|
Spookydonut posted:Yeah I doubt planets and moons will actually move. Also to deorbit a chunk of moon would take stupid amounts of thrust/energy. I'm interested to know how the gravity will affect ships, will you be able to orbit? I presume that's why the sun will be orbiting around the planets and not the other way around - giving the impression of a day/night cycle by moving the light source around rather than having to calculate the orbits of the planets themselves.
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2015 12:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
Spookydonut posted:I'd say that's more simulation of planet rotation for a day/night cycle, orbital path doesn't determine that. Pretty much exactly what I was going for, I'm just pants at explaining things. Bottom line being that as cool as it'd be for planets and moons to orbit eachother 'realistically', the thought of Keen's netcode moving around whole freaking planets makes me twitch.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 01:55
|
|
|
OSad posted:So, if a dedicated survival server is having spasms where FPS is dropping to single digits, objects occasionally go flying across space with the lightest of bumps (only to a second or two later, return to where they were), and your inability to grind/weld anything in the game world, followed by a very large perceived delay when trying to interact with objects, is it a mod problem or something? Doubleposting, but the main issue is that Space Engineers is far from optimized; there're memory leaks, the netcode was coded by a drunken Belarussian monkey and is being held together with baling wire and hopeful thinking, and that's not factoring in high-load sectors - as you build or bring in more ships and stations into a given area, the zone gets heavier for the server and the players' computers to process. Basically what's happening is that the combined load of memory leaks taking up more and more processing power from the computers involved and your general area getting more resource-intensive, things are getting slower to process. Coupled with network lag, it's easy for items to end up in a desynced state where you have two computers trying to convince the server that a given object is in two different spots, compounded by the server probably placing it somewhere else. The game can't figure out where the ship should really be and it ends up twitching and flickering between states until the physics engine glitches and launches the offending object into a more or less random direction (and then one of the computers goes 'hey, that should be here', and it reappears where it started..). Also, when the server's loaded enough, it starts slowing down physics calculations to try and keep stuff from exploding, which makes everything slow down to a crawl. In your case, you took out the solar arrays and that brought down server load just enough to make the lag more tolerable - then you added in the cargo ship you captured and that was more load in your area. If you move away (say, 10, 20km away) from your base you'll notice things speed up as the things you left behind get stored instead of being actively loaded in your reality bubble. And yes, things aren't helped at all by SE not supporting multicore processors. Anyhow, besides waiting for Keen to get an actually functioning build of the netcode out, there's little you can do besides keep your area clean and 'simple' - grinding up or moving unused ships further away, for example, and simplifying your designs. Mobile ships use up more computing power than immobile stations, and simple armor blocks use up less computing power than blocks that actually -do- something. Unfinished blocks take up more processing power than finished blocks (mostly because there's no display culling and scaffolds have more triangles than simple cubes) so finishing up any projects can make things easier for you. The server settings also have the 'number of floating objects' and 'automatic cleanup' toggles for performance - the former limits the amount of floating pickupable objects (like floating chunks of ore and components) that can be in existence at a time, the other makes 'garbage' like severed blocks and simple wreckages disappear if there aren't any players around them for a while. Rebooting the server regularly can also help - like I said, there are memory leaks, and if you're got a 24/7 dedicated server running, it's going to end up taking shitloads of resources just to handle the 'trash data' left by the memory leaks. Rebooting will clear up the crud from your RAM and give you a little performance boost, at least until the leaks compound again.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
OSad posted:I see. Thank you very much. Last time I checked, we did have quite a few captured NPC ships just sitting there waiting to be deconned, right next to our little construction area next to some unfinished ships. Might be worth it to move those to their own little dedicated scrapyard 10 kilometers out or so. That'd absolutely do it. Another option I like to do is plonk down a 'station' of a single starting block, attach a merge block to that, and then just start fusing ships to it. Mobile ships use up more powrer than immobile stations, so the idea is to just fuse all those loose ships into a single massive stationary 'space hulk'. It also makes it much easier to deconstruct and salvage them since once the ship is a part of the station, any sections mof it that get severed are physically unable to float away even if they wanted to. Still probably best to set up a designated junkyard somewhere a bit away from your main base. Bonus points if you make a dedicated Junkyard Dawg patrol drone.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:Nah, just having to render all those blocks will eat the CPU anyway. On another topic, turns out there's a fun bug with this week's build - anything constructed with a Projector blueprint will start off with all its blocks turned Off Ooh. What mod are those gatling guns from? Much prefer them to the stock model.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2015 13:41
|
|
.
.
|
GotLag posted:Don't vents already refuse to output when they're not in a sealed room? Yes, they do. The update basicaly means that the vent changing its status can be used as a trigger signal for timer blocks or computer blocks - say, vent detecting a pressure breach in your main hallway, slamming down pressure doors in the area, and triggering a hull breach and atmo loss alert. Drake_263 fucked around with this message at 14:52 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
zennik posted:Servers are live again! Yay! Been too long since I got to mess around with goons.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2015 10:43
|
|
|
So fair warning for anyone on the goonserver, the server's set to delete starter ships when you logout. I went to play with a friend of mine earlier and didn't find the ship I'd built with Kermit. Well, I merged my starter turd with a friend's, made a little base out of that - and when I logged out, the ship ceased to exist around my friend. So, uh, merge them into a station first and then re-make them into a ship to make it a 'not starter'. There seriously should be a warning for that - in fact there used to be, but not anymore. KEEEEEENNNNNN.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
zennik posted:It got stolen. We had it parked over at New GoonBase last I checked. We recovered it from someone. Traditional goon right there, then. Will have to start parking things in the assend of nowhere, then.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2015 18:14
|
|
|
Self-assembling, flying buttbots? Jesus on a stick.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2015 09:32
|
|
|
I ust had the idea of building gravity-operated orbital lifts. Essentially - this assuming natural gravity doesn't entirely override ArG - you'd build a giant fuckoff tower or chute lined with gravity generators st to provide negative Gs. Depending on the scale of the project it might not be enough to provide a -full- -1G (and entirely negate gravity within the zone) but it should still certainly help big sperheavy cargo lifters and the like getting off the ground and into orbit. bonus points if you estend the upper end into an orbital shipyard.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2015 13:14
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:^^^Space elevators are going to get important if they make it really difficult for large ships to operate in a planet's gravity. Don't ships basically ignore gravity right now if they don't have a mass block on them? I wonder if they are going to make "real" gravity a distinct force from artificial gravity, that affects your ship regardless of the presence of a mass block. That's exactly how it's supposed to work in the Planets patch, from what I've understoodt. Out in the black, with asteroids and stuff, ships are 'naturaly' weightless and you need a gravity generator - artificial mass-combo to get a response. In a planetary gravity well, ships will fall 'naturally'. The idea with the orbital elevator is to use up-oriented gravity generatos and artificial mass blocks on hsips to combat the 'natural' gravity and make for softer landings and easier takeoffs.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
I may or may not have to perform a new series of experiments on power/thrust efficiency ratios on the different thrusters, along with benchmarking how much power you need to run them. I'm particularly curious about that official-mod small thruster booster - if I'm correct, using a couple of boosted small thrusters should make for a fairly impressively zippy little ship without having to devote real estate to the ginormous large thruster.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
The game has little to nothing in the way of optimization at the moment, so just plain server memory leaks are very much a thing, too. Restarting frees up the memory and makes things run faster until the junk data starts building up again.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2015 10:50
|
|
|
Jackson Taus posted:So is there some secret to finding silver? It's the only metal I haven't found yet and I've looked all over for it. Sometimes the RNG just likes putting certain ores in difficult-to-reach spots. Also, the ore scanner on your drill has a very, very short range - chances are there's a deposit on an asteroid you've explored but it was just hidden underneath stone or other ores. Build a surveyor ship with an ore detector - preferably a large one, that'll spot deposits from within 150M. (Assuming Keen hasn't broken them again, sometimes it fails to show deposits that are -right there-...) Drake_263 fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Sep 29, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Zodack posted:The joke is on you - the small version already features TWO belly connectors! Two ships of the same size class, definitely merge blocks. Merge blocks fuse the two ships into a single physics component so there's no center-of-mass weirdness or the like (although you may want to disable some thrusters to keep the docked ship from melting anything important). Small ships to big ships, the connector paired with autolocking gear seems your best bet - connectors seem to have a more solid lock on them than landing gear, though the connection is slightly 'flexible'. Use both and you get the best of both worlds. The center of mass can be an issue but if your main ship is massive enough compared to the drones, there's not really much of an effect.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2015 18:39
|
|
|
Speaking of bugs, found a fun one: sometimes when you spawn in, it decides to randomly shoot you in your spaceshuiot instead of the respawn ship you picked. When you splatter yourself all across the terrain, sURRPISE - you still have your respawn ships on cooldown!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Literally Kermit posted:Planetary Landers are loving bullshit, is it because i am trying to use the atmospheric thrusters too high up? It takes practice to land one of those things safely. Basically the stock 'blueberry' planetary lander (cousin to the starter potato we all love to hate) has gently caress all for lateral thrust, your only big thrusters are the ones that keep you aloft. That means you need to keep yourself oriented appropriately -the more level you are, the stable you are, and sometimes the game likes to spawn you in with your nose pointed down. So the moment you get control, you need to find the horizon indicator and pull yourself level with it - the inertial dampeners SHOULD kick in and (gradually) arrest your descent. Yeah, the higher you are, the less effective those thrusters are, so you probably will end up about a kilometer or two lower than you started - you'll usually balance out somewhere around 2-3KM altitude. There's also a lovely bug where your thrusters cease receiving input sometimes (I blame crashing that carrier on that), so if nothing seems to be happening tap space a couple of times, wiggle the mouse, and pray. Anyhow, once you've stabilized your altitude, you're pretty much set - the blueberry only has 0.3 kilos of uranium in the reactor, but that's still enough to keep you in stable hover for several hours with no issue. Take a look around, figure out where the hell you want to set down (near a lake/ice patch is recommended, though not mandatory), and head in that general direction. The trick is to fly that thing like a helicopter - the lander weighs a whopping 350 or so tons, so it's got obscene inertia. Think bringing a type-9 to dock with a busted thruster array and 400 tons of cargo and you're close. Essentially you want to keep level, point yourself in the air ABOVE where you want to go, and try to come to a halt there - when you're above the site, you just level yourself again and gently tap the 'thrust down' button to temporarily cut your altitude thrusters. Just keep pulsing them, go slow, and you should touch down pretty nicely. Protip, as said, your lateral thrusters are pretty lazy - so if you want to accelerate/decelerate faster, you gently tip your nose a little bit down or up respectively to get a little extra vectored thrust out of your main drive. Be aware that this proportionally reduces your downwards thrust, though, so it's not the best if you're barely skimming the treetops as is. Also, when Planets first released, there seemed to be a bug in the dedicated server code that would have client ships chew through power super fast - that likely explains why when we first tried it on Zennik's server, we couldn't bring those things down intact. For some fucktarded reason you have four batteries on the blueberry, but they all start out dry and you only have less than half a kilo of uranium, so.. yeah. Better now, though.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2015 10:24
|
|
|
Immanentized posted:What's up with station blocks and planets? I can't seem to rotate or place them properly when trying to build out a new platform, and the cornerstone always ends up skewed. Is there something I'm missing? Basically when you start placing station blocks, they're aligned to the 'universe' grid, while when you're standing on the planet, your feet are pointing towards its core and therefore you're not aligned to the grid. What you need to do is start placing the block and hit B to align it with yourself. Be aware that this disconnects the station you're buiolding from the universe grid and lets you place blocks freely/gradually; this prevents you from connecting two station blocks together unless you use merge blocks. Truga posted:Anyone else have issues with batteries not charging from solar panels at all in multiplayer? poo poo, I thought I was just draining the battery so fast! Yeah, same problem here. 10 solar panels and not an erg of charge when night falls.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
Truga posted:I have 11 panels now and batteries are filling fine (though still very slowly obviously), but it could have also just been a server restart that did it It's probably the server restart. Sometimes it seems to work, sometimes not, could be related to ship welders/grinders ceasing to function after the server's been up a certain time. Edit: I had no problems when I was manually hosting the game on Thursday night, but last night/today it's been a pain in the rear end since I transferred over to my new dedicated server.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Snow, apparently, also counts as ice, not as rock as I had been left to believe. If you spawn over frozen tundra like I did, you'll essentially have enough dV to budge the planet from its orbit. (No, you can't, but still!)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
There is, apparently, a bug in the world generation code that may place ore markers on planets but fail to place the actual ores. The power system is also bugged for dedicated servers - stations anchored into the planet may experience 'ghost drain' where the station reports using 10+ MW of power on non-existent thrusters. This in addition to batteries being pretty much broken at the moment.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 01:30
|
|
|
Batteries on dedicated servers fail to build a charge. Set up a basic array with some solar panels and a single battery, set the battery on full-auto (no ticks in any boxes), you'll see it says 'input xxx, output 0, fully charged in x days' but the 'power stored' levels stay at 0. Batteries also should have about 25% of their maximum charge when placed/built, but start out at zero. (This is why they made power cells unrecoverable, so you can't cheese an infinite power source by just deconstructing/reconstructing batteries). Oddly, sometimes (very rarely) when you set the battery onto 'recharge' only it'll say it gains a steady output from somewhere even if there is no actual power source attached. What makes it exceptionally sucky is that they purposefully designed planetary bases to be mostly powered by solar panels and batteries - uranium is extremely rare on planets. Batteries being broken makes survival multiplayer basically much unplayable - it's pretty much impossible to design a ship that can maneuver with atmospheric thrusters and solar panels only. Strangely, I've had no problems with this when I've been the server host, instead of using my dedicated server - they probably hosed something up in the dedicated server netcode. Edit: Even more weirdly, batteries seem to charge themselves from reactors just fine. When my friend attached a small reactor into the solar array above, it immediately burned through what little uranium we'd salvaged from his lander (about 0.2 kg of it) but built a couple of pips of charge into the batteries. Batteries just don't interact with solar panels in a reasonable manner for some reason, now. Drake_263 fucked around with this message at 13:52 on Nov 16, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2015 13:42
|
|
|
That shuttle reminds me of the Python, in the best possible ways:
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
I have an updated compact GCV design that can actually fit through a 1x3 slot in large blocks - it can get kinda sluggish if it's loaded to the brim with cargo, but aside from that it's got everything you need, up to and including an onboard battery, solar panel, and an antenna/drone brain combo. I'll upload it when I get home from work.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
Your multipods are awesome, but in this case, a little.. involved. Which isn't to say they don't do what they're meant to - it's just that the stock GCV is pretty much designed to be the Lada of Space Engineers - simple to lay out, build and maintain, even by hand, and fast to slap one together with limited resources, making it ideal for starting a new base or mass production - because let's face it, these are goons we're talking about, sooner or later someone will crash (into) one.Spookydonut posted:Atmosphere versions are a little bit bulkier because of the need for large engines pointing downwards, and you can squeeze an oxygen generator in behind the cockpit at only the cost of 2 extra block length of the ship. Yeah, I haven't quite managed to naildown the logistics of building atmo-capable ships. The biggest issue I've noticed is that large atmo thrusters work but they're enormously huge and bulky, so you can't really make compact designs, along with them being quite power-hungry; hydrogen thrusters are more compact but require fuel feeds and the vanilla small ship hydrogen tanks have really, really low fuel capacity compared to the enormous 5x5x5 footprint. My first cute little zippy scout skimmer didn't even make it down the mountaintop I built my base on before the H2 tanks ran dry.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 08:29
|
|
|
McGiggins posted:I do not consider a space engineers session to be complete until I have needlessly crashed an essential support craft like a GCV through incompetence. poo poo like this is why I can these days put a GCV together by hand in three minutes.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2016 11:17
|
|
|
I think they changed the rendering engine for the game in the latest update so modders will have to update their mods to work with the new renderer, now? I have no idea.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2016 17:08
|
|
|
Hey so I was toying around with the idea of setting up a custom multiplayer map for potential shenanigans, and was looking for goon input. The core idea here is that I was to bring things a little closer to the 'old' Space Engineers, with a bigger focus on salvaging/stealing poo poo over enormous mining projects (which are still cool and a nice way to make large amounts of a given resource). First off, the map (which I've tentatively titled Hades Sector) is built around three large moons: Acheron, a standard Moon-type rocky moon with large ice caps; Plegethon, a Titan-type moon - looking like a miniature Mars with rusty red sald/rock outcrops and scatterings of blue-green solid ice 'lakes'; Styx, an Europa-type moon with a thick exterior shell of solid ice, and valuable ores deeper underneath the ice layers. In addition, the Lethe Debris Field is a dense collection of asteroids and wrecks of various sizes and shapes sitting in the space between the three moons. This will be custom-built and very dense - I want an Elite RES-style field where you can't chuck a rock without it bouncing off three different asteroids and dinging a pirate. Each moon is 25km in diameter so about half again the volume of your standard 20km-diameter moon. The moons themselves sit in a roughly equal triangle, about 60-80km apart; it might be 'unrealistic' but let's face it, a) it looks cool to have two enormous sister moons dominating your sky, and b) It's not like you actually need thousands of kilometers of empty space between points of interest. Respawn ships are either custom designs or entirely disabled. Instead, each moon has a small (likely indestructible, let's face it, somebody will end up dropping an orbital on top of one of these things) salvage platform with basic amenities and equipment situated in an interesting spot on the surface (next to a lake or canyon, in a big crater, whatever). Near the salvage platform is going to be a large shipwreck (likely just a Big Red dropped from 50km or so) and maybe a couple of 'crashed' small asteroids for easily accessible starting resources. Besides this, the surface of each moon is going to be littered with the remains of crashed NPC ships and fallen debris field objects - some of the former may well still have active defenses. These give the players opportunities to salvage or repurpose ships without worrying about mining into the lunar surface, and adds a bit of interest/challenge when that Minelayer you were trying to salvage starts summoning combat drones. In addition, each moon has, on the pole further away from the starting station (a 'safe' distance away) a large space pirate salvage facility. These will be heavily defended by turrets and will start spawning attack drones when you approach within 5km or so, along with smaller more lightly defended storage facilities scattered across the moonscape. These will contain plenty of ready-processed resources to loot, assuming you can fight your way past the defenses. The debris field will also likely have a handful of these larger pirate drone stations and smaller storage facilities, along with whatever the RNG decides to bless it with. NPC cargo ships and pirate drone attacks will be enabled, though I don't think meteor storms are worth the hassle right now. Specific design goals are: * A relatively 'dense' map with lots of varying things to do - there are relatively quiet safe spots where you can just build, build, build, but if you want something more exciting, action isn't far away * Multiple roughly equal starting positions make the map also viable for a 'team versus team' style game, where each team claims a moon and dukes it out in the debris field * Variety in starting positions also supports multiple playstyles or simply to give players more space without tripping over one another - one moon can be a sandbox for building all sorts of poo poo while Shenanigans are focused on the others. * Lunar bases still have certain gravity-related challenges to deal with while not being nearly as processor-heavy as full-blown planets - frankly I don't feel planets in and of themselves yet offer much interest over more classic lunar/asteroid shenanigans. The only things planet have that moons don't are a) heavier gravity, and b) active atmospheres and potential for spider/turbowolf attacks, which aren't really worth the hassle. What do you guys think?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Nuclearmonkee posted:Did they remove the start where you start in a survival pod falling through the earth planet atmosphere? Or am i just very dumb and missing it. You pick the Star System start and pick Planet Lander for you spawn ship. Mars Lander and Alien Lander are the same thing but for different planets.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:I think you should go with a planet and one or two moons, just because it's the traditional NASA-style challenge then. Room to set up groundside bases for everyone, along with free oxygen, and it gives a better separation of regions in the map than a Moon's low gravity and starlit lack of atmosphere. But my creative vision  Naw, I appreciate the input. I was toying around with the idea of adding a planet into the mix, actually - a planet, three moons (the game actually comes with three different skins/biomes for moons so there's a distinct biome/theme/resource balance separation) and the debris field. You're right, having a workable atmosphere does make things different and a 'real' planet has a lot of useful materials and resources to access, with all the hazards that come with it - I'm just unimpressed with the classic 'drop down on the planet and figure out how to dig down' type of a start.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 13:47
|
|
|
johnsonrod posted:The workshop has quite a few different planets and moons that are really well done too if you're looking for more than the standard ones. The workshop does have all sorts of awesome pregenerated planet/moon types available, yes, but I'm kind of leery to use them just to avoid the usual modder drama. (I didn't give you permission to use that, you suck and I'm going to report you blablablabla..). The less īmod content this thing is reliant of in the first place, the better. I was thinking of handplaced asteroids. It looks like Keen removed the old 'start with an otherwise empty map but a bunch of big regular asteroids' type of a map, otherwise I'd go for that and expand the debris field a little. Honestly I don't feel most players are going to need the new infinite map - or in fact, it creates problems of its own, problems shared with the usual planet start. Specifically, people in multiplayer end up starting really drat far from one another - when I play SE with my friends and we decide to spawn in our own ships, there's usually at least one poor bastard who ends up starting on the opposite side of the planet from the rest of us. At that point you either crash and respawn in one of your buddy's ships, (losing your own ship), or you crash and respawn in a new ship and hope you spawn in closer (you won't), and lastly, you can fly to your buddies (which takes forfuckingever at 100 m/sec - literally from the other side of a 100km-diameter planet is 150+ km, or near half an hour of a flight). None of those options are really fun. Spawning in generic empty space has the same issue, players generally end up separated 50-150km or so - this smells suspiciously like it's been designed to be used on big servers where you play with random people and want everybody to have their own little kingdom but really sucks for people playing in groups. (This is why I figured I'd place a common starting position on each moon, a neutral station where players can spawn, collect some resources, and head off to do their own thing in groups or otherwise - they'll obviously build their own stations and ships wherever they feel like) I haven't honestly thought about server hosts yet. Zennik, a goon, runs the APTAA Space Engineers server and he might be persuaded to run the map - other than that I've been toying around with the idea of renting a dedicated server slot somewhere (SE server slots are really cheap) for my friends and if enough people are interested I might as well make it a slightly bigger server (say, 20 or so people?) and run this there. Donations would be cool but not expected. Honestly, if/when this map is finished I'm going to put it on the steam workshop and whoever wants it can just load up a copy and run it however they like. I don't currently care about server rules or whatever, I just want to make an interesting sandbox people can play in.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Really? Usually games like this draw idiots like flies. (Shoutout to the one guy who got super salty about Keen fixing a bug that let his shield mod work and pitched a fit..)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
I am strangely surprised but you definitely won't hear me complaining! There's just something about games like this that draws out the autism in people.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
Ambaire posted:??? Why would you think mods etc are on the workshop if they weren't intended to be used? Mods are awesome and the more, the better. Mods are awesome and there's a bunch of mods I definitely won't be running a server without - some of the people who make mods on the other hand... It's less of a question of me not wanting to use mods and me wanting to avoid having to bundle mods in with the map. If the map won't run with mod A, everybody who downloads the map must also be running mod A; also, the modder who made the modded planet in the first place might take exception and decide I'm stealing their intellectual property or something equally stupid. That's why I want the core map to be as unreliant on particular mods as possible - I much rather would give people the chance to add their own mods to their liking than go 'no, this is the one and only correct way to play my map'.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
We'll see! Honestly I'm pretty fine with the choice of planets and moons already available in the game, but if anyone has any good suggestions I'd loive to hear them. Also, I just realized something - the Titan-type moon has a thin atmosphere. Not enough to keep you alive without a suit.. but apparently enough to support alien life. Specifically, sabiroids AKA giant-loving-nope-spiders can spawn there if enabled in the server. This could be interesting as long as players got to start with enough resources to defend themselves.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2016 19:11
|
|
|
Neddy Seagoon posted:Small Ship Mega Modpack, Azimuth Mega Modpack, Mexpex's battlecannon pack, Rider's cannon pack. All in the OP, and more. I meant for the planets and moons, but I'm definitely going to check these out (I think I had Azimuth at one point). I have like almost all Darth Biomech's mods but it looks like he's gotten burnt out on modding :< McGiggins posted:I think he's just wanting to be sure that the SE modders are NOTHING like some of the Skyrim modders, for example. *cough* Arthmoor *cough* A thousand times this. Like I said, the map itself is just going to be a blank canvas to play on. Individual servers and players will add whatever mods and rules they feel like.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
If I actually end up creating and running a goon server I will absolutely collect a nice set of fun and interesting mods to run it with. The map itself simply won't need mods when I build it - a couple of stock planetary/lunar bodies, a whole bunch of stock asteroids, sprinkle the area with wrecks (I figured out how to convert the ingame template files for various NPC ships into blueprints so you can spawn them on demand in creative, I'm just going to spawn a Big Red 500m up and let physics do the rest), build a couple of custom starting shelters, done.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2016 11:47
|
|
|
McGiggins posted:But like most concave holes, it tells a story! There's a your mom joke in there somewhere, I can smell it. Neddy Seagoon posted:Spawn the ship, lob a few warheads into it, paste it into the ground at an angle. Looks much nastier than a wreck sitting in a concave hole. For the big wreck right next to the starting shelter maybe. Smells a little bit like too much work if you want to do this about thirty-plus times per moonlet.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 18:49 |
|
|
I was just tootling around creative (got the converted prefab bloops working, woo!) and thoroughly impressed by the new models. Old SE had a cleaner, more stylized look, these new blocks look less Minecraft and more oily and gritty. I quite like it. And man, I love your modular fighters, Neddy. Awesome designs, big fat and stompy. Drake_263 fucked around with this message at 16:00 on Dec 24, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2016 15:41
|
|