Hidden Fold out wings for atmospheric flight - is Fdev holding out on us?

Boff'in

Boff'in
I've had a hunch, a gut feeling for some time now.
The Adders has a few animations,
It has wings that fold down for atmospheric flight it had a sidewise ramp which once animated down with the landing gear (but alas no more).
But I have it in the back of my mind, "hidden animations or features for Atmospheric landings and space legs".

One or two of the ships, look like they have extra superfluous hull designs that resemble wings as they appear to be panelling that sticks out and don't contribute much.

For example, the DBX was a late addition to the game and didn't fall foul of the ships which were available at launch (like the adder and annaconda's damage model) that might have had an animation or two extra than the game could really use at that point.




latest

Like the top two panels that follow from the centre of the DBX to the tail, could actually swing down to make proper wings.

But since most ships have wings already I sort of just forgot about that.

Until the last year.
Well, I had to replace my Adder, with a Krait Phantom for some guardian resource collection and long distance void opal gathering,
and I started to admire that it too had some features that seemed like they had potential.
Both Kraits have two flat panels that extend back for some vertical thrusters. It feels like since the majority of the ship's weight is further ahead so it might be some energy-efficient balancing act that no other ship has or Fdev trying to mask their true importance.

latest

The sensor probes on either side of the main body of the ship at the extremities of the Ship also look like they could "retract" into themselves, and then fold neatly into the gap in the hull adjacent to them, making the vessel more aerodynamic.
latest


So what do you the community think?
Have I been staring at the lack of stars in the void between the spiral arms for too long?

Or can you also imagine (and get giddy) by each ship having a few hidden extra animations and features that fold out for atmospheric flight?
 

Nasc

N
I would love some hidden things for atmospheric flight without being limited by it (i.e. only ships with fold out wings can fly in atmospheres).
Then again, I'd quite like an extra reason to say "Hey guys, that Anaconda description, it says a Sidewinder fits aboard. Where's my atmospheric boat?" etc.
 

Deleted member 110222

D
Nasc said:
I would love some hidden things for atmospheric flight without being limited by it (i.e. only ships with fold out wings can fly in atmospheres).
Then again, I'd quite like an extra reason to say "Hey guys, that Anaconda description, it says a Sidewinder fits aboard. Where's my atmospheric boat?" etc.
Click to expand...
Anaconda description no longer says that. :)

Also this game's community clearly hasn't had much exposure to video games if they don't realise that most games have loads of text fluff intended solely to enrich the setting via lore: Not introduce gameplay.

Don't read the books in Elder Scrolls. You'd be driven mad.
 

VR SenseiMatty

VR SenseiMatty
David Braben always said that he wanted to have the game ready to implement things like legs and atmospheric planets since the beginning. That's we keep finding interesting teasing details in the game.
This doesn't mean that these things will come for sure though...
 

Deleted member 110222

D
Nasc said:
If so, that's a right kick in the fighter bay.
Click to expand...
Blame the community at large. They say they don't want "hand holding" but then need fluff text deleted just so they understand it was fluff text.

I play RPGs a lot so perhaps I'm just better equipped than most here to understand that it is unheard of for games to let you do everything in the lore.

Even tabletop RPGs, which have massively more gameplay features than any computer game... Still have lots of things players simply cannot do that NPCs/lore characters can.
 

Stealthie

Stealthie
Speaking as a fan of KSP, I'd love the opportunity to properly optimise a ship for atmospheric flight.

Trouble is, we've already got ship-kits that are purely cosmetic.
If we then add on proper aerodynamic surfaces, ships are going to end up looking a right mess.

From a lore perspective, it's plausible that ships fitted with shields wouldn't actually need physical aerodynamic surfaces.
Far more likely they'd simply reconfigure their shields into a shape that'd provide aerodynamic lift.

People moan that this won't work since shields deflect energy but they also deflect bullets and if they can deflect matter in the form of bullets they should be perfectly capable of deflecting matter in the form of atmospheric molecules in order to provide lift.

Let's face it, no amount of physical wings is going to turn something like a T7 or an FGS into a glider.
There's going to need to be some kind of handwavium applied to make it plausible.
 

Deleted member 110222

D
Stealthie said:
Speaking as a fan of KSP, I'd love the opportunity to properly optimise a ship for atmospheric flight.

Trouble is, we've already got ship-kits that are purely cosmetic.
If we then add on proper aerodynamic surfaces, ships are going to end up looking a right mess.

From a lore perspective, it's plausible that ships fitted with shields wouldn't actually need physical aerodynamic surfaces.
Far more likely they'd simply reconfigure their shields into a shape that'd provide aerodynamic lift.

People moan that this won't work since shields deflect energy but they also deflect bullets and if they can deflect matter in the form of bullets they should be perfectly capable of deflecting matter in the form of atmospheric molecules in order to provide lift.

Let's face it, no amount of physical wings is going to turn something like a T7 or an FGS into a glider.
There's going to need to be some kind of handwavium applied to make it plausible.
Click to expand...
Radical idea:

They might just deal with the fact it's a video game and have ships fly in-atmosphere the same way those Star Destroyers in Star Wars do: Artistic license.
 

Stealthie

Stealthie
Un1k0rn said:
Blame the community at large. They say they don't want "hand holding" but then need fluff text deleted just so they understand it was fluff text.

I play RPGs a lot so perhaps I'm just better equipped than most here to understand that it is unheard of for games to let you do everything in the lore.

Even tabletop RPGs, which have massively more gameplay features than any computer game... Still have lots of things players simply cannot do that NPCs/lore characters can.
Click to expand...

Trouble is, fluff text is fine as long as it doesn't create reasonable expectations in players.

When I read a book, in Skyrim, all about mythical Dwarven cities, I don't necessarily expect to find that stuff in game.
If, OTOH, I read a book that says Red Eagle's sword can kill a vampire with a single stroke then I'm damned-well going to expect Red Eagle's sword to do that when I swing it at a vampire.

Trouble is, a lot of the "fluff text" in ED does create a reasonable expectation in players.
You go to Dav's Hope and there's "fluff text" about problems with the mine... and yet there's no mine.
You read a Galnet article about an escaped robot going nuts on a planet surface... and yet there's no landable planet, let alone an escaped robot.

There's nothing wrong with "fluff text" but FDev need to get better at making it obvious that it is fluff text and not intended as a reference to something in-game.
 

Stealthie

Stealthie
Un1k0rn said:
Radical idea:

They might just deal with the fact it's a video game and have ships fly in-atmosphere the same way those Star Destroyers in Star Wars do: Artistic license.
Click to expand...

Star Destroyers don't use artistic license for atmospheric flight. They use Repulsorlifts.

See "handwavium" for further details.
 

Deleted member 110222

D
Stealthie said:
Trouble is, fluff text is fine as long as it doesn't create reasonable expectations in players.

When I read a book, in Skyrim, all about mythical Dwarven cities, I don't necessarily expect to find that stuff in game.
If, OTOH, I read a book that says Red Eagle's sword can kill a vampire with a single stroke then I'm damned-well going to expect Red Eagle's sword to do that when I swing it at a vampire.

Trouble is, a lot of the "fluff text" in ED does create a reasonable expectation in players.
You go to Dav's Hope and there's "fluff text" about problems with the mine... and yet there's no mine.
You read a Galnet article about an escaped robot going nuts on a planet surface... and yet there's no landable planet, let alone an escaped robot.

There's nothing wrong with "fluff text" but FDev need to get better at making it obvious that it is fluff text and not intended as a reference to something in-game.
Click to expand...
I still blame the players if I'm honest.

You're acting like Frontier is the only Dev that does this.

They really aren't.

Honestly a lot of people need to reel back their expectations. It's one of the reason games get so many complaints these days.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Deleted member 110222

D
Stealthie said:
Star Destroyers don't use artistic license for atmospheric flight. They use Repulsorlifts.

See "handwavium" for further details.
Click to expand...
So a fantasy invention that doesn't exist?

That's literally the definition lel
 

777Driver

777Driver
Stealthie said:
Let's face it, no amount of physical wings is going to turn something like a T7 or an FGS into a glider.
There's going to need to be some kind of handwavium applied to make it plausible.
Click to expand...

There is no special requirement for the ships in ED to fly within an atmosphere. Thrust is all that is needed, our ships have plenty of that. An engine-out situation is obviously different. All this talk of lifting bodies, aerodynamic designs etc.... None of that is needed, our ships don't even burn fuel based on thrust output, could happily hover in the atmosphere for days with non-essential modules shut down..

Aerodynamic lift is not a requirement.
 

Stealthie

Stealthie
777Driver said:
There is no special requirement for the ships in ED to fly within an atmosphere. Thrust is all that is needed, our ships have plenty of that. An engine-out situation is obviously different. All this talk of lifting bodies, aerodynamic designs etc.... None of that is needed, our ships don't even burn fuel based on thrust output, could happily hover in the atmosphere for days with non-essential modules shut down..

Aerodynamic lift is not a requirement.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah.

We're in a thread discussing spaceships with wings, though.

As you say, when it comes right down to it, aerodynamics really don't matter.
All that matters is gravity, and our ability to overcome it.
Since we can already do that - on planets with no atmosphere to provide aerodynamic assistance - aerodynamic aids are really just "sprinkles".

It might be nice if/when we get atmo' planets, FDev put a bit of effort into aerodynamics, though.
You're flying a "standard" T7 and it, basically, comes down through the atmosphere like the Nostromo did in Alien - engines screaming, systems overloading, warning sirens going off and the ship juddering and groaning under the strain.
You fit an "adaptive shield" which is, say, the equivalent of a bi-weave shield but with the ability to generate aero' lift, and things are considerably smoother.
Alternatively, you try the same thing in a Clipper and things are much, much smoother.

Might even be possible to create a bit of new gameplay by causing people to choose ships on the basis of how well they do in atmo' flight vs space flight, depending on where a CMDR plans on spending their time.
Maybe the FdL could turn out to be a bag of poop in atmo' flight (doubtful, given it's shape, but still...) and the smart atmo' PvPer will need to fly, say, a Clipper?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom