Talk:Freighter

From No Man's Sky Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

A new discovery?[edit source]

This is PRE-Next! I found an Amino Hub entry of Quanta while looking through the GC with the Cafe 42 on PC... since he did note down some systems here. He didn't find it here, but he posted THIS:

A special type of Oculus

We need to find that thing... I want a confirmed localized position to add it to the list as its own archetype. It is as rare as the Oculus (only found in the Alpha Spiral) it seems. Well it is a variant of it...Thamalandis (talk) 04:27, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

It is the Delta Spiral's special freighter?! I just found it in a nearby region by sheer luck during a random black hole research. It will be up in the wiki shortly!Thamalandis (talk) 04:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Makes you wonder how many other odd quirks there are out there just waiting to be found. Ddfairchild (talk) 03:36, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

30 v 50 Frigattes[edit source]

I have had enough to see the SAME edit ever day... back and forth. Please, if it is 50, TELL THEM why it is 50. Can you upgrade your fleet room later to get 50? Post a proof or explain it so the people stop changing it! Or if it is not 50 but really 30... stop changing it... It's like a tug of war with no one offering proof at all...Thamalandis (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, it can be annoying. This is what I found, so currently the limit is 30, as he tested it. Gorla (talk) 16:29, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Cannon Numbers[edit source]

Hey guys, just thought I'd ask, should we include the number of Cannons, (or, as they are known in game, Defense Turrets), on the Capital Freighters? Just thought I'd ask, since I was counting the number of Cannons on Vanguard-5 today, and counted 20, (Over-hull: 2 central mounted bow, 6 to port, 6 to starboard. Under-hull: 1 port bow, 1 starboard bow, 3 central mounted, 1 central mounted on under-hull thruster array). Now, Vanguard-5 is a Resurgence-Class, but I'm assuming that the number of Cannons doesn't change for bow mounted Cannons. However, I can also assume that for Imperial-Class Cruisers and Venator-Class Cruisers, the numbers of port and starboard over-hull and central mounted cannons may differ. Not to mention that the absence of a under-hull thruster array may change the numbers further. As for Sentinel-Design craft, I have absolutely no idea how many Cannons any of them can boast. I state the need for Cannon numbers as we are getting mush more advanced multi-player this summer, it would be most unlikely if we were not able to battle each other's Freighters, either in this update or in future updates. Especially since it was stated that you could play pirate-style and loot other players, which, I really don't see why that couldn't involve our beloved Freighters, (unless, of course, your massive C-Class Resurgence-Class Capital Freighter looks like something out of a happy meal, at which point I would say it's probably not that much beloved). So, it might help new and, potentially returning players to decided on a new Freighter, (or, at least, Capital Freighter), if we knew the number of Cannons allotted to it. Again, that's just my thoughts, so your own thoughts may vary. Anyways, Rockatoa, Brickticks out! P.S. I was referring to one of my old Freighters when I said "C-Class Resurgence-Class Capital Freighter that looks like something out of a happy meal", yeah, I was glad to get rid of that thing, long ago!!!!! Brickticks (talk) 01:23, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

You may have noticed that I already added a military assessment for most normal freighter and the Resurgent on the side. And during my check the top indeed has 8 in front and 6 in rear. So that number is consistent. I didn't see any central under hull turrets between the two cargo units that my Resurgent has. So like the normal freighters, the KEEL might be a variable. Should be observed for several. The top seems fixed, as do front and back underhull. Which means they at least have 17... and in your case maybe up to 20 for the Resurgent. Thamalandis (talk) 12:35, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, the under hull turrets between the cargo-pod sections can be a little hard to spot, unless you look right at them! My advice, get that big, old juggernaut turned belly up, (meaning summon it in so that it's under hull is facing towards the sun), and try counting then! And if you can't manage that, then consider flying at your Freighter from the front and looking for the red glowing sensor that sits on every turret, (said turrets should always face front, unless there's something I don't know about). Anyways, Rockatoa, Brickticks out! Hope I was helpful. Bye! Brickticks (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Design vs Class - Same Name? (02.11.2017)[edit source]

Since Talinwind wants to reemphasize the point, let's outsource it here. The point is the difference between naming the design and the class. And while the point might be legitimate that most people would refer to them blandly as "Star Destroyer", the flattened nose design is explicitly the 'Venator' in all its 3 versions, elongated or not. So this has one rough goal, I want Talinwind, Me, DDF, Ketila and maybe Brickticks idea for this. We go with the majority. Shall we discern between class an design by name (instead of using the design name for the base form) and what should it be? Obviously for the Venator Design the "Star Destroyer - Design" is the replacement. We could stick to Sentinel for the design and just go for a third approximate version of a battleship for the other. My vote? Fine as it is... Thamalandis (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

To put all of this discussion, good as it is, into context, what we're doing here is doing what humans usually do - categorizing things, putting them in a box, or whatever you want to call the process. And whatever we decide, it is still OUR choice to apply names to things that HelloGames chose not to give names to. If categorizing freighters helps people understand them better, than bully for us. Now occasionally a "name" this wiki has created (Civilized Space comes to mind) does become well enough known to become standard terminology. But for freighters? Who knows?
For those of you that have been around the wiki for awhile, you may remember the categorizations we used when for multi-tools. They were based on appearance because that's all we had at the time (no classes or bonus levels). I remember a user once sent me information where he thought we should categorize them by the pieces they contained, not by the overall appearance (sort of like the bow of a freighter as compared to the whole thing). Yeah, it would be nice if we had a diagram of freighter "pieces" like we do for fighters. But since we don't, we are forced to do the best we can.
I really am not an expert on freighters, but I guess I would call for a mid-range solution. If we aren't careful, we could end up creating new classes for each freighter we find. And that is basically a worthless solution. On the other hand, having NO categories doesn't help either. Probably the most likely method is to decide on what one or two features of a freighter are the most prominent, and use that for our nomenclature.Then down the road if we find we have 30 freighters in a single category, they could be evaluated to see if the category needs to be split. And yes, I know I haven't given a MY VOTE IS THIS, and that is intentional. I welcome additional discussion... Ddfairchild (talk) 22:37, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
I think you planned to answer the class discussion for standard freighters further down... this was just about the fact that Venator-Design (for capitals) has the same name as the first class... Thamalandis (talk) 23:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

A new Freighter Bow? (31.10.2017)[edit source]

Oculus Freighter

So I just left Olenwag Prime in the Alpha Spiral, when a local freighter fleet jumps in with the ordinary random 2 of 3 system designs. Turns out they come with a BOW I never saw before... or must have forgotten. It isn't even recorded under regulars yet. This thing looks humungous and I will have to find a landable and purchasable first, but maybe it is the missing medium class. Or it is just the damn biggest Regular Freighter one can own, it looks like a Sentinel or Eyeball Bow. I would thus dub it the 'Oculus'-Class. It would be funny if these monsters are unique to the Spirals of the galaxy. Thamalandis (talk) 02:36, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

When you have procedurally generation, who knows what you might see next? <g> I'd say that since you're the first one to report seeing one of these, you should have the honor of naming the class as you see fit. Document on the Freighter page and let her rip! Ddfairchild (talk) 02:46, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
I found one to land in and these monsters really are 'regular'. So it is another normal bow type. A-Class 19 slots (so max or near max potential), which indicates no new medium class. However it looks pretty badass and this system might be the spot to farm an S-Class, it is not rich, but at least moderate. Thamalandis (talk) 03:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
There is another Oculus Freighter right next door, in Houdat, Olenwags double star partner system 1ly away. I will post it tomorrow. It also had 19 slots, but with only a B-Class. If I a) find more in this Spiral and/or b) they have 19 slots regardless of class (max slots) I would consider that odd. Let's see. Thamalandis (talk) 05:27, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Nice :)... Well if you define the 'Oculus-Class' why not go all the way and classify the other regular freighters :) I think the classification per bow turn quite well, and it will stay as "optional / fan-fiction" classification ^^. Talinwind (talk) 00:58, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
As the first to document it, DDF just allowed me to christen it, so I did. I didn't take the discussion over designs as finished yet. Otherwise I would have sorted the rest by now with a short description. Thamalandis (talk) 04:30, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Freighter Class Names (October 8, 2017)[edit source]

So, yeah, I just had the greatest idea ever!!! What if, instead of labeling each Freighter by its appearance, we give them classes based on their appearance? I've already thought of a few:

  • Vertical Star Destroyer: Insurgence-Class
  • Horizontal Star Destroyer, (aka the one that actually looks like a Star Wars Destroyer): Ventnor-Class
  • Enterprise-head type: Enterprise-Class
  • Hammerhead type: Shark-Class

So, what do you think of these names? Sure would make it easier to deduce which Capital Ship is referred to by "Star Destroyer (Type 1)" and "Star Destroyer (Type 2)". Let me know what you think, and feel free to come up with your own names for these awesome Freighters! Rockatoa, Brickticks out! Brickticks (talk) 03:28, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Well, are we sure the price range depend of the appearance? I noticed some freighters around 80M-90M and others 130M-180M. But there was a lot of patch recently. I wander if the price range change due to patch but not appearance. Another point is that there is a lot of different appearance but maybe only 2 or 3 tiers in the price range. Notify players of the prices ranges is good idea, naming each appearance might be overkill Talinwind (talk) 05:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
That said I agree that there is a confusion with the naming that need to be addressed. On this page Star Destroyer refers to the 2 S34 models... If you look at the Starship_Catalogue_-_Freighter the section inventory use 'Star destroyer' in a general way... but the category is entitled Capital. It would be nice if the we could defined the good terminology here. In our discussion (AGT discord and Facebook NMS ship & tool catalog group) we mostly use Capital to define the big freighters that pop in a middle of a battle (so the 2 model of S34) then the "flat" model would be called "Star Destroyer" as reference to Star wars, and the second model will be called "Battleship" or "Sentinel"... Then to complete the Catalog question a ship S19 will be "small" and a ship S34 would be "large" if we compare with Fighter or explorer type... Talinwind (talk) 01:57, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Admittedly I do not know the difference between Star Destroyer Type 1 and 2. Is one the vertical style and one the horizontal style? Each Capital comes in three flavors as far as I know, small, medium, and large. At least the horizontal style does. I believe the price is only based on the number of slots. Knottypine1979 (talk) 20:51, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Yeah I believe those refers to the horizontal type vs the vertical type, and yes prices for all ships, freighters and multi-tools are purely based on the slot count, the ship type(not the model, but the name you see in the menu) and multiplied by the class multiplier, you lose 30% when doing a trade in, and broken slots reduces the value of the ship by an exponential curve, biggest reduction for the first few slots(more than if it just had less slots in the first place) --Ket (talk) 21:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
I personally support the naming of types, but do we even know how many there are? I mean there is hammerhead, wheelhead, enterprise, tanker, rectangle, ripcage freighter etc. And those are only a few I catalogued. There is also the "hatchet" class with the small blade on its frontside. If we "vote" for names, that will take ages I fear. So how about we make suggestions with an attached picture. I think we can all agree that the Star Destroyer should only be attributed to the Capital horizontal S34. Now about calling the big guy "Sentinel"... I like the "Battleship" class for it. I would also support "Dreadnought". And regarding the "hatchet" class I mentioned, this is it: Dateyamakuroishi The main problem is, what defines a type? Because in the S19 category, aside of major parts, many seem interchangeable. Like the extended ship nose can be on a ripcage freighter or some basic transporter. Ekinohesiar vs Anyokopf. So do we define by rear, middle or bow? Just by looking at some pictures, ANY is interchangeable with bow and rear the most easiest to define. I checked several models for bow, middle and rear. ALL are for ALL races. So we can freely pick our definition point. Let's just make it consistent... so bows? Or middle? I wouldn't propose rear... Thamalandis (talk) 05:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Ooh, Dreadnought Class, I really like that one! Brickticks (talk) 22:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
There is a third S34 capital ship. I found it twice now, but it is as consistent as the others. It also supports the claim of players to have seen TWO star destroyers (the "Dreadnought" not included). One is the old Jedi design of the Republic and the later one ditched the side carving of the engine and elongated for the Imperial class. While the Imperial class isn't a perfect match (lack of triangle), there is no doubt the shorter one is the Venator. Thamalandis (talk) 02:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
The "Star Destroyers" actually seem to follow the mystical (small/medium/large) idea, with only the small looking like the Venator. All others are elongated... Since Hello Games removed the different inventories (Venator and 4 section also have 30+), we might differentiate them instead with names. Thamalandis (talk) 03:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

If you are going to include these different freighter types in the freighter catalogue, please be sure to include a sample picture on the Freighter catalogue page for each of your various designs. A picture, in this case, truly is worth a thousand words. I would also suggest to be careful about the number of classes you define - the more classes you come up with, the harder it will be for your average NMS editor to properly categorize their freighter. Ddfairchild (talk) 06:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

The "bigger" (medium and large) Star Destroyer are effectively a Hello Games relict of their old inventory system I guess. If Knotty, you and maybe Talin want all three to be merged with just a small note behind it, sure. But in theory these are 3 designs of different size. I haven't seen a "Sentinel" dreadnought with more or less than 3 middle sections yet. So I wonder if those 4 classes are the only ones. However, all are easily distinguishable by their midsection number... or plain form in the "Sentinel". I can add a picture pre-catalogue above. However I don't know how the clean screenshots are made by some. I always screen from my micro cockpit. The Elendis frame is always in the way. Thamalandis (talk) 14:21, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
There are 3 sizes of the "sentinel" type capital freighter as well, if I remember right its 3, 5 and 7 sections, if we are going to list all the various part combinations you might as well start naming all the ship and multi-tool part combinations as well, and then it starts getting slightly ridiculous in scope --Ket (talk) 22:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Your use of hyperboles is unappreciated. You also forgot to tag your text K. The multi-tools already operate in different "internal" classes, from rifle etc. with very distinct looks. Yet I would even support a further classification for visuals, BUT the multi tool list will still be huge either way, because - I want to strongly emphasize - they STILL spawn 100% exact as a copy of previous ones at the same locale in switch with one other random tool. They did not get the ship treatment. They are still UNIQUE. Thus it is still important to catalogue them per unique appearance and exact place. Which is a huge dataload and will blow up the catalogue and make it harder for people to find the S rank beauty they want... unless it is sorted by visuals. If anything deserves more subdivision, it actually is multitools! The ships also follow an internal assortment of size and type. But unlike Freighters, they do not differ that tremendously. Freighters are a whole new beast. Ships have 3-4 cockpits with some random assortments of parts. If classified by bow you would still only have 3-4 subclasses for each slot size. Which we don't do. If we continue to add ships (and we is mostly me and Talinwind) the catalogue will... explode into ugly 4-5 coloumns of 200+ ships. Any subdivision might be useful in the near future. This "extreme" overload already happens with regular freighters. To be honest you would see it with capitals if they wouldn't spawn once in 15 jumps at best... if you do the work to catalogue them then. So... ridiculous is cleary the wrong word... and unbased. Still, instead of hyperboles, feel free to contribute with content and SOLUTIONS. We wait K. Thamalandis (talk) 20:03, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Sorry about that, guess it wasn't really the right word for it, just meant that it would be quite a large workload with somewhat subjective names, but I can kinda see the need for it if that many are posted and if you want to subdivide them depending on certain looks. If you want I could get the list of parts from the files and how many variations exist for each part "slot". Also here is a link to a post with several 3 and 5 section sentinel freighters that got posted by someone on reddit a while ago: imgur and here is a link to a new reddit post with a 7 section sentinel freighter: reddit --Ket (talk) 08:20, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Alright that settles it, each design has 3 sizes - as was fairly expected with the old inventory system in Pathfinder. Well if all are against an early sorting, we can just use the 2 (real) designs and not its 2 variations. Although only you objected this 6 class sorting yet. But in the long term we will have to seperate them if we find more or if people add more. For capitals later than normal ones that's sure. They are just so rare! You got 3 designs of regular freighters per system spawning easily (well 2, the 3 is sometimes hard). And 1 capital freighter due to rare battles. But we will have to. We could call the 5 section "Battleship" and the 7 section "Dreadnought" by then. However as far as I want to use the reddit pictures, the wiki is against using other peoples pictures without consent. So we can't use them without finding our own. Not our copyright. That being said, yes Keltis, a part info on the REGULAR freighters could help. That way we know which has the greatest variety and which the least - and if Overbite/Underbite/Cuboid really lack the bow. I still think the bow is the most distinct and easiest for players to identify. Not all midsections are easy to spot like the ripcage or the belly. If my 3 without bow and the other parts are all there is, I guess we have all. Thamalandis (talk) 14:07, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Here have a screenshot of a 5 section and 7 section I just took, found the variable in the file that control the space battle spawn rate so was easy to generate new ones --Ket (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
I added the thumbs to the freighter catalogue. For now they kinda stray of course, but that will change once we have enough models to push the text further down. Until then we should just take it as is. We have time to document more majors before we classify the regulars anyway I guess. And I need to finish my travel to the Outer Rim. Thamalandis (talk) 23:35, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I checked the regulars and if we use the bow to define them, we got 3 WITHOUT bows. But those are distinct themselves due to the midsection. I would call them Underbite, Overbite and Cuboid. The others are distinct by their head. We got the barrel, hammerhead, galleon, wheel, axe/hatchet/blade, enterprise (or disc). Thamalandis (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Well guys that an awesome work you have done yesterday ! I like the new page ! that so useful info... Few feedback though:

  • I would rename the two designs "Destroyer design" with classes as it is Venator / Imperial / Resurgent. And "Sentinel design" with class Battleship / Crusader / Dreadnought. Why: destroyer and sentinel are the generic words I heard the most in the community, and I like your names for the 3 classes, I just feel better to have different names between design and subclass.
  • For the regular freighters, my feeling is if/when we will need subclasses, I would go with categories based on the bow, that is as already said, the most easy to distinguish (we could have a category "no bow" for the few Thamalandis mention). I get the barrel, hammerhead, wheel, blade (please no hatchet, we talk about massive badass stuff here :p), disc... what do you call "galleon" ? Talinwind (talk) 10:11, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
The only bow design that looks like a ship... the drawn out one of the Anyokopf. I am open for the name, I just call them Galleons.Thamalandis (talk) 11:12, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with calling the curved freighters "Blade". I kinda adopted it already. I do however not support renaming the designs. It is the Venator and the Sentinel design. Those names are the closest approximation to what they are. I also don't see a problem with naming the BASIC version of said design the same in each class.Thamalandis (talk) 04:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Size matters! (August 22, 2017)[edit source]

When you see a ship which is called "CARGO" and be 10 or 30 times bigger than your own individual ship (which can have 44 stock spaces), it's NORMAL to hope get MORE than 13 stock space even they can contains (ONLY) the double of a player ship's stock space. EVEN with full customisation, we DON'T have the amount of stock we reasonnably can have on such huge vessel! (22 August 2017)

And why, when YOU attack a natural Cargo, it fight back you and can damage you, and while you own it, it is UNABLE to fight back anymore ?????? No damage on attackers? (22 August 2017)

Clarification on Paragraph (June 26, 2017)[edit source]

What does this mean "Presently, there is no way to track them."? Can it be clarified a bit?

That's a good question - I suspect that's a holdover from the days before you could buy freighters and they just appeared and flew around places. I'll modify the page to indicate that. Ddfairchild (talk) 19:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

How many starships can a freighter hold? (May 24, 2017)[edit source]

So, I noticed that the page says a freighter can hold 6 starships, but I've also noticed that all the freighters I've seen have three landing bays. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't that mean each landing bay can only hold 2 starships? I'm saying this because the image used at the top of the page clearly shows a landing bay with three starships docked to it, with two other landing bay doors visible in the background. Wouldn't that mean a freighter can hold 9 starships, not 6? Cause if there are three landing bays, and each bay can hold three starships, then that's 9. So, is the page wrong, was it just a typo, or is there some information missing about just how the freighter holds the starships? I won't change it unless told to, since all of you are clearly superior gamers to me, and I really am just an annoyance. So, in any case, do freighters hold 6 starships or 9 starships? Brickticks (talk) 02:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

While there is a limit as to how many of your OWN ships can be stored, empty bays can be used by visiting NPC ships. So while you can have up to 9 ships docked at any one time, not all of them are going to be yours. Ddfairchild (talk) 16:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
the way the main article is written, it gave me the impression that a freighter could only hold max 6 ships, but since it has 3 bays of 3 docks, i was also confused about the 9 thing too. perhaps some minor clarification could be made to call out that there are 9 slots but you yourself are limited to ownership of 6? (and thus leaving 3 spaces for non-player ships?)
updated main page with specific note that despite there are 9 slots, soon as you have 6, NPCs stop. previous discussion note was me as well before i made login. Jrrs (talk) 20:47, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Only one player owned Freither ? (06 August 2018)[edit source]

The sentence "Only one player controlled freighter is allowed in a system and other players will not be able to summon theirs." I believe it is wrong now as of "next" update, to be confirmed. IncuB (talk) 12:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately that is not the case. Until NEXT it was really by chance to meet other people, and people didn't test this until now. On reddit there are quite some discussion about it, and also PCGamer mentions it in a recent article. Gorla (talk)

The Droid[edit source]

So yeah, I've noticed something, and I just wanted to see if any of you think it needs to be addressed. It's that little Droid that constantly circles around your Freighter's Central Hologram Terminal. I was just thinking, you know, as a little added info, should we give this Droid any sort of information on this wiki? I'm posting this here because that little Droid first appeared on Freighters when they were implemented back in Foundation, although I will note that, as of lately, the Starship Tech Merchants on Space Station also seem to use them. That being said, should we try to some up with some sort of, oh, I don't know, history for this little unsung hero? I was thinking at least some references to his appearance on Freighters and at Space Stations, and maybe some sort of name for him. Like, uhh... Maybe.... Hmm, I can't really think of anything to call him.... I guess he doesn't need his own page, (unless of course, you guys want to give him one), but maybe a name like, like.... Maybe more of a Model/Series Designation instead of a name, like calling him a RX-100 Personal Assistant Droid. I mean, that's kinda what he does, he just floats around the Central Hologram Terminal on Freighters and back and forth between the Merchant and Starship in the background of the Starship Tech Merchant booth on Space Stations, helping with whatever he can. I just kinda thought, you know, it'd be a little piece of lore for such a nice little hard working Droid, always working away in the background, with nobody ever hearing a single complaint out of him. Although, I supposed it is a little morbid when you find one scrapped at Freighter Crash Sites, and a little sad. It's like, that little droid was the only one who didn't make it off the ship..... Sniff, now I feel bad, poor little Droid. Anyways, that's my thought, what do ya'll think? it's OK, if you don't like the idea, I just kinda want to create a little lore. Oh well, let me know what you think and where to put this if you guys like the idea, I'll gladly make the page for him, all by myself, which will be a pretty massive achievement for me, as I've only ever made one really complete page before, (if you can even consider the Galactic Republic of Eissentam page to be complete, I really need to get out there and find some more Star Systems to list). Either way, what ever you think, I am at your command, (at least, on the subject of this little hardworking under-droid, see what I did there?). Rockatoa, Brickticks (talk) 21:44, 11 September 2018 (UTC) out!

It is a normal worker drone. I don't reward an Alexa for doing as she is told either. That aside, you are free to add a screenshot in a section about freighter interior/bridges wherever it fits with him shown. And a sidenote. It is in freighters, it can be mentioned. Just don't make more of a deal about a mass produced EVA of No Man's Sky than it is. Heck, systems with no intelligent life "left" by now are filled with sentinel drones. NMS, special that is not. And the lore kept "experiments" even on sentinels not especially hidden. The lore bits in terminals kinda implied this is how the Korvax might have happened or the Mecha-Travellers. The fusion of flesh and technology. So a drone is rather low-tech.Thamalandis (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2018 (UTC)