Small ship flight model buff!
- Thread starter Alexander the Grape
- Start date
Yeah, human players do both of those things. 
Really? In the real world, most criminals that want to stay alive try to run from the police, not start a shootout
I think the implication was, as in the real world, if you've been found out enough to where you need to either shoot or run, you've already lost. There should be a greater emphasis on planning and stealth, rather than just "lolboost".
The problem being planning and stealth aren't really applicable, since the cops just spawn on top of you and interdict you immediately, and then scan. The first decision point is 'after you've already lost'.
Maybe we're supposed to be dropping out of supercruise and trucking it to the stations in normal space, like those apparently FSD-less Signal Source convoys.
Faster-than-light travel is a crutch!
Prolly none of that.
As I said, it's not going to make much of a difference. For example, the top speed is "enforced" by the flight computer. Having stronger thrusters does not change it. Modifying the flight computer would.
Same with handling. The max rotational speeds are also enforced by the flight computer, stronger thrusters do not help. The flight computer turns off the thrusters when turning almost immediately, even though the joystick/gamepad is still deflected.
Edit: You can see this easily with FA Off when you are standing "still". deflect the flight stick full left for 2 seconds. Then deflect it right for two seconds. you should end up with no rotational speed. But since thrusters were cut off early, it will not be the case.
Also, not only the speeds, but also the thrust is limited by the Flight computer. In Horizons, the directional thrusters do generate a lot more thrust than the flight computer allows in space conditions, without an engine upgrade (just the "software upgrade" in the planetary landing package).
Without changing the flight computer, those "upgraded" engines will not make a Star Fury or a BSG Viper out of the small ships.
- Route planner (bad algorithm, tied into main game loop)
- threading issues (only single core is mostly used, many tasks are not run asynchronous as they should) and bad resource utilization in general.
- bad usage of available RAM (there are still assets being loaded of the disk even though the whole game easily fits in RAM)
- bad performance in Horizons (I only get 45fps on the planet, despite the point above. CryEngine works a lot better with given hardware)
- support for multiple screens (without xinerama configuration), so we can have galaxy map etc. on dedicated monitors
- "camera shake"
- standard game options (FOV, network settings, HUD Colours,..) should be modifyable in the game's UI, instead of XML files - bad for non-technical people
- single player offline mode
- removal of "speeding" mechanic
- NPCs that don't cheat and adhere to the same physical laws as CMDRs (scanning, heat, ammo, bounties..)
- UI improvements (more bindable "fire"buttons,...)
- general bugfixes (random drops out of supercruise when approaching planet, falling through, shader errors etc.)
- fix newtonian physics (e.g. no space drag - currently the ship slows down even with thrusters disabled!)
- ..and a bunch more..these are just some out of my head
Plus, we could have more content and general improvements (not such a big issue):
- it would be nice to have the surface scanner actually generate a usable map for Horizons (now it's always empty) - maybe display the elements that could be found? or wreckage?
- SRV should not use "exotic" fuel and limited ammo, instead, it would make sense to use materials to repair it
- it's unrealistic to have so much navbeacons and ships crash tens of thousands of LY away from the bubble in uncharted space
- integration of iPads etc. as additional MFDs
-...
Last edited:
I don't think that the ships that use these thrusters are getting a straight speed buff. My guess is that the optimal mass for class 2 & 3 thrusters will increase by 20%. My reasoning is as follows.
Class 3 thrusters have an optimal mass of 120t atm. This gives a top speed at 60t.
The viper mk3 is 72t completely stripped.
So a 20% increase would give an optimal mass of 144t, with a top speed at 72t.
Class 3 thrusters have an optimal mass of 120t atm. This gives a top speed at 60t.
The viper mk3 is 72t completely stripped.
So a 20% increase would give an optimal mass of 144t, with a top speed at 72t.
The funny thing is that you can reach more than 500m/s above planets right now.
It would be nice if these new engines were to put the top speeds of light ships in the 450-550 bracket.
It would be nice if these new engines were to put the top speeds of light ships in the 450-550 bracket.
The route planner works quite well. Wouldn't be suprised if galmap gets some improvements like it did with almost every update so far.
That's true for 95% of the market. Anyway why do you think there will be no performance optmisations in 2.1? They improved performance with almost every update so far.
Are you playing below optimum specs? Anyway comparing the Cobra engine to the Cryengine doesn't work. Especially since you are comparing something that CryEngine isn't even able to do.
Would be a nice feature but not business standard - no bug / shortcoming.
?
Last time I checked FOV slider was in game. Everything else is not business standard - no bug / shortcoming.
You expect them to fix that in 2.1? Anyway, no bug / shortcoming.
That's a gameplay mechanic to protect players from station ramming - no bug / shortcoming.
I hope there'll be some improvements. I think something is already confirmed for 2.1.... Anyway cheating NPCs are business standard - no bug / shortcomming.
Game design, that's not a bug / shortcoming.
What makes you think there'll be no bugfixes in 2.1?
Are you sure that ships slow down with flight assist off? Anyway game design....
Agreed but not a bug / shortcoming.
Agreed but not a bug / shortcoming.
Already confirmed for 2.1. Why is it in your list of stuff that isn't in 2.1?
Agreed but not a bug / shortcoming.
The route planner works bad. This is documented in countless threads and can be reproduced easily. Maybe your definition of fun includes waiting for minutes until the route is calculated while the FPS drop to 5-15 instead of 60. Mine doesn't.
There have been no performance optimizations so far.
I'm playing on a 5960X with 3x TitanX and 64GB RAM. plenty of hardware. The CryEngine performs BETTER. I frequently fire-up SC for direct comparison in terms of FPS and graphics fidelity. CryEngine just crushes the Cobra engine, especially with custom optimizations in user.cfg.
Proper Sims can do that (sometimes with a bit of fiddling), see DCS, FSX, X-Plane.
Non-Games are inherently good at that, I can use my ssh, firefox or whatever on multiple screens. I expect same features to be implemented in games.
The camera shakes and moves, which causes nausea to some users and, for all others, makes the HUD unreadable at the FOV settings that can be defined in the UI. Workaround is to use custom FOV settings in the XML file.
The FOV slider offers only a limited range, which is unusable for normal gameplay.
No, I expected it to be implemented by 1.0. And yes, it's a shortcoming. Workaround is combat logging, but some players abuse it in PvP.
That's wrong. The mechanic makes ramming more dangerous. Therefore, it is a bug - since it also wasn't there at the beginning. Many users complain about it.
It's also a game design flaw since I would expect the inflight part of a combat oriented game to be much more dangerous than simply docking/undocking.
Again wrong. In a SIM, NPCs should abide by the same laws.
And you're wrong again. If you now a bit about user interface design, the errors are obvious.
Experience with FD.
Yes, they do. Throttle up, turn FA off, boost, disable thrusters. You see that the magic space drag acts as a force that will slow your ship down.
And the rest are just suggestions. It would be nice for a software product to evolve over time, in addition to fixing the bugs and shortcomings it already has. It's also industry standard in the rest of the software industry. Features are added upon customer requirements.
Edit: Workaround for the missing offline mode could also be to release the server code to the public, then people could run their own galaxys.
Plus, one more annoying (but minor) bug: In the Python, the engine sounds are completely contrary to the load of the thrusters. When I'm flying at full throttle, the thrusters are idle. When I pull back the throttle, the thrusters fire up to slow the ship down, yet the engine sounds like if it was powering down instead of up. That's really immersion breaking, although I just turn the sounds low anyway.
Last edited:
The route planner calculates in less than a second on my machine. That's inside the bubble though, IIRC there are reports that it takes longer if you are exploring. Anyway make sure to submit a bug report and hope that it will get fixed in 2.1.
Wrong.
Again, you can't compare two different engines with very different features.
Elite Dangerous is not a sim. Anyway I really like the idea and it sounds great. But it's nothing that they owe you or that you could expect because it's not a common feature for a game.
Disabling camera shakes would be a great feature for those that get sick of it.
That's true for 99% of the other games I played, most don't even have a FOV slider.
Going to Solo is the workaround for the absence of offline mode, not combat logging. Anyway it's FDEVs game and they decided it will be online only. There are many other publishers who follow the same model, I don't like it either BTW.
It's not a bug and it only becomes more dangerous if you don't play by the rules. Sure many users complain about it, but it got implemented based on player feedback. We had way more threads complaining about ramming before the change. I hope it will be even less complaining once we get the AI update.
Elite Dangerous is not a sim. And it's impossible to create an AI that doesn't cheat, the goal is to make it less obvious... FDEV is pretty good at creating a believable AI and I hope it will get even better with 2.1.
That's just your opinion, not a fact.
Like the 300 pages of patchnotes and fixes?
That's by game design. It was the other way around before the game got released but they decided to change this mechanic for balancing reasons. The goal was to make FA OFF different, not superior.
That's not true for the gaming industry where most games get abandoned as soon as the publishers got their money.
I guess you already submitted a bug report? Anyway it's a shame that you turn the sounds to low, I can't think of another game that has a soundscape similar to ED.
EDIT: Sorry, I realise that this gets slightly off topic...
Last edited:
When does this engine upgrade update come out?
Hey Blast! With 1.6/2.1 when it hits live. Or the beta if you have access.
Any idea when that will be? I haven't paid much attention to Elite in a couple of months as I've been on final draft run for my latest novel. Three chapters left!
I don't have beta access, btw.
The beta hits the week of May 8th, so probably the first half of June I'm guessing. Give or take. I kind of took a break after 2.0 hit as well and just got back into the game. Make sure when ya finish your novel, you send an appropriate sci-fi track to go with it for easy listening.