|
Yeah, mass reduction is a must for exploring, and with less mass comes increased range. I also got a decent heat efficiency boost on my low emissions power plant.
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:48 |
|
|
Trustworthy posted:Now the update has dropped, I'm going to jump back in for some Engineer grinding. I like the whole more resource drops thing, but it's weird that they got rid of some of the rare resource requirements as well...? The system needed a little balancing, not nerfing into babyland. When I roll a level 5, I want to feel like I've loving earned it. -There are shield upgrades which make your shield a little bit lighter (and stronger, if you're lucky) -Power Plant and Distributor upgrades can potentially make a size too small just powerful enough that you can take them, thus saving more weight -Weapons all have light-weight options, so if you want to arm your explorer, it's time to save yet even more weight -Likewise if the math is right, you can take a smaller drive and tune it up to compensate. Weight saved again. Also sometimes you can get extra-effects even on non-weapons (my level 4 FSD range-upgrade for example dropped a couple percent from my charge-up time as secondary effect), so if you have the materials, it may be worth a gamble to try multiple times. Edit: beaten again
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:01
|
|
Yolomon Wayne posted:Didnt they scrap the idea of multiplayer in NMS? It was never really there in the first place.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
If you've brought armour, you can lightweight it. You can actually lightweight no armour and gain slight bonuses for free.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:39
|
|
|
"no armour" is really lightweight armour. It's says right there in the outfitting window! 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Well there isn't a no armor. It's just lightweight armor that comes standard with the ship.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Right but it's got no mass as it is. So you just gain extra hull strength for free.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Nicetalga4Meltdown posted:Well there isn't a no armor. It's just lightweight armor that comes standard with the ship. I mean, it's the space-age alloy equivalent of aircraft aluminum. Able to withstand cropdusting the sun, but basically it's 1/8 of an inch of metal between you and infinite void.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 14:59
|
|
|
deadly_pudding posted:I mean, it's the space-age alloy equivalent of aircraft aluminum. Able to withstand cropdusting the sun, but basically it's 1/8 of an inch of metal between you and infinite void. This description makes me hard for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
What attracts me to exploring in Elite is the accuracy of it, and modeling our actual galaxy- that I can go fly around real objects that I can go look at through a telescope. Objects have realistic physical properties, are classified using real systems and are named according to real catalogues. E:D is the most complete and thorough model of our galaxy in any video game, excepting possibly Space Engine. As an astronomer, it means a lot to me to see my field being represented fairly accurately. No Man's Sky has none of that, and that doesn't hold nearly the same appeal to me. I realize that 99.9% of players don't give a poo poo about that- but the ability to explore our own galaxy is what drew me to Elite in the first place, and NMS probably won't scratch that itch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:What attracts me to exploring in Elite is the accuracy of it, and modeling our actual galaxy- that I can go fly around real objects that I can go look at through a telescope. Objects have realistic physical properties, are classified using real systems and are named according to real catalogues. E:D is the most complete and thorough model of our galaxy in any video game, excepting possibly Space Engine. As an astronomer, it means a lot to me to see my field being represented fairly accurately. I think the original Elite was one of the reasons I developed a fascination with space as a kid that has lasted well into my adult life. I agree that there's something special about the verisimilitude at play here that NMS won't have. Of course, being able to visit Poopdickballs II and see the glorious speckled Mangina discovered by A7X~GoKuSePhIrOtH420~A7X still holds its own special appeal. Hexenritter fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Jul 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:What attracts me to exploring in Elite is the accuracy of it, and modeling our actual galaxy- that I can go fly around real objects that I can go look at through a telescope. Objects have realistic physical properties, are classified using real systems and are named according to real catalogues. E:D is the most complete and thorough model of our galaxy in any video game, excepting possibly Space Engine. As an astronomer, it means a lot to me to see my field being represented fairly accurately. One of the first computer games I ever played was The Halley Project on my Apple IIc. Flying via spaceship to real-life destinations within our Solar System felt magical then (so much so that I'm vividly imagining and mentioning it now, like 30 years later). I think E:D captures a lot of that magic for very similar reasons, and on a larger scale. edit: oh and it definitely helped to fire me up about space/STEM to the point that i became an astronomy educator
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
LCL-Dead posted:On NMS multiplayer, from an article dated May this year: In the exact article you quoted the developer flat out says "no multiplayer, but you will see what other players have named things". It's basically, literally, going to be dark souls without summoning or invasions, it's very clearly obvious and yet people and the media keep reading into things soooo much, the drama when it comes is going to be fabulous. Don't get me wrong I hope it's fun, who doesn't want more good space games, but I feel like I'm one of 6 people with reasonable expectations of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
I haven't played Elite Dangerous since just after Horizons came out. I've been thinking about getting back into the game but I was a little burnt out on how dull things were feeling. What's been going on in updates, community events, and Diamond Frog activities since?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:What attracts me to exploring in Elite is the accuracy of it, and modeling our actual galaxy- that I can go fly around real objects that I can go look at through a telescope. Objects have realistic physical properties, are classified using real systems and are named according to real catalogues. E:D is the most complete and thorough model of our galaxy in any video game, excepting possibly Space Engine. As an astronomer, it means a lot to me to see my field being represented fairly accurately. I like both approaches. In my view point, both games are doing things well, just differently. It's like reading either a good fantasy or a good SF-novel. Both are fundamentally different, but still fun to read.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
My impression of NMS is that its more of a survival game. If its done like subnautica you gather poo poo so you can equip better gear, that lets you go into more dangerous areas that have rarer resources etc. All with loose narrative you can ignore or advance, like going to find whatever is in the center of the galaxy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2016 21:26
|
|
|
Hexenritter posted:I think the original Elite was one of the reasons I developed a fascination with space as a kid that has lasted well into my adult life. I agree that there's something special about the verisimilitude at play here that NMS won't have. Ditto. Elite 2 in Amiga (together with the 1992 Shuttle game) made me a space buff. I am going to play the hell out of NMS, and probably put Elite off some months because of it. But Space Madness will always call back..<3 In other news, Newsletter is out. http://email-elitedangerous.com/t/3F35-A0QS-EC33OUQFC5/cr.aspx Horizons weekend sale coming.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 01:43
|
|
|
It's a pretty small thing and maybe it's just me, but… …did they change the timing on the “Slow down” warning so that it appears early enough to actually give you a chance to throttle back in time?
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 06:01
|
|
|
I was always under the impression that the 'Slow Down' warning isn't telling you that you should slow down now but that you're so deep into a nearby gravity well, you are being slowed down.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 18:35
|
|
|
Yeah, the "Slow Down"-warning showing up earlier wouldn't do jack poo poo when you're passing through a gas giant's moon system or through an asteroid belt, because in those cases you don't want to slow down anyway. I've always taken it as a warning that other stellar objects nearby are slowing me down, not that I need to slow down myself. In my experience, in 9 out of 10 cases, you actually have to go full throttle when the warning shows up, to compensate from gravity clinging to your ship like molasses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Maybe. Either way, it feels like it's showing up earlier now so it now can be used as a tip rather than as a warning. e: By the way, just tested it. It is clearly meant to be a tip that you're going too fast to be able to stop, as opposed to a warning that you're losing speed. Try locking onto a USS while going at full tilt, and turn towards it — the Slow Down warning will pop up because you're going too fast, not because the USS has any gravity (if you don't lock onto it, you can just blow past it without any warning). Tippis fucked around with this message at 00:30 on Jul 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 21:07
|
|
|
If this game supported modding, a good one would be to add a HUD element to depict gravity wells 3D wireframe TRON style.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
It does that already at the point where the gravity will mass lock you. A gravity well isn't a wall though, you can't draw a line and say it's "here". Not saying a visual indicator of what's happening to your ship wouldn't be nice, just that what's happening isn't really that simple.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
It kind of does that with the blue circles around planets, but I dunno what they actually signify other than 'there is gravity'. I want a button to close shutters over your canopy and have a wireframe of sensor data projected, 1984 style 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 22:35
|
|
|
Started my trek out to Jaques Station. I don't know why. I probably won't even get there to deliver my puny 72 tons of cargo before the 3 weeks runs out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
How real is Elite on the world modelling stuff, like can I literally go to the science museum, look through a telescope, pick out a star, and go find it in game? Or look up a constellation Wikipedia page to get the Star names and find it..do the real names match up on the galaxy map? Played for hours this afternoon in a Rift and dang it's so groovy and chillaxing. The HMD+hotass+(diy)buttkicker setup is sublime. Not to mention a whole lot cheaper than racing sim stuff.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 23:12
|
|
|
Elite is probably one of the most realistic depictions of the Milky Way ever put into a video game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:I want a button to close shutters over your canopy and have a wireframe of sensor data projected, 1984 style That's an awesome idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
teh_Broseph posted:How real is Elite on the world modelling stuff, like can I literally go to the science museum, look through a telescope, pick out a star, and go find it in game? Or look up a constellation Wikipedia page to get the Star names and find it..do the real names match up on the galaxy map? It's real in the sense that the procedural generation is reasonably consistent with existing models of formation of stars and their systems. It's also real in the sense that, if you look up any of the 160k catalogue stars that they've put into the game, there's a decent chance that at least the primary star will be consistent with the scientific data, as will the general location of the star. But that's about it. Exoplanetology is still in its infancy so even in well-known systems, any planets you find are at best pure guesswork. And if you look up good old HIP 63835, it will not be listed as an insane O + triple blackhole binary binary orbited by a smattering of brown dwarfs, red dwarfs, G- and O-stars, along with their invariably insane planets. Instead, it'll just be some vague variable star. Similarly, you don't really have to try very hard to find stars that aren't in Elite, especially if you start looking for way-down-the-alphabet constellation stars. If, for instance, you look up a list of Wolf-Rayet stars on Wikipedia because you want to go visit one of those, there's a fair chance that they won't be in the game. Still, as a general idea and broad depiction, it's pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 00:26
|
|
|
Tippis posted:It's a pretty small thing and maybe it's just me, but… Just to add to the chorus: the "Slow Down" warning means you are experiencing slow down, not that you should slow down. This has a distinctive warning which you can hear: your FSD will start getting louder and whining as it loses traction in the gravity well. If you want to not overshoot objects, set your throttle to the middle of the sweet spot when you get to 6s, if it goes below 5s you will overshoot. If you hit it right, it will stay at 6s and you will be able to hear your FSD keeping hold as you fall into the object. teh_Broseph posted:How real is Elite on the world modelling stuff, like can I literally go to the science museum, look through a telescope, pick out a star, and go find it in game? Or look up a constellation Wikipedia page to get the Star names and find it..do the real names match up on the galaxy map? Yes, literally this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
Toxic Fart Syndrome posted:Just to add to the chorus: the "Slow Down" warning means you are experiencing slow down, not that you should slow down. This has a distinctive warning which you can hear: your FSD will start getting louder and whining as it loses traction in the gravity well. If you want to not overshoot objects, set your throttle to the middle of the sweet spot when you get to 6s, if it goes below 5s you will overshoot. If you hit it right, it will stay at 6s and you will be able to hear your FSD keeping hold as you fall into the object. …but again, it also shows up when you should be slowing down, such as for a USS, which does not have a gravity well that would affect your ship. Now, granted, it may be because the ship is trying to slow down to match a locked target, but at that point, you have to ask why the ship would do that and why you can't ignore gravity wells by not locking them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
Tippis posted:…but again, it also shows up when you should be slowing down, such as for a USS, which does not have a gravity well that would affect your ship. Now, granted, it may be because the ship is trying to slow down to match a locked target, but at that point, you have to ask why the ship would do that and why you can't ignore gravity wells by not locking them. Now that's easily explained: In one case you have gravity wells externally influencing your ship, in the other case your ship's computer tries to match speed to a locked target. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 07:02
|
|
|
Libluini posted:Now that's easily explained: In one case you have gravity wells externally influencing your ship, in the other case your ship's computer tries to match speed to a locked target. Well… sure. But the mystery — or at least the original question — remains: have they change it so that it triggers sooner now, since it seems like the warning goes off early enough to actually let you slow down, whereas before, it pretty much universally went off when you were already over-shooting (intentionally or not)?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 07:05
|
|
|
I suppose it doesn't really matter why it happens, the warning functionally means the same thing regardless of it being caused by a gravity well or  computer thing. When you see the "Slow Down" warning, even if your throttle remains at 100%, your ship's relative velocity will begin dropping. Much the same as a pilot hearing his computer say "STALL STALL STALL." It means he is stalling, not that he should stall his plane. You should really gauge when to throttle down by the impact countdown I mentioned: it works for any targeted object. This is also probably the real reason you get slow down for objects without a gravity well: to make it easier to land on them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 07:17
|
|
|
 Yes? And? That was never the problem, now was it?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
My favourite method is still flinging yourself past your target with wild abandon, putting your speed just barely into the blue zone and then curving back, letting the slingshot slow you down. Disclaimer: This is only great fun in a nimble ship and be careful when trying this on planets you want to land on. Otherwise, I'm just Mr. Impatient and use the impact-countdown method with slight adjustment: 80-90% blue zone, but I adjust my speed as soon as my arrival time drops into the single digits. Many roads lead to Rome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 07:36
|
|
|
I usually curve toward the target. Turning sheds speed too in supercruise too, so coming in aimed off-target gives me the opportunity to shed any excess speed that might have built up and end on target, instead overshooting and having to do a 180
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 09:35
|
|
|
Tippis posted:It's real in the sense that the procedural generation is reasonably consistent with existing models of formation of stars and their systems. It's also real in the sense that, if you look up any of the 160k catalogue stars that they've put into the game, there's a decent chance that at least the primary star will be consistent with the scientific data, as will the general location of the star.  (An arcsecond is approximately the angle subtended by a U.S. dime coin (18mm) at a distance of 4 kilometres (about 2.5 mi).) As I watch this gif, I think about systems with 400,000LS distances between stars, and I wonder how how elite reconciles close and rapidly changing stellar distances. But mostly I wonder if there are any planets orbiting "S0-2" that I could ride on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
DreadLlama posted:But mostly I wonder if there are any planets orbiting "S0-2" that I could ride on. Nope, sorry, there's only Sag A* and S0-2 in that system there. And the orbit is still years anyways so it wouldn't be moving all that fast. ...but if it's wild ride you want head over to Mitterand Hollow!.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 20:48 |
|
Natsuumi posted:Nope, sorry, there's only Sag A* and S0-2 in that system there. And the orbit is still years anyways so it wouldn't be moving all that fast. Someone posted a video of one even way crazier than that but I don't remember the name.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2016 17:58
|
|