@Syngyne Do you know how to set your spawn point to a new facility so that you're not spawning on Crusader?
I didn't. I just poked around for how to do this, and will give this a shot. I think Hurston is the only place I haven't tried as a starting location yet. Other than just having new scenery, is there a lot that would set it apart from Area 18? I liked Area 18 due to convenience (can get to every shop without taking a shuttle, shops had a generally good variety).
Hurston lacks the great selection of shops that area 18 has but IMO has better mission access. It's where I generally go for ship based bounty hunting as I find it more beginner friendly than around crusader.
The station's hospital is on the same level as the hangar access elevators. There are three or four different places with accessible monitors in the hospital and one of them (I think the one furthest in the back) allows you to set a new respawn point.
@Syngyne Do you know how to set your spawn point to a new facility so that you're not spawning on Crusader?
I didn't. I just poked around for how to do this, and will give this a shot. I think Hurston is the only place I haven't tried as a starting location yet. Other than just having new scenery, is there a lot that would set it apart from Area 18? I liked Area 18 due to convenience (can get to every shop without taking a shuttle, shops had a generally good variety).
Hurston lacks the great selection of shops that area 18 has but IMO has better mission access. It's where I generally go for ship based bounty hunting as I find it more beginner friendly than around crusader.
The station's hospital is on the same level as the hangar access elevators. There are three or four different places with accessible monitors in the hospital and one of them (I think the one furthest in the back) allows you to set a new respawn point.
@Syngyne I would recommend setting your respawn point at one of the orbital stations so it's just a brief walk to get to your ship instead of having to take trams. I don't know if they added a respawn point to Port Olisar yet
Olisar does not have a hospital yet, so I set my home to Grim Hex for now. Which is a good thing, because I accidentally tagged a friendly again during a bunker mission, and I don't think the nicer stations will let me land at the moment.
So I tried the P.I. Wanted investigation mission, and while looking at a terminal somewhere inside the station my character just died. No warning, no sounds of gunfire, I just suddenly had a black screen, and woke up in prison. I have no idea what happened. My only thought is another player killed me, but I have no idea, because I have not found anywhere in the game that lets you know what killed you.
Yeah, the game is really lacking in feedback in certain areas, sometimes really really important ones. There's a nasty two-part bug in 3.17 which is thankfully fixed in 3.17.1 where when you land at a bunker mission, the defense turrets don't immediately recognize you as friendly. They're supposed to only fire at people who aren't on the mission, but due to funkiness they don't always get the "don't shoot me bro" memo right away.... and to make matters worse, they have invisible lasers. And it turns out that when you're being shot with invisible lasers, its very easy to miss your ship's shields slowly ticking downwards until you explode for, as far as you can tell, no reason.
Its also not immediately obvious whether someone, NPC or otherwise, is friendly or enemy until they actually start shooting at you. On bunker missions you just have to know what colors the respective gangs and security services are wearing. To their credit they did at least put the two sides in very different colors, but they should at least put "DO NOT SHOOT THE GUYS WEARING WHITE" in the mission brief. Also, killing a friendly on one of those missions should be a fine, a mission failure and a reputation hit, not a homicide charge.
Then there's Quanta. As of 3.17, fuel and combat beacon prices are affected by the in-game economy; fuel prices will go up and down with supply and demand, and combat beacons will spawn wherever simulated pirates are targeting simulated traders, with the rewards offered also varying according to supply and demand of bounty hunters, simulated and otherwise. Cool! Except there's no information provided in-game that would actually let players take advantage of this. Is there an area of the system that's being particularly heavily hit by pirates, that an enterprising player could take the time to clear up? Maybe, but you'd have to way of knowing it other than keeping an eye on where the combat beacons keep popping up and figuring it out from there. Fuel prices vary by location, but they don't exactly have big signs outside of stations with the prices on them like they do at real-life gas stations, nor can you sell fuel to them, nor is is known where actually produces quantum fuel or what resources they need to do so. And if you're out of gas you're probably going to accept whatever price you're given. This video is a pretty good guide to how it all works as of right now:
Its neat that this stuff is finally making it into the universe, but until we get the tools to actually engage with it properly it doesn't really mean a whole lot.
Skunk Works devised their own little territory control game for their Taskforces to take part in
Wouldn't be SC without a tank getting pinned against a rock by a jeep that was too close to shoot, but what are you gonna do: that seems like a really fun idea!
I wasn't clear on the rules allowing one side to field as many tanks as players while the other doubled up with gunners; but it seems like a good place to implement a point-buy system.
Are the AA vehicles in game yet? Super curious to see how much impact even a small ship would have had there.
Since you can stow stuff on ships now, it would be nice if CIG just put in a proximity resupply as an interim solution. It would make those ground battle events more interesting with logistics being a thing. But CIG never does simple QoL mechanics while they come up with the "fleshed out" version that they make sound like its just around the corner, and then years pass by.
There's a Reddit thread that popped up the other day showing that the gigantic gun under the bengal carrier now works.
I noticed today that NikNax claims I have a Javelin at New Babbage.
I assume the thing is too large to spawn at New Babbage though and therefore not actually spawnable
Some pretty juicy details in there. Highly recommend checking it out if you're already a fan of the game or even if you're a hater.
A couple quick highlights:
-iCache had to be abandoned because it was not technically capable of handling what they needed for object container streaming + server meshing
-A new system was created to replace iCache caled PES or Persistent Entity Streaming. Chris claims that they had an internal demo of this tech and it was working on their internal development servers
-3.18 is not the next major patch. Chris claims 3.18 will be bringing in the new PES technology, and they are planning a minimum of 3 months of PTU testing before they merge it to live
-The next content patch will be 3.17.2, which will have a ton of playable content including new missions and locations and "other gameplay" and will arrive in late June
-4.0 and Server Meshing are planned to go to their closed Evocati test program at the end of Q4 (this is heavily dependent on the success of their PES rollout in 3.18)
I have not read the entire Letter from the Chairman yet, but SaltEMike posted a good video summary.
Some pretty juicy details in there. Highly recommend checking it out if you're already a fan of the game or even if you're a hater.
A couple quick highlights:
-iCache had to be abandoned because it was not technically capable of handling what they needed for object container streaming + server meshing
-A new system was created to replace iCache caled PES or Persistent Entity Streaming. Chris claims that they had an internal demo of this tech and it was working on their internal development servers
-3.18 is not the next major patch. Chris claims 3.18 will be bringing in the new PES technology, and they are planning a minimum of 3 months of PTU testing before they merge it to live
-The next content patch will be 3.17.2, which will have a ton of playable content including new missions and locations and "other gameplay" and will arrive in late June
-4.0 and Server Meshing are planned to go to their closed Evocati test program at the end of Q4 (this is heavily dependent on the success of their PES rollout in 3.18)
Thoughts from me having read the whole letter:
PES is not replacing iCache. PES is what iCache was incapable of supporting. I believe Replication Layer & Entity Graph are the new terms being used for the tech that replaced iCache. (PES being the ability for the state of everything to be persistent. As in, drop a coffee cup somewhere in a forest, and it will remain there for you to visit again a week later)
"a content-rich Alpha 3.17.2 patch with known stable code, new missions, new locations, and other gameplay in late June. " to me, the wording does not say 'a ton of playable content', it just means that 3.17.2 is not simply a bug fixing patch. But I guess that's mostly semantics over what people consider 'a ton' of new content.
Gen 12 Renderer/Vulkan will likely release near the end of 2022
Citizencon this year will be a smaller/simpler online affair. No keynote demo. Will just be some devs giving their own panels/discussions over what they want to talk about. Less distraction from development.
2 New offices, in Manchester & Frankfurt, are being built
Staff has already expanded to 780 CIG+ 130 Turbulent people, with plans to grow to ~840 people in 2022.
Hearing PES has been shown working now has me pretty hyped. I think I am doomed to buy more ships during Invictus with this timing.
I noticed today that NikNax claims I have a Javelin at New Babbage.
I assume the thing is too large to spawn at New Babbage though and therefore not actually spawnable
Have they discussed their storage plans for capitals? None of the stations seem capable of plausibly containing them, but I doubt they have envisioned them landing on planets as a routine logistical necessity.
0
Options
Just_Bri_ThanksSeething with ragefrom a handbasket.Registered User, ClubPAregular
I do really wish that large ships didn't despawn ever and small ships only despawned if you sent them to a parking garage.
...and when you are done with that; take a folding
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
I noticed today that NikNax claims I have a Javelin at New Babbage.
I assume the thing is too large to spawn at New Babbage though and therefore not actually spawnable
Have they discussed their storage plans for capitals? None of the stations seem capable of plausibly containing them, but I doubt they have envisioned them landing on planets as a routine logistical necessity.
Just send them deep into the Periphery and let them come back to the Inner Sphere in about 100 years
Hearing PES has been shown working now has me pretty hyped. I think I am doomed to buy more ships during Invictus with this timing.
I'm on the fence on this. I was planning on upgrading my LTI Avenger to a Vanguard, but this bit:
[*] 2 New offices, in Manchester & Frankfurt, are being built
kind of gave me pause. Not specifically that they're opening new offices, but looking at the concept for the Manchester office, I can't help but think "This is where the money is going?" Like, I get having a nice work environment, but it looks like they're wanting it to be a Star Citizen theme park. Granted, they're just concepts, but it feels a bit tone deaf to show something like this when there's already concern about funding vs. progress on the game.
I do really wish that large ships didn't despawn ever and small ships only despawned if you sent them to a parking garage.
That seems like what the ultimate goal would be. The question of "what happens to my incredibly expensive assets when I'm offline?" is one that needs to be solved for player structures which are even more defenseless and expensive.
I haven't seen their books or their budget, so I'm only speaking from an outside perspective on this, and definitely not claiming any accuracy.
Each year is always a record breaking year over the last. In the Letter from the Chairman, Chris said they have had 1million new accounts made in the last year, and around half of that in first-time purchases / starter bundles sold.
They're making loads of money. Money vs Progress is always a hot topic and likely to bring out the people who can't help themselves but shit on the game every chance they get. But my take (and again, this is purely speculation) is that money is not the problem. You can blame poor management, or time, or any other number of factors, but money is not the issue. The issue ultimately comes down to tech roadblocks. Everything at this point basically hinges on TES and Server Meshing coming into the game. Even if it's static server meshing where they give each planet its own server, that's a starting point that they have to hit. And it's also a problem that isn't solved by throwing more bodies at it or more money. They have the server engineers and they have a plan. The bottleneck is time, testing, iteration, and invention.
Server sharding, static server meshing, and phasing are not new tech. The new tech that they're trying to create is making it all loadscreen free, or with background handoffs. Being able to switch servers seamlessly without a load bar. And the long term goal is dynamic server meshing -- where servers are created and removed on an as-needed basis, with the idea that as more people crowd into an area, the smaller and smaller each shard becomes, possibly down to a single ship being a server. That's the goal.
Anyway, that's the long way of saying I don't think money is the issue for development. They have spare cash. They have a huge hiring initiative going and it seems they still have money to spare after that. Why not build a nice facility? That will help with employee retention and employee morale. I really don't have a problem with them building swank offices. They have more money than they can spend. Or so it seems.
Lucascraft on
+1
Options
NEO|PhyteThey follow the stars, bound together.Strands in a braid till the end.Registered Userregular
So I have been generally hands-off on following Dev progress. I read what gets posted in here, occasionally I will patch up and actually play a bit, particularly it sounds like if there is an attempted push for doing some group stuff. Is that tentative evocati testing in Q4 the first time they have set a hopeful date on server meshing, or another in a line of dates for it? Well aware of their track record in general, but I am curious about this specific thing, given that it's such a keystone.
It was that somehow, from within the derelict-horror, they had learned a way to see inside an ugly, broken thing... And take away its pain.
Warframe/Steam: NFyt
Anyway, that's the long way of saying I don't think money is the issue for development. They have spare cash. They have a huge hiring initiative going and it seems they still have money to spare after that. Why not build a nice facility? That will help with employee retention and employee morale. I really don't have a problem with them building swank offices. They have more money than they can spend. Or so it seems.
I agree. I admit, I maybe had some concerns around the time of the escapist article and Derek Smart claiming '90 days tops', but I think that after 10 years of existence and continued growth, they've proven themselves to be financially responsible enough for me not to worry about their strange spending habits.
Anyway, that's the long way of saying I don't think money is the issue for development. They have spare cash. They have a huge hiring initiative going and it seems they still have money to spare after that. Why not build a nice facility? That will help with employee retention and employee morale. I really don't have a problem with them building swank offices. They have more money than they can spend. Or so it seems.
I agree. I admit, I maybe had some concerns around the time of the escapist article and Derek smart claiming '90 days tops', but I think that after 10 years of existence and continued growth, they've proven themselves to be financially responsible enough for me not to worry about their strange spending habits.
So my Avenger spontaneously combusted when I sat in the pilot’s seat. It was damaged (bounty mission to an unfriendly bunker), and I’d landed it on a slightly tilted hillside, but it sat there fine when I was doing the bounty kill. It was windy, but I’d shut the engine down on landing. The bunker also couldn’t have shot me, as I was behind a hill 1km away. Scratching my head on this one.
If the sub-optimal landing job caused it, wouldn’t it have blown up when I touched down, rather than when I hopped in the seat when I got back?
Is there a good write-up anywhere on how they envision the server meshing tech functioning? I’ve dug in a bit but I’m having a hard time conceptualizing how what they’re describing solves the problems they seem to be aimed at.
I don’t think I’m getting this right at all, but on a surface level I don’t really see how server meshing in highly populated areas would address the limitations of each instance.
I’m thinking of the 50-person cap specifically here - if an instance can handle 50 people max, and server meshing is supposed to blend instances to give the impression/reality of greater than 50 people in real-time, how does that not translate to needing an instance to be capable of handling more than 50 dynamic and player-controlled entities?
So my Avenger spontaneously combusted when I sat in the pilot’s seat. It was damaged (bounty mission to an unfriendly bunker), and I’d landed it on a slightly tilted hillside, but it sat there fine when I was doing the bounty kill. It was windy, but I’d shut the engine down on landing. The bunker also couldn’t have shot me, as I was behind a hill 1km away. Scratching my head on this one.
If the sub-optimal landing job caused it, wouldn’t it have blown up when I touched down, rather than when I hopped in the seat when I got back?
I have definitely had the bunker turrets blow my ship up through terrain before, I wouldn't necessarily rule that out. Dunno what the range on their guns are. That being said if it was the turrets it shouldn't have waited for you to get back in to do it, the times I've had it happen they blow my ship up as I'm running to the bunker, or in the cases of the turrets that don't aggro until you physically enter the bunker, while I'm in the bunker.
It was that somehow, from within the derelict-horror, they had learned a way to see inside an ugly, broken thing... And take away its pain.
Warframe/Steam: NFyt
And that new ship is a small-ish ship-to-ship boarding vessel. Universal docking collar, hacking station (for the second, non-piloting crew member), 8 hot seats, lockers for weapons and munitions (in the event the ship being boarded refuses to open their hatch/door).
I'd be awfully tempted to maybe pick one up if I didn't already have a Valkyrie.
@SCREECH OF THE FARG Yeah, looks pretty neat! I like the idea behind it. Of course I'd like some pilot weapons, but I'd probably use it for box and bunker missions primarily since 2 2xsize 2 turrets aren't much.
I'll use my account credit to pick it up when it's available and once I can earn it in game with aUEC I'll melr it down for the next ship to try out
So I have been generally hands-off on following Dev progress. I read what gets posted in here, occasionally I will patch up and actually play a bit, particularly it sounds like if there is an attempted push for doing some group stuff. Is that tentative evocati testing in Q4 the first time they have set a hopeful date on server meshing, or another in a line of dates for it? Well aware of their track record in general, but I am curious about this specific thing, given that it's such a keystone.
Server meshing was first announced in 2016. On the roadmap to be released in 2018. Hint, it wasn't. That was cut down to just iCache, which was supposed to be out in 2020. iCache didn't do what they needed and the whole idea renamed to Persistent Entity Streaming and Server Meshing (PES). Now they think PES might enter testing by the end of 2022.
SiliconStew on
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
And that new ship is a small-ish ship-to-ship boarding vessel. Universal docking collar, hacking station (for the second, non-piloting crew member), 8 hot seats, lockers for weapons and munitions (in the event the ship being boarded refuses to open their hatch/door).
I'd be awfully tempted to maybe pick one up if I didn't already have a Valkyrie.
The Legionnaire is way too cheap. I wanna CCU away the useless Hoplite or Valkyrie, but can't due to how cheap the leggy is.
The Leggy seems like the first useful dropship. It looks like the only one actually designed with the developed boarding mechanics in mind.
And that new ship is a small-ish ship-to-ship boarding vessel. Universal docking collar, hacking station (for the second, non-piloting crew member), 8 hot seats, lockers for weapons and munitions (in the event the ship being boarded refuses to open their hatch/door).
I'd be awfully tempted to maybe pick one up if I didn't already have a Valkyrie.
The Legionnaire is way too cheap. I wanna CCU away the useless Hoplite or Valkyrie, but can't due to how cheap the leggy is.
The Leggy seems like the first useful dropship. It looks like the only one actually designed with the developed boarding mechanics in mind.
The Valkyrie has room to unleash hover bikes, though, so that's pretty fun. I love the Valkyrie but it's underpowered. If only it could fit a Nova.
Is there a good write-up anywhere on how they envision the server meshing tech functioning? I’ve dug in a bit but I’m having a hard time conceptualizing how what they’re describing solves the problems they seem to be aimed at.
I don’t think I’m getting this right at all, but on a surface level I don’t really see how server meshing in highly populated areas would address the limitations of each instance.
I’m thinking of the 50-person cap specifically here - if an instance can handle 50 people max, and server meshing is supposed to blend instances to give the impression/reality of greater than 50 people in real-time, how does that not translate to needing an instance to be capable of handling more than 50 dynamic and player-controlled entities?
1- Servers covering static (overlapping) regional 50 player shards (instances) that can hand off players.
2- Dynamic region sizing and server allocation
3- Client-side performance improvements to support more than 50 people in one place
4- Raise shard player limits to suit
My understanding is the that near term goal (1) will have to sort players over the regional limit into different mirror dimensions physically, but they'll sharing the same overall reality in terms of the global economy and such.
Will your character and ship always be in-game when you have left; i.e, if I logged out from my ship bed on a planet, will my ship still be there, meaning people could try and break into or destroy my ship?
When an entity is “unstowed” in a shard (it physically exists in the shard), it exists permanently within that shard until the player “stows” the entity into an inventory. This can be done by picking up a gun and placing it into your backpack, or by landing a ship on a landing pad, which will stow the ship into a specific landing-pad inventory. Once an entity is within an inventory, it is stored in the global database and can be unstowed into any shard. This allows players to move items between shards.
There seem to still be quite a few devils in the details like:
What if I drop something in a shard and never pick it up again? What if everyone checks an agreed upon location everytime they pass through a region, and drops something there if they see it's empty? Will we eventually have staked out private shards for everyone?
But that's stuff they're actively trying to figure out.
Is there a good write-up anywhere on how they envision the server meshing tech functioning? I’ve dug in a bit but I’m having a hard time conceptualizing how what they’re describing solves the problems they seem to be aimed at.
I don’t think I’m getting this right at all, but on a surface level I don’t really see how server meshing in highly populated areas would address the limitations of each instance.
I’m thinking of the 50-person cap specifically here - if an instance can handle 50 people max, and server meshing is supposed to blend instances to give the impression/reality of greater than 50 people in real-time, how does that not translate to needing an instance to be capable of handling more than 50 dynamic and player-controlled entities?
This is the latest thing from citizencon last year, its very long and kind of dry and technical but a lot of info here:
As I understand it, they're hoping that once a server is handling just one planet, moon, whatever vs an entire system, the load will be reduced sufficiently that each server can handle more than 50 players.
So my Avenger spontaneously combusted when I sat in the pilot’s seat. It was damaged (bounty mission to an unfriendly bunker), and I’d landed it on a slightly tilted hillside, but it sat there fine when I was doing the bounty kill. It was windy, but I’d shut the engine down on landing. The bunker also couldn’t have shot me, as I was behind a hill 1km away. Scratching my head on this one.
If the sub-optimal landing job caused it, wouldn’t it have blown up when I touched down, rather than when I hopped in the seat when I got back?
I have definitely had the bunker turrets blow my ship up through terrain before, I wouldn't necessarily rule that out. Dunno what the range on their guns are. That being said if it was the turrets it shouldn't have waited for you to get back in to do it, the times I've had it happen they blow my ship up as I'm running to the bunker, or in the cases of the turrets that don't aggro until you physically enter the bunker, while I'm in the bunker.
If you picked up a crimestat, there's also a chance someone was just waiting for you to power it up.
So my Avenger spontaneously combusted when I sat in the pilot’s seat. It was damaged (bounty mission to an unfriendly bunker), and I’d landed it on a slightly tilted hillside, but it sat there fine when I was doing the bounty kill. It was windy, but I’d shut the engine down on landing. The bunker also couldn’t have shot me, as I was behind a hill 1km away. Scratching my head on this one.
If the sub-optimal landing job caused it, wouldn’t it have blown up when I touched down, rather than when I hopped in the seat when I got back?
I have definitely had the bunker turrets blow my ship up through terrain before, I wouldn't necessarily rule that out. Dunno what the range on their guns are. That being said if it was the turrets it shouldn't have waited for you to get back in to do it, the times I've had it happen they blow my ship up as I'm running to the bunker, or in the cases of the turrets that don't aggro until you physically enter the bunker, while I'm in the bunker.
If you picked up a crimestat, there's also a chance someone was just waiting for you to power it up.
I was clean this time. I guess that doesn't rule out someone just waiting to gank me outside for funsies, though.
That's the number they have chosen for now, because that's all the current server can handle, since they have one server running literally all of Stanton.
They actually reduced that number down to 40 for the first release of Xenothreat. They have since then done some further optimizations and raised the cap back to 50. But that number is something they themselves have set. It's a limitation brought on by the insane amount of process strain they are placing on a single server.
If you cram a ton of people onto a Carrack that is also a dynamic server (with dynamic server meshing), the server capacity could actually be well over that 50 person mark, because the server would only be processing the Carrack, and not all of Hurston, Crusader, MicroTech, ArcCorp, GrimHex, etc. The fact that they're running the entire Stanton system on a single server is the crazy part.
I'm not saying you could physically fit 1000 people on a Carrack, but if the server load was only a Carrack and nothing else, the amount of players the server could handle would go way up.
And that new ship is a small-ish ship-to-ship boarding vessel. Universal docking collar, hacking station (for the second, non-piloting crew member), 8 hot seats, lockers for weapons and munitions (in the event the ship being boarded refuses to open their hatch/door).
I'd be awfully tempted to maybe pick one up if I didn't already have a Valkyrie.
The Legionnaire is way too cheap. I wanna CCU away the useless Hoplite or Valkyrie, but can't due to how cheap the leggy is.
The Leggy seems like the first useful dropship. It looks like the only one actually designed with the developed boarding mechanics in mind.
The Valkyrie has room to unleash hover bikes, though, so that's pretty fun. I love the Valkyrie but it's underpowered. If only it could fit a Nova.
I just want to be able to air-drop my G12 out the back, like a mini-Mako being pooped out of the Normandy.
| Origin/R*SC: Ein7919 | Battle.net: Erlkonig#1448 | XBL: Lexicanum | Steam: Der Erlkönig (the umlaut is important) |
And that new ship is a small-ish ship-to-ship boarding vessel. Universal docking collar, hacking station (for the second, non-piloting crew member), 8 hot seats, lockers for weapons and munitions (in the event the ship being boarded refuses to open their hatch/door).
I'd be awfully tempted to maybe pick one up if I didn't already have a Valkyrie.
The Legionnaire is way too cheap. I wanna CCU away the useless Hoplite or Valkyrie, but can't due to how cheap the leggy is.
The Leggy seems like the first useful dropship. It looks like the only one actually designed with the developed boarding mechanics in mind.
The Valkyrie has room to unleash hover bikes, though, so that's pretty fun. I love the Valkyrie but it's underpowered. If only it could fit a Nova.
I just want to be able to air-drop my G12 out the back, like a mini-Mako being pooped out of the Normandy.
I want a Jump Ship that acts like the Galaxy in Planetside 1. Room for a tank or two in the back and instead of landing it's equipped with a jump system that lets the soldiers air drop and do a little retro burn before hitting the ground.
Edit: I don't think it really fits in their view of how their universe functions, I just think it would be neat
Posts
Hurston lacks the great selection of shops that area 18 has but IMO has better mission access. It's where I generally go for ship based bounty hunting as I find it more beginner friendly than around crusader.
The station's hospital is on the same level as the hangar access elevators. There are three or four different places with accessible monitors in the hospital and one of them (I think the one furthest in the back) allows you to set a new respawn point.
@Syngyne I would recommend setting your respawn point at one of the orbital stations so it's just a brief walk to get to your ship instead of having to take trams. I don't know if they added a respawn point to Port Olisar yet
Even this video feels like a Scientology recruiting tool.
Its also not immediately obvious whether someone, NPC or otherwise, is friendly or enemy until they actually start shooting at you. On bunker missions you just have to know what colors the respective gangs and security services are wearing. To their credit they did at least put the two sides in very different colors, but they should at least put "DO NOT SHOOT THE GUYS WEARING WHITE" in the mission brief. Also, killing a friendly on one of those missions should be a fine, a mission failure and a reputation hit, not a homicide charge.
Then there's Quanta. As of 3.17, fuel and combat beacon prices are affected by the in-game economy; fuel prices will go up and down with supply and demand, and combat beacons will spawn wherever simulated pirates are targeting simulated traders, with the rewards offered also varying according to supply and demand of bounty hunters, simulated and otherwise. Cool! Except there's no information provided in-game that would actually let players take advantage of this. Is there an area of the system that's being particularly heavily hit by pirates, that an enterprising player could take the time to clear up? Maybe, but you'd have to way of knowing it other than keeping an eye on where the combat beacons keep popping up and figuring it out from there. Fuel prices vary by location, but they don't exactly have big signs outside of stations with the prices on them like they do at real-life gas stations, nor can you sell fuel to them, nor is is known where actually produces quantum fuel or what resources they need to do so. And if you're out of gas you're probably going to accept whatever price you're given. This video is a pretty good guide to how it all works as of right now:
Its neat that this stuff is finally making it into the universe, but until we get the tools to actually engage with it properly it doesn't really mean a whole lot.
Skunk Works devised their own little territory control game for their Taskforces to take part in
Wouldn't be SC without a tank getting pinned against a rock by a jeep that was too close to shoot, but what are you gonna do: that seems like a really fun idea!
I wasn't clear on the rules allowing one side to field as many tanks as players while the other doubled up with gunners; but it seems like a good place to implement a point-buy system.
Are the AA vehicles in game yet? Super curious to see how much impact even a small ship would have had there.
There's one, the Ballista. From videos shared on Reddit, it looks like it does it's job pretty well.
@ArbitraryDescriptor Here's the group using the Ballista to lock down the skies around Jumptown when that even was ongoing
Earlier in the video it shows the force limits and it was 10x Tonks/10x Cyclones, I think
There's a Reddit thread that popped up the other day showing that the gigantic gun under the bengal carrier now works.
I noticed today that NikNax claims I have a Javelin at New Babbage.
I assume the thing is too large to spawn at New Babbage though and therefore not actually spawnable
Some pretty juicy details in there. Highly recommend checking it out if you're already a fan of the game or even if you're a hater.
A couple quick highlights:
-iCache had to be abandoned because it was not technically capable of handling what they needed for object container streaming + server meshing
-A new system was created to replace iCache caled PES or Persistent Entity Streaming. Chris claims that they had an internal demo of this tech and it was working on their internal development servers
-3.18 is not the next major patch. Chris claims 3.18 will be bringing in the new PES technology, and they are planning a minimum of 3 months of PTU testing before they merge it to live
-The next content patch will be 3.17.2, which will have a ton of playable content including new missions and locations and "other gameplay" and will arrive in late June
-4.0 and Server Meshing are planned to go to their closed Evocati test program at the end of Q4 (this is heavily dependent on the success of their PES rollout in 3.18)
Thoughts from me having read the whole letter:
Hearing PES has been shown working now has me pretty hyped. I think I am doomed to buy more ships during Invictus with this timing.
Have they discussed their storage plans for capitals? None of the stations seem capable of plausibly containing them, but I doubt they have envisioned them landing on planets as a routine logistical necessity.
chair to Creation and then suplex the Void.
Just send them deep into the Periphery and let them come back to the Inner Sphere in about 100 years
I'm on the fence on this. I was planning on upgrading my LTI Avenger to a Vanguard, but this bit:
kind of gave me pause. Not specifically that they're opening new offices, but looking at the concept for the Manchester office, I can't help but think "This is where the money is going?" Like, I get having a nice work environment, but it looks like they're wanting it to be a Star Citizen theme park. Granted, they're just concepts, but it feels a bit tone deaf to show something like this when there's already concern about funding vs. progress on the game.
That seems like what the ultimate goal would be. The question of "what happens to my incredibly expensive assets when I'm offline?" is one that needs to be solved for player structures which are even more defenseless and expensive.
Each year is always a record breaking year over the last. In the Letter from the Chairman, Chris said they have had 1million new accounts made in the last year, and around half of that in first-time purchases / starter bundles sold.
They're making loads of money. Money vs Progress is always a hot topic and likely to bring out the people who can't help themselves but shit on the game every chance they get. But my take (and again, this is purely speculation) is that money is not the problem. You can blame poor management, or time, or any other number of factors, but money is not the issue. The issue ultimately comes down to tech roadblocks. Everything at this point basically hinges on TES and Server Meshing coming into the game. Even if it's static server meshing where they give each planet its own server, that's a starting point that they have to hit. And it's also a problem that isn't solved by throwing more bodies at it or more money. They have the server engineers and they have a plan. The bottleneck is time, testing, iteration, and invention.
Server sharding, static server meshing, and phasing are not new tech. The new tech that they're trying to create is making it all loadscreen free, or with background handoffs. Being able to switch servers seamlessly without a load bar. And the long term goal is dynamic server meshing -- where servers are created and removed on an as-needed basis, with the idea that as more people crowd into an area, the smaller and smaller each shard becomes, possibly down to a single ship being a server. That's the goal.
Anyway, that's the long way of saying I don't think money is the issue for development. They have spare cash. They have a huge hiring initiative going and it seems they still have money to spare after that. Why not build a nice facility? That will help with employee retention and employee morale. I really don't have a problem with them building swank offices. They have more money than they can spend. Or so it seems.
Warframe/Steam: NFyt
I agree. I admit, I maybe had some concerns around the time of the escapist article and Derek Smart claiming '90 days tops', but I think that after 10 years of existence and continued growth, they've proven themselves to be financially responsible enough for me not to worry about their strange spending habits.
For a guy with the last name Smart..
If the sub-optimal landing job caused it, wouldn’t it have blown up when I touched down, rather than when I hopped in the seat when I got back?
I don’t think I’m getting this right at all, but on a surface level I don’t really see how server meshing in highly populated areas would address the limitations of each instance.
I’m thinking of the 50-person cap specifically here - if an instance can handle 50 people max, and server meshing is supposed to blend instances to give the impression/reality of greater than 50 people in real-time, how does that not translate to needing an instance to be capable of handling more than 50 dynamic and player-controlled entities?
I have definitely had the bunker turrets blow my ship up through terrain before, I wouldn't necessarily rule that out. Dunno what the range on their guns are. That being said if it was the turrets it shouldn't have waited for you to get back in to do it, the times I've had it happen they blow my ship up as I'm running to the bunker, or in the cases of the turrets that don't aggro until you physically enter the bunker, while I'm in the bunker.
Warframe/Steam: NFyt
I'd be awfully tempted to maybe pick one up if I didn't already have a Valkyrie.
@SCREECH OF THE FARG Yeah, looks pretty neat! I like the idea behind it. Of course I'd like some pilot weapons, but I'd probably use it for box and bunker missions primarily since 2 2xsize 2 turrets aren't much.
I'll use my account credit to pick it up when it's available and once I can earn it in game with aUEC I'll melr it down for the next ship to try out
Server meshing was first announced in 2016. On the roadmap to be released in 2018. Hint, it wasn't. That was cut down to just iCache, which was supposed to be out in 2020. iCache didn't do what they needed and the whole idea renamed to Persistent Entity Streaming and Server Meshing (PES). Now they think PES might enter testing by the end of 2022.
The Leggy seems like the first useful dropship. It looks like the only one actually designed with the developed boarding mechanics in mind.
The Valkyrie has room to unleash hover bikes, though, so that's pretty fun. I love the Valkyrie but it's underpowered. If only it could fit a Nova.
Have you read this?
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/18397-Server-Meshing-And-Persistent-Streaming-Q-A
The roadmap is something like:
1- Servers covering static (overlapping) regional 50 player shards (instances) that can hand off players.
2- Dynamic region sizing and server allocation
3- Client-side performance improvements to support more than 50 people in one place
4- Raise shard player limits to suit
My understanding is the that near term goal (1) will have to sort players over the regional limit into different mirror dimensions physically, but they'll sharing the same overall reality in terms of the global economy and such.
There seem to still be quite a few devils in the details like:
What if I drop something in a shard and never pick it up again? What if everyone checks an agreed upon location everytime they pass through a region, and drops something there if they see it's empty? Will we eventually have staked out private shards for everyone?
But that's stuff they're actively trying to figure out.
This is the latest thing from citizencon last year, its very long and kind of dry and technical but a lot of info here:
As I understand it, they're hoping that once a server is handling just one planet, moon, whatever vs an entire system, the load will be reduced sufficiently that each server can handle more than 50 players.
Citizen Kate and Olli43 using headtracking is kinda making me want to break out my TrackIR again. I wish I could run the game as well as they can.
If you picked up a crimestat, there's also a chance someone was just waiting for you to power it up.
I was clean this time. I guess that doesn't rule out someone just waiting to gank me outside for funsies, though.
That's the number they have chosen for now, because that's all the current server can handle, since they have one server running literally all of Stanton.
They actually reduced that number down to 40 for the first release of Xenothreat. They have since then done some further optimizations and raised the cap back to 50. But that number is something they themselves have set. It's a limitation brought on by the insane amount of process strain they are placing on a single server.
If you cram a ton of people onto a Carrack that is also a dynamic server (with dynamic server meshing), the server capacity could actually be well over that 50 person mark, because the server would only be processing the Carrack, and not all of Hurston, Crusader, MicroTech, ArcCorp, GrimHex, etc. The fact that they're running the entire Stanton system on a single server is the crazy part.
I'm not saying you could physically fit 1000 people on a Carrack, but if the server load was only a Carrack and nothing else, the amount of players the server could handle would go way up.
I just want to be able to air-drop my G12 out the back, like a mini-Mako being pooped out of the Normandy.
I want a Jump Ship that acts like the Galaxy in Planetside 1. Room for a tank or two in the back and instead of landing it's equipped with a jump system that lets the soldiers air drop and do a little retro burn before hitting the ground.
Edit: I don't think it really fits in their view of how their universe functions, I just think it would be neat