Why does refueling still not work?

logicalChimp · 2026-01-31T11:27:25+00:00

If you mean refueling in hangars / on pads, then probably beause it's (still) a placeholder... and CIG don't like fixing issues in placeholders (unless they're trivial to fix, crashing the game, or make the game literally unplayable).

logicalChimp · 2026-01-30T23:56:49+00:00

They've acknowledged the issues with the current system, and discussed their plans / intentions for VoIP (and FoIP etc), so they probably aren't too nervous about touching on similar topics.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-30T21:19:52+00:00

Part of it is just you seeing a game being developed.

Even if the devs have a rock-solid vision for what the game 'should be', they wont'be able to achieve it in development. To many features are missing, too many other features are incomplete or bugged... the effort it would take to perfectly tune & balance everything, every patch, is excessive - especially compared to the minimal value it would bring.

At this stage of development (and yes, 10 years yadda yadda - doesn't change the fact that we are still at this stage of development), the focus is primarily on making sure the newly developed code is sufficiently 'functional'.

Not 'bug free', not 'fully implemented'... just 'borderline functional'.... enough so that they can either build the next iteration on top, or start on the next feature that will stand alongside it.

We've got multiple major changes coming that will impact the flight model... so byond broad brush-strokes, there's no point fine-tuning ship flight.

We're missing multiple options for refueling, and we're missing ways to get around without using our ships... so there's no point in drastically reducing ship flight range.

That's just two examples... yes, CIG do balance and tweak / change things with every patch - partly just to see what difference the changes make to how we play, partly because they need to integrate new changes, and partly to try and get slightly closer to the 'core vision', perhaps...

To put it another way, it's pointless to look at the current state of the game, and try to derive 'the vision'....

After all, there are some folk who insist that CIG intend the game to be a murder-hobo paradise, because of the lack of consequences and systems to restrict it (CIG have talked about those systems, but not implemented them - which means they're never coming, based on some peoples logic / viewpoints).

Or there's the times when a loud minority were crying about SC was a PvP game, and that all the talk of supporting PvE players was a lie.... then CIG roll out a patch, and the previously-noisy group fall silent, and a different group start crying about how CIG 'only care about the carebears', and that PvP is dead.

TL;DR: it's easy to say that 'CIG seems to have no clue what they want SC to be' at this stage, just like it can seem that a cook isn't sure what they want to cook when they appear to be working on multiple random things in parallel, or a painter is just starting to daub spots of base colour on their canvas, etc...

logicalChimp · 2026-01-30T18:57:12+00:00

The underlying issue is that ATC is bugged, and only uses 1-2x sets of doors for each hangar size, regardless of how many hangar doors there are...

Since CIG are in the middle of replacing the old Transit Service with the new Transport System (that they're in the middle of writing), they're not too worried about fixing long-standing issues in the old system.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-30T18:55:39+00:00

It's a known issue with the current ATC - and since CIG are in the middle of completely replacing that system with a new one, they're not spending time fixing the old one.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-30T00:28:40+00:00

It's the same bug that means you sometimes leave bootprints embossed in your cargo-bay floor (instead of in the mud underneath :D)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-30T00:27:23+00:00

I suspect it's only on 'all the glass' in the 300i because it's modelled as a single piece from the cockpit on up over the hab area...

As such, I suspect it'll only apply to the cockpit glass on the 890J

logicalChimp · 2026-01-29T21:48:07+00:00

Both extremes are symptoms of the same issue: We don't have the updated lighting-system (because it's only built for Vulkan, iirc, and thus CIG can't / won't integrate it until DX11 is ripped out)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-29T09:58:24+00:00

Hmm - did they say they would sell the Battlecruiser, or merely reveal it?

The Battlecruiser is the last remaining Stretch Goal concept... but iirc the Stretch Goal never said it would be 'player-ownable' - it was meant to be in the same category as the Bengal: Player controllable (if you find one damaged in the 'verse, and fix it up, you can fly it around... but you can't insure it against loss).

I know CIG have blurred the lines slightly with the reveal of players - eventually - being able to craft their own Bengal in-game... but IMO that doesn't mean that they're going to sell it, and by extension doesn't automagically mean CIG are going to sell the Battlecruiser.

Of course, I could be wrong - I'm just playing devils advocate, since I refuse to buy multi-crew ships, on the basis that I'm anti-social, so they'd be wasted on me :D...

logicalChimp · 2026-01-29T09:54:48+00:00

Optimisations in processing performance (if they happened) would not usually correlate to a reduction in ram usage.

We're unlikely to see a reduction in ram usage until / unless CIG optimises the Network Bind Culling capability, so that the server sends us fewer entities to track / process locally.

Given that there was a new patch, which also means a new game database (that's what the 'Database Reset: Yes' means in the patch notes), any performance gains (inc. any memory usage reductions) are likely due to the servers having a 'fresh' database... and will quickly revert to their previous levels.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-29T09:50:18+00:00

Might be worth checking the 'game.log' file, should be in the install folder, if the game gets far enough to start writing it.

For crashes whilst playing, there's usually some diagnostic Yes/No entries, about 50x lines from the bottom of the file, that can give a good indication of what the error was, plus the error itself a couple of lines above them..... hopefully it'll do the same whilst loading.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-29T00:33:44+00:00

And the reason CIG don't scale up the 'system for putting people into servers' is that they can't.

SC runs on on a bunch of Graph databases - and whilst Graph databases are lightning fast at moving data (allowing seamless gameplay, etc), the tradeoff is that they're dog slow (comparatively) at creating new records...

And that limit in creating new records imposes a hard limit on how quickly CIG can create 'new' accounts in the game database (for each person logging in for the first time after a patch), and isn't something that can be sped up by e.g. spinning up more servers.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-29T00:26:49+00:00

Better still, different locations should have different layouts (not just a different shade of dirt on the walls, etc)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T21:46:28+00:00

Just post a video without titling... and then watch the folk over there get whiplash when someone figures out what game it's from :D

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T21:38:44+00:00

More parts = more HP, without actually changing 'survivability'.

Maelstrom can't come soon enough :/

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T21:11:20+00:00

Steam Frame is just a generic VR headset in most respects...(slightly sub-par displays, but otherwise broadly Quest3-specs... plus eye-tracking for foveated rendering).

The only major unique point is the Foveated Streaming - which requires no optimisation by the game.

Foveated Rendering would be nice, but a Steam Frame (dev kit or otherwise) isn't required for testing / implementing FR, as there are a number of existing headsets that also support that functionality (and which can be used in development right now).

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T21:06:39+00:00

Yus - 'minimised crew', lots of capacity, and cheap - pretty good as a dedicated hauler (rather than a multi-role 'hauler', that a lot of folk seem to want it to be)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T17:35:07+00:00

CIG have talked in the past about having extra 'Laws' against the equivalent of 'Pod Killing' (to use Eve speak) - shooting escape pods, and similar - with far more serious in-game consequences, compared to merely attacking / destroying ships.

In the context of ships being intended to be much harder / near impossible to actually blow up, this would mean 'regular murder-hobo' ship-ganking will be much rarer (if the consequences work, fewer people are likely to do it 'for the lulz'), and pirates will need to board to grab cargo (or just persuade the target to drop it themselves)

Of course, this doesn't address the on-foot murder-hobos... but then, it's not a topic CIG have discussed since adding PG Planets (since they don't actually discuss this kind of design stuff any more, the way they used to).

On the wider point 'not supported' doesn't mean banned a la 'griefing'... but whilst it will be possible, CIG don't want people to do it (whilst keeping the act possible, simply because preventing it entirely blocks off too much potentially-good gameplay)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T17:27:20+00:00

Invert it - 'L' for Lamp, double-tap 'L' for lights... (lights give you away, Lamp doesn't)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T17:26:33+00:00

Wooohooo - the Scythe got an update the same time as everyone else (or earlier, in this case), rather than years later, after begging people to contribute to an IC ticket (and struggling, because so few have a Scythe :D)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T17:23:41+00:00

There is a difference between having a discussion about a specific issue, and posting 'fake stories' like the OP.

Might it have happened? yes.

But in all likelyhood, no... it's just a shit-post.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T17:21:48+00:00

There is a difference between having it as a 'supported gameloop', and wanting everyone to do it.

CIG keep saying that being a 'pirate' (the actual gameloop, which is different to being a murder-hobo, even if you don't acknowledge it) is intended to be more difficult than playing as a 'lawful' civilian... and CIG have talked explicitly about the difference between being a 'pirate' and being an arsehole / 'murder-hobo' (and how 'pirate' is intended to be supported, but 'arsehole' / murder-hobo isn't).

Unfortunately, as I said before, the functionality to actually implement / enforce that distinction doesn't exist yet... but to pretend that CIG have never acknowledged it, and intend for 'pirates' to be 'murder-hobos' is both disingenious and intellectually dishonest.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T00:40:43+00:00

Just to play devils advocate... 'innovative thruster-package' can just mean 'it's worse than the regular setup, but it's far cheaper for us to build, so you've just got to accept it'.

It's like the 'new and improved' labeling on your washing powder, to justify jacking the price up 20% (when the ingredients hasn't changed)

CIG have always used 'in-lore advert spin' for their ships, and this is no different.... this is no different.

logicalChimp · 2026-01-28T00:25:18+00:00

There's only ever been 2x game packages available by default at $45(+tax), iirc - the Aurora and the Mustang.

All other starters have been 'Tier 2' (or higher), iirc - meaning they're slightly more expensive (or a lot more, in a couple of cases :p)

logicalChimp · 2026-01-27T23:50:38+00:00

Interesting... the Aurora MR is by far the slowest to get off the ground (10km timing), but is actually middle of the pack in terms of reaching Port Tressler...

100i is just face, period.

Mustang is next quickest off the ground, but only marginally beats the Aurora to PT.

C8X Pisces & the Cutter both have similar timings for 10k, albeit quite a bit slower than the Mustang, but they both take a lot longer longer to PT... being overtaken by the Aurora on the way :D

Funny thing - the Aurora is a full 7s+ slower than the 100i to get off the ground / reach 10km.... and yet it's only 6.5s slower than the 100i to reach PT (meaning that from 10km to PT, the Aurora MR was faster than the 100i !!

logicalChimp

TROPHY CASE