Using a.2.2.1b on Windows 10.
I have a house at -1539W -933 N. It is a Rustic 2x2 Patio.
Just killed a Treant on my own property.
Tried to loot, and getting the "You have no right to loot this" message.
It was working for wolves. Will see if I can reproduce with another Treant when this one respawns.
Hey guys. Not sure if you're using User Stories. Have something to report/suggest that isn't quite a bug, but also isn't quite a feature.
Writing it up in user story format, hope it's helpful. 
Using version A2.2.1b on Windows 10 at time of writing.
As a player I want to be able to fill a large blueprint from a handcart with as few mouse clicks as possible.
Right now I am filling a large chest blueprint form a handcart that is full of wood. The handcart is close enough to the target blueprint that I don't have to walk between them.
For each piece of wood I want to place onto the blueprint, I must:
Iterate those steps 10 times to place everything for the blueprint.
The animations are a little annoying, but don't bother me too much. Animation time feels justified in gameworld.
But having to do the mouse hovers and clicks on the cart every iteration feels like too much clicking and it could be simpler. It feels like the GUI is obstructing me from doing what I want to do.
Suggested fix would be to just keep the handcart inventory window open so long as the player is standing close enough to be able to pull from it. This would remove steps 1 though 6 from each iteration. I feel that this would help my user experience stay focused on the game world instead of getting annoyed at the GUI.
Thanks for reading!
Using a.2.2.1b on Windows 10.
I have a house at -1539W -933 N. It is a Rustic 2x2 Patio.
Just started placing outdoor furniture. I can place some things, like large wooden chests, simple workbench, etc.
But I can't place fences. While attempting to place the indicator blueprint shows as blue. But when I right-click, the placement mode ends, but no fence blueprint is placed in the world.
Or to be more clear: I went around the property to see if there was any spot I could drop a fence. Most of them failed. But suddenly one worked. Then I destroyed that fence blueprint and tried to place a new one in the same spot - but I couldn't.
There may be something intermittent about this issue. However, other than that one random success, every attempt to place a fence outdoors on my house plot has failed.
Using a.2.2.1b on Windows 10.
I have a house at -1539W -933 N. It is a Rustic 2x2 Patio.
Inside, I have a fireplace, bed, and enchanting table.
Outside on the porch, I have a wooden chest - the small one.
I really wanted to place it against the wall between the bed and the enchanters table, for the purpose of storing my enchanting materials.
THe blueprint showed up as blue for that location, but I was unable to place it.
I tried placing it outside on the porch, which worked. But now that it is built, when I try to move it into the location I want it, this does not work. Again, the blueprint for the placement shows blue for the targeted location. But it does not place when I right-click.
But I can move it to other locations on the porch. Just something about the room itself.
@Huntsmaster said in Passive Wisps:
I solo'd to 100% Wisp knowledge without any issue using magic missile and the skills that I learned from the wisps. Only about 10% of the wisps attacked me.
Hey, I've just gotten back to the game after a long time away from the forums.
Just put a house together, but there happens to be a wisp spawn near my house. No biggie, but frustrating.
Having trouble with the wisp, and I'm playing a mage. How'd you do it? I can beat wolves, sprouts and treants 1v1. But I can't do the wisps, can't break their mage shield + heal tank.
@SicariusAnatar said in Questions on demons and angles:
why would a demon take the path of light in the first place?
Because you want to play on Arboreus, but you also really like the Hellfire demon stat table. 
Best option in my view would be to introduce a counter-play mechanic that would give a prepared and organized group of players a way to counter and neutralize a zerg ball.
For example: Have a kind of siege weapon that is focused on anti-infantry. It damages and microstuns in a large AoE, but the damage and length of stun scales with the number of enemies it hits. More enemies = scaling damage. So it's useful against zergs, less useful against smaller squads.
Then you set up a killbox, lure in the zerg, and then bam. Dead zerg.
Just once concept - I'm no game designer and this is just the first thing that came off the top of my head. There's probably better ideas for zerg counterplay than this that a real game designer could come up with.
From the mainstream media article:
The key change in the terms of service appeared to be a new block from Unity on using its engine for cloud gaming services that do not have specific authorisation. Narula speculated that the change, and subsequent block was “probably either an accident or a negotiating tactic” on the part of Unity. “We’re waiting for someone in the west coast to wake up and make some ransom demands, basically.”
Obvious interpretation: They realize the value that can be delivered through using Unity as a server in this way, and want to update their existing licence agreements to extract more value (fair). But instead of being upfront about it, they're deciding to be assholes to set up a stronger negotiating position (dickish).
Worse interpretation: They realize the value that can be delivered through using Unity as a server in this way, and they're planning to develop their own Unity-as-a-server platform in place of SpatialOS, so they're blocking any possible competitors from using their own technology before announcing their own product.
Or it could be something else entirely. What do I know? 
Fingers crossed guys! Hope this gets resolved with an updated licensing agreement sometime soon.
@gothix said in Power gap between r1 and r3 spells is too big (POLL):
Reducing CD and scaling up damage is just inappropriate for horizontally marketed game (even if scaling would be low).
This would be horizontal "ranking up" (an example):
Axii's Sun Strike:
(all ranks 120 mana cost, all ranks 15 sec CD, all ranks 520 damage)R1 ignores targets fire resistance
R2 adds a slow effect to targets
R3 never misses the targets - (hit chance based, not players aiming miss)(Higher rank does not include benefits of previous ranks, each rank effect only works for that particular rank.)
And then player chooses which rank to slot on his skill bar depending on what he needs for particular situation.
Player could slot R1 of Sun Strike for fire resistant mobs, or R2 for melee mobs, or R3 for evasive ghostly mobs. Depending on what ranks are available in his spell book of course (what ranks he already learned).
I know I'm a bit late to the party - but I really like the examples because they're adding something different to the spell at every level rather than just taking existing numbers and making them bigger.
I'm not sure about the sequence though. R1 seems a little bit OP to me. But as a general example, yeah, I think that's a really good way to think about it. Not even from a horizontal vs. vertical game design perspective, but more from an interesting vs. boring game design perspective.
Just going to throw in my weight with the others, in that I just don't see this being a massive problem.
I think that any engine upgrades - if DS do in fact do any - will come down to something other than the need to be on the newest, shiniest graphics.
For example, if SpatialOS grandfathered out an whatever version of Unity Fractured winds up being built on? That would be a huge deal... And depending on expectations set between DS and SpatialOS, that alone might be enough of a justification for regular engine upgrades to make sure they gap between the current version and the latest SpatialOS supported version never gets too large.
Because it turns out you can accrue Technical Debt even if you don't touch anything! In the event that the market moves forwards multiple versions you can lose access to formerly viable upgrade pathways, and then when all of a sudden you have to upgrade you're stuck on a smelly waterway without a propulsion device. What fun! (my company has going through dealing with that very problem for the last 18 months and we're still not done...)
So there may still be really good reasons for DS to keep Fractured up to date on current or semi-current builds of Unity. I just don't think that being on the latest version on release simply for the sake of being on the latest version on release is a powerful enough issue that it's worth the time and effort to solve.
If the engine is a year or two out of date on release, I'm not personally going to be too fussed. If anything that might even be a plus given not every system may be able to run the bleeding-edge version or it might still be a bit buggy. But a version that's a few years old should have had time to propagate around the marketplace and should have had most of the most obvious bugs and issues killed off by then.
Initially the plan is to set up in a guild town in Tartaros with access to two or three different kind of workshops.
Plan is to do a mix of solo or small-group PvE and crafting to fill in the time between getting involved in group PvP with my guild.
If Tartaros turns out to be too dangerous for that, may wind up moving to Syndesia looking for a similar setup. But I expect that I'll learn quickly enough after dying a few times about how to die less often. 
Welcome!
However, should probably have been posted in the Welcome to Fractured forum. 
Expect a mod will be along shortly to move it.
I have a bridge in Myr I'd like to sell you...
Oh, wait, crap. Wrong game.
Not EVE. Not EVE. Ex-nay on the amming-scay.
@target said in Forum Privileges:
The problem is that the forum uses Markdown which doesn't support embedding video.
Wait, what?
[blinks]
What?!
@gothix said in Forum Privileges:
@greenfire said in Forum Privileges:
I'd like to propose allowing members to post videos, perhaps it can be something integrated with the alpha when it comes out, or members who have shown that they aren't simply going to shit post when they do share. I for one would love to be able to see video once members are creating it, rather than only posting links, why not allow an embed for certain ranks on the forum?
I'd guess because of forums storage space capacity limits.
Forum already went crazy once when it went out of memory (at that time devs noticed they partitioned the space wrong and they fixed it), but even so, space still has limits since devs are running this on their own server.
Space isn't the problem if the users are posting videos they uploaded to another service like YouTube or one of its competitors. So long as the videos are entirely rendered on the browser side the load on the DS servers will be trivial.
The issue with posting videos is that they can be distracting if they take up a lot of screen space on the forum. Granting that privilege based on Kickstarter or Foundation rank to users that can be trusted to not abuse it would work out.
Not sure if there's enough of a need for this to justify the development time though. Depends on how long it would take to implement.
I think I'd rather the DS devs focus on the actual build rather than the forums at this point.
@gothix said in Enter the Thunderdome - Creating ways to deal with conflict as a Demon.:
Structured PvP is called... Syndesia
Tartaros is here for unorganized chaotic PvP. Whoever wants structure in his PvP has another planet to play on.
Agreed.
But I do like the idea of setting up a player-run area on Tartaros for gladiatorial combat where the other races can come and participate for prizes of money or loot.
I don't think this should be built into some kind of crime and punishment system. I think it'd just be a fun PvP mode.
@mcrackenstan said in Enter the Thunderdome - Creating ways to deal with conflict as a Demon.:
Prepare .... to ENTER THE THUNDERDOME!
@vortae said in Alpha 1 Map & Pledge Integration:
@kairosval Yeah, in the news they say they will be available in the coming months. See the 'Kickstarter pledge integration' paragraph.
Ah, read past that somehow. Thanks!
