Topics created by Shibdib

@shibdib I like slack for chat, but one major drawback is that there is no history .. obviously in this forum there is not to much traffic but there are many topics that have very valuable content which would be lost if it would have been just discussed in slack. There is even more going on in the screeps steam forum .)

@shibdib It works exactly this way.

@shibdib said in Alpha Map - Same color as plains: @artch All good, I know o4 was commenting about squishing bugs. Just wanted to make sure this thread didn't get lost in the shuffle Apparently this got lost in the shuffle https://i.imgur.com/YUa94hk.gif

I personally don't think their max HP is absurd as I recently took out a bunch of rooms with 300m HP ramparts but I do think something should be tweaked with their placement near room exits. It can be close to impossible to deal with them when they are right next to an exit leaving little room for the attacker so maybe their max HP could scale with distance to the room's edge or exits?

FWIW I've always used the https://screeps.com/a/#!/map page as my "portal". I rarely look at the front page.

With all the recent news regarding ping back vs redirects the redirect might be uBlocks fault as well. If you disable ping backs most sites use a redirect instead. All browsers except Brave are removing the ability to disable ping back because it only results is poor experience with no added privacy. It's trivial for sites to detect and switch to redirects when ping back is not working. You really should allow ping backs in uBlock, your browsing will be faster. Now that the tracking is less obtrusive you can go on to wonder why checkload.dir is tracking you. screen shot of google using a ping back. With uBlock disabling ping back the url will be a redirect instead of a direct link.

I don't know whether ramparts can go too high, but I feel like there are a few "wrong" arguments being made here. @smokeman said in Ramparts should be weaker than walls and they both need a nerf: Once these ramparts get above a certain level, that room is almost too tough to crack. It's not the total level of ramparts that makes a room too tough to crack, it's the general defences the room has. Above say 20m ramparts, in my opinion, the only difference between defeating 20m and 300m ramparts is cost and time. If you can't defeat a particular player's room that has 300m ramparts, I very much doubt you could defeat the same player with 20m ramparts. I'm not saying that every room is crackable (it might well be the case that some rooms are uncrackable), it's just that ramparts aren't the deciding factor (they or walls are merely the entrance fee to the party). @Shibdib As far as numbers go I think both walls and ramparts max hits needs a look, but RAMPART_HITS_MAX should be a significant amount less than WALL_HITS_MAX. IMO if ramparts were limited to 100m while walls were limited to 300m, there would be negligible difference in whether a room was attackable or not. If you can't defeat the 300m walls room, you can't defeat the 100m ramparts room. @Smokeman the super high wall limit gives the appearance (If built high enough) that the room will be untakeable in many circumstances. There is no real justification to have it this high, If you can only play screeps at weekends because of your high-powered executive job, why not be able to have defences that take at least a week to break through, so that you get a chance to intervene if your active defence code is failing somehow? Regardless, if you build high walls or ramparts you're sacrificing GCL/power so it's not like you're not making sacrifices! @Shibdib do you have any examples of rooms that you think have gone too far and are really good examples of why high ramparts are too bad? If you put several example rooms in your post it would probably be quite helpful.

I guess so. I edited my instructions to add that.

But forum issue being solved, the not being able to buy subscriptions seems to still be a thing.

Thanks for reporting, I'll take a look.

Actually, on the second thought, it's nothing wrong about being able to build tunnels under these objects (because you can't actually walk there). This is the same as that you can build a road under a non-walkable structure.

Agreed. If anything performance seems to be worse with the change from SVG graphics. Now when you zoom in inside a room the whole page stutters to a halt in chrome. I'm running an r9 280X and 3570k so those aren't the issue and this wasn't really a problem when SVG was in use. The map view is also pretty bad with larger window sizes. Having the window set to 1440p, it takes about 5 seconds to load all the rooms in the map and just panning around is incredibly slow. Strangely, firefox seems to have better performance at room level but worse at the map since it freezes the entire window until every room in view is loaded.

@gankdalf I don't like setting time frames, but it's definitely our focus now, and will become our primary development project as early as this summer.

One idea I used some time ago (originally to let me schedule building for after I reached a new RCL) was flags. I would place a flag designating the location and type of construction site, then my code would automatically set up construction sites whenever it could. This could also be used to overcome the construction site cap.

I've not had auto-complete bug out, but it just pops up when i'm typing something as I press enter, and now my command has changed to whatever stupid thing was at the top of the auto-complete list! I would support this product or service

We're fine tuning servers distribution in our cluster currently, it became quite tricky due to two different types of nodes now. Things will improve eventually, thank you for your patience.

@shibdib We're not affiliated with ScreepsWorld.com, please contact their administrators regarding this issue. If you want to provide any help with writing Screeps World Review, feel free to contact @o4kapuk in Slack, he's currently gathering materials and player feedback for the next review.