I can see the orientation of other ships. Why not orientation of Orbitals?
- Thread starter Hark0n
- Start date
Whether station position and orientation wrt the player is calculated during the load into the station instance from sc, or during sc is irrelevant. The fact remains that at some point the information exists within the game engine and thus can be leveraged to create what the OP is asking for at minimal dev cost.
As for this, it certainly isn't random. You can tell this by approaching a station from the same direction will always place you in the station instance with the station at the same orientation.
It's how players can always enter the station instance nicely lined up with the station mail slot, by knowing the station orientation with respect to the planet it's orbiting (i.e. the station mail slot always faces 45 deg north of the plant's "north pole").
- - - Updated - - -
Again, this isn't true. As otherwise player would never be able to deterministically enter the station instance from sc knowing the station orientation wrt the orbiting body in advance.
You can always enter the station instance from sc, with the mail slot lined up in front of you, by entering from the direction of 45 deg north of the orbiting planet's north pole. If you don't believe me, boot up the game and test it. So, the station orientation info. exists within supercruise.
If it didn't you'd always enter the station instance from the exact same direction every time, regardless of the direction of approach from sc.
You're clearly not understanding anything that is being explained to you in this thread. The station simply doesn't exist in supercruise, they would have to add this into the game and that would be quite a bit of work for them to do. It involves adding something that does not currently exist in that instance. I've been playing the game since launch and have seen how many difficulties FD has been having when implementing seemingly "simple" features like mission timers and have sen how long it takes them to fixing the endless number of bugs these seemingly simple changes cause. Suggesting that they should be able to add a new supercruise functionality "easily" when you clearly don't understand how the instancing works in the game is not something you seem to be capable of understanding.
Not in supercruise. How are you still not getting this? It's like you're not even reading the posts and have zero understanding of what we're telling you.
You're just not getting it and I really don't know how else to explain this to you. You need to go back and re-read everything that has been explained in this thread about stations and instancing if you want to have this conversation. At the moment your argument consists of stating "but it's just simple MAAATHHHHHH" as if that constitutes a rational argument about implementing a new functionality in the game.
I suspect that they may even simplify the instance to the point where the station's centre of rotation is used as the "centre" of the instance and this is most likely considered to be "stationary" while everything else is calculated relative to that point. I've noticed that the station "distance" on the HUD is actually measuring a point inside the station itself, not the station entrance. I suspect that the station most likely never actually "moves" while everything else in the instance rotates around the station instead, including planets. That's why I think that the station doesn't so much have an orientation around a planet as everything else is oriented relative to the station when the instance is created. I occasionally use RenderDoc to take 3D "screenshots" to use for 3D printing of ship models and it's interesting to note the other objects you "capture" while sitting docked in the station or flying in the station instance. The station and hangar are rendered in detail while docked while planets nearby the station are all just simple spheres and these seem to be placeholders for where the planet is supposed to be relative to the station. Unfortunately I haven't been able to use RenderDoc for any type of detailed testing of these issues as the program seems to have a substantial system memory leak where I will use all 12 GB of system RAM in 1-2 minutes of launching RenderDoc and if I don't exit the game by that time it will simply crash.
I've noticed something similar for planetary bases, they seem to have a simplified "model" for the base that is not fully rendered until you enter glide mode. If you carefully look at the bases they have a very simplified appearance as you approach them in orbital cruise, which I suspect are very simplified geometric shapes with textures to give the illusion of a complex building shape. As soon as you enter glide you're loading the planetary base "instance" and that suddenly gives you detailed 3D rendered buildings instead of a simplified placeholder. It's not a gradual process and is an abrupt transition and I suspect that the planetary bases have a very rudimentary shape until you create the base instance. There seems to be something similar going on with the planetary terrain, at some point this transition from what appears to be texture-only to 3D-rendered terrain and I suspect that this is only a happening upon entry into glide mode, similar to how a station is only 3D-rendered upon dropping out of supercruise.
I suspect that the networking issues are probably contributing to the slowdowns to some extent but I think the main issue is that the game is only loading the detailed 3D objects when you get close enough to enter the instance itself and this seems to be a major factor affecting loading times as well.
I have heard that players running high-end rigs with good graphics cards (i.e., GTX 980 and upward) have much faster transitions both when jumping and when dropping into glide mode and they are probably rendering the necessary 3D objects/terrain much faster. I have even heard that these players can load the universe/system maps faster as well although I'm not sure how their GPU would affect this unless the GPU is used to calculate optimal jump routes which would not really surprise me given the GPU architecture is probably good at running those types of algorithms (much like how GPUs can be used to mine bitcoins efficiently).
Last edited:
Starports don't fly/exist/rotate in supercruise (in a warp bubble) but in normal space.
Wouldn't that be akin to saying that we should also see the rotation of ships flying in normal space (say at a Nav Beacon) also in SC?
This station approach works most of the time:
If you combine the above technique with avoiding shipping lanes you can decrease the chance of pirate interdictions when you are carrying cargo. This old video demonstrates that technique but this was when there was no shipping lane indicator on the HUD:
Wouldn't that be akin to saying that we should also see the rotation of ships flying in normal space (say at a Nav Beacon) also in SC?
This station approach works most of the time:
[video=youtube_share;E1cvw5jPL6I]https://youtu.be/E1cvw5jPL6I[/video]
If you combine the above technique with avoiding shipping lanes you can decrease the chance of pirate interdictions when you are carrying cargo. This old video demonstrates that technique but this was when there was no shipping lane indicator on the HUD:
[video=youtube_share;1nC3KmSF85Q]https://youtu.be/1nC3KmSF85Q[/video]
Last edited:
Wow, you're either being intentionally dense or willfully ignorant... and then you have the gall to say i'm not reading responses.
1) How about you tone it down a notch for starters. It's not a war, but an amicable discussion.
2) Read and try to comprehend what i'm actually talking about.
What is clear from your response here is that you're talking about something, and i'm talking about something completely different. You have and idea of what i'm talking about and what is being proposed, but it isn't a correct one.
First off, it seems you're speaking to the reason a 3D model of the station in supercruise isn't realistic. That's not what I'm even talking about, nor what I understand what the OP is asking for.
I'm talking about the station icon that appears in the HUD when you target a station in supercruise. Right now it is a simple 2D icorn that appears. I'm saying that the devs can update this to be a tiny 3D model that will rotate with respect to the player, so as to allow players to line up their entry before dropping out of supercruise... you still with me?
You stated (erroneously) that there isn't enough information within the game to implement this without a major change to the game. Principally, the position and orientation of the station in sc.
I responded to this with the rebuttal that this information must exist within the game in supercruise. Why!?! Because if it didn't, how would the game know from which direction you were approaching the station when you drop out of supercruise and enter the station instance? The game currently DOES know how to do this, because the required information (i.e. station position and orientation with respect to the player) IS calculated and DOES exist in supercruise.
You still deny this fact, despite providing a meaningful explanation as to how the engine can determine the player ship's angle of approach to a station when dropping out of sc into the station instance.
If I haven't put forward a clear arguement as to why this information MUST exist within the game then lets remain civil about it and simply ask me to be clearer.
Otherwise, I would recommend actually going back through my posts to and properly reading them, exercising a bit of reading comprehension before throwing out accusations. It is very clear that I have both read and understood the OP, the posts in this thread and the arguments put forth. I simply don't agree with your argument and have presented evidence to prove it incorrect. So perhaps, it's you who hasn't been listening properly?
- - - Updated - - -
Starports don't fly/exist/rotate in supercruise (in a warp bubble) but in normal space.
Wouldn't that be akin to saying that we should also see the rotation of ships flying in normal space (say at a Nav Beacon) also in SC?
This station approach works most of the time:
If you combine the above technique with avoiding shipping lanes you can decrease the chance of pirate interdictions when you are carrying cargo. This old video demonstrates that technique but this was when there was no shipping lane indicator on the HUD:
Again I'm not talking about an actual station in supercruise. I'm talking about a 3D rotating station icon that appear in the target panel of the HUD when you select a station in SC.
By the way, VJ is slightly inaccurate with his info. here. The station doesn't always face the planet, it faces 45deg to the planets north pole. Hence, the station position (i.e. distance from the planet, distance to the player) and orientation (i.e. 45deg north of the orbiting planet) is information that exists within the engine.
Last edited:
Sorry, but you simply aren't reading and understanding the discussion in this thread. You're not demonstrating any understanding of why the detailed information about station shape and orientation is not currently available while in supercruise despite multiple attempts to explain it to you. If you can't follow the concept of instancing and the related concepts that have been described in this thread I really can't help you with this. You're treating the game as if it's a unified, persistent game world where they just need to a let the player "access" certain information when that's not the case at all.
I agree it could be done. The data is available. I think the reason it has not been is that there are no other systems are dependent on this information while in SC. If Interdiction did not depend on ship orientation then the ships in SC would also be static icons as there would be nor need for the data on their orientation either. I don't think it is a question of whether the target object has a 3d model in that specific instance, its a case of there is a cost to everything and the cost of this is not worth the reward at this time. There are more important things to do and by exercising your grey matter you can achieve the end result this change would help you achieve without the need to implement it.
In SC you can visually identify the positions of the stations relative to the solar object they are orbiting. If what others have said is true, then you can use this information to determine the rough angle of approach which is required to be positioned close to inline with the slot. In the end I do not really understand the need to be aligned with the slot upon exiting SC. There is more then one way to slip in to a station unnoticed.
Last edited:
You don't need to see it: The side with the hole in always faces the planet.
Again you simply aren't reading nor understanding my posts nor any of the other discussion in this thread... so it's willful ignorance then is it?
No problem. I was merely trying to get you to challenge your own incorrect assuptions about the game's design. You've clearly demonstrated both poor reading comprehension as well as a poor understanding of how the game itself works (I mean, you were talking about station shape, volume and mass... as if it was at all relevant. All your talk about instancing and yet you don't seem to even understand how that works).
I certainly don't need your help in understanding elite's engine design, as it's clear you're far from an expert on the subject. On the contrary, even worse.. you're wrong, you know it and can't even bring yourself to admit it. Poor showing really...
Last edited:
Given that you aren't able to follow the discussion about instancing here it's clear that you don't know enough about how Elite is designed, or about programing in general, to follow the concepts involved. Like I had said, there's nothing I can do to help you with this beyond what I've already explained.
That would make it too easy . . .
Your need to resort to personal attacks when you cannot defend your argument is what is most sad. But yeah, I'm done with any further attempts to try to reason with you.
Stating that you don't understand a concept is not a personal attack. I'm not the only one in this thread who has been discussing the issue of instancing and how this has a direct impact on the server workload and excessive loading issues the game currently experiences. Instead of demonstrating an understanding of these concepts you've resorted to a simplistic and dismissive approach to the topic and that is why the discussion with you has not been productive.
Well I would also agree that you are missing the point that people are explaining to you. Your posts are arrogant and you demonstrate the ability to not want to listen to what people are telling you if you don't agree with them. This is why people are getting frustrated with you. Your attitude and tone are not conducive to a sensible discussion.
Simply put the station is not in the super cruise instance therefore the game engine has no means or need to calculate the exact position because it doesn't know it until you drop from supercruise and the new instance is loaded/calculated.
My first thought is....why is that information important in SC mode? not like you can use it for anything while in SC
Second thought is, all mail slots point towards the body they orbit...be it star or planet, so unless you're talking about the slot's rotation angle, I don't know what to say.
Second thought is, all mail slots point towards the body they orbit...be it star or planet, so unless you're talking about the slot's rotation angle, I don't know what to say.
I'm just amazed at how many advanced coders/programmers there are here that have proprietary knowledge of the inner workings of this game.
And labeling differentiating views as being personal attacks.... weak.
Your 3D icon while in supercruise could assume certain aspects (ha! see what I did there) of the normal space'd version of the station. But there can't be a 1:1 factual representation since until you drop out of SC into normal space, the station doesn't exist. I could see some of the data you're stipulating as being present and from that, your 3D icon could approximate the station's orientation.
Or
You could just do as I've done, draw an imaginary line from the planet to the station and this is your approach vector. This places me w/i 22.5` approach vector of the mail slot 100% of the time. This is a simplistic distillation of the previously linked approach methods.
And labeling differentiating views as being personal attacks.... weak.
Your 3D icon while in supercruise could assume certain aspects (ha! see what I did there) of the normal space'd version of the station. But there can't be a 1:1 factual representation since until you drop out of SC into normal space, the station doesn't exist. I could see some of the data you're stipulating as being present and from that, your 3D icon could approximate the station's orientation.
Or
You could just do as I've done, draw an imaginary line from the planet to the station and this is your approach vector. This places me w/i 22.5` approach vector of the mail slot 100% of the time. This is a simplistic distillation of the previously linked approach methods.
You also haven't read or understood my posts. I've in no way intimated nor claimed that a 3D volumetric (or otherwise) representation of a station exists within supercruise. The existing solution doesn't need it, and what the OP is asking for, I.e. some way of knowing which way the station is facing in supercruise, doesn't require it either.
If you've read my posts as me saying "a 3D version of the station" does exist in supercruise (despite me saying otherwise multiple times in this very thread) then I can only apologise that despite attempting to be clear about this multiple times, for some odd reason my argument is still being misrepresented as this.
This is NOT what I'm saying...
What am I saying, then?
I'm saying that some properties of the station, i.e. information about the station position and orientation with respect to the stellar plane and the player's ship, is calculated and exists in the engine within the game.
Some players have argued that station position and orientation doesn't exist because it is not used for anything.
I argued that it IS indeed used for something in the game, I.e. the approach vector of the player ship when the player drops out of supercruise into the station instance. The game engine cannot determine this approach vector without calculating these numbers. As much as Devari won't like to hear this, but it is actually basic maths.
The station in supercruise doesn't have shape or volume or mass whilst in supercruise. I've agreed this and haven't ever argued this. However, everything in supercruise, not just stations, will have a position vector and orientation information with respect to the stellar plane. If it didn't, you could drop out of sc facing the star and the position of the star in that new game instance would be entirely random and not based on the exact orientation and position, with respect to the player ship and the galactic plane. Stations are no different...
I hope that makes my argument more clear?
Last edited:
With respect, one doesn't have to be an advanced coder or programmer to understand how programmers will render something like a star system in a 3D simulation. You only need to know a little bit about 3D rendering to know that it is simply a 3-dimensional coordinate system. Of course that's an oversimplification, as the instancing complicates the design of ED, but it is true that this is essentially what it is.
Once you grasp this, it is easy to see how and why some information, like the position and orientation of a body in the simulation has to exist, for the position and orientation of the entire instance itself to remain consistent with the stellar plane in supercruise.