Replace SRVs (Make mat grinding fun)

There’s no in game activity that would necessitate a vehicle like an SRV, nor is there an in-universe reason to use one beyond giving moon-landing vibes.

The physics of the SRV are unforgiving and do a poor job of reflecting the 6 wheels with 6’ suspension arms.

If we are going to be in bubble turrets, a quad copter makes way more sense. We see quad copters in the game regularly, you could probably re-use a lot of the fundamental control and physics of ships/the camera.

(Personally, I would prefer air speeder bikes like Star Wars or Destiny, but that’s probably less likely.)

You then just need to add things to make flying the copter a game. Here are some ideas:

Fun collection: deliver things to a chute or landing pad on the ship. Maybe employ a tether to collect items from the ground similar to cargo door. Add concussive charges that break apart collectibles but must me placed and then flown away from, similar to deep ore mining.
environmental hazards: Storms, volcanoes, gyres, caves. Anything that throws things to avoid, affects control/visibility, or asks us to manoeuvre better.
Resource management: limited energy, have to return to ship occasionally or use suit to recharge. Manage shield use, like on foot.
Combat: add remote detonation bombs and missiles for combat. Have to skim ground in some situations to avoid AntiAircraft turrets. Maybe put the quad copter into sentry mode where it just behaves like NPC quad copter.

Most importantly: meaningfully combine it with Odyssey/on-foot activities.
 
Quoting myself from another topic:
Off-topic, but I would really have fun if I could reliably get my SRV to permanently float or even fly out into space on lower gravity planets. Managed to do it with the Scarab, but that was using some glitch. More like an accident.

To get enough ENG recharge to do this, I'd be willing to sacrifice 75% cargo capacity, 50% driving speed and 50% of the gun's DPS.

Optionally, make that 1 remaining unit of cargo corrosion resistant

Or just give us more SRVs, even if they look like 80% reused model from one another.
Attached screenshots remained there :(
 
Having more assets to play with is great but digging at the SRV and saying it does not serve any purpose is just incorrect and inaccurate!

All my exploration ships have both the Scarab & Scorpion and I absolutely love them...and I suspect the vast majority of the community do too so that's a huge assumption you are making CMDR!

o7,
 
I have, and always have had, a love/hate relationship with the SRVs. On one hand, they are practical tools for gathering mats, and exploring POIs. On the second hand, they are crazy fun to drive (especially the Scarab). When ever I get into an SRV I end up driving all around crazy-like looking for canyons or craters to jump over or in. I get so little work done, that I never have enough Raw Mats.

I have mentioned being interested in a new SRV. One that has cargo capacity like, or better than, the Scarab, but the driving characteristics more like the Scorpion. I could actually prospect should I find myself in a vehicle like that. But, who knows...
 
Having more assets to play with is great but digging at the SRV and saying it does not serve any purpose is just incorrect and inaccurate!

All my exploration ships have both the Scarab & Scorpion and I absolutely love them...and I suspect the vast majority of the community do too so that's a huge assumption you are making CMDR!

o7,

I take one out into the black with me mainly because I enjoy driving around every now and again
 
I have, and always have had, a love/hate relationship with the SRVs. On one hand, they are practical tools for gathering mats, and exploring POIs. On the second hand, they are crazy fun to drive (especially the Scarab). When ever I get into an SRV I end up driving all around crazy-like looking for canyons or craters to jump over or in. I get so little work done, that I never have enough Raw Mats.

I have mentioned being interested in a new SRV. One that has cargo capacity like, or better than, the Scarab, but the driving characteristics more like the Scorpion. I could actually prospect should I find myself in a vehicle like that. But, who knows...

Being able to load a SRV at an Odyssey settlement and drive the cargo to your waiting ship would be awesome
 
Removing an asset would be counterproductive, and yet people keep asking to remove things they don't enjoy (and others do).
How about just asking to add something else, instead?

I'd love to see new ground vehicles, and more integration with on foot activities, but not at the expense of the two existing SRVs!

Otherwise, I'd start a campaign to have the Anaconda removed, based on 10% personal taste and 90% pettiness! 😆
 
Removing an asset would be counterproductive, and yet people keep asking to remove things they don't enjoy (and others do).
How about just asking to add something else, instead?

I'd love to see new ground vehicles, and more integration with on foot activities, but not at the expense of the two existing SRVs!

Otherwise, I'd start a campaign to have the Anaconda removed, based on 10% personal taste and 90% pettiness! 😆

Where do I sign the petition? 😆
 
The SRV is great and shouldn't be removed but I've been a fan of the hoverbike suggestion for a while. No cargo and built for fast traversal of reasonable distances to deliver data that can't be trusted to be on board a ship that can leave the planet. There might be need for small settlement type places that border around a planetary port's fringes outside a dozen or so miles. Would be nice, especially if those that come after you are using the same vehicle.. some Star Wars speeder bike shenanigans would be pretty neat IMO...
 
A Hoverbike would be very nice. I have Spacebourne2, and it has a hoverbike. Its a mess, janky and kinda hard to control but once you get used to it, you can go places fast.
I used it a lot when I was playing it.
GL HF
 
Having more assets to play with is great but digging at the SRV and saying it does not serve any purpose is just incorrect and inaccurate!

All my exploration ships have both the Scarab & Scorpion and I absolutely love them...and I suspect the vast majority of the community do too so that's a huge assumption you are making CMDR!

o7,

Please explain how the SRV functions well. And then explain how it makes sense in contemporary or in-universe context to drive around in a single occupancy go kart on rails.

I guess you get the game you deserve.
 
There's no need to replace SRVs just because you don't like them... Driving an SRV across random planets is one of the things I enjoy most about E: D!
Bad logic.
You like thing thus it is good game design (?)

I made objective observations about the issues created by the SRV implementation and offered a low expense solution. You just tried to indict the idea by suggesting my logic is flawed… by using the exact inverse logic.

This is what I said, I am open to debate, but respond to this:
If we are going to be in bubble turrets, a quad copter makes way more sense. We see quad copters in the game regularly, you could probably re-use a lot of the fundamental control and physics of ships/the camera.
 
If we are going to be in bubble turrets, a quad copter makes way more sense. We see quad copters in the game regularly, you could probably re-use a lot of the fundamental control and physics of ships/the camera.
Quad copter? We see quad copters in the game already? Where? Do you mean the skimmers? They don't have the weight of a pilot and don't carry several tons of cargo.

How does a quad copter work over zero atmosphere planets?

A Viper4 with a retractable canopy would be good. Just like a Star Wars landspeeder it could hover over planet surface and allow the pilot to jump in/out.
 
Bad logic.
You like thing thus it is good game design (?)

I made objective observations about the issues created by the SRV implementation
You said the physics was unforgiving and you felt the suspension was not accurately modelled.

The physics is unforgiving because the physics of a low-grav low-friction surface are unforgiving. That's the objective situation.

For me, the suspension travel only becomes an issue when driving over undulating rocks over four feet tall or so. An ornithopter would be cool for that, sure. Or you could not drive over huge areas where there are tricky rocks.

And you seem to have completely missed the part where the SRV can effectively fly anyway. You know you still have attitude control when you are off the ground, right?

You just tried to indict the idea by suggesting my logic is flawed… by using the exact inverse logic.
Aristotle mate, have you heard of him? Philosopher dude.

If we are going to be in bubble turrets, a quad copter makes way more sense. We see quad copters in the game regularly, you could probably re-use a lot of the fundamental control and physics of ships/the camera.
You could reuse the physics of ships for a much smaller ship too. Those stingers aren't big enough for a cockpit. But if the problem you are trying to solve is those massive fields of rocks so you can get the Frutexa, then I propose hoverboards, much more fun...

... Especially if you hit a geyser.
 
you said the physics was unforgiving and you felt the suspension was not accurately modelled.

The physics is unforgiving because the physics of a low-grav low-friction surface are unforgiving. That's the objective situation
No it's unforgiving because it's missing basic features that we've had on vehicles for 100 years in our timeline. We spin out because the suspension can't be adjusted for the body you're on and they didn't implement any wheel differential so when a wheel loses traction it gets derranged. It's just a poorly implemented driving model that is to blame in the far future with advanced computers they should drive like they're on rails and anyone who wants the vomit comet experience can turn drive assist off.
 
Back
Top Bottom