This, but not in the next update though
Development Update 3 - August
- Thread starter Arthur Tolmie
- Start date
Instead of new mission board walking simulator give us;
1. Proper atmosphere daylight as advertised in trailers (some planets/moons ingame have way better conditions for visualy thicker atmosphere than Mars for example yet their atmos are barely noticable).
2. Improve dirt ground texture to look more like dirt instead of rubber/plastic .
3. Create missions to salvage abandoned/wrecked outposts with some dangers in it (dangerous alien lifeforms, ravagers....etc.), but not in high numbers like in CZ's, let it be mostly empty with suprise attack of few......make it tense like in alien movies.
As a reward put some random but costly materials and ship/weapon modules in there.
1. Proper atmosphere daylight as advertised in trailers (some planets/moons ingame have way better conditions for visualy thicker atmosphere than Mars for example yet their atmos are barely noticable).
2. Improve dirt ground texture to look more like dirt instead of rubber/plastic .
3. Create missions to salvage abandoned/wrecked outposts with some dangers in it (dangerous alien lifeforms, ravagers....etc.), but not in high numbers like in CZ's, let it be mostly empty with suprise attack of few......make it tense like in alien movies.
As a reward put some random but costly materials and ship/weapon modules in there.
I'm glad to see that FDEV is trying to un- the bed with all of these updates to Odyssey but can we please get A NEW SRV...is that too much to ask for? It's been almost 6 years since Horizons was released and only 1 type of ground vehicle. Come one FDEV, I'm sure that with the collective brain power over there, just one SRV can be created (maybe a skimmer type)...or maybe not.
Not an Option, that means mandatory
Although i'd say that AX combat can be done with Guardian gear only and not a single piece of engineered equipment.
So engineering is not really mandatory here, but QoL stuff
And i sort of heard that San Tu non engineered pvp happens from time to time... sure the big boyz pvp is out of the question for non-engineered ships, but arranged fights are not.
Not at last... CQC is still here. No idea why the diehards pvp are not getting seriously into CQC. Is Musketeer that scary?
No, "not an option" means not available as a choice. "Not optional" (or "the only option") means mandatory.Not an Option, that means mandatory
Are we there yet???
About seven more sleeps
Megaships but not fleet carriers? Arthur, I'm glad of even this development but seriously, FC owners have been screaming for this since Odyssey was announced and that there would even BE social space in the game. How is this a hard concept to understand? and why does it continue to sound like the Dev team just doesn't know this? I'm surprised the dev team members themselves aren't thinking of this themselves even without prompting of the community. You expect me to believe not one person, not ONE piped up and said "Hey since we're doing social spaces we should put these on fleet carriers, people would love that. Give Carriers owners somewhere to be and hang out."
Like I get that there are a TONS more important things to do first, but I'd at least figure this would be on the road map, maybe lower priority but at least ON the road map.
Agreed with this, very much needed.
I tested this thoroughly - covert thefts aren't counting, and shared missions from other commanders don't count either, regardless of type.
I had to complete 6 of my own covert heists to get the unlock, and I got the invite immediately after turning in the 6th (and relogging, because of a different bug)
Could we talk about Multicrew in general, at the moment?
1.Many Multicrew functions are harmful.
I have never had a multicrewmate successfully or helpfully use Shield Cell Banks, Heat Sinks, or even Limpetssuccessfully. Their efforts are at best less useful than leaving them in my control/under AI control, and at worst, griefers can pop them intentionally to hurt me. Some others, like Prospector Limpets, are actively harmful, since I lose the ability to fire them myself; needing to have the copilot fire them only hurts me and slows everything down.
The ideal solution would be a simple menu where we can enable or disable these for our copilot, but acceptable would be simply removing most of these from multicrew control entirely. As I said, in the majority of cases, it's only harmful.
Of course, the Fighter bug needs to be fixed. In many cases, fighters can reach a state where attempting to deploy them can instantly disconnect you 100% of the time until the session is restarted.
2. Turrets are (mostly) harmful.
Having your copilot control your turrets sounds cool, but unfortunately, they typically only do a worse job than the standard AI. Yes, ignoring Chaff is theoretically nice, but in most cases, simply having a turret able to constantly fire at the target already compensates for chaff, since most enemies can't chaff 100% of the time, and the trouble is, your copilot often has a hard time telling just what you're shooting at. Even in the best case, they'll generally only improve your effectiveness by a few percent, and most cases aren't the best case; most of the time, they'll end up reducing your effectiveness, not increasing it.
It would be nice to be able to lock multicrew out of turrets entirely, if we want to do so. That would be the bare minimum, but still a significant improvement.
What would be much nicer is if multicrewmates could actually make turrets useful. Compare to fighters, where we can deploy one fighter with a NPC crewmate, but can't deploy any more without players present? Why shouldn't turrets be enhanced similarly?
If turrets were supercharged when players controlled them, it would result in a turret that would actually be better when controlled by another player. Of course, you couldn't allow them to supercharge ALL your weapons, or multicrew would become extremely overpowered, but why not a SINGLE turret? Let players take control of ONE turret, move their perspective to that one turret, and overcharge that one turret. This would have tertiary benefits of showing off those great weapon animations that are so often ignored! Assuming that the DPS of fighters is considered fair, then multiplying the damage of a turret by about 3x would be reasonable; that would put a Large Overcharged Turreted Multicannon at about the same level of DPS as a Multicannon Fighter. 4x would be reasonable if you also wanted to compensate for the lost DPS from losing the weapon slot.
3. Multicrewmates don't have much to do besides shooting.
The more broad problem with multicrew is that multicrewmates just don't have all that much to do. In theory, that stuff would be doing the stuff like SCBs and Heat Sinks, but because the pilot already is accustomed to doing that stuff, having a Multicrewmate try to do it is only harmful. So what multicrewmates really need is some way of contributing BEYOND just flying a fighter or shooting the turret. It needs to be in a way that can't be considered harmful, either, to avoid griefing.
I've got a few ideas.
1. Shield Modulation. This one is pretty straightforward. The Multicrewmate could assign their energy to a particular direction, and reduce damage from that direction by a multiplier, just as if the pilot put an extra pip to shields, but only from one of the six directions (Up, Down, Left, Right, Front, Back) at a time. This pip would stay there as they then flew a fighter or took control of a turret.
2. Re-integrating the shields. Once the shields go down, the crewmate can play a minigame where they assist in re-integrating the shields. If they're successful, the regeneration rate accelerates. If they fail, nothing happens. No harm, that's key.
3. Engine Modulation. The Multicrewmate could, rather than putting their pip towards the shields, instead put it towards the engines. They could choose to make the engines more powerful, or they could reduce the boost cooldown, or they could increase the straight-line boost speed. This, too, would remain in place while they controlled a turret or flew a fighter.
4. Engine Repair. If the engines are temporarily damaged, the crewmate could play a minigame where they attempt to find and clear blockages to the fuel flow. If they're successful, the engines return to full function more rapidly. If they fail, the engines restore to function at their standard rate.
Combine these roles with the enhanced turrets and fixing fighter crashes and you'd have a real legitimate game mode I think people could truly enjoy.
Last edited:
[removed because I didn't read the time stamp on the comment I quoted]
Yeah sorry, correction, its 10%
This post deserves to be a dedicated multi-crew improvements post on Suggestions! For the sake of Friday - @sallymorganmoore please pour this to the developers ears!Could we talk about Multicrew in general, at the moment?
1.Many Multicrew functions are harmful.
I have never had a multicrewmate successfully or helpfully use Shield Cell Banks, Heat Sinks, or even Limpetssuccessfully. Their efforts are at best less useful than leaving them in my control/under AI control, and at worst, griefers can pop them intentionally to hurt me. Some others, like Prospector Limpets, are actively harmful, since I lose the ability to fire them myself; needing to have the copilot fire them only hurts me and slows everything down.
The ideal solution would be a simple menu where we can enable or disable these for our copilot, but acceptable would be simply removing most of these from multicrew control entirely. As I said, in the majority of cases, it's only harmful.
Of course, the Fighter bug needs to be fixed. In many cases, fighters can reach a state where attempting to deploy them can instantly disconnect you 100% of the time until the session is restarted.
2. Turrets are (mostly) harmful.
Having your copilot control your turrets sounds cool, but unfortunately, they typically only do a worse job than the standard AI. Yes, ignoring Chaff is theoretically nice, but in most cases, simply having a turret able to constantly fire at the target already compensates for chaff, since most enemies can't chaff 100% of the time, and the trouble is, your copilot often has a hard time telling just what you're shooting at. Even in the best case, they'll generally only improve your effectiveness by a few percent, and most cases aren't the best case; most of the time, they'll end up reducing your effectiveness, not increasing it.
It would be nice to be able to lock multicrew out of turrets entirely, if we want to do so. That would be the bare minimum, but still a significant improvement.
What would be much nicer is if multicrewmates could actually make turrets useful. Compare to fighters, where we can deploy one fighter with a NPC crewmate, but can't deploy any more without players present? Why shouldn't turrets be enhanced similarly?
If turrets were supercharged when players controlled them, it would result in a turret that would actually be better when controlled by another player. Of course, you couldn't allow them to supercharge ALL your weapons, or multicrew would become extremely overpowered, but why not a SINGLE turret? Let players take control of ONE turret, move their perspective to that one turret, and overcharge that one turret. This would have tertiary benefits of showing off those great weapon animations that are so often ignored! Assuming that the DPS of fighters is considered fair, then multiplying the damage of a turret by about 3x would be reasonable; that would put a Large Overcharged Turreted Multicannon at about the same level of DPS as a Multicannon Fighter. 4x would be reasonable if you also wanted to compensate for the lost DPS from losing the weapon slot.
3. Multicrewmates don't have much to do besides shooting.
The more broad problem with multicrew is that multicrewmates just don't have all that much to do. In theory, that stuff would be doing the stuff like SCBs and Heat Sinks, but because the pilot already is accustomed to doing that stuff, having a Multicrewmate try to do it is only harmful. So what multicrewmates really need is some way of contributing BEYOND just flying a fighter or shooting the turret. It needs to be in a way that can't be considered harmful, either, to avoid griefing.
I've got a few ideas.
1. Shield Modulation. This one is pretty straightforward. The Multicrewmate could assign their energy to a particular direction, and reduce damage from that direction by a multiplier, just as if the pilot put an extra pip to shields, but only from one of the six directions (Up, Down, Left, Right, Front, Back) at a time. This pip would stay there as they then flew a fighter or took control of a turret.
2. Re-integrating the shields. Once the shields go down, the crewmate can play a minigame where they assist in re-integrating the shields. If they're successful, the regeneration rate accelerates. If they fail, nothing happens. No harm, that's key.
3. Engine Modulation. The Multicrewmate could, rather than putting their pip towards the shields, instead put it towards the engines. They could choose to make the engines more powerful, or they could reduce the boost cooldown, or they could increase the straight-line boost speed. This, too, would remain in place while they controlled a turret or flew a fighter.
4. Engine Repair. If the engines are temporarily damaged, the crewmate could play a minigame where they attempt to find and clear blockages to the fuel flow. If they're successful, the engines return to full function more rapidly. If they fail, the engines restore to function at their standard rate.
Combine these roles with the enhanced turrets and fixing fighter crashes and you'd have a real legitimate game mode I think people could truly enjoy.
Please don't - just get them to fix the current stuff and not tempt a lawyer's letter from George Lucas.
Now I understand why multicrew feature is so badly implemented - all due to fear to be sued. Maybe the amount of bugs Odyssey brought is also to not violate someone's "bugless software patent"
Now I understand why multicrew feature is so badly implemented - all due to fear to be sued. Maybe the amount of bugs Odyssey brought is also to not violate someone's "bugless software patent"
I was alluding to the poster's use of screen grabs from the pod racing in Star Wars.