And the merging of cores is gonna be useless if there is a 10k block limit. How can I merge my house with someone else’s house if the windows exceed the device limit or if the blocks are simply too many… Not to mention other problems.
Maybe I just misunderstand it all. But I’m getting this feeling that 5.0 is gonna be a weird patch with tons of restrictions… But can’t be worse than 4.0… 4.0 has a nearly infinite amount of exploits/imbalances it seems. I’m still finding them on an almost daily basis.
10k block limit is ideal for some people. There are plenty of ships that exceed that I personally enjoy flying. 10k block limit I think would be too severe limitation on people’s creativity. Some of the star trek ships are minimum 15k blocks. So now I can’t fly any star trek ships I want if this limitation is in place. I think 20k is more fair for everyone including people who play PVE. What the fun in flying around in a small cube?
Also the core limitation is only for BA or is it for overall? For instance if I want to make an orbital station (BA) and build a dozen ships (CV,SV) there, I wouldn’t be able to do it with the core limitation?
Wrong, but you wasn’t on Gold Planet before the 5AP exploit.
Have fun. But I see your point so I am already rewriting a lot of rules. “No CVs on PvE planets (except restricted donator Planets)” for example.
We can’t make this hardcore exceptions. I am still thinking about the NPC feedback topic and the rework… but CVs for now too.
Armaggeddon.
Well if you get to this point, gratulations. You conquered one planet but have nothing else in the rest of the universe. Have fun for the intruders or to conquer different planets you are not spread out.
I was more thinking of better defend tactics. Now you need to use 3 BA cores to have a little planetary defend system. Now you only need 1.
Don’t be so negative
Restrictions are sadly needed as long as it is needed.
As mentioned, only for BA.
But I get all your critique… instead of BA everyone will have millions of CV defense towers on the planet. If you tryhard this way, we tryhard with restrictions. Easy.
If devs wouldnt fix dat random dmg that goes through 100500 layers of armor and ruin devices… U’ll loose a lot. As for me, Battle CV less than 15k blocks - useless. Its just waste of time.
Rexx, one thing that confuses me is this block limit, is it per player and faction at the same time? For example, my faction can have up to 1 BA and 3 Cvs per game field, if yes that is ok, but besides that would be only private ships of members of the faction, example, in Jagal there is already 3 CVs of the faction and BA and later Could only private ships of members of the faction be there?
And as for the 10k block limit, it would be for everything a player can contruct, example I can build 1k 5k blocks and a 5k blocks BA and soon could no more do any other ship, and this way it works?
Or is the 10 k block just for each ship?
Another issue is with the creation of limits by field of play by factions, it means that the tax system will no longer be necessary since the faction could only by a nucleus in the player field, you could restrict the faction planets to only one nucleus of BA For each faction and levy taxes only on the CVs stationed on the planets, so the bases would be just places where the groups would hold resources used in wars or trade.
That’s what I meant. Thanks . I’m glad you agree that we NEED these rules. Otherwise this is the first thing a lot of players would be doing on both PVE and PVP on day 1. I’m glad you write the rules at forehand regarding things like this.
I’m surprised that BA’s cost more server performance than CV’s though… That’s super odd because they are basically the same only they are immovable. There must be something odd then that makes them drain more. No I wasn’t on gold planet that early. I was still care-bearing in Milky Way under the old rules I bet .
What I meant: Of course you would do this to a very important playfield (orbit more likely, like Homeworld now). Dividing the entire galaxy in two and also semi-automatically occupying all planets within that playfield. Effectively you occupy 1 orbit + 5 planets while having to do almost nothing to defend it. But this will only work if the playfield does not bug out at max cores and instead prohibits new cores. But since this will still trigger “Armaggeddon” this won’t even happen. That’s good
Yes perhaps I’m too negative… It’s just… I can’t believe the devs actually fixed&improved so much complex code for one patch while adding more features. It just sounds too good to be true. And such big changes usually mean: lots of bugs&exploits at first which may destroy PVP again (especially in small ships). But we can only wait and see so I should&will shut up about 5.0.
Thanks for answering all my ‘negative’ questions & critique. I just don’t want anything bad to slip through. I’ll just wait it out.
[quote=“AlexAKM, post:16, topic:2629”]
If devs wouldnt fix dat random dmg that goes through 100500 layers of armor and ruin devices… U’ll loose a lot. As for me, Battle CV less than 15k blocks - useless. Its just waste of time.
[/quote]Had that yesterday… Evengy shot through multiple layers of spaced armor and damaged a component inside… Then the repair bay bugged so I had to drill my way through it to repair it… Sigh… But if I understood Rex correctly this will all be fixed.
he didnt know that. And Im sure - no one knows. We already send tons of video materials with bugs, and there is no reaction till now. And we didnt sure, that 5.0 fix that all…
[quote=“RexXxuS, post:10, topic:2629”]
Yes, 30k seems to much after some testings yesterday. Guess it will around 10-17k again.
[/quote]Oh I assumed Rexxus has access to pre-experimental versions (closed testing) and thus already verified that this is fixed. Especially since he works closely together with the devs I guess. He owns the only worthwhile server for this game and reports a lot of bugs/exploits.
absolutely 15k. 30k is way too much. Alltough depends how much net code and collision problems is improved. If theres improvement, i would keep class 4
Boys, I can only consider a ship of this size and presence when we can, move within it with the same moving and have a system of alliances, a ship like this does not deserve to be piloted by a single player, it should rather captain a squadron of CVs and Svs going to attack an enemy planet
The issue has matured I have such a plan. How will the work of the turret in the next update? All as the range of the base turrets firing at the Golden Planet will be 200 meters? All well and range of weapons on-board capital will be 800-900 meters?
If yes, then why you need a base on the planet? How does it protect? If you still have a problem with stealth ships and turrets that do not lead them on the fire, the update does not bring absolutely nothing positive.
meant. that block count neither is not necessary to go down, if net code is improved enough, Best ofcourse would be that, net code would be so good that restrictions is not need, but i dont think they can improve it that much.
I have a question to the administration. If you impose restrictions on the cores, then tell how it will look if the interaction within the faction, will be carried out as a collaboration between the factions. Imagine the situation: Somewhere in space, the member of the base set. He named as standard, base. Flies another member of the faction, asked “whose base?” Master database is not in the game. No one confessed. As a result - Base demolished, labor in vain. Then apologize, etc … Why this crap? Do game developers have optimized the game so in version 5.0., Which can not be played in 4.0 without ogranchieny the number of bases and ships within the faction.
Can I get a choice? It is necessary to make the limit for the installation of the nuclei in the playing fields (eg homeworld, satium planet, pirate planet), etc … 30 cores maximum. Above, can not be put. In PvP worlds, this problem will be resolved by the players - will demolish the nucleus, thereby exempt under him. In PvE worlds - or will look for other worlds, or to settle in PVP, or wait when the player stops playing.
Question. Rexxx, why do limitations in all directions, if I may confine the restriction in the 30 cores on the field? Why put a restriction within the faction? How to play the pirates? With 3 base, I can not grab someone else’s base or ship. Do I have to bear in its core, destroy everything that has been done? Why is it so difficult?
And what prevents a large Guild on the server to share a few small example for 2 players in the guild. So instead of 63 bases in a guild, we will get 90 databases. Where are the savings? The right thing to do for 3 private base and factional depending on the size of the guild. Membury the more, the more bases. 10 people - 10 bases. 1 person - 1 base. So the right thing?
I actually really agree with this. From my experience both in se and emp, as well as coding games and visual engines myself, blocks are not nearly the concern that devices are. While I agree that it is wise to implement a restriction immediately after a wipe, rather than once people get built up, it my be worth testing what moving the block restriction back to 30k does to server performance, while keeping 500 devices. I would expect it to run just fine, especially considering if you are limited to half the devices that you currently have, many pvp ships may sacrifice bulk in order to keep rotation speed high. Then you wind up with the ability for ships designated as factories or carriers to be big enough to fill the role, while remaining class 3. I dont know enough about the inner workings of the admin tool yall built, but I would actually really like to see allowances for each faction to have one “mothership”, something that can have a little more devices/blocks.
. I’m glad you agree that we NEED these rules. Otherwise this is the first thing a lot of players would be doing on both PVE and PVP on day 1. I’m glad you write the rules at forehand regarding things like this.