Another Ship interior thread, and some suggestions

[Kraenor]

Keep up the new ships, etc. But don't waste the opportunity to take control of Star Citizen and turn Elite Dangerous into what it should have been from the start.

Eva, abandoned ships to explore, enter, etc.

Ship interiors, from the stairs to the main room and walking around, for begining make, improvements later.
On-foot combat also needs an overhaul: more missions, caves, and on-foot mining.

They could make a new type of ship that uses a laser to destroy abandoned ships in space and collect materials.

I hope one day they can make more immersive missions, with voiced NPCs, like the introductory mission to Odyssey.

The planets need improvements.
Camera suite needs to let us save a favorite position, only 1 not asking for like 5 cameras to save.

 

[Devilish Dave]

For those wanting ship interiors, how do you expect them to do that, especially in the case of ships which have 4 SRVs such as Mandalay? For functioning interiors, one would have to remodel everything, skew measurements and force things to fit. It wouldn't look good or it would be too much of a hassle to do at this point I think.

I'm for interiors too, but I've settled with this iteration of Elite not having it. It would however be a shame if the next installation for this franchise would also skip on it.

I support the other ideas though. On-foot combat definitely should be improved and make it feel better. More missions would be nice, on-foot Thargoid missions would be cool too.

Land on a Thargoid planet, infiltrate a híve, steal an egg, extract, and adios.

 

[Darrack]

don't waste the opportunity to take control of Star Citizen

I stopped reading there, Fdev don't need to take anything from SC, at least they produced a working game.

O7

 

[SlickPBW]

sigh

 

[Factabulous]

It's a bit cruel to start a new shinteriors thread when the existing one is coming up for it's first birthday party later this month.

 

[Kraenor]

I stopped reading there, Fdev don't need to take anything from SC, at least they produced a working game.

O7

Well, un terms of economy, sorry but yes.I know that SC is not a finished game.But imagine Elite with the money of SC.They sell smoke, Elite is a finished Game but they need to impove it we are in 2025, gaming standards has changed.And is not so crazy that people spent money in an enternal alpha when the only competition is not reacting to what players want.

 

[Darrack]

Elite is a finished Game

Yep so folks keep telling us

O7

 

[Commander Gigolo]

Since Elite Dangerous is built the way it is, the only ship interiors that is needed is the Cockpit, Ship Entry and Exit points, SRV Bay, and Ship Launch Fighter Bay. Use the present doorways in the ship to basically teleport you between these areas similar to the Stations and Outposts. And Animated entry and exit for ship launch fighters and SRV's. Would also love to be able to land and enter and exit ship launch fighters. They already have there own landing gear. It will no be like other games (because Elite Dangerous is not like other games), but it will bring a lot of emergence to the game that player will appreciate, because we all use these ship compartments all the time.

 

[Tryohazard]

For those wanting ship interiors, how do you expect them to do that, especially in the case of ships which have 4 SRVs such as Mandalay? For functioning interiors, one would have to remodel everything, skew measurements and force things to fit. It wouldn't look good or it would be too much of a hassle to do at this point I think.

I'm for interiors too, but I've settled with this iteration of Elite not having it. It would however be a shame if the next installation for this franchise would also skip on it.

I've viewed and played around with the 3d models of the ships. I promise you there is space and then some. In fact, I estimate that most ships can fit twice the optional modules (basing the sizes on cargo canisters) The anaconda could comfortably fit over 10,000 tons. I am not joking. and that's a conservative estimate.

The colored boxes are estimated sizes of all possible modules 1 - 8. Their volumes are based on their size cargo rack fitting every possible ton into the smallest volume. given the density of 1 ton of steel, this is a very generous volume. even if you think they should be a bit bigger because of some apparatus to manage the cargo, just look at this:

Even the Sidewinder has potential for an interior (those boxes are all modules both optional and mandatory)

The only thing stopping this from working is the size of SRV hangars and SLF hangars. but they can stand to be the exception, and for a ship like this, maybe having one removes your ship interior. alternatively, FDev can just revert back to when the sidewinder didnt have an SRV bay because they shouldnt have added one for the smallest ships anyway.

Edit: I initially said 40,000 tonnes. Sorry, that was my misremembering. It's around 10,752 with the 42 size-8 cargo racks I have loosely fit in there. Even then, I left the SLF bay intact and a some room near the engines and upper shell so if I CRAMMED them in there maybe I could get that to around 18,000 or so lol

 

[KRISXR]

I think the shining achievement of Elite is it has never copied or jumped on any bandwagon, like 99% of other games that do. The first was groundbreaking, unique, and a technological leap from just what, 32kb's of memory. Those two chaps were brilliant in manipulating that old hardware. I have alot of respect for this game, it's creators, and their vision. Not saying they are or that Elite is perfect, definitely not trying to blow smoke, just giving respect where it's due. Star Citizen, it's state after ten years, the cost to the player, is gross, if anything, Star Vagrant could take a page from Elites book.

And for sure, any type of ship interior would make me flop like a fish out of water.

Tryohazard- you posted that as I was typing, wow, i get to use the word brilliant twice in one post! Outstanding visual representaion, brilliant! ha three times

 

[Darrack]

I've viewed and played around with the 3d models of the ships. I promise you there is space and then some. In fact, I estimate that most ships can fit twice the optional modules (basing the sizes on cargo canisters) The anaconda could comfortably fit over 10,000 tons. I am not joking. and that's a conservative estimate. View attachment 428539


The colored boxes are estimated sizes of all possible modules 1 - 8. Their volumes are based on their size cargo rack fitting every possible ton into the smallest volume. given the density of 1 ton of steel, this is a very generous volume. even if you think they should be a bit bigger because of some apparatus to manage the cargo, just look at this:


View attachment 428540


Even the Sidewinder has potential for an interior (those boxes are all modules both optional and mandatory)

View attachment 428541


The only thing stopping this from working is the size of SRV hangars and SLF hangars. but they can stand to be the exception, and for a ship like this, maybe having one removes your ship interior. alternatively, FDev can just revert back to when the sidewinder didnt have an SRV bay because they shouldnt have added one for the smallest ships anyway.

Edit: I initially said 40,000 tonnes. Sorry, that was my misremembering. It's around 10,752 with the 42 size-8 cargo racks I have loosely fit in there. Even then, I left the SLF bay intact and a some room near the engines and upper shell so if I CRAMMED them in there maybe I could get that to around 18,000 or so lol

Really good work, however we have no idea how much of the ship is taken up with equipment/engines that actually make it fly.

O7

 

[Devilish Dave]

I've viewed and played around with the 3d models of the ships. I promise you there is space and then some. In fact, I estimate that most ships can fit twice the optional modules (basing the sizes on cargo canisters) The anaconda could comfortably fit over 10,000 tons. I am not joking. and that's a conservative estimate. View attachment 428539


The colored boxes are estimated sizes of all possible modules 1 - 8. Their volumes are based on their size cargo rack fitting every possible ton into the smallest volume. given the density of 1 ton of steel, this is a very generous volume. even if you think they should be a bit bigger because of some apparatus to manage the cargo, just look at this:


View attachment 428540


Even the Sidewinder has potential for an interior (those boxes are all modules both optional and mandatory)

View attachment 428541


The only thing stopping this from working is the size of SRV hangars and SLF hangars. but they can stand to be the exception, and for a ship like this, maybe having one removes your ship interior. alternatively, FDev can just revert back to when the sidewinder didnt have an SRV bay because they shouldnt have added one for the smallest ships anyway.

Edit: I initially said 40,000 tonnes. Sorry, that was my misremembering. It's around 10,752 with the 42 size-8 cargo racks I have loosely fit in there. Even then, I left the SLF bay intact and a some room near the engines and upper shell so if I CRAMMED them in there maybe I could get that to around 18,000 or so lol

Wow, very neatly explained.
Thanks!
Love seeing actual thought being put towards ideas as opposed to just spamming nonsense.

Well done!

 

[Elyssaen]

The anaconda could comfortably fit over 10,000 tons.

This does highlight a problem! Ship interiors might draw attention to how awkward ship scaling is. Anacondas would really be about the size of Asp Explorers if their external size scaled with their internal modules.

They'll just need to bite the bullet with the larger ships and have the interior be smaller than the actual space inside the ship.

 

[Tryohazard]

Really good work, however we have no idea how much of the ship is taken up with equipment/engines that actually make it fly.

O7

Thank you, and actually we can figure a good estimate because we know the weight of these modules and they are actually modular meaning they can work when moved from a cutter to an anaconda. And like their cargo racks, for example the size-8 256 unit cargo rack weighs up to 256 tonnes. But a size 8 Shield generator also weighs 256 tonnes. Given that they are modular they are most likely as space effecient as possible whil still being easily worked on and moved. The real kicker is the density of metals like steel, gold and even the lightweight Titanium (4,500kg/m^3). This tells us that one of those cargo canisters does not always use its full volume to store the material. I never calculated it but assuming the commander is around 6' or 1.8 meters tall, those canisters are probably around 2 cubic meters in volume. So titanium takes up a fraction of the volume inside, and the rest is probably just lightweight padding for protection.

Ive wanted to test his sort of thing with all other ships to see if the space works out with their volumes and so far the larger ships have it, but I havent done them all so there may some problems. But it almost seems like Fdev took their scale pretty seriously.

 

[Tryohazard]

This does highlight a problem! Ship interiors might draw attention to how awkward ship scaling is. Anacondas would really be about the size of Asp Explorers if their external size scaled with their internal modules.

They'll just need to bite the bullet with the larger ships and have the interior be smaller than the actual space inside the ship.

Hah! Im not sure people would like that interpretation but I know what you mean. If they saw the vast empty space they would have some questions. In my opinion they should just give us at least SOME more modules in ships that can fit it, but after so much weight it worsens at 2.5x the rate of loss of maneuverability. Which means if you fill it with cargo racks but are empty, you wont notice anything. And they may have to rework jump weight scaling but in my opinion all that would be a better alternative than lying about the size of the inside of the ship.

 

[Ian Doncaster]

But it almost seems like Fdev took their scale pretty seriously.

There's certainly a lot more internal space on most ships (by a long way!) than they need to store their modules.

Scale is really quite off in other respects, though - the mass of a ship scales up by maybe length squared, not length cubed, for example (which is why a lot of core modules are usefully swappable between ship classes). Interior spacing is similarly reasonably believable on the Sidewinder and "where is all the rest of the space going?!" on a T-9 or Beluga.

And like their cargo racks, for example the size-8 256 unit cargo rack weighs up to 256 tonnes.

True, but this breaks down if you consider other module sizes or uses for them.

A size 7 optional internal can hold 128t as cargo. Or it can hold 160t as a prismatic shield. Or it can hold 320t as a G5 reinforced 7A limpet controller.

On the other side, a size 2 optional internal can hold a SRV which is a lot larger than a 4t of cargo canisters (indeed, the Scarab SRV can carry 4t of cargo itself)
A size 5 optional internal can hold the parts for 6 SLFs; even the single SLF stored "assembled and ready to launch" is a lot bigger than 32t of cargo.

Internal sizings were probably about plausible for the smaller ships up until the Horizons release, when the SRV clearly was not thought out in those terms. I don't think they've ever been particularly plausible for the bigger ships.

Ship interiors might draw attention to how awkward ship scaling is.

And also to the artificial gravity generators. A station in freefall is implausible for the "magnetic boots and velcro" option already but a ship undergoing rapid turns would be a whole different degree of silliness.

 

[Tryohazard]

There's certainly a lot more internal space on most ships (by a long way!) than they need to store their modules.

Scale is really quite off in other respects, though - the mass of a ship scales up by maybe length squared, not length cubed, for example (which is why a lot of core modules are usefully swappable between ship classes). Interior spacing is similarly reasonably believable on the Sidewinder and "where is all the rest of the space going?!" on a T-9 or Beluga.


True, but this breaks down if you consider other module sizes or uses for them.

A size 7 optional internal can hold 128t as cargo. Or it can hold 160t as a prismatic shield. Or it can hold 320t as a G5 reinforced 7A limpet controller.

On the other side, a size 2 optional internal can hold a SRV which is a lot larger than a 4t of cargo canisters (indeed, the Scarab SRV can carry 4t of cargo itself)
A size 5 optional internal can hold the parts for 6 SLFs; even the single SLF stored "assembled and ready to launch" is a lot bigger than 32t of cargo.

Yeah the SRV and SLF bay are way too large in that respect but at the end of the day its about coming close and making it enjoyable while youre at it. It is still a game. And they are still modules meaning if you dont have it simply take it away in the interior and replace it with a smaller module.

Frankly the 160 T and 320T size 7 makes sense. The G5 is reinforced so it's probably packed and covered with heavy armor plating. And I personally believe that there is space to spare when doing that. Metal is DENSE. you could fit well over 6 tonnes of titanium in a single cargo canister. So all this really makes more sense than not.

 

[Dragsham]

I've always been in favour of taking some of that other games stuff. But that would turn elite into that other game.
Do we want that?
Yeh!

Just done better.

 

[Kraenor]

Well, they can do ship interior like Star Trucker, the problem with this topic is that "ship interior" is synonymous of all the ship, cargo, etc. They don't need to do all the ship walkable, with just an elevator to the cabin, or something like X4 will be OK, with the immersion that Star Trucker has.

Also the camera is better, click a key, external camera active, rotate to see the truck... simple and normal, Idk why in Elite they add camera suite so user unfriendly.

I buy a ship or a space suit. I'm supporting the game and I have to click like 10 keys to positioning the camera to see the ship that I just bought and when I click the camera key again it goes to default position. I mean what. Simple camera please, click a key, external view, rotate to see the ship, not so hard, is not crazy what I'm asking.

Same with ship interiors, that is a kickstarter promise for those who doesn't remember.

But again, simple, elevator to cockpit, walk around, get outside the ship and create new game loops.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nK97oA6rQhM&ab_channel=Rooslahn

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3d8w6FAte0&ab_channel=Egosoft

 

[Raedawn]

Keep up the new ships, etc. But don't waste the opportunity to take control of Star Citizen and turn Elite Dangerous into what it should have been from the start.

Eva, abandoned ships to explore, enter, etc.

Ship interiors, from the stairs to the main room and walking around, for begining make, improvements later.
On-foot combat also needs an overhaul: more missions, caves, and on-foot mining.

They could make a new type of ship that uses a laser to destroy abandoned ships in space and collect materials.

I hope one day they can make more immersive missions, with voiced NPCs, like the introductory mission to Odyssey.

The planets need improvements.
Camera suite needs to let us save a favorite position, only 1 not asking for like 5 cameras to save.

After I had my carrier awhile I stopped walking through it for any reason whatsoever. This is how useless it is to walk around even in a ship that you have a reason to (I did when i was doing exploration). Adding ships that have interiors because, 'Oh Oh, wouldn't interiors be awesome' is a waste of Dev time.

Also your entire thread amounts to, 'Oh and another idea just popped into my head, I'm going to add that to my pointless wish list" and "Oh there is another idea in my head that simply must be added to the game, Oh wait there is another gem right there...."

NO