I mean all yours comments in this thread. You started with CZs. Have you ever expected exhaustive CZs with triggered inside submissions and progress bar? I bet no. Me neither. Damn it, it makes sense of progression through the war and it looks dynamic with these submissions. I’m sure it could be better, but in very this moment the designer team deserves applause instead of your clever suggestions.
News Content Recap: Beyond - Chapter Four Livestream - Background Simulation and Scenarios
I mean all yours comments in this thread. You started with CZs. Have you ever expected exhaustive CZs with triggered inside submissions and progress bar? I bet no. Me neither. Damn it, it makes sense of progression through the war and it looks dynamic with these submissions. I’m sure it could be better, but in very this moment the designer team deserves applause instead of your clever suggestions.
I've gotten used to having the ADS on all my ships anyway. I wouldn't mind if it was a built-in, or if they added an extra utility on all ships and made it a utility instead.
But I want to be involved, telling the poor guy that I'm coming back with help.
Come on, tree based interactions came out in 1982, they're older than original Elite!
Can I haz all ya stuff?
Well, I don't at the moment. But there's not much point to being prepared for that at the moment.
On the other hand, depending on what these scenarios are like and what you get for fulfilling them ... two rescue limpet controllers, a cargo hold with some limpets, food and basic medicines, discovery scanner, shield. That'll all fit pretty neatly inside a Cobra III - I might be tempted to put one together and just go around rescuing people for a bit.
It's interesting... At what point would a Discovery Scanner no longer best conform to ED's gameplay model from 4+ years ago of best being offered as an optional module, and now it (or its FSS) be better offered as a standard feature, of via some other less "expensive" method than a cargo space?
Spitballing? What would be the problem of an FSS being standard on all ships? If you're in a new virgin system, you'd still need a Discovery Scanner would you not to break the back of the system to then use the FSS on? Or am I missing something?
I am confused, what would the FSS do without a scanner to detect stuff for it to investigate?
It's possibly me confused
But if you arrive in a system (eg: Sol), you can use the FSS to find the exact locations for USS can you not? I'm not sure if you need to honk or not?
If we assume you do not need to honk, then we now have a big separation in purpose between the Discovery Scanner and the FSS. ie: If every ship was given an FSS as standard it might be rather useful/productive to general gameplay experience, without the penalty of having to use cargo space for a Discover Scanner (which clearly is for more dedicated exploration purposes)?
Welcome to my world,they did the same with exploration last week.
Re: Combat Zones, and fighting for both sides
One simple way that Frontier could implement this would be to make it so that, when you go to a Combat Zone and choose a side to fight for, your reputation with the other side instantly becomes 'Hostile' (after all, you are going to be shooting at each other, so it makes sense). Then, if you press J twice to exit and re-enter the war, you cannot choose to fight for the side that is Hostile to you - because they don't trust you!
The reason I think this would be simple for the Devs to do is because the 'Choose a Side' text boxes shown in the stream last night already display your reputation with both of the factions, as you can see:
...so, all Frontier would need to do is highlight the Hostile faction's text box in red, and make it unselectable - and there you go, your actions now have consequences! What's more, if you really want to change sides, you could simply go to a station, do a bunch of missions for the Hostile faction to restore your reputation with them, and then return to the Combat Zone and choose to fight for them. So it would not stop players from switching sides entirely... but you would have to earn their trust again before they would allow you to fight for them, you couldn't just switch sides willy-nilly.
(Who knows, maybe Frontier have already implemented this, and they just forgot to mention it in the livestream? I would like to think so!)
One simple way that Frontier could implement this would be to make it so that, when you go to a Combat Zone and choose a side to fight for, your reputation with the other side instantly becomes 'Hostile' (after all, you are going to be shooting at each other, so it makes sense). Then, if you press J twice to exit and re-enter the war, you cannot choose to fight for the side that is Hostile to you - because they don't trust you!
The reason I think this would be simple for the Devs to do is because the 'Choose a Side' text boxes shown in the stream last night already display your reputation with both of the factions, as you can see:
...so, all Frontier would need to do is highlight the Hostile faction's text box in red, and make it unselectable - and there you go, your actions now have consequences! What's more, if you really want to change sides, you could simply go to a station, do a bunch of missions for the Hostile faction to restore your reputation with them, and then return to the Combat Zone and choose to fight for them. So it would not stop players from switching sides entirely... but you would have to earn their trust again before they would allow you to fight for them, you couldn't just switch sides willy-nilly.
(Who knows, maybe Frontier have already implemented this, and they just forgot to mention it in the livestream? I would like to think so!)
Welcome to my world,they did the same with exploration last week.
I'd like to see ships dedicated to electronic warfare that are able - at the cost of additional modules/hardpoints- to disable communications/sensors/missiles on the battlefield.
May give small ships a purpose again since stealth will be vital for this type of ship to survive.
Technically there are also two more choices: from joining each side and then turning on them! If you want to blow up the pirates, should it really matter to the scenario and outcome that you've lulled them into a false sense of security by pretending to side with them before blowing them up? Do actions speak louder than words?
I am of the same opinion. So far from what I saw, I expected something much deeper than just what they are showing.
+1 to this, this has bugged me forever. You enter an instance, and unless there were already players there ships more or less visibly "spawn" and the scenario starts with everyone in their places at 100% shields hull etc like everyone just appeared there at exactly the same time. And yes, in a technical sense that's exactly what is happening, but it would be much cooler if the game sold the illusion that you've jumped into a situation already underway. We don't need the game tracking AI dogfights for every USS in the system you might happen across, just some cheap tricks so that when you spawn a bunch of ships into a USS it looks like they were busy before you arrived.
It's possibly me confused
But if you arrive in a system (eg: Sol), you can use the FSS to find the exact locations for USS can you not? I'm not sure if you need to honk or not?
If we assume you do not need to honk, then we now have a big separation in purpose between the Discovery Scanner and the FSS. ie: If every ship was given an FSS as standard it might be rather useful/productive to general gameplay experience, without the penalty of having to use cargo space for a Discover Scanner (which clearly is for more dedicated exploration purposes)?
From what Frontier has said, we will have three options to find the new USSs:
1) Visit the Nav Beacon - Scanning the Nav Beacon gives you all the information you need about a system, including USSs.
2) Scan the System with the FSS. Exact functionality regarding USSs still unknown at this time.
3) Fly within range of one. They should still show up on your Nav panel when you get close enough.
Understood... So what you're suggesting is a small step towards aligning yourself to one side. ie: Making a commitment and having a longer term outcome/involvement?
Wouldn't signing up to a Faction, or a Faction related missions to take part in their War (or other affairs) for a longer period (eg: a week, or until a state (eg: the war) is over), thus making you 100% affiliated with one side and their cause, be a more interesting way to do this?
ps: It's entirely likely I'm overlooking something with that proposal? But do you get my drift?
You're not overlooking anything - I deliberately kept my proposal as simple as possible, on the grounds that the simpler it is, the more likely it is that Frontier might actually be able to implement it!
Signing up to a Faction, and committing yourself 100% to their cause, would definitely be more interesting... but I assume it would also require more work, which might be why Frontier have not done it (yet?) Although having said that, if the upcoming Squadrons can ally themselves with a minor faction, perhaps this will allow for that kind of committed gameplay...?
(Incidentally, with regard to my own idea... once you have become Hostile with the enemy faction, they might start trying to interdict you as you travel through the system, which means that your decision to oppose them will have consequences outside of the Conflict Zones! There was another thread somewhere on the forum where people were calling for systems at war to feel more dangerous... and I think that if you automatically become Hostile to one side as soon as you take part, that would help to make travelling through a war-torn system at least a bit more risky. And of course, if the enemy faction win the war and take control of the system, you could officially become an 'Enemy of the State'! Something for a future update, perhaps?)
Given (1) and (2) is the far more prefered behaviour for anyone interested in the USS, I wonder how much of an added pain (1) will be for most CMDRs, given the "cost" of a cargo rack for (2)...