltogether for only a few really work and the others are really situational... maybe damage should be applied in area patterns. a blastradius is like a sphere a amc impact has the shape of a streched drop with the pointy end still going far depths wise and a beam weapon - no clue really...

Anyway keep in mind that as long as everything is still subject of change all these systems might get altered again in a few years...
Thanks for reading

 

[GalactusX]

RedAlert might have some points, IF Starmade makes the building aspect restrictive and dumb!

Those other games are all so shiny-shiny, BUT they do not have all the core elements that make Starmade special. Logic building for one. Interesting block rules for another ( :/). A heart of Derp for a third .

Starmade sits on its building mechanics as a foundation and as a rewarding process in-itself.

Other games make shiny-shiny and fighty-fighty much more easy-peasy to get at quickly. But honestly, if Machine based combat (esp PvP) is primarily what one is looking for, there are a host of much more suitable games, with much better optimized contexts for competition. Starmade will never be primarily a FPS competition, but rather focused on building 'content' with real function (including the fighty-fighty of course)

I applaud the intentions, work and efforts made by Dev team, but i think some directions taken are work-without-much-reward and others too much taking-the-lowest-common-denominator as a guide for player-base and potential long-term interest in the game.

For me, Starmade has many good things, but it lacks many others, which other games have been able to take advantage of. At this point of development of starmade, if someone asks me "what is starmade for you" ... I would say it is a sand-box construction game ... and nothing more.

STARMADE allows PVP ... but it is not a PVP game ... it also allows the PVE ... but it is not a PVE game ... it also allow RPG ... but it does not have RPG content .. What do we have then? a game of pure and hard construction does not have specific content for PVP, PVE or RPG.

The problem that I see with starmade, is that it has no defined direction, only to build spaceships and space stations, apart from that, it has no content for anything else. You can build the most powerful ship in the universe and then ... what do you do with it? fight against pirates NPC's ... and later? fight against players ... and then? create a faction with multiple players ... and then? ... It has no established goal.

... We ask for "player mission system", answer "soon" or "in progress" ...
... We ask for more PVP content/progress, answer "soon" or "in progress" ...
... We ask for more PVE content/progress, answer "soon" or "in progress" ...

Until Starmade replaces those "soon" or "in progress" questions with real content, starmade will remain, in my humble opinion, behind other games, even if they do not have a polished job like starmade, they will have more content, and that at the end of everything, is what draws attention.

This is not a criticism of the work done so far by the development team, they have done a very good job so far, is just what I think, many players feel.

 

[Non]

Our current approach tries to span the distance between non pvp and pvp building.

To add to the discussion, by far the best way to do this is to improve ai, if pirates posed more of a threat it would force players to learn the game in more detail to survive.

 

[JinM]

Thanks for the heads up Schema. I think this power update will turn out very nice. Even if there will be some flaws, they will be figured out sooner or later. It's good that the pvp mechanics get deeply adressed, even though it seems to be stressfull...At least the majority of people knows, that you care. Even though some people claim that it's different, they are not the community.

on topic suggestion (alter pirates in the next dev build)[doublepost=1511011568,1511010995][/doublepost]

For me, Starmade has many good things, but it lacks many others, which other games have been able to take advantage of. At this point of development of starmade, if someone asks me "what is starmade for you" ... I would say it is a sand-box construction game ... and nothing more.

STARMADE allows PVP ... but it is not a PVP game ... it also allows the PVE ... but it is not a PVE game ... it also allow RPG ... but it does not have RPG content .. What do we have then? a game of pure and hard construction does not have specific content for PVP, PVE or RPG.

The problem that I see with starmade, is that it has no defined direction, only to build spaceships and space stations, apart from that, it has no content for anything else. You can build the most powerful ship in the universe and then ... what do you do with it? fight against pirates NPC's ... and later? fight against players ... and then? create a faction with multiple players ... and then? ... It has no established goal.

... We ask for "player mission system", answer "soon" or "in progress" ...
... We ask for more PVP content/progress, answer "soon" or "in progress" ...
... We ask for more PVE content/progress, answer "soon" or "in progress" ...

Until Starmade replaces those "soon" or "in progress" questions with real content, starmade will remain, in my humble opinion, behind other games, even if they do not have a polished job like starmade, they will have more content, and that at the end of everything, is what draws attention.

This is not a criticism of the work done so far by the development team, they have done a very good job so far, is just what I think, many players feel.

>PVE:

Yeah, some better pirates to fight against in the next update would be great. Please you have 20 fleets, just replace those insanths. It will take you one day to adjust the standard Starmade instalation to some different pirates, schema . And don't say that they are placeholders or should not impact performance and are therefore smaller, or that you want a consistent universe style. Just replace those pirates man. And then, when you guys make the factions update, they are gone anyway. It doesn't matter that bigger ships might be a problem for server owners. The servers use boring pve content all the time and have 100 excuses to not alter them. If the server owners don't like different ships, then they still easily can replace new pirates, with the boring insanths.

Just add pirate ships that are bigger than 50m. Those 20 m long ships are not hitable with beams and missiles right now. Whenever a insanth pack attacks my station, they are not a threat to my 80m long frigatte at all, but they take like half an hour to shoot down, because of their big armor.

This would really improve the experience of ALL players, and it would server owners only take like 10 minutes to replace the new ships with the old insanths, if they really are against it. It's really important imo to give the players something to actually play against.

This would be such an easy way to improve the game. Not doing this 50 cent feature (things that only take 1 day to implement) is really strange for us players. Please man. =) I know the people don't ask for it very much. But I tell you that they want that too, and I tell you that this game could be really enjoyable with some more enemies allready.

Just imagine taking out one 100m long ship, that has good rp content. This pirate would not just give the players a good fight, it also would players give this "hey lets explore one of the 30 different ships that pirates have right now" experience.

about alpha (off topic)

I am going to say that you are wrong, the alpha games I mentioned are pretty darn comparable to the current state of StarMade. Alpha is a common excuse used by fanboys of this game to sweep any criticism under the rug, it isnt exclusive to this game but it exists in this game none the less.

I was pointing out even though two of the 3 games I mentioned were in alpha, their products are not nearly as buggy and broken and contain much more content then the current state of StarMade.

Avorion in particular is very comparable because it has almost identical base gameplay (build your ship, roam and do whatever) and has been developed in shorter a period of time then StarMade (Avorion has been in development for about 4 years compared to StarMade's 6 years) with a smaller developer team (3 team members compared to Schine's listing of 12 team members on StarMade wiki) and it is in the same alpha development boat as StarMade. In spite of this Avorion is more optimized, has less gameplay inhibiting bugs and has significantly more content then StarMade.

Avorion and other space voxel alpha games demonstrate that Alpha does not stop developers from making their games run decently and be fun to play.

While I do not like saying this because I want to see this game become successful, StarMade is falling behind in the "Voxel Space Race" and if the trend keeps going as it is this games community will be empty pretty damn soon.

Avorion is not comparable, as it is not a typical block-build game. Also it has no first person. It's easier to code, the mechanics are way easier to compute.

But I agree on "alpha" is being overused and not an excuse for bugs. If I want feedback from kids about my game, I have them to give something fun to play. I mean if I had children, and would not want them to play with something that gives them a bad time. And bugs are certainly the worst type of experience. And as game developer you have this kind of responsibility: The majority of your consumers are below 18 years old, even in alpha games. So you should ask yourself, if you like your own children to play your alpha game.

Yeah, we had a very buggy phase, but right now, and I also assume with the next update, the bugs will not be so crazy. I just assume that from the dev length of this cycle. Also: Just don't release it when it has bugs, please, let it stay in pre-release until february, if that's needed to get rid of important bugs.

Anyway, no one forces us to play alpha games. It's my decission to enjoy Starmade from time to time. You know. Let's take pubg for example. I like the concept, I like the looks, I like gameplay overall, I like the looting, I like the big world, I like the match length. But it's alpha. Everyone is talking about it, and I am just like: You are all apes, it's an alpha, if the game is really so good, I pay for it when it is in beta. If it is really so amazingly good, I can purchase this overpriced game when it is finished - then there will be even more players who play it, if the game is not just good because it's popularly hyped right now, but because it really is long-term good. Right now it's just hyped. Apes. G t f o fanboys and paid streamer advert allways positive slaves. That's what I think about the pubg alpha.

I came to the point, were I really despise alpha games. They are simply not finished, and just a waste of time. Everytime I see the alpha label, I am not looking at what they promisse, I look at what it is right now. For example pubg has not a good leaver punish system, and many games have a bad quality because the players can do what they want. That's not finished gameplay, as having systems for a quality competetive experience is a basic part of a modern shooter.

A good positive example is Rimworld. It was a good and fun time to play in every alpha number. Another positive example is Empyrion. It has working gameplay. But. Empyrion has no story and seems not to give players good quests or the ability to make complex buildings that use logic to manipulate texts and stuff. It's not deep enough for a long term play, so I stopped playing it, until I know if they ever going to integrate that deep-rp possibilities. Without them, a sandbox game misses out a big opportunity (add complex quests that players can make easily themself Schema, pleaaase =) ).

I only make an exception for Starmade when it comes to having high hopes, as the most important part, being creative, allready works for me here. And I know that pvp will work here one day, and that's why I have even more reasons to stick around. Without a good combat system, building in creative for rp becomes meaningless. So as a creative builder I also have reasons to hope and care for a good pvp system.

 

[Thingie]

Turret aim mode: manually aim turrets from your mothership

Stealth/Recon: New system for players to hide or gain information about their opponent

Ability to save and load inventory hotbar layouts

Some pretty spiffy things i look forward to seeing (I don't play devbuild releases).

 

[Scypio]

Uh... 9 pages of comments already ? Go to sleep guys.

When are you going to fix the problem of spaghetti ships? Or does Lancake still not think they're broken because the math works out when you look at things entirely from a numbers only config perspective?

Even for me, mathematically, ships' balance is a complete mess. Was it some discussions on the chat or somewhere i can read about ? Well, not like it'll change a lot but that could still be informative.

 

[schema]

Just to clear up on the myth size of schine and development. While there have been more members at one point, the code development was at any point in time at max 3 people. And at least 4.5 of those 6 years, I've been programming alone. We are trying to get more developers, but it is not easy to work people in such a huge project, and it is not easy to keep them, which is why with Nightrune we opted for going with a developer that is that already very much familiar with the game.