Bad idea : shovels can dig, this deforms the voxel terrains. Give them sticks instead.

With no melee attack... HAHAHAHA !

 

damn it.
did you remember it all or did you research it?

I ask because I remembered them saying but I had no idea where.

 

post removed this is going off the rails

 

I remembered but I had to search a while to find the threads, because I forgot the name of the Youtubers so I had to search many of Hummel's and Taelyn's posts.

The point is not "did they ask for it" but "was it created for them" : nobody asked for CPU the way it was done.

The "CPU for structural blocks" is what directly contradicts the quote "There possibly *might* be a slight performance gain" in the written Q&A thread I linked. If CPU had nothing to do with server performance, then why limit structural blocks? What does "ship class" bring to singleplayer games ?

"Lagshot" has nothing to do with PvE : it's the result of two opposing client actions at each end of the network, whereas PvE is always client vs server (much shorter delays). Besides that, the AI does not complain on forums if players are overpowered relative to them, but PvP players will if they get zapped by technical problems rather than by opponent's skills.

Check the 3rd item here , "Artificial lag/ lag switch".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheating_in_online_games

This explains how lag affects mostly PvP, as in PvE the server manages the AI relative to the client's coordinates, it is not depending on "perceived" positions like players do visually.

That's a completely different topic (apart from the 1st sentence which I already addressed). That CPU was originally described as attempt to solve lagshot has nothing to do with players lacking civility on forums. And the first one to pull on the "divide" trigger here was not @Joij but @CyberMech . Why didn't you quote him instead of Joij ?

.

 

First of all, thanks for new groups and POIs - that's great.

I would think it would be great if you included the EmpyrionScripting and computer blocks in the game. Because the feedback I get from players who use this is extremely positive.

 

I just said what I needed, and drew attention to the long-standing wound of the game with which everyone seems to have already resigned themselves and are trying to ignore, especially those who play a single game or grow tomatoes. Such players do not care about these problems, because their ships often eat a T3 processor and that's more than enough for them to fight stupid NPCs.

 

When you write a wall of text describing "problems" and 2 other players (ravien_ff and me) point you to the server owners who have a responsibility to adjust their game, your reply is borderline "divisive" but I did not make a big case of it.

Then when 2 players (Joij and me) point you towards the real reasons behind CPU another guy (Stanley Bourdon) drops from the sky asking this complex task of finding the "proof" of what we say. Have I not been following this topic closely at that time, I would have not been able to find all what I remembered, and this "give me proof" is now changed to "I don't want battles between PvP and PvE/ singleplayer".

This is called "changing the premiss" as it changes the focus of the discussion from "prove me that CPU was made for PvP" to "Do not start a battle PvP against PvE against Singleplayer etc". That's an evasive maneuver. And from the short history of these few posts it's quite obvious that you were the one who first started pointing fingers at the other groups (PvE / singleplayer) so my question, which was not addressed to you but to @stanley bourdon , still remains : why quoting any of me or @Joij if the "real problem" he sees is "divisive attitudes" and not so much about "CPU is for PvP".

Because I brought proof now he can't point a finger at Joij and me, but he's still not pointing a finger at you, if his real concern is "divisive attitudes".

And to be honest, that's a lame way to try to get out of trouble. I don't mind searching the forums for 2 hours to find information nor to try to act neutral in topics where I could easily pick sides, but then being told it was not the topic is insulting and shows me some players are here way more for causing trouble than trying to understand topics or to discuss like mature, adult people.

 

post removed this is going off the rails

 

I don't mind anymore what you may be thinking Stanley. It's clear you have no clue what you're talking about and just try to win points, subjects don't matter to you. Now confusing splash damage with lagshot, at best keeping your wording vague to keep a few escape routes open.

Good day.

 

How is it "not correct" when on a PVP server your opponents will be under the same building constraints as you?

Also I don't think ships need to have all these bells and whistles in PVP. Why would you need a hanger in PVP when SVs are useless in a battle? Why would you need a mini farm and kitchen on your battle ship when you can just get food from one of your bases? Do you really need an elaborate and exposed bridge that can easily be destroyed like a Super Star Destroyer? Is oxygen even necessary when you already have a suit which you can fill up with O2 bottles in your inventory? Does it even need to be airtight when you can just use suit boosters to make yourself immune to radiation and extreme temperatures?

 

And what does the server owners have to do with the basic things of the game? The scenario, star map? "All right. Ship size class restrictions? "All right. Turn the game on the wrong side by adding or subtracting 45100111051 CPU or from the character to make a superman capable of carrying a CV engine and an oven in his pocket? - In the trash such nonsense. It's none of their business to rebalance the blocks and devices of the game. Add a function for those things that do not work yet, such as NPC-crew-I agree, but definitely not in terms of changing the fundamental things. And in general, I do not find any sense in all this huge number of servers. The game needs a cluster of 5-6 official servers with a capacity of 50 people, the ability to move between them through a huge warp ring and a single balance of the game, such as it was conceived by the developers.
The balance of the CPU, the system of weight / volume, the strength and weight of the blocks, the performance of the devices are all fundamental things before which should not concern any outside people at all. It's a bullshit. Such things should be customized by developers, and players can modify some things that are not yet working, like a large radar, a crew, etc., thereby showing and helping the developer to implement possible functions for such things.
So do not try to tell me that "You have a car from the factory, but you yourself can find the wheels / engine / interior somewhere in the trash heap and install it yourself."

 

I don't want to sound rude, but you too have no clue what you are talking about. What we can mod and what rests on the developer's shoulders are the complete contrary of what you mention. If you knew what you were talking about you would have seen the numerous posts by the game developers saying what we can modify, and what they will not release (for now) for us to modify. If you had tried modding, anything, even just some easy .ecf stuff, you would understand what it is all about and how easy it is, and how unrealistic your suggestion to make NPC crew (what? the model? The scripts and animations ? The core AI to drive them ? WTF are you talking about here ?) or a large radar ( show me how you do that please).

What you describe as "fundamental" is actually secondary, and what you suggest could be made by players is "fundamental" and only the developers can access it. That's the base if you want to discuss this topic. If you don't grasp this then you are just wasting everyone's time.

If you have no clue how to customize CPU by yourself, don't start talking about making NPCs or coding devices (radar) which we have no clue how they are coded in the first place.

 

How is it "not correct" when on a PVP server your opponents will be under the same building constraints as you?

Also I don't think ships need to have all these bells and whistles in PVP. Why would you need a hanger in PVP when SVs are useless in a battle? Why would you need a mini farm and kitchen on your battle ship when you can just get food from one of your bases? Do you really need an elaborate and exposed bridge that can easily be destroyed like a Super Star Destroyer? Is oxygen even necessary when you already have a suit which you can fill up with O2 bottles in your inventory? Does it even need to be airtight when you can just use suit boosters to make yourself immune to radiation and extreme temperatures?

Spoiler: Example

I have already written about this above, I do not understand what can be unclear here, and even more so if it does not concern your style of play... I'm not suggesting removing all NPCs from the game by replacing them with players, or allowing 44544154 turrets to be built, although many PVE players would very much like that.

I just pay attention to the lack of balance when playing on a server with a CPU system, as well as the fact that in its current form it does not allow you to build many different shapes and designs of ships from the world of Sci-Fi. Have you seen for example the star destroyer cruiser from Star Wars for a long time so that it is compatible with the CPU system? No, not 151560 size class, but within the gold standard = 10.50.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1470859023&searchtext=mod
It doesn't exist, just like other ships that require a lot of engines for their mass or to reproduce a +- reliable design, and within 10kk they are just useless and slow-moving garbage that can kill even a civilian ship with 5kk CPU.

Maybe then, in general, according to your logic, you need to build a horse of their cubes, sit on it and fly through space catching space feces after space whales with your mouth? XD
The experience of the game and its mechanics suggest that when you are flying in your business for 44,150 years from home to dig ore or for some other reason, and suddenly you see that you can attack the player, what do you say to him, “hey friend! wait here, I'll fly to the base in 2 hours, take a warship and come back here to shoot you "? XD Of course not) You either run in horror, only so that you will not be noticed or attack if you have the means.
Have you watched science fiction for a long time? Star Trek at least? They did not return to base for months and at the same time very often either defended or attacked themselves. This became especially true when developers introduced many solar systems. Space has become a little more realistic and PVE players have become calmer, because it is no longer possible to block the paths of a warp jump while sitting in ambush next to them, or very quickly within 20-30 minutes to find someone to attack. Now you need to spend 2 hours to track someone down, and it is far from the fact that your victim will still be online. I don’t understand what are you afraid of all the time? This is a game, people come here to feel like a lone khan and get into trouble or become a dark Jedi who laid siege to the planet of farmers

 

Probably the difficulties of translation interfere with us.
The large revolving radar has been made functional in the reforged eden scenario.
The NPC was also endowed with at least a primitive functionality that reduces CPU consumption. Moreover, this is even on the HWS server.
I didn't say anything about animation. A game scenario has always existed before in steam workshops.
I didn't say anything about AI, I just touched on problem of T5-T6 CPU.

 

Possible.

That is .ecf modding, which we (and server owners) can do.

This is also .ecf modding which we (and server owners) can do.

I know you didn't mention these, that's why I asked you about what you mean by "making NPC".

That is all part of what we are allowed to modify by ourselves. But we (or server owners) don't have to modify everything to solve one or two problems. If CPU is a problem, then just modify CPU values so they fall below the actual extender limits, very simply. No need to make a T5 or T6, just make a quick search & replace all CPU mentions with lower values. Even a noob can do that with very basic instructions.

And there is a whole history to why Eleon gave us all these modding options : they spent lots of time tweaking these secondary aspects of the game because players kept complaining the game was too this and that, and after each tweak other players came complaining the game was now too off balance the other way. That was a huge waste of time for Eleon, so they made the very smart move to give us all power to fix this ourselves.

Now at this point I can only repeat what I already mentioned in my previous posts, or what I just wrote. You drop here and ask for modifications to be done by Eleon, while I just explained (a few times now) that it's all up to us (or server owners) to do it. They may do some more balance at some point in time, but that is really not worth a long rant like you wrote because doing it ourselves takes even less time than the time we waste here arguing about it.

That's why I wrote "Take that to server owners" and "lazyness is not a virtue". Players always have lots of energy when it comes the time to argue, but surprisingly they don't have an ounce of energy to open a text file and see what they can do, without getting all riled up from unsatisfying forum arguing and having the developers not responding, or just throwing a simple " Sure, will do, but not now".

 

This makes no sense. You want a fully functional star destroyer yet insist that it has to be small? Its most likely going to be size 15 or 20 not under 10.50. Also true 1:1 scale star destroyers can't even exist do to the games 242x242x242 voxel block limit. That means you can only get a ship approximately 484 meters in length, where as a Star Destroyer is 1,600 meters.

As far as CPU is concerned, you can make anything work if your using Reforged or Reforged Eden. Crew members give negative CPU in those mods, so if you buy a lot of them and place them on your ship you can get rid of all your CPU points without having to worry about extenders. Crew is expensive however, and they only take away a small amount of points, so you'll likely be grinding for one full year of IRL playtime just to get something the size of a star destroyer to work CPU wise, and that's not even the resources you'll also need to grind for just to build it.

PVE players want to build those kinds of ships? NO, its only the PVP crowd that builds those types of ships. Sci-fi looking ships are always built by the PVE crowd that plays on singleplayer because they are not under the same constraints as a multiplayer server.

Don't blame people who only play singleplayer for creating those ugly ships. Those are a product of PVP culture, and it seems you don't really like how PVP culture works and how it emphasizes function over form. So instead you blame all it's shortfalls on the singleplayer crowd when they have nothing to do with that.

 

A short note on this part.

If CPU was made to lower strain on servers, I think it's counter-productive to require NPC models to lower CPU costs, since these models are even more costly than other devices (if not THE most costly models in game) regarding computing demand. One NPC model might represent thousands of faces, while other devices may have only a fraction of this. Just my 2 cents.

 

Size class is for single player and server performance. Restrictions are set on the max size class allowed for official POIs, and servers can set their own size class limits. In single player there is no size class limit.
Size class is based on how much of a performance impact any given blueprint will make. So the more block faces are showing, more detailed models, more lights or devices, etc, all affect the size class of a blueprint. The idea is it's there to prevent one player from lagging out a server, or in the case of POIs to make sure a POI doesn't lag out a single player game.

CPU is for progression and ship specialization. It's an option to enable or disable under the game difficulty settings in single player, or gameoptions.yaml for servers. It has nothing to do with game or server performance. Whatever info they gave in the first dev blog, obviously they have since changed the purpose of the CPU system.
There are also no restrictions on the max CPU of official POIs submitted. If CPU was meant to limit the performance impact of blueprints, then there would be a CPU limit on official POIs, and there wouldn't be an advanced core that allows unlimited CPU, and CPU costs of blocks and devices would be based on the performance impact they incur instead of their power and function.

I didn't want to involve myself in this discussion, but since CPU balance is an important part of both the default game and custom scenarios (some previously mentioned on this post), I wanted to clarify that CPU is a game balance and progression mechanic, NOT a game performance and server stability mechanic.

Of course I'm not a developer, and ultimately someone will say that I'm wrong and that CPU is there as a limiter for performance reasons and that is certainly their opinion to have. But I ask them then why are CPU costs assigned to devices based on their strength and function instead of being assigned based on their performance impact, in both the default game and custom scenarios?

 

I loved these new factions and ships. Adorable.
And the blog entries are so awesome.

One thing I think it's missing though is a feature to set difficulty of those large CVs to something other than "impossible".
Those Lvl 1 large destroyers are so much harder than enemy bases on planets, even the shielded ones. And in space, you can't hide.
Maybe options to balance shield, weapons range and damage, I dunno.
Or a single multiplication factor in a config file that would affect every weapon, shields and spawn rates for a group of enemies.

 

I linked videos where the developer explains what is CPU. It is not exclusively a performance feature, it also serves the purpose you described, and it is not exclusively what you described either.

Values changed a lot since the first iteration of the feature (it was enabled by default and couldn't be disabled, remember ?). They simply toned down and adjusted values with feedback to some extent. Structural blocks costing CPU completely fall out of any rational explanation, even out of the one you just mentioned.