A good answer (I think) to the problem of the majority of ships not being atmosphere friendly would be to introduce a device (i.e. a ship module) that would simply "generate" some sort of powered, aerodynamic shell around the vessel, much like ordinary shields but providing lift and friction during atmospheric flight.
Atmosphere, hard or easy mode ?
- Thread starter Remus
- Start date
I think they could balance angle of descent, speed of entry, and heat. Basically you should go in at an angle so you don't fry. Naturally ships that are confiugured to have better heat characteristics can go in with a faster speed and deeper dive.
Yes and no. I think the traditional challenges are irrelevant because we practically sit in the "no-go" zone, refuelling from stars. At the same time I think there are a lot of posibilities with regards atmospheric planetary entry - density of atmosphere causing hull damage, storms causing interference with scanners and potentially draining capacitors and weather causing significant changes to the flight model.
I'm not convinced that they will do this though so I'm aiming low and just looking to enjoy the vistas, as always
I'm not convinced that they will do this though so I'm aiming low and just looking to enjoy the vistas, as always
I do believe that is the purpose behind the current planetary approach suite. It is not out of the realm if possibility that as various atmosphere types are introduced, that higher grade versions of the suite could become available. Say, existing for airless worlds, another for up to earth standard, another fir toxic/corrosive, another for high pressure/water, etc. tradeoff of power and weight for capability.
This is my opinion, FWIW
Great topic for discussion.
I think it should be skill based, not so much that our ship dies , but that if done wrong it could result in severe damage. Immediate thoughts are what happens if our ship is already damaged and we balls up the entry? Well that would be risky so a player could dock somewhere else and repair first.
Since not all play takes part with a nearby station, I'm thinking of those out exploring, another aspect of the game might be to allow us to gather resources to repair our ships (perhaps in the future leading us to get out on foot).
I've always found one of the most enjoyable aspects of playing ED is mastering ones piloting skills. Whether it be having a perfect landing or being a pro dogfighter. Whilst I dont hold back when it comes to complaining about the game I'm also happy to say whats great about it and the folks who've nailed the flight system have done great work. It could certainly add to players enjoyment, the difficulty for FD is it not being too punishing for those learning the ropes.
That said, people have adjusted to approaching high g planets.
I think it should be skill based, not so much that our ship dies , but that if done wrong it could result in severe damage. Immediate thoughts are what happens if our ship is already damaged and we balls up the entry? Well that would be risky so a player could dock somewhere else and repair first.
Since not all play takes part with a nearby station, I'm thinking of those out exploring, another aspect of the game might be to allow us to gather resources to repair our ships (perhaps in the future leading us to get out on foot).
I've always found one of the most enjoyable aspects of playing ED is mastering ones piloting skills. Whether it be having a perfect landing or being a pro dogfighter. Whilst I dont hold back when it comes to complaining about the game I'm also happy to say whats great about it and the folks who've nailed the flight system have done great work.
It could certainly add to players enjoyment, the difficulty for FD is it not being too punishing for those learning the ropes.That said, people have adjusted to approaching high g planets.
Last edited:
Yes and no. I think the traditional challenges are irrelevant because we practically sit in the "no-go" zone, refuelling from stars. At the same time I think there are a lot of posibilities with regards atmospheric planetary entry - density of atmosphere causing hull damage, storms causing interference with scanners and potentially draining capacitors and weather causing significant changes to the flight model.
I'm not convinced that they will do this though so I'm aiming low and just looking to enjoy the vistas, as always
Interesting point about refueling. Though, when I hear Fdev talking about "core improvements" to the game, this is an example of one of the things I'd like to see redone. Not only should we not be able to practically land on a star to fuel, we probably shouldn't be able to fuel from one at all. Fdev should completely revamp that mechanic.
Learning to gain control over my ship for all aspects of flight is the only undiscovered country left in ED for me at present; I'd love to see more advanced entry requirements for atmospheric planets.
Hard I think, at least harder than non atmospheric worlds.
Maybe things like correct approach angle and speed for entry, clouds and weather hazards, buffeting, wind-shear, cross-winds, stuff requiring a bit of experience to counter. Giving it a bit of danger requiring a bit of learned skill would make it more interesting and fun in my opinion.
Maybe things like correct approach angle and speed for entry, clouds and weather hazards, buffeting, wind-shear, cross-winds, stuff requiring a bit of experience to counter. Giving it a bit of danger requiring a bit of learned skill would make it more interesting and fun in my opinion.
But it wouldn't be the same game without star refueling: it was inherited from the original game, so I should imagine it was on David Braben's must-have-list. Just one of those gamey things that have to fly in the face of physics
that's the thing. i have actually no idea what the glide means except a 'soft' exit from sc, and an artificial way (for gameplay and loadscreen reasons) to cover the gap from the extremely high speed in sc to 'crawling' normal flight speed.
on earth glide would drop you halfway through the troposphere already, which means the 'entry' would have happened during glide. so yes, my bet is on a glide with more heat buildup and some turbulences. i don't think it will be hard unless on exceptional conditions (say high gravity and/or extremely high density or turbulence).
it shouldn't be so long. landing on unpopulated planets with atmo should be straightforward. rumors are gas giants navigation is already in the working. it's populated worlds full of life (and maybe civilization) what i don't expect before another 5 years at least, if at all.
I think there should be a right approach angle and glide angle. The closer you are to the right angles then the easier it will be. Being off a little should make it a bit harder but be possible to get it right and so become easy. Be too far off and you have a hard job to keep control, and can end up entering the lowest levels of the atmosphere a long way away from your target. How forgiving these angles are should be determined by the atmospheric density, local weather conditions and gravity. So a 1g, 1atm, low wind planet should be fairly easy to land on, but a 4g 10atm, high wind should be hard.
Projecting an optimal glide path based on ship characteristics, atmosphere and gravity would be cool. Perhaps something like a simple wire frame heads up to follow. Get too far out of the path and things could go sour.
Something like this?
A bit too dense, a wider spaced frame would be nice. Just a thought
Something like this?
[video]https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-2042531-stock-footage-animated-flight-inside-a-data-tunnel-with-flares-journey-through-an-endless-tube-of-numbers-hd.html?src=rel/25816679:3/3p[/video]
A bit too dense, a wider spaced frame would be nice. Just a thought
![[VR] Deggial](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/47/47252.jpg?1553527110){kind=avatar}
By the way ... should "ditching off" the atmosphere be a thing, if the entering angle is too small?
Last edited:
Perhaps this is one of those things where FDev could take a leaf out of Kerbal Space program's book?
Squad started off by setting KSP up so the atmospheric flight model was "in place" but a lot of the variables were set as constants or switched-off completely.
That way, the system was in place but not really doing much and then, with each subsequent update, they could tweak things like the drag model and air density, and enable additional things like friction and stability.
The big problem with ED is that there's a huge variety of planets and, due to the procedural generation, it's entirely possible that FDev won't even be able to predict the full range of requirements that are necessary.
I mean, you might set it all up so that flight is straightforward on anything up to, say, a 2g planet and then things get progressively harder for planets up to 6g.
Trouble is, then you're going to find there are planets with 8g and a lot of the ships just flat-out won't fly there.
So, you adjust the envelope so that ships can just about fly on an 8g world.
And, by doing that, it becomes much easier for ships to fly on more "normal" planets, thus undermining your original intentions.
Course, this could provide yet another opportunity for diversifying the roles of the ships.
Your Cobra 3, Viper 4 and AspS might currently seem very similar but they might have entirely different aerodynamic characteristics which means one will be the best all-rounder while another one is suited to low-g worlds and a different one is best for high g-worlds
Squad started off by setting KSP up so the atmospheric flight model was "in place" but a lot of the variables were set as constants or switched-off completely.
That way, the system was in place but not really doing much and then, with each subsequent update, they could tweak things like the drag model and air density, and enable additional things like friction and stability.
The big problem with ED is that there's a huge variety of planets and, due to the procedural generation, it's entirely possible that FDev won't even be able to predict the full range of requirements that are necessary.
I mean, you might set it all up so that flight is straightforward on anything up to, say, a 2g planet and then things get progressively harder for planets up to 6g.
Trouble is, then you're going to find there are planets with 8g and a lot of the ships just flat-out won't fly there.
So, you adjust the envelope so that ships can just about fly on an 8g world.
And, by doing that, it becomes much easier for ships to fly on more "normal" planets, thus undermining your original intentions.
Course, this could provide yet another opportunity for diversifying the roles of the ships.
Your Cobra 3, Viper 4 and AspS might currently seem very similar but they might have entirely different aerodynamic characteristics which means one will be the best all-rounder while another one is suited to low-g worlds and a different one is best for high g-worlds
My hope is that ships with wings/control surfaces will have an easier time. The Fed dropship line, for example.
If FDev are going to implement atmosphere and atmospheric landing in any sort of "realistic" way, I think that would be challenging enough. You have to fight through air currents, make sure your ship is in a perfect glide slope so you don't burn up, using your thrusters to slow/ manouver your ship, compensating for the aerodynamics of your ship, fighting your ship's density vs the density of the atmosphere (looking a one ship in particular,) and at the same time dealing with the planet's gravity.
I think the complexity of trying to make atmospheric flight "realistic" is what is stopping FDev from implementing it at this time.
Have fun, fly safe. o7
I think the complexity of trying to make atmospheric flight "realistic" is what is stopping FDev from implementing it at this time.
Have fun, fly safe. o7
Last edited:
This is sadly what I expect. I'm not a flight sim nerd or anything but I do feel like ED tends more towards the casual audience than the hardcore, for better or worse. I think atmos landings are a brilliant way of introducing greater challenges to the game and I hope FD do focus on that, for those of us that really enjoy FA off and all the fun challenges it brings.
i think heat shielding should be a thing with regards to atmosphere landings, which need to be replaced or repaired and upgraded to class.
battle damage on a ship with heat shield modules should effect the ships atmospheric entry. heat damage and hull breach in areas that are exposed.
would be nice that damage is taken when flying through weather systems. different types of atmospheres have different effects on the ship in terms of friction and corrosion. lightening damage.
different preasures effect the ships ability to turn and can crush the ship if not rated high enough. Heat during entry transition is dependant on the ships rating (heat shield) and the planets atmospheric preasure.
winds blow us off course and rain, fog can block our view.
[video=youtube;tbU3zdAgiX8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbU3zdAgiX8[/video]
battle damage on a ship with heat shield modules should effect the ships atmospheric entry. heat damage and hull breach in areas that are exposed.
would be nice that damage is taken when flying through weather systems. different types of atmospheres have different effects on the ship in terms of friction and corrosion. lightening damage.
different preasures effect the ships ability to turn and can crush the ship if not rated high enough. Heat during entry transition is dependant on the ships rating (heat shield) and the planets atmospheric preasure.
winds blow us off course and rain, fog can block our view.
[video=youtube;tbU3zdAgiX8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbU3zdAgiX8[/video]