Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Feedback' started by JayCo, Jul 14, 2015.
So can we get the web removed?
Space Spider Alien Race confirmed...?
Haha just about. I'm currently adding 2 more orbits now. should be done shortly.
BIGGER planets - are they coming?
Last time I checked, we still don't have "ball" planets, but I'm more interested in sheer size of planets anyway.
Last I heard, is Incoming, but ETA currently unknown.
I also wonder if the Size Boost will also provide deeper Undergrounds for Planets too?
Hello there, sorry for long silence. Got myself again employed so been quite busy
Now, you're absolutely spot on with three first points, so let me elongate a tad bit more on the question you had.
There's plenty of research, which seems to currently indicate (most of it made by NASA, so it's easy to find and English as well) that planets without satellites are not able to sustain proper magnetic field and are very prone to catastrophic changes in axial tilt. So to our current knowledge planets without proper magnetic fields are very void of life, because of cosmic radiation killing almost anything. This can however be combated with super thick atmosphere (like in Venus) or life hiding deep inside planets crust. But more importantly the radical and relatively fast changes on axial tilt of the planet resets seasons and even location of major oceans, which fastens the pace water escapes to the space and effectively leads into mass extinction events on very short schedule. So complicated life has very little time to develop before it would need to be on a level that it understands major tilt swap is coming and has enough time to hide or run. However truth is that it's all just educated guesses, since we can't yet prove if Mars has had any advanced lifeforms before Hellas collision event tore away half of the planet and we can't yet even prove if Hellas was originally satellite of Mars or not
Multiple star systems more planets and larger planets. Ability to modify what planets are starter planets when you play single player.
honestly think your current planet tech is not so good. Should strongly consider investing in real procedural tech. I would sign up first for a kick starter if needed.
Since 5.1 everything is so dark at night and bright during the day. Also when you can see something leans flares blurs the rest.
Can i see properly please ?
Personally I like the dark being dark it emphasizes the survival aspect of the game.
The dark should be feared until we get better tech.
Personally I would like to see space suit gear to combat the dark.
checkout Suggestion: Space Suit Equipment (Vision Augments)
Until then i just carry lots of work light 2 around.
Hear a nasty sound drop a couple and hope i can see it coming.
A short head up. I basicly stoped playing the game. Reasons:
1. Missing option for meteorites in single player
2. Missing spherical planets and moons without borders
As soon as those issues are solved, I will be back in.
Can you elaborate?
I assume you want the meteorites to fall in single player and not just in MP? Personally I had always hoped that the meteorites would be replaced with a much more logical game system and cease to fall in MP as well. It has to do with the planets.
So far as I understand it the planets that are currently being used are "placeholders." That is why they don't have the proper borders and goofy instances. So maybe when the real planets are in meteors won't be necessary as planets with enough resources can be created to support MP. Players just might start having to dig deeper or maybe mine underwater etc.
I get it about the planets. I really do. Even though they are pretty, the tiny size of them coupled with the no-go zones and the instancing would be weak as hell even for a console game. For a pc game it's just well.. sad.
And at the last I doubt I will be playing very much either until the planets are fixed and more planety.. As it is the immersion of the game is destroyed as soon as I hit the barrier or come to realize that the "planet" I'm on is only about 8km in diameter. It's really just a giant asteroid and not a planet at all.
Everybody who is testing this game goes through cycles where they get burned out and have to give it a break. Hopefully they'll get the planets working a lot better soon. It seems to be their lowest priority though.
Frankly it really bothers me. It makes me feel like they really don't have an ambition for anything better or more immersive planetwise and my fear is that it is because of the growing focus on multi-player. Large interesting planets are going to be a problem in MP mode as currently the game can barely manage the tiny little planets we're using now. Really I expect the devs to announce any day that the SP mode is going away so they can focus on PVP issues or some trash. It'll be much easier to make that game you see.
It's really hard to test a game when you see it going off in a direction you don't like.
Supposedly. But I don't see any work on this happening at all. Also it's really very promising when they go about beautifying the tiny planet place holders instead of showing their work on the actual real planets. Nevermind the rest of the galaxy generation they have promised.
Just show me one real damned planet! Just one if you can!
Wow. nothing in the planetary thread in forever. So, here's my $0.03 (inflation)
1: Spherical Planets and moons. Based 0n what I've seen while travelling over the map and how it relates to the polar cap and all the issues with proper rendering of solar position north of about 20 degrees, I think the best probable solution for this should be for each planetary zone to be one larger playfield. Basically, the Planet, orbit, and moon are all rendered together at varying LoD in one virtual playfield space with the surface of the planet and moon being rendering spherically. I understand that this may not be physically possible in the current engine, but it's the most logical solution for the polar cap issue. It would also allow for the theoretical ability to actually see large objects in oribt (Death star, anyone?) and have seamless insertion from orbit to atmo, as they'd be the same playfield. Unfortunately, I see this as also presenting an issue with being able to keep properly optimized data for larger planets. As, we'd want something in the 5k meter radius instead of the 1300 we have now. (I think that a 1:1000 reduction would be more than acceptable) if we made the orbital space bigger and then allowed us to move the moons further out, we might be able to then 'subdivide' the playfield into zones so that the moon and planet have differing localized areas (which I believe happens now already?)
2: Orbital Mechanics. I would like to see moons oribt their planets and planets orbit the star. As of right now, of course, we have to artificially build 'solar systems' by putting groups of planets away from each other and then connecting them via wormholes, but I suspect that will change, what with the fourth map option. So, when that happens, I would rather see the sectors.yaml have orbital data for distance from the sun and mass of the planet and then calculate the orbital speed based on those. Ideally, I would love to see a generation schema that can dynamically generate solar systems whole from the seed. However, this is a game, so hand-picking the planets allows for us to have more control over the planets and solar systems and therefore, we can better assure that we have a playable system for ourselves and our players. This would make asteroid stop-over stations amazingly useful. It would also require people who are planning trips to the outer rim plants to carefully plan their trips so that they don't get stuck until a waypoint planet swings around again.
3: As above, multiple star systems. Rather than 160 planets hanging out around one star, we should start moving towards multiple star systems so that we can spread everyone out. Perhaps have a system whereby you have to use zascosium and/or erestrum to further modify pentaxid to make higher power warp crystals that are then used to travel between stars. I personally like the current in-system warp set up, as it allows us to continue to separate the playfields for speed and optimization.
4: With orbital mechanics and star systems, we should be able to set up stellar types. Red dwarves, red giants, white supergiants, regular yellows, etc. The full chart of spectral classes is out there for us to experiment with. A single dim red dwarf with one lonely lava planet or the large main sequence yellow with a close-in gas giant and several 'green' moons. We want it .all.
You dreamer . I would be happy if we would get just ONE planet with a radius of 10 - 20 km with no borders.
Lets hold on and hope for this first step, before we look up at the end of the ladder.
Never stop reaching for the stars!
Pulsars (X-Ray, Gamma, Radio)
Super Nova (how would you like to exit warp into this system)
I think we already got Asteroid Belts. Hell yeah to the rest!
The problem with Black Holes, Pulsars, Neutron Stars and Super Nova are that they are instant-death scenarios. There is no valid reason that we'd be close enough to one for it it be in the game without the characters instantly dying from it. Neat concept, not so much feasable.
They could be placed beyond the Space Playfield Borders.