Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Again, to avoid someone saying 'you can build anything you want anywhere' - yes, of course there is glitch building, with wire glitching just one common example of that.
But again, would be nice if it had at least a few snap points like the old landing pad to make regular, non-glitch building for elevated positioning lot easier.
By this logic, neither should the old landing pad. There are no snap locations on any of the sides.
But what the devs did is add a clever extension that is created automatically whenever an eligible snapping pieces is put near the landing pad side-center.
e.g. a balcony sort of extension is auto created, with hand railings, and the snap piece gets nicely snapped to that location (or vice versa, create the snap piece first and snap the landing pad to the newly created extension.
There is no reason the new landing pad couldn't do the same. If the justification to not do this is basically 'look at how it looks when placed by itself', then the old landing pad is in same boat, yet has full functionality to be freely placed as is on ground, on other snap pieces, or on snap pieces that create a nice extension piece so the snap piece can be fully integrated into the landing pad design
Decide where you want your pad. Set down a stone floor tile at the level you want and aimed at the place you want the pad to be. Run a single row of tiles out to where you want the pad plus two more tiles. Select the landing pad from the build menu. Turn off snap (Go into free placement) Go into free camera building mode and move your view to above where you want the pad. Turn the pad hologram (green) to face how you want it to be and where you want it to be. It should be "sitting" on the row of tiles. Then click place it. Now you can delete the floor tiles or incorporate them into your build. I've done this five times now and it has worked every time.
So the even cheaper, basic floor piece costing a few carbon can be free placed, snapped on ground, elevated in air and auto snaps, etc is fine, but the landing pad isn't?
It's always dangerous to assume dev intentions but I can't believe HG deliberately thought out the design intent to be --> new landing pad costs less than old one, so no snap functionality.
What they -DID- do was make the much cheaper landing pad have less function - e.g. can't use nav data to call your ship to it free of fuel charge. That makes sense. Not being able to snap due to build cost makes no sense - the dirt cheap basic floor tile snaps to everything - on ground, elevated in air, etc.
If build cost = justification to snap or not snap, then tons of other pieces wouldn't snap either.
Yea it's what I've been doing atm, and if not a temporary base, then spending the actual time to wire glitch the new landing pad where I like, including elevated or sky bases.
But I'd still prefer at least some basic auto snapping to a few common pieces like floor tiles.
The cheap cost is already more than justified by not having the more advanced functionality of the old pad (e.g. no computer console to click and use nav data to call your ship. This seems a significant and sensible trade off - want more functionality, use the higher cot pad. For a high sky base, there is zero way to call a new ship from your collection without landing on ground or using the old pad, so again, decent trade off due to build costs.
But the snap function is clearly not a build cost factor given all the other cheap pieces that snap to practically everything else. Floors, walls, etc. And there are reasons even for ground level bases why you'd want at least -some- elevation to avoid the possible undergrowth coming back or like with Frontiers or any new significant update changing the growth sticking up a bit.
I think the new landing pad is just a cheap alternative when you want to slap it down quickly. To be honest the old landing pad use to cost a lot more in terms of materials that were a bit harder to get. Now they are pretty cheap as well. Which is fine by me. I really did not like the old requirements for base materials and I'm glad they reduced / changed the costs a bit.
Six minutes in:
https://youtu.be/q2U_nPWt0uo?t=366
Snap points might make it easier to do certain positioning, but it is not necessary, even to avoid using glitching.
Just old version will snap.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2597487825
Have you played around with the old landing pad with current Frontier's update? Because it sounds like you're not caught up on how it is currently working (or not).
a) snapping is still working fine with old landing pad - I won't say 'ever', but since I started playing just before Beyond came out, the snap point for old landing pad wasn't "always been the edges".
It was and still is the center area of each of the four sides. As long as you hovered any eligible piece that snapped to the pad, or vice versa hovered the landing pad center-side near an eligible piece, two things would happen:
1) an extension of the landing pad side would automatically be created, what I call a 'balcony' because it is a significant length extension of that side, plus has hand railings all along that side.
2) the eligible snap piece would snap into this newly created extension, right at the center point of the landing pad side that you were snapping the pad + eligible piece
What is an 'eligible piece'? Well, this is where Frontier's kinda changed the old meta. It -used- to be a bunch of prefab component parts, and still is. But they either removed by design or is bugged atm that 0-9 storage containers no longer auto snap to old pad (or vice veersa)
You -can- still snap and have the side extension created for any prefab corridor piece (single hall, L shape, T shape, etc), any prefab room (circle, square), some other misc prefab parts. (*minus the storage containers that atm don't work)
So the entire point of my OP on this thread was - why can't the new landing pad have the same limited snapping functionality as the old landing pad?
The argument that bc new pad is far less costly than old pad, to me, doesn't really work because there is already a major functionality loss by using new vs old - e.g. the loss of ability to nav data call ship to that pad.
The argument that because by shape it doesn't look like it should snap to anything on that side also doesn't work because older pieces like the old landing pad had and still has extensions automatically created for many different eligible pieces that snap to it.
p.s. the door creation you are talking about still happens - long as you snap it to a type of piece that logically should have a door, e.g. a side, L, or T shape corridor. If you snap it to a room object like pre-fab circular or square room, then a door isn't automatically created but the extension and the snap is, and then you create a door using any door that object can have. (which is exactly same functionality as if you didn't snap to landing pad because a prefab room put down by itself has no door either - have to use a door piece to make a door.