Why Are Weapons And Sensors Badly Unrealistic?

So in the real world, sensors (like radar etc) have a nap of the earth range of 200km or more and missiles an even longer range with satellite telemetry.

Why then is the average scanner on Elite Dangerous ships given a 5km range and weapons a 3km range?

Modern combat aircraft can paint another aircraft from hundreds of kilometres away. Why then is a KWS only valid on average to 2.5km.

Modern combat aircraft can target multiple incoming aircraft and fire against all at once. Why then can we not select targets by order of priority and target weapons to take out multiple targets?

Just saying that from a modern combat perspective, weapons in the 34th century seem very under rated.
 
So in the real world, sensors (like radar etc) have a nap of the earth range of 200km or more and missiles an even longer range with satellite telemetry.

In supercruise your ships sensors are able to detect ships that are billions of kilometres away.
Why?
Because it is necessary for the game mechanics that they do so.
 
Doylist:
Gameplay. (See above.)

Watsonian (possibilities):
Sensors: Massive advances in stealth technology and ECM have rendered most sensor technology in real space obsolete except short-range IRST. That's why you can't achieve a target identification or lock even though you can see the target with your Mk. I eyeball.

Weapons: See sensors, so you don't shoot stuff you can't identify. Also, kinetic ammo destroys itself at a maximum range to reduce possible collateral damage. (Think living in a Coriolis and suddenly your window gets torn apart by a few hundred multi-cannon shells fired three years ago.)
 
Last edited:
Weapons: See sensors, so you don't shoot stuff you can't identify. Also, kinetic ammo destroys itself at a maximum range to reduce possible collateral damage. (Think living in a Coriolis and suddenly your window gets torn apart by a few hundred multi-cannon shells fired three years ago.)

Thanks for the chuckle :D
 
You can identify a Clipper silhouette before they hit your scanner when sneaking into a warzone.

Sensors are useful but the crafty mercenary knows better than to rely on them.

"Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe."

"Beware the Jabberwock, my son!
The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!"
 
What I want to know is why sensors become massively less efficient the bigger your ship gets.

My python has a sensor range similar to a smaller ship yet my python's sensors require more power and weigh much much more.
 
Well I don't know about weapons sensors but my discovery scanner can take accurate readings of a planet through the middle of star if close enough, show me the modern system which can do that!
 
The arbitrary range cutoff for the sensors is kind of funny when you condider that it's usually pretty easy to see ships that are out of sensor range though, especially larger ships like the Anaconda.

It's one of those moments where you go "Apparently my ship needs glasses. Captain to sensors, what am I even paying you guys for?"
 
What I want to know is why sensors become massively less efficient the bigger your ship gets.

My python has a sensor range similar to a smaller ship yet my python's sensors require more power and weigh much much more.

Exactly the same reason why you pay through the nose for the stereo in your Aston Martin even though it has no noticeable quality difference compared to one at a tenth of the price.

How much more real can you get?
 
I'd personally like to see dogfighting made higher-tempo, like, (and i hate to say this,) Ace Combat 4 & 5 were.
To clarify=
Max speeds up to almost 1000m/s.
Turning combat speeds typically around 300m/s (this is the "blue zone")
Basic missiles and direct-fire weapons having range they have now, but heavier versions and torpedoes having significantly better range, but lower ammo count.
Sensor ranges around 3 times what they are now, with detection range determined by target size as well as target heat.

I realise it won't happen, as all of the changes I mentioned are based on higher flight speed, and there are network issues with high relative speeds, apparently.
 
So in the real world, sensors (like radar etc) have a nap of the earth range of 200km or more and missiles an even longer range with satellite telemetry.

Why then is the average scanner on Elite Dangerous ships given a 5km range and weapons a 3km range?

Modern combat aircraft can paint another aircraft from hundreds of kilometres away. Why then is a KWS only valid on average to 2.5km.

Modern combat aircraft can target multiple incoming aircraft and fire against all at once. Why then can we not select targets by order of priority and target weapons to take out multiple targets?

Just saying that from a modern combat perspective, weapons in the 34th century seem very under rated.

'Because gameplay' is a 'correct' answer, but it's also a cop-out.

I find myself being a bit of a 'random rationaliser' for Elite in its various forms. Yes I know it's a game, but it's also a universe in which our combined stories unfold, so it ought to make some sort of sense, right? In my view saying "It's just a game" is selling it rather short.

So on this one, how can we resolve this apparent regression in technology? Here's my take.

1. Elite spacecraft are not fighter planes. Yes, they can fight, but they are actually more akin to cars, or perhaps privately owned yachts. They are technologically 'dumbed down' to make them accessible to the common man or woman who wants to travel. We've had this discussion already in relation to the weird way they handle in space... eg. slowing down when you throttle back. They've been designed and built to act intuitively, hiding the tedious realism from the owner/user by layers of automation, simulation and flying 'aids'.

2. Sensors are some kind of passive units, rather than active. Quite why radar isn't allowed isn't clear, perhaps it was too susceptible to being jammed. Ships use passive sensors to locate other ships, based on heat signature. Range appears to be limited, not by technology, but once again by usability, limiting the pilots view to information in the immediate vicinity - the stuff that's important. An analogy might be a modern sat-nav, which shows your route, but only the bit that is relevant for you to see at the moment.

3. AI is very limited in the Elite universe. Something happened way back in history for artificial intelligence to have been severely repressed. Given that, everything is automated to make it as simple as possible for people to use. Most folks don't know how things work, just that they know how to operate it. This is little different from today - most people have no idea how a Sat-Nav/Phone/Toaster works. In the future, space travel between systems is no more daunting than a quick run up the motorway to your local supermarket.

4. Legislation (and to a lesser extent cost and competition) strictly controls what everyday ships are allowed to do, how they perform and what they are capable of. This is strictly enforced on and by the manufacturers. Perhaps the military are immune from this, but civilians have to abide by it.

Cheers,

Drew.
 
Last edited:
Hello there

My only gripe is the *really* short range of most sensor suites and scanners. (I may have missed some?) but I'd like to see them have a greater range, not a "realistic" one but a greater range nonetheless.

Rdgs

LoK
 
Gameplay yes.
If you wanted a ship with systems similar to a modern jet fighter you'd need the mega bucks helmet to control it all with.
 
Back
Top Bottom