What's the point of this post? I'm serious. You could just say you don't like seeing people post requests in a roadmap thread... Or you could just say you don't like people expressing anything but gratitude for everything that comes down the line. Or whatever. My point is I see nothing wrong with players posting complaints or requests. The feedback on the roadmap is valuable to the devs if they know what to look for. Obviously, you don't take every request or complaint as though it's one of the Ten Commandments. You use said feedback to get an understanding of what players think, and obviously with the understanding that not every player can articulate what they'll end up enjoying in the end. Kaeser's post is pretty spot on for many reasons, but the one I think I agree with most is this: The roadmap states an intention of bringing a better experience to the late stages of the game, but a lot of the listed upcoming additions or changes don't reflect that intention. Or if they do, they certainly don't make it clear to the existing playerbase that the design choices exhibit an understanding of what exactly needs to be improved about the later stages of the game. I've made a number of my own requests elsewhere, so I won't bother repeating them here. Nor will I bother to break down the roadmap. A lot of it looks potentially interesting to me, but unless Taelyn (or any of the devs) are planning on further elaborating on what their intentions are, I don't see a point. A lot of it is kinda vague and we'll just have to wait and see it. Some I see looking good, some I see being a potentially bad direction or wasted effort. TL;DR: rude and/or ungrateful sounding posts are still valuable feedback. The only thing to gain from the tone of the posts is that the user might not be gifted at articulating their desires in a professional manner.
Steam says I have 4,199.5 hours of play in Empyrion. I think it must be more like 5,500 as a result of play in 2015-17 when Steam's hour logging seems to have been more inconsistent and impacted by offline play. Obviously I love the game, and felt that it was always moving in the right direction. Some of the decisions made in the course of development have been absolutely brilliant, namely: making a lot of the major game-mechanic alterations (e.g., Mass, Volume, CPU Limits) optional, and paying close attention to both the "middle-ground" of consensus in their community as well as the more fringe elements, and always attempting to design the game so as to satisfy as many people as possible and provide MORE OPTIONS to end-users, rather than less. That sentiment is sadly far too uncommon in game development overall and it has been one of the main reasons I've played so much Empyrion: it has almost always been possible to play the game how one wanted to play it. A large fraction of all my hours have been with Reforged Eden "Scenario" and I also have always had good feelings about that mod and the direction it was going. I've always disagreed with some of the "Player Must Die A Lot" mentality which seems to have guided the balancing in RE. But on the whole, I've always been able to play the game how I wanted so it has never felt like a "dealbreaker." The last time I played 7 months ago I was flummoxed that the Anvil server changed settings yet again, and made some of my favorite blueprints obsolete, else in need of more updates. This is probably my biggest gripe with the game: the periodic changes to the base game and/or to RE have made scores of my blueprints obsolete by now and redesigning old BPs or re-inventing the wheel every few years has grown tiresome. The other thing I've wished for in the game for years is an "hard-core mode," for example one in which death without a proper clone chamber = permadeath, along with more tiers of clone chambers with even the very highest tier one being much more costly to build and maintain and with more consequences to death and rebirth. I do believe I've gone on at length about such a mod more than once on this forum and elsewhere so I will not belabor it; but it never seems to have been an interest among either the developers, any modders, or even very many other users. To me, it is absurd that a game which has "Survival" in the name, and in which attending to basic physical needs to stay alive (nourishment, hydration, respiration, etc.) is a major game play element, essentially treats player death as a non-issue, even to the ludicrous extent of offering a TENT which effectively functions just like a high-tech T1 Clone Chamber. I've often played with a personal / "house rule" that if I die before I have an actual clone chamber built, then I wipe the save and start over, and far from being "too hard," or "not fun," approaching the game (even some of the more challenging starts in the RE package) with this more cautious, thoughtful and methodical approach enhances the experience a great deal. It is disappointing that so few in the community seem to grasp this, especially the developers themselves. Ah well, maybe if I want a "Death|Life Matters" mod, I'll just have to dive in to the API and make it myself one of these days. I wish the best for the game, and look forward to getting over my burnout and getting back into the game; maybe even finally taking the plunge into the API and attempting to make the mods I've wished for for years. But for now, I shall sit back and watch from a distance. I appreciate the update and wish everyone the best!
What if you die to a NPC shooting from behind walls, or under the terrain, or when you're shot out of a fully shielded SV cockpit or when you take damage from simply flying a ship or when you end up in space in middle of nowhere after teleporting, or when your ship warps into an enemy base?.... I'm afraid the game is not yet ready for such a mechanism
Well I think that a small change could be done here. Respawn only at clone chamber or crash site. Add to this one equipement permanent lost on death and You got Your hardcore in soft version mode In fact a player does not have to eat at all it the beginning. Play, starve, die - respawn, pick up equpement and play along till next hunger death. Same with medical stuff. If player is poisoned, radiated, dehydrated or receiving any other health damage due to abnormal medical state (or sth) it is just better to die and respawn than waste medkit, am I right? Now this is something that could be changed. IMHO of course.
There is already a gameoptions.yaml setting to disable the "respawn nearby" option. Last I checked they never bothered to add it to the example file though. So if that is still the case (I'm at work right now) then you have to dig through thousands of posts to learn about it.
Even though this isn't a super exciting feature it's something the game should have had a long time ago. I've shown this game to dozens of people over the years and the lack of mob diversity is one of the main things I think is kind of embarrassing about the game alongisde a lack of much to do when you are riding in a vehicle someone else is driving. I hope you guys don't settle for one or two dozen new mobs, the game is in need of several hundred new enemies at least and a couple dozen more crew models.
I do think the game already has a pretty good variety of enemies, at least in terms of models. The problem is most of them fall into one of four categories. - weak melee enemies you only see for an hour and then ignore for the rest of the play through - melee guys that inflict five strains of space herpes with each attack - hitscan guys (the sweeping majority of enemies you'll see) - enemies that are so rare you probably forgot they're in the game (giant mech, fire breathing dinosaur, etc) I don't think we need any more until the ones we have are decent to fight. For comparison, OG Doom and Doom 2 have what? twenty- something? But each one is unique, identifiable, and actually engaging to fight. (Except Lost Souls, but that's another topic) People have been playing Doom for decades and I don't think I've ever heard anyone complain about the lack of enemy variety. For clarity, that's about the enemies. Non-combat npcs could use variety, but they don't really do anything anyway.
I agree, some variety with the behaviours of enemies would help distinguish them a little more. As would refining existing behaviours to prevent things like melee attackers dealing damage way beyond their reach, or not getting the lurgie after every hit while in intact, air-tight, armour. Armour integrity being inversely proportional to the chance of something penetrating the suit would be ideal. Plus heavier armours, which are a pain to move around in, should be largely immune to damage from most melee attacks...just a bit of bruising (low damage taken) no cuts, breaks or infections except from really large foes...while the armour is in good repair. As an aside, I remember the early-days of heavy armour with boosts. You'd be painfully slow and barely able to jump, but you'd be a TANK, able to shrug off damage from multiple attackers. Loved that. However, I usually go for a nimble, don't get hit, light or medium armour (with appropriate boosts) load-out. So, when I get "hit" invalidly by a melee attacker that's waaay out of range, it frustrates immensely. I've been 10+ metres away from something with an, at best, two metre reach and taken damage. Hitscan weapons are a cause of frustration too, definitely. However, for me, it's when I see a hitscan enemy able to insta-turn to shoot me or, even if I am in LoS, they react instantly rather than more naturally. An enemy might be being shot at by several turrets - a far greater threat than little ol' me - but as soon as I pop my head up, they're instantly on me. The AI needs to notice me first, then aim then shoot, not all at once, instantly. So, behaviour and situational awareness are key here. More enemies, while nice, doesn't really add anything if the behaviour remains the same. Having a contrast between dumb hoards we can mow down vs. genuinely dangerous foes with quick reactions would be dead cool. Steam does not appear to record time played offline. Despite playing many hundreds of hours, Empyrion showed as less than an hour played for months, as I always let Steam update, then went offline. Only when I started playing scenarios that required me to be online, did my time played actually start going up. As another example, Fallout 4 shows just 39 hrs on record for me, since I got it at launch... erm, nope! lol.
A new block that generates drones to defend your base and vessels The game world changes and additional content will be added to our galaxy. New creatures: To bring more diversity to the game we will add new NPCs. Water/Lava Blocks love all of those , have said that i can imagine that will have a fluid system and that alone can bring so much possibilities ( deco for example , a little aquarium or new forms of energy ) and also bases that can work under those circustances . the fact that we will be able to use drones its just amazing and inmersive and adds a lot to think when making vessels or bases. even better if its a core that you could put on your own SVs or Hvs new creatures and npcs also its a cool addition , it would be interesting having more interactions with them , recruiting or even capture npc/creatures for research or more. thanks like always , bit by bit the game gets even better , just the changes on graphics are amazing the lights , shadows and more . this game its on the right direction . ps: it would be nice to have like a calendar system , even with seasons according to the planet itself. also in some point could we get floating bases ? love the game so far as always , and thanks !.
I would like to see creative mode with few things added (should be easy as there are commands for this): 1. Remove devices button. Removes all devices (obvious) 2. Replace all blocks made of ;material; with the same but with different material. Helps work with BP's 3. Same as above but within selection. Wouldn't that be great?
Well not quite. You have to use console and know block names. Also there are few names for certain material (square block, thin etc) so You have to type this for every name. It should be super easy for devs to do it. Button when clicked should release few commands to console. All replaceblock commands (to replace really EVERY block) and maybe also commands that bring back color and texture to replaced plocks (if texture exist and if those change).
You need to know there's hull, hullarmored, and hullcombat. Then they come in full, extended, and small shapes. SVs and HVs use small blocks. So you want to replace all the steel blocks with combat steel, you type "replaceblocks shipid# hullfullsmall hullcombatfullsmall". Or something like that. I don't really bother specifically remembering because I can instead use the "di" command and look at any block to see its name.
"Or something like that" is a solid proof that this should be done. I also remember that there are such commands but when it comes to getting things replaced I always end up asking google what exactly has to be typed in conole.
Well "replaceblocks" is the only thing I have to remember. Everything else I need to know I can read from the debug info screen. I'll tell you what though. I'd really like the ability to swap out hull block types using the selection box in the build menu. This would make it much simpler to create protected areas of structures without having to replace or upgrade a whole bunch of blocks by hand, especially in sections three or more blocks thick. I think I'll have to go make that thread today.
Mabe we could prepare our own Roadmap for Empyrion? And then the EGS would comment and complain on that?
"We aim to add fresh starter experiences New Game starts: To make the start of the game on three of the four starter moons more varied, the normal Escape Pod drop is planned to be replaced by more exciting starting conditions for Masperon, Ningues and Skillon. All game starter moons in the Ellyon system, as well as the game start in the Ashon system, are planned to get additional, optional mini-story missions limited to the game start sector." This is the most welcome bit personally. Currently I've stopped playing due to the lack of random starts. Same seeds means zero replayability. Ditto with the same POI's showing up in the same places. Scenarios are great (and more are welcome) but after playing them maybe 2 or 3 times (to try different strategies) they'll have reached the "been there, done that" spot. At the end of the day replayability means having random terrain and more configurable planet starts. I get that the story mode probably needs everything being locked in, at least for the time being, and if I want to play the story I'm fine with the set seed business. But as a long(ish)time player now, 95% of the time I'm going to be wanting to start a new game without the story. I might do the story once every two years just to check out what's changed but the rest of the time I just want a random seed world. Please, please, please give us random seeds back and basically just more configurable start options: 1) Kind of planet/moon (temperate, arid, snow, swamp); 2) Size of planet; 3) Random seeds (with input field if you really want to play a particular one): 4) Story mode ON or OFF. 5) How many POI's: lots, some or very few and how large. Personally I'd rather have many small POI's and only one or two large ones. For example, no more than one or two crashed CV's with thrusters. In the old random starts I felt the game was essentially over once I'd looted even two really large POI's that gave so much loot that further exploration (on that planet) was pointless. Plus, the large ones are so tedious that after doing them 2 or 3 times in my Empyreon "career" I really don't want to do them anymore. The medium ones have gotten old too but if I can clear them out quick enough they're still tolerable. 6) The usual difficulty settings like starting equipment, presence and severity of hostile drones; CPU, mass/volume, etc. There also needs to be a way to set the availability of edible plants (above ground and underwater) for temperate worlds. For example, it should be possible to start up a game on a temperate moon or world and not be swimming in edible plants. Or increase the population of hostile critters like spiders, hostile dinosaurs, etc. Right now every temperate start is a total kiddy walk. Sometimes I just want to have a tougher game that ISN'T a snow or arid one. In conclusion, please don't forget about the type of players (like myself) who enjoy the early survival/exploration phase the most and love starting new games to get more of THAT instead of continuing games out to mid and end-game content.
Yes! For me, survival games are primarily about SURVIVING, meaning NOT DYING. Dying and respawning incessantly as if it is not that big of a deal (just have to get back to my body) is not an inherently "bad game dynamic," it is just that, it seems inappropriate to me for a game calling itself a survival game, and with so many game dynamics devoted to "keeping your character alive" (air, gravity, heat, cold, starving, etc.). A buddy I've played with takes a totally different view, and just accepts that "It is what it is." We'd do a POI together and he'd just barge ahead and human shield stuff and I'd kite. We developed a sort of tactical style based on our preferred approach to the game, and very often he'd be like "Oh I forgot food," or "Oh I'm low health." I'd be like "I got stuff for you here . . " and he'd be like "Nah, I'll just die, respawn at my ship and grab some stuff. Watch my corpse until I get back okay" takes off helmet and dies. The game has had these dynamics for what? 8 years now? So it certainly should not be removed as an option for play. I'm just saying, I'd really like there to be a playmode in which there were real incentives to STAY ALIVE for as long as possible (maybe even never dying ONCE during an entire "campaign" shocking to imagine I know, but I've done many times in games like FO4, Skyrim, Oblivion, and have come close in games like 7Days [and I'm not talking easy difficulty here, true mastery of such games means = you can overcome the obstacles and NOT die, not that you can keep dying enough to eventually overcome the obstacles]). There are a zillion ways to approach these kinds of dynamics in character-based games, and when a game actually includes true RPG mechanics (meaning: characters develop and grow over time, thus gaining characteristics which can be lost on respawn, creating "punishment" for death and incentive to not die) then the possibilities expand considerably.
