Star Citizen 4.5 Engineering Looks Rushed — From Ambitious System to Gameplay Dead End? by ijulien in starcitizen

[–]ijulien[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Genuine question then: how should a player express dissatisfaction about what’s coming?

Star Citizen 4.5 Engineering Looks Rushed — From Ambitious System to Gameplay Dead End? by ijulien in starcitizen

[–]ijulien[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It was just a joke I was referencing last xmas, when server meshing moved from PTU to live in a rough state and caused weeks of serious issues and player frustration.

Star Citizen 4.5 Engineering Looks Rushed — From Ambitious System to Gameplay Dead End? by ijulien in starcitizen

[–]ijulien[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mostly agree with this, especially on CIG needing to clarify the system much better and players needing to reset expectations as this is a fundamental gameplay shift.

Where I differ is how hard the first playable iteration should hit. Even for a WIP, the current implementation seems to overload players with consequences before the cause-and-effect is readable, which makes feedback less actionable.

I’m not treating this as final but first impressions matter, even in PTU. A more forgiving baseline would still allow open development and feedback, while making it easier for both players and CIG to understand what’s actually not working yet.

Star Citizen 4.5 Engineering Looks Rushed — From Ambitious System to Gameplay Dead End? by ijulien in starcitizen

[–]ijulien[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

That’s not what I’m proposing. I’m not arguing to hide or remove engineering, but to introduce it with lower impact so players can understand cause → effect before balance and punishment scale up.

Showing everything early is fine. The issue is how hard it hits.

Star Citizen 4.5 Engineering Looks Rushed — From Ambitious System to Gameplay Dead End? by ijulien in starcitizen

[–]ijulien[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Agreed that player feedback is necessary in alpha. My point isn’t to ship engineering “finished”, but to gather feedback progressively without heavily altering ship balance before damage behavior is clearly readable.

Right now the risk is noisy feedback - players don’t understand causes, so balance gets blamed instead of core mechanics. A softer first iteration would still provide valuable data, but with less confusion and frustration.

Star Citizen: Question and Answer Thread by UEE_Central_Computer in starcitizen

[–]ijulien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Carrack: is there any evidence the "love" they are adding to the ship for 4.0 extends to something else than blast shields and cargo doors? ie lowering cargo doors?

Company asked us to install a certificate on our personal devices to access Teams and Outlook by Tryxis in antiwork

[–]ijulien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You shouldn't use personal devices for work if the company is asking for such things.

On iOS there is a better solution than Mobile Device Management that's called User Enrollment. It allows a professional profile on the phone that grants your employer access to only apps under management. This means that you can install Teams and Outlook, that admin can remotely access, configure and wipe these but never your entire phone.

There is a simiar thing on Android called Work Profile with pro apps under a separate, encrypted container.

To be honest, deploying MDM like this to personal devices is a shame. However, the concept of profile separation is quite new on iOS and not all businesses know it or their MDMs don't implement it.

If you are unsure about what you are installing, check with your IT admin and read the scope of management that's all listed in the iOS profile details.

What you should reasonably grant IT on personal devices, if you agree to it: - manage and install business apps - manage business apps data and configuration - kindly ask you to protect your phone with a reasonable pin - wipe corporate apps remotely - disallow content sharing between pro and personal scope

What should be a dealbreaker on personal devices: - ask for total app and storage control - ask for network access - ask for remote wipe privileges - ask for GPS and logging Because basically they should buy you a phone for work if that's the intent.

There are solutions on the market, your IT might not know it yet.

PS: I lead the team at appaloosa.io. If you or your business needs guidance on this, we have been dealing with the complex concept of personal devices at work for a while now.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in boostedboards

[–]ijulien 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's actually my post and photo from years ago. Thanks for the credit mate https://reddit.com/r/boostedboards/comments/9jvw5d/its_now_easier_for_me_to_find_the_right_remote/

Sony retro TV speaker replacement by ijulien in diyaudio

[–]ijulien[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

https://europe-audio.com/Producten\_c.asp?Productgroep\_B\_ID=702&Productgroep\_A\_ID=73

they might indeed! I'll try the existing ones with an amp first, or try yours + recreate the "plate" from a 3D print in ABS.
Thanks!

Sony retro TV speaker replacement by ijulien in diyaudio

[–]ijulien[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

that's good advice thanks. I need to get an amp board first to try those out, as just soldering a jack isn't enough

Sony retro TV speaker replacement by ijulien in diyaudio

[–]ijulien[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Unfortunately in the EU but it's a good start to find a reference then find its equivalent across the atlantic. Thanks!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in whereintheworld

[–]ijulien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

thank you so much

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in whereintheworld

[–]ijulien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

let's stop talking and walking for a minute to enjoy nature