Tenuous Atmospheres: How Will They Work...?

I keep reading that SC is rubbish, but then I see a post like this and think, "Well that sounds cool to me!" So which is it?


It's Schrodinger's scat ;)

As mentioned, the stuff he said there that 'they already do', is stuff that is slated for 3.10.

3.10 isn't out yet. (It's with 'Evocati' at the moment, the small sub-set of closed door testers).

Some might say it's worth waiting until it is at least out in a public alpha build before lauding it... ;)

---

But I don't want my thread to get closed over this pap, so head to the SC thread if y'all wanna discuss the pros and cons!

---

On Topic:

Anyone found an example of 'tenuous' in the system map info yet? 😄
 
The
Anyone found an example of 'tenuous' in the system map info yet? 😄

You won't find it. Pretty sure he used the word as a common adjective, not as a rigidly-bounded classification, which I believe currently doesn't exist in the game or outwith.

It'll just mean atmospheres below some arbitrary pressure threshold, on planets that don't additionally have any major unmodelled features (thin atmosphere water worlds and volcanic hell worlds will likely not be in, just as the rare, and likely bugged, "no atmosphere" water worlds are not accessible in Horizons).

It's a safe bet that all those little gas giant rocky and rocky-ice moons with 0.01 or 0.02% atmospheric pressure will be in, but without knowing where the cutoff at the high end is, it's hard to point to anything else and say "that's definitely an Odyssey world".
 
The


You won't find it. Pretty sure he used the word as a common adjective, not as a rigidly-bounded classification, which I believe currently doesn't exist in the game or outwith.

It'll just mean atmospheres below some arbitrary pressure threshold, on planets that don't additionally have any major unmodelled features (thin atmosphere water worlds and volcanic hell worlds will likely not be in, just as the rare, and likely bugged, "no atmosphere" water worlds are not accessible in Horizons).

It's a safe bet that all those little gas giant rocky and rocky-ice moons with 0.01 or 0.02% atmospheric pressure will be in, but without knowing where the cutoff at the high end is, it's hard to point to anything else and say "that's definitely an Odyssey world".


Yep that's what I'm leaning towards.

Think I'm going to dig more into the 'thin atmosphere' definition in the journal, given that it's an existing 'backend' definition in the game already. If someone can figure out a way to comb EDSM then we could get the upper and lower ranges of the 'thin' planets at least. And spot any other novel aspects to them. (Like say, worlds with greater ammonia content, for example, which might harbour new Tharg bases. Stuff like that ;))
 
Yep that's what I'm leaning towards.

Think I'm going to dig more into the 'thin atmosphere' definition in the journal, given that it's an existing 'backend' definition in the game already. If someone can figure out a way to comb EDSM then we could get the upper and lower ranges of the 'thin' planets at least. And spot any other novel aspects to them. (Like say, worlds with greater ammonia content, for example, which might harbour new Tharg bases. Stuff like that ;))

That's a good point, I had previously noticed those classifications on EDSM but it slipped my mind, and I agree, the new access might very well map (roughly?) to that class of planets.

But is the thin/thick descriptor an internal classification of FDev's, or is it EDSM/ED Discovery's assessment of the raw data from the game? I think it probably is from the game itself (behind the scenes), but something worth checking nevertheless.

One observation I would make is that these thin atmosphere planets seem to be a lot less common than the zero-atmosphere (and zero-ish atmosphere) Horizons worlds. I mean, it's a big galaxy, so there's still billions of them, but they're a bit less ubiquitous.

I'm saying this with any statistical proof backing up my words, so take with a pinch of salt, but (those just-barely-too-thicc-for-Horizons moons aside) I seem to see an awful lot more of planets with absurdly high surface pressures in the thousands and hundreds of thousands of atmospheres, and planets with no atmosphere at all, than I do of thin or even normal atmosphere worlds.
 
Last edited:
Dusk:

Dusk.jpg



Now THIS is a "tenuous" atmosphere!
Tenuous.jpg


Unfortunately none of this just happens - it requires a lot of staging. But still, it shows that Frontier could give us some nicely-colored skyboxes in VR (where these shots were taken), and considering how much people pay for colored paintjobs they normally don't see, I'd pay for some colored skyboxes that just happen naturally!
 
That's a good point, I had previously noticed those classifications on EDSM but it slipped my mind, and I agree, the new access might very well map (roughly?) to that class of planets.

But is the thin/thick descriptor an internal classification of FDev's, or is it EDSM/ED Discovery's assessment of the raw data from the game? I think it probably is from the game itself (behind the scenes), but something worth checking nevertheless.

One observation I would make is that these thin atmosphere planets see to be a lot less common than the zero-atmosphere (and zero-ish atmosphere) Horizons worlds. I mean, it's a big galaxy, so there's still billions of them, but they're a bit less ubiquitous


It seems to be an a category within the game, revealed by the Journal API (designed to help 3rd party tools etc). I'm presuming that EDSM is built using that info. See the exchange here with Sapyx

Yeah I'm definitely seeing fewer of them per system, based on my random dives through EDSM. But I guess if they're worth the visit, we'll seek them out. (Either because they've got unique stuff to do or experience on them, or because doing stuff there would just be cooler ;))
 
It seems to be an a category within the game, revealed by the Journal API (designed to help 3rd party tools etc). I'm presuming that EDSM is built using that info. See the exchange here with Sapyx

Yeah I'm definitely seeing fewer of them per system, based on my random dives through EDSM. But I guess if they're worth the visit, we'll seek them out. (Either because they've got unique stuff to do or experience on them, or because doing stuff there would just be cooler ;))

Yeah, I would expect there to be a higher number of bases and structures to interact with on the new worlds. In lore, because a base in a thin atmosphere is marginally easier to construct and maintain than one in hard vacuum. In reality because FDev will hopefully be trying to give us reasons to go there. Something they didn't quite get right with Horizons.

As an aside, hopefully, the fluff-talk of ships, SRVs and on-foot commanders concerging means we're finally getting stuff like planetary conflict zones, base defence, invasion, infiltration, espionage, etc. The conflict zones, at least, should have been there from 2.0. All those massive surfaces, and I can't remember the last time I fired a shot in anger down there, and the NPCs won't make use of canyons or terrain at all.
 
Yep that's what I'm leaning towards.

Think I'm going to dig more into the 'thin atmosphere' definition in the journal, given that it's an existing 'backend' definition in the game already. If someone can figure out a way to comb EDSM then we could get the upper and lower ranges of the 'thin' planets at least. And spot any other novel aspects to them. (Like say, worlds with greater ammonia content, for example, which might harbour new Tharg bases. Stuff like that ;))
If you want to see the planets I think will be landable, have a look at the two currently non-landable planets in Shinrarta, A2 and A3 I think. They are basically high metal content worlds with atmospheres, travel into the exclusion zones and the landscape looks similar to our current landable planets but with atmospheres, one quite a thin blue one a deeper yellow/red. No clouds of water etc.
 
If you want to see the planets I think will be landable, have a look at the two currently non-landable planets in Shinrarta, A2 and A3 I think. They are basically high metal content worlds with atmospheres, travel into the exclusion zones and the landscape looks similar to our current landable planets but with atmospheres, one quite a thin blue one a deeper yellow/red. No clouds of water etc.


Hah, as chance would have it, Shinrata was one of the systems I dipped into looking for the 'thin' designation.😄

A2 is indeed set to 'thin'!

Shinrarta Dezhra A 2

Surface pressure: 0.04223438 Atmospheres
Atmosphere: Hot thin Carbon dioxide
Atmosphere composition:
83.82% Carbon dioxide
16.18% Sulphur dioxide


The other two thins were:

AB 2 g (100% argon, 82% ice) & AB 2 f (same)

EDIT: A3 is a 'thick' designation. We don’t get that until 2028 ;)
 
If you're talking about my post a while back, it seems I was mistaken. I thought I had seen that for planets with very low atmospheric pressure, but I've gone back to check today and, at least currently, those worlds are listed as "Surface Pressure: 0.00 atm".

Ah ok cool. Yeah they could have juggled the terminology in prep for Odyssey maybe.
 
Hah, as chance would have it, Shinrata was one of the systems I dipped into looking for the 'thin' designation.😄

A2 is indeed set to 'thin'!




The other two thins were:

AB 2 g (100% argon, 82% ice) & AB 2 f (same)

EDIT: A3 is a 'thick' designation. We don’t get that until 2028 ;)

AB2g has a surface pressure of 704.545149 pascals, which is a bit more than 7 times the current landable pressure. Current landable cutoff is 99.99 pascals.

I am in the process of getting data related to the "Thin" designation and seeing where the lower bound is for that.
 
Another interesting data point that I noticed trawling through some "0.00 atm" worlds I'd found. Consider Gliese 9142. Moon 12 d displays that way in the system map, and in EDSM is recorded at 0.00121966 atm (123.6 Pa) and "Thin Ammonia" atmosphere. So far, as expected.

However, moons 9b, 10b, and 12b all also read "0.00 atmospheres" in-game, and are not landable, but have no pressure listed in EDSM. Perhaps not coincidentally, all three are "Sulpher Dioxide" atmosphere type with various types of volcanism - basically Io analogues.
 
But you can decrease their max output to, like, 20% - and suddenly all ships in SC will handle very similarly to ED
Where is this option? Do you have a screenshot of which panel and which setting? I fly in SC since years but I admit I've never look deep into the system panels
 
Just trying to land but there's a sandstorm over the target port. Visibility is zero. Turning night vision on is better but still a lot of white noise. The ship gets pushed and shoved around by 500 km/h gust. The autopilot refuses service. There's the choice to make: Abort landing and wait for the sandstorm to pass in orbit and forgo the time bonus or risk your ship and land.

Now that is gameplay.
I like it, but I expect an army of cry-babies that couldn't achieve their cr/hours rate because of the storm :ROFLMAO:
 
I keep reading that SC is rubbish, but then I see a post like this and think, "Well that sounds cool to me!" So which is it?
Star Citizen has an insane level of details. It's far beyond Elite Dangerous in many aspects (you can also see the graphic quality of planets in the Odyssey vs. The Verse trailer, see below -both ar alpha after all).
You can walk inside all ships, all starports, explore abandoned assets in zero g, seamless transition from artificial gravity in ships to zero G outside when in space.
You can offer/request hitch ride to other players (these can be real missions where the other player pays you)
The planets have got several biomes and atmosphere types: hot/cold, extremely h/c, tenuous, habitable, thick fogg etc.
There are certain landing pads on microTECH where you need to fly through the city's skycrapers to approach and land (as seen on Coruscant).
Everything is seamless, there's not a single transition. Everything happens in real time. Even when you are inside the elevators you can see your ship marker moving around you.

But it still terribly lacks of gameplay and it's full of game breaking bugs . There are only few type of missions to play with since years and there's nothing to do in "the verse" (the open world). The Quantum travel also is boring because you have no control of your ship (it goes straight to destination) and if you try to walk around during the travel there are high chances that you clip through the ship and you are left behind, so you have to kill yourself and restart from the bed in the nearest starport.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8l-E3uCF6w&feature=emb_logo
 
And of course no possibility to walk across ship/check missions during supercruising.
Wrong. You have full control of every side panels.
Sur you can sit up, but apart from counting the polycount and enjoying the textures this is pretty absurdly useless. And let's not forget the ships that won't have much place to wander around and/or won't have meaningful "gameplay" attached to them. I prefer being stuck but still be in charge of my ship.
 

Viajero

Volunteer Moderator
Let's compare currently existing gameplay activities in SC and ED:

1) Trading: (including in-game trading App, including possibility to send credits to other players).
- In both games the process is the same. The only difference is that in SC there is in-game trading App, including possibility to send credits to other players. But bugs are more frequent still. Kinda "on par".

2) Mining:
- In ED only in-space activity, with for variations which differe only by type of QTE minigames (lasers, abrasion blasters, SSM, seismic charges).
- In SC can occur in space (both from ship and via EVA), on planet surfaces (again, from ship and via EVA), in caves on legs. But process is represented by only two QTE minigames.
Week ago i'd say "on par", but... yesterday the thing, about which CMDRs were dreaming all these years, was introduced in SC - wheeled vehicle with manipulator arm for medium-sized deposits mining on planets surfaces, which fits into cargoholds of medium ships.
e4O3zrd.jpg

So, ED is "behind", at least until we will get (will we?) mining SRVs in Odyssey.

3) PVE combat pew-pew missions.
- ED is ahead for ship-to-ship combat due to lack of balance and unfinished damage model in SC yet.
- But on the contrary, there is no combative ships boarding in ED, no seamless switching from ship-to-ship to FPS gun / hand-combat. Part of this will appear in ED with Odyssey, but only on planets. Without boarding / shooting inside ships, without ships hijacking.
Also, ED still lacks any ship-to-ship combat conditions except open space. In SC, combat in atmosphere introduces significant differentiation to ships.
xrRoxjx.jpg
(blue lines are lift forces, red lines are drag forces, affecting the ship at the moment).
Well, let's say "on par" on the average.

4) PVE delivery missions.
- In ED source/destination are always clones of the same space station or surface port, only colors differ a bit due to star light. Process is very monotonuous, without any variations - you just get line of text about goods in cargo, undock, jump, fly, dock. Maximum variety is an accidental NPC interdiction attempt.
- In SC each destination is visually unique, highly detailed and semi-hand-crafted. In gameplay terms there is also much more variety in SC, for example you can land your ship a bit awkwardly, so you'll not be able to get / jump onto the ramp because it's too high above the ground, and will need to do some trick to get into ship, like place a few boxes to jump onto ramp from them.
All in all, ED is behind.

5) PVE "investigation" missions.
- In ED you are asked to fly to the marker, pickup blackbox, fedex it back. Again, very monotonously.
- In SC there are following variations for these missions:
Fly to crashsite (sometimes on planet surface, sometimes in space), EVA from ship, and
- search among derbis / parts of ship hull for crew bodies, to identify them
- find blackbox, bring it to your ship, fedex it to contractor
Navigate to some Cave, go into it, and locate missing human in it (simulatneously you can do some hand mining, meet other players who are mining, or bounty hunting, etc)
All in all, ED is a bit behind here.

6) PVE "blackops" missions.
- In ED you are asked to: interdict NPC ship attack it and steal goods, or scan beacon in the settlement using SRV, or disable power generator / kill drones in settlement
- In SC you are asked to: assault the bunker blow away or evade its air defence go inside and kill NPC in FPS combat, or interdict NPC ship kill escort in ship-to-ship combat then board interdicted ship, go inside and kill targets / free hostages / free prisoners
Currently, to my mind, on par.

7) PVP.
- In ED you can go to Open, and get ganked, or try to gank somebody, in just a few "populated" systems like SD. Your foe can combat-log, can switch to Solo, and except 3-5 "populated" systems, the chances to meet other player are negligible. PVP is limited to ship-to-ship combat, you cannot kill Cutter owner before his shields go down :)
- In SC you can:
Just try to gank random players
Take missions to bounty hunt players with crimestat (then you even get marker to their location)
Take missions to assassinate lawful players if you have max crimestat (again, you get marker to location of player)
Rob other players, for example miners or traders (but remember - you get crimestat and play bountyhunters will come after you)
PVP is all-way, you can kill owner of that big dreadful ship just with a single gunshot, when it goes away from his ship ramp :)
You can even knockout player in safe zone, and drag him out to your ship and kidnap, for example
0CEBQCL.jpg

ED is far behind here.

8) Crime and punishment.
- In ED there are just ATR ships in some systems (which still cannot prevent griefing/ganking), negligible payout which criminal player must pay when he dies (yes, negligible, show me PVPer with Cutter, who doesn't have 10-15 billions "just for expenses"). Also, upon death, criminal player is teleported to detention center, which means that he has to waste 5-10 minutes on getting from it back to his ship. There is no gameplay at all in getting from detention center - just jump-jump-ump.
- In SC there is PRISON, to which criminal player gets when he dies. In Prison, criminal player has to stay, depending on number/severity of crimes, for Hours or even Days of REAL time, if he does this in offline/AFK. But he can shorten this time drastically - down to 1-3 hours, if he will Work Grind in the prison to redeem his guilt. Really, he can mine rocks in prison mines hardly, and donate it to prison complex for free, thus significantly decreasing imprisonment time. But it will still take at least 15 - 120 minutes depending on crimes. And of course he can try to escape... If he has friends outside with ship, who are ready to put at risk their ship, and their freedom.
And what is the most interesting - in the ED, despite all those ATRs, detention centers, etc - griefers and gankers still freely kill lawful players just "for fun" anywhere they want in Open. So crime and punishment mechanics in ED is still total failure. It doesn't work.
In SC, the Prison works great! All the griefing, pad ramming, killing "for fun" - everything just vanished in thin air completely! I can freely and safely fly outside of no-fire zones in noobship around some tough guy player, who could evaporate me with single shot. And he does NOT do it. Just because that 5-seconds "fun" doesn't worth hours in prison. But he still goes with his thug life, doing for example lawful players assassination missions. Because those have fun, profit and RP which balances risk of imprisonment.

So, in terms of crime and punishment mechanics, ED is far, far behind SC even right now.


Finally, all in all, in gameplay terms, even with the current single system, SC is a bit ahead of ED atm.



Only during free flight weeks, or if you have weak hardware. With good hardware, even in-game bugs like clipping are very seldom, like one per 3-4 hours of gameplay. Crashes are once per few days.


Quantum travel in SC is brief - 5-6 minutes at max for longest routes, and during it player can walk across the ship (without any issues, see above about clipping bugs), browse/sort/accept contracts, or just go AFK for a few minutes to "strain legs" (c). Ship will arrive the destination and stop on its own.
On the contrary, in ED player HAS to sit and wait during whole supercruise flight time (which can often go far beyond 5 minutes), staring into blackness. Because destination can be obscured for supercruise assistant, because ship can be interdicted and killed by TASTY CARGO, because if player enables supercruise assistant then flight time doubles... And of course no possibility to walk across ship/check missions during supercruising.

And did i mention beauty and details? :)
t2RUk1U.jpg
There is so much in this post that is either plain wrong, incomplete / cherrypicked or just personal anecdotal opinion that not sure it is worth at all to try to address in any reasonable manner to be honest 🤷‍♂️
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom