Ship parts; more variety and flavour

[The Land]

Rather than having "thrusters" and "class 1 hyperdrive" and "1MW pulse laser" and so on, I wonder if Dangerous could have a little more variety?

Say you have different "brands" of ship equipment, made by different manufacturers in different systems, with different characteristics.

Things you could differentiate are;
- size/weight of equipment
- effectiveness (thrust, power, jump distance, whatever's appropriate)
- efficiency; (e.g. fuel consumption)
- damage resistance / reliability
- cost

So if you were interested in racing, or very fast message delivery, you could not only buy yourself a fighter (with plenty of space for drives) but you could also buy yourself a further 20% increase in acceleration by getting hold of the latest neutron-stressed double thrust vector thrusters from Faulcon de Lacy (or whoever), ignoring the fact that they drink highly expensive at an alarming rate and need a full service every 20 AU, and cost more than a small starship...

Equally, an explorer would want parts with long range, good fuel efficiency and great reliability, and speed would be a secondary priority.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Basically you're asking for more variety which I think is a good thing.

I personally am hoping for more depth to the items. Rather than a completely built item (say a 1MW beam weapon) you buy a "casing" and have 2 or 3 parts that make up the beam weapon (like power pack; cooling; lasing material) and depending upon what you put into it affects the output (power) duration of beam before it over heats (cooling) and effective range (lasing material) ...

 

[Abysinth]

Or, with different classes or types of drives. There could be a requirement for a particular drive to be installed before a particular laser will have enough power to function.

or if you have an overpowered laser you cannot maintain full speed.

so, I suppose I'm asking for calculated power distribution.

 

[The Land]

I personally am hoping for more depth to the items. Rather than a completely built item (say a 1MW beam weapon) you buy a "casing" and have 2 or 3 parts that make up the beam weapon (like power pack; cooling; lasing material) and depending upon what you put into it affects the output (power) duration of beam before it over heats (cooling) and effective range (lasing material) ...

You could do it that way as well!

 

[Captain Black]

Basically you're asking for more variety which I think is a good thing.

I personally am hoping for more depth to the items. Rather than a completely built item (say a 1MW beam weapon) you buy a "casing" and have 2 or 3 parts that make up the beam weapon (like power pack; cooling; lasing material) and depending upon what you put into it affects the output (power) duration of beam before it over heats (cooling) and effective range (lasing material) ...

I like this idea Liqua. How about being able to own your own factory, take delivery of the components and manfacture and sell the finished products.

 

[Kipper]

I'm for a huge variation in components for the ships so you can really personalise, but the more there is, the more it has to be balanced - depending on how much PvP there is.

It won't matter a jot in PvE whether some players have found the optimal setup for powering their weapons and shields, but some just like their setup because it's a nice colour.

In PvP though, it will quickly matter.... and the last thing I would want is for everyone to want the same gear because its 'the best'. Personally, I like to have what I like the looks of, but wouldn't want to be disadvantaged in doing so.

 

[Cosmo Bozo]

Rather than having "thrusters" and "class 1 hyperdrive" and "1MW pulse laser" and so on, I wonder if Dangerous could have a little more variety?

Say you have different "brands" of ship equipment, made by different manufacturers in different systems, with different characteristics.

Things you could differentiate are;
- size/weight of equipment
- effectiveness (thrust, power, jump distance, whatever's appropriate)
- efficiency; (e.g. fuel consumption)
- damage resistance / reliability
- cost

So if you were interested in racing, or very fast message delivery, you could not only buy yourself a fighter (with plenty of space for drives) but you could also buy yourself a further 20% increase in acceleration by getting hold of the latest neutron-stressed double thrust vector thrusters from Faulcon de Lacy (or whoever), ignoring the fact that they drink highly expensive at an alarming rate and need a full service every 20 AU, and cost more than a small starship...

Equally, an explorer would want parts with long range, good fuel efficiency and great reliability, and speed would be a secondary priority.

Looks like your wish is granted

 

[Dr Wookie]

Yeah, the latest update seems to show a great deal of possible engine options etc. Looks to be variation in parts, rather than components though.

I am VERY excited (as if I wasn't already!)

 

[Sir.Tj]

Yeah, the latest update seems to show a great deal of possible engine options etc. Looks to be variation in parts, rather than components though.

I am VERY excited (as if I wasn't already!)

It's an excellent update, just goes to show how much thought and work has already gon into the game

 

[Slawkenbergius]

Maybe a bit selfishly, I hope they don't go overboard and make the system too complicated. I like The Land's idea of branded parts, so you know from the company's reputation whether you're getting great value for money / top quality for top dollar / junk for peanuts. Maybe you see a rundown, second-hand Faulcon de Lacy hyperdrive going for a song, and know it's worth paying to fix it up.

Each part could have a little blurb that goes with it, giving a hint as to what to expect, and enriching the mythology of the tech companies. That way there's not too much head-scratching or poring over technical sheets when buying a new part.

I remember with F-Zero GX, that it wasn't actually that fun testing out different combinations of parts, and I ended up looking on the net for the 'best' configs.

 

[The Land]

Maybe a bit selfishly, I hope they don't go overboard and make the system too complicated....

I remember with F-Zero GX, that it wasn't actually that fun testing out different combinations of parts, and I ended up looking on the net for the 'best' configs.

Overcomplicating things is indeed a risk... if you're not careful, you don't enrich gameplay, you just create cookie-cutter choices and general frustration (and, as Kipper points out, unbalanced competitive play!)

 

[Schwarzwolf]

Hmm yes, the update and fitting system. Only played Elite 2: Frontier and Frontier: First Encounters. And i wasn't very kind of the system there.
Things i doesn't really liked was that we had a huge cargo and could build everything there in we want without limitation. So example a ship with 305 tons cargo and then a 300 ton weapon in.
Second the weapon and shield balancing of larger to smaller ships. A large cruiser was able to widstand the fire of 10 small ships with ease. But only one hit of a larger ship and it went boom. And this with 100 or 150 shield generators.

This was actually ridiculous. But what i heard and read, was Elite 1 different and also Elite: Dangerous will use another system:
From David: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/15od2s/i_am_david_braben_cocreator_of_elite_creator_of/

What features are you most looking forward to that perhaps haven't had the airtime yet? Also, what aspects of the two Frontier games were you most disappointed with and how will these be overcome in E?
I was most disappointed by the loss of immediacy in the combat - it just wasn't much fun (effectively jousting).

So think he wasn't very happy about the fights aswell.

And the interior and the different updates look aswell, that things will change in Elite: Dangerous drastically.

So for me personally a bit simplification could be good aswell. And the visible updates are nice aswell. So not to simple, but also not to difficult that nobody could enjoy the game.

As example small, medium and large systems and there different objects. That you have as example a large MK10 shield generator on the Panther and not 150 shieldgenerators.

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

Overcomplicating things is indeed a risk... if you're not careful, you don't enrich gameplay, you just create cookie-cutter choices and general frustration (and, as Kipper points out, unbalanced competitive play!)

That depends.

In Elite (my only reference) they had 3 types of weapon - Pulse, Beam and Military. The "cookie cutter" choice was Military.

In ED there will be a wider variety of weapons but ultimately there will be 1 maybe 2 BiS (Best in Slot) weapons that everyone uses. All the others will be stepping stones until you can upgrade to them.

If you go with the brands idea then again you will end up with 1 best item from each brand that becomes BiS and (for balance purposes) they likely will be the same in all but name. If you go modular then the same scenario applies - after you have changed all your modules to the BiS then you will end up with the same weapon.

This is unavoidable in my mind but I am open to ideas of course

How about being able to own your own factory, take delivery of the components and manfacture and sell the finished products.

I asked something similar on the KS comments and it was to do with crafting and auction houses. Michael said that there were no plans to allow crafting (and thus AH's) so it's a no go. After launch though if there was enough demand for it maybe FD would consider it - I am not adverse to it but I have seen the effects of what happens in game ... Inflation ... People spamming "common" chat channels and not the trade ... etc. Can turn a game into something that it's not.

 

[The Land]

If you go with the brands idea then again you will end up with 1 best item from each brand that becomes BiS and (for balance purposes) they likely will be the same in all but name. If you go modular then the same scenario applies - after you have changed all your modules to the BiS then you will end up with the same weapon.

Well, that depends. Any system can end up producing "cookie-cutter" choices. If well designed, however, even quite simple systems can give players choices to take which can support particular play styles.

In FE and FFE there were a couple of examples of this;
- military hyperdrives vs regular hyperdrives: military drives were more expensive and inconvenient to run, but took up less space (hence allowing more military equipment or cargo space). (In fact you probably wanted a military drive if you could afford one, so not the best tradeoff; but if the disadvantages to military drives were greater...)
- choice of class of hyperdrive; you could get a bigger one, costing you loads of space, and your ship would go much further
- military equipment versus cargo space; did you want a more powerful laser, or a meaningful amount of profit?
- to an extent, class of ship; bigger ships were usually slower both in-system and between systems (though in fact the bigger ships dominated pretty much everything, unless you were doing either assassinations or courier missions...)

But there could be many more tradeoffs to make; speed, protection, firepower, reliability, cargo space, purchase cost, running cost... possibly even some weapons that are more effective against small, fast targets and some which are more effective against great big lumbering ones.

 

[Slawkenbergius]

If you go with the brands idea then again you will end up with 1 best item from each brand that becomes BiS and (for balance purposes) they likely will be the same in all but name. If you go modular then the same scenario applies - after you have changed all your modules to the BiS then you will end up with the same weapon.

Why I like the brand-identity idea is that it makes it easier to process the information for people who don't like reading technical manuals (though the info should still be there for people who do). I would say branding (as well as price) is how most people buy their tech in the real world anyway, as specs can often be confusing/misleading, and you know a monitor made by Samsung is likely to be reasonably good.

Different companies would aim for different markets of course, so there wouldn't be one dominant brand that makes the best of everything. Just like Ferrari doesn't produce anything to compete with the Ford Transit.

Generic parts that fit magically together seems unrealistic to me (though modifications I would accept as realistic). It would be cool if most craft have standard fixing points for complete weapon / thruster units, but a few have proprietary tech so can't accept certain parts. (Yes... Windows vs Mac in disguise!)

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

In FE and FFE there were a couple of examples of this;

Sadly I did not play FE/FFE so my understanding of how this changed is limited.

Generic parts that fit magically together seems unrealistic to me

And yet cars are modded all the time, sometimes with generic (non-branded) parts that magically fit together

Both ideas have merits - Let's see what FD come up with .. they may have a trick up their sleeve. (The dev diary of the dynamic universe for instance blew me away !)

 

[The Land]

Sadly I did not play FE/FFE so my understanding of how this changed is limited.

There is still time! There are a number of places you can download either the originals, or versions hacked to run in modern operating systems, or clones...

 

[Slawkenbergius]

And yet cars are modded all the time, sometimes with generic (non-branded) parts that magically fit together

My brother-in-law is a mechanic and does a bit of that kind of thing. It does seem more like hard work than magic in his case. I don't think you can just slot any part onto any other part and expect it to work!

As I said, I've nothing against modding as an idea - if it were up to me, the extra labour costs would make it more expensive, so one for the gearheads. It's the idea of having loads of choices as standard for engine-casing / thruster-unit / fuel-injector, and so on - rather than buying as a single unit - that I don't like.

But of course, it's not up to me!

 

[Aewarin Jameson]

There is still time! There are a number of places you can download either the originals, or versions hacked to run in modern operating systems, or clones...

I will hang my head in shame now and say sadly I can't - the .. *cough* ... ermm .. Graphics really do my head in .. great at the time .. look so dated now .. which is why I have pledged a huge amount into this KS to ensure it's made

It's the idea of having loads of choices as standard for engine-casing / thruster-unit / fuel-injector, and so on - rather than buying as a single unit - that I don't like.

Perhaps FD will have a better idea that's a hybrid of the 2 systems (branded / modded) ? We shall see .. One thing we agree on though is that more variety and flavour is key to it's success

 

[SnowGhost]

I like this idea Liqua. How about being able to own your own factory, take delivery of the components and manfacture and sell the finished products.

If you follow this thought a bit further, you end up with something like the X games, by egosoft. And you end up not flying your ship so much as managing a fleet of stations. Then the logical follow on step of ships to buy components for that stations and then to sell it's product, and then support and defend it and then you end up with a space sim inside Excel.

While I like excel, it's a work tool and I don't want to use it at home as well as work.

I would not like this in Elite.