Collection of Ideas for Elite 4

[Glyndo]

I would love to see some sort of extra firepower capability - something like two or three lasers at the front, with the centre laser obviously firing straight ahead and either the other two doing the same (obviously they won't be in the centre as well ) or converging at a certain distance (say 2 or 3km).

I'm not too sure if I would want to have the crew firing weapons as well; knowing me I'd end up expecting them to to better than the miniscule damage they inflicted on the other ship and end up sacking them!

I'd like there to be some better missiles too - playing FFE if you come up against an pirate Imp Courier, an NN500 doesn't do that much damage and my 4MW beam doesn't kill him quick enough - that's my excuse anyway!

There was a good idea posted earlier (I've forgotten who and this thread is too big to go searching so credit to whoever) about being able to make pirates/other ships trade for their lives - either taking their cargo or keeping them as slaves to sell. Anything to get rid of that awful "ha ha" to my "Surrender or die" message when they've got no drive and a hull of 2.3%!

The two things I want to see more than anything are:
1. The game being released when it's ready, not rushed like FFE; and
2. The ability to travel to unexplored systems and map them. I don't want to see an "update" possibility though the internet, but rather a file on my computer. Hard drives are getting bigger and bigger so I'm sure we'd all have space to save an ever increasing universe.

 

[DraQ]

I would love to see some sort of extra firepower capability - something like two or three lasers at the front, with the centre laser obviously firing straight ahead and either the other two doing the same (obviously they won't be in the centre as well ) or converging at a certain distance (say 2 or 3km).

That would work better with wider selection of wepons, for example, you're flying an Asp with, say, three forward hardpoints. You fit a mass-driver for long range artillery barrages (as mass driver round, while easier to dodge would travel almost infinitely through space without losing destructive potential), 1MW beam laser to deal with small fighters up close and personal, and 5MW or 30MW pulse to pierce large ship's hull at short range. Of course, you could mount several identical beam lasers (game would automatically treat them as single weapon) for improved damage (and heat ) output or multiple identical pulse lasers for improved rate of fire. There could be many different kinds of weapons - relatively compact (heavy fighter mountable) plasma pulse weapons firing magnetically contained plasma projectiles that move relatively slowly and dissipate quickly, but do alot of damage to unshielded targets; EMP weapons not doing physical damage, but stunning systems and knocking down shields; various mass drivers; flak cannons firing shells bursting into clouds of small particles damaging fast moving targets; terrible antimatter accelerators carryable only by the largest ships that would produce nuclear-scale explosion upon hitting an unshielded target outside the atmosphere (in the atmosphere the gun would explode itself); etc.

Also, number of forward weapon mounts should depend on ship's type.

I'm not too sure if I would want to have the crew firing weapons as well; knowing me I'd end up expecting them to to better than the miniscule damage they inflicted on the other ship and end up sacking them!

Is it better to have them rumaging through your cargo hold in search for that last container with famous bourbon from Epsilon Indii, while you're trying to simultaneously fly the ship and fend off overwhelming horde of pirates using turrets?

I'd like there to be some better missiles too - playing FFE if you come up against an pirate Imp Courier, an NN500 doesn't do that much damage and my 4MW beam doesn't kill him quick enough - that's my excuse anyway!

I'd opt for more diverse selection of missiles. It'd be fun to have various missiles with different acceleration, maneuverablility, fuel supply and payload. For example, fast, but not particularily maneuverable long range missiles; small, fast, maneuverable missiles with large area of effect, but rather weak proximity triggered warhead and limited range (against small fighters); slow and sluggish torpedos with contact payload that does tremendous damage over a small area; multi-warhead missiles; rocket-packs containing multiple small rockets; etc.

There was a good idea posted earlier (I've forgotten who and this thread is too big to go searching so credit to whoever) about being able to make pirates/other ships trade for their lives - either taking their cargo or keeping them as slaves to sell. Anything to get rid of that awful "ha ha" to my "Surrender or die" message when they've got no drive and a hull of 2.3%!

That'd be me. I appreciate black humour, but it too should have it's limits.

Hard drives are getting bigger and bigger so I'm sure we'd all have space to save an ever increasing universe.

All it would take is single bit per system determining whether the information about this system should be visible.

 

[Glyndo]

That would work better with wider selection of wepons

Agreed. I was just using the three lasers as an example. Like the idea of an artillery barrage, especially for military missions

Also, number of forward weapon mounts should depend on ship's type.

Definitely - a trading ship shouldn't really have the same weapon potential as a figher, but compensate by being able to fit extremely powerful single weapons.

Is it better to have them rumaging through your cargo hold in search for that last container with famous bourbon from Epsilon Indii, while you're trying to simultaneously fly the ship and fend off overwhelming horde of pirates using turrets?

To me, yes! If you're gonna die, do it in style!

All it would take is single bit per system determining whether the information about this system should be visible.

Not sure if it's that simple. If the game is deciding whether to show the info, it already has to be saved onto disc, either the game disc or HDD. Depending on the size of the universe in E4, it could be a lot of systems designated "invisible" - that could be a lot of space. I'm sure DB and the team have a novel way of storing that info; FFE had info on loads of systems and that wasn't exactly a big game!

 

[DraQ]

Hmm... How about enchanced hyperspace targeting upgrade that would allow you to pick the star (in multiple systems) relative to which an exit point would be calculated. Being able to emerge 10AU from Proxima Centauri, rather than 10AU from Alpha Centauri A-B barycenter and 950AU from Proxima would be a real lifesaver in some circumstances. Of course being able to target your hyperdrive with too much precision would be too easy, but picking a star or component binary system's barycenter seems ok.

Not sure if it's that simple. If the game is deciding whether to show the info, it already has to be saved onto disc, either the game disc or HDD.

The only problem would be indexing system. Frontier doesn't hold all the information on HDD AFAIK, it generates system on the fly in predictable (so they are always the same), if pseudorandom manner. So, the only thing to do is finding a way to index the systems then flip the appropriate bit if system was already visited by you. Of course there would still be problems, as, at least in theory (no one would ever visit all the systems) the file storing the visibility data for all the systems could grow to gigabytes in size. I like my saves smaller.

 

[Steve O B Have]

I'd be surprised if Frontier were approaching the system info solution in a similar manner to the previous Elite games - I'm not so sure I'd be entirely happy with a similar level of depth in planetary systems as FFE and FE2. They now have the space (excuse the pun) to expand on the information within systems i.e. comets and asteroid belts and also the ever expanding cities and space stations contained within the game. It would be cool for a planets rings to resolve into ice particles/rocks and be mineable for water and rare minerals.

FE2 and FFE were extremely rich environments for their time but we're quite a few years down the line now and I suspect David and his team are looking at something that far exceeds the expectation set by E1,2 and 3.

 

[Steve]

Agreed, I've always found it strange that the police think you deserve to die just because you disobeyed ATC!! A system where they stop and board you for less serious offences could lead to a short (or long) stretch in jail?

Me, I'd be inclined to engage hyperspace and get away from the cops. Ultimately, if you never surrender to them and keep getting away, they might be forced to take you out.

 

[DraQ]

I'd be surprised if Frontier were approaching the system info solution in a similar manner to the previous Elite games - I'm not so sure I'd be entirely happy with a similar level of depth in planetary systems as FFE and FE2. They now have the space (excuse the pun) to expand on the information within systems i.e.

Umm... No they don't. At least not if the universe is going to be comparable to the one in Frontier. I estimated that a file keeping only a single bit for every system in frontier could be several gigs in size. It's not half bad though, as we now have cycles to waste on procedural generation. I think that using old procedural generation alogrithm from Frontier to make the canvas (perhaps sprinkle the galaxy with some more interesting systems like working contact binaries) for handmade (Sol and some handcoded systems) and procedurally generated details would be the best approach and it should allow for all the stuff you detailed later in your post (for example, rings are already present in FE2/FFE, just make them swarms of small bodies and use their temperature - calculated similarily the temperature of panets, except without making correction for atmosphere, to determine the material they are made of).

 

[Steve O B Have]

Umm... No they don't. At least not if the universe is going to be comparable to the one in Frontier. I estimated that a file keeping only a single bit for every system in frontier could be several gigs in size.

What are you basing this on? If there is going to be some level of exploration and discovery and the possibility of a living breathing system there has to be more that one bit per system. If there were only one bit per system then surely each of the systems would be static in their nature right up into the point that you depart the system. The moment you come back there has to be more info stating the contents of the system, i.e. moons, planets and sun/suns. Surely they will be looking at a significantly larger linear system presentation like you say in the form of hand coded systems.

I agree there has to be a majority of proceedurally generated systems but I would say that the depth of the generation is going to be significantly more indepth. What I am curious about is whether it will be done per install or before hand in the lab and then distributed.

 

[VR jefranklin18]

What are you basing this on? If there is going to be some level of exploration and discovery and the possibility of a living breathing system there has to be more that one bit per system. If there were only one bit per system then surely each of the systems would be static in their nature right up into the point that you depart the system. The moment you come back there has to be more info stating the contents of the system, i.e. moons, planets and sun/suns. Surely they will be looking at a significantly larger linear system presentation like you say in the form of hand coded systems.

I agree there has to be a majority of proceedurally generated systems but I would say that the depth of the generation is going to be significantly more indepth. What I am curious about is whether it will be done per install or before hand in the lab and then distributed.

Long time no post for me, although I do occasionally lurk here.

I would expect there to be a combination of technologies used. Viz:

• Procedurally-generated systems as per the original Elite
• Procedurally-generated terrains as per Frontier and FFE
• Procedurally generated cities/towns - I recall reading a paper on the 'net about doing it and would expect Frontier to be able to do something similar
• Fractal mathematics for the rings around the planets, thus when you fly closer to them they start to show themselves as being constituted of individual rocks
• Fractal mathematics maybe used for the terrain as well (I recall there was a game in the 8 bit days, which was one of Lucasarts' first where you flew of a fractally-generated landscape rescuing stricken pilots on an alien world
• "Evolution" to be handled using the system date of the machine being played. Thus, every couple of months or so (IRL) a new building may appear, every year a system in a state of anarchy stabilises (or vice versa) and maybe every couple of years the coastline on a planet may (slightly) change due to erosion.

Of course, I may have completely missed the point that you were discussing but I thought I would share

 

[Steve O B Have]

No that's pretty much what I was talking about. There has to be much more information per system than a single bit. I'm guessing the real complication occurs when you make the game multi player as the networked clients are going to have to share the discovery information and then decide which one takes precedence over the others.

 

[DraQ]

What are you basing this on? If there is going to be some level of exploration and discovery and the possibility of a living breathing system there has to be more that one bit per system.

I said that for about 10,000,000,000 systems (reasonable estimate for FE2) file storing only a single bit of data for each system would take over one gig. Multiply according to your estimate of reasonable nuber of information per system. I don't have a Panther Clipper to store my E4 discs in anyway.

The moment you come back there has to be more info stating the contents of the system, i.e. moons, planets and sun/suns.

Aha, wrong. You don't need all this. You only have to ensure that the system is pseudorandomly generated in a way, that uses the same seed, so it's the same system you've seen for the first time (of course, Braben needs to do his voodoo to make the algorithm yield astronomically correct systems). Since planetary movement is predictible, you can then determine the 'astronomical' state of the system at any moment without having to store the data anywhere. Now, since the initial 'astronomical' state determines most things about the system, like temperatures, atmospheres, life, etc. as well as can be used as source of seeds for procedural generation of things like vegetation and geography, you can have your detailed systems without storing them anywhere. How do you think Braben managed to fit whole galaxy on a 3.5" floppy?

I agree there has to be a majority of proceedurally generated systems but I would say that the depth of the generation is going to be significantly more indepth. What I am curious about is whether it will be done per install or before hand in the lab and then distributed.

If good people at Frontier Developements stick to the Frontier's way, it will be done mostly per entering system or a cluster of systems, but using deterministic algorithm so that results, at least in astronomical scale, will always be the same.

No that's pretty much what I was talking about. There has to be much more information per system than a single bit. I'm guessing the real complication occurs when you make the game multi player as the networked clients are going to have to share the discovery information and then decide which one takes precedence over the others.

I'm not concerned about MMO aspect. Core Frontier mechanics is unconductive to MMO, while abandoning the core Frontier mechanics is unconductive to game being a true sequel and successor. Why should I bother with Elite 4 in name only?

 

[{SAS}Stalker]

I would like to see the ability for clans / guilds /groups or what ever you want to call them have the option to host their own systems / sectors along side the official ones.

It would work pretty much like a standard multiplayer game browser works at the moment, IE you activate your hyperspace drive / jumpgate and up pops an in game browser showing you all the servers (systems). Player numbers would obviously be controlled within these areas in much the same way they are controlled now (think COD4 / BF2 / CSS / ETQW etc etc) but you would be given the opportunity to join a queuing system if so wish (if system was full). Its been proven by BF2 that persistent stats and assets can be controlled in this manner also with the “ranked” server provider partnership.

Would love to have a clan controlled system, could be run in anyway you want and would promote sporadic faction warring. Also the system could continue to function even when empty.

I just see so many opportunities available in this way, you could still buy from one server and sell in another and it would create a localised dynamic economy based on what each groups targets and aspiration were, add in an in game forum / bulletin board and it would be perfect (for me anyway).

Anyway that’s it, apologies if this has already been suggested, didn’t have time to closely read the whole thread.

 

[The Space Pirate]

I would like to see the ability for clans / guilds /groups or what ever you want to call them have the option to host their own systems / sectors along side the official ones.

It would work pretty much like a standard multiplayer game browser works at the moment, IE you activate your hyperspace drive / jumpgate and up pops an in game browser showing you all the servers (systems). Player numbers would obviously be controlled within these areas in much the same way they are controlled now (think COD4 / BF2 / CSS / ETQW etc etc) but you would be given the opportunity to join a queuing system if so wish (if system was full). Its been proven by BF2 that persistent stats and assets can be controlled in this manner also with the “ranked” server provider partnership.

Would love to have a clan controlled system, could be run in anyway you want and would promote sporadic faction warring. Also the system could continue to function even when empty.

I just see so many opportunities available in this way, you could still buy from one server and sell in another and it would create a localised dynamic economy based on what each groups targets and aspiration were, add in an in game forum / bulletin board and it would be perfect (for me anyway).

Anyway that’s it, apologies if this has already been suggested, didn’t have time to closely read the whole thread.

All sounds good, as long as they don't neglect singleplayer. In my view, they should focus mainly on singleplayer while providing good multiplayer as well. Welcome to the forums by the way!

 

[Glyndo]

All sounds good, as long as they don't neglect singleplayer. In my view, they should focus mainly on singleplayer while providing good multiplayer as well. Welcome to the forums by the way!

I think that's the general consensus on here. Every one of the Elite series of games has been single-player; I don't think DB and the rest of the team are going to change the entire structure of the game and have multiplayer first. Well, I hope not!

 

[Steve O B Have]

Had another idea.

Remembering that some of the space stations in Frontier E2 and FFE had names like Asimov and Ridley Scott and the like. I think it would be cool to have a roster or similar where we could get one named after ourselves - O B Have Space Casino or T.J. Mining base, Turwhitt's Trading Bazar etc... Be a fun way to promote the game as well. I'm sure a few people would buy the game only to go find themselves (excuse the horrible pun).

 

[Glyndo]

Had another idea.

Remembering that some of the space stations in Frontier E2 and FFE had names like Asimov and Ridley Scott and the like. I think it would be cool to have a roster or similar where we could get one named after ourselves - O B Have Space Casino or T.J. Mining base, Turwhitt's Trading Bazar etc... Be a fun way to promote the game as well. I'm sure a few people would buy the game only to go find themselves (excuse the horrible pun).

Great idea! It would be nice if they rewarded all the people patiently waiting for E4 (cough cough) by naming systems after them! Don't tell us the co-ordinates though; make us find them ourselves!

 

[DrBaggy]

Great idea! It would be nice if they rewarded all the people patiently waiting for E4 (cough cough) by naming systems after them! Don't tell us the co-ordinates though; make us find them ourselves!

Agreed! And for those of us who remember FFE, how about a black hole called "Gametek" (should send the lawyers running!)

 

[Sir.Tj]

Agreed! And for those of us who remember FFE, how about a black hole called "Gametek" (should send the lawyers running!)

That's just had me spitting tea over my keyboard!

 

[Alien]

Had another idea.

Remembering that some of the space stations in Frontier E2 and FFE had names like Asimov and Ridley Scott and the like. I think it would be cool to have a roster or similar where we could get one named after ourselves - O B Have Space Casino or T.J. Mining base, Turwhitt's Trading Bazar etc... Be a fun way to promote the game as well. I'm sure a few people would buy the game only to go find themselves (excuse the horrible pun).

Any ideas for something named after Alien? (as in me not the films!)

 

[Alien]

I thought of one..

Alien's Pet Store

I could sell you a very nice pet called a Tribble
Or maybe you'd be interested in this one called Gizmo