|
gently caress I'm hoping they ignore those stupid forums and don't keep that horrible AI. That's going to ruin so much. And the more they listen to that forum the worse the game gets in respect to allowing new players to get into the game and be able to really advance without stupid amounts of grinding. Also nostalgia 4 infinity is right :p
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
I'm in total agreement with Nostalgia 4 Infinity about this, so you know something got hosed up pretty good.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
H13 posted:Quick question that was answered before, but I can't find it. Donation missions at Tun or 17 Draconis.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
I said it in Discord and I'll say it here, I hope they keep it for some NPC archetypes, like the celebrities you have to assassinate sometimes. Would make total sense for them to panic and book it, but also they're flying paper Orcas so it's not too hard to stop them.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
It's going to be a pain in the rear end getting my sister to play this game if the AI isn't dumb enough for someone who isn't good at space sims to kill it at lower levels.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 06:23
|
|
|
Dabir posted:I said it in Discord and I'll say it here, I hope they keep it for some NPC archetypes, like the celebrities you have to assassinate sometimes. Would make total sense for them to panic and book it, but also they're flying paper Orcas so it's not too hard to stop them. Orcas actually have fairly strong engine speeds apparently? Or at least, they are listed as having the same Normal/Boost as a Clipper. Which I suppose is supposed to fit their intended role as space taxi... A space taxi with a garbage Jump range  EDIT: Stripped down shiedless orca with A grade Thrusters and FSD, D grade for the rest. 17.8 ly Jump range with a full tank. 4 Jumps. 63.22 LY fastest unladen range. Wowie Zowie, not bad for a ship that costs twice as much as the Clipper stock  Section Z fucked around with this message at 06:39 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 06:33
|
|
|
where the hell do you find basic conductors. every engineer wants em but nobody's got em
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 07:54
|
|
|
TRON JEREMY posted:where the hell do you find basic conductors. every engineer wants em but nobody's got em
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 08:32
|
|
|
TRON JEREMY posted:where the hell do you find basic conductors. every engineer wants em but nobody's got em FronzelNeekburm posted:Engineer materials like that are probably rare stuff you pick up from planetside, shipwrecks, unidentified signal sources, etc. Welcome to a MMO-style loot system. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 09:54
|
|
|
Just found a post on the Frontier forums:Frontier Forums posted:There are four possible things that you might need: materials, manufactured materials, data and commodities.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 10:14
|
|
|
radintorov posted:You can also get them as quest rewards, from blowing up NPCs and even just scanning them. It's good that literally everything drops things you can use now. It's not so good that it's basically a RNG system. Combo'd with another RNG system of crafting  Hmm, yes, let's give people more chances to get hosed over by RNG, that sounds like a glorious idea.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
Do you have a place where you can store that stuff or are these crafting materials lost on death?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
I think it's like the other surface things where you just have a backpack that goes with you on death? No idea how that'll work though, mine's already almost full.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
limaCAT posted:Do you have a place where you can store that stuff or are these crafting materials lost on death? Data has its own separate inventory that works like the Synthesis Elements one with it's own separate maximum capacity; in theory this too will be preserved on death. I'm going to log in the beta in a bit and blow up my Anaconda to test it out.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:10
|
|
|
radintorov posted:Manufactured materials share the same inventory as Synthesis Elements. And you still have an upper limit of 300 units total.   Of note is that I've had missions that provided Data or other materials as rewards (in addition to cash) and they even told me in advance what they were going to be, so running missions is another source for these. Edit:  You can see the materials in the Rewards section of the new mission interface, and you can also see that the mission is for someone that has a combat rank of Dangerous but I am still allowed to Accept it. radintorov fucked around with this message at 11:36 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
Truga posted:It's good that literally everything drops things you can use now. This system would work splendid if we could trade stuff we don't need with other people.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
There's so much new poo poo now that I almost don't know how to process it all. I still haven't really hosed around with the buggies, and now all the things are changing. It's daunting, but also nice to see.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 12:17
|
|
|
So I just gave bounty hunting in a HiRES a shot in the beta. Two Fer-de-Lances tried to run away but me being in one myself, I could actually keep up. Ended up dragged about 20km from the site beacon, though. Most ships I shot down would drop 5-10 units of various crafting materials - mostly different alloys, shield generators, focusing crystals, that kind of stuff. I also ended up with some data scans just from locking onto an enemy ship. More importantly, I managed to find a gimbaled C4 multi to fit on my FdL.  It fires at a speed roughly comparable to a C2 multicannon, except that each shot is a) actually two shots, and b) roughly equivalent to a C2 cannon shell. It's a beautifully flexible weapon - smaller ships are absolutely mauled by the hair of ordnance, and while the armor on ships like Anacondas and Pythons can resist it for a while - the high individual damage (for a multicannon) and surprising armor piercing make it exceedingly nasty when you target subsystems. I crashed the shields of a pirate Anaconda and proceeded to rip out its FSD in a single long salvo - must have taken me 5-10 seconds to take it from full health to null. I can't wait to see what happens if I can get this thing loaded with incendiaries.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
I'd really like a continuous boost in this game as an alternative to the f-zero style burst of speed you have to repeatedly fire off. It would be a relief not to have to hammer that button repeatedly when you're trying to speed towards a station or through a canyon etc. Has anyone tried souping up a cutter with speed buffs? or a clipper for that matter. Imagine a 500m/s clipper...
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Surprise Giraffe posted:I'd really like a continuous boost in this game as an alternative to the f-zero style burst of speed you have to repeatedly fire off. It would be a relief not to have to hammer that button repeatedly when you're trying to speed towards a station or through a canyon etc. Limited to size 3 thrusters and below unfortunately.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Is the Iggle the fastest ship in the game now with those thrusters, or is something else faster? I'm sure that a Courier would be a better combat craft as it has much more shields and such than the iggle, but for just pure speed, the iggle would be better?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
..I started a big effortpost about how the VIper3 would likely be even faster seeing as stock it's faster than the Eagle, THEN realized that Iggle = IEagle. Yeah, the iEagle will likely be the fastest ship, though this really needs to be experimented on. (Personally, I think a Viper3 with those racing thrusters will be terrifying - especially if you modify the hell out of the power core and FSD as well..)
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Drake_263 posted:..I started a big effortpost about how the VIper3 would likely be even faster seeing as stock it's faster than the Eagle, THEN realized that Iggle = IEagle. Yeah, the iEagle will likely be the fastest ship, though this really needs to be experimented on. (Personally, I think a Viper3 with those racing thrusters will be terrifying - especially if you modify the hell out of the power core and FSD as well..) I'm excited because the Viper and Eagle were my favorite ships to fly when I started playing a year ago. Now that their getting an upgrade, I'll be happy to use them again.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Xae posted:I've often thought that the next big Space Sim game should be a game set in our solar system with relativistic, but not Faster than Light, travel.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Sekenr posted:Not gonna happen. It would take 4 hours to travel to Neptune from the sun at the speed of light. Our supercruise is FTL and it's still boring as gently caress. For the person moving at .999c it's only 10 minutes though.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Dandywalken posted:How will the change affect my FAS I wonder? FAS can boogie pretty well itself, so it's not terribly inconvenienced by npcs running off. I will offer a bit of advice: Don't underestimate high rank Anacondas anymore. They've gotten extremely good at putting their crosshairs on you. In 2.0, I could fly my FAS into a HAZRes and 9 times out of 10 Anacondas never even opened fire because they never managed to get me in their firing cone. This was emphatically not the case when I tried it in 2.1. Fucker shot my power distributor out and made me run away.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Truga posted:For the person moving at .999c it's only 10 minutes though. Don't forget acceleration and decceleration: Both will add multiple hours to the travel time.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Yeah, was gonna say if the entire game is just one system you can fill it with content, but if you're going sperg about realism, system is pretty much avacuum, the rest is just a rounding error, so not really good to put content in
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
KakerMix posted:Limited to size 3 thrusters and below unfortunately. i'm gonna make a smuggling adder that goes really fast  And an eagle for canyon racing. Rah! fucked around with this message at 18:27 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Truga posted:Yeah, was gonna say if the entire game is just one system you can fill it with content, but if you're going sperg about realism, system is pretty much avacuum, the rest is just a rounding error, so not really good to put content in I'm definitely on the "gently caress realism" train. I just think that setting a game in our solar system would be cool.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
Xae posted:I'm definitely on the "gently caress realism" train. Well give the Diamond Frogs a few months to expand and you will get your wish
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:35
|
|
t
|
Sekenr posted:Not gonna happen. It would take 4 hours to travel to Neptune from the sun at the speed of light. Our supercruise is FTL and it's still boring as gently caress. Yeah, which can either be solved the Kerbal Space Program way or with a jump drive. Hamilton has a neat little system for this, wherein the ships navicomputer contains the relative speeds of the different jump targets and calculates the jump from star charts - basically a supercomputer with an observatory. The neat part is that the ship has to use its delta-V reserves to "match" the speed or the delta-V profile for its target: If you want to jump to Pluto, Pluto is either going quicker or slower than you (in orbit somewhere else) and you need to "catch up" to it before you jump, or risk a one-way ticket to pancake town/hurtling into space. This limits both your jump range (on average, the further you want to go the bigger your delta-V reserves need to be) and is a cool game mechanic where you put some actual stellar/orbital mechanics into your game. What I'm saying is, okay, gently caress realism, but is it such a crime to make a hard sci-fi game for actual nerds? Maybe, I don't know, actually require something of the player? Guess I'm just bored with piss-easy superficial games. I also think realistic space combat would be a cool thing, as long as it's nothing like EVE online.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
I haven't really played since Horizons came out, but I got a Rift in the meantime and holy gently caress is it a whole different experience. The only problem I have is the galaxy map is basically unuseable. I have remapped my HOTAS controls to be able to pan/zoom/rotate, but I just can't focus on specific planets. I watched one youtube video that showed a guy doing this, and his targetting cursor seemed to 'snap' on to nearby bodies, but mine doesn't do this 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Xae posted:I'm definitely on the "gently caress realism" train. Isn't that what the battlescape kickstarter was? I backed that, hoping it's cool. Literally Kermit posted:Well give the Diamond Frogs a few months to expand and you will get your wish 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:What I'm saying is, okay, gently caress realism, but is it such a crime to make a hard sci-fi game for actual nerds? Maybe, I don't know, actually require something of the player? Guess I'm just bored with piss-easy superficial games. I also think realistic space combat would be a cool thing, as long as it's nothing like EVE online. Infinity Battlescape is built for one solar system. Also, this is promising for hard sci-fi. http://imagespaceinc.com/rogsys/ There is always Orbiter too.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
Nice piece of fish posted:Yeah, which can either be solved the Kerbal Space Program way or with a jump drive. Hamilton has a neat little system for this, wherein the ships navicomputer contains the relative speeds of the different jump targets and calculates the jump from star charts - basically a supercomputer with an observatory. The neat part is that the ship has to use its delta-V reserves to "match" the speed or the delta-V profile for its target: If you want to jump to Pluto, Pluto is either going quicker or slower than you (in orbit somewhere else) and you need to "catch up" to it before you jump, or risk a one-way ticket to pancake town/hurtling into space. This limits both your jump range (on average, the further you want to go the bigger your delta-V reserves need to be) and is a cool game mechanic where you put some actual stellar/orbital mechanics into your game. This would be a cool and fine game but I feel like realistic space combat cannot possibly have an involving action / twitch component without losing the 'realistic' part. As a strategy game or similar, sure, go nuts.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
Tried out a Viper III with the enhanced thrusters. Weight makes a big difference with these thrusters, so the Viper's hefty enough that an Imperial Eagle still outruns it. Good for well over 500 m/s, though. Still no luck finding Basic Conductors, not from combat, missions, or even mining.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
TRON JEREMY posted:Still no luck finding Basic Conductors, not from combat, missions, or even mining. I seriously don't know why Frontier doesn't allow us trading that stuff, it's the last great barrier to make this system really good. 
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:This would be a cool and fine game but I feel like realistic space combat cannot possibly have an involving action / twitch component without losing the 'realistic' part. As a strategy game or similar, sure, go nuts. I donno, we don't even need to go very far to find an example of trying to marry "realism" and combat. Elite: First Encounters sort of did it, I think? I remember the flight engine feeling a lot more Newtonian than anything else I've ever played. I also fondly remember mistiming a deceleration window and slamming into a planet screaming. At the risk of stating the obvious, this is more of a spectrum than a dichotomy between "realism" and "fun," where you can add touches that enhance the verisimilitude without going nuts with it. Game developers just need to remember their first question is "Is this fun?"
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 23:01 |
|
|
RabidWeasel posted:This would be a cool and fine game but I feel like realistic space combat cannot possibly have an involving action / twitch component without losing the 'realistic' part. As a strategy game or similar, sure, go nuts. At that point you're not especially realistic anyway, since you have ships that somehow have a power source that can generate relativistic amounts of energy and are armored enough to not be torn apart just moving at those speeds. Most likely those ships would be zipping around like flies on crack at anything remotely near the 1000-km scale, and the main limit to their tactical maneuverability would be the maximum force their crews could take before passing out/getting crushed into paste. At the same time, there's enough space in a solar system to set up countless orbitals and space stations, only Earth is known to be habitable so you have a point of conflict, and you have maybe a dozen regions to focus on as opposed to a thousand different stars all over the place. Keep in mind how drat big a planet is; moving around the outer orbit of an inner planet still wouldn't be doable without hitting your warp drive or whatever, and moving at all in an outer planet's system of rings and moons makes it mandatory. Each one could be structured like a region in Eve rather than a system in Elite. Good Dumplings fucked around with this message at 20:54 on May 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 20:50
|
|
