The randomised signal sources need to go

[Adept]

What Elite needs, more than anything IMO is a feeling that the world is concrete and alive.

The randomised signal sources, that are spawned around the player (try crawling around in supercruise, at minimal speed) are killing that immersion pretty badly. Why is that trader tooling about in normal space in the middle of nowhere, rather than carrying cargo in supercruise? Why is this bunch of wanted criminals just hanging around here?

NPC traders need to be ferrying cargo between stations. NPC bounty hunters need to be cruising the space lanes, scanning for wanted ships.

Combat zones can't be (for long) static locations in real space where ships blow each other up for points. Why are they there? Why aren't they laying siege to the other side's space stations? Taking over resource extraction sites?

I understand this is 1.00, first release version stuff, but we need to feel things are moving forward, and have a clear vision of what Frontier is shooting for.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

For anybody looking to see how dynamic NPC driven and player effected battlefields and worlds are done right, I recommend checking out Mount & Blade: Warband. The factions have limited resources, castles and cities, and their leaders with their personal warbands ride around the map, making choices where to attack, when to retreat, and trying to take each others trade caravans, loot the villages and put castles to the siege.

That is what we need.

 

[Desolator]

you raise a valid concern here.
I do wonder how the comparison with M&B holds up though. In that game you can amass an army yourself, so in due time you will be able to match the other roaming warbands in size and strength.
We could never do that in this game as it stands, maybe after they add the Wings system, though it remains doubtful even then.
another thing in Warband is the size of the map. everything is pretty small and literally everyone and their mom are prepared for war. in E most people are traders who can't fight when their lives depend on it

 

[Sacman]

you raise a valid concern here.
I do wonder how the comparison with M&B holds up though. In that game you can amass an army yourself, so in due time you will be able to match the other roaming warbands in size and strength.
We could never do that in this game as it stands, maybe after they add the Wings system, though it remains doubtful even then.
another thing in Warband is the size of the map. everything is pretty small and literally everyone and their mom are prepared for war. in E most people are traders who can't fight when their lives depend on it

That is because IMHO ED does not consist of a single coherent space in which NPC ships really travel and do their own business.
They just don't exist independent from you and you are the creator of them.
Space in ED consists of instanced 'space rooms' which are populated with stuff when you enter them.
SC exit loads the targeted USS instance and generates random stuff for you ... and that randomness is what you describe.
Just my opinion.

 

[Hethwill_Khan]

Valid concern, nonetheless ...

... for me I wouldn't give up my random USS content encounters... I never know what I will find there which makes it good fun most of the time while I pursue mission targets ... yummy.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

It's like that old Goodies line...

"If only I had an eskimo phrase book, ah here's one."


...a dramatic device or conceit so absurd it smacks you in the face as it gives you the "thing" you're looking for.

"If only I had a canister of rebel transmissions, ah here's one."

 

[Rog]

That is because IMHO ED does not consist of a single coherent space in which NPC ships really travel and do their own business.
They just don't exist independent from you and you are the creator of them.
Space in ED consists of instanced 'space rooms' which are populated with stuff when you enter them.
SC exit loads the targeted USS instance and generates random stuff for you ... and that randomness is what you describe.
Just my opinion.

Hard to see how it's all going to change - this is how the game has been designed.

Changing the fundamental nature of what's going on under the hood isn't going to happen anytime soon.

You're basically stuck with how it is.

But that's OK, because everything is awesome!

 

[Sacman]

Hard to see how it's all going to change - this is how the game has been designed.

Changing the fundamental nature of what's going on under the hood isn't going to happen anytime soon.

You're basically stuck with how it is.

Unfortunately i have to agree ... it won't change ... and that is bad.

 

[purf]

I don't mind the mechanics of it,
it's just a pretty bad smack in the face everytime I realize how 'Rebel Attack Plans' are not Rebel Attack Plans. There's no rebels. No attack. No plan.
Just generic_name_x for random_canister_y

 

[Sacman]

Yes ... but we have to realize that generic_name_x for random_canister_y IS the mechanic.

 

[Ainoaoikea]

I wouldn't say they need to go altogether, but I do think they need to be special occasions and spiced up. Distress calls, accidents and the like, and preferably at least some should have a story dimension to them, like attack recorded in black box giving you mission to hunt the attacker/sell the box to relatives of the victim/black mail the attacker. Things like that.

 

[withnail]

I can't see how it can be altered to make it better. More precise locations for the USS', less randomisation of the occurrence, even a USS scanner that could be used in supercruise.

Why is that so difficult?

(I do agree that they need to change though)

 

[Seboss]

I sincerely hope USS are the easy, cheap solution FD had to came up with to cope with the aggressive 1.0 release date, and that they have something much better in the pipes, because they really have to go. I agree 100% with the OP, and they are my #1 gripe with the game.

It makes absolutely no sense that black boxes just basically spawns around the player's ship at random regardless of where they are in a system. At the very least, they should spawn in a sensible manner around a specific zone of the system. The signal signature should also be something relevant to the mission ("wreckage", "abandoned battle zone", "derelict station", or what have you), and if the player somehow detroys the item(s) to be retrieved, then BAM! mission failed. It makes absolutely no sense to recover just any black box/military plans/etc to complete the mission.

Once again, I think the USS are the absolute bare minimum FD could implement to have a working instanced mission system and I'm certain they realize it's pretty poor. If not, well, allow me to stress out that they're bad and I think FD really should get back to the drawing board on this subject.

EDIT: Nav beacons don't make much sense either if you ask me btw.

 

[Bambi]

Rather than being "unidentified" I think signal sources should be identified. Basically they would be how your scanners pick up real-space activity.

So for example if someone is interdicted, rather than leaving a wake, it creates a new signal source representing that instance, showing up with properties like "weapons discharge" and "ships detected".

In this way you could see a bunch of "mining activity" signals dotted all around a resource rich planetary ring, instead of an arbitrary "resource extraction point". Miner npc's would spawn (randomly) from star bases and fly towards it, and some of them would jump out of their instances and fly back. Apply this principle to all npc and player activity.

This would also give new life to silent running as ships with silent running on could have their signal sources disappear.

Rather than appearing random and arbitrary signals would then be seen as signs of activity in a persistent universe. Even if it is still simply generated around the player.

Missions would have to be redesigned with much more specific directions as you can no longer be expected to drop out of cruise at any point and magically find exactly what you were looking for. Assassination missions could play out more like a detective minigame, which I think would make them more fun.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

EDIT: Nav beacons don't make much sense either if you ask me btw.

Yes, either nav beacons should be removed completely, or you should be dropped into realspace near them after hyper jumping. This would give them a purpose, and create a chokepoint in systems where pirates could intercept ships as they pass through and recharge their FSD. Right now there's no reason for any npc's to be there, and the only reason a player would go there is because npc's do.

For unexplored systems I imagine you could simply be dropped at a random point near the star instead. Or perhaps even much further out, give it some lore saying that nav beacons are required to drop so close to the inner planets.

 

[Seboss]

Yes, either nav beacons should be removed completely, or you should be dropped into realspace near them after hyper jumping. This would give them a purpose, and create a chokepoint in systems where pirates could intercept ships as they pass through and recharge their FSD. Right now there's no reason for any npc's to be there, and the only reason a player would go there is because npc's do.

For unexplored systems I imagine you could simply be dropped at a random point near the star instead. Or perhaps even much further out, give it some lore saying that nav beacons are required to drop so close to the inner planets.

I was thinking the same thing, and I remember the idea was discussed extensively in the DDF. I'm not sure why things turned out differently. I suppose having to wait for a FSD cooldown after each single hyperdrive jump before the player could re-engage SC was deemed too annoying. Especially since the cooldown would have to be long enough for players around the nav beacon to have a chance to interact. Tricky.

 

[CaptainKremmen]

Hard to see how it's all going to change - this is how the game has been designed.

Changing the fundamental nature of what's going on under the hood isn't going to happen anytime soon.

You're basically stuck with how it is.

But that's OK, because everything is awesome!

Why you had to add that last snarky line, and undermine your own post, is totally beyond me.

 

[Adept]

Hard to see how it's all going to change - this is how the game has been designed.

Changing the fundamental nature of what's going on under the hood isn't going to happen anytime soon.

You're basically stuck with how it is.

But that's OK, because everything is awesome!

It's very MMO 101, from the days of the original Everquest. It's very far from the DDF plans outlining the different tiers of NPCs and such.

The comment about how the NPC ships do not really have an independent existence is spot on target. They need that.

Getting "rebel transmissions" should mean sneaking in, using stealth and actually listening in on... rebel tansmissions. I wouldn't get rid of signal sources totally. They have their place, but they should be spawned into the system, be permanent until investigated / solved, and detectable from a lot further away.

The current situation is nowhere near good enough. It is very abstract and gamey.

- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -

I don't mind the mechanics of it,
it's just a pretty bad smack in the face everytime I realize how 'Rebel Attack Plans' are not Rebel Attack Plans. There's no rebels. No attack. No plan.
Just generic_name_x for random_canister_y

Exactly. They are separate bits of a game, but it's not being tied together. We need a living, dynamic simulation of the galaxy.

 

[trumpet]

I agred that USS needs vast improvement.

1.) they need a scanning module (signal decoder, particle sniffer whatever) probably with basic & advanced. Basic would give mass read out similar to the coloured dots in Nav map in FE2. Advanced could trace tell tail signatures in the signal . Or once scanned it can pattern recognise a similar signal .

2.) name the signals! In Lave once I saw in the Nav an signal titled 'domestic goods wanted' - I flew straight there!!

 

[HappyMonday]

I wouldn't say they need to go altogether, but I do think they need to be special occasions and spiced up. Distress calls, accidents and the like, and preferably at least some should have a story dimension to them, like attack recorded in black box giving you mission to hunt the attacker/sell the box to relatives of the victim/black mail the attacker. Things like that.

Strongly agree with this, expanding descriptions allows for all sorts of suggestive stuff which feeds into the feel of the play even without implementing too many complex new mechanics like stealthy listening...

We're not going to get rid of the USS system to my mind, so improving it is the way forward. The spawning of USS appears to be relative only to the player at the moment, even the mission the player is on doesn't appear to feed the USS system - like altering the frequency of certain 'base' encounters appearing - they just allow the mission delivering it's 'alternative' outcome. So you're as likely to meet pirates if you have three 'kill pirate' missions as if you have three courier runs active...It's a nonsense in a system that's supposedly crawling with miscreants.

I say keep nav beacons, but USE them...Spawn these automatically when you land in-system in strings, along travel routes from sun to station perhaps, and stick a reason to stop at them in each one...Checkpoints for system authority vessels for example, giving the idea that those ships are having to travel around and actually patrol the system, even if NPC's are not really, literally doing so. It's not too much of a leap to consider these as potential 'speed traps' for ships along popular routes that way, which would explains why there's always a load of bounty hunters and randoms hanging around when you drop in. NPC ships already use the various USS / nav beacons as way points in SC after all.

Same with USS generally, spawn a few when you land in system so it's not so obvious that they're entirely appearing 'around' your ship - basic little things like that go a long way for me.

It's difficult to tell if basic encounters have higher or lower frequency based on location relative to stellar object at present, but they definitely should...IE, player is close to nav beacon = player more likely to encounter piracy OR sys authority (getting sick of spawning into one Wanted, two authority and another bounty hunter, myself), player close to mining facility = player more likely to encounter ships loaded with ore / more likely to be interdicted by pirates IF piloting a big cargo ship.

It's because it's not finished I realise, but it doesn't hang together at the moment.

Finally, I still think allowing players to broadcast their own USS (creating their own instance and luring people in) would be interesting, and would definitely jumpstart all the bounty-hunting / PvP side of the thing. You'd have to balance it all carefully and TOTALLY randomise the location of the people jumping in, but it's worth a go I reckon. Making USS 'discoverable' would enable this too...You can target some and have a chance of finding out roughly what it is WITHOUT dropping in (because I'm sick of that BLOODY Lakon, I really am)...Then sell a module which enables / increases the likelihood of spotting player-created ones. That'd increase uncertainty and be great fun, from my perspective at least.

 

[MACMAN86]

USS ships make sense to me as you go to these for cargo and so do other ships. Some do it to spring traps whilst others are doing the same as a Clean. Nothing too wrong about it really. Plus those missions to go after targets gets easier if you got an interdictor.

 

[HappyMonday]

USS ships make sense to me as you go to these for cargo and so do other ships. Some do it to spring traps whilst others are doing the same as a Clean. Nothing too wrong about it really. Plus those missions to go after targets gets easier if you got an interdictor.

So you think the system is fine as is?