I agree that the big boats shouldn't turn so quickly. They shouldn't be a great advantage in game, but should have a lot of damage capability before things start to break. Eagles should run rings around them. However, the big boats would lose a lot of appeal this way for all but hauling. At least, I'd like it to be experimented with.
Combat distances are ridiculous in Elite
- Thread starter AstralHawk Exo
- Start date
It would be a very different kind of fun, and it would be a very different kind of game, appealing more to those who enjoy tactical "big picture" warfare.
The earlier Elite games were never about tactical big picture warfare, and the combat was always up close and personal, so FDEV couldn't really change the nature of combat in this 4th iteration of the game. It wouldn't feel like an Elite game if there was such tactical big picture warfare. (Again, I'm saying that as a fan of hard sci-fi tactical big picture warfare)
Well yes, I was kinda going a bit far by flat out saying it wouldn't be fun.
I'd find it fun to slag planets from the edge of a solar system so yes.
However, I don't think you'd be showing off your paint jobs much, unless it was through a pretty powerful telescope!
Repeat to yourself “It’s just a game, I should really just relax”.
who is to say that there haven’t been significant advances in sensor avoidance technology as well?
who is to say that there haven’t been significant advances in sensor avoidance technology as well?
OP checking back in. Thanks for everyone's replies. Sorry that mine is so long.
I lament that I brought up the comparisons to the capabilities MiG radar, because my argument was never about realism. It was an argument for better, or perhaps... at least more diverse... gameplay mechanics for combat. I will try to explain, with examples.
Suppose with great sensors you could detect larger ships at 100km, but smaller ships were only detectable at 20km. Suppose again that all of those distances are inconsequential in asteroid fields, because you could avoid detection by hiding behind the asteroids. Now you have the scenario that a smaller fighter could, by hiding in the asteroid belt, sneak up on a larger ship with long range missiles. The fighter, using cover, could approach to within 2-3 km before it was detected. So if the fighter wished to engage the larger, better-armed ship with long range missiles, it could close the distance before being detected to completely negate that missile advantage, and then engage it's prey where it has the advantage in close range maneuverability. In this case, despite the long range weaponry, you still end up with your classic close-quarters ED dogfight.
People above keep calling missiles "fire-and-forget". Hardly so! Modern missiles are very defeatable with chaff / flare / ECM / evasive maneuvering. If long-range missile are still too effective, then make them semi-active (meaning the target lock must be maintained until they hit the target). Now the target aircraft can break missile lock using ECM, or again asteroids, or possibly other gameplay mechanics. In jet aircraft combat, it appears that many of you guys don't realize the missiles can start flying at 20nm, but they are definitely not guaranteed to hit their targets. Often, the first volley of missiles is defeated while the fighters continue to close range and they still end up in a circling dogfight. If this wasn't true, they wouldn't be building thrust-vectoring jets or putting guns on jet fighters anymore. So again, even in open space with no cover at all, you have the potential for the engagement to end in a classic ED dogfight.
How about getting interdicted? Immediately a close range encounter. ED close-range dogfight ensues. Unless one of the ships manages to pull away. Then they could employ long-range tactics.
Somebody said it would be terrible to have missiles reach 20km, because people could detect the missiles and just initiate a jump to supercruise to avoid getting hit. That's exactly what I think would be awesome! If you were the aggressor in that situation, you would have to consider that possibility and close range before engaging.
How about closing on a pirate and getting a warrant scan done at ~5km? ED close-range dogfight ensues.
What about technology's role in a larger combat envelope? Give players stealth hull coatings at the expense of durability, so they don't get detected at those larger ranges. Or different sensor options with advantages and disadvantages at various ranges. Even if weapons were effective to 20km, there are ways to keep the battle from always being a one-shot kill at 20km.
Can you guys see how much more diverse the combat landscape could be if there was more range involved? More range = more time to react = more options = more diversity in combat. Again, my point was never to argue realism. Of course if we want to talk about what's scientifically plausible, we are talking about combat distances of 1000's of miles. I just think that combat could have been much more diverse if different weapons had different ranges and/or capabilities. As it is now, they are practically all the same in range capability and so ALL fights are close-range dogfights... thus all feeling the same, and thus combat gameplay is repetitive. At least that has been my experience.
I truly think ED has the best space sim experience, with the best environments, but I think there is a huge missed opportunity for more interesting combat in those environments. Going back to my initial post... imagine some of the scenarios I put forward above being employed in this environment. Imagine trying to stealthily sneak up on your larger prey, knowing that you could spoil the attack if you were detected, especially if they have longer-ranged weapons than you. I just think that would be a lot of fun. And, most importantly.. different!
I lament that I brought up the comparisons to the capabilities MiG radar, because my argument was never about realism. It was an argument for better, or perhaps... at least more diverse... gameplay mechanics for combat. I will try to explain, with examples.
Suppose with great sensors you could detect larger ships at 100km, but smaller ships were only detectable at 20km. Suppose again that all of those distances are inconsequential in asteroid fields, because you could avoid detection by hiding behind the asteroids. Now you have the scenario that a smaller fighter could, by hiding in the asteroid belt, sneak up on a larger ship with long range missiles. The fighter, using cover, could approach to within 2-3 km before it was detected. So if the fighter wished to engage the larger, better-armed ship with long range missiles, it could close the distance before being detected to completely negate that missile advantage, and then engage it's prey where it has the advantage in close range maneuverability. In this case, despite the long range weaponry, you still end up with your classic close-quarters ED dogfight.
People above keep calling missiles "fire-and-forget". Hardly so! Modern missiles are very defeatable with chaff / flare / ECM / evasive maneuvering. If long-range missile are still too effective, then make them semi-active (meaning the target lock must be maintained until they hit the target). Now the target aircraft can break missile lock using ECM, or again asteroids, or possibly other gameplay mechanics. In jet aircraft combat, it appears that many of you guys don't realize the missiles can start flying at 20nm, but they are definitely not guaranteed to hit their targets. Often, the first volley of missiles is defeated while the fighters continue to close range and they still end up in a circling dogfight. If this wasn't true, they wouldn't be building thrust-vectoring jets or putting guns on jet fighters anymore. So again, even in open space with no cover at all, you have the potential for the engagement to end in a classic ED dogfight.
How about getting interdicted? Immediately a close range encounter. ED close-range dogfight ensues. Unless one of the ships manages to pull away. Then they could employ long-range tactics.
Somebody said it would be terrible to have missiles reach 20km, because people could detect the missiles and just initiate a jump to supercruise to avoid getting hit. That's exactly what I think would be awesome! If you were the aggressor in that situation, you would have to consider that possibility and close range before engaging.
How about closing on a pirate and getting a warrant scan done at ~5km? ED close-range dogfight ensues.
What about technology's role in a larger combat envelope? Give players stealth hull coatings at the expense of durability, so they don't get detected at those larger ranges. Or different sensor options with advantages and disadvantages at various ranges. Even if weapons were effective to 20km, there are ways to keep the battle from always being a one-shot kill at 20km.
Can you guys see how much more diverse the combat landscape could be if there was more range involved? More range = more time to react = more options = more diversity in combat. Again, my point was never to argue realism. Of course if we want to talk about what's scientifically plausible, we are talking about combat distances of 1000's of miles. I just think that combat could have been much more diverse if different weapons had different ranges and/or capabilities. As it is now, they are practically all the same in range capability and so ALL fights are close-range dogfights... thus all feeling the same, and thus combat gameplay is repetitive. At least that has been my experience.
I truly think ED has the best space sim experience, with the best environments, but I think there is a huge missed opportunity for more interesting combat in those environments. Going back to my initial post... imagine some of the scenarios I put forward above being employed in this environment. Imagine trying to stealthily sneak up on your larger prey, knowing that you could spoil the attack if you were detected, especially if they have longer-ranged weapons than you. I just think that would be a lot of fun. And, most importantly.. different!
Last edited:
Just make sure you don't mix it up with the remlock tubes you have for your biowaste.
I thought the "why is there sound in space" question had been answered? Somthing about your ship makes the noise so you don't go insane
Not really. Asteroid fields are sparse and combat in them is rare. It'd just be missile spam fest trying to outgun and overwhelm PD.
Not even really hard to justify. Humans are VERY tied to sounds for environmental awareness. Remotely sensing vibration and converting that to sound is completely possible today using lasers. The ship painting objects around it and presenting the 'sound' is completely plausible to me.
^____ Same.
Also, it's a video game. I'm not saying it to break peoples immersion but can you imagine how dull that would be to the average player?
Also, it's a video game. I'm not saying it to break peoples immersion but can you imagine how dull that would be to the average player?
Imagine the minefield of the galaxy, if weapons just obeyed newtons law? The amount of gatling spray you get, imagine if those bullets just kept going at the same velocity until meeting 'something' at some point in the near or far future.
Imagine stopping to admire Sag A, taking some screen shots, and then getting ganked by some rogue rail gun slugs that StigBob fired 8 years prior somewhere near Rigel...
Imagine the servers keeping track of every munition asset across almost infinite expanses.. LOL in theory it would be fun! but in practice, we just have to accept that a game will be gamey lol, and needs to be gamey to be a game!
Imagine stopping to admire Sag A, taking some screen shots, and then getting ganked by some rogue rail gun slugs that StigBob fired 8 years prior somewhere near Rigel...
Imagine the servers keeping track of every munition asset across almost infinite expanses.. LOL in theory it would be fun! but in practice, we just have to accept that a game will be gamey lol, and needs to be gamey to be a game!
That would suck harder than meeting Harry Potter with a hold full of VO
Edit: Just imagine the pure hate filled saltiness of that open letter if it was to happen? It would be epiicccc
Finally! Beagle point! It's everything I've dreamed of! Now to plot back to the bubble and go aimless to Elite in one trip!
BANG
AAAAAAAAÀAAAAAAAAAAAAA
BANG
AAAAAAAAÀAAAAAAAAAAAAA