This is intended, perhaps later it will be improved but this isn't a bug so rejecting.

@lancake Ok, so should I open a new one ? Because it's may not the same cause but it's the same result. SHP ==> power & trust outage ==> uncontrolable spin.

This task was about you running out of power (which kills your thrust). Not about the SHP penalties.

I request a re-open

In T1748#68069, @SmilingDemon wrote:

seems not to be restricted to the Intel hardware as of T970 this time

this is affecting Astonaut preview, Advanced build mode preview
there isnt any see through block being rendert before placement for any build mode and also not for copy paste and their rotations.

Result:
4/5 Yes
1/5 Skip

Result:
4/5 Yes
1/5 Skip

Result:
5/5 Yes

It happened again. So I have more details this time.

During an another drones test it happened again.

After that recent slack discussion, I found this, seems to address the issue of GL2.1 vs GL3.2/GL4.1 support, and how to enable the appropriate OpenGL support on OSX: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/26807573/lwjgl-wont-give-me-an-opengl-context-that-supports-4-1

the driver info files from where this is being pulled are not providing that info for Linux and OSX. i have seen samples for Intel and Nvidia and assume AMD wouldnt look any different. I agree that someone in support has to know about how to read that , but nothing can be done about it otherwise.

In T1709#67554, @lancake wrote:

Did you see overheating?

In T1307#67491, @Valck wrote:

I disagree, it's one growth, even if it consists of multiple individuals.

intended behaviour ... would be exploitable otherwise

Yes to stations NO to ships

-QATesting-
.115 starts up again fine for me

It is irrelevant insofar as the information is duplicated in other places.
However because of this lack of information in the expected places, lancake suggested I go download and install drivers when I already had the latest, and as such I see a potential issue with support, however trivial.
I know my system, and know when and how to install drivers, but someone less computer literate might follow the suggestion and get frustrated or potentially even mess up their installation when it isn't necessary in the first place.

I guess that is an Nvidia driver issue ... that it isnt providing that type of information.

-QATesting-

I don't think this is possible without forking the greenworks library.

I also concur, my F710 gamepad instantly crashed starmade upon hitting joystick button 1 (thumb stick buttons)

I will address this when consolidating the options windows (T1724)

The update sanitizes each foldername in turn, stripping out invalid characters.

This issue or a similar one affects me in flight mode only. It acts like inertial scrolling is on or something. I can scroll fairly comfortably on my Macbook's trackpad, but trying to use a clicky mouse wheel causes erratic behavior. This happens only in flight mode; build mode and astronaut mode behave as expected with one wheel click moving the hot bar one space.

This is docking on ships as well, not just for stations, anything that crosses sector causes a teleportation but entity is docked and in correct place if sector is unloaded and then reloaded

unavoidable known problem right now

In T1737#67666, @Megacrafter127 wrote:

In T1737#67665, @Crimson-Artist wrote:

i can already envision some one going around dropping hundreds of small self sustaining interdictor ships to completely lock down an entire system.

what would be so bad about that? after all, normal thrusters will still operate normally.

In T1737#67665, @Crimson-Artist wrote:

i can already envision some one going around dropping hundreds of small self sustaining interdictor ships to completely lock down an entire system.

in all inevitability station blocks will at some point be placeable on ships so why not i guess. However i do feel that it has to be balanced in a way that it prevents trolling. i can already envision some one going around dropping hundreds of small self sustaining interdictor ships to completely lock down an entire system.

Why not allow it on both ships and stations, while only the latter will have reach beyond its own sector.
As for countermeasures, just use normal thrusters.

Quoting the ever-correct Dr. Zoidberg, 'Why not both?' It'd be a very interesting mechanic in a fleet battle if you were interdicting to stop an enemy from escaping, but needed friendly ships to enter the battle to assist you.

This is more or less the idea that I had for jump interdiction before it was added to the game. If I looked hard enough I'm sure I could find myself making a very similar suggestion. I would like to see the ability to lock down areas with stations. This would prevent ships from jumping directly to a protected location and maybe even allow for a player to set up an ambush point along a known travel route by preventing ships from jumping past a certain point.