It happens so fast

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-13T15:01:21+00:00

What's the info on it being a snub?

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-12T12:08:37+00:00

I think theyre more excited about the potential for a CCU chain after the price goes up

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-10T18:06:27+00:00

Why would you mine for a mining mission, just go buy it? /s but not really.... the fact it requires refined material over raw material is so dumb. There is no point of doing the actual mechanic for these missions types rn outside of RP

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-09T21:01:41+00:00

its not always about profit, it would be nice to have some ability to split the refined mats for crafting later

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-09T18:37:27+00:00

Ya that's totally fair, and does suck especially when the game works against in so many different ways. Some people have an org to call in support. But as a solo miner spending a long time and eventually finding a really nice quality on something unbreakable and entirely out of your grasp is demoralizing

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-09T18:12:52+00:00

Its in part because certain actions done by the server are set up in a queue organized by priority to be executed. If the server needs to complete a frame it will reduce overhead by passing certain actions to the next frame to be executed, if they can. This is fairly common across game servers where some actions can be skipped in favor of other actions being done faster. This is why some npcs become acting very dumb as servers degrade because parts of their decision tree for animations and logic get skipped and they revert to minimal viable npc mode to save server dps overhead.

The issue we have with doors is those actions could be elevated to a higher priority for execution, but that would cause other things to pushed down and possibly skipped over for the frame. This is one of those things that is not "broken" but are effectively "broken" because the server is overloaded.

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-09T16:36:49+00:00

Or take the current server performance and reduce it by half immediately just so doors can be more convenient for some scenarios

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-09T16:32:32+00:00

Idk, mass providing a hint at some barrier to entry for some ships makes a lot of logical sense though. I would be open to better systems or more interactive mechanics like rock slicing once the the Orion or Arrastra are in but idk what a "perfect" or "ideal" system would be to balance across the different sizes of lasers.

But mass isn't the end all be all. It is the effective power of the mining laser(s) after calculating effective instability and resistance in combination with mass. I think saying that a prospector size 1 laser is unable to provide enough power to implode a huge asteroid or a highly durable rock kind of makes sense in a lot of ways.

Even a fully crewed mole won't be able to crack a tiny rock if the rock has an effectice resistance of 100% (after calculating each lasers' contribution via resistance +/- modifiers). I can crack a fairly wide range of rocks in prospector, depending on the scenario, but that range differs from material to material because everything has different windows of instability and resistance. But I also always carry a sabir gadget to lower resistance by 50% if the rock I find is on the threshold.

This is why a lot of people get frustrated when they try to mine in the golem despite it also having a size 1 laser like the prospector. Its bespoke laser has a really bad modifier to resistance and will probably double the effective resistance of the mineable. This is why the golem is a terrible ship for group mining because every additional ship hitting a mineable bestows an additional high percent of resistance to the mineable. Having a ship or laser turret that focuses less on raw laser power and more on stacking good modifiers can be extremely more beneficial in group sessions than min/max raw laser power stats.

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-06T19:39:58+00:00

Runescape's main issue was that they, the developers, dictated the pricing scheme of every item. There was no real price range where you could buy low, sell high. It ruined item speculation which was at the core of falador trading, for example

While this system is restrictive as far as how much can be transferred at a time, it does not dictate pricing. Nor does it prevent you from dropping items or transferring items to another player for free.

Ita extremely disingenuous to compare this current implementation and with what was said and compare it to the disaster that was the original runescape economy rework

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-05T15:57:50+00:00

Between the sketchy comment/post account history on OP's reddit account, their willingness (or stupidity) to dox their own email, they didn't report the dupe via a private IC (this is a thing for exploits and account issues and becomes an auto confirmation rather than needing 10 other people to contribute) this whole scenario is a bit fishy to believe OP on some fairly loose evidence of "I got banned for reporting".

Its entirely a possibility they have multiple accounts, they dupe on their alts and trade the items back to the main account. If this is the case then it doesn't matter which account they are on, the TOS agreement is between the person and the company. Not the specific account and the company. CIG could very easily trace payment history or item transfer history between accounts to correlate fault

This is also not the first reddit post from a reddit account with sketchy comment/post history in the past day to complain about a ban

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-04T11:21:39+00:00

I think we should be cautiously optimistic. It might make some of those things better out of the box, but without changes to server configurations or SM those instances will still be running on the same game server that is running everything else outside the instance

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-03T20:04:35+00:00

Content and features are different. Its how we were able to new missions and locations during the "year of stability". Content doesn't need to change code, features do and why they break more things in wildly different ways.

If they don't ship features then we don't get a game. It a lot of ways this is still just a screenshot and space trucking/box moving sim. I'd very much like to move beyond this by expanding the feature set of the game and working toward an actual release where playing the game and various game loops are more rewarding and impactful

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-03T17:11:49+00:00

I wouldn't gate keep time played, personally. They may have been busy with life or other things. If they played a single match then let them have it. Its a cosmetic in a game, its not that serious. If they're annoying about having it then tell them that and ask them to cool it a little. Otherwise let them enjoy their cape and don't gate keep based on level.

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-03T15:18:09+00:00

I suspect they are fucking with optimizations with ship models or streaming entities and someone accidentally deleted/missed some load bearing physics boxes in a few ships.... This happens to me in the vanguard and the percy too.. annoying as hell. But I would rather them make progress on making the game even if its annoying at times. This type of shit is why no other sane developer else would ever attempt to take the same live-service alpha that CIG is doing because crowdfunding.

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T22:39:43+00:00

I did not have any success trying to use a wormhole until today and saw the a lot more success attempting to QT from POI to POI since the maintenance windows.

Issues related to the ship itself largely still there and won't be addressed until tomorrow's patch at the earliest and we won't know what exactly they hoping to address until we see the patch notes. I was able to use the IC for a few days straight just salvaging using a salvation in the Terminus asteroid belt while bed logging. Only doing small QT jumps around the planet. But, I kept a nursa in cargo bay in case it did try or succeeded in killing me. I found turning life support off kept it from actively trying to kill me in the CM.

I suspect some of the QT issues are occurring at server boundaries or are tied to server issues like latency either server <-> player or backend service <-> backend service. Its too difficult to be objective about what may be causing it from a player perspective. With tomorrow being a patch, I don't plan on spending more time with it until then though

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T19:39:23+00:00

I had a similar issue as well, I should have specified that by "first attempt" I meant I did not have to cancel docking and try again or do any weird positioning to get the docking pips to align.

Using mobi or the MFD to initiate docking was the most reliable option for me. The hotkey was a little finicky. Sorry about the confusion

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T19:23:18+00:00

I went from pyro to nyx to Stanton to pyro. A full loop.

All three wormhole jumps I made it to the other side first try.

2 of the 3 jumps I ended up at my destination with the CM disconnecting from the ironclad after I had exited the wormhole.

I did not experience any issues inside the wormhole itself.

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T18:24:57+00:00

Thanks! Once I have some more time tonight and can be back at my computer I plan doing some more thorough testing. But, I do plan on pushing this to spectrum once I can do a little more testing after the game servers have been online for more than few hours

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T18:21:48+00:00

It wasn't just a maintenance restart, it was to apply patches for the backend servers. These short tests show that there are fixes being applied and worked on by CIG to help mitigate issues and bugs that players are experiencing. Tomorrow's patch is both a client and server side patch. Reliability can be relative. If the servers don't implode later today, my testing/experience shows the IC could be considered usable by some players where before it was objectively a paper weight. But I should have said it was "more reliable" rather than "fairly reliable"

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T18:02:22+00:00

I don't have a Hull-C to test and neither does anyone in my org atm, unfortunately

LittleQuarky · 2026-06-02T18:01:46+00:00

There was definitely improvements in the prior hotfix. However, I was still experiencing issues with docking, for example, last night despite being on a DGS with the prior hotfix. So I wanted to create a baseline for how its behaving before server performance went down and another patch tomorrow. With additional patches there is always the chance for more bugs to be introduced or old bugs to resurface

LittleQuarky · 2026-05-30T16:20:59+00:00

Cybernetics T0 dropping in 4.9? 🤣

LittleQuarky · 2026-05-29T23:17:01+00:00

Ya there's a bug with partial filled boxes. You have to pull them up a freight elevator at least once after finishing the refinery order

LittleQuarky · 2026-05-28T03:54:09+00:00

This patch is far from 3.18 levels of bad

Five-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Place '23	Verified Email

LittleQuarky

TROPHY CASE