USS appreciation society

[spacejumbofudge]

The mention of USS in the Wings pcgamer article got a lot of people worrying in the related thread that it hints USS are here to stay and not just a placeholder.

I'm not personally a fan of them in their current implementation, though I can see why we have them - they're quite simple and flexible. The problem is they get the job done but in a way that further detracts from the feeling of instances and random number generators rather than helping hide it and make the universe feel more real, simulated and persistent.

I wonder if the solution is to tackle the negative aspect of USS mentioned above rather than simply saying the whole premise needs to go.

My suggestion on how you could do this is to create USS globally for a system on entry rather than on the fly as you travel. You'd be able to see them on a system map (not sure if the current system map would be ideal for this unfortunately). Where in the system they are would be an indication of the likely contents. So near a RES site or belt would most likely be pirates. Near a station might be abandoned cargo. I think you could also then offer an improved scanner module to buy that might add some extra info on a USS to reduce the guesswork further.

I think you could do that without much work (compared with a completely new system) but would give a much more rational and persistent feel.

 

[Devil's Refugee]

The only good USS is a dead USS.

or the USS Enterprise.

I'm fine if they stay, just needs an overhaul of how they're triggered and the content. Wings suggests there will be more tweaking so it's fine to say wait and see what they implement before decrying it all over again. I do think there's an over reliance on USS as a mechanic for faction missions, needs some TLC and intelligence behind it now.

 

[SiriusSeven]

Literally anything would be better than the present USS system.

For example, suppose I pick up an assassination mission to go kill the pirate lord "Max Power", last seen flying a red Python near Dalton Gateway in the LH 3447 system. Max Power often travels by the alias Mal Reynolds (sorry feeling unimaginative with naming)

Ok, so I switch to my sensors system, and program it to alert me to any transponder signals matching "Max Power", "Mal Reynolds" or any unidentified pythons. I travel to LH 3447 and surrounding systems, watching my scanner carefully for contacts matching my filters. I then interdict and question all unidentified pythons until the prey is found. All of this can still be instanced just like USS.

Not very complicated. Programming the sensor system could add some depth to that subsystem. Way way better IMHO than random USS that always happen to be what you are looking for.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[spacejumbofudge]

Literally anything would be better than the present USS system.

For example, suppose I pick up an assignation mission to go kill the pirate lord "Max Power", last seen flying a red Python near Dalton Gateway in the LH 3447 system. Max Power often travels by the alias Mal Reynolds (sorry feeling unimaginative with naming)

Ok, so I switch to my sensors system, and program it to alert me to any transponder signals matching "Max Power", "Mal Reynolds" or any unidentified pythons. I travel to LH 3447 and surrounding systems, watching my scanner carefully for contacts matching my filters. I then interdict and question all unidentified pythons until the prey is found. All of this can still be instanced just like USS.

Not very complicated. Programming the sensor system could add some depth to that subsystem. Way way better IMHO than random USS that always happen to be what you are looking for.

Just my 2 cents.

Personally, I think for assasination missions they got it right in Frontier and FE - you get told what station they'll be leaving and when and the rest is up to you. ED already has the mechanisms for following wakes and people in supercruise, so it'd be easy to follow someone from a station to somewhere a little more private and then interdict and kill them.

 

[Gogster]

I love crashing a wedding that I'm not invited to.

 

[Hadron-Higgs-Boson]

when you put lipstick on a pig, it's still a pig!

 

[SiriusSeven]

Personally, I think for assasination missions they got it right in Frontier and FE - you get told what station they'll be leaving and when and the rest is up to you. ED already has the mechanisms for following wakes and people in supercruise, so it'd be easy to follow someone from a station to somewhere a little more private and then interdict and kill them.

That works too! I guess I'm just a little disappointed that USS appear to be here to stay. They know how to do it right. They did so in Frontier. I am guessing that USS are necessitated by the peer-to-peer nature of the game. Multiplayer is worth the sacrifice here if, and only if, they get multiplayer right. At present, things like broken comms, wings limit of 4, lack of guilds, lack of player owned assets, etc. suggest that they aren't levering multiplayer to its fullest capacity. The thing I liked about games like UO was that a person really could follow any profession. I could become really good at carpentry, for example, and set up shop selling to other players. Even WoW has crafting and the auction house. Stuff that creates a real market, and leverages multiplayer for trade and business. It doesn't look like any of this is in the cards. Oh well.

But back to the OP, I agree that even if the peer-to-peer tech limits what can be done, the present USS mechanism can be improved by adding a little more variety and imagination -- perhaps hiding the instanced nature of the encounters similar to interdictions. Other than interdictions, when I fly around in SC, I don't get that sense of scale because things only really happen at a small selection of discrete endpoints.

 

[Devil's Refugee]

I love crashing a wedding that I'm not invited to.

And raining death from above at a Funeral procession

 

[spacejumbofudge]

That works too! I guess I'm just a little disappointed that USS appear to be here to stay. They know how to do it right. They did so in Frontier. I am guessing that USS are necessitated by the peer-to-peer nature of the game. Multiplayer is worth the sacrifice here if, and only if, they get multiplayer right. At present, things like broken comms, wings limit of 4, lack of guilds, lack of player owned assets, etc. suggest that they aren't levering multiplayer to its fullest capacity. The thing I liked about games like UO was that a person really could follow any profession. I could become really good at carpentry, for example, and set up shop selling to other players. Even WoW has crafting and the auction house. Stuff that creates a real market, and leverages multiplayer for trade and business. It doesn't look like any of this is in the cards. Oh well.

But back to the OP, I agree that even if the peer-to-peer tech limits what can be done, the present USS mechanism can be improved by adding a little more variety and imagination -- perhaps hiding the instanced nature of the encounters similar to interdictions. Other than interdictions, when I fly around in SC, I don't get that sense of scale because things only really happen at a small selection of discreet endpoints.

The odd thing about the instancing is how it makes it look much worse than it actually is. When I first started playing I was sure that places you could stop were all separate little bubbles - stations, nav beacons, RES sites, belts, etc.. I was surprised when I tried existing SC at other parts of a planet ring that the whole system was accurately modelled and just as populated by NPCs. I think in many ways having to avoid time acceleration and the implementation of supercruise is more to blame for the increased instance feeling than the peer to peer restrictions. Once you do know it's all there if you decide to exit SC, it does feel a bit better.

 

[SiriusSeven]

@spacejumbofudge
Great points. Rep'ed.

 

[spacejumbofudge]

@spacejumbofudge
Great points. Rep'ed.

Thanks. I think, re-reading my last post, what I was really getting at is that it is the multiplayer aspect that has lead to the feeling of playing in bubbles, - but not because of the net-code, but because of having to travel in real-time rather than accelerated time as in the old games. It's the way SC is implementat that feels... wrong. I don't actually mind the mechanic, it solves the problem reasonably. I just think it FEELS like fast travel in a computer game, rather than a simulation of something.

In games like TES Oblivion, you could use fast travel or you could do the actual journey. I never used fast travel, because as soon as you did, the charm and real feel of the world disappeared. Suddenly it would feel like min-max grinding of fetch quests. The journey was part of the joy in those games. The problem is when doing it the non-fast-travel way gets too long, you are forced into fast-travel. In Skyrim I think I used fast travel more, because the distances got too great, even with a horse.

Gotten a bit off topic from the original post - but I think it's all related - how good Supercruise feels and how the USS are found an encountered is the bit that isn't quite right at the moment.

 

[Doctor Axel]

I like the idea of being able to see ALL signal sources in a system, on the same scale at which ships are visible. That seems sensible to me and would make them feel less random.

I think the main way they could be improved, though, would be to ditch the name "Unknown Signal Source" and actually identify them - not explicitly, but something a LITTLE more descriptive like "Distress Signal," "Weapons Discharge Detected," "Trader Broadcast Signal," "High Radiation Levels," et cetera. That way you at least have some idea of what you're pulling over for, even if it's vague, and even if it's a pirate pretending to broadcast a distress signal so he can take your booty.

 

[Riedquat]

I think USS would be ok if they werent so easy to find, but I wouldnt call them USS, I would classify them as different itemts (like the Dr says in the post above).

If you had to do some work to reveal one (some sort of tricky scanning process or something), it would make them seem less 'theme park', having them pop up around you is just too easy and immersion breaking, even then though, I would only use these for static entities, not ships.

For Assasination missions I think these should not be USS and should be just like in the sequels, you have to go and find/stalk your prey and make your move, these missions were great in the earlier games and I also enjoyed these the X games.

Instead of the USS, I would prefer to see some sort of coloured heat signature that gives you an indication of what might be at the site, for ships engaging in battle it would be a hotter signal and be more obvious and easier to find whereas much fainter for a wreck or crago cannisters, or single ships.

 

[spacejumbofudge]

I like the idea of being able to see ALL signal sources in a system, on the same scale at which ships are visible. That seems sensible to me and would make them feel less random.

I think the main way they could be improved, though, would be to ditch the name "Unknown Signal Source" and actually identify them - not explicitly, but something a LITTLE more descriptive like "Distress Signal," "Weapons Discharge Detected," "Trader Broadcast Signal," "High Radiation Levels," et cetera. That way you at least have some idea of what you're pulling over for, even if it's vague, and even if it's a pirate pretending to broadcast a distress signal so he can take your booty.

+Rep

Your second point is sort of what I meant with my upgraded scanner idea, but yeah just having them all there and with a rough name exactly as you've suggested would be an improvement.

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

I think USS would be ok if they werent so easy to find, but I wouldnt call them USS, I would classify them as different itemts (like the Dr says in the post above).

I certainly think mission descriptions should be 'last seen near <station/planet name>' not just what system they might be in. It's stupid that you can find a pirate lord or particular cargo type by staying in one spot travelling as slowly as possible, encountering different things until jackpot.

 

[SiriusSeven]

Thanks. I think, re-reading my last post, what I was really getting at is that it is the multiplayer aspect that has lead to the feeling of playing in bubbles, - but not because of the net-code, but because of having to travel in real-time rather than accelerated time as in the old games. It's the way SC is implementat that feels... wrong. I don't actually mind the mechanic, it solves the problem reasonably. I just think it FEELS like fast travel in a computer game, rather than a simulation of something.

There was no misunderstanding here. I've exited SC at arbitrary parts of planetary rings, and I've accidentally exited too soon on approach to a station and noticed that I could see the station 200km in the distance. You just reminded me that these details are present, and I appreciate that.

I think what could help SC would be to see contact points and radar blips of things that were not in SC with you. For example, if I exit SC at a random part of a planetary ring, maybe I show up as an USS on your radar?

Or maybe it would help to have system maps that look more like the mockups (with the addition of "You are here" and the locations of the various contacts). At least this would give a sense of where people are, and what a USS might be. USS near a conflict zone... probably not a wedding party.

View attachment 15900

 

[Kancro Vantas]

The worst about USS for me, is that they kill the immersion effectively and immediately after spawning. Not only I know is a bubble -I could get over that part- but the fact that is a bubble ONLY VISIBLE FOR ME makes me go bonkers.

That leads to those stories where you are with a friend and they start shooting and going mad about a "phantom" ship only they can see. Feels pretty lunatic, moronic and wrong.

Then knowing I am SC in a system that has no planets, only a star, for instance...finding this USS with vessels going to a wedding, or a funeral....TO FREAKING WHERE??? NOTHING OUT HERE DUDE!!!...

If they were fixed, instead, as suggested, fixed areas for all to see..more like nav beacons....I would feel better about the idea... not some stupid thing that spawns only for me and that on top of that has a very non-credible background story.

 

[Mufus]

I like the idea of being able to see ALL signal sources in a system, on the same scale at which ships are visible. That seems sensible to me and would make them feel less random.

I think the main way they could be improved, though, would be to ditch the name "Unknown Signal Source" and actually identify them - not explicitly, but something a LITTLE more descriptive like "Distress Signal," "Weapons Discharge Detected," "Trader Broadcast Signal," "High Radiation Levels," et cetera. That way you at least have some idea of what you're pulling over for, even if it's vague, and even if it's a pirate pretending to broadcast a distress signal so he can take your booty.

Probably the quickest fix to the appalling gameplay crutch that USS are. We have a wonderful space flight sim, but with random "interaction" events shoved in as an afterthought.

Having to trawl through a system looking for specific things would make the missions much more immersive than they are now, which is just an annoying random number experience. It's such a pitiful system that if you're running cargo missions there is no point in running any other type as you'll just get lots of lame "ah, commander, I've been looking for you... blah, blah". Boom. At least in an anarchy system as I'm so fed up with these USS instances offering to quit missions for pathetic rewards that I just blow them away. Makes no difference to the game, but it makes me feel better!

 

[Philip Coutts]

I like the idea of being able to see ALL signal sources in a system, on the same scale at which ships are visible. That seems sensible to me and would make them feel less random.

I think the main way they could be improved, though, would be to ditch the name "Unknown Signal Source" and actually identify them - not explicitly, but something a LITTLE more descriptive like "Distress Signal," "Weapons Discharge Detected," "Trader Broadcast Signal," "High Radiation Levels," et cetera. That way you at least have some idea of what you're pulling over for, even if it's vague, and even if it's a pirate pretending to broadcast a distress signal so he can take your booty.

What he said ^. It would be far better if the information looked like something your ship was actually scanning and picking up as unusual readings. You could still have blank USS where some form of natural cause was fooling your sensors. It would just make it feel a bit more alive that what we have which is basic to say the least.

 

[Mufus]

(snip)

View attachment 15900

That is exactly what the system view should look like... what we have now is horrible in the extreme compared to this. Yes, there will be problems fitting some of the more outrageous systems into one screen area, but we can still pan and zoom and we have to do that anyway.

 

[CMDR i Tetsuo]

I like the idea of USS just not the implementation, I think it would work better if like the advanced discovery scanner you actually had to ping a system and then it came back with all the USS in that area at once. You could then have a readout that shows information the player has to decipher to figure out which (if any) of the USS they need/want to visit. Something like energy readouts that have peaks and troughs that could translate to radiation, heat levels, energy discharge (ok I'm running out of things, but this isn't my job!!) so different events give off slightly different signals. Weak energy signals with high radiation could be for the exploded ships/cargo drops (Black boxes etc) and so on for each type of discoverable event.
-
it just needs to be more involved than flying in a straight line waiting for a marker to pop up...