Vipex, that'd be fine, but those changes weren't submitted with your fixes in mind. They were submitted to address the blatantly broken pricing system we currently have in view of existing field setups and mechanics. By the time you update all of your configs and throw a new version out the door, the entire effort will have been entirely wasted and irrelevant.
Trying to use those prices after a new update that substantially alters the fields would just further break them, and we actually offered to re-do them entirely once the fields were updated in order to accurately standardise the prices again.
This is what we've been trying to tell you people since August. The proposal was to use these prices now as a stopgap until a better mechanical solution could be implemented through an actual mod update. Instead the entire opportunity has been squandered. As Karst said, checks absolutely could've been done in half an hour and implemented in 5 minutes by a server admin.
The fact that they passed the buck to the mining devs in the first place is also kind of disgraceful too.
(11-25-2015, 08:28 AM)Oldum Wrote: [ -> ]After changing your nombers to this :
Quote:Ballpark Polycount Numbers
- Fighters (LF, HF, VHF, SHF), Bombers, & Freighters (≤ 650 cargo): ~2,000 to ~3,000 polygons
- Transports, Liners, & Gunboats: ~3,000 to ~5,000 polygons
- Destroyers, Cruisers, Battlecruisers: ~5,000 to ~8,000 polygons
- Battleships, Dreadnoughts, Carriers: ~8,000 to ~12,000 polygons
I'd like to know how do you guys plan to make a 5k transport and a GB , not to mention liners from the same polycount ? I dunno if you was what I cooked in teh back yards for OSC , but 2 of those are already 10.5k poly , and I still felt I didn't make then detailed enough. Thank god I stopped there.
Also, could you explane why we are still playing with these extra low poly models ? Cause I've been lurking around the internet and saw 140k poly models being handled my Freelancer engine pretty well. So unless you are assuming everyone is playing on toasters from 1980's, could you tell me ? Serriously, I'm curious.
From another thread:
(11-25-2015, 08:21 AM)Oldum Wrote: [ -> ]It's not any better now either .. not to mention from the five OSC ships I'm doing currently 2 are arouns 10k , one is about 6 and the 2 small ones are around 3k each, cause back when I started the whole thing, I was told by that's generally good. I love changing expectations ...
Also, how do you expect to make a 5k transport out of the same poly count as a GB ? 
With the "quality" and "detailes" you desire ?
First of all please bear in mind that the numbers outlined in that post are general guidelines, NOT hard limits.
That being said, for the level of detail shown on those models 10k is way too high. You're probably using unnecessary amounts of polygons on overly smooth areas, or stuff which can be optimized with a few simple tricks.
I intend to write a full guide on model design at some point which should hopefully help new would be modelers out. For now I suggest you look at the geometry of some of Massdriver's models for inspiration on how to better optimize your stuff. His texturing may be wonky at times, but he's very good at packing in large amounts of model detail while retaining a low poly count.
If you want me to take a look at the models myself and offer any advice, you have my Skype.
I'll keep this week's update short. We've recruited a few new trainees onto the dev team, some of which aren't even on the structure page yet. With this, we've been looking to increase productivity in a number of areas.
As usual, we are planning to get the next update out Soon™ ... more seriously, we're looking to have a "mini-patch" out in the near future with a lot of the ships that need currently processing. In addition to that, the Dev Team does have a semi-definite deadline by which we'd like to have more substantial changes out by, however I'd like to wait until we get a little bit closer to then before announcing that, just in case.
We're aware that not much of the progress that has been made lately is apparent to the general community, because much of it (like how far the system changes are coming along, how recruitment is going, what the weather is, etc.) isn't very announcement-worthy and would take up more time to talk about than just do. That said, do know that us developers are working at a steady pace and are getting things done.
Been testing out new events lately. We have a huge list that has a lot more event ideas that fit the current story, and will be going through them at a somewhat steady pace.
We also have update progress bars. Looking to get the next set of updates out before 2016, but within a month from now at the latest. Our apologies for the long duration it has been since the Gallia Update. The forum rollback put us behind schedule, and so has the departure of the team's prior leadership. We're rolling along, though, so no worries.
We've been training a number of new people lately as well, for positions including economy, effects, models, and PvP. Provided that they stick around and keep active, productivity will increase and some of their usernames may appear in dev gold. I've been receiving some training lately as well, geared towards managing updates. We all have things to learn.
Next week, if I'm not lazy, I might write up a post about how lore works. Also, happy holidays!
Any insight as to what the balance and holiday update is? Is the above what you mean by those?
Also great work on those events. The server got really great activity out of them. Great work!
The balance update is more of a quality of life thing focusing on ships that were largely broken. This includes both buffs and nerfs, mostly the former. I'd post details but I'd rather get Teerin's permission on that first. On the whole, expect things that should've been done a long time ago.
, is there someone who could make a few guidelines or something on texturing things for the mod ?Or could that be a subject of this thread sometimes ? Cause with the fact that told me that the stuff I made is crapbad , but didn't tell me why or how it should be or something, it's pretty hard to fix it and I'm walking around in the dark, desperately trying to figure something out that depends on the personal opinion of those responsible for models. With all due, I won't even try to bother with it, I feel like I'm not one of those people who would get an answer any time soon.
It's starting to get frustrating, cause there would be still loads of things to do with the meshes I made and I don't plan to finish them by next christmas, but without info, it's pointless to even try, thus making me reconsider if I actually should bother making new content to the mod.
Oldum, Durandal merely said "There are a number of problems there but I don't have time to go over them all right now." He did not call them crap. As for your question, I can see if someone wants to but I can't make any guarantees.
why don't you guys make detailed video tutorials , It makes easy to learn things, Starport links are dead I tried