Hi there, it's CMDR Charonys, full-time noob and amateur critic!
I have been playing Elite for a bit now and decided to contribute to this community with my subjective experiences and weird thoughts by writing a non-regular series - call it personal log if you will. The main goal is to provide food for thought, hopefully sparking interesting discussions, maybe even come up with good suggestions that may or may not be implemented. I hope there is some entertainment value, but constructive contributions are very welcome.
Today I want to talk about landing on planets. Just to clarify, I do like the general approach - I'm just not a fan of one particular aspect: finding a proper spot to land on. I'm sure this has been a topic in the past, maybe suggestions have been made already, an actual change seems unlikely - but if there ever will be a quality of life update, this is why and how I would love to see a change.
_
From a character's in-game perspective, landing on planets seems tedious because finding the right spot can be such a pain, especially with larger ships. Obviously, terrain isn't flat, that's just how the Creator made all planets in this universe. I'm not saying that the Creator is bad at creating flat surfaces, I'm just saying we can't expect flat surfaces on every single planet. However, mankind has been using brains pretty efficiently for the most part - so why is developing proper landing technology such a problem?
We have come up with some great inventions and with the help of alien technology we have progressed even further. We can travel the galaxy without much effort these days, the need for expansion has resulted in our species colonizing the most remote and usually uninhabitable places. Thus, I can't even begin how much time has been wasted trying to find the perfect landing spot. Imagine how much faster we could get things done if only there was a more efficient way to set foot on a planet.
Ironically, when we command the ship's A.I. to pick us up from the ground, there are almost no problems finding a proper landing spot. In fact, the technology we already have developed is capable of quickly identifying a suitable, flat-ish surface to land any ship of any size within seconds. Meanwhile, a commander piloting the ship him/herself may not be that lucky.
So my biggest question is: how is it even possible that we do have the tech that allows A.I. to analyse/process obviously available information and translating that into an efficient landing approach - meanwhile human pilots can't do so? Why is that information not presented to the pilot? With all the sensors and data analysis and computing power at our fingertips, we still are not able to access it?
People have developed technology to land on surfaces automatically already about 1000 years ago (remember that weird guy, Musky or whatever his name was with the rocket thing who was obsessed with Mars?), yet in 3305 we still struggle with it? Where did all the money go that R&D has spent during the past centuries?
I really think we need to convince manufacturers to give us full access over ships and modules, even if it's just more data to make more informed decisions. If A.I. already has access to that data, I don't understand the reason why pilots shouldn't.
_
From a player's perspective, finding the right spot is just busy work. Sure, one can learn to speed up the process somehow, but often it seems like it's just pure luck (or bad luck) to find a proper landing spot. Furthermore, the A.I. assisted landing doesn't find perfectly flat surfaces either. Usually, it's more uneven ground than what I was forced to find which is just silly. I often find pretty flat surfaces with my SRV, big enough for the huge ships, yet it won't let me land there for whatever reason.
So here are some suggestions that I think would make sense, not just from a player's perspective but also from a character's perspective:
1) better tools to search/identify suitable landing spots, e.g. something that involves a more detailed, manual scan of the nearby terrain - for example by using the DSS in "close range mode", which would then make suitable landing areas visible on the terrain map from a distance, e.g. 5 km above ground in a 2 km radius or something like that.
2) better sensors that provide a better short-range analysis of the terrain below, providing better visual indicators - basically an iterative approach displaying possible landing spots from further away, which may or may not turn out to be good landing spots. At least provide a number of choices which then can be narrowed down by approaching all the viable options, giving players something to start with.
3) upgrade-able landing gear, either through a better planetary approach module or the option to engineer that module which basically allows landing on more uneven surfaces. The technology involved would overcome height differences via adjustable/hydraulic landing gear - that's really basic engineering solutions that should be available (applying some logic, taking into account the technology already available in the game).
A combination of these three solutions could not only result in faster landings but also introduce a change of pace. I'd be more willing to play an extra mini-game that actually provides some solid options thanks to my time investment, instead of wasting my time by simulating an unnecessary challenge that only delays my gameplay experience. As of now, I really do not see the benefits of the current approach, nor do I feel like it's a real challenge that creates any sort of depth - it's just annoying at best.
If the main aspect is to create a challenge, there are far better ways to introduce such an element from a game design perspective as well as in-game perspective (imho). After a pretty easy approach, heading for the surface basically unharmed in most cases etc, I can get behind the idea that there has to be some sort of problem solving or puzzle that adds tension/excitement or an obstacle to overcome so the reward (landing safely) is somewhat justified, but this is just tedious and not really fun. In some areas, finding a landing spot is really annoying. Now, maybe areas around POIs are treated differently in terms of "surface generation", but I feel like there is no consistency - which one would expect. If I can land "here" I would expect similar terrain to provide a similar experience, yet it doesn't. So even if we approach this from the perspective of "learning by doing" it doesn't seem to work.
Sure, maybe I'm just really bad at this and there is a great trick or a really simple approach to this - but in that case, the game has failed to inform me how I can optimize the process myself reliably. In that case, it's still not designed properly to result in a learning experience for the player, leading to increasing "landing skills" as one would hope with such an approach.
_
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. From my perspective, introducing some sort of change - even if it creates a new, but fun challenge - would be more than welcome.
PS: if there ever will be a more interactive planetary experience, it would be cool to be able to invest a few resources to place a tiny, (semi-)permanent beacon to mark a good landing spot or any type of interesting location for that matter.
I have been playing Elite for a bit now and decided to contribute to this community with my subjective experiences and weird thoughts by writing a non-regular series - call it personal log if you will. The main goal is to provide food for thought, hopefully sparking interesting discussions, maybe even come up with good suggestions that may or may not be implemented. I hope there is some entertainment value, but constructive contributions are very welcome.
Today I want to talk about landing on planets. Just to clarify, I do like the general approach - I'm just not a fan of one particular aspect: finding a proper spot to land on. I'm sure this has been a topic in the past, maybe suggestions have been made already, an actual change seems unlikely - but if there ever will be a quality of life update, this is why and how I would love to see a change.
_
From a character's in-game perspective, landing on planets seems tedious because finding the right spot can be such a pain, especially with larger ships. Obviously, terrain isn't flat, that's just how the Creator made all planets in this universe. I'm not saying that the Creator is bad at creating flat surfaces, I'm just saying we can't expect flat surfaces on every single planet. However, mankind has been using brains pretty efficiently for the most part - so why is developing proper landing technology such a problem?
We have come up with some great inventions and with the help of alien technology we have progressed even further. We can travel the galaxy without much effort these days, the need for expansion has resulted in our species colonizing the most remote and usually uninhabitable places. Thus, I can't even begin how much time has been wasted trying to find the perfect landing spot. Imagine how much faster we could get things done if only there was a more efficient way to set foot on a planet.
Ironically, when we command the ship's A.I. to pick us up from the ground, there are almost no problems finding a proper landing spot. In fact, the technology we already have developed is capable of quickly identifying a suitable, flat-ish surface to land any ship of any size within seconds. Meanwhile, a commander piloting the ship him/herself may not be that lucky.
So my biggest question is: how is it even possible that we do have the tech that allows A.I. to analyse/process obviously available information and translating that into an efficient landing approach - meanwhile human pilots can't do so? Why is that information not presented to the pilot? With all the sensors and data analysis and computing power at our fingertips, we still are not able to access it?
People have developed technology to land on surfaces automatically already about 1000 years ago (remember that weird guy, Musky or whatever his name was with the rocket thing who was obsessed with Mars?), yet in 3305 we still struggle with it? Where did all the money go that R&D has spent during the past centuries?
I really think we need to convince manufacturers to give us full access over ships and modules, even if it's just more data to make more informed decisions. If A.I. already has access to that data, I don't understand the reason why pilots shouldn't.
_
From a player's perspective, finding the right spot is just busy work. Sure, one can learn to speed up the process somehow, but often it seems like it's just pure luck (or bad luck) to find a proper landing spot. Furthermore, the A.I. assisted landing doesn't find perfectly flat surfaces either. Usually, it's more uneven ground than what I was forced to find which is just silly. I often find pretty flat surfaces with my SRV, big enough for the huge ships, yet it won't let me land there for whatever reason.
So here are some suggestions that I think would make sense, not just from a player's perspective but also from a character's perspective:
1) better tools to search/identify suitable landing spots, e.g. something that involves a more detailed, manual scan of the nearby terrain - for example by using the DSS in "close range mode", which would then make suitable landing areas visible on the terrain map from a distance, e.g. 5 km above ground in a 2 km radius or something like that.
2) better sensors that provide a better short-range analysis of the terrain below, providing better visual indicators - basically an iterative approach displaying possible landing spots from further away, which may or may not turn out to be good landing spots. At least provide a number of choices which then can be narrowed down by approaching all the viable options, giving players something to start with.
3) upgrade-able landing gear, either through a better planetary approach module or the option to engineer that module which basically allows landing on more uneven surfaces. The technology involved would overcome height differences via adjustable/hydraulic landing gear - that's really basic engineering solutions that should be available (applying some logic, taking into account the technology already available in the game).
A combination of these three solutions could not only result in faster landings but also introduce a change of pace. I'd be more willing to play an extra mini-game that actually provides some solid options thanks to my time investment, instead of wasting my time by simulating an unnecessary challenge that only delays my gameplay experience. As of now, I really do not see the benefits of the current approach, nor do I feel like it's a real challenge that creates any sort of depth - it's just annoying at best.
If the main aspect is to create a challenge, there are far better ways to introduce such an element from a game design perspective as well as in-game perspective (imho). After a pretty easy approach, heading for the surface basically unharmed in most cases etc, I can get behind the idea that there has to be some sort of problem solving or puzzle that adds tension/excitement or an obstacle to overcome so the reward (landing safely) is somewhat justified, but this is just tedious and not really fun. In some areas, finding a landing spot is really annoying. Now, maybe areas around POIs are treated differently in terms of "surface generation", but I feel like there is no consistency - which one would expect. If I can land "here" I would expect similar terrain to provide a similar experience, yet it doesn't. So even if we approach this from the perspective of "learning by doing" it doesn't seem to work.
Sure, maybe I'm just really bad at this and there is a great trick or a really simple approach to this - but in that case, the game has failed to inform me how I can optimize the process myself reliably. In that case, it's still not designed properly to result in a learning experience for the player, leading to increasing "landing skills" as one would hope with such an approach.
_
I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. From my perspective, introducing some sort of change - even if it creates a new, but fun challenge - would be more than welcome.
PS: if there ever will be a more interactive planetary experience, it would be cool to be able to invest a few resources to place a tiny, (semi-)permanent beacon to mark a good landing spot or any type of interesting location for that matter.
Last edited:
