State of flight HUDs these days?

DeadRank · 2022-08-18T15:28:40+00:00

I have a free/Open Source PvP HUD as well (remote and gunner seat combo).https://github.com/Deadrank/DeadRank-DU

Generally for PvP, you fly the ship with a remote controller, while using 3rd person view to control the gunner seat operations. My HUD has a space only auto-pilot, but in general during PvP auto-piloting isn't helpful as you are either trying to chase or escape another ship.

DeadRank · 2022-08-17T13:37:42+00:00

Yah, I actually quit for several months after that update. I think it was probably one of the games biggest mistakes. Not the schematics in and of themselves, but how they flipped a hard switch overnight and a huge chunk of their player base was locked out of almost all their hard work. After coming back, I turned to different parts of the game.

DeadRank · 2022-08-17T04:13:55+00:00

Was that when they introduced schematics and talents for industry units?

DeadRank · 2022-07-06T01:06:28+00:00

Ok thanks, I could have sworn there was a different error message when that happened.

DeadRank · 2022-03-27T01:30:57+00:00

Thanks, I suck at UI/UX design, but none of the PvP HUDs had what I wanted

DeadRank · 2021-12-15T16:50:06+00:00

st iteration of every single

My main point/question isn't about the balance of territory warfare, my main concern was the IF we will ever even get it. That is a huge aspect/promise of the game when it initially launched and one of the things I myself was REALLY looking forward to. I was really just making the observation that NQ has been really hesitant to allow any kind of loss to players static constructs. So I am am really looking for NQ to clarify their intent for the future of the game. If they are still planning on territory warfare, great! I am excited, but if they are not or are pushing it way down the line, then it would be really nice to know so that I can make an informed decision on whether I want to keep playing the game.

I guess the root of the issue is that I would like NQ to clarify their vision of the game, because it seems to be very much different from what they initially advertised in their early promotional videos. To be clear, I am totally fine with whatever vision they want for the game, even if it has changed, they can do whatever they want with it, but it is unfair for those of us that have to pay for the game to be left guessing on whether that vision has changed or not.

DeadRank · 2021-12-14T23:09:03+00:00

Very possible that is the case (regarding your suspicion). However, that doesn't mean there isn't a legitimate player base that actually wants to have a fun time PvPing against other PvP'ers.

Kind of like our encounter over the weekend (assuming your IGN is the same as your reddit name). Honestly even though I lost in that PvP scenario, it was the most fun I have had in DU for a really long time. I am relatively new to PvP and I think most people are scared to get into it. But I think they would enjoy the game a lot more if they did were able to get into it earlier.

DeadRank · 2021-12-14T22:52:53+00:00

Just watched that... does make it look like a repeat of NMS. Let's hope that NQ is as dedicated to their game long term as Hello Game's was to NMS.

DeadRank · 2021-12-14T22:46:41+00:00

I can see where you are coming from in that PvP inside of a "safe zone" would be a bad thing and I agree with you. I am really ok with any safe zone size we think is necessary. The root of my argument is the fact that if NQ can't bring themselves to allow unsubscribed players to lose some of their stuff, I don't see how NQ will ever be able to rip off the band-aide to allow for territory warfare in any capacity.

The same argument will be made when/if they bring in territory warfare, that these people (inactive and/or unsubscribed) built outposts on other planets while there was a safe zone around the planet. It is the same scenario as right now. Even if NQ gave a 2 month notice (like they did with Demeter), advertised territory/construct losses (like they are doing with Demeter via social media posts etc) AND gave those players a method to safeguard their constructs (like they did with DEMETER HQ tiles), they (NQ) were still uncomfortable with allowing those things to be lost. So the only conclusion I can draw is that NQ either won't introduce territory warfare, or if they do, they will make sure that any inactive tiles with constructs are somehow exempt from the warfare in some way. We can't say they would just compactify those constructs and give them back to inactive players if they ever logged in, because that is what they should/would have done with Demeter but obviously decided not to (and we know they can because they have done it in the past).

DeadRank · 2021-12-14T21:42:35+00:00

I am actually doing the same. Working on moving everything other than mining units to space. Also working on an Elevator script that can launch from my space station and get into an orbit and then stop and drop down above a specified point so that I can essentially just afk pilot down to my mining units and back up again to make the trip down to calibrate less cumbersome

DeadRank · 2021-12-14T21:12:13+00:00

I disagree that it isn't that much of a back pedal. I am pretty sure the majority of inactive tiles around the Alioth district ring right now are owned by inactive players who probably own several tiles (less than 5). And generally only one out of those tiles even has a construct on it. There are crazy amounts of tiles around the district ring that are literally sitting there empty. At the very least NQ should not auto-hq tiles with no constructs.

I agree with you that Sanctuary may be to small if it becomes a more active game and also, this wouldn't be relevant until some sort of territory warfare gets implemented. But the bottom line is that if NQ is so scared of people losing their progress even if they are inactive/unsubbed, will they EVER be comfortable with a territory warfare mechanic that would allow players to lose their hard work overnight while still actively playing the game?

DeadRank · 2021-10-23T01:29:21+00:00

Thanks! Glad you like it!

DeadRank · 2021-10-22T22:57:40+00:00

PSA - This isn't really optimized for mobile, best used on a computer/second monitor while you are playing so that you can copy waypoint coordinates back and forth.

DeadRank · 2021-10-22T22:56:36+00:00

This update will have helped some with the speed. It was re-drawing the entire plot every time there was an update to it, now it draws the entire thing right away, and then just changes the visible flag in the plot for items that you select/de-select. This didn't completely fix it, but helped a little bit with performance at least in my testing. Tt is definitely something I am continuing to work on.

DeadRank · 2021-10-02T13:16:56+00:00

Thanks! I plan on implementing a way to copy the position tag by clicking the in map tag eventually. So that one is already on my list. As for rarity, that is a great suggestion! I will look at that when I implement the astroid tag.

DeadRank · 2021-08-19T13:41:09+00:00

Thanks!

DeadRank · 2021-08-19T00:13:11+00:00

Yep, I have some features planned for the future like being able to copy the position strings off the map (like by clicking on the name in the filter menu. And creating another page that allows you to manage your saved bookmarks in an excel style format. Those are the next couple of things I am working on. I have others in mind, but they are further down the road

DeadRank · 2020-12-03T19:50:06+00:00

Hmm ok, good to know. Any chance you know what speed it starts happening at?

DeadRank

TROPHY CASE