Alpha 11: Flight model, CPU, Docking

Discussion in 'Patch Notes' started by EleonGameStudios, Nov 18, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Amberyl

    Amberyl Lieutenant

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2019
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    24
    I am not sure where to post this, so sorry if in wrong place. I was out harvesting trees with my harvester module and cannot harvest any logs. Then I switch to my Survival Tool and still no logs. Then I shot at them with a gaitling gun and it didn't destroy the trees or get logs. Logs are impossible to get now. The last time I got logs was before the current update. Trees are IMMORTAL AND BULLET PROOF!! lol
     
    #161
  2. geostar1024

    geostar1024 Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2016
    Messages:
    6,298
    Likes Received:
    9,101
    You should probably . . log it as a bug :p.
     
    #162
  3. Vermillion

    Vermillion Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    9,657
    One of the problems with the current CPU system is that getting Tier 2 CPU isn't obvious to new players or those who aren't already familiar with the systems.
    A Tier 2 CPU extender is made from Flux Coils dropped by the bigger drones on the starter moon. But there's nothing that would tell a player that unless they've killed those drones before and remember what they drop. A better choice would've been a cobalt-containing component (Energy Matrix) that a player would see on the constructor recipe is made from cobalt and that cobalt is found on the moon from the map info. I believe they're also dropped by regular planetary drones, ensuring that being stranded off-world in a CPU-damaged SV is repairable.
    I suspect the reason that they use flux coils is so that the T2 CPU is acquired in tandem with the cobalt used to make your first SV warp drive and not before.

    The second is the current fear of the limit. With people believing that if they reach the limit, that's it, your ship will explode or stop working.
    You can go over the limit but people are loathe to do so. Just 10% over the limit (600 CPU) will give you access to a more equipment (that's 12 S-thrusters with just that) with only a tiny penalty that is easily outweighed by the benefits, even if/when they increase the penalties.
    As your CPU tier goes up, that 10% buffer area over the limit gets equally bigger.

    Another, temporary problem with CPU is the... "teething" problem of players used to building huge constructions full of every device from the very beginning as you've just experienced. This is compounded with the huge shift away from RCS use and the dependency on thruster-based torque for turning as well as the lift and drag system being implemented together with CPU.
    Since you said you put 1 of everything in your barebones ship, I assume that means you included a Constructor and an RCS. You may not have needed the RCS at all and the constructor is a CPU-intensive optional attachment at best for a starter SV.
    Either way, you say you have 5900/6000 CPU, which leaves 100 CPU for building blocks and both steel and carbon composite only consume 1 CPU each. 100 blocks is enough to build a decent-sized ship within that limit on top of the frame you already have. If you give up the constructor (2000 CPU), you can have more storage, more thrusters, more armor, another pair of gatling guns or a bigger ship.
    The question is: How valuable is that SV constructor to you?
    Where you are and where you're going with it are an important part of that questions. Are you using it for repairs? If so, would it be easier to carry replacement parts, fuel or ammo in an extra storage box worth almost nothing in CPU?
    The same question can be applied to any device, and the most common expenditures of CPU are always the RCS, Constructors and extra generators. Even without CPU, those devices are all the heaviest parts of an SV and for every extra device you take out, your ship gets lighter, faster and has more internal space for other things. It's those choices that make up the core of Specialization, as I see it.

    Disclaimer: I'm not telling you how to play the game. I'm just pointing at common problem areas and posing questions and letting you come up with your answers. What you do with those answers is up to you.
     
    #163
    Sofianinho likes this.
  4. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,630
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    Why is "building huge constructions full of every device from the very beginning" a "problem" ? How often do players build that "from the beginning" ?
     
    #164
  5. Vermillion

    Vermillion Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    9,657
    Surprise, surprise. Here's Kassonade for another round.
    Now, obviously this won't satisfy your loaded question, since the sole reason you made your reply is as a pretense for an attack.
    Since you don't want to hear anything I say, I suggest you go to your personal settings, go into the "People I Ignore" tab and enter my name and simply forget my existence.
     
    #165
  6. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,630
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    Surely you can come up with a real answer. I will try to understand it, and maybe I will have other questions. Please don't jump to conclusions!

    You can easily see the difference between Booyaah's ship and what you describe as a "problem". So just explain why it is a "problem".
     
    #166
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  7. RazzleWin

    RazzleWin Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2017
    Messages:
    1,212
    Likes Received:
    1,966
    Vermillion just who are you telling to Ignore there? From my end you linked in Booyaah and then told him to Ignore you. Not being picky or anything just confused as to who your talking to.:confused:
     
    #167
    Vermillion likes this.
  8. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,630
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    He's addressing me, not Booyaah. I want to know what is the problem with "building huge constructions full of every device from the very beginning" and how often do players build that "from the beginning".

    I could be more precise and also ask if "full of every device" means 1 of each or max amount of each. Not talking about blocks here, just assuming they're included in the "huge constructions" problem.
     
    #168
  9. Vermillion

    Vermillion Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    9,657
    Fine.
    That's not the problem i'm describing. It's a case of an experienced player knowing all the devices and having a long-time association with them, knowing what they do and where they went pre-CPU.
    An analogy to the problem would be the difference between say... a professional footballer vs a guy who's only just stepped onto the field for the first time. The pro knows all the rules, all the technicalities, when and where to kick the ball and so on. The newcomer does not. He has everything to learn and no habits to break when the rules change.

    In this, a new player with little or no experience will usually use the minimum in fear of screwing up and wasting time and resources, focusing on what the current situation in front of them requires. The veteran on the other hand has been overcapitalizing and is used to fitting ships with many thrusters, RCS and multiple constructors beyond what their current situation requires because they're preparing their ship to last a long time, not just for the current situation they're in.
    Thus, the "teething problem" is that the veteran can no longer prepare their ship for a long time and they want to, they've been doing it for years and it's what they know. This happens to everyone in every aspect in life when change is put before them.

    So now let me pose you a situation, one that should be asked of every player so that everyone can understand and reply as necessary to player based on their preferred playstyle.
    How does your standard playthrough in the default survival scenario play out?
    A concise step-by-step answer would be nice. I'll even do my own.
    Another would be: What should a starter ship, made with the starter planet's materials contain and what should it do?

    My bad, yeah that was intended for Kassonade, not @Booyaah
     
    #169
    Wellingtoon, Sofianinho and RazzleWin like this.
  10. RazzleWin

    RazzleWin Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2017
    Messages:
    1,212
    Likes Received:
    1,966
    @Kassonnade I can see that you two do have issues with each other. In defense of my question to him. Normally when people link in someone else then make a statement or question they are speaking to the person they just linked in. So yes I was confused because he had already addressed you. But please do understand I was asking him.:)
     
    #170
    Vermillion likes this.
  11. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,630
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    And why are you telling me this ?

    Note : busy writing an answer to Vermillon, by the way.
     
    #171
  12. RazzleWin

    RazzleWin Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 22, 2017
    Messages:
    1,212
    Likes Received:
    1,966
    Let me ask it this way. Why did you reply to a question that was meant for him with your own interpretation of what it meant. Now I have gone off topic once again. So I will drop this and enjoy my day and stop derailing topics.:oops: I'm not really expecting a response as it's off topic.:)
     
    #172
  13. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,630
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    I answered quickly to avoid Booyaah from being also confused, requiring Vermillon to answer to both of you, while I clearly understood he was only addressing me (like he confirmed) but using Booyaah's words as his answer to my question. From the substance of his previous answer to Booyaah, it was clear that Vermillon did not have any reason to ask him to "ignore" him. I could still be wrong, but I preferred to clarify things quickly, since... life's so short. :rolleyes:

    If the rules are less complex than before, why would this be a problem for the veterans ? And if they are more complex, how could the brand new player not experience more difficulties learning them than the guys who already have experience ? In fact that analogy takes into account that the "whole game" changed, but it's not the case. Let's leave it at that for now, I think "adaptation" is not the crux of the matter here.

    Was this never the case prior to CPU , even with veterans starting a new game ? Besides that, with the amount of materials already available on a planet (I never tried cutting all the trees and mining all the rocks, but I wonder...) why would a new player not build an incrementally bigger vessel from the start, as he gathers resources to do so, since he has no idea that some artificial restriction will kick in at some point ?

    Just pointing out a 2nd possible behavior, here, but show me if it's "unlikely".

    Here I can say that's a convenient generalisation, because many veterans do not play like that when starting a new game. I don't, and Scoob is another one, and I think many others don't try to build the "huge ship with all devices from the start" if I remember well. But I'm following you, although not agreeing on the severity of the "problem" (if it is one). And as such, I still don't see why building a huge ship early in the game should be deemed a "problem" from what you wrote, apart from a perspective that "it shouldn't be like that" for some reason. Which is ?

    My standard playthrough, with the earlier versions, could have been very different each time. In the first few times, I would build some walls as soon as possible to get cover in case of attacks, and have growing plots to avoid starvation, but that was not possible after the implementation of "environmental hazards" which killed plants just a few degrees lower than "normal". I had to "adapt"

    My next "new starts" required more grind/ gathering to get to the same "safety" state, which changed a lot with new mining requirements where a device was needed to "see" the ore chunks, and digging was a nightmare. It changed too, so I adapted.

    My late starts were the same, with more elaborate and complex sequences of actions to get to the same point, now requiring an armor and leveling up to make devices to put armor on, to a point it was a bit hard to explain how to achieve it in a straghtforward manner to a new player, without looking at various game screens like the HUD and the tech tree.

    But in all these starts for a genuine "survival" play and not for pure testing, I used materials to build a base (mostly a platform with some walls) and put blocks aside to eventually build a CV, and some other blocks to build a SV. Of course, when exploring planets, players find big blocks and small blocks, so obviously the big blocks are not used to make a SV or HV, so I put these aside in cargo boxes to eventually build a very ugly flying box of various dimensions, resting on the side of a hill or uneven grounds, hurting myself many times falling from it when building. I built a big CV once like that, but it was at a time where I was not tired of starting a new game and repeat all previous, tedious steps one by one. When I started using the factory, half of the fun of building/ defending a stub of a CV was gone, the process was "secured" behind the magic walls of the factory.

    As a "starter ship" made from the base planet's materials, it would depend on what I can find, and how much I can make myself safe from the environment while I build or gather materials for the factory. With the constant harassing from drones and dropships, I would probably resort to the factory and skim the planet from all its friendly POIs before trying the harder ones, but I'm not even sure I would need to do this. One thing is sure though : I would not leave the planet for good until I have a ship capable of maintaining the same "comfort" and having the same "facilities" as what I had on the planet, because this would mean trading safety and convenience for a flying tomb. So if I spend some time gathering big blocks, I would try to carry them with me, or to build a ship with them, or a bigger base. Why should I leave all this play time down on the planet behind me anyway, knowing (actually not true, but as a noob might suspect) that everything could disappear if attacked while I'm far away ? For new players, there seems to be no incentive to leave the starter planet's safety in a flying shoebox, when they can build a huge base and start growing up from there.

    As an experienced player, I can make good choices, but I know new players will have a hard time understanding the many strange limits and dangers of the game. But I also know that most players will not build a "huge ship with all devices" (many of these, not just 1) so I hardly see how it was such a problem that it called for the CPU to act as a limit to favor "specialized builds" since players were already doing that for the most part, in survival.

    Edit : most of the ships I built were done between v5.5 and v7. I stopped wasting time on building CVs when it became obvious that the game would render almost all my designs useless at some point, and from seeing frustrated builders leaving the game on a regular basis. I did not want to "burn" myself out of the game, just like I avoid playing "pure survival" all the way to level 25 now, knowing the game will have no more interest in a short time if I play too much. So I hope you understand I am not among those players that throw a tantrum because all their ships are useless because of CPU : I stopped at v7. That being said, I hope you will put my opinion on CPU in another perspective, which takes into account the new players and added complexity, that keeps building up version after version.

    The only reasonable way to avoid ship obsolescence, in my view at that time, was to build only "shells" with blocks, since devices often changed dimensions or characteristics. I see with CPU that even this cautious approach would have been mostly useless since CPUs apply to hull blocks too, against any logic.
     
    #173
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2019
  14. Arrclyde

    Arrclyde Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2015
    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    I do understand what @Vermillion is saying, while reading:
    "I have a little escape pod I use as my starter sv, it's basically just a device ship with no blocks, 10 small thrusters, a cockpit, 4 gats, and 1 of everything else that. This ultra barebones ship (basically the smallest you could build one) was sitting at 5900/6000 CPU points."
    It clearly shows what has grown to be the norm. 10 thrusters for 6 directions, 4 gattlings while 1 is the smallest number of devices, and 1 of everything isn't probabably the incarnation of "bare bones". It is well over "bare bones" even though it does not have armor blocks.
    I remember discussions in which people were complaining about other people naming their ships fighter even though they do not have burried thrusters, 3 layers of armor and every weapon to its limit on the vessel. Those fighters are not fighters and totally useless for pvp.
    I don't think that there is nothing wrong about building big. I only see problems in that when doing so from the beginning. It takes a big part of survival away. Survival at first means you do not have one of everything and need to cope with lack of many things. As you progress there is nothing wrong with growing bigger.

    That is the problem with implementing things and restricting them afterwards when they have reached "standart" status already.
     
    #174
    Vermillion likes this.
  15. Arrclyde

    Arrclyde Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2015
    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Here me!... i do not.
    Usually i build my vessels and bases modular. Not the highest tier armor, trying to avoid using high tier devices too. I build the shell, stuff it with everything i want in it and save it as the "max version" of that vessel. Then i strip all the devices off that vessel/base and fit in the really bare bones you need for moving, life support, basic defense, and its first needed primary specialization and call it "base version". This is what i usually build first in my survival play throughs. Sometimes i have (mostly) a HV that has a bit more than only basic stuff. That "camper version" is thought of living in it until i have a spot to set up a base while also being able to collect materials and crafting supplies i need.

    I have no reasons to build vessels that have everything at the beginning. Not only its hard to come by the needed materials, to me it feels cheap and it takes survival and progression out of the game.

    But that's of course only my personal opinion and way to play this game.
     
    #175
    StyleBBQ likes this.
  16. Kassonnade

    Kassonnade Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    May 13, 2017
    Messages:
    3,630
    Likes Received:
    5,029
    I don't see much "survival" once players acquire the tech level to make their first turrets, constructors and armor lockers, frankly. Building up from the start to get to that point is relatively easy, and from there they can start piling up blocks for a base or a ship. In reality, players start building when they start playing, period. "Big" or "small" is just a question of how players want to spend their time, and you are mostly repeating what Vermillon said that I took a long post to show it was not true for me, and surely many other players. I'm still trying to see what the problem might be, after all this.

    The ships used to support the "Mega Ship with all devices and weapons" only exist in Creative, are almost impossible to make in survival, and have never been a problem is singleplayer survival. Has it been a problem to you in singleplayer survival ? Unless you built it yourself, this would not happen. This is a multiplayer problem, ported to singleplayer with an empty excuse like "need for specialization". Players already build small, but if they put 4 gatling instead of 1 it's wrong : that's not "survival"... Come on... How many bullets are we allowed to carry before it's "not survival" anymore ?

    No one ever forced players to build "big", and arbitrary restrictions are the rule in Empyrion, not the exception. Why would CPU be the only "reasonable restriction" all of a sudden ? Judge the tree by the fruit : is "survival" better now with these requirements on ship building ? Give players a ridiculously efficient survival tool, but cripple their ship building ability ? Does it sound like "survival logic" to you ?

    We all heard the initial "motives" behind that CPU thing. Here, don't look too far:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_razor

    Surely you know that theory, so I see no point in searching for elaborate answers or making up new ones now.
     
    #176
  17. StyleBBQ

    StyleBBQ Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2016
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    1,446
    For me playing with CPU on & the 'top speed limited by acceleration' in it's current state has resulted in skipping more early game 'survival' content, not less.

    I used to gather just enough surface boulder ore to make a tiny HV with GRU engines & a Harvest module. Taking away the HVs old Harvest Box (and ammo box) was a poor choice, imo. Tack on the now severly limited top speed & much lower turning rate when using GRUs and my adaptation has been to jump right to a multi turreted HV that can readily haul 50+ tons. The OP'd, yet gimped, Survival Tool makes mining so fast that I can easily gather ~150 of each ore on the 2nd day and have that HV on the 3rd.

    Survival Tool is gimped in that it can't Retrieve blocks from player owned ships, so that encourages using the Factory, which seems backwards.
    I generally like complexity, and _might_ have enjoyed CPU a bit from a 'builders challenge' perspective, except for the head scratching costs. Combined with the real pita of not being able to retrieve whole blocks while trying to figure out; thruster layout, what devices, center-of-mass to hover level, guns, etc., well, in a real survival playthrough it's a major hassel, so the factory.

    Btw, HV used to be the easiest ships to build, now they are the hardest. And as the first taste of ship building in Empyrion? Now? Really?
    Come on guys, this has become a horror show for a new player.

    If you wanted to encourage more time spent in the "early" game then why does everything push us to hurry through it?

    Allow the lower end constructors to make a few more things, support having a basic constructor on HV/SVs for a nomad playthrough.
    The ground placable Portable constructor can make Nutrient Solution & a BA Fridge, but not a HV/SV Fridge.
    HV Constructor can make a 3x8x3 Lrg Drill but not 3x3x1 turrets.
    Plant Grow Lights & Food Processors can -only- be made in Large or Advanced Constructors, for heavens sake why?

    All these small bits, that have had concerns raised when they were implemented, add them up and the general result is to make the early game basically just a slight inconvenience.

    Try stepping through a survival game and really considering why you built X. If you had to, why? Early game the -only- reason I build a Small Constructor is to build a Large Constructor; which I -have- to have to build Lrg Solar Panels, Grow Lights and Food Processor. Now with CPU costs that Small Constructor gets torn out and thrown in the Factory.
     
    #177
  18. Vermillion

    Vermillion Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2018
    Messages:
    3,721
    Likes Received:
    9,657
    There's a notable difference between yourself and arrclyde's playstyles and from the various videos and streams of players both in SP and MP, that most players rely on the factory to produce ships and bases. While you and he seem to play by survival-building.
    You're probably less affected by CPU with your build methods than most because of this. You build with what you make, with what materials you have on hand. While ships either made in creative or taken from the workshop were made by a player operating with unlimited resources. Usually focusing first and foremost on "coolness" rather than cost.

    I will gladly admit that the CPU system had grand aspirations, but failed to reach them. I think everyone can agree that it could've been handled a lot better. The tier system is a travesty that could've been handled any number of better ways. Deco and armor should've been free of CPU costs being the most obvious obstruction to aesthetic builds with the system. Although it's nowhere near as punishing as people would claim.
    The CPU system does work, it did what it set out to achieve. Not well, but it works. It would've been more functional without armor costs because players would be able to build big unrestricted, detailed and subsequently heavy ships from the beginning, but getting them up to speed or off the ground with CPU constraints on their thrusters would be another question entirely.
    But it's easier to upgrade or replace just thrusters on a finished hull than it is to replace the entire ship. Which is more or less what we have to do presently.

    CPU brought specialization. The choice between different aspects of a ship and an upper limit to their performance. Where before, the norm was a ship that could accelerate in every direction instantly with enough guns to annihilate a POI or player base with a few shots and so much armor and a shield that it could tank any hit.
    Now, at least at the lower tiers, you have a choice to make in how you build your ship. It boils down to the simple question: What is more important to this ship?
    When you start answering that question, you start moving towards specialization.
    The only sad part of that question is that "appearance" is included and it shouldn't be. (and that some device values are screwy)


    Now, my standard playthrough:
    I do it with the hard settings on; So slow xp progression, hard enemies, bad status effects, mass and volume on. Constructor and Factory speeds are left at normal. Waiting excessive time for something that has nothing to do with my actions is a no-no as far as i'm concerned.

    I've avoided following any quests for the last two playthroughs, so I hit the ground in my pod, get my stuff and start out towards the nearest wreckages. Picking every pickable item I come across and grabbing ore rocks as I come across them for xp and dropping what I can't use or don't need as I fill up.
    By the time i've cross the starter biome i'll be at least level 3 and should have all the main rocks. So I make 3 Portable constructors and process any ingots I can, make a bit of biofuel from plant fiber or wood, steak from bugmeat and a lot of carbon composite which I feed into the factory to make a level 1-3 HV (Hoverbike or Raider), shotgun and some ammo and go off looking for... anything really for more xp, food and loot. I leave 2 of the constructors behind as a portable storage inventory left to process wood into biofuel while i'm gone.
    Simply finding wreckage POIs and ore deposits give plenty of XP without stupidly going into a fight. Grab ores and food items, get out to cap the odd spider for meat and XP. Avoid any raptors and zirax territory.
    Depending on how full my storage is, I may dig up some ore deposits for the ore i'm missing and process it on-site with the portable constructor I have with me since it's easier to carry ingots than it is to carry ore.
    Head back to the wreckage (level 5 by now) and set the factory producing another lightweight, carbon composite HV with a constructor and guns this time. A Tachikoma this time, or a Raider Technical. This is SP, so I can sleep in my tent to accelerate the factory for anything too lengthy to build if necessary.
    The finished product has a constructor so I make a sniper rifle, ammo for it and ammo for the HV's gatlings, fill up the HV's containers with what I can and head off to zirax territory to snipe patrolling troops inside the territory and pick their remains after they're dead for ammo, food and medicine. I'll be at least level 10 in a couple of minutes of sniping zirax.
    The tachikoma is back-heavy, so it can be tilted up to shoot down drones with it's gatlings long before they get into range and the raider technical has a minigun turret. So i'll also check out the Titan wreck and check the cargo containers for a loaded multitool. If I find one, good. I'll salvage some parts from some stuff, probably. But unlikely, I have no use for a CV thruster at this time, maybe some consoles, antennas and deco for computer parts and cobalt.

    At level 10, it's all downhill. Since the survival tool is OP af I can just mine out entire ore deposits without a miner and process it on-site with a portable constructor or the HV's constructor to save on capacity.
    Now though, I make a base since by now I can barely carry everything i've picked up and don't feed everything I mine or pick up into the factory as "storage" as some people do.
    My latest playthrough I used the Polaris prefabs, Module-B was my choice. Somewhere with a nice view not in anyone's territory. Now I make a cheap, lightly-armed SV (Maverick Type-A) and bugger off to the moon to mine Cobalt, Magnesium, Promethium, Pentaxid and get Flux Coils from drones for a T2 CPU extender.
    Previously, I would go for the Xenu Supply Stations on the moon because they have basically no guards and no turrets and 6 alien loot containers out in the open, but those got an upgrade, so that's not really an option without rocket launchers.

    With everything I need for T2 CPU extenders for everything, cobalt for bigger thrusters and a warp drive, magnesium for rockets, pentaxid for warp and promethium for power i'm good to go for anything else.
    SV Carrier Refuge + Mining HV. Give the Refuge a T2 extender, warp drive, a few guns, T2M-thrusters and dock some portable defense HVs to it; upgrade the Maverick with rocket launchers and get busy off-world cracking low level POIs open, starting with those xenu supply stations on the moon.
    I don't even bother with a CV unless there's somewhere I can't go with my SV warp drive that I absolutely need to go. I'd use the Stratus in my next playthrough earlier though. That thing is goddamn spectacular. Put a shield generator on it and float it over a POI and it'll destroy every single turret on a POI long before it depletes its shield. It doesn't even need to dodge. If i'd even considered it in my last playthrough, i'd have made the Stratus much earlier. It's a perfect example of focused specialization done well if I may say so myself.

    I always move to the desert planet at some point, if there is one. Build a nice base there with everything i've got out in the middle of the sand dunes. All tattooine-like.
    Salvage my old ships and HVs as I go and put them into newer, better versions. The Rapier, Gladius, Seer. The really hard-to-kill ships.
    Sadly, I could've used much better CPUs on my ships if i'd remembered that there are now repeatable quests that give optronic components as rewards. This useful bit of information would save a lot of grief for people hunting POIs for optronic components, except i'd completely forgot they added those quests until earlier today. I'm not even sure what they are.
     
    #178
  19. Arrclyde

    Arrclyde Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2015
    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Soory to disappoint you, but the only thing i build in Survival is bases i make from wreckages that i find fit to start from there. All other bases, CVs, SVs, and HVs i build in creative and spawn them in survival via the factory.
    The way i build is probably different though. I pick devices and places as i feel them fit there. I don't calculate anything in terms of performance, weight, acceleration or such in advance. If i don't like performance i add things or cut things away. It is more of a feel based building. No real planing. I am not an engineer. ;-)
     
    #179
  20. Arrclyde

    Arrclyde Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2015
    Messages:
    1,736
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    I have never said it is not survival. But i do not aggree that 4 gattlings or 10 thrusters on being "bare bones". And less an "escape pod". I thought bare bones means the bare minimum. Having 4 gattlings seems amlost luxurious.
     
    #180
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page