Deleted member 38366
D
-- Deleted --
Last edited by a moderator:
Please consider renaming the Adder
- Thread starter Zalifer
- Start date
I don't know, really. The eagle is pretty clearly a combat focused ship at around 44,xxxCR and the next up is the Viper at 142,xxxCR.
I think it probably could do with a bit of a bridge ship in the middle, but to be honest, the eagle will do well enough in a fight that earning the 100,000cr to upgrade should be handy enough, over a few hours of play. I don't think it would hurt, but you might also be out of the eagle and whatever you put in that gap rather quickly, and never really spec it out well. Having that gap be large actually does a good job of teaching the player about fitting and stuff, as they need to do it to see the eagle to it's peak potential, while saving for the viper.
Yes, because it looked like a flying brick. They just figured that they couldn't keep the exact same feel without it being ugly.
Yeah, I might buy that if they had not done such a wonderful job of updating the designs of every other classic ship from elite without making them look like something totally different, or something from a previous generation of games. The eagle for example captures everything that defined the eagle from previous games, but it also looks amazing, and modern. Same thing for each of the other ships we have seen, such as the sidewinder, cobra, anaconda.
There are key differences in the basic design of this ship. A flat top does not "evolve" into a rounded top. Sure, it might get some fins, but not a rounded roof. A wedge shape nose does not "evolve" into a rounded, bulbous nose. Stubby, vertically centred winglets do not "evolve" into wide, thin, vertically floored wings.
Look at each of the previous ships carried over from older games, and you can easily see that you can add tons of modern detail and effects to the ships, without throwing away the overall aesthetic. A good example of a modern adder.... hrm. How would I design it? Probably damn close to the concept artwork of the adder produced by Frontier Developments, which perfectly captured the essence of what the adder was, while adding detail to the originally basic design.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
Fine, but don't keep the exact same name either. That's all I'm asking. Adder MKII.
[video=youtube;KUrdgiXgwGA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUrdgiXgwGA[/video]
But then where does the Fer-de-Lance fit in? I'm pretty sure it was a Zorgon Peterson product in the earlier games.
I completely agree with OP. I have not played the previous Elite games but he makes it perfectly clear what he is after - and this actually makes sense. Voting for YES, change the name to MK III or something completely different.
Those of you who have voted 'No', did you even stop to think that you would be getting an extra ship IF they changed the name of this ship and left it in the game and brought the original Adder into the game?
Those of you who have voted 'No', did you even stop to think that you would be getting an extra ship IF they changed the name of this ship and left it in the game and brought the original Adder into the game?
You know, I didn't even think of that myself! I'd love to eventually get the "Concept adder" into the game, I really liked that design!
If you look at the windshield you'll see that it's quite different from the Adder we have now. The windshield in the picture looks like it belongs to the ship in the concept images. It even has that square look that the windshield had in the old games without feeling dated, so it looks absolutely spot-on to me... Why would they change it?
FTFY.
I voted 'No' because I think it looks like an improved version of the concept design and I don't see the point in kicking up a fuss over something so trivial.
Its not a fuss! Just stick mk2 on the end of the name and all problems are solved. It is quite reasonable that there would have been a new updated version of the ship by 3030 for Lughs sake! Oh, for the love of Lugh, just change the name !
Last edited:
Hi there.
I have seen the "3 Series" 320d which was added in 2012 and I must say I am a little disappointed. Not because I think the vehicle has been "rushed", is "lazy", or "ugly" as some people are saying. In fact, I rather like the vehicle itself. However, I have an issue with the name of this vehicle. This vehicle is not the 3 series from previous years. The 3 series, however, has diverged so much from the original design that it is unrecognisable.
The hard lines of the original are replaced with a rounded car, with almost no flat surfaces, or hard edges, other than the skirting.
In addition, they even dared to add extra doors to the thing.
The striking wedge nose of the original has been replaced by a rounded, bulbous front.
The window has become much more tilted. While I appreciate that the designer must consider driver visibility, it is totally different to the original 3 Series.
I include here a few versions of the 3 Series from previous generations.
Here we have the first generation
It features here as the unfortunate victim from a tree.
Then, in 1995, it was updated graphically, remaining roughly the same shape.
Finally, in 2012, a car was released, referred to by many as a 3 Series.
As I am sure you can see, the earlier images all feel aesthetically similar, while the release model of the 3 Series in 2012 is rather different. Something happened during development of the car, since the concept phase, which caused BMW to radically change the design. I suspect the desired to fit the car to the quizzically-popular Audi design style, which I feel they have done. However, that's means that it is now radically different from the original 3 Series.
What I would like is a simple name change. The car itself is fine. I don't want it scrapped and redesigned, I don't want it removed. However, this car does not look like a 3 Series to drivers who have seen 3 Series cars from previous years. It's not the same car, and should not share the same name.
TL;DR
I would ask BMW to Please change the name of the 3 Series to something else. It looks like a new car, and should have a new name.
Thanks to anyone who read my wall of text
I have seen the "3 Series" 320d which was added in 2012 and I must say I am a little disappointed. Not because I think the vehicle has been "rushed", is "lazy", or "ugly" as some people are saying. In fact, I rather like the vehicle itself. However, I have an issue with the name of this vehicle. This vehicle is not the 3 series from previous years. The 3 series, however, has diverged so much from the original design that it is unrecognisable.
The hard lines of the original are replaced with a rounded car, with almost no flat surfaces, or hard edges, other than the skirting.
In addition, they even dared to add extra doors to the thing.
The striking wedge nose of the original has been replaced by a rounded, bulbous front.
The window has become much more tilted. While I appreciate that the designer must consider driver visibility, it is totally different to the original 3 Series.
I include here a few versions of the 3 Series from previous generations.
Here we have the first generation
It features here as the unfortunate victim from a tree.
Then, in 1995, it was updated graphically, remaining roughly the same shape.
Finally, in 2012, a car was released, referred to by many as a 3 Series.
As I am sure you can see, the earlier images all feel aesthetically similar, while the release model of the 3 Series in 2012 is rather different. Something happened during development of the car, since the concept phase, which caused BMW to radically change the design. I suspect the desired to fit the car to the quizzically-popular Audi design style, which I feel they have done. However, that's means that it is now radically different from the original 3 Series.
What I would like is a simple name change. The car itself is fine. I don't want it scrapped and redesigned, I don't want it removed. However, this car does not look like a 3 Series to drivers who have seen 3 Series cars from previous years. It's not the same car, and should not share the same name.
TL;DR
I would ask BMW to Please change the name of the 3 Series to something else. It looks like a new car, and should have a new name.
Thanks to anyone who read my wall of text
Hopefully this puts how silly this thread is into perspective. A significant amount of time has passed since the older game settings. Naturally, creators will sell things with an older item's name to cash in on that brand loyalty. This is normal.
To FD:
Is the opinion of 100 people for you an empty phrase? Are FD just spit on their investors?
Like many others I have given a lot of money for what you could make the game a legend. So I ask the developers listen to the people.
Instead, you simply ignore the obvious.
Voting is not for the fact that to win a majority. And in order to understand how understanding people outraged unjustified departure from tradition.
Just complete mismatch sketches and finished ships example Adder.
People see that you have done something wrong and ask you to fix it.
What is the problem?
Let six months, but will present Adder, not Hauler 2
Everyone will be happy.
We understand that there are controversies. To do this, and there is a forum.
If you make a game for people - please listen to them. If you made the game for yourself - why would need a forum?
Is the opinion of 100 people for you an empty phrase? Are FD just spit on their investors?
Like many others I have given a lot of money for what you could make the game a legend. So I ask the developers listen to the people.
Instead, you simply ignore the obvious.
Voting is not for the fact that to win a majority. And in order to understand how understanding people outraged unjustified departure from tradition.
Just complete mismatch sketches and finished ships example Adder.
People see that you have done something wrong and ask you to fix it.
What is the problem?
Let six months, but will present Adder, not Hauler 2
Everyone will be happy.
We understand that there are controversies. To do this, and there is a forum.
If you make a game for people - please listen to them. If you made the game for yourself - why would need a forum?
Vote Yes, let's keep the tradition
Sargon
Banned
First, it's really a nice ship, I like mine a lot. It handles great, plenty of cargo, decent speed and weapons... But it isn't the Adder I was expecting either.
Although I won't start calling it names since it's bagged me a nice buck and is well worth the asking price... so it deserves some love and respect... But just not the Adder name per se.
I vote for a name change also. Just lets keep the ship because it's a nice step up from the Sidey in many areas.
Although I won't start calling it names since it's bagged me a nice buck and is well worth the asking price... so it deserves some love and respect... But just not the Adder name per se.
I vote for a name change also. Just lets keep the ship because it's a nice step up from the Sidey in many areas.
The forum is largely for players to socialise out of the game. If they listened to everything everyone says on the forum and went with their wishes, you wouldn't have piracy in the game or player interaction of any kind.