I'd find that very disappointing if Fdev would go that route. I wannt to be this guy:
Not this guy:
2.3 dev update feedback mega thread
- Thread starter Jenner
- Start date
- Status
I'd find that very disappointing if Fdev would go that route. I wannt to be this guy:
Not this guy:
Ok there's another idea for the frontier sales and marketing department: licensed ship and character model. If ED plays in our timeline they sure know and embrace Star Wars, like we do with ... other 1.3K year old stories.
No Jar-Jar-Binks please.
Last edited:
No, it would be cheaper and more fuel efficient. It wouldn't need a cockpit and, especially, wouldn't need life support, like the pilot's oxygen supply. Those weight savings would, in addition, also translate into fuel savings.
It would especially be useful in combat. A plane can be capable of pulling tremendous G forces, but it's always restricted from doing so because the pilot can't physically handle them. Removing the pilot makes evading missiles much more viable.
The F-35 will probably be the last US manned fighter (and has just been getting fantastic kill tallies at the most recent Red Flag event).
Last edited:
Man it is so true. It is so superb.
Frontier said something about new game based on Hollywood production - maybe they will create Star Wars space arcade games like Elite?
dynamicbob
Banned
Man it is so true. It is so superb.
Frontier said something about new game based on Hollywood production - maybe they will create Star Wars space arcade games like Elite?
jarassic park or avatar ( they also have an IP for safari planet and it was meant to enter early pbeta/kickstarter in late 2017. Combine that with coaster planet (jarassic park or avatar park rides) and then on top of that flora and fauna engine for atmospheric landings in elite dangerous u can see the three way uses and cross over between these 3 engines (cant rule aliens out either) and there is a new jarassic park movie in 2018 as well
Im going for Jurassic Park. It will be building and running your own jurassic theme park with hybrid dinosaurs etc. I can really see some of the tech being used for ED further down the line, if there is a line.
I'm hoping for Blade Runner, personally.
Hmmm, could be.
Has it been brought up that some ships like the ASP Explorer will have broken multi-crew ?
- Hard point placement does not allow 360° firing arc for the gunner
- No SLF hangar
What will the crewman do ?
- Hard point placement does not allow 360° firing arc for the gunner
- No SLF hangar
What will the crewman do ?
If this is your serious opinion about this game, please tell us about the reasons why you are playing . Why didn't you already stop?
to your words: This game has bad design, no lore that is giving you something. I would look eleswehere to spend my time better.
You can come back later on when you think times have changed.
Why this inconsequencial way is here all around. Moaning, Moanin, Moaning. But no consequence taken from it.
I am critizising this update as combat related only. But I tried to be constructive at least leaving something like a suggestion behind.
You may like it or not. Pobably only a few will.
But it would look better to all the Moaning having a suggesting to think of a bit at the end of Moan.
Otherwise you are giving more distructive comments that will no one help but maybe write down your personal frustraion.
It it helps, I am fine with it. But constructive attitudes will even work better.
Regards,
Miklos
Probably nothing but enjoy the view. Not until this is added to the game:
https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php/307770-A-year-worth-of-Elite-photoshop-concepts!
Netflix and Chill?
So, again no news in the newsletter. Meh.
Probably act as a missile battery operator.
Like that lame BF3 SP jet mission? Wow, I hope not.
Certainly something I've thought about - not only does this first implementation focus on combat uses, it's already nerfed out of the box for the reasons you describe. Not all ships have hardpoints suitable (never mind optimal) to a turret-based loadout and only a relatively small number of ships can even fit a fighter hangar. So out of the box it's all only really practical for a subset of the playerbase, and a particular subset at that - combat focused player that flies a big ship with good hardpoint placement for a good number of turrets AND capable of fitting a fighter hangar. Just another question of Frontier's design prioritisation that baffles me.....but that's clearly why they've had to incentivise it's use with instant 'telepresence' and the reward structure. I can't help but wonder why they bothered with implementing such a feature, which is a gimmick at best in my opinion, in this manner when it clearly (in my opinion) can't stand on it's own as viable/attractive content without incentivisation to encourage people to use it in the first place....
Proof will be in the eating when we can test it ourselves of course, but I find it hard not to be cynical about this one. If only we had more information about where Frontier hopes to take multicrew beyond this rather limiting initial(?) approach......
Last edited:
Has anybody considered NOT capitulating to the demands of the terrorists, this time?
They can't take hostages. All they can do in protest is quit. Would that be a bad thing?
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
If by terrorists you mean a minority, when was the last time that Frontier "capitulated"?
- Status