Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

The lack of that information is indeed by design, and will not be added. You will have to gamble!

But, be aware that you're talking about new branch areas that haven't even been completed yet, so it's still early to be weighing what is and isn't worth it in the bigger picture. You'll be seeing more.

The suggestion is for identified exits to also show the depth of the area they lead to. I feel like that would be fairly logical, at least with Signal Interpreters.

Before Subcaves were added, the fact that there's no indication as to the depth of where an exit leads to was only relevant when exiting Garrisons.
Now that the Subcaves exist and can lead to Recycling, no matter the depth of Recycling, that becomes a bit more of an issue.

Maybe it's by design, but the fact is that it isn't reliably possible to figure out the depth of Recyling while going to the Subcaves is fairly annoying to me.
I want to go to the Subcaves for what i can find in there, and i also want to go to Recycling for the same reason, but only if it isn't at -9. However, since Subcaves always lead to -8, the only way i can ever go to both in the same run is by either :
-Finding out Recycling's depth thanks to tunnelling, which, with two tunnelling opportunities, would only work out ~20,526315789% of the time, assuming tunnelling can't reveal Mines. And only about a third of that would have Recycling at -9.
-Taking a gamble that recycling will be at -9. If the gamble fails, which it will most of the time, then i miss out on one or both Lower Caves branches. That gamble is not worth it to me.

I was trying to make a joke, in the sense that i didn't think of myself as a veteran player. That run was my very first W++, and i have no idea how i would ever complete a ++ run without speedy propulsion.
It does occur to me that i don't actually know what the "floor" for a veteran player is.

Heh, not saying you're not a veteran, you clearly are, just wondering about all the others up there (almost everyone else in the top 50 hangs out on the Discord, so it's easy to ask if I do need the info... but anyway I'll come back to this when I get to it on my list)

I actually only thought of the overloading thing in my latest run (which currently places me in 7th and 1st place in the leaderboards, respectively. Am i a veteran player yet?) because i noticed that the melee modifier of 40% wasn't perfectly accurate.
It's either when trying to make sure the imperfection existed or when making the calculations that i noticed that overloading to reach a speed of 8 gave me the maximum bonus with only 1 momentum.

May i suggest changing it in a different, less annoying-to-use way?
For instance, requiring the player to have moved with x speed as their last action for that speed to apply with momentum to non-ramming attacks? That would remove the benefit from constantly switching propulsion from overloading to not overloading, at least when attacking a single enemy, because even if they move away, you'd want to keep propulsion overloaded when following to get the maximum bonus from momentum.
I know there's probably quite a few issues with that alternative, but it's just an example.

Yeah I hadn't really given it much thought yet, was just the first approach off the top of my head, but overall the general intent is usually to avoid adding complexity to the rules, however that can be achieved while maintaining the desirable balance and removal of any tedium. I've actually never heard or seen anyone doing this overloading thing, not even all the veteran players who top the leaderboards and like to minmax, though I do wonder if anyone else actually does it.

But anyway, yeah I do think the idea of requiring movement on the previous turn to get the speed bonus makes sense. I mean to be honest originally at the beginning of this thread that's how I assumed it works

Okay, now I see what you mean. It would've been really helpful if you mentioned the Reaction Control System in your original post, since that changes everything and I wasn't thinking about that at all, was just looking at overloaded propulsion in isolation. (You mentioned momentum, but I considered that as a part of movement, but here we're talking specifically about in combination with another utility.)

Sorry about that, i wanted to mention it but completely forgot to do so when writing the post.

So back to the original point... considering this discovery, attacking while overloaded should also burn out your propulsion (perhaps even at a higher chance?), and under such circumstances, having a permanent option to enable that would not be desirable, since then it could damage your prop due to attacks, and you may not always want that in every encounter.

Gah.

Given what you're saying, it sort of feels like i'm going to cause a nerf to flight/hover melee

That change sounds like it would make managing overloading even more annoying and tedious than it already is, (which is the opposite of why i created this topic,) since you'd then have to be more careful as to which propulsion you'd want to overload when attacking, and you might also still want to stop overloading to approach enemies that just moved away.
May i suggest changing it in a different, less annoying-to-use way?
For instance, requiring the player to have moved with x speed as their last action for that speed to apply with momentum to non-ramming attacks? That would remove the benefit from constantly switching propulsion from overloading to not overloading, at least when attacking a single enemy, because even if they move away, you'd want to keep propulsion overloaded when following to get the maximum bonus from momentum.
I know there's probably quite a few issues with that alternative, but it's just an example.

Ah, thanks for letting me know. I'll take a look at the advanced options, and perhaps the advanced config options, too. Cheers!

Not scrolling through like that, no, but you can use keyboard or mouse to select an item and the map centers on it, then also repeat that command again for the same item to have you path straight to it.

You can scroll the list itself when it's too long (which is what scroll normally accomplishes there), but I'm assuming you mean to simply scroll through the entire list as it shows you each item's location one by one. Overall not as helpful, but note that they're also listed in terms of distance from your current position.

The manual covers more advanced features like this. Once you're familiar with basic functionality of the interface, you might want to check out the section on Advanced UI, and also the advanced config options--lots more you can do which may not be obvious at first.

Is there a way to scroll through the map locations of items I search for using the keyboard?

Perhaps this is an option in keyboard mode, but I play almost exclusively mouse+keyboard. I’ll hit Space, then F, to open the search menu. I’ll type in the item name, and I often (subconsciously) click the down key to start scrolling through the item list, but that has no effect

This might be a handy addition. We type in the item, then we can scroll through the list via keyboard; perhaps we’re taken to the location of each item on the map as we scroll. Or perhaps we scroll to an item we’re interested in, then hit a key to bounce to its location.

If this is already an option and I’ve missed it, my apologies!