Exploring the Galaxy, less thrilling than mining?

I bought Elite Dangerous because I wanted to bravely explore a simulation of the real Milky Way, yet the "galactic wilderness" has turned out to be a disturbingly tame and an uneventful place and there simply isn't enough to do while exploring besides snap the odd breathtaking picture. The current exploration "gameplay" revolves around 3 bare-bones, low-risk, low-reward elements:


I) Fiddling with the map for scoopable/interesting stars. There is no real danger of getting lost or stranded in a patch of unscoopable stars. Or jumping to a star that you know nothing about. All of the main sequence types (and those off the main squence as well) are clearly shown on the Galactic Map. You can filter your route in advance for scoopable stars and avoid any risk at all. This destroys the mystery of visiting any system except to get an idea of the Planets. At the very least, solar weather in a system should be a surprise factor which increases the danger of scooping a main sequence star (see part III below).

II) Scanning. Right now, scanning is more boring than mining. More boring than mining... let that sink in for a bit. At least mining has the twin "nail-biters": 1) the sampling lottery, and 2) the rock scooping mini game. There needs to be both a discovery-scanning, and a detailed surface scanning mini-game. Ideally the surface scan would show useful scientific & commercial data that would require active interpretation and look quite badass in the process, like an onboard telescope that displayed multiple spectrums and was capable of frequency analysis (sidenote: this could also serve double duty to collect military intel when used in scout ships). And most of all, it needs to be an engaging skill based mini-game that doesn't guarantee success. Right now, the only active exploring button is the D scanner that shows you a picture in the system map that makes the detail surface scan a formality. The surface scan can be done passively while the object is still a mysterious blip on the sensor panel, and gives the same payout regardless of how far away you are. At the very least, the useful monetary value of any surface scan should decay as the square of the distance from that object with a big payoff for a truly upclose 360* orbital sweep. That is basic physics of angular resolution limitations over distance.

III) Refueling. Flying into a corona should be extremely dangerous. The corona is actually much hotter than the "surface" of the star itself! Yet parking in this raging inferno is actually the safer than trying to park in a space station. At least a space station offers the possibly of a catastrophic crash. It would be far more interesting and realistic if the galaxy itself were at least as dangerous as a vengeful wing of pirates, and if refueling at a star was a bit more dangerous than landing in a hanger, but right now the wilderness is such a safe place that people don't even slot shields or supplies of any kind beyond scanners and life support. I have never had to use a heat sink while playing Elite. I don't even need shields to fly into a sun. Wth? If the hull can withstand the incinerating thermal damage a star has to offer, why do we need shields vs thermal weapons?


TLDR: There is no real risk/reward during the mostly passive act of exploring. The only thing that will be killed on an Exploration outing is "time". It's so safe that the only challenge on a 13+ hour journey to Sag A*, orbiting a supermassive black hole, is to come back with 100% hull integrity and at least 50% of your mental integrity. There should be far more risk/reward and far more active player involvement in the discovery, the scanning, and the route planning processes.





Or as Niel DeGrasse Tyson put it: The universe itself is an extremely deadly place and is actually trying really hard to kill you...


EDIT: Below are my proposed solutions to make exploration more interesting and rewarding, and yes a tiny bit riskier. Not risky enough to kill you outright per se, but enough to cause sizable attrition damage and thus make a trip to Sag A* a truly meaningful accomplishment of planning, cunning, physical endurance, and skill.


STEP 1) Add space weather and unpredictable solar events to non-main sequence stars to make blind jumps into systems based only on the Galactic map information more risky. This could be alleviated by doing scans of less stable star types immediately before you jump to that system. Scans would have limited range say 10-40 LY based on equipment class.

STEP 2) Make scanning of planetary systems more active with a mini-game where the pilot uses on board telescopes to do a spectral analysis of a planet to search for the strongest signal peak. This will involve lining up the target, filtering out noise, and searching for the peak frequencies. The more chemically complex a planet is, the more peaks, and thus more time it will take. The further away the planet is the more difficult it will be to target it and the more noise there will be. All of these factors will lead the accuracy score of the collected data, and the accuracy will determine the cartographic CR reward. The quality of the equipment will also impact the accuracy, so a sidewinder with class 1A scanners will have to be extremely close to a planet to get even a 50% accuracy rating due excess signal noise, etc. Better ships, higher class scanners = more exploration rewards.

95-100% = 5 x base CR reward
80-94% = 4 x base CR reward
60-79% = 3 x base CR reward
40-59% = 2 x base CR reward
20-39% = 1 x base CR reward
0-19% = .05 x base CR reward

The base is the current base value for basic scanning of each object.


STEP 3) Make stars and black holes dangerous. The current overheating penalties are OK. On top of this we should suffer 20% hull damage from dipping too close to a star and suffer heat damage while sitting idle in front of a star. Mirrored Surface Composite bulkheads will reduce the heat rate accrual rate and heat damage by 50% each. So crashing into a star with thermal resistant bulkheads would result in only 10% hull damage. Still, you could not stay locked to a star for very long without suffering damage. If you have mirrored surface bulkheads you should be able to escape the gravity lock into super cruise without extra heat damage if you don't linger. If you don't have thermal bulkheads, then you will take an extra 5-10% damage even if you run as quickly as possible. However, any hull damage could be repaired with an auto-field maintenance unit. All of this can be easily avoided with careful piloting, just as it is now. But if you are flying while tired, or attempting to reach Sag A in a marathon run, then scooping would become increasingly dangerous endurance based event. Mistakes would cost you limited resources and time. Preparing for those mistake with supplies and proper exploration outfitting would slightly reduce your jump range, but would also result in a much safer trip.

If for some reason your shields are down (or not equipped) then you will take 2x the heat damage from any "accident" that occurs while refueling.

Black holes... obviously we should be able to fall into them, and suffer hull damage from tidal forces the closer we get, until we are spaghettified well before we hit the event horizon. But right before we die, If we look away from the black hole, the "reward" for falling in should be a very cool light show revealing the end of the universe in a tunnel of light above us, since time will slow down to infinitesimally slow degrees the closer we get. We would still die, but not before everyone else in the universe died too.
 
Last edited:
I don't even need shields to fly into a sun. Wth? If the hull can withstand the incinerating thermal damage a star has to offer, why do we need shields vs thermal weapons?
Generally, you're going to be in SC when you get too deep into the star. That's an artificial environment in which none of the ormal laws of physics need apply. As far as dropping out when you get too close, well apparently magic. :p
 
Interesting viewpoint OP! I enjoy exploration partly just because it seems to be the least stressful of the professions. So the fewer risks there are the more I enjoy the game.

I understand some want their games to be challenging, but I prefer games that are like movies with a happy ending, but where I have some control over what happens. :)
 
Boring is a matter of opinion that will vary from person to person.
I find it more interesting if you don't use an advanced scanner and have to actually search for some of the planets and stars. I find that approach requires attention and is engaging in a way that doesn't require a mini-game. You also have the risk of not finding what you are looking for.

Galaxy Map star filter was put in place after enough players requested it. So you have fellow players who considered exploring and route planning in general 'too hard' to thank for that.
You'll see posts of people who have gotten themselves into trouble getting too close to suns, however heat damage was also recently revamped.
Frontier responding to the requests of players.
 
Exploration isn't boring, it just requires patience. It's a lot like fishing inasmuch as an angler patiently waiting on the riverbank *just knows* that the next nano second will provide him/her the biggest catch they've ever had.

Simple.
 
It's hard to argue that the exploration is not very simplified - it's nowhere near what was discussed in DDF back then. To me, it feels like driving Google street view car: we are travelling to already mapped cities solar systems, taking known public roads hyperspace routes. But it's still less dull than other activities. Which tells a lot about the general state of the game... but let's not beat that dead horse again.
 
So OP, how should it be improved in your opinion?


Good question, and to elaborate on my OP:


1) Add space weather and unpredictable solar events to non-main sequence stars to make blind jumps into systems based on the Galactic map more risky. This could be alleviated by doing scans of less stable star types immediately before you jump to that system. Scans would have limited range say 10-40 LY based on equipment class.

2) Make scanning of planetary systems more active with a mini-game where the pilot uses on board telescopes to do a spectral analysis of a planet to search for the strongest signal peak. This will involve lining up the target, filtering out noise, and searching for the peak frequencies. The more chemically complex a planet is, the more peaks, and thus more time it will take. The further away the planet is the more difficult it will to target it and the more noise there will be. All of these factors will lead the accuracy score of the collected data, and the accuracy will determine the cartographic CR reward. The quality of the equipment will also impact the accuracy, so a sidewinder with class 1A scanners will have to be extremely close to a planet to get even a 50% accuracy rating due excess signal noise, etc. Better ships, higher class scanners = more exploration rewards.

95-100% = 5 x base CR reward
80-94% = 4 x base CR reward
60-79% = 3 x base CR reward
40-59% = 2 x base CR reward
20-39% = 1 x base CR reward
0-19% = .05 x base CR reward

The base is the current base value for basic scanning of each object.


3) Make stars and black holes dangerous. The current overheating penalties are OK. On top of this we should suffer 20% hull damage from dipping too close to a star and suffer heat damage while sitting idle in front of a star. Mirrored Surface Composite bulkheads will reduce the heat rate accrual rate and heat damage by 50% each. So crashing into a star with thermal resistant bulkheads would result in only 10% hull damage. Still, you could not stay locked to a star for very long without suffering damage. If you have mirrored surface bulkheads you should be able to escape the gravity lock into super cruise without extra heat damage if you don't linger. If you don't have thermal bulkheads, then you will take an extra 5-10% damage even if you run as quickly as possible. However, any hull damage could be repaired with an auto-field maintenance unit. All of this can be easily avoided with careful piloting, just as it is now. But if you are flying while tired, or attempting to reach Sag A in a marathon run, then scooping would become increasingly dangerous endurance based event.

Black holes... obviously we should be able to fall into them, and suffer hull damage from tidal forces the closer we get, until we are spaghettified well before we hit the event horizon. But right before we die, If we look away from the black hole, there should be a very cool light show revealing the end of the universe in a tunnel of light above us, since time will slow down to infinitesimally slow degrees the closer we get.
 
It's hard to argue that the exploration is not very simplified - it's nowhere near what was discussed in DDF back then. To me, it feels like driving Google street view car: we are travelling to already mapped cities solar systems, taking known public roads hyperspace routes. But it's still less dull than other activities. Which tells a lot about the general state of the game... but let's not beat that dead horse again.

Quite. I posted this in the PBF last year, when I was still into impersonating Sandro Sammarco - perhaps Exploration just needs rebranding as Tourism?

Hello, hard-working Commanders!

Since you've been busy discovering Gamma 1 all week, how about the chance to cool your jets, spend some credits and relax on-world? Without further ado, let me present

TOURISM IN ELITE: DANGEROUS

  • Tourism is seeing the galaxy for pleasure
  • In game terms, Tourism adds texture to systems, increases players' attachment to their Commanders, motivates fostering good faction reputation, and acts as a credit sink
  • GalaxyForge procedurally generates Tourism Destinations along with systems
  • Tourism Destinations can be man-made facilities, historic sites, cultural locations, natural wonders on-planet or in space
  • Tourism Destinations are classified as Common, Uncommon, Rare, Exclusive, Unique
  • GalNet news articles are randomly generated covering near and remote Tourism Destinations, depending on how common they are
  • Commanders can obtain Vouchers to Tourism Destinations
    • Vouchers may be bought
    • Vouchers may be scooped as rare drops from destroyed ships
    • More exclusive Destinations' Vouchers require Minor Faction reputation to purchase
    • Some Vouchers may be given as mission rewards
  • Vouchers may be traded
  • Upon docking at a station with a Tourism Destination, Commanders in possession of the appropriate voucher can expend the voucher, visiting the Tourism Destination
  • Initial implementation simply adds the Tourism Destination as a 'visa stamp' to the Commander's list of visited locations. Expansions may allow Commanders to compare where they have been.
  • Visiting a Tourism Destination increases the Commander's Tourism Rank. Tourism Ranks are as follows:
    • Hitchhiker
    • Backpacker
    • Package Tourist
    • Seasoned Tourist
    • Boutique Tourist
    • Independent Traveller
    • Insider Traveller
  • More exclusive Destinations increase Tourism Rank by a greater amount.
  • Tourism Destinations consist of procedurally generated names including the system and world name. Examples:
    • Wretgoe 12-345 A 1 Recreation Zone (common)
    • Styx Family Fun Park (common)
    • Dahan Heavy Industries Workers' Holiday Resort (common)
    • Eranin People's Party Distillery Tour (common)
    • Meadow Hole Consumer Paradise of Vulcan 1 D (common)
    • LP 98-132 Pirates' Pleasure Dome (uncommon)
    • The Iron Cathedral Of Opala V (uncommon)
    • Alcatraz Moon Federal Prison (uncommon)
    • The Zero-Gravity Fountains of Corodain 11 (rare)
    • The Contemplation Ponds of St Fiachra's Garden (rare)
    • The Data Ossuaries of Hooper's World University (rare)
    • The Inverted Flesh-Pits of Procyon A (exclusive)
  • Tourism Destinations generate Passenger Missions (link) for NPC travel
 
i think its far less tedious and boring then mining is currently if you ask me but maybe some things can be improved down the road :p.
 
Just watch any of my Deep Space Survey videos and you'll see what amazing fun exploring is. When done properly and with the right outlook, it's the deepest, most rewarding part of the game by far.
 
Exploration is not difficult, it does require a bit of stamina to carry out a long mission. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I'm less in favor of doing A or B to make it more dangerous, and would rather they did X or Y to make it more interesting. Give us more stuff to scan, rather than more stuff to (potentially) blow us up.
 
I'd rather scan 1000 systems than spend 1 minute chasing goldfish food (mining).

IMHO: Currently, Mining is horrific. And I doubt very much drones are going to fix it, either.

While there are a few ways to improve exploration, mining is INTENTIONALLY sadistic/tedious/punitive. It's like the devs said: "How can we make mining the most terrible activity in the game?" and proceeded to design from that premise.
 
I'm thinking this is presented as a black or white option only....
"We are bored so we want it more complicated and we need to do more actions per journey"
or
"We want the calm and peace exploration offers, we can't always be on our toes and doing action-packed play"

Surely both sides would be right on their own account, but there has to be a middle ground. One that is -hopefully- filled with options and choices for both to pick.

To me, it hurts more that the universe is so... dead. No star collapsed upon itself, no new star was born. No rain of meteors crashed a station and put it offline for repairs.
No alien empire destroyed the moon of SDY8532e and no weird magnetic phenomena locked a player's ship on a planet who now broadcasts a distress signal for fuel delivery.
We also don't buy/sell fuel, which would be a trade profession on its own.

Uneventful Horizon...

So maybe if such random happenings occurred, and we could get such info upon system scans, we could decide whether to actually venture into that system more thoroughly or backtrack and avoid it, so we continue a relaxed journey- or, get into it and try help out /discover /take part /adventure, whatever happening is going on.
And maybe we could have a board to post those records of events for other travellers, as well as earning more credits for it.
 
Gavarron, I agree that there should be safer "lanes" of exploring, and that the dangers should be mostly avoidable if you aren't completely reckless. Main sequence stars should be the most stable and therefore the least risky systems to enter. The safety of fuel scooping would depend entirely on how sloppy the pilot is and would still be safer and easier than docking. All they have to do to avoid damage is to not fly directly into a star. This is already ridiculously easy to avoid. If they slot mirrored (anti-thermal weapon) bulkheads, the damage will be minor. And, they can erase any mistake with a field repair kit.

Right now, field repair kits aren't required. Mirrored bulkheads aren't used much either. Clearly the game was meant to be more risky than it currently is.

I think think the active engagement is much more important than the risk of space travel however. What is worse is that you make the most money by jumping into and out of a system scanning distant specs of light without fully exploring a system up close in all its wonder. There isn't even a completion bonus for scanning every body in a system.
 
To join both professions...is is still beyond me how can I scan an entire planet and know its composition, but cant do the same with an asteroid that I am mining? This would help mining a little, if we could scan instead of drilling..

Well, time would still be about the same...

Nevermind.
 
I would quite enjoy mining if I could etch my name into the rock.....no, on second thoughts I can imagine what some people would do...me included.
 
To join both professions...is is still beyond me how can I scan an entire planet and know its composition, but cant do the same with an asteroid that I am mining? This would help mining a little, if we could scan instead of drilling..

Well, time would still be about the same...

Nevermind.

You have to target an object individually in order to scan it. You can target distant fields and sliced off nuggets, but asteroids can't be targeted individually, and I think this is because it would:

1) interfere with people trying to target pirates

2) overload the radar hud in RES

3) cause a performance hit due to the increased data load, and target processing, detection. Like having hundreds of ships on screen at once.


But yeah, it would be nice and I've often wondered if was technically possible. With mining limpets coming soon, its a big question mark. Will they be AI and just zoom around drilling/marking/lasing asteroids? Will we target asteroids and "fire" the drones at them? Or will they be like dumbfire missiles? I think the first two are more likely, but the targeting/marking system will be very interesting in either case.

I wonder if "exploration" limpets will be next...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom