What's the Brand New Feature for ED in 2024?

For surface mining to be worth I think it would be best done with placing stationary mining lasers at a resource spot, connecting them to a refinery, adding storage facilities for the end product and a landing pad so you can fill up your ship with the product for export once you have enough in the storage.

This is genius. It's basically just off-boarding mining.
  • You need to buy all the modules - that logic's already all there.
  • You need some cool-looking mining-friendly surface assets. Already got those with plenty of the planetside assets.
  • You need some logic where you can leave a thing to do a thing somewhere. OK, don't have that in terms of week-long ticks, but we do already have the idea of autonomous assets including some that do some extremely interactive things. The actual logic of the refinery farting out cargo is already in-game.
  • You need a ship which can unload a bunch of modules onto the surface ... like if you had, say, a Python kitted out for mining like, y'know, everyone does... and it was somehow... "functionally different" ... ;-)

Nothing says that a new thematic feature has to become available before base building, not with it. For all we know we might get customizable carrier's ready room and captains quarter or whatever along with base building. I suspect that at this point Fdev has been busy with this upcoming new thing, whatever it is, for more than a year already and has had plenty of time to plan and start implementing other things that tie into and release with the new feature.
Yes. Good portfolio planning is this. Look at the ridiculous vision for an epic (small "e" but yes I chose that word on purpose) feature; look at the dependency tree for it; and shuffle that tree so some of the features in there can make smaller useful working states before you get all the way to implementing everything.
 
[Industrial manufacturing] doesn't exist because you can't mass manufacture stuffz without first having production facilities.
That's true but not the biggest barrier to it. (All this also essentially applies to surface mining operations, too; mechanically they're just an industry with a much shorter chain)

Adding a Fleet Carrier module which over time will convert 1t of Indium and 1t of Aluminium stored in the cargo hold to 2t of Domestic Appliances, and keep working through this conversion so long as it's stocked up, doesn't seem that difficult and Frontier could probably put that module together (with a bunch of different cargo chain options) pretty quickly if they wanted to.

There are two big problems with that module, though:
1) 1t Indium + 1t Aluminium is considerably more expensive than 2t Domestic Appliances. It'd need to make something like 20t for it to be worth it. All the arbitrariness of the market prices (every single refined metal is a lot cheaper than the same mass of its ore, most manufactured goods are cheaper than the same mass of even cheap refined metal, etc) would need to be fixed to make most production chains make a profit while keeping to conservation of mass, and that would shake up a lot of the trade economy. The way that BGS states affect trade prices would need to be substantially toned down, too. Lots of things in the trade sim which are currently fine because the NPC factions don't have a budget and don't need to be profitable would need a complete overhaul to be player-usable. [1]
2) What are you going to do with 1000t of Domestic Appliances once you have them? Even with the FC module instantly converting all its raw material supply and not having any separate maintenance costs, the only thing you can do with them is sell them to a station, and you'd likely have been more efficient just buying them from an Industrial station in the first place. The same applies to essentially every commodity. So it needs not only uses beyond "sell them" adding for at least the end-of-chain commodities, but also extreme adjustments to the NPC markets so that they don't provide enough of those commodities on their own. That's again a much bigger change in terms of either the BGS or direct player use of a whole lot of cargo.

The one case it could potentially work right now is a production chain leading to Tritium, where the NPC markets are insufficient to meet demand once you get a few thousand LY from the bubble, and there's a player demand in the absence of NPC markets. But then Tritium is directly minable, so you'd either need to be able to run the whole production chain from mined materials where 100t of precursors is substantially quicker to mine than 100t of Tritium (or the exchange rates break conservation of mass, of course, so you only need 20t of precursors to get 100t of Tritium), or you'd need a way to transport other precursor commodities to the deep-space factory from the bubble which could be used to just transport Tritium directly instead.
(And that's with all the existing deep-space player-run Tritium depots essentially being run as a non-profit service: they'll cover their costs and make a nominal surplus but it's definitely not a fast way to make money)

I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but the precursor steps of sorting out the entire commodity pricing structure to have something approaching a rational profit-making balance at all points (which would need careful alignment to things like bounties and exploration data which don't have the same considerations) would be immense and should absolutely be done first because if the economy can't even be balanced with purely NPC production it's certainly not going to be balanced once players get involved.

[1] This gets even worse if the production chains can make ship/outfitting modules, which are player-usable, because then comedy points like "the Sidewinder hull costs considerably less than its mass in scrap metal" suddenly become gameplay-relevant rather than minor sources of fun, and all those prices need rebalancing too.
 
Since I just wrote a skeptical post I'll balance it out a bit - I do like this point a few people have raised: that base-building is basically CMS, and that is absolutely core competency and territory for 2024 FDev's stated business plan. It is a bit odd that settlements got good in Odyssey and they took the time to fix the FPS issues from making them so good, and then... nothing.
The reason why i don't think the new feature is base building is time and resources, the 'already coded, wont take too much to do' brigade forget how complicated introducing player settlements will be.

What purpose will they serve other than glorified homes?
If they are integrated into the economy that brings its own issues just like fleet carriers (the settlements can be dismantled etc)
They will show across all modes as they are structures like carriers, what's to stop griefing?
My T10 can destroy any settlement in minutes (obviously not the structure) and what's stopping the usual pad blocking muppets in Open causing you issues?

The main problem is Fdev are about to introduce a huge (possibly) change to PP, that's not going to be easy or without its issues, they will need folks dedicated to the fallout/changes/bug fixes for several months in my opinion.

Introducing two major changes in the same year would be very bold indeed.

O7
 
what's to stop griefing?
I dont like idea of basebuilding in elite but I guess, that "elite magic" could do that.
You cannot assault fleet carriers, you cannot gank ships on landing pad, so I guess, that "you cannot attack player bases" could be easy to do.

Don't create issues, which simply dont exist, becase "open bad, griefers everywhere".
 
Why doesn't it exist yet? I think it's because mobile surface mining is not simply practical compared to asteroid mining. Collector limpets couldn't (until very recently) pick up materials from the surface. Mining with SRV that can carry just a few tons of cargo? How efficient would it be compared to laser mining an asteroid or how engaging would it be compared to popping a core? IMO it could only be viable with rare, really expensive minerals (something like 2+ million cr per ton galactic average) and even then I'm not sure it would be more engaging gameplay than current surface prospecting hunting metallic meteorites and bronzite chondrites.

For surface mining to be worth I think it would be best done with placing stationary mining lasers at a resource spot, connecting them to a refinery, adding storage facilities for the end product and a landing pad so you can fill up your ship with the product for export once you have enough in the storage.
Or use an MB4 Mining Machine 🤷‍♀️ Worked in FE2/FFE. But the economy is a busted waffle, so that needs to be fixed.
It doesn't exist because you can't mass manufacture stuffz without first having production facilities. Sure, you could rent a station's plant to produce stuffz for you, but simply buying the end product from the factory and exporting it (maybe slapping your own brand name on it, too) is probably easier and just as profitable—the Shenzhen model, if you will. If you want to set up 24/7 vertically integrated production Intel or Samsung style, owning your own factories is probably most reliable and profitable in the long term. Upfront costs are high, but my experience in X3 has been that it's totally worth it.
Lack of production facilities is a tiny fraction of the problem. Again, it's a whole-of-game economic overhaul that's required. You really want that coupled to base-building?
Nothing says that a new thematic feature has to become available before base building, not with it. For all we know we might get customizable carrier's ready room and captains quarter or whatever along with base building.
Yep. That's exactly what I said so far. Customizable rooms/quarters are about the only mechanism that you could get "for free" with base building.

Everything else would be substantial.
I suspect that at this point Fdev has been busy with this upcoming new thing, whatever it is, for more than a year already and has had plenty of time to plan and start implementing other things that tie into and release with the new feature.
I disagree. The aggregate of 10 years of game updates shows that pretty readily.
 
There's only thing about this new feature I want, and that's they don't spend a huge amount of time and effort working on something I will never use. And right there that's your problem right, because everyone thinks the same, and everyone has a different list of features they will have no interest in taking part in or using, so there will always be some push back no matter what it is. Could they possibly find something that everyone wants and work on that? That's a hard call, but one thing that would fit that requirement is, MORE PLANETS, so that's my call out for the new features, more planets with weather and liquid oceans!
 
I'd be happy in either case. Although I don't think removing mods from suits/guns is a grand new feature, or even that much of a QoL improvement—suit/gun mods don't matter that much; I don't sweat it that maybe I could use more ammo instead of damage resistance on my CZ Dominator suit. It gets the job done either way.

I’d like to see at least a modest revamp to on foot engineering as a side bonus to the new feature.

I acquired all the materials to make a bigger backpack for my Maverick suit and the grind put me off doing any further engineering, so I just bought G3 guns and suits for credits and left it at that.

Lets see some more interesting mods and far less grind supporting a new non combat on foot activity, possibly surface mining.
 
I still reckon it's thicker atmosphere with weather and water, that qualifies as new features right?
The New Feature for release this year is likely to be a free update due to the way it was announced, it seems highly implausible that Frontier will release access to new planet types as a free update.

The mention of the other development work that is going on in addition that had no vague release date is a more plausible candidate for new planet type access.
 
There's only thing about this new feature I want, and that's they don't spend a huge amount of time and effort working on something I will never use. And right there that's your problem right, because everyone thinks the same, and everyone has a different list of features they will have no interest in taking part in or using, so there will always be some push back no matter what it is. Could they possibly find something that everyone wants and work on that? That's a hard call, but one thing that would fit that requirement is, MORE PLANETS, so that's my call out for the new features, more planets with weather and liquid oceans!
Can't bear oceans.
 
The New Feature for release this year is likely to be a free update due to the way it was announced, it seems highly implausible that Frontier will release access to new planet types as a free update.

The mention of the other development work that is going on in addition that had no vague release date is a more plausible candidate for new planet type access.

Why not? All the background work has been done, we have atmospheres, adding more planets is just a small step now, it's not like the first step with the new terrain model and planetary modeling, that's all been done, it's just liquid and weather.
 
I would argue that Base Building would be the perfect pre-requisite to More Planet Types

How so, you reckon we can't have more planets without base building? That seems rather silly, we got planets originally without base building, we got more planets with 0.10 atmospheric pressure without base building, what is it about more planets that would in any way require base building?
 
What purpose will they serve other than glorified homes?
There's a big slice of the community as-is who pick a "home system" despite the in-game universe having absolutely no narrative or tools to support that, so I wouldn't worry about that too much tbh. Obvious opportunities here to tie in territory with PP 2.0 though!

If they are integrated into the economy that brings its own issues just like fleet carriers (the settlements can be dismantled etc)
Yep. Could mitigate that somewhat by making these "player faction HQs" so the faction owns the base - that fits right in with how settlements theoretically work at the moment, but the faction mechanic is so weak and inconsistent it doesn't really happen.
They will show across all modes as they are structures like carriers, what's to stop griefing?
Nothing, but that's true of every mechanic. The defence against griefing should be to ban it in Open. If they have at least as much anti-griefing thought as carriers do, then you're not introducing any new issue.

My T10 can destroy any settlement in minutes (obviously not the structure) and what's stopping the usual pad blocking muppets in Open causing you issues?
If it's your base, you set the pad rules. And you enforce the pad rules.

The main problem is Fdev are about to introduce a huge (possibly) change to PP, that's not going to be easy or without its issues, they will need folks dedicated to the fallout/changes/bug fixes for several months in my opinion.
Yep BUT in this case, a lot of the problems you'd get if you dropped settlement ownership in cold, tomorrow, are exactly the sorts of things you'd want to work into PP 2.0, so if settlements is the second feature, that's sort of... 1.5 changes? Which is merely very bold, not very bold indeed. It also has the advantage that the kinds of skills in the team overlap a lot; and neither of them put you in expensive asset hell either, provided you limit the initial drop to surfaceside assets that are already in-game and make it more like adopt a base.
 
Why not? All the background work has been done, we have atmospheres, adding more planets is just a small step now, it's not like the first step with the new terrain model and planetary modeling, that's all been done, it's just liquid and weather.
Planet Type access is the perfect way to gate content in a game that has a large open shared game world, both Horizons and Odyssey Paid DLCs were based around that model, I dont see how or why they would change that approach.

However they have always struggled to sell these DLCs based on planet access in a space ship game. Base Building just makes too much sense as a pre-requiste functionality for DLCs based on new planet type access as it has the potential to tie it all together without the major downside of trying to generate enough new content for 1:1 scale planets to make a DLC pricepoint at say £30-£40 seem value for money.

Player owned assets/unique purchasable assets with unique functionality to aid the players wider game will be the gameplay driving force behind the desire to access new planet types, while the art team can concentrate on creating distinct landscapes and flora and fauna.
 
Last edited:
2) What are you going to do with 1000t of Domestic Appliances once you have them? Even with the FC module instantly converting all its raw material supply and not having any separate maintenance costs, the only thing you can do with them is sell them to a station, and you'd likely have been more efficient just buying them from an Industrial station in the first place.

Unless they introduce shortages - some kind of chain of production which needs player-made raw materials and goods to actually produce anything (or much of anything)

Maybe you supply to a faction, and that faction's stations have stock of the item, which increases the factions inf as people come to buy?
 
Planet Type access is the perfect way to gate content in a game that has a large open shared game world, both Horizons and Odyssey Paid DLCs were based around that model, I dont see how or why they would change that approach.

Nothing I or FDEV have said indicate the new feature will be a paid DLC, there's no reason for it to be separate from the current Odyssey game, and that still doesn't translate to "base will be required for more planets," that seems a complete invention of your own that simply doesn't make sense!
 
The defence against griefing should be to ban it in Open
But you cant, structures like FCs are persistent in all modes.
If it's your base, you set the pad rules. And you enforce the pad rules.
Ok so most settlements have 1 or 2 pads, i think there's a tourist one with 4 but anyway, you and your mate land Sidey McSideface (sorry Drew) and FDL McFDLface on those pads.
Your friend's also coming to the dinner party then do what most of us do and park around the settlement.
Along comes T10 McGankface and unloads his pack-hounds on the parked ships.

Not too mention when we now scan planets we have named installations you would only find in Soho.

O7
 
Here's what I don't think it'll be:

Base Building
Ship Interiors
These are too big for a casually rolled out feature. They would be (and should be) their own expansions.

Arf said that what they have done with this new feature is "super cool". Which to me implies creativity.
So that probably rules out EVA and surface mining.

Here's an idea that came into my head that I'm going throw into the mix of speculation.
What if the new feature is greater creativity with ship paintjobs and suit customization? For example, what if instead of one complete paintjob that you apply or remove, you could mix and match parts of your ship with different paintjob parts like you do currently with ship kits?
 
Last edited:
There's only thing about this new feature I want, and that's they don't spend a huge amount of time and effort working on something I will never use. And right there that's your problem right, because everyone thinks the same, and everyone has a different list of features they will have no interest in taking part in or using, so there will always be some push back no matter what it is. Could they possibly find something that everyone wants and work on that? That's a hard call, but one thing that would fit that requirement is, MORE PLANETS, so that's my call out for the new features, more planets with weather and liquid oceans!
more planets would be a dream including base building :)
 
Back
Top Bottom