@gankdalf That's a bug, spawning should stop when a nuke lands, we'll check that.

@geir1983 we were able to reproduce and fix the issue, thank you for the report!

@artch could we please update the documentation to reflect this change? I'm not sure how somebody would know about this other than finding this article or perhaps reading screeps source code. https://docs.screeps.com/api/#Game.cpu.generatePixel [edit] Sorry, I didn't read the full thread but it sounds like intents are no longer cancelled. Docs are up to date then. Thx.

Let's move this discussion to the follow-up thread.

The discussion is moved here.

Temporary Shards/Monthly Challenges where players compete (or cooperate against a shared challenge) for prestige/practice.   ooh, and maybe allow us to get early access to a new shard before it opens up if we want to have to jump through the temporary shard.

@jbyoshi said in Screeps Discord?: Why not set up a Discord/Slack bridge? I'm part of a project that started on IRC and then later added an "unofficial official" Discord server. To prevent fragmentation, we then added a chat bot to link them. Screeps could do something similar. This would give us the benefits of both Discord and Slack, whichever you prefer to use. I did something like that for a eve alliance some time ago, and it failed because of rate limits. I don't remember which side was the problem, screeps or discord, or if they changed the limits.

As announced before, the /api/auth/signin endpoint now uses Google Invisible reCAPTCHA. If you haven't changed your auth flow to tokens yet, please do this ASAP.

Update: Bugfixes. WebGL renderer is now turned on by default. New display options dialog:

Maybe market system changes should be discussed in a separate threat. I'm also not a friend of order fees and I'm more a friend of transaction fees, but it would be too offtopic to deepen this topic now. The current changes show what we'll expect but there is still something missing: The regional commodities need different resources, so their production cost varies a lot between different regions. What will be the market prices for these commodities? How much ops will OPERATE_FACTORY need for which effect duration? ( I know proposed is 100 ops for 1000 ticks, but they are "still considering other timings too" )

@zpike said in Discussion: long-range logistics revamp: It is already very hard to quickly come back after a wipe and transfering all my energy through terminals to a focus room is required to speed that up at all. Using a leg force of transports is a huge CPU and Spawner hit for a new player and is thus not much of a solution. You can do RCL 7->RCL8 in under 50k ticks with without power creeps or external shipments. Seems fast enough to me. Remember batteries are a thing and while factory cooldown means you can only get 50 energy/tick from them, that only uses 5/50 of the terminal throughput, which gives you 95 energy/tick coming through total. Combined with upgrade boosts (going to use some terminal capacity, but 2x on energy) and local energy harvesting and 50k ticks is very acheivable. You can move a lot of energy with creeps without using much CPU. I think it's a fine solution. If you're within about 5 rooms (call it 250 tiles) unboosted haulerers can move >15 energy/tick/CPU. Seems reasonable to me. I agree, you can be limited by spawn time. Also, warp containers. Also, I think most respawning players will have many rooms to level concurrently and there's no real need to push one at a time. Unless you're spending hundreds of credits/tick on energy you're not going to be hitting these limits. I'm not trying to say it won't be a restriction, but I am saying that it isn't exactly slow to level rooms.

This mechanic does definitely seem interesting, but I would be much more open to it if there was a smaller cooldown. As is, as Steeler said, it very heavily penalizes spread out empires, and practically makes portal-expansion completely pointless. As of now, my furthest two rooms are have a linear room distance of 104, and all of my rooms are either claimed by moving a large distance, or by moving through a portal. I felt this was a good strategy at the time, both because it allowed for more remote mining, and so that it was harder to "attack" my empire. If this change goes through as is, it will leave players like me at a huge disadvantage compared to the ones who just chose to "dominate" an contiguous block of rooms.

Just one more point I would like to make, is the technical burden for remote mining.  As a new player, I still haven't dealt with remote mining, since it would take a significant time to get code that would result in a profitable operation.  Right now, I am more focused on immediate issues inside my own rooms. If you make is such that we need this power creep to boost a source, I fear that will just increase the burden of remote mining for newer players, in terms of coding (and cpu).   I 100% agree that higher player remote mining operations are too profitable right now, but on the flip side, if you reduce those profits, you will make it such that newer players will almost never remote mine.  I would like to see a balance that limits higher players, without harming newer players.

@deft-code Oh man don't make this TF2 XD That said, it could be great to have some side revenue generating options for screeps. Things like reskins or custom badges could bring in some extra cash without increasing server load.

I would disagree with shedletsky's opinion that HEAL should be cheaper and that recycling should be removed. HEAL is already very powerful and recycling provides interesting strategies. However, I do think that it would be worth considering buffing CARRY boosts. Currently the manufacturing cost is the same as ATTACK / RANGED_ATTACK / HEAL boosts, but I don't think that 4x carry capacity provides nearly the same utility that 4x damage/healing does (ignoring the fact that the healing further synergizes with XGHO2, which I personally think is a bit overpowered). For example, assuming 100% lab efficiency and using T3 boosts, if you want to move a full storage worth of resources from 3 rooms away using 40 move / 10 carry creeps, it will take you 25 creeps and 3.56 million lab ticks for the entire operation. The same amount of lab ticks could boost 20 creeps (5 full 2x2 squads) with 10 tough / 40 (attack/ranged/heal) / 10 move bodies, which, in the hands of the right players, is more than sufficient to take out most rooms. I would argue that taking out a room is worth far more than faster and slightly cheaper resource transport. One final thing I would add is that I think a big factor that limits the usefulness of CARRY boosts is that containers are limited to 2000 capacity, which is only slightly higher than the max unboosted creep carry capacity. I think it is worth considering adding an EXTEND_CONTAINER power to the operator power creep, which would increase the capacity of a container from 2000 to 8000 (max boosted carry capacity) for X ticks. (This would really need to be useable in outpost rooms to be useful, however, so I'm not sure how that would work with enabling/disabling powers in a room.) Alternately, simply increasing container capacity altogether could make this boost more useful on a day-to-day basis, and I don't forsee any balance problems with this change.

I found Dissi's suggestion of "intermediate rooms" very interesting. What about yellow/orange sectors for intermediate players. While there wouldn't be walls blocking entry, it would have some limitations to help players get established. For example - no boosted creeps (any creeps entering the zone lose their boosts), and no nukes. I could also support Tedivm's idea of signing controllers with boosts to prevent noob zones from opening. Dewey

Let's move this discussion to the new thread.

This seems like an idea that would be fun to program for the devs, but not very usable in practice. If this is added to your todo list, I hope it will be with the lowest priority possible, there are so many other things that would be better to spend your time on. Just my opinion.