I can't point to specific instances but there is a clear trend to assume that hull/structural blocks are not as empty as they appear. Empyrion is a game about abstracted engineering, balancing fun with the science fiction rather than going hyper-realistic. That's why I'm still hesitant to endorse cargo weight/volume despite enjoying the conveniences put in place to support them. But the real argument is that the performance cost of conveyor/pipe systems is a huge drain on other games and it limits the scope of other features.
Not sure I understand the meaning of your first paragraph. Maybe English is not your main language ? It is not for me so I fail to see the point of paragraph #1, sorry. I did not write that the game would focus on automatization, and I think that before diving any further in a discussion about "automatization" it could be helpful to define the term first, as there can be many different "definitions" of it for lots of players. At the time the "automatization" feature was first requested, some aspects of the game may have called for it in specific playstyles, and not for others. After the advent of the control panel, the "requirement" may have been fulfilled for some players, but not for others. Some players might have thought that "automatization" would be in-game devices to illustrate inventory/ material management, and "logistics" being the interface (window) into which the system is set up. That would be logical. But clearly, from the way the developers wrote " Automatization ( conveyor system etc) " we can hardly say that the "conveyor system etc" part would not be represented in game. Not saying here that I want it or not, just making sure that we are on the same page. Some players only wished for a way to rapidly transfer inventory from A to B, while some wanted automatization of various game tasks (gardening/ picking up crops, mining, having fuel/ O2 tanks refilled automatically, etc). These in turn would also suggest the possible representation of devices performing the task visually, in game. So unless "automatization" is not defined more clearly by the developers, discussion is a bit useless presently. I gave links to the various surveys that were conducted since 2015. Reading these can help show the relative importance of some features compared to others, notwithstanding methodology and "wording" bias, and put ( I hope) things in perspective. August 2015: https://empyriononline.com/threads/results-of-survey.1088/ September 2016: https://empyriononline.com/threads/results-of-survey.7525/ December 2017: https://empyriononline.com/threads/feature-survey-2018-results.35530/ "Automatization" is not the focus of the game, it is a given. The focus of the game is defined in the major classes which are shown in the survey's results 1st charts : Adventure, Exploration, Building, Survival & Sandbox.
I think it's pretty clear that the devs intended that phrase to be sufficiently general to encompass a variety of automation components/concepts. And I think it's safe to assume that the logistics system is actually the conveyor system; technically, the conveyor system would be a subset of the logistics system if it were to exist separately, but, based on the architecture of the logistics system (especially the network part), it seems likely at this point that a separate conveyor system is not intended. In any case, unless the devs definitively say that the logistics system is their intended complete implementation of "automatization", I see no reason not to expect more automation features in the future.
In other words : you don't know any more than any other player. I could write the same about "wheeled vehicles" : players still open threads wishing for tracked & wheeled trucks & tanks, but they are just wasting time as long as the developers don't commit themselves to declare the "motorbike" as only representative of the wheeled class vehicles. What is the point in keeping players in unrealistic expectations regarding features ?
The difference is that the devs have talked about automation as a feature, while they haven't in the case of wheeled vehicles besides the motorbike.
That is purely semantic : they made the surveys and offered "wheeled vehicles" in the plural form, which doesn't require a University degree in linguistics to understand they surely meant more than only one vehicle - the motorbike. To make a comparison : if they had mentioned "weapons" in the plural form, would you reasonably expect players to believe they would get only one model of pistol, and that the plural form relates to the fact that players can craft many of the same pistol ? And in a game where players can build a huge variety of flying/ hovering vehicles, having many different "versions" of "wheeled vehicles" wouldn't be a reasonable expectation ? The fact that they "talked about X" or "mentioned X" or "included X in a survey" shows their intent. You only speculate that because there is a difference in the means of communication it makes a difference in the nature of the object of the communication. "Automatization" is a "feature", as well as "wheeled vehicles".
Well, I didn't know about STNG but I do know beaming cargo into ships or buildings. Like master cheif beamed into alien spaceship in HALO, which would be much cooler and more convenient than current elevator system. I think that is a good idea indeed. If the beam is visible, it would be not only acceptable but also cool as hell!
I fully understand your vision about future. I have to say maybe I was limited by real life too much. The point is, however the tech would be in year 8102, when we could travel faster than light (sorry about the thread, again), the tech must be convincing and persuasive. We have to somehow show why it could work. What kind of tech we are trying to use or invent. Think this way, IF we can easily transport items somewhere precisely, we could simply teleport bombs or bullets into enemy's body, so why are we still using guns or cannons ? It's hard to explain, I fully understand. But the different between pure magic and Sci-Fi is that Sci-Fi is based on science. The basement must be shown, or it would be magic anyway.
I like most of the new logistics system, but one small change would make it HUGELY better. Allow alphabetical sorting of crate names and/or a search filter so that we can quickly find them in the menus. I'm not sure where the current ordering comes from, but it can make it a real pain to find the right crates/sources/outputs when you start dealing with more than 5 or 10.
Feedback: - Building large things in survival became somewhat harder and simpler in the same time because: a) Rearranging virtual toolbar is needed more often then normal toolbar in A8 (for example if leave to get some food) b) You have to mind the range, 100m is not always enough, especially if you don't want to construct near your active structures for fear of accidents c) You now have two toolbars! so you can keep texture/color tools in player inventory and blocks in virtual toolbar (valid for creative) d) Virtual toolbar can have blocks inside on top of player's inventory, so it saves some trips to base - Virtual toolbar overall impression: simply too magical - Virtual toolbar and constructor will need tutorial - Renaming containers became much more important yet it somehow became harder to do (switching to device list for some reason doesn't work as well as is it did) and containers forgeting their names if removed from their group is much more annoying now - CV/BA modular inventory power consumption of 10kPU makes it impractical for 'storage only' purpose (in case of BA it is much simpler to spawn a storage CV/BA nearby, in case of CV docked HV/SV storage boxes might be still a thing, volume or no volume, haven't tried yet) - The fact that we can't place cargo CC/CE modules one near another is really inconvenient (perhaps there should be a connection direction? Or like this: half-blocks or sloped blocks won't interact if they 'don't touch' even if they are blocks one next to another?) Suggestions for fixing 'too magical' part: - Instead of placing large blocks via virtual toolbar+wifi personally limit it to use by F5 drones/drone-toolbars, remove virtual toolbar for player (perhaps add a BA/CV block to spawn construction drones with 'memorized per drone' toolbar?) - Instead of items picked by player magically transporting themself to connected inventory use either drones-animation to pick them up or at least add teleporting animation (perhaps a block specifically for purpose of remotely picking items? Or just rename/reuse Wireless Control Block to something like Item Receiver) - Player should not be able to take items from base/vehicle unless in direct vicinity, or through F menu, Wireless control block should not extend this range, only pickup/manipulation/control range. - Wireless control block should not extend transfer range between vessels (bases are fine, otherwise it will cause to much work). - Instead of allowing transporting large amount of items magically from one inventory to inventory of undocked HVs/SVs, allow it to work only with docked entities. Probably should still work between bases/CVs that are close one to another. - Limit how often player can pick up items to connected inventory or make it very costly energy wise (the longer the distance, the bigger cost) - Add teleportation suppressor block, it shouldn't be possible to move heavy blocks from large alien bases that are fully active +1!!! But this is a bit tricky by itself: bases that are close will require vessels to transport resources (redock) despite being meters apart, so it needs to be a bit more complex. And what if you have dozen independent solar turrets around your base? Restocking them will be fun only first couple times. Large CVs can't dock to small bases, so same issue. While it might be nice to see cargo vehicles traveling from CV to base, it is a bit too much work for player. Probably docking requirement should be limited to HV/SVs...
I have been looking around and may have just missed it, but is their still a way to pre populate a container? My starter bases for the users have guns on them and I had ammo containers loaded with ammo so the guns would defend it from drones and etc... But now the same building spawn with no ammo in the cans and instead have a small amount of random ammo of other kinds in them.
At the moment most people play Empyrion for two reasons: #1) To test new features and concepts, then provide feedback on how it fits with the overall game design #2) When a stable enough build is released, people settle on that and just have fun playing that version of the game. The problem with this is that many of the new releases are still too buggy to be enjoyed by group #2. Many of the buggy releases should still be in the experimental branch. They are getting pushed to active status too fast. The HUGE problem with option #1 is that players CANNOT test the game very well WITHOUT knowing what Eleon considers a feature or not. What is on their future road map? Without that critical information, we as testers CANNOT provide feedback that is of any use if we cannot see the "Grand Picture" of things. Only a small beta team gets to see that information and that is a huge shame. I really encourage Eleon to explain to us what they plan the game to be. Right now it just seems like they are tossing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. There seems to be no priority or reason for why things are being implemented and why in certain order. I'd really love to see Eleon's development flowchart whiteboard. I just cannot endorse this game with the current WIFI magical concept. Kerbal Space Program EASILY solved inventory problems and containers with a simple mod called "KIS". It's simple and make sense. No "magic" is involved either. Just about all of the active forum users have left them for the most part. There is only so many times you can point out a bug only to have it sit there for years at a time. We don't even get feedback if and when it will be fixed sometimes. We get information that certain features are "placeholders" but later they become permanent. This is horrible communication. I do see some of the older users come back to the forums to check on things but they have gotten worn down about making comments. The game has changed too much to their liking and they are taking a wait and see attitude. I've taken my fair share of breaks but right now, I'm at the brink of finding no joy in the game as it is until maybe I check back a year from now. If the game is no longer a survival game (versus the elements and fauna then), and has turned into a MMORPG/shooter hybrid, I'm just done. I will post how people can download earlier versions of the game for those "older" players whom backed the game in pre-alpha to 3.x or about. You sold them a concept, then moved the direction of the game waaaay in a different direction. I think the money I paid provides enough enjoyment for older versions of the game, so I am not bitter. I am just disappointed to see so many older players leave due to the game taking such a diversion from its Single Player survival roots.
I loved the basic concept of survival of this game. Got over 4000 hrs and to say I was addicted was putting it mildly. Now I am not so addicted. Then they changed things. logistics not for me still cannot get to grips with it though I have been trying now and then. Mass and volume when it comes on properly- -- I don't want it. I used to be able to come on this game myself and gather resources, build couple HVs, build a base and start gathering stuff for food and meds. If I needed to go to another planet my son would come on coop game and organise that because I'm not great at flying SVs and CVs. I have tried. then we would raid bases together and just generally have fun. Now it is too much of a grind.. Trying to gather resources while fighting off spiders ( I hate spiders) and rabid raptors, Only bit I don't mind are the other factions.. Getting friendly or unfriendly with Zirax doesn't matter because you are going to raid their bases anyway. Got a couple of hours in this week playing but finding I am playing less and less. Fun part was when my son put me onto older version of the game and I could go on just by myself and do all the things I used to.. If I play latest version my son has to be on from start and we have different ways of doing things in the game..
Yeah. It would be really more complex, but that will change the way vessels were designed. Special vessels such as tunnel bridge vehicles which work in real-life airports would be a good idea. For smaller bases with no giant landing area , Logistical module with massive transportation beam would be handy, but the module itself should not be always necessary for any base. Or, docking itself could be different. It might be better if we don't really have to land the vessel onto base or bigger vessels. Tube to tube plug-in would not only be more handy but also persuasive to logistic system. The game would become more complex. More things could be built. And something we can easily done right now may become harder and more tedious. I guess I was such a jerk who's trying to dig interesting things over there
So we can magically transfer items via wi-fi but we cannot start production if not phisically touching our base? I can start my cooking machine via mobile-phone in 2018 but i cannot start a constructor in the same planet in the future without phisically touching my base... OK
Got a Question regarding the sorting order in the Dropdown Menu of the Logistics Screen: What Logic is sorting these?
Found a great real-life example of collapsible blocks made of sheet metal. Suddenly "6 steel plates" recipe starts to make sense That would also cover mass-volume discrepancies, at least for steel blocks, and explain why do they deform so easily when hit.
What's in a name... I think (hope) That the volume and quality of the feedback contained in this thread should be enough to guide the Dev team to improve/polish the logistic system. Making the UI easier to use and addressing the functional issues. What ever UI we have need to be simple to comprehend and adopt by the player. One thing that I would also suggest changing is a cosmetic thing - the term WiFi for the matter transportation system should, in my opinion, be changed to a more sci fi term. I get and know the term WiFi as a way to connect to the internet, so to me it just sounds wrong in the context of the current in game mechanic. … Something like: Local Material Teleport (LTM)? (It is like the base teleport system, but not capable of transferring living creatures...) or perhaps Send Material Auto Relay Teleport (SMART)! or other such term, could be more appropriate and less misleading.
