Jump to content
Stray Fawn Community


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


12 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I don't think weapons should work fully normal, but maybe it is just something like I mentioned earlier about fading projectiles and shorter lasers. While the weapons are futuristic, the water should show some type of resistance. It might be not that much at the beginning, but it builds itself over the distance, I would think. But then again the special case of the temperature weapons. That might be a nice feature, too, that it isn't especially water, but some type of liquid that needs you to adjust your weapons/equipment. I would say that the projectiles of weapons affect the surrounding liquid, but depending on the liquid (or rather temperature) standards of the planet it might be less, or even more, effective. Lava/Magma is a type of liquid that instantly deals damage on contact, which you might try to avoid by freezers, but still not fully. Heated/cold(frozen) water could have an interesting effect, maybe with some enemies effecting its temerature in order to annoy you, or some natural generation that effects it. Maybe there could be objectives depending on the temperature, like "Taw a frozen planet by destroying 'x'", or "Avoid 'y' by heating up the planet, by doing 'x'". Edit: There could be interactions like tawing frozen water, so instead of just mining you would be able to generate water instead with Plasma (heated) weapons.
  2. (don't count this post) Some did multiple posts (like the person who did spam), so I think there are actually posts after page 20 needed to verify the chances.
  3. Hmm, I think I am the only one who is questionable about this: - If multiple cores are available, wouldn't there be a problem with the connections? I think with bigger cores a bigger connection length is necessary, or maybe the core would have attachement points at its borders in order to avoid that and possible instabilities. - Wouldn't it be strange that some players would prefer the smaller cores and build them in a row in order to increase their block placing capacity? I think that mechanic could be problematic, so maybe a solution could be that the capacity is for all connections from that core, connections going into another core have their capacity ignored for that one. - An occuring problem of the above would be the factory, as it doesn't essentially would be a core attached to it, and there are more parts leading to the core, but which are ignored because it counted to the last core. Maybe those parts which lead from a factory are an exclusion and would count towards the next core. - What about logic dependencies? I guess the extra cores would be for building purposes and are irrelevant from the logic, which comes from the main core (which could maybe have a seperate design to highlight, but I think that should be done anyway). But what I like about the idea is that a bigger core could make a bigger drone more stable, or a normal size core isn't necessary for a smaller one.
  4. I like the idea and possibility it could give. The specialized propellors would be an interesting addition, too, but maybe dependend on how much water would be added to other planets. I am already thinking of different ways to play, like having the main drone hovering above the water and letting a remote "sub"-drone explore the planet, or some way of letting the main drone in and somehow out, maybe changing its "equipment" (maybe if recouplers would be implemented). I think the main problem could be the ressource container, whether it is above or in the water. If thruster don't work, don't they work temporary or permanently? If the whole drone goes underwater and you need to do something above it it would get complicated. Another feature that could be included would floaters, so instead of flying you could float above the water. Of course the water should be an additional detection type for sensors, or it could be a main difficulty problem for automated drones. I think thrusters wouldn't be the only things that wouldn't work in water anymore, but weapons would be a major point. Well, they are rather futuristic so they could practically work underwater, like laser shooting normally, or maybe balanced with some type of resistance, like it's shooting through, but slowed down and earlier faded. But besides the weapon types, the damage types are a bigger influence. The "flamethrower" weapon type isn't essentially fire, so it might be logical it that it still works. The damage types could have a big impact on the surroundings, so Plasma would heat the water around its projectiles and cryo cool down and freeze it. As weapons' projectiles are effected, the same applies to that, so it is more slowly heating/cooling. Terraforming is a bit questionable, whether it gets affected by the water or not, because you could just give the argument "It needs to be more solid in order to work", or it might work directly at the output of the weapon, but that would be a huge problem as it would be too close and weapons could be in a drone, so you would create terrain in the drone. Well, a big topic to discussion here ^^'
  5. Oh yeah, I forgot the upgrades. I am not sure how big the impact could be if more upgrades would be possible, but I think in the future more slots will be added anyway (I think). I think it might get too problematic if you can't use any energy efficiency upgrades, a bigger laser could use too much, dependend on how big the scaling would be. I think it might be a bigger topic to discuss the weapon balance as that feature for customization shouldn't be for weapons only, and I am not sure what possible upgrades there could be for other parts besides weapons. Maybe another way of balancing could be that the part doesn't have a specific disadvantage at the start, but maybe you are forced to select one per a downgrade, which would increase (even if not in the intentional way) the upgrade slots. A problem could be that downgrades could be used in a way that might benefit more than it gives a disadvantage, but I think that is rather making something positive out of something negative and not a balance issue. The point is that the extra slot(s) would only apply to larger parts and not the smallest one. I am not too fond of my last idea about the downgrade, but is just an idea. I think it might be better to rather increase/decrease stats in an intentional way (or atleast there should be smaller and/or bigger variants for downgrades, as some could be too drastic if applied).
  6. I agree to your point of view, that a single block might be op, but I think there are other ways to avoid that problem. Ways like: - Banning that block type, so players are forced to use more blocks - or that there is some point of limitation when using that block, that there is some way of "counting possible parts". Not sure how they would plan to introduce such a "script block", if it is some type of actual scripting or maybe something more related to the current logic parts (only set amount of inputs, outputs, etc.), so with the latter option it could be possible to "count" things as if they would be the actual parts. But besides that limitation, I think there is a problem which may make it even more OP, which you didn't (clearly) mention. It isn't the fact that it occupies a single part slot, but the size gets way smaller. Normally you could consider that as soon as a specific logic part gets destroyed, the drone malfuntion gets too big and it might lead to an easier lose, but the "scripting block" could be much more easily protected. But again, I don't think it is a real problem, instead it could be seen as a challenge between experienced players, and in a combined way of "banning" it, it would be rather another category of sumo battles, so you normally are not allowed to use it except in that category. Edit: I don't think it would be too convinient as you rather try to clarify the issues with sumo battles, but it should be added as an overall game feature. The sumo battle is just a game mode, with the explanation above I think such a thing could be just avoided, but the main game experience should be rather boosted. For me such a block wouldn't be really helpful, as the main point of the script block should be the needed space and a better overview of the logic and its connections. Additionally the script block works normally, as if it would be a placed block, but your variant would be seperated and might make it more complicated if you need to specify inputs and outputs seperatly. But it's just my opinion, people could have others, I stated my main reason before the edit.
  7. I think this is one of the games which could have many tutorials, because it offers many possiblities for building things. Because of that it could be smart to categorize them rather than showing a (big) single list. The first category would be the basic one about basic building and convinience (like showing the tag feature (requested in another request)). More categories could include more complicated ones, because the current ones are very basic. Tutorials shouldn't be too basic, or it might get confusing for less experienced players when further playing the game. Of course it can be fun to experiment with things, but showcasing and explaining could be pretty helpful if a player is unsure about something or wants to know about more possibilities. Not sure if it would be categorized as convinience or something feature related, but some gameplay elements should be explained so it doesn't get confusing. While playing further I asked myself what the transmitter really did, and didn't know why I didn't do that connection in my brain earlier, but it should be explained that the transmitter grants the advantage/disadvantage, that is shown in the top right corner in the editor, until it is destroyed. The biggest confusion was when there were too often planets with more gravity/air density, but in reality it was the fault of the transmitter, which decreases the thrusters' force by half. Not sure if it is really convinient, but maybe the tutorials could be unlockable (depending on the future content). With my lack of creativity, I don't know too many possible tutorials that could be locked away until you really need them, as the game is rather sandbox oriented, but it might be possible if more mission types get available. Instead of locking them away, it could be smarter to show a hint box when it might be helpful to do a specific tutorial when you reached specific points, like the above example of the transmitter. The tutorial isn't really necessary earlier, but as soon as that disadvantage occurs it might help confused players. Well, I am not someone with the creativity to know what tutorials might be possible or really necessary, but I think these points should be considered.
  8. Bigger parts aren't essentially better, so maybe there could be some way of strengthening the connection between parts? The game already includes some type of stronger connection if the part size increases (not that strong in my opinion), but I think there could be another mechanic included to lose some of the "wiggly". - Rigid blocks was already suggested, so maybe a special block variant instead? It could have two possible advantages, whether to strengthen its connection to other parts, or make a rigid connection to others, but both (or the latter) only to the same part variant, so it won't connect benefit from others. A disadvantage could be an increase in weight, so it won't be smart to build too many of them. - Or instead of rigid blocks the part sizes could have a bigger impact. Connections between bigger parts are bigger, so more stable than between a big and a small one. It could be a ratio of the part sizes that defines the strength (2x2 + 1x1 / 2 = 1.5), but the impact would be only if it connects to the same size or bigger. Or maybe the overall game connections could be strengthened, but connections to smaller ones gives disadvantages. Or maybe a mechanic that strengthens the connections if more previous ones are between bigger parts (so a row of bigger parts can make smaller ones at the end more stable), but depending on the length of connections between parts. Not sure if I said everything, but its open to discussion.
  9. Not sure if already suggested, but anyway: At the beginning of playing the game I was at a loss because of all the keybindings that had to be done and that they would overlap sometimes. I saw the icon "tag" in the top left corner, but didn't see any effect so I turned it off again. At some point I asked myself how the game would be if you could write own variables instead of selecting a key input, and got reminded of the word "tag", which could be similar to a variable, and saw the effect. As soon as you work with more complicated drones, in most cases where logic gates and sensors are used, it might be helpful to know about that feature beforehand so it will be easier to create more complicated drones earlier, than testing around and wondering what that icon on the top left corner is (like I did).
  10. I like that you can create you own weapons, but I would like to see that feature more expanded, and not just to weapons. - Parts would have a base which can be chosen, bigger sizes give better stats, but can give disadvantages as well (weapons would normally cost more energy, but maybe making the efficieny upgrade less efficient? (80% might be too much)). Batteries and fuel could have bigger explosions, shields recharge more slowly, etc.. - Part types could maybe have different variants, like the different weapon types, and have their own tech tree (in most cases) for customization. Maybe there could be upgrades included that don't just give a advantage or disadvantage, but both, as an example a slower recharging shield for more capacity (or a faster one for less). Not sure if I said everything, but its open to discussion. Read below replies for additional content ideas
  11. Have only played on a friend's computer, if I can't win I'll just buy it
  • Create New...