The blueprint system is killing this game

[sedstr]

Why can't I take an existing ship and create a blueprint from it?
Why cant I modify an existing blueprint and make a .2 version?
Why cant I browse 100's of ships in the steam workshop and add them to the game so I can make them?
I like the SD tool, but I should be able to load up an existing ship design and modify it.

The vast majority of designers would freely share their designs if the in-game systems provided a convenient way to share them - a simple checkbox 'make public'.
But it seems like the game devs, at the detriment of the game as a whole, created a monster - a blueprint trading system that discourages the sharing of ship designs.

The problem is, if a new player actually pays for a blueprint, it generates a sense of entitlement that that blueprint meets their needs, which then requires the build standards to be so high that 1000's of innovative, interesting designs never seeing the market at all, which results in new players only having a limited choice of 'off the shelf' ships to choose from - unless they spend the hours required to familiarize and get proficient with the SD.

If blueprints were free, users of those blueprints wouldn't feel entitled to anything and designers wouldn't feel obliged to meet an undefined or unrealistic standard before releasing their designs.

I understand that, as a designer, you would appreciate that your time and effort be rewarded, but that doesn't happen in 100's of popular games, why should it be so in Starbase?
Having an in-game blueprint trading system that encourages that feeling of unjustified entitlement for SD creations, adds an incentive that simply is not needed, producing resentment for designers who never sell a blueprint, and players who feel like they game is lacking content.

When you look at the steam workshop for games like Cities Skylines for instances, there are many addons/mods that are absolutely free, and be realistic, they have required more hours, skill and talent than any blueprint designed in Starbase.

I'll keep playing and I'll reverse engineer and enhance any design I like, and I'll make those designs public, despite the barriers being placed on doing so, because that's what will keep my friends interested in the game.

Frankly, the devs need to stop thinking 'Eve Online' and start thinking about having a product that sells and has a wide audience, otherwise this game will fail.

 

[Lukas04]

Why cant I modify an existing blueprint and make a .2 version?

You mean in-world? This will be possible with the upcoming patch. You will be able to modify a ship and save up to 3 different versions of itself in-world.

Why can't I take an existing ship and create a blueprint from it?

Drive-In-Designer is still planned as far as i recall, but not sure how they will make the rules for it, i.e if you have had to have a version of the BP before to be able to modify it or not.

Why cant I browse 100's of ships in the steam workshop and add them to the game so I can make them?

I agree, Steam Workshop could help quite a bit, and would work better than the current Ship Shop system in most ways. They could even create an automated shop that simply displays the currently popular Steam Workshop ships instead of the current physical shops.

I'll keep playing and I'll reverse engineer and enhance any design I like, and I'll make those designs public, despite the barriers being placed on doing so, because that's what will keep my friends interested in the game.

Ok, the tone suddenly switched. Did you make this post just to justify what you are doing?
Creating an enviroment where people can easily share their Blueprints is important as the current system sucks, but i wouldnt want a System where immidiatly after making my Blueprint i would loose all control about it. That would demotivate me from creating more Ships personaly.

 

[sedstr]

Ok, the tone suddenly switched. Did you make this post just to justify what you are doing?
Creating an enviroment where people can easily share their Blueprints is important as the current system sucks, but i wouldnt want a System where immidiatly after making my Blueprint i would loose all control about it. That would demotivate me from creating more Ships personaly.

I get that, if you create a ship, and you want to be the only one flying that ship, you don't have to share it, that's absolutely fine.

My argument is, the mechanics of blueprint transfer within the game, have resulted in product that has failed to attract new players, and keep existing players interested, all to satisfy the demands of a vocal minority of the minority.

If the starbase steam workshop was filled with amazing and interesting designs. people would buy the game just so they could build a collection of cool ships, and they would need to gather resources, and many would go further, and actually discover the other 90% of the game.

The survival of this game relies on actual revenue - in the real world.
It cant survive on 'happy feelings' and good reviews from ship designers.

 

[Oobfiche]

the original plan for a "steam workshop" was that you pay for the blueprints in-game in some form of UI marketplace where people sell blueprint chips with the ship's design as a preview. but they never got the time to add it in because it required other features to be in the first place

 

[Drstarke]

Why can't I take an existing ship and create a blueprint from it?
Why cant I modify an existing blueprint and make a .2 version?
Why cant I browse 100's of ships in the steam workshop and add them to the game so I can make them?
I like the SD tool, but I should be able to load up an existing ship design and modify it.

The vast majority of designers would freely share their designs if the in-game systems provided a convenient way to share them - a simple checkbox 'make public'.
But it seems like the game devs, at the detriment of the game as a whole, created a monster - a blueprint trading system that discourages the sharing of ship designs.

The problem is, if a new player actually pays for a blueprint, it generates a sense of entitlement that that blueprint meets their needs, which then requires the build standards to be so high that 1000's of innovative, interesting designs never seeing the market at all, which results in new players only having a limited choice of 'off the shelf' ships to choose from - unless they spend the hours required to familiarize and get proficient with the SD.

If blueprints were free, users of those blueprints wouldn't feel entitled to anything and designers wouldn't feel obliged to meet an undefined or unrealistic standard before releasing their designs.

I understand that, as a designer, you would appreciate that your time and effort be rewarded, but that doesn't happen in 100's of popular games, why should it be so in Starbase?
Having an in-game blueprint trading system that encourages that feeling of unjustified entitlement for SD creations, adds an incentive that simply is not needed, producing resentment for designers who never sell a blueprint, and players who feel like they game is lacking content.

When you look at the steam workshop for games like Cities Skylines for instances, there are many addons/mods that are absolutely free, and be realistic, they have required more hours, skill and talent than any blueprint designed in Starbase.

I'll keep playing and I'll reverse engineer and enhance any design I like, and I'll make those designs public, despite the barriers being placed on doing so, because that's what will keep my friends interested in the game.

Frankly, the devs need to stop thinking 'Eve Online' and start thinking about having a product that sells and has a wide audience, otherwise this game will fail.

your comments are killing this game

 

[pavvvel]

Why can't I take an existing ship and create a blueprint from it?
Why cant I modify an existing blueprint and make a .2 version?
Why cant I browse 100's of ships in the steam workshop and add them to the game so I can make them?
I like the SD tool, but I should be able to load up an existing ship design and modify it.

The vast majority of designers would freely share their designs if the in-game systems provided a convenient way to share them - a simple checkbox 'make public'.
But it seems like the game devs, at the detriment of the game as a whole, created a monster - a blueprint trading system that discourages the sharing of ship designs.

The problem is, if a new player actually pays for a blueprint, it generates a sense of entitlement that that blueprint meets their needs, which then requires the build standards to be so high that 1000's of innovative, interesting designs never seeing the market at all, which results in new players only having a limited choice of 'off the shelf' ships to choose from - unless they spend the hours required to familiarize and get proficient with the SD.

If blueprints were free, users of those blueprints wouldn't feel entitled to anything and designers wouldn't feel obliged to meet an undefined or unrealistic standard before releasing their designs.

I understand that, as a designer, you would appreciate that your time and effort be rewarded, but that doesn't happen in 100's of popular games, why should it be so in Starbase?
Having an in-game blueprint trading system that encourages that feeling of unjustified entitlement for SD creations, adds an incentive that simply is not needed, producing resentment for designers who never sell a blueprint, and players who feel like they game is lacking content.

When you look at the steam workshop for games like Cities Skylines for instances, there are many addons/mods that are absolutely free, and be realistic, they have required more hours, skill and talent than any blueprint designed in Starbase.

I'll keep playing and I'll reverse engineer and enhance any design I like, and I'll make those designs public, despite the barriers being placed on doing so, because that's what will keep my friends interested in the game.

Frankly, the devs need to stop thinking 'Eve Online' and start thinking about having a product that sells and has a wide audience, otherwise this game will fail.

People spend hundreds of hours to make a ship. Do you want to just take and copy the blueprint? Do you understand exactly what it looks like?

 

[MrFaul]

Steam workshop isn't the way to go here, it's external tool with very little control.
Valve is extremely slow in managing the workshop should a issue arise.
(And trust me on that one, there will be tons of issues... And it's a nightmare to deal with them.)

Community fan based tools are already available and useable even so they are a bit cumbersome.
But they are nishe and fast to react while no effort on FBs side is required to maintain them.

Also, you are lamenting something is killing the game that's not even properly implemented yet.
The blue print market will be a vital part of the game as much as the actual ship manufacturers will be.
Sharing BPs for free with the community will be part of the market.

The current "buy ship from the ship designer" is a stopgap method and will be replaced with something more appropriate down the line.
I assume someday you will handover the BP to a contractor for manufacturing.

 

[shado20]

i have some ship i made. they are only available to my company. i have a 1048 can mining ship with 12 mining lasers (with mutable mining systems) 5hr flight time and max speed empty about 100 full.
for the moment im not sharing how i can cram all of that into 1 ship. but latter i would like to only sell the ship, not the blueprint.

i have received other blueprints and well , there is a lot of trash. steam workshop sharing would just be that, full of trash and maybe a few decent ones maybe.

there is so many other things that need fixed and added first, way before this.

 

[Vexus]

The blueprint system is killing the game, because:
1) players spend 100's of hours in a 3D editor instead of playing the game
2) ships made in the 3D editor are compact and unable to be properly repaired in the game world
3) there is no emotional investment in any ship since you can print another copy of the exact same ship

The entire SSC, as I pointed out before the game even released, is a bad idea. Every point I made about it has occurred. It should be removed from the game. The devs should be the ones putting out custom ships (and removing old ones) every few months to the playerbase, based on their own ideas of gameplay, while everyone else should be using the in-game tools to put together their ships from crafted parts or parts they find in the game world. The human effort to make a ship would both limit the size of ships as well as their power, because no one could perfectly test their ships in a 3D editor without any risk. Ships would be one-off creations, players would be incentivized to buy (dev-made) ship-shop ships to begin customizing a ship after they lose their current ship, emotional attachment to ships would lead to adrenaline rushes during combat, you wouldn't have ultra-compact ships because parts would need to be accessible in order to be placed and wired by hand, you would have odd-shaped ships due to using what parts you had on hand, all your crew would be helping to upgrade your ship over time so everyone would feel useful at all times, ship loss would matter regardless of how rich you were, you would not have (one for each member of your company) 1000 crate ships printed, defending large investment ships like huge ore haulers or miners would be worth it, thus leading to people banding together for protection instead of just taking the risk of loss of a multi-million credit ship since they can "just reprint it", and so, so much more.

Each ship should be an amalgamation of creativity and thought based upon the people who have been working on the ship - or, if you don't want to do that, you just buy one of the ships available in the shops. The amount of time spent in the SSC in this game far outweighs the amount of gameplay time had actually in the game world.

So much gameplay has been lost with the SSC, and players wouldn't have known any difference had the SSC never been in the game. They'd have been bolting parts together to create unique works while being in the game, playing the game, as was shown in the trailers.

Some middle ground would be the blueprint projector discussed and shown off somewhat by the devs, where if you have the parts, the ship can be assembled - but still requires the time and effort of putting parts into the game world, and an existing ship from which to save a blueprint from. Player time is the most valuable resource, and when you can print 1000-crate ships every two minutes, the player time is invalidated. Anyone who does any upgrade or work on their own ship - their time is worthless, since someone else can print 10 ships in the same time it took the other player to expand their frame a little bit.

 

[Foraven]

For having spent a lot of time in the SSC, I see your point and I agree. Currently it's way too easy to replace whole ships and have an armada of them. Of course I assume it won't remain that way if the devs gets around to continue developing the game. I am sure they never meant the game to be about "printing ship" in seconds but having to manufacture them in factories. Unfortunately they just skipped that part while they tried to rush the station siege...

 

[shado20]

So much gameplay has been lost with the SSC, and players wouldn't have known any difference had the SSC never been in the game. They'd have been bolting parts together to create unique works while being in the game, playing the game, as was shown in the trailers.
.

i totally disagree, the best part of this game is the SSC! most of all the ships in the ship shops are created by other players, not the devs. if the argument was the repair-shop is killing it then yea, as i don't even refuel my fuel-rods anymore, i just repair my ship to before the rods where empty.
the dev made ships are well, not that good.
but the SSC is here and was the best part of understanding how to build ships from the start.
the skill tree thing is an incentive to make all the parts before assembling the ship, as it reduces the cost and you get the points for making the parts to unlock more tech. if your all worried about the printing of this fast, then massively up the price of the SSC to make the parts for you.. make the player assemble all the parts of the ship first before assembly. but the inventory system needs to be updated before this, as reaching item cap is a problem.
no the blueprint/SSC is not killing this game, the last second untested changes to the game on launch and now the devs not working on this game is killing the game!

 

[Vexus]

the best part of this game is the SSC!

This is precisely the entire problem, which I pointed out. Thank you for confirming and unknowingly agreeing with my point.

I think a lot of people will share your sentiment. Which means the game is not Starbase. The game is the SSC for players who think it's the best part. The SSC should not be the game. The SSC should be a dev tool for creating custom ships to give to the community every few months. Imagine if Blizzard gave players the tools to create raid dungeons, and allowed players to run their own raid dungeons. Everyone would run the easiest, most loot-dense dungeons with as little risk as possible. That is what Frozenbyte did with the SSC in Starbase. It gives players too much power and, in effect, cuts out incalculable amounts of game time from the actual game world, instead putting it into a 3D editor.

I enjoy the SSC, but it's not a game, and not part of the game at all; it's a tool you enter into to create stuff so you can play the game. I hope the difference is clear. A game called Robocraft has a "ship-builder" as part of the game. You build custom "ships" to fight others in arena-style combat. It was a decent game; their editor was part of the game because that was the point. Starbase is more open-ended than an arena-based "design your ship and see how it performs in structured combat" game, and the gameplay of Starbase has no indication that such structured gameplay was the main goal from the beginning concept (though, there's lots of later evidence someone thought it would be good to add some structure while never finishing the core gameplay loop...).

Everyone still playing Starbase likely thoroughly enjoys the SSC. Everyone else - 99% of all gamers - would not agree.

 

[Askannon]

This is precisely the entire problem

If the SSC being the best part of the game is a problem... why not polish the rest of the game up to the point where the activities are similar in quality.
As far as I can tell, the BP system is the only way of actually progressing currently, as flying, mining and fighting gets you only so far with EBM, in-world building and published ship shop ships.
It is also one of the few systems that is definitely not a placeholder, and as such enjoys quite a lot of polish and stability. Even in-world building does not have as much consistency and suffers from inventory concerns.

The entire SSC, as I pointed out before the game even released, is a bad idea. Every point I made about it has occurred. It should be removed from the game. The devs should be the ones putting out custom ships (and removing old ones) every few months to the playerbase, based on their own ideas of gameplay, while everyone else should be using the in-game tools to put together their ships from crafted parts or parts they find in the game world. The human effort to make a ship would both limit the size of ships as well as their power, because no one could perfectly test their ships in a 3D editor without any risk. Ships would be one-off creations, players would be incentivized to buy (dev-made) ship-shop ships to begin customizing a ship after they lose their current ship, emotional attachment to ships would lead to adrenaline rushes during combat, you wouldn't have ultra-compact ships because parts would need to be accessible in order to be placed and wired by hand, you would have odd-shaped ships due to using what parts you had on hand, all your crew would be helping to upgrade your ship over time so everyone would feel useful at all times, ship loss would matter regardless of how rich you were, you would not have (one for each member of your company) 1000 crate ships printed, defending large investment ships like huge ore haulers or miners would be worth it, thus leading to people banding together for protection instead of just taking the risk of loss of a multi-million credit ship since they can "just reprint it", and so, so much more.

The core of all of this is investment, be it time, resources or credits (with the latter two being derived from the first).
So overall you want players to invest time into their ships, which would require resources and credits to be worth more time or for the SSC to be limited in some way. Buffing survivability of ships would also be a way of increasing time investment
And instead of finding a balance between the three you went to one extreme (limit the ssc 100%), whilst not thinking of other options, like not providing certain components to the ssc (current examples: tripods, crafting bench upgrades) or working on increasing the time investment by using a ship longer (making sure a ship is not instantly crippled because one explosion happened by making explosion damage not absolute inside its radius).

But in the end you have to think of how many would be willing to take their ships and actually risk them, so the upfront time-investment can't be too much or you get too many feeling stuck inside the safezone or that the game is too time-intensive.

 

[Vexus]

If the SSC being the best part of the game is a problem... why not polish the rest of the game up to the point where the activities are similar in quality.

It's the best part according to everyone left, so the opinion is largely skewed; the majority of gamers do not want to 3D edit for 100's of hours before playing the game.

It is also one of the few systems that is definitely not a placeholder, and as such enjoys quite a lot of polish and stability. Even in-world building does not have as much consistency and suffers from inventory concerns.

Because it is completely separate from the rest of the game. It's a 3D editor. It's a dev-tool. It has lots of bugs like weird gravity on the moon and being unable to leave your pilot chair while on the moon along with other bugs. Solar works in the SSC, but may not outside. All sorts of stuff is not great in the SSC.

In-world building was how the game was presented. The editor is like giving players cheat codes to build all manner of otherwise impossible ships. It devalues gameplay heavily. The SSC is not gameplay. It's a 3D editor. It is a great tool, but it's a tool that brings you outside a game, an MMO, where players are supposed to interact, not go away into another program for the majority of the time they're "in-game."

But in the end you have to think of how many would be willing to take their ships and actually risk them, so the upfront time-investment can't be too much or you get too many feeling stuck inside the safezone or that the game is too time-intensive.

What we have now is people feeling stuck inside the safezone and that the game is too time-intensive because it takes 100's of hours in the SSC to learn the tools to make your own ship the way you want it. Then you get good at 3D part-placement in a dev-tool. But you're not playing the game. If your first 100 hours was spent playing the game, upgrading your ship as you go, or building a new one from parts you find, you wouldn't have the current issue of the game being time-intensive because every bit of effort you do towards improvement actually matters, since no one can reproduce your effort.

That last part is key, because right now, your effort to manually improve your ship is a complete waste of time, energy, and resources. You should always be making changes to your ship, or making a new ship, inside the SSC. You should never alter or change a ship already in the game - only make changes inside the SSC for the next version of your ship. So anyone doing anything to their ship that involves playing the game is "losing" compared to someone making those changes in the SSC. The person who makes the changes in the SSC ends up being able to spend more time gathering ore and making credits, because they weren't wasting time playing the actual game, bugs and all.

If the SSC never existed, the 2 hours you spend per night working on upgrading your ship or making some design change... it "sticks" in that no one can replicate it, and anyone else doing the same upgrades probably needs to spend the same 2 hours. So your time is valuable. If you're not in the SSC, currently, your time is worthless. I spend time making ships from scrap because it's fun, but I'm losing millions of credits every time I do, as well as not obtaining anything worthwhile in the long run, because anything I make in the SSC is not only much more efficient, but suits any purpose I want, versus having to deal with "the ship I have" in terms of any obstacle I encounter. Fighter for fighting, miner for mining; little hybridization, because you can just print super-specific ships at will.

If the SSC didn't exist, people would be playing the game, necessarily always risking their ships, because that's the only way to do anything; instead, if a design doesn't seem perfect in the SSC after a week's worth of 3D editing, you spend another week making in perfect, all the while not really interacting with anyone.

Starbase has the best 3D editor spaceship designer I've ever seen for a multiplayer game. If that was enough, there would be a lot of people still playing the game just for the SSC alone. The reality is people expected a game, not a 3D editor, and no one is lured in enough to only play Starbase just for the ability to piece together parts into something. Everything hinges on player interaction. In other words, the SSC is not a huge selling point for the game, but it is detracting from players actually playing the game as a whole. Go crash a ship you like somewhere on purpose, and then decide; reprint the ship, or fix your ship up and get it back to station to perform more repairs to get it working, hopefully back to how you had it before? You will just go reprint, because it's much more efficient to do that; you're actively incentivized by the cheat tool to not play the game.

 

[pavvvel]

The blueprint system is killing the game, because:
1) players spend 100's of hours in a 3D editor instead of playing the game
2) ships made in the 3D editor are compact and unable to be properly repaired in the game world
3) there is no emotional investment in any ship since you can print another copy of the exact same ship

The entire SSC, as I pointed out before the game even released, is a bad idea. Every point I made about it has occurred. It should be removed from the game. The devs should be the ones putting out custom ships (and removing old ones) every few months to the playerbase, based on their own ideas of gameplay, while everyone else should be using the in-game tools to put together their ships from crafted parts or parts they find in the game world. The human effort to make a ship would both limit the size of ships as well as their power, because no one could perfectly test their ships in a 3D editor without any risk. Ships would be one-off creations, players would be incentivized to buy (dev-made) ship-shop ships to begin customizing a ship after they lose their current ship, emotional attachment to ships would lead to adrenaline rushes during combat, you wouldn't have ultra-compact ships because parts would need to be accessible in order to be placed and wired by hand, you would have odd-shaped ships due to using what parts you had on hand, all your crew would be helping to upgrade your ship over time so everyone would feel useful at all times, ship loss would matter regardless of how rich you were, you would not have (one for each member of your company) 1000 crate ships printed, defending large investment ships like huge ore haulers or miners would be worth it, thus leading to people banding together for protection instead of just taking the risk of loss of a multi-million credit ship since they can "just reprint it", and so, so much more.

Each ship should be an amalgamation of creativity and thought based upon the people who have been working on the ship - or, if you don't want to do that, you just buy one of the ships available in the shops. The amount of time spent in the SSC in this game far outweighs the amount of gameplay time had actually in the game world.

So much gameplay has been lost with the SSC, and players wouldn't have known any difference had the SSC never been in the game. They'd have been bolting parts together to create unique works while being in the game, playing the game, as was shown in the trailers.

Some middle ground would be the blueprint projector discussed and shown off somewhat by the devs, where if you have the parts, the ship can be assembled - but still requires the time and effort of putting parts into the game world, and an existing ship from which to save a blueprint from. Player time is the most valuable resource, and when you can print 1000-crate ships every two minutes, the player time is invalidated. Anyone who does any upgrade or work on their own ship - their time is worthless, since someone else can print 10 ships in the same time it took the other player to expand their frame a little bit.

are you all right..?
the ship editor is the best thing in this game right now. For a year, I spent 90% of my time in the ship editor.
the ship editor allows those who want to improve the technology of ship construction. I find improvements to these technologies all the time. the only problem is that now the game is frozen and too raw.
the ship editor will allow those who are smarter to have an advantage and this is 100% fair.
there is nothing more stupid than suggesting to remove the ship editor or saying that the editor is killing the game

 

[BlackAndWhiteBird]

You're confusing warm with soft. SSC is just a design and drafting tool like autocad, compass 3d or solidworks. This is an environment in which you can design and test a "technically sophisticated device". And this tool is literally the best part of this game. And it is in many ways superior to the same tools presented in similar games with an "engineering" bias.

SSC is not a problem.

The problem is how the manufacture of the ship is implemented. Now you bring to the station raw ore (or alloys if you use them) and poof! Magic! The drawing turns into a ship. Manufacture or purchase of parts, ore cleaning, production lines - no, we haven't heard. Just magic.

 

[Vexus]

the ship editor is the best thing in this game right now. For a year, I spent 90% of my time in the ship editor.

Thank you for reinforcing my point!

BlackAndWhiteBird is fairly right about the issue with magic poofing of ships from nothing. The issue of being able to pack in parts and do crazy not-able-to-do-in-the-actual-game things in the SSC still exists, and there's no clear way to make that not be a thing. It's a huge problem when you can do things in a 3D editor that you can't do in the actual game itself. That shows a huge disconnect. The only way I could see the SSC being "acceptable" is if the parts and wiring had to be hand-placed for the blueprint, meaning it was more a blueprint for parts and not a "game automagically builds the ship for you" thing. It is mainly the execution of the SSC in terms of giving players the ability to do things in the SSC they cannot and could not do in the actual game. Getting the SSC to act more like the actual game would be reasonable. But doing away with it achieves the same thing, since players would then manually build ships on their own within the rules of the actual game.

I built a 24 crate scrapper ship yesterday from within the game world. It took me 2 hours, and was a lot of fun. I upgraded it as I found upgrades. It's a one of a kind ship; I cannot print another. And it's more valuable and fun to me than all my other ships.

 

[pavvvel]

Thank you for reinforcing my point!

BlackAndWhiteBird is fairly right about the issue with magic poofing of ships from nothing. The issue of being able to pack in parts and do crazy not-able-to-do-in-the-actual-game things in the SSC still exists, and there's no clear way to make that not be a thing. It's a huge problem when you can do things in a 3D editor that you can't do in the actual game itself. That shows a huge disconnect. The only way I could see the SSC being "acceptable" is if the parts and wiring had to be hand-placed for the blueprint, meaning it was more a blueprint for parts and not a "game automagically builds the ship for you" thing. It is mainly the execution of the SSC in terms of giving players the ability to do things in the SSC they cannot and could not do in the actual game. Getting the SSC to act more like the actual game would be reasonable. But doing away with it achieves the same thing, since players would then manually build ships on their own within the rules of the actual game.

I built a 24 crate scrapper ship yesterday from within the game world. It took me 2 hours, and was a lot of fun. I upgraded it as I found upgrades. It's a one of a kind ship; I cannot print another. And it's more valuable and fun to me than all my other ships.

If the in-game building capabilities outside of the ship editor are weak - you need to develop them, not break the ship editor.

If you don't like the way ore is turned into parts, it doesn't mean that the ship editor is to blame. Because those same parts can be crafted in the world. It's not the editor's problem. Suggest to the developers that we need parts factories - no problem, it would even be interesting. But then you need convenient cargo containers in which to transport ship parts.

Condemning people to building ships outside of the ship editor means having 100% ugly and low-tech ships.
It's a robot world and there's nothing wrong with the ship editor automatically building a ship if you provide the blueprint and resources.

Reducing the ship editor means that all the smart people will leave the game at once.

Yesterday I accidentally stumbled upon another thing in the ship editor that will make the ship more reliable, compact and lighter at the same time. It's moments like this that I've been finding for 1,500 hours in the editor. I combine them, refine them, and each time the ship gets better technically. When the developers change the way the armor works and add new details, it will be possible to make beautiful and efficient ships at the same time.
I want to see these ships, design them and fly them.
I want to gain a well-deserved advantage over other players who haven't improved their skills in the ship editor.

The ship editor is creativity, it's a huge layer of gameplay, to criticize and try to cut it down is blasphemy.

If you are unable to work in the editor, it does not mean that you should take this opportunity away from other players.

 

[Vitold]

ssc and blueprints is killing the game? Are you seriously? maybe you're just crooked and can't design a normal ship for yourself?

 

[MrFaul]

The issue of being able to pack in parts and do crazy not-able-to-do-in-the-actual-game things in the SSC still exists, and there's no clear way to make that not be a thing. It's a huge problem when you can do things in a 3D editor that you can't do in the actual game itself.

Honestly Vexus, the more I read from you lets me believe that you don't like the ship editor because
you are jealous of what other people are able to archive with it.
So many of your "points" are hot air, that gets blown away time and time again by sound arguments but you are still relentless.
It's just pure annoyance at this point...

pavvvel may be rude as f but at least you can discuss things with him.
(No offence buddy, you do you...)

Also do you like Apple products?
They are virtually unserviceable by design too, people are still buying that crap.
But it is their choice to buy it, the problems are well known.

It's the same with the space ships, you can do a test flight beforehand.
You can completely rip it apart and see if its repairable or not.
If you don't do that, don't blame the SSC for that.

Seriously grow up...