Interiors, why?

[rootsrat]

It's called an 'opinion', based on my experience of the past 4-5yrs of development from FD. I really would have thought you'd have encountered them before on the forum by now?


Here, if you're still struggling with the concept:-

noun: opinion; plural noun: opinio​

1. a view or judgement formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.​
   "that, in my opinion, is right"​

I have no problem with opinions as long as they are not stated as facts.

 

[Ydiss]

Understood, but the risk is with these new areas of the game - if we park the FPS aspects - is walking around ships and stations risks being a possibly very large development effort not only initially, but then going forwards too (ie: future developments may need to cater for it too). And if the risk is, like the misjudged Multicrew, these new developments prove of little interest/purpose/engagement to the vast majority of the community, are they a wise way to invest that development time.

Maybe I'm wrong, and walking around ships, and walking around stations, will not be a two hour novelty for the majority of the community. Maybe it's something you'll do regularly. And/or, maybe it's not a significant amount of development time, and it's only taking a small amount. Who knows at the moment... But put me down on the concerned list for these sort of developments! I think they risk being done because they sound sexy on paper/adverts... Just like Multicrew did.

Ignoring the possibility that multicrew isn't yet a complete concept (I'd say adding legs to the game in Odyssey is a really big prerequisite to enhancing that feature, because its initial iteration was too limited by what we can currently already do alone) and ignoring the potential for legs to open up synergies with that part of the game, we're getting Odyssey... We're getting legs. First person content is going to happen. Walking about in a varied list of locations (and shooting stuff and other things we don't yet know about) is going to happen.

I'd say to effectively write off the chance that we'd be able to walk from the outside of our ship to our cockpit seamlessly on the basis that it might require a lot of development time to hook everything together might be closing the door after the horse is bolted.

I agree with you that it needs to have compelling game play reasons to be worth the effort but we're about to get an entire paid for expansion that'll hopefully give us a whole bunch of new content that'll be the basis for just that.

Granted that quite a significant portion of this player base might not be excited about fps game play and I think the general apathy seen here is linked to that. I imagine no amount of suitable ship interior content will ever satisfy a player if all they want to do is fly space ships.

So there is that.

I'm really excited about it though. I love both genres and styles of play. So the idea that Odyssey will unlock a whole new way of playing this game is really exciting to me. That excitement just extends to as many complementary scenarios as I can think of because I see no reason for fdev to stop at tenuous atmospheres.

Once fps combat is locked down, it'll then just be a matter of expanding our play space. I'm struggling to see the negatives with that if I'm honest.

 

[sandkid]

I always find this question fascinating, OP, because it has been answered many times and yet is consistently ignored.

Including by FDev, who seem unable to read their own suggestion forums.

Gameplay for Ship Interiors (By Pilot Type)

Combat:

• Illegal boarding while docked: when docking at stations in anarchy or unstable (war / civil war status) stations, there is a chance for a 'boarding event' to occur on the ship. NPCs will spawn in ship interior and attempt to kill pilot and/or steal cargo/materials.
• Station Bounty: infiltrate a docked ship (NPC) and eliminate the crew or specified crew member.
• Hack Ship Databank: Disable the engines of and then board ship (NPC) to acquire data for mission giver. Eliminate or disable crew.
• SLF/SRV Smash & Grab: Disable the engines and then board ship (NPC), reach SLF / SRV bay and steal the vehicle - return to your ship, board with stolen asset, and return to mission giver. Requires empty hangar in player ship. Asset cannot be kept or redeployed once docked in own ship.

Trade

• Manually stack cargo to optimize space (mini-game), allowing for upwards of 25% gain in capacity. Engineering can install mechanisms to expedite the process.
• Conduct illicit trade deals on other ships (NPC), escort slaves from one ship to another (Combat / Trade hybrid), or smuggle cargo to/from ship (NPC) to/from your ship.
• Utilize EVA to carry sensitive/illicit cargo to designated zones on installations, stations, or ships (Delivery Mission).
• Utilize onboard synthesizer or other industrial hardware to craft/construct unique commodities to then sell.

Exploration

• Investigate the ruined hulks of doomed spacefarers on distant planets.
• Conduct in-depth analysis of promising planets, increasing chance of locating specific POI's the standard ship scanners cannot find.
• Augment the SRV and SLF to explore specific enviornments: change the chassis, rockets, and tires, calibrate sensors, or restock consumable exploration equipment.
• Enjoy and immerse yourself in the views of the galaxy from a window other than the one you've looked out for six years.
• Conduct ship repairs that automated systems, such as the AFMU and repair limpet, can't access (applies Trade and Combat, too)

Keep in mind...none of this requires multiplayer. I get it, people think ship-boarding and they assumed PvP.
Yes, that would be cool. No, that isn't remotely easy to develop.
But everything I just listed is possible and can be done.

There is plenty of gameplay opportunity for ship interiors. And plenty of different ships to provide 'different locales' and environments. There is no reason to not do ship interiors except that they require critical thinking and an imagination that goes beyond randomly-generated structures on a barren planet. Do I understand why FDev isn't doing them at launch? I do. I disagree with their analysis, but I understand. They shoot for low hanging fruit, always have and always will.

Multicrew is still broken.
CQC is still an underbaked feature.
Powerplay is still borked.
Passengers are still untouched since launch.

 

[Tyvolus]

Just a few questions respectfully to you people.

Why exactly do you want to walk around in your ships? In what way will it make everything better? Why wouldn’t you rather have new ships to pilot than have huge amounts of work sunk into making Doom Eternal level sized ship interiors?

Because, yeah it is a gigantic amount of work. I modelled a few military vehicles for work and it was a very long process. The longest I did took 6 months, it was a tank. It’s smaller than most cockpits in Elite.

Seriously just walking around will captivate your attention for a month and then you’ll stay glued to your seat like before, that’s my prediction because Ifail to see what it adds aside from a few wow moments.

geez I guess it’s more than a few questions but what the hell...

one example that comes to mind, is the fantasy MMO's I play...have player housing. you can set it up, customize it, and just chill in it on your gameplay downtime.

 

[Random Player]

Can DEV just focus on graphics and interesting planets? Even NMS gets that right, sort of, in a cartoony way. Real eye catching lakes of methane or volcanoes, or oceans. Snow, lakes, something other than ROCKS and canyons please. Something beautiful and not just the same awful planets would be enough for me. I don't want to have the same cheesy animation of leaving my chair and doing the SRV transition to walking on the planet. Waste of time, unless they offer really good play, with the ability to explore caves or something cool. But right now, I can't think of a larger waste of time and what I am sure is not only going to be a BIG disappointing experience, but probably totally break the game. Watch! Get ready for Odessy, anger and endless patches. Again, ED, you're NOT Star Citizen!

 

[Ydiss]

Can DEV just focus on graphics and interesting planets? Even NMS gets that right, sort of, in a cartoony way. Real eye catching lakes of methane or volcanoes, or oceans. Snow, lakes, something other than ROCKS and canyons please. Something beautiful and not just the same awful planets would be enough for me. I don't want to have the same cheesy animation of leaving my chair and doing the SRV transition to walking on the planet. Waste of time, unless they offer really good play, with the ability to explore caves or something cool. But right now, I can't think of a larger waste of time and what I am sure is not only going to be a BIG disappointing experience, but probably totally break the game. Watch! Get ready for Odessy, anger and endless patches. Again, ED, you're NOT Star Citizen!

I definitely want more planet types and I think we're not alone there. Still though, first person isn't something fdev just stole from SC...

 

[Random Player]

I definitely want more planet types and I think we're not alone there. Still though, first person isn't something fdev just stole from SC...

Even just new space scenery would be cool. The occasional Nova or actually seeing one star syphon off another would be cool. I want SEE stuff, not walk to a rock to scan some green texture that's supposed to be alien slime mold or whatever. Maybe, after 5 years, I've just gotten used to what I know and love. Yeah, Hyperspace jumps, when done for the 40th thousand time are getting stale, but pop me into a Black Hole that is actually sucking material off stars. Hell, add the ability to JUMP through wormholes and end up somewhere 30,000 LYs away. That would be cool. I just don't see walking around as what this game sim needs, when it needs SO much more already. Wow me FDEV, and maybe, they will. I hope

 

[DemiserofD]

You didn't read it very well then and missed the part where it said the act of boarding a ship disables the drives of said ship, preventing it from escaping, and hacking the cargo racks would transfer the full cargo of each rack to your ship instantly, which is an order of magnitude apart from slowly hatch breaking small volumes of cargo and then needing to scoop or collect them up. You also probably don't know that much about existing piracy mechanics if you think the proposal I made is no different to current piracy.

So, as promised, I said I would reply in full to you. I'm actually thinking of putting together a more detailed, wider scope suggestion out at some point but this is just piracy and bounty hunting. Just two reasons to combatively board a ship.

Boarding Ship Game Play Proposal

The proposals below are presented with some assumptions made, due to the lack of detail currently known about FD's FPS design. These assumptions (and logic behind each) are:

• Commanders don't actually die if attacked via FPS combat. It's a reasonable assumption to make given the existing ship death approach of ship vs ship (hereby refered to as SVS).
  • The assumption made is that commander "death", in combat or otherwise, will be handled as "suit death", where the integrity of the commander's suit reduces zero. Hereby, this will be simply refered to as player death, to avoid complication.
  • A further assumption will be that player death will result in a similar process to ship death (it may be that player death on a planet might result in relocation to a medical facility at the nearest star port or settlement but, for the purposes of this design proposal, this isn't particularly important). So, for the purposes of this proposal, player death will result in loss of ship and rebuy.
• FPS combat will include a non-lethal option. This is pure speculation on my part but I base it on the existance of non-lethal weaponry in the game (as a commodity).
  • Non-lethal combat, hereby refered to as Less than lethal (LTL), would enable an alternative to the current single solution of death as a combative mechanic. It would open up a whole new game play style of play that would allow for greater rewards for a greater challenge. That is, taking your target alive.
  • To enable this approach, suits are assumed to have both armour integrity (like a ship's armour integrity, which will result in player death when it hits 0%) and also energy level (which is also measured by a %).
  • When a suit reaches 0% energy, it'll be temporarily disabled, preventing the player from moving for a limited period of time.
  • Suits have a defense mechanism that will trigger in this case. Once the suit regains power from its backup source, a large surge in power will prevent any further egergy loss from LTL attacks for a period of time.
  • This essentially acts as the "stun lock" prevention function. Players can "stun" a target with LTL but only once per x seconds (subject to testing and balance).
  • It's possible that suits could be upgraded to enhance energy defence in contrast to armour integrity (pirates may choose this option for example, more on this below).
• Multicrew allows up to 4 crew (player or NPC) to assist with aggressive boarding events. I'm not 100% sure what multicrew is limited to right now but the idea is any boarding event allows FPS combat between 2-12 players (and/or NPCS) at once, never more.

The scope of this proposal will fit within the following constraints:

• All activity will be in space (this is not related to activity on the surface of planets)
• How players will engage in boarding another ship
• This will be posible in three ways:
  1. By agreement (not covered in this proposal)
  2. By force
  3. By assistance
• The consequences of boarding a ship
• How this impacts the ships of the boarding and target parties
• What modules will be required to engage in these activities
• This proposal will cover the act of boarding a ship by force and by assistance in three scenarios:
  1. Intent to engage in piracy (stealing cargo)
  2. Intent to engage in bounty hunting (apprehending a criminal target)
  3. Assisting in defending a target ship or attacking an aggressor of a target ship (to either assist the target or simply steal the cargo for yourself as an act of piracy)
• The objectives of the boarding and target parties within the ship interiors
• The benefits of opting to board a ship as opposed to ship destruction as a bounty hunter or using hatch breaking limpets as a pirate.
• The difference between boarding small, medium or large ships
• Conclusion

How players will engage in boarding another ship

There will be three methods used by players (or NPCs) to board another ship in space:

1. By agreement
2. By force
3. By assistance

Boarding by agreement will be a non-combative engagement and isn't covered in this document but this process will not require any specific modules to be fitted. All ships will have a standard module named the Air Lock. The Air Lock can engage a tether with another ship's Air Lock within 350m range and this is engaged by one commander requesting permission to board with their targeted ship (action available in the contacts > target panel). If both parties agree and the ships are within 350m range, the Air Locks will be tethered. The requesting party can then disembark their ship on foot and board the target ship. This will be done via the tether, which will be a flexible tube connecting both ships via their Air Locks.

In all cases when a tether is engaged, both ships disengage drives and FSDs (so neither ship can leave) and will orientate themselves so that the tether can engage properly. At any time, one of the commanders can return to their cockpit and disengage the tether. This can also be done by the boarding commander at their own tether. Both ships will be returned to full function and both commanders can continue on their journey. If the target commander disengages the tether whilst the boarding commander is still on board, they will be returned after a short timer (if they don't do so of their own volition).

This proposal will cover boarding by force and boarding by assistance.

Boarding by force

To board a target ship by force will require a new module to be fitted, called the Breach Limpet Controller. This module will come in various sizes and qualities, much like existing modules of a similar nature. The more advanced versions will perform their functions faster and with increased range (distance from target) of functionality.

The Breach Limpet Controller will launch a Breach Limpet at a target. This will require that the target has no shields. The act of launching a Breach Limpet at a target is considered a criminal act. The Breach Limpets perform three functions:

1. They fly to and lock on to the target ship's Air Lock.
2. They hack the target ship's computer (this process takes a varied length of time dependent on the quality of the controller)
3. Once the hack is complete, the Limpet will allow the aggressive ship to engage a tether with the target ship once they get within 350m

If the aggressive party can engage a tether by force, the Breach Limpet will supress all drive and FSD capability of the target ship. It will also disable the drives and FSD of the aggressive ship. Both ships will stop moving at this point. Neither ship can move or jump until the tether is disengaged.

In addition to this, if the aggressor has fitted the Distress Call Dampener module, the Breach Limpet will disable the target ship's squawk capability. Until the tether is released, the target ship will not be able to alert authorities of the attack. More on this new module and its functionality later.

Two ships that are tethered are treated as a single entity for any other third party that may arrive and think to attack either of the ships. If an authority ship were to arrive and attack the aggressive ship, the link enabled by the tether results in a huge risk of decompression or structural damage to the target ship as well.

This means that any aggressive act made on the pirate ship will be treated as an attack on the target ship. Authority NPCs will never fire on tethered ships unless both parties are wanted and have a bounty upon them. If a player attacks a wanted ship that is tethered to a clean target ship, they will recieve an assault bounty just as though they had attacked the clean ship. If they destroy the pirate ship, they will receive a murder bounty.

Think of this feature as the Alien face hugger. Once it has engaged with a victim, attempting to remove it by force will damage and kill the victim.

In the event any player does attack tethered ships, both commanders will be warned and the aggressor can then disengage and return to their ship. Suffice to say that a pirate boarding a target ship need not be concerned by the potential for attack from another ship unless that ship is interested in murdering them both. The actual game play scenarios where this could happen are no different to those that exist now (i.e. if you're a pirate and you engage in piracy in Open where another player might spot your low wake and engage you... well, you're going to have to fight them regardless).

The purpose of this feature (tethered ships are treated as one target) is to ensure that the only legal way to assist or interfere with an act of forced boarding is to board by assistance.

Boarding by Assistance

This is performed by a ship when it encounters two tethered ships where one boarded by force. The target ship will show as "Boarded by Force" in this scenario. In the contacts > target menu, the commander of this "third party" will be able to opt to board by assistance. This does not require the use of the Breach Limpet Controller.

Boarding by assistance will attach a tether to the aggressor's tether at the point of the target ship Air Lock. Essentially, you will "hijack" their tether. This will enable you to board the target ship at the same location. You will be considered neither an aggressor or ally to either party on the target ship until you take an aggressive action. All relevant bounties or fines will be enforced depending on the actions you take as an assisting boarding party.

You can leave the target ship at any time by returning to the Air Lock and selecting "Leave ship". If the aggressive tether is disengaged and you have not performed an aggressive act on the target ship or the commander of that ship, you will have a short time to exit the ship via your tether before you're returned automatically.

Modules Required for Boarding by Force (And the Distress Call Dampener)

As mentioned above. Boarding by force required the Breach Limpet Controller. An additional module can be utilised by pirates who wish to board by force but avoid detection by authorities. The Distress Call Dampener (hereby refered to as the DCD) will be introduced and will be fitted to the utility slots of the ship. The effectiveness of this module is dependent on the security rating of the system it is used in. It is not required in Anarchy systems, for obvious reasons (no law is broken so the target ship doesn't squawk). In low security, it will last for the lonest duration, medium for a slightly shorter duration. In high security systems it will last only a very short period of time.

The DCD will not prevent a bounty being issued against your ship if you attack a clean target in a lawful system. If any other ships are nearby, they will still see the bounty and can engage you instantly, as can the ship you attack. What the DCD does is prevent the target ship from sending its crime reporting squawk for a limited period of time, delaying the response from the system's authority NPCs. The cooldown for the module is significantly longer than this duration, so it must be used with care by the pirate.

Where this module gains its full benefit is where the pirate opts to board by force, instead of using hatch breakers to take cargo. If the pirate can engage the DCD, then remove the target's shield, deploy a Breach Limpet with enough time for it to complete its hack and then get close enough to engage the tether, the Breach Limpet will then be able to take over from the DCD by blocking the target ship's ability to report crimes. The benefit of this is obvious.

The game play rationale behind this approach (and the tethered ships being treated as one) is straightforward: Once two ships are tethered by force, the game play shifts entirely to FPS game play within the target ship. The outcome of the event will be determined only by the actions of the attacking, defending or assisting commanders in the FPS enviroronment. The only other outcome is if an aggressive party decides to engage and attack the tethered ships with their ship in an act of assault/murder (in which case all tethered ships can immediately disengage and return fire on the aggressive party).

Any tether engaged by force will only remain in place for a finite duration (I'd suggest a maximum of 10 minutes tops). This is to prevent the obvious griefer paradise of boarding by force and never relinquishing control or completing objectives. If any objectives (outlined below) are completed, then the tether automatically disengages before that timer completes.

The Scenarios of boarding a ship covered by this proposal

This proposal covers the following three scenarios:

1. Intent to engage in piracy (stealing cargo)
2. Intent to engage in bounty hunting (apprehending a criminal target)
3. Assisting in defending a target ship or attacking an aggressor of a target ship (to either assist the target or simply steal the cargo for yourself as an act of piracy)

For each of the above scenarios, the proposal will cover:

• The objectives of the boarding and target commanders in FPS combat/engagement
• The benefits of opting to board a ship as opposed to ship destruction as a bounty hunter or using hatch breaking limpets as a pirate.

Intent to engage in piracy (Stealing cargo)

As a pirate boarding a target ship by force, you have three objectives and these are outlined below in order of preference:

1. Locate the cargo modules and hack each to transfer all cargo to your ship via the tether before the tether timer expires (10 minutes)
2. Kill the target ship's commander and any other crew, then hack as many cargo modules as possible before the self destruct timer expires, then escape the ship
3. Hack the ship's computer to initiate self-destruct, then hack as many cargo modules as possible before the self destruct timer expires, then escape the ship

The best outcome for the pirate is to hack all cargo modules on the ship to transfer all of the cargo. This is the second reason, in addition to supressing the crime reporting ability, that boarding by force is beneficial compared to simply using hatch breaker limpets: Boarding by force allows you to potentially steal all of the cargo of a target ship, not just some of it. It will instantly transfer the cargo via the tether. You do not need to hang around after the event to scoop or collect the cargo one by one. The obvious advantage of this would be when boarding very large cargo ships.

If the pirate's cargo bay is full, they've depleted all of the target ship's cargo or they've hacked all cargo racks and none remain to hack, their tether will begin to disengage automatically, giving the pirate time to escape. The tether won't remain in place for the full 10 minutes for no good reason (and the defending player can try to force the disengage with their objectives below).

In the event that the pirate is forced to kill the defending commander of the ship, this will place that player in an incapacitated state and the ship will automatically initiate its self-destruct sequence. The pirate will be free to hack cargo modules at this point but will need to do so quickly and then escape via the Air Lock before the ship explodes.

In the event that the pirate is forced to hack the ship's computer to initiate self-destruct (more below on why they might need to do this), the same process will play out. The only difference being that the defending commander won't be incapacitated and can still stop the pirate and the self-destruct sequence.

Objective 1: Stealing cargo

Hacking cargo modules requires a new personal module called the Cargo Hack Terminal (hereby refered to as CHT). The CHT can be obtained in various qualities and can be upgraded. The better the CHT, the faster it hacks cargo modules. The player cannot perform any action whilst hacking a cargo module but can stop the hack at any time. The hack will take between 5 and 15 seconds depending on the CHT quality (rough initial proposal, obviously subject to testing and needs to be balanced). If the player is attacked during a hack, the hack is automatically interrupted. Restarting an interrupted hack begins the process from the beginning. A successful hack results in the player seeing the list of cargo inventory. They can opt to transfer individual items, all items or prepare by adding items to ignore lists (so transfering all cargo will only take the cargo you're interested in). This process can only be reversed if the defending commander successfully hacks your tether (more on this later).

A pirate can only hack each cargo hold once and this means they have limited time to transfer what they want from it (it's instant, they just need to select what they want). Once this has happened, they cannot take anything else from that cargo hold but they can move onto another one. Once all cargo holds are hacked, the pirate's tether automatically begins its disengage proces and the pirate must then exit the target ship (there's enough time for this to happen but the defending player could stop them).

Objective 2: Killing the Target Ship Commander

The target ship commander might defend their ship (they can choose not to and just let the pirate take what they want and it would be up to the pirate if they wish to grant them mercy and let them continue). In this event, the pirate may need to kill them. In the case of forced boarding, this will incapacitate the defending commander (their suit integrity is destroyed) and their ship will automatically start the failsafe self-destruct sequence. This is, effectively, the combat "win" for the pirate but is less desirable than objective 1 because it could result in less cargo and, of course, will result in a murder bounty. Some pirates might not care about that and may always opt to kill their targets and steal what they can before the self-destruct sequence completes.

This self-destruct sequence cannot be stopped by anyone in this scenario.

Once the ship is destroyed, the target commander goes to the rebuy and is re-spawned wherever at a medical facility at the last port they docked at.

If the pirate fails to escape in time, they are also killed and the same consequence applies to them (though no bounty is awarded to the defending party unless they're assisting and engaged the pirate. More on this later).

Objective 3: Hacking the Ship Computer

This objective is the least desirable for the pirate. The only reason they might attempt to do this is when the defending commander initiates one of their objectives (more on this below), which is to hack the tether. If this happens, the pirate can still kill the defending commander but can, alternatively, counter attack by hacking the ship computer; to do this, they need to reach the cockpit of the target ship and manually hack the computer terminal (takes 20 seconds, cannot be made faster). This will initiate a self-destruct sequence that can be terminated by the defending commander but cancels their hack attempt in doing so.

The same process as with objective 2 will play out (the pirate must escape but can steal any cargo they can before the self-destruct sequence plays out).

As above, if the self-destruct sequence completes then the defending commander is killed. The same applies to the pirate if they did not escape in time.

The defending commander also has three objectives during a boarding by force:

1. Kill the pirate(s).
2. Hack the pirate's tether terminal (at the Air Lock)
3. Reset their ship's computer from hack attacks

Objective 1: Kill the pirate(s)

Players (and NPCs) can arm themselves to defend their ships. Primarily, this will be with personal weapons. But there is potential for players to buy defense turrets, trip wires and lockable blast doors to defend their ship from attack internally. These defense modules aren't included in the scope of this proposal but these would enhance the game play considerably, particularly for trader players who wish to defend themselves better. As the pirate boarding the ship has already committed a crime by engaging the Breach Limpet, they'll have a bounty (or if it's Anarchy, this is irrelevant anyway). So defending commanders can freely attack pirates.

Killing the pirate player (assuming there are none left) will reward the player with the bounty, the tether will be disengaged and all stolen cargo will be automatically returned. The pirate's ship is destroyed at the same time.

There will be an option to use LTL weaponry to stun/disable the pirate's suit (and the pirate can use the same) and this will be covered below in more detail. This would allow the defending player to "capture" the pirate. Essentially, for the pirate, this outcome is the same as death but they'll be sent to a penal colony and the player that captured them will get a much greater reward. This is purely optional for the defending party. Killing the pirate will be the easier route to defending the ship.

Objective 2: Hack the Tether terminal

The defending player can, alternatively, attempt to divert the pirate from their attack by getting around them (ship interiors will not all be linear, more on this below) and hacking the tether terminal at the Air Lock. This will take 20 seconds and the pirate will be warned if the player does this. Successfully hacking the terminal will upload a key to the defending player's suit. They then just need to get back to their cockpit and enter that key into the computer (this is instant). If they do this, the tether is immediately disengaged from the ship, returning full functionality (drives, FSD, crimes reporting) and instantly capturing the pirate player (same result as above for them). Any stolen cargo is also returned at this point.

Objective 3: Defend from ship hack attacks

The above objective is the one that can force the pirate player to have to attempt to hack the target ship's computer. If the pirate player successfully hacks the defending player's computer, the key obtained from the tether hack is useless and the defending player must then deactivate the self-destruct sequence (takes only 3 seconds but requires them to get to the cockpit) or lose their ship anyway.

Intent to engage in bounty hunting (apprehending a criminal target)

As a bounty hunter intent on apprehending a criminal target, the process and objectives above remain largely the same with some slight differences. Obviously, a bounty hunter using Breach Limpets to board by force won't incur any criminal bounties if their target is indeed wanted. The differences in the event are:

• The bounty hunter has only two objectives (kill/capture the target commander/NPC or hack their ship computer to force self-destruct)
  • In other scenarios, such as rescue, the bounty hunter can also use the CHT to hack cargo, just in the same way the pirate would do. This event isn't covered in the scope of this proposal.
• The criminal is the defender in this scenario and has the same objectives as the piracy scenario above (kill the bounty hunter, hack their tether and/or defend their ship's computer from hack attacks).
• The bounter hunter can opt to capture their target, instead of killing them. This is where boarding by force truly opens up for the bounty hunter and this is where it becomes beneficial in contrast to simply destroying the target ship for the kill bounty.

Capturing a target instead of killing them by using LTL weaponry

The first caveat of this function (capturing a target) is that they must be either wanted or you must have a warrant for their arrest (the latter being granted only to players via Dead or Alive missions). A pirate has no way to capture a clean target (and no need to). They can opt to use LTL weaponry if they want to avoid killing as a pirate, which absolutely will be a valid approach for some players, but it'll be much harder than just using lethal weaponry.

To capture a target, you must disable their suit using LTL weaponry. Less than Lethal weaponry will function by attempting to overload a suit's power pack with surges of energy. This does hurt the target's suit but causes minimal damage compared to lethal weaponry (so the suit will lose integrity, just not a lot). Suits have armour integrity and an energy level. The idea behind this approach is to disable your target (subject to the cool-down timer as mentioned above in the assumptions section) and then get close to them to capture them. Capturing takes 10 seconds. You are exposed whilst doing this so any other players involved could attack you to interrupt this. Also, disabled targets can still aim and fire weaponry! They just cannot turn around or move. So you must get behind them and use the use key (default E) to capture them.

Successfully capturing a player, as mentioned above, nets greater bounty rewards in most cases. To fully benefit from this mechanic, new bounty hunting missions and assassination missions would have the "Capture Dead or Alive" feature, or more advanced versions would be "Capture Alive" missions. The former would reward a significantly increased reward for optionally capturing a target as opposed to killing them or their ship (I'd suggest around 300% more). The latter (Capture Alive) would demand boarding by force to capture the target. Killing the target may result in a penalty. However, these missions would pay out huge values compared to existing massacre/assassination missions that exist now.

Assisting in defending a target ship or attacking an aggressor of a target ship (to either assist the target or simply steal the cargo for yourself as an act of piracy)

In the scenario where a player or NPC (i.e. an authority ship) comes across two tethered ships where the tether was forced, they can opt to board by assistance. Doing so is not an aggressive act and can be performed without a Breach Limpet Controller. It is assumed that the attacked ship is exposed to boarding by either aggressive or assisting parties.

It is entirely up to the assisting boarding player whether to help or hinder the attacked ship. As a pirate player, you may wish to attack both the pirate NPC and the defending NPC and steal the cargo for yourself. Otherwise, you can opt to assist the defending party with their objectives versus the pirate.

The number of tethered ships is limited to two. There can never be more than two tethered ships attached to a target ship. Any aggressive action via SVS combat on any of the two or three tethered ships will apply to all of these ships.

An important benefit from this approach is that multicrew play has an additional benefit over purely wing-based play. In a wing, only two ships can engage a target. But with multicrew, up to four players per ship (total of 12 between all three ships) can be involved in FPS game play.

The difference between boarding small, medium or large ships by force

The main difference with boarding a small or large ship by force is that small ships really don't have the same scope for interior combat. Take the Sidewinder, for example. It's known that the potential interior volume of this ship is tiny, potentially just two rooms in total. It should be said that the pirate scenario above would see very little benefit from boarding as opposing to just using a hatch breaker limpet, due to the low volume of cargo on smaller ships.

Due to this, small ships do not allow for the alternative objectives (hacking tether or ship's computer). Essentially, small ship boarding will almost always result in direct FPS confrontation where, in piracy, the defending commander only has two options: Fight or Surrender.

Medium ships would provide much more scope for interior "map design" and large ships would provide the best scope. Both would enable the alternative objectives as outlined above. Both would also provide much more involved FPS game play between larger groups. In addition, the interior "map design" for larger ships can provide multiple routes about the ship between Air Lock, modules and the cockpit - this would allow for flanking game play for both defending and attacking players. In addition to this, large ships can have terminals that allow a player to recharge their weapons, armour or suit energy levels (takes time to do), providing a tactical edge and a purpose for "map control".

Conclusion

Allowing players and NPCs to board target ships by force opens up new ship interior FPS game play. The balance of these encounters is different depending on the ship interior and will always play out differently because of this and the multiple objectives open the both parties (and the additional third party). This game play is isolated as FPS only, ensuring that a careful attack will be isolated (except where friendly players get involved and this will only be the case with wings or where a player drops into a low wake due to the existing restrictions on the game for multiplayer interaction). It provides added incentive to engage in this game play in the form of both greater rewards and greater functionality to the attacking party (pirates get more time to steal more cargo than currently possible and bounty hunters get to capture targets alive, opening up a whole new career path for them).

I'm sorry, but all of this sounds terrible. If you're engaging in piracy, you're talking about a prolonged process with the only benefit being faster cargo transfer. But 98% of piracy cases that is irrelevant, with either insufficient pirate cargo space or not enough to steal. The remaining case is ONLY t9s, and doesn't justify modeling all other ships by any means.

As far as bounty hunting/npc capture is concerned, the payout would need to be exponentially higher to be worth the substantially greater time investment. In all practical terms it just would never happen, because the main places you go for piracy have unlimited respawning enemies that dont care about attacking your 'tethered' ships. So it wont be on most ships and it wont be in most locatios, so why bother going to massive effort for little gain?

And what about players? I know that if I'm getting boarded involuntarily after my ship is disabled, I'm just hitting the self destruct and peacing out. If the game blocks that, I'm menu logging. And if that doesn't work, I'm just playing without odyssey, and laugh as their boarding limpets splash against an error screen.

Practically, the best solution are ground locations that can be purpose built for fps combat and dont NEED a bunch of bandaids and workarounds to function.

 

[NeilF]

You’re entitled to your opinion, you’re not entitled to have other people’s opinions for them.

Can I suggest maybe then just keep discussion on topic, rather than (needlessly) declaring things that risk being rather pot calling a kettle black.


I'll simply continue voicing my opinion...

 

[NeilF]

Ignoring the possibility that multicrew isn't yet a complete concept (I'd say adding legs to the game in Odyssey is a really big prerequisite to enhancing that feature, because its initial iteration was too limited by what we can currently already do alone) and ignoring the potential for legs to open up synergies with that part of the game, we're getting Odyssey... We're getting legs. First person content is going to happen. Walking about in a varied list of locations (and shooting stuff and other things we don't yet know about) is going to happen.

I'd say to effectively write off the chance that we'd be able to walk from the outside of our ship to our cockpit seamlessly on the basis that it might require a lot of development time to hook everything together might be closing the door after the horse is bolted.

I agree with you that it needs to have compelling game play reasons to be worth the effort but we're about to get an entire paid for expansion that'll hopefully give us a whole bunch of new content that'll be the basis for just that.

Granted that quite a significant portion of this player base might not be excited about fps game play and I think the general apathy seen here is linked to that. I imagine no amount of suitable ship interior content will ever satisfy a player if all they want to do is fly space ships.

So there is that.

I'm really excited about it though. I love both genres and styles of play. So the idea that Odyssey will unlock a whole new way of playing this game is really exciting to me. That excitement just extends to as many complementary scenarios as I can think of because I see no reason for fdev to stop at tenuous atmospheres.

Once fps combat is locked down, it'll then just be a matter of expanding our play space. I'm struggling to see the negatives with that if I'm honest.

Well, fingers crossed FPS and walking around ships and stations is indeed all part of some well designed and well craft gameplay. I truly hope FD have raised the bar and deliver some nice compelling and engaging content... But going on the past 4-5yrs, I'm concerned oin that front.

ps: "Ignoring the possibility that multicrew isn't yet a complete concept" - A worrying notion given how many years early it was then seemingly needlessly introduced

 

[DemiserofD]

I always find this question fascinating, OP, because it has been answered many times and yet is consistently ignored.

Including by FDev, who seem unable to read their own suggestion forums.

Gameplay for Ship Interiors (By Pilot Type)

Combat:

• Illegal boarding while docked: when docking at stations in anarchy or unstable (war / civil war status) stations, there is a chance for a 'boarding event' to occur on the ship. NPCs will spawn in ship interior and attempt to kill pilot and/or steal cargo/materials.
• Station Bounty: infiltrate a docked ship (NPC) and eliminate the crew or specified crew member.
• Hack Ship Databank: Disable the engines of and then board ship (NPC) to acquire data for mission giver. Eliminate or disable crew.
• SLF/SRV Smash & Grab: Disable the engines and then board ship (NPC), reach SLF / SRV bay and steal the vehicle - return to your ship, board with stolen asset, and return to mission giver. Requires empty hangar in player ship. Asset cannot be kept or redeployed once docked in own ship.

Trade

• Manually stack cargo to optimize space (mini-game), allowing for upwards of 25% gain in capacity. Engineering can install mechanisms to expedite the process.
• Conduct illicit trade deals on other ships (NPC), escort slaves from one ship to another (Combat / Trade hybrid), or smuggle cargo to/from ship (NPC) to/from your ship.
• Utilize EVA to carry sensitive/illicit cargo to designated zones on installations, stations, or ships (Delivery Mission).
• Utilize onboard synthesizer or other industrial hardware to craft/construct unique commodities to then sell.

Exploration

• Investigate the ruined hulks of doomed spacefarers on distant planets.
• Conduct in-depth analysis of promising planets, increasing chance of locating specific POI's the standard ship scanners cannot find.
• Augment the SRV and SLF to explore specific enviornments: change the chassis, rockets, and tires, calibrate sensors, or restock consumable exploration equipment.
• Enjoy and immerse yourself in the views of the galaxy from a window other than the one you've looked out for six years.
• Conduct ship repairs that automated systems, such as the AFMU and repair limpet, can't access (applies Trade and Combat, too)

Keep in mind...none of this requires multiplayer. I get it, people think ship-boarding and they assumed PvP.
Yes, that would be cool. No, that isn't remotely easy to develop.
But everything I just listed is possible and can be done.

There is plenty of gameplay opportunity for ship interiors. And plenty of different ships to provide 'different locales' and environments. There is no reason to not do ship interiors except that they require critical thinking and an imagination that goes beyond randomly-generated structures on a barren planet. Do I understand why FDev isn't doing them at launch? I do. I disagree with their analysis, but I understand. They shoot for low hanging fruit, always have and always will.

Multicrew is still broken.
CQC is still an underbaked feature.
Powerplay is still borked.
Passengers are still untouched since launch.

Trouble is, most of your proposed features dont need ship interiors, and in fact would probably be hurt by the requirement. For example, the interior of a ship just doesn't make a very good fps arena; you'd be much better off with purpose built areas on planets or in stations. And most other options are just trading grind for module efficiency. Stacking 790 cargo manually aint ever happening, even for increased efficiency.

 

[TScal12]

LOL today's Galnet article literally revolves around game play in ship interiors:

“From interviewing multiple sources, we gather that a single assassin managed to infiltrate Harold Duval’s personal transport. He was killed by shipboard guards but not before shooting the Prince at close range.”

 

[Gunther_Bladderburst]

ship interiors will add hours and hours of possibilities for me and thousands of other CMDRs, just not you it would appear.

It will add hours and hours to you and months and months of development time (just art wise). Don't tell it's done easily, I know it is not.

 

[CMDR Bausell]

I for one would rather see the devs’ time and effort go into letting us crack open Guardian vaults (which we can see sealed from our SRVs but can’t open), board generation ships, or get in trouble on stations instead of fully modelling the interiors of 36 different ships. The Anaconda is as long as the Great Pyramid of Giza is wide. You come under attack while you’re puttering about in the forward observation bay and you’d need so long to run the length of the ship and get back to the cockpit, you’d probably be dead by the time you got there without having a clue who’s shooting at you from where the whole time you’re doing your corridor crawl. You aren’t going to be abandoning the helm in the middle of a dogfight to go repel boarders, and boarders wouldn’t politely wait for the action in space to die down before attacking you. It’s a bad idea plain and simple.

 

[sandkid]

Trouble is, most of your proposed features dont need ship interiors, and in fact would probably be hurt by the requirement. For example, the interior of a ship just doesn't make a very good fps arena; you'd be much better off with purpose built areas on planets or in stations. And most other options are just trading grind for module efficiency. Stacking 790 cargo manually aint ever happening, even for increased efficiency.

I never implied interiors were needed - I implied they were requested.

You don't need space to have a flight simulator, either. Nor do you need multiple ammunition types from synthesis when we have engineering.
My personal favorite "unecessary" feature: ship external lights.

The point of ship interiors - and why it's such a great, but bound to be avoided, feature - is what it gives to the overall 'feel' of the game. Elite is a game about piloting space ships. Says it on the tin - literally, check the front page - so it stands to reason that a game (about piloting spaceships) in a universe where all activities are centered around vehicular tasks (see: spaceships and their toys) would see a logical expansion of gameplay into (literally and figuratively) the core asset of the game...

spaceships.

(Where's the lego meme...)

Tremendous arguments can be made against spaceship interiors for Elite. Business metrics. Development costs. 'Gameplay Value'. Retention of players.
They are all good arguments, too. I don't dispute any of that. Technically, I'm not disputing anything. I'm just disagreeing with FDev's call and recognizing I can only say my speel and leave it at that.

Spaceship interiors make sense for Elite Dangerous and hold an incredible amount of value to the player.
If time were taken to develop them meaningfully.
Give the previous list of features I mentioned...that is the only reason FDev didn't do it. They can't develop meaningful features.

 

[CMDR Bausell]

I’d be happy if we could just walk around our cockpit, interact with a station to choose our gear to deploy on foot with, and interact with the door to get out of the ship on foot or by SRV.

Speaking of which, I assume we’ll be able to get in and out of SRVs?

 

[Ydiss]

I for one would rather see the devs’ time and effort go into letting us crack open Guardian vaults (which we can see sealed from our SRVs but can’t open), board generation ships, or get in trouble on stations instead of fully modelling the interiors of 36 different ships. The Anaconda is as long as the Great Pyramid of Giza is wide. You come under attack while you’re puttering about in the forward observation bay and you’d need so long to run the length of the ship and get back to the cockpit, you’d probably be dead by the time you got there without having a clue who’s shooting at you from where the whole time you’re doing your corridor crawl. You aren’t going to be abandoning the helm in the middle of a dogfight to go repel boarders, and boarders wouldn’t politely wait for the action in space to die down before attacking you. It’s a bad idea plain and simple.

All good ideas.

But there's always a way to make any game play function work sensibly.

I'd first suggest that no one will board a ship in the middle of a dogfight. The whole idea is that the boarding ends the dogfight.

Prime precedent example... No pirates get very far trying to pirate "in the middle of a dogfight" right now, do they?

Boarding a target ship would be an alternative outcome than just blowing them up. The added bonus would be what happens after you board.

Personally, I'd love to set up a trade ship as a honey trap for pirates to interdict me, take my shields out, board my ship and... Oh, hi there. Say hello to my lil friend...

 

[DemiserofD]

All good ideas.

But there's always a way to make any game play function work sensibly.

I'd first suggest that no one will board a ship in the middle of a dogfight. The whole idea is that the boarding ends the dogfight.

Prime precedent example... No pirates get very far trying to pirate "in the middle of a dogfight" right now, do they?

Boarding a target ship would be an alternative outcome than just blowing them up.

Dunno what you're talking about, when I find a piracy target I open the fight by firing hatchbreakers, and keep doing so until I get what I want. The only exception is t9s full of ltds, but they're incredibly rare.

98% of cases are 20-30 commodities, which is never worth the effort to disable.

 

[CMDR Bausell]

Personally, I'd love to set up a trade ship as a honey trap for pirates to interdict me, take my shields out, board my ship and... Oh, hi there. Say hello to my lil friend...

Or they could just take out your thrusters and life support and hang out until it’s time to pick the bones.

 

[Ydiss]

Dunno what you're talking about, when I find a piracy target I open the fight by firing hatchbreakers, and keep doing so until I get what I want. The only exception is t9s full of ltds, but they're incredibly rare.

I think we've established you have zero interest in fps game play. Probably best for everyone that you stick to your corner and I'll stick to mine.