I don't remember seeing it confirmed anywhere, but it seems pretty straightforward to me: each pip will influence the recharge rate just as before, you just have more of them. Meaning that maximum capacity and recharge rates are not changed, but you are able to have more recharge at the same time (for example with 2 crew and 8 pips you can in theory max out the recharge in two capacitors). That and the bonuses from SYS pseudo-res and ENG top speed.
Gunner = Arcade Action Cam for the 12 yr olds?
- Thread starter MyHammer
- Start date
I don't remember seeing it confirmed anywhere, but it seems pretty straightforward to me: each pip will influence the recharge rate just as before, you just have more of them. Meaning that maximum capacity and recharge rates are not changed, but you are able to have more recharge at the same time (for example with 2 crew and 8 pips you can in theory max out the recharge in two capacitors). That and the bonuses from SYS pseudo-res and ENG top speed.
In short: We don't know.
...
Because we haven't played the Beta or read the changelog, yet. Even what they said in the 2.3 dev update is subject to change, seeing how long ago that was posted. Neither have we found out if or what Frontier would do about singleplayer-multiaccount-multicrew. Which is still not a telepresence issue, because if I was a filthy PvP player and nasty griefer rather than a PvE person, I sure as hell would buy a second account and run Elite on both my Laptop and PC standing right next to each other in order to exploit the additional pips, telepresence or not be damned. What about having to meet up before crewing up? Not exactly an issue if I control both accounts anyway...
Or would people happily gloat at home at all those poor griefers, who'd have to endure the meet up time? If they had to do a meetup with their two accounts rather then tele-presencing (which is not feasibly to manyually do with two accounts while in combat anyway), you surely woul've shown them:
And everybody who would just happily crew up with friends without 20 mandatory unskippable loading screens first. Just as you would've shown any of the people who will happily take the err... arcade action cam for 12 year olds. Or so. Filthy 12 year olds, you would've surely shown them, if Frontier now prematurely backtracked again as they did with instant transfers because of all the whining.
Last edited:
In all fairness, it sounds like there are just two more pips or so when you have a multicrew gunner available. And it's entirely possible Frontier haven't thought far enough ahead and would allow for the singleplayer-multiaccount-multicrew "exploit".
It sounds. We don't know, yet.
Last edited:
That's not an accurate summary of my post. A better one would be:
We don't know, but Weps speculates it's going to be like this....
I don't really see how it could be "divided up differently". The recharge rates on each capacitor are different, meaning that, from what I understand, there is no universal total recharge rate which could be divided between the available number of pips, so that an unassigned pip would always be equal to a recharge rate value, regardless of where you are about to assign it.
If this were the case, then having more than 6 pips would mean that each pip is weaker in terms of power than what it would be without crew (because you divide by more), meaning that 4 pips with crew are weaker than 4 pips without crew, meaning that ships with multicrew would actually be weaker in terms of defense for example (SYS assignment). Totally opposed to what the developers have said (that they want multicrewed ships to be more powerful that single pilot ships).
aye, with recharge rate being set based on the power supply output, i wonder if maybe they will just go for a flat value for each of the 2 extra blue pips. yeah they were saying that a multi crewed ship was considered by the game to be a wing in a ship.. but less so than an actual wing, and more so than a single player in a ship.. im still of the mind that a wing is always going to be a better option if you are looking to group up and go hunting.. 2 pips for having a gunner in a multi crew ship configuration =/= an extra 6 pips, in a 2nd fully set up ship in a wing (let alone 12 pips and 2 extra ships lol) they definitely said that being in a multi crew 'and' a wing would not be compatible though... now that that would be a beast of biblical proportions.. potentially a very confused, self harming biblical beast, but a beast all the same
Last edited:
That can't be right because FDev have told us they really, really thought about ship design especially for the future builds of the game.
![[VR] Merkir](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/141/141091.jpg?1553527154){kind=avatar}
Seriously, that's your argument? That because cheap, consumer-level parking assist can't be used to drive a car, that we don't have more sophisticated technology to provide a gunner's remote view reconstruction using current data analysis and image/sensor processing techniques? Where do you think state-of-the-art is at right now? Car parking assist?
The question is not whether a remote gunner's view is technically possible. Of course it is. The only question is how much computing hardware you're willing to throw at the problem to give the desired resolution, occlusion reconstruction, dynamic effects simulation, and reduction of other artifact errors. It's obvious that not much computing power is required. Look at what a single PC does now to render ED. Then add more to process the ship's camera/radar/sensor data to provide object locations/orientation to the rendering system. It's all very standard these days.
What you call "god-mode perspective" I call current technology. And then extrapolate current technology 1000+ years into the future... enough said.
You also ask why this technology isn't being used elsewhere in the elite universe. Well that's a totally different question which I agree should be asked of FD. Indeed there are far more compelling questions, such as why instantaneous, zero latency data transfer as used in telepresence isn't also used in every other aspect of the elite universe. IMO FD are introducing new and more profound logical inconsistencies with each update.
Last edited:
My issues are that there are no consistancies. If there is a 3rd person mode for the gunner, why isn't there one for the pilot etc. I am finding everything all over the place and nothing makes any sense.
I agree. Hopefully if enough ask, FD might take it on board. New features seem out of context and make their existing universe illogical. I just tell myself it's a work in progress.
Last edited:
Ditto, inconsitancies and back tracking.
The question is if I can distinguish the gunners view from either the cockpit or navcam view. What I currently can not IMHO. I can think of an advanced scanning system with a real time 3d holographic display, but I must have visible clues of how this works, else its just pure magic - hence the term "god-cam". That was all what my concern was about originally. And there are a lot other inconstancies throughout the game. For example, and I dont think that was already mentionend, the new mixing of multicrew communication with ship based functionality. I can understand the reason for this very well, but the whole multicrew infotab and invite system makes you less feel to be an actual pilot in space and more feel like playing a game. Of course I can ignore that part.
Well, even if this is current tech, one simply cannot create something from nothing.
Producing a rendered absolute hologram of a real time area using sensors still cannot compute a scenario of such complexity.
If I had such sensors on my car and was able to extrapolate a 3rd person view of my car and everything around it in real time with no latency it would be very basic. very basic indeed. We're not talking 4k high resolution texture perfect everything. Trillions of dust pixels casting individual density shadows on various textured pixels taking into account prevailing random interaction, and that's just for the dust! What about light sources and the quadrillion different refraction elements associated with that? Then you have your actual subject matter, and the quadrillion different realtime inetractions with the environment at any given time... You start to build up a real time computer generated image that simply cannot be done. Remember in ED, there's no such thing as even a commodity pricing feed that our ships can dial in to.
As much as a camera itself is picture perfect, a 3d holographic exact replication of realtime extrapolation of sensors is just too much, even for yr 3300.
What this actual Action Cam for 12yr olds is, is a camera. That's what it is. There's no hologram tech capable of this level of detail of real time broadcasting across the other end of the galaxy with no latency or interference.
Else you'd end up with a computer interpretation of the ship view, not the actual view.
What it can be, and i'm quite happy with this is a computer controlled drone that acts as THE source of the 3rd person view. With this, it makes sense. Makes absolute sense that this is what is capable of streaming the view seen by the gunner, the computer is able to help track the guns to the crosshair of the gunner. I cannot fathom why this simple explanation isn't the way it is. It also gives pilots that do fly solo, to knock out some of the magic 'I WIN' elements to flying with multicrew. I.e... shoot the drone. Then the multicrew ship will have to (3d print) then launch another drone.
I agree with the inconsistencies mentioned though, they're like the cherry on top of a deliciously interesting cake.
Producing a rendered absolute hologram of a real time area using sensors still cannot compute a scenario of such complexity.
If I had such sensors on my car and was able to extrapolate a 3rd person view of my car and everything around it in real time with no latency it would be very basic. very basic indeed. We're not talking 4k high resolution texture perfect everything. Trillions of dust pixels casting individual density shadows on various textured pixels taking into account prevailing random interaction, and that's just for the dust! What about light sources and the quadrillion different refraction elements associated with that? Then you have your actual subject matter, and the quadrillion different realtime inetractions with the environment at any given time... You start to build up a real time computer generated image that simply cannot be done. Remember in ED, there's no such thing as even a commodity pricing feed that our ships can dial in to.
As much as a camera itself is picture perfect, a 3d holographic exact replication of realtime extrapolation of sensors is just too much, even for yr 3300.
What this actual Action Cam for 12yr olds is, is a camera. That's what it is. There's no hologram tech capable of this level of detail of real time broadcasting across the other end of the galaxy with no latency or interference.
Else you'd end up with a computer interpretation of the ship view, not the actual view.
What it can be, and i'm quite happy with this is a computer controlled drone that acts as THE source of the 3rd person view. With this, it makes sense. Makes absolute sense that this is what is capable of streaming the view seen by the gunner, the computer is able to help track the guns to the crosshair of the gunner. I cannot fathom why this simple explanation isn't the way it is. It also gives pilots that do fly solo, to knock out some of the magic 'I WIN' elements to flying with multicrew. I.e... shoot the drone. Then the multicrew ship will have to (3d print) then launch another drone.
I agree with the inconsistencies mentioned though, they're like the cherry on top of a deliciously interesting cake.
Sure you can, we can do it today even
Its called Elite: Dangerous, by Frontier Developments plc. If you look closely, it's rendering elite dangerous level 3d graphics in real time, based on the data available to a 2014 era computer.
Last edited:
Well a third person camera for the pilot is coming with 2.3. The pilot just can't use it in combat. So there's no inconsistency there that I can see. Plus, up till now we've had the debug camera. Player's haven't fallen over themselves to explain how the existence of the debug camera breaks immersion and should be removed, so I don't see why a third person gunner cam for MC should be any different.
The debug cam exists out of the actual game play. You switch from being "the pilot" to the "player" who does navcam stuff. Whereas as gunner you are like the pilot actually immersed into that role. Or should be.
Yes it is inconsistant. Why can the gunner use a 3rd person perspective and the pilot can't.
The debug camera doesn't break anybodys immersion as you do not have to use it. It's only function is to take pictures, so if it breaks your immersion don't use it, you are not missing out on any game features. The 3rd person gunnery, you don't have a choice but to use it if you want to do multicrew, so if it breaks you immersion, you are missing out on a gameplay feature.
I myself don't have major issues with the 3rd person gunner position (not my perference but can live with it), I think there should be an option for a 1st person method as well.
I agree, just would have preferred something different and more in depth.