Number (2) is possible.... But I don't count your chances for the rest.
Some actual deeper more involved joined up mechanics would be nice after all these years...
The end of the “tick”?
- Thread starter CaptainPugwash
- Start date
Some actual deeper more involved joined up mechanics would be nice after all these years...
![[VR] Mad Mike](https://forums-cdn.zaonce.net/data/avatars/m/27/27910.jpg?1553527108){kind=avatar}
And that is exactly why they should have implemented it.
the planning of an organised effort to map a highway of systems to places like sag A, and it taking possibly years is exactly the kind of multiplayer content which would get my juices going.
Sure, I did have some fun with the community goals, but ultimately it was just box filling.
but a long term player coordinated cartography mission which would absolutely have shaped the galaxy would be the kind of gameplay i could have lost so many hrs into (and still be doing it)
it could still happen but would take 1 cheesy ship reset combined with a radical design change.
The lore (ignoring the magic ship reset) could be something very much like how the technology was exploited by the cylons in BSG..... I may be wrong here and using some of my own head canon - but at the end of FFE - in my version of it at any rate - we made peace with the thargoids and they shared their tech with us.... that could fit nicely here - albeit we stole it off them in this retelling of course as there was no friendly ending in this time line.
but if our current drive tech was based on thargoid tech then its not outrageous that they could scupper our tech.... which then essentially means (for instance) we then need to map all systems without at least complete basic scan data off - lore wise this is needed to work out precise co-ordinates. These data would be sold to UC which we could pay a fee to access.... however on top of that the mission generators would make missions to construct nav beacons - which then cmdrs without paying said UC fee could then connect to once hyperspace window is open and jump to.
Totally agree, but fed up of poking the angry 'let me play my game' crew.
I think it is pretty safe to say that FSD genie will never be put back to the bottle, not in this iteration of Elite.
Last edited:
Yep, adding an extra scanner for the Gal Map is a great idea. Never mind the fact I can do most of the mapping myself with a camera, a calculator and some other basic tools. Some around here seem to ignore the fact that most of the existing map we have was drawn and calculated from Earth, so how does your idea work in a more advanced society?
Seems like some of you want to kill exploration entirely.. Based on that, let's just ditch the FSD and we can all live in the Sol system, no Supercruise just regular thrust. You can't have SC without an FSD..
Seems that you want everyone to play YOUR way, how does this make you any different?
Seems like some of you want to kill exploration entirely.. Based on that, let's just ditch the FSD and we can all live in the Sol system, no Supercruise just regular thrust. You can't have SC without an FSD..
Seems that you want everyone to play YOUR way, how does this make you any different?
Wow strawman much?.
The reason we have it how it is isn't because FD think it is better than what the developers proposed.... It is because they released an MVP with the intention of fleshing out mechanics as the game went along..... Imo of course but I believe FD vastly under estimated how much pushback they would get when trying to fill out mechanics.... ... Other examples are the never ending supply of ships to pew with no real reason or logic in a RES.
Either way.... Exploration should never have released as it did imo. We were never meant to have players in sag a less than 24 hrs after release.
Bottom line tho.giving opinions is kind of the point of the forum
Last edited:
Him: "I want what I want"
Other people: "We want what we want"
Him: "Other people are ridiculous!"
If that was a sarcy post, then sorry, but you missed the wink.
If not.... WHAT THE ACTUAL ARE YOU SMOKING ? I suggested a game design decision made years ago might have been better if they went the other way. AT NO POINT did I suggest it should change. You are the troll I was referring to.
If you propose removing a current, established game mechanic, try actually explaining your alternative, lest it appear that don't have one. Because, as it stands, all I'm seeing in this thread are some vague, nebulous ideas about an extra scanner.. Ideas that ignore existing star maps and how some of them were made. I'm not seeing anything that I, as an explorer, see as a positive - at least from an Elite POV. Now, don't get the idea that I think the exploration mechanics are perfect, they are far from it. I'd like to see some changes to the Surface Scanner, for example. It should launch a single 'satellite' that orbits and maps the body, with mapping time dependant on size. Maybe have an option to fire 2.. I'm also enough of a realist that I know that all the begging/demanding/asking nicely online will not make it happen.
Hmm, on the subject of the lore, I was under the impression that humans had attempted to commit a genocide against the Thargoids via a bio weapon.
On a slightly different note, I fly a Python with a 20-30ly jump range, depending on loadout.. It's barely Eng'ed and lacks a Guardian FSD Booster and yet, in talking to explorers out and about in the galaxy, I find that this kind of build is fairly common amongst explorers. Max jump range is handy, but simply means you skip over more systems than you need to. I'm currently 50 odd jumps from the Gnosis, I can Boost that down to about 10 jumps, but it would cost too much in data.
Pretty much.
Imagine FDev suddenly telling all the hundreds of CMDRs in deep space doing galactic circumnavigations, BP trips or outer rim explorations that FSD was just retconned to oblivion and from this on you will have to play a probe shooting minigame to jump.
I remember someone mentioning "galactic fog" before, and I have always found that appealling. This is defnitely NOT going to happen with Elite Dangerous, I do know that. Nevertheless, in a game sequel, I wouldn't want a probe-shooting mini-game, I'd want a requirement for triangulation from multiple star systems sufficient to narrow the position of a given star down to an accuracy of say 0.01 LY or better. Essentially, formalise and put into the game what happens with EDSM right now when we supply distances to its database, though a proper system would involve angles from stars with positions already fully known. In short: parallax them suckers.
1) Let there be lore, such as say based on extensive astronomical studies from Sol of Sag A, clouds, spectral analyses, M31 (Andromeda, visible in the skybox), and so on, that allows the establishment by Universal Cartographics of a standardised galactic plane and a 3D cartesian grid for reference purposes. The plane and coordinate system already exists, of course, it's just a lore thing at this stage based on things astronomers already do IRL to determine the galactic plane etc.
2) Let the positions of inhabited systems with populations over 1 million be known accurately and available in the Univesal Cartographics public database, using the grid from Point 1. Let the start-locations of lesser populated systems sometimes be similarly known, based on factors yet to be determined as gameplay, lore, or other factors, needs them to be, which other factors must include Point 3 overriding any gameplay or lore needs. Whether the internal structure of a given star-system is known in the public database is a separate matter, and can be left to gameplay and lore.
3) Let the positions of star systems within appropriate distances any stars from Point 2 above also be known, with the appropriate distances for knowledge of the location of a given star being determined by that star's luminosity. Naturally, various IRL high-profile stars would also be fully located, eg Sagittarius A*, Betelgeuse, Rigel, Polaris, et al.
4) There is no need for a new module, we already have our sensors, and we already have the FSS technique in-game. Let sensors be able to uniquely identify stars by their spectra, even if their positions are not fully identified yet. The better the sensors, and the more luminous the star, the further out it can be identified when seen in the skybox, where either it is a new star to add to our list of known stars or a star we recognise as having been seen before on our list. This sensors mode borrowing FSS techniques is for recognition and angle-measurement only, so it can be safely considered as built into Sensors and not require a discovery scanner or whatever else would be used for determination of structures of solar systems in a sequel to Elite Dangerous.
5) As we fly from one star to another, we take measurements of the angles of not-fully-located stars as compared to known referents in the grid. The more angles we determine by jumping to different stars and then taking further measurements against established referents, the more accurately we can determine the location of a star of interesty. I am aware that knowing the star class and apparent magnitude already affords an initial estimation of distance, but for gameplay at least I'd say it is not to enough accuracy to admit of safe jumping, therefore parallax-method and triangulation is the order of the day.
6) For jumping, let there be two levels of accuracy of interest. One is the minimum accuracy required to jump with some minimum confidence of arriving safe and within some reasonable distance of the primary star, but where there will still be a chance of misjump, and the other end is when enough measurements have been taken for the game to say in effect "Yep, accurate enough, misjumps will not happen, arrive not far from the primary star's EZ and just outside scooping distance." Commanders make their own decisions about when they want to risk the jump, so long as some mininum confidence level has been calculated by the Sensors. This minimum required confidence level could also be adjusted by Commanders, when docked, and perhaps only at an appropriate Engineer's Workshop?
7) When an explorer returns to civilisation and hands in data to Universal Cartographics, that data gets added to the public database that EVERYONE can see in their Galaxy Map if they have docked after the explorer has handed that data in (ie if explorer A is still out in the deep when explorer B hands in data, explorer A will not have an updated Galaxy Map showing B's findings until A's own next docking at a station with a Universal Cartographics service). Therefore, over time, the galactic fog would be lifted for everyone by explorers doing work bit by bit, either by playing alone or on organised mapping expeditions. Again, effectively, just bring EDSM in game. Think of it as one colossal and never-ending CG for explorers and with some universal rewards for everyone, if you will.
8) The above mechanics are for primary stars only, and not the other constituents of a given solar system - this latter has its own mechanics, which I wont go into here. As to monetary rewards, I'd keep the idea of first-discovered (and first mapped) bonusses for all bodies (primary star or otherwise), though, given the amount of time and effort required as detailed above, I'd jack up the firsts' rewards for all bodies considerably. Thereafter, a body only provides exploration monetary reward from UC for the next yay many Commanders to hand in additional data, say 1000? I see no immersive reason where there cannot be tiers of payouts based on how many times a scan / mapping of a given body has already been handed in, where actual reasons for not having something like that would be external to the game and be things like client computing power or internet etc. After 1000 (or other number) handings-in of cartographic data on a given body, UC will no longer pay out at all for more scans of that body. This allows for:
a) seasoned explorers to go out and do their thing on their own or as part of great expeditions, getting rewards for cutting new trails and further establishing new ones in a reasonable manner, without putting them all unduly at odds with each other, and
b) new explorers to start on their own trails close to civlisation and still get rewarded by starting where some people have already gone before and getting the itch to explorer and contribute more #ForScience.
2) Let the positions of inhabited systems with populations over 1 million be known accurately and available in the Univesal Cartographics public database, using the grid from Point 1. Let the start-locations of lesser populated systems sometimes be similarly known, based on factors yet to be determined as gameplay, lore, or other factors, needs them to be, which other factors must include Point 3 overriding any gameplay or lore needs. Whether the internal structure of a given star-system is known in the public database is a separate matter, and can be left to gameplay and lore.
3) Let the positions of star systems within appropriate distances any stars from Point 2 above also be known, with the appropriate distances for knowledge of the location of a given star being determined by that star's luminosity. Naturally, various IRL high-profile stars would also be fully located, eg Sagittarius A*, Betelgeuse, Rigel, Polaris, et al.
4) There is no need for a new module, we already have our sensors, and we already have the FSS technique in-game. Let sensors be able to uniquely identify stars by their spectra, even if their positions are not fully identified yet. The better the sensors, and the more luminous the star, the further out it can be identified when seen in the skybox, where either it is a new star to add to our list of known stars or a star we recognise as having been seen before on our list. This sensors mode borrowing FSS techniques is for recognition and angle-measurement only, so it can be safely considered as built into Sensors and not require a discovery scanner or whatever else would be used for determination of structures of solar systems in a sequel to Elite Dangerous.
5) As we fly from one star to another, we take measurements of the angles of not-fully-located stars as compared to known referents in the grid. The more angles we determine by jumping to different stars and then taking further measurements against established referents, the more accurately we can determine the location of a star of interesty. I am aware that knowing the star class and apparent magnitude already affords an initial estimation of distance, but for gameplay at least I'd say it is not to enough accuracy to admit of safe jumping, therefore parallax-method and triangulation is the order of the day.
6) For jumping, let there be two levels of accuracy of interest. One is the minimum accuracy required to jump with some minimum confidence of arriving safe and within some reasonable distance of the primary star, but where there will still be a chance of misjump, and the other end is when enough measurements have been taken for the game to say in effect "Yep, accurate enough, misjumps will not happen, arrive not far from the primary star's EZ and just outside scooping distance." Commanders make their own decisions about when they want to risk the jump, so long as some mininum confidence level has been calculated by the Sensors. This minimum required confidence level could also be adjusted by Commanders, when docked, and perhaps only at an appropriate Engineer's Workshop?
7) When an explorer returns to civilisation and hands in data to Universal Cartographics, that data gets added to the public database that EVERYONE can see in their Galaxy Map if they have docked after the explorer has handed that data in (ie if explorer A is still out in the deep when explorer B hands in data, explorer A will not have an updated Galaxy Map showing B's findings until A's own next docking at a station with a Universal Cartographics service). Therefore, over time, the galactic fog would be lifted for everyone by explorers doing work bit by bit, either by playing alone or on organised mapping expeditions. Again, effectively, just bring EDSM in game. Think of it as one colossal and never-ending CG for explorers and with some universal rewards for everyone, if you will.
8) The above mechanics are for primary stars only, and not the other constituents of a given solar system - this latter has its own mechanics, which I wont go into here. As to monetary rewards, I'd keep the idea of first-discovered (and first mapped) bonusses for all bodies (primary star or otherwise), though, given the amount of time and effort required as detailed above, I'd jack up the firsts' rewards for all bodies considerably. Thereafter, a body only provides exploration monetary reward from UC for the next yay many Commanders to hand in additional data, say 1000? I see no immersive reason where there cannot be tiers of payouts based on how many times a scan / mapping of a given body has already been handed in, where actual reasons for not having something like that would be external to the game and be things like client computing power or internet etc. After 1000 (or other number) handings-in of cartographic data on a given body, UC will no longer pay out at all for more scans of that body. This allows for:
a) seasoned explorers to go out and do their thing on their own or as part of great expeditions, getting rewards for cutting new trails and further establishing new ones in a reasonable manner, without putting them all unduly at odds with each other, and
b) new explorers to start on their own trails close to civlisation and still get rewarded by starting where some people have already gone before and getting the itch to explorer and contribute more #ForScience.
---
Yes, I am aware that this effectively cuts off deep-space explorers from timely access to Fuel Rats who are not already nearby as well (eg as members of expedition teams). As both an explorer with over 1MLY accross two accounts and a Fuel Rat who has gone 30,000ly from Colonia and then the same back again for a single rescue, I am cool with that on both sides, but I do not speak for other explorers, other rats, or the Mischief. That being said, my personal opinion is that the game (or rather, its sequel) needs what it needs, and that it would be good to reintroduce more risk back to exploring and in a manner that turns the immersion dial to eleven. It woud also be further reason to have multiple characters so players can play one character while another is indisposed for whatever reason, but that is another story.
Last edited:
The only nuts things is that that wasn't the design in the first place, but I'd have the superpowers just being the superpowers.
Yep, it was the first time I was totally gobsmacked by FD Design decisions. It wasnt the last.
PP as a level between Faction and Superpower, with PP Actions that "persuaded" similarly minded factions to support a specific PP leader, all seemed so mindnumbingly obvious.