dynamicbob
Banned
srv pvp
What do you want to see added to the game?
- Thread starter Sunsol
- Start date
That's why most games have countermeasures against every possible build in order to support a healthy metagame. So if a build/ship/character/class/weapon/etc becomes standard, we then see a rise in its designated counter, making the initial go-to build obsolete. Balance doesn't mean everything needs to be equal. Rock isn't equal to paper or scissors, yet there is a perfect balance between them.
Adding some high-tiers fighter ships (like a 100m+ credits eagle), which would actually have an edge against big ships, but be very vulnerable against medium ships, would add that sort of asymmetrical balance to the game.Every ship would then be vulnerable against something.
Last edited:
Also:
A breakdown of the different start types I have scanned in the exp stats.
So 10 black holes, 5 neutron, etc.
That way I can check that I've seen the different types in the game.
And:
"The last person to shoot you was: CMDR MeanPersonThatNeedsToDie".
Useful when you manage to run away from an encounter
Finally:
Elite Exploration rank should only be obtained when you have discovered X stars of type Y. (So say 10 black holes), and travelled a certain distance (E.G 60 Ky).
That seems better than just using the exp cash equivalent.
A breakdown of the different start types I have scanned in the exp stats.
So 10 black holes, 5 neutron, etc.
That way I can check that I've seen the different types in the game.
And:
"The last person to shoot you was: CMDR MeanPersonThatNeedsToDie".
Useful when you manage to run away from an encounter
Finally:
Elite Exploration rank should only be obtained when you have discovered X stars of type Y. (So say 10 black holes), and travelled a certain distance (E.G 60 Ky).
That seems better than just using the exp cash equivalent.
- Remove RNGINEER and add something like that ENGINEER NEXT GEN
- Would love to see AI/NPC into CQC. First, for fix the unbalance and matchmaking issue, second, no wait into the matchmaking room.
- Would love to see AI/NPC into CQC. First, for fix the unbalance and matchmaking issue, second, no wait into the matchmaking room.
I would gladly sacrifice a good deal of development time to making our game support multiplayer activities better. Instancing would be my Number One priority.
I don't harp on about bugs and don't believe that badgering development teams is a very fair activity, so I'm phrasing this carefully here:
If instancing is not fixed, what will happen after the arrival of Multi-Crew features? I'm sure we don't have to list the possible pitfalls!
So, what would I want to see added to the game? If I could only ask one thing? I'd like to be able to play with my friends, wherever they live, and without spending 'ages' trying (possibly fruitlessly) to get in an instance together.
My suggestion: hold (regular?) community events that set up the ideal situation for testing/debugging instancing. The recent Beta Blowout was a good opportunity for this.
Thanks for watching.
I don't harp on about bugs and don't believe that badgering development teams is a very fair activity, so I'm phrasing this carefully here:
If instancing is not fixed, what will happen after the arrival of Multi-Crew features? I'm sure we don't have to list the possible pitfalls!
So, what would I want to see added to the game? If I could only ask one thing? I'd like to be able to play with my friends, wherever they live, and without spending 'ages' trying (possibly fruitlessly) to get in an instance together.
My suggestion: hold (regular?) community events that set up the ideal situation for testing/debugging instancing. The recent Beta Blowout was a good opportunity for this.
Thanks for watching.
It doesn't have to be better, only different. Do other manufacturers not make competing ships? In the real world, if you want a large family car you can get a Ford Mondeo, or an Audi A4, or a BMW 3-series, etc.. Such variety would flesh out the ED universe.
Can be found in Frontier: First Encounters.
Yes, so can lots of things that are missing from ED.
Well,
I think it should be possible (for the small Internals) to make them splitable, so that you can split a class2 internal and build 2 class1 internals in it. Considering that one upgrade in class for an internal means double the capacity in comparison to its previous class.
Also i would love to see all weapons for all hardpoint sizes. i mean, it can't be to hard to balance them.
For example look at the Beamlaser:
-class 1: little
-class 2: slightly bigger
and now the interesting part
-class 3: looks like 2x class 2 Beamlasers
-class 4: looks like 4x class 2 Beamlasers
Same thing goes with the Missile and Torpedolaunchers...
So if you don't want to make the weapon bigger just take the a seize you like and multiply it until you get to the right Hardpoint size.
I mean a Huge Missilerack which can shoot 4missiles at a time, probably useable to overload a single Pointdefence or stuff like that.
It would give much more use to the weapons bigger variety of how you use it which weapon in which slot fits you the most.
Consequently the distributor draw/Energyconsumption/generated heat would be higher.
Broken down on the 3 biggest playable ships it would be:
Cutter=4*2+2*4+1*8=24
Anaconda=2*1+2*2+3*4+1*8=26
Corvette=2*1+2*2+1*4+2*8=26
Based on the assumption that 1class 1 weapon=1Firepower, class2=2, class3=4 and class 4=8 it would finally all make sense for me.
So Anaconda and Corvette got more Firepower but the Cutter is faster, because of its more diplomatic usage (also quite more space and jumprange etc.) with a weapon balancing following this simple calculation.
Sincerely yours,
CMDR Mathewslyer
I think it should be possible (for the small Internals) to make them splitable, so that you can split a class2 internal and build 2 class1 internals in it. Considering that one upgrade in class for an internal means double the capacity in comparison to its previous class.
Also i would love to see all weapons for all hardpoint sizes. i mean, it can't be to hard to balance them.
For example look at the Beamlaser:
-class 1: little
-class 2: slightly bigger
and now the interesting part
-class 3: looks like 2x class 2 Beamlasers
-class 4: looks like 4x class 2 Beamlasers
Same thing goes with the Missile and Torpedolaunchers...
So if you don't want to make the weapon bigger just take the a seize you like and multiply it until you get to the right Hardpoint size.
I mean a Huge Missilerack which can shoot 4missiles at a time, probably useable to overload a single Pointdefence or stuff like that.
It would give much more use to the weapons bigger variety of how you use it which weapon in which slot fits you the most.
Consequently the distributor draw/Energyconsumption/generated heat would be higher.
Broken down on the 3 biggest playable ships it would be:
Cutter=4*2+2*4+1*8=24
Anaconda=2*1+2*2+3*4+1*8=26
Corvette=2*1+2*2+1*4+2*8=26
Based on the assumption that 1class 1 weapon=1Firepower, class2=2, class3=4 and class 4=8 it would finally all make sense for me.
So Anaconda and Corvette got more Firepower but the Cutter is faster, because of its more diplomatic usage (also quite more space and jumprange etc.) with a weapon balancing following this simple calculation.
Sincerely yours,
CMDR Mathewslyer
1. Giving groups of bulk passengers a single trait similar to that of their VIP counterparts (so tourists who are in a hurry, refugees that are secretive, CEO's who dislike illegal activities etc), as well as a satisfaction level.
2. Slight changes to how passenger satisfaction works. Start off passengers as Content (unless they book passage through a friendly/allied faction) then have lots of different trait based triggers for increasing/decreasing satisfaction levels-to make the whole process more interactive.
3. Tie in passenger mission mechanics with Occupied Escape Pods, Hostage Rescue missions and imperial slave trading. Also add in kidnapping/manhunt mission types.
4. Bring in a better visual/audio interface for passenger missions-like individual avatars for passengers when you examine your cabin inventory screen, & eventually voice acting too.
2. Slight changes to how passenger satisfaction works. Start off passengers as Content (unless they book passage through a friendly/allied faction) then have lots of different trait based triggers for increasing/decreasing satisfaction levels-to make the whole process more interactive.
3. Tie in passenger mission mechanics with Occupied Escape Pods, Hostage Rescue missions and imperial slave trading. Also add in kidnapping/manhunt mission types.
4. Bring in a better visual/audio interface for passenger missions-like individual avatars for passengers when you examine your cabin inventory screen, & eventually voice acting too.
Now i know that the captain rarely interacts with the passengers, except on the Love Boat and the obligatory captains dinner.
-Base building/colonization mechanics. I want a place to call home
-Proper criminal system and security force response in civilized sectors
-Find a balance between consequence/reward of piracy so that no more than 10% of players are pirates
-Different instances for offline/open gameplay or increased reward in open as an incentive to play online
-Proper trading mechanics. You're not really a trader, you're a delivery boy.
-MUCH better map navigation when in VR. It's a nightmare to navigate
-Proper criminal system and security force response in civilized sectors
-Find a balance between consequence/reward of piracy so that no more than 10% of players are pirates
-Different instances for offline/open gameplay or increased reward in open as an incentive to play online
-Proper trading mechanics. You're not really a trader, you're a delivery boy.
-MUCH better map navigation when in VR. It's a nightmare to navigate
Maybe not better but different, The ASP (Explorer) is one of the most versatile and commonly used ship. Its not a problem but it would be nice if it had some competition.
So a ship that is medium and more dedicated to exploring, space and planetary.
- More internals then ASP but smaller (Not so small that you cant fit a good fuel scoop), the Cobra IV have more internals then the ASP.
- Rely good jump range, Around Anaconda and ASP.
- Good speed for searching on planets.
- Hard points enough to defend it self.
in other word a smaller and faster ASP for planetary exploring.
My original thought is a Gutamaya, They do not have a medium ship and this would fit the role. Courier would be a great name for it, but that is taken (sorry but i do not see the Courier as the descendent to from Elite I and II, but i rely like it)
My other thought is that the Dolphin could fit that role, fast exclusive ship for small groups.
And another thing wouldn't it be good with a advanced discovery scanner with in built surface scanner, that would be a perfect internal for engineers to sell
Last edited:
An option to Split Module bays.
I absolutely LOVE the changes to the Type-7. It now feels like the flying box truck it was meant to be.
BUT.. wasting an entire Class 3 slot for Docking Computer? No. Being able to split a Class 3 slot into a Class 2 and Class 1, yes.
The same could be said for many slots on many other ships. There are plenty of times where I only need a small module - Prospector Limpet Controller for example, but the ship's slots are much larger than the module, and could easily be split into smaller bays. Even if it takes a trip to an Engineer to do it would be so worth it.
I absolutely LOVE the changes to the Type-7. It now feels like the flying box truck it was meant to be.
BUT.. wasting an entire Class 3 slot for Docking Computer? No. Being able to split a Class 3 slot into a Class 2 and Class 1, yes.
The same could be said for many slots on many other ships. There are plenty of times where I only need a small module - Prospector Limpet Controller for example, but the ship's slots are much larger than the module, and could easily be split into smaller bays. Even if it takes a trip to an Engineer to do it would be so worth it.
Maybe not better but different, The ASP (Explorer) is one of the most versatile and commonly used ship. Its not a problem but it would be nice if it had some competition.
So a ship that is medium and more dedicated to exploring, space and planetary.
- More internals then ASP but smaller (Not so small that you cant fit a good fuel scoop), the Cobra IV have more internals then the ASP.
- Rely good jump range, Around Anaconda and ASP.
- Good speed for searching on planets.
- Hard points enough to defend it self.
in other word a smaller and faster ASP for planetary exploring.
My original thought is a Gutamaya, They do not have a medium ship and this would fit the role. Courier would be a great name for it, but that is taken (sorry but i do not see the Courier as the descendent to from Elite I and II, but i rely like it)
My other thought is that the Dolphin could fit that role, fast exclusive ship for small groups.
And another thing wouldn't it be good with a advanced discovery scanner with in built surface scanner, that would be a perfect internal for engineers to sell
If they added a few internals to it, the Diamondback Explorer could finally fulfill its designation as an entry-level exploration ship...