Feature Requests

• 

  [Discussion] More structures in unowned rooms
  • Davaned

  4
  4
  Posts
  4644
  Views

  

  Renewing creeps is (at least was) planned for the Commander class of PowerCreeps, which I think is actually a more suitable place to have it. I'd love to see it happen Might actually be a reason for me to invest into PCs more.
• 

  Enable map filters when zoomed out one level
  • Tigga

  2
  2
  Posts
  2153
  Views

  

  Please, it really annoys me
• 

  My [ideas] to some new stuffs like: Logistic, Factories, Metals, Armor and Craft
  • Fepalito

  4
  4
  Posts
  3696
  Views

  

  @Fepalito Looks like you're going to get factories of some sort
• 

  Carrier role idea for the Commander class of Power Creeps
  • Orlet

  2
  2
  Posts
  2786
  Views

  

  Personally I liked the idea of renew creep. I worry that renew creep would lose most of its usecase (and interesting long range gameplay) if you don't have a good reason over spawning a creep. The kind of spawning idea I would be interested in would be a certain creep type you define, eg. you have have ability to spawn large numbers of a particular creep body. Basically like an aircraft carrier that can cheaply produce fighters, rather than a mobile manufacturing plant than can create anything. However, that just because I think the challenge of going a far distance with renewing along the way sounds interesting. No strong reason against spawning as a power. The idea of building a container to start producing creeps from just outside an enemy base is an interesting concept. Cool thought and good limitation with max energy cost.
• 

  Don't send emails for errors on the interactive console
  • SystemParadox

  2
  2
  Posts
  2863
  Views

  

  yep I like the email notification feature but I agree there's not a huge need for console typos to trigger it...
• 

  More notifyWhenAttacked-control
  • Kasami

  10
  10
  Posts
  9732
  Views

  

  That's a good point!
• 

  A few requests for SIM mode and the SIM World
  • StormWing0

  2
  2
  Posts
  2692
  Views

  

  We recommend using private servers for multiroom and multiplayer testing environment.
• 

  InterShardSegments for each shard rather than a shared one.
  • SteveTrov

  23
  23
  Posts
  24176
  Views

  

  This feature is now deployed to the PTR: https://screeps.com/forum/topic/2534/ptr-changelog-2019-01-30-intershardmemory
• 

  API Request - Battle and Nuke endpoints
  • tedivm

  21
  21
  Posts
  29838
  Views

  

  Ah now I can find em! Thanks for the ids, now they gone.
• 

  Novice Zones => reduced code size
  • wtfrank

  4
  4
  Posts
  4323
  Views

  

  I in general agree to @wtfrank's idea. There needs to be a way to limit the proliferation of open source codebases among newbie zones. Hell, check the respawn zones on shard3, most of them are full of Overmind bots. @Smokeman that's what the newbie zones are for. Setting up entire shard like that would be inefficient, and result in most newbies not learning anything and/or just leaving their code vegetate on the shard. Timed safe area for initial development is a much better incentive to "get sh!t going". And I'm yet to see a person who'd go out of their way to wipe all the rookies from a rookie area once it despawns. Most of this community are incredibly welcoming to new players, at least to the ones who are actually developing their own code. And finally, getting roflstomped early in the game can also act as a great motivator. Need to exact revenge on someone can really get you going. Speaking of motivation, all those overmind bots in my vicinity on shard3 have been a good motivator for me to get going with stuff too. I've been using them as punching bags to test/develop battle code. But I am not OK with them spawning in a rookie zone and driving the real rookies away from the game.
• 

  This topic is deleted!
  • Communication

  1
  1
  Posts
  1
  Views

  No one has replied

• 

  [Idea] Compound breakdown reactions
  • Orlet

  10
  10
  Posts
  7719
  Views

  

  Yeah, strongholds can possibly create some extra uses for combat boosts, which would be nice.
• 

  Allow calling notifyWhenAttacked during spawning
  • WarInternal

  4
  4
  Posts
  4345
  Views

  

  Quick hack to fix this. Creep.prototype._notifyWhenAttacked = Creep.prototype.notifyWhenAttacked; Creep.prototype.notifyWhenAttacked = function(notify) { const spawning = this.spawning; this.spawning = false; const ret = this._notifyWhenAttacked(notify); this.spawning = spawning; return ret; }; The processor doesn't check that the creep isn't spawning. So bypassing the client side check in Game is all you need. Getting rid of the restriction entirely is better idea though. The change is simple and sane enough that you would probably get it done faster by creating a pull request than asking them to do it for you. PS: Devs, please make an official intents api, most (all?) client side checks can be bypassed anyways.
• 

  additional options to sort saved server list
  • psy372

  1
  1
  Posts
  2599
  Views

  No one has replied

• 

  checkbox/toggle to disable animations on new UI frontpage
  • psy372

  1
  1
  Posts
  2682
  Views

  No one has replied

• 

  Pulling multiple branches from github
  • Estecka

  1
  1
  Posts
  3494
  Views

  No one has replied

• 

  Sound
  • klugemonkey

  5
  5
  Posts
  4903
  Views

  

  @qgazq Somehow I'm not able to paste the complete code here. So we try gist: Link to Gist
• 

  Usermade (clientside)interface
  • Fiskmans

  3
  3
  Posts
  3854
  Views

  

  Doing this through to the server seems very strange to me. Don't forget you can run Javascript in the client through <script> tags in the console. Consider writing a function you can call from the console that modifies your client UI, or check #client-abuse in Slack for examples. (They're working on a redesign for the UI though, so choose carefully how much time you invest.)
• 

  Please redesign the goal of markets
  • Conquest

  18
  18
  Posts
  15312
  Views

  

  To me the main issue with the market is that it's very difficult to link up buyers and sellers. The only way to express your interest in buying or selling a resource is to create an order. There are two issues here: The limit of 50 orders is totally insufficient. There are 42 resources, so you can't even have 1 buy and 1 sell order for every resource. That's before we even think about multiple rooms (which will be needed, because the market is localised). Orders are subject to a fee as soon as they are created These issues seriously discourage creating prospective market orders. I have some LO to sell, but I'm not going to create an order because I can't afford to waste one that might never be fulfilled. I have no idea if anyone is interested in buying, or if there is, I have no idea what price they would buy at. If I do decide to create a sell order, what price do I start with? How long do I wait before lowering the price? Has it not sold because I'm asking too much or because there are no buyers right now? What amount should I place the initial order for? If I create an order with a small amount to see whether anyone is interested, perhaps no-one will buy because they don't want to waste a terminal cooldown on such a small amount. If I create it with more, I'm wasting more credits if no-one buys or I have to reduce the price. Both issues discourage creating orders in the first place. If I do create an order, the up-front fee with no refunds causes orders to be placed with tiny amounts, even if I have 500,000 resource to sell. This is what slows the market down, and it's particularly bad for less popular resources like middle-tier boosts.
• 

  Update/rework of the ATTACK part's hitback damage
  • Orlet

  21
  21
  Posts
  24843
  Views

  

  @kyralee said in Update/rework of the ATTACK part's hitback damage: Re-purpose the Tough Body Part - With this suggestion we would remove the hit back of attack parts entirely and move that over to the Tough body part. This would function like the "Thorns" stat in Diablo and other similar games/mechanics. This could hit back every target or limit it to the number of Tough body parts the creep owns similar to my suggestion 2. Obviously cost and damage values would need to be tweaked. Newbie, here, but FWIW I like this idea of ATTACK doing only what it says on the tin, and either turning TOUGH turning into THORNS, or adding a new part that reflects, say, 10% of damage (at a greater cost than TOUGH).