|
Wasn't the prevalence of mods supposed to be scaled to the rank of the NPC anyway? Sacrificing variety seems like the wrong way to address complaints about difficulty, no matter how much some people whined that "it's not fair that they have these things  ". Having to contend with special effects being used against you in PVE is a cool thing that improves gameplay.Maybe the mundane stat boosts are less meaningful because you probably can't tell they're there on an NPC, but then by the same token how do you know how much of the increased difficulty is actually attributable to those mods?
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:53 |
|
|
So wait, the multiple youtube videos with tens of thousands of views with the multicannon PAC isn't evidence enough? Or was that seriously 'working as intended'?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
On the upside, I bloody well love how nav beacons can get scanned and point out where the hell your elusive object is for a mission.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:Didn't they previously say that Bi-weave shields being removed was 100% the plan and always intended? At least own the mistake. A customer service rep implied it on Twitter over the weekend. Not that this matters to the circlejerk.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:They never said that. https://twitter.com/Frontier_Help/status/736590422215151616
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
So yep, they never said that. Can you point me to the intended part?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Good to see they have finally taken action. Like N4I said there were a lot of complaints about those aspects during beta, but then again the grognard ratio is probably higher amongst beta testers than in the player population as a whole.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:So yep, they never said that. I may well be misunderstanding this, but is the timeline not: 1 - Bi-weave shields added in the non-beta, live game as of 1.5/2.0 2 - Bi-weave shields removed when 1.6/2.1 is released to the live game. 3 - That tweet states they were only "available in beta" and were purposely removed from the live game (despite being in the live game for several months already) 4 - The latest communication says it wasn't intended and is a bug. ?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
Truga posted:Yeah, the accel/deceleration part of supercruise is waaaay too long. This is the type of thing that would be solved with something like an Advanced Navigation Computer upgrade that gives you a wider margin to drop out of super-cruise or even point-to-point jumps in systems to other large gravity wells when they're in the same system. Requirements for something like that would be at least a Surveyor or above and a trip to Hutton Orbital for a part. That way you've at least done it the hard way a good number of times before you can take the easy way out.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
TTerrible posted:
I don't really get that feeling from the tweet man. I mean, it states two things. 1. This item was made available for testing in Beta 2. This item is not currently available in the live game It does not state that the item was ONLY available for testing in Beta and then got purposely removed. If I could judge the tweet, I'd say that the guy in CS just asked a developer before answering (he didn't know), and didn't understand the answer he gave. I don't think that FDEV ever wished or wanted to remove the shields. If they did, I think they would have given us a reason for it. The reason I do believe this stems also from the fact that in the past they have not shied away from making controversial decisions and actively/loudly defending them on the Frontier Forums and social media....at least until they themselves understand how terrible they were. I might be wrong on this, but I think that the fact they readily admitted it was a bug was truthful. Turmoil posted:This is the type of thing that would be solved with something like an Advanced Navigation Computer upgrade that gives you a wider margin to drop out of super-cruise or even point-to-point jumps in systems to other large gravity wells when they're in the same system. I think we need three things. 1. The ability to go over 2000c for loooong trips. 2. The ability to do micro-jumps inside a multiple star system (strictly from one star to the other). 3. An acceleration/deceleration curve that is more connected to the whole idea of gravity wells. Dante80 fucked around with this message at 17:05 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:I don't really get that feeling from the tweet man. Yeah, fair enough. I can see how it can be read both ways. Its just so 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
Glad they're changing the NPC mod stuff. I don't mind seeing NPCs with them like other goons have been saying but things were pretty ridiculous. Getting vaporized in seconds without any real chance of being able to run away really blows and makes bounty hunting very unfun IMO.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
Well good that they're clearing up their mess, I really hope that they give at least some small chance for highly ranked AI pilots in good ships to have engineer mods, with a correspondingly larger bounty. It would be nice to occasionally run into a big, scary enemy which gives a big fat reward. This probably isn't going to happen because their ability to judge risk / effort vs reward has been totally hosed since day 1 but it's nice to dream.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:I ground out my initial imperial ranks by just taking any old [empire] missions on the bulletin boards. It's not terribly efficient I guess but the early ranks aren't that bad. NoneMoreNegative posted:I ground a couple ranks to Baron at HIP 10716, but I'm not sure if it's still viable post-patch. There's a Reddit page and some youtubes documenting the procedure. Base assaults have been thoroughly nerfed. Dumbfires' damage radius was toned way down to make them less destructive against bases, surface bases now have point defense to shoot down missiles, attempting to ram skimmers will cause your ship's shields and (I think) thrusters to shut down, and the cap on how many missions you can have at once has been lowered to less than half of what it used to be. All the easy rank methods have been nerfed into the ground and I don't think anyone's found the new fastest way yet.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
This was the expanded response given a day after the confusing tweets:quote:Twitter is an amazing resource for quickly engaging the community and providing answers, but that character limit sure is tricky sometimes. Allow me to clarify things here: If support didn't know anything they shouldn't have said anything. Nothing Sticks tweeted or posted made anything any clearer and just made people extremely confused. A simple "I don't know but am looking into it" would have stopped the wild speculation and complaints long enough for the real response we got today: quote:Bi-Weave shields The twitter and email support ticket team don't know anything about the game in my experience. I have yet to have a helpful exchange with them on any topic and they seem ignorant on basic game mechanics. They usually refer me to the support forum to post there instead because they just can't answer simple queries about bugged mechanics. They really screwed up the hiring or prepping in that department. Space Skeleton fucked around with this message at 17:25 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Ok so that expanded tweet now says it was a design decision. I give up.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:22
|
|
|
I would kill to have light orbital mechanics for landing at planets when atmospheres become a thing. Tie it to the planets Gs. Draw a line to show your current path so you can tune it to an orbit or decent. Have a lax entry envelope and speed that creates a safe ammount of heat. If your a total rear end and boost straight in you'll cook your ship and components. Since fuel isn't an issue it would be a fairly forgiving minigame at best and add some depth to the travel.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
I'm really, really excited to see how Fdev will tackle atmospheric flight in their model. Different gravity and atmospheric density would be something very fun to play with if they do it justice.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
Come back after four months off to my worked Vulture.... USS [Threat 2] Jumped by a four agile as hell cobras. I thought that was pretty funny.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Truga posted:What I'm doing these days is just keep throttle at 100% (100% pretty much stops decelerating almost completely for some reason), fly "below" the target, look up at it, and keep the timer at 2-3 seconds by pulling up into it and reducing throttle to 95%. I do something similar but I set it to 75%, then aim down and keep the target at the top of the screen, and then you don't circle around at all. I have found it much faster then other methods.,
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:I'm really, really excited to see how Fdev will tackle atmospheric flight in their model. Different gravity and atmospheric density would be something very fun to play with if they do it justice. Judging by how this patch went, they'll probably intend for different flight dynamics, but instead you'll just be stuck forever in place once you exit Glide mode and the devs will just say it's because you don't have 4 pips to engines
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
Combat is hard now, which is nice. On that note, grinding powerplay merits is really hard now because of system security. I like the change because it's actually making me consider trading!
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Icedude posted:Judging by how this patch went, they'll probably intend for different flight dynamics, but instead you'll just be stuck forever in place once you exit Glide mode and the devs will just say it's because you don't have 4 pips to engines No, it is that poo poo that they do get right. Flying in space feels awesome, as do flying in planetary bodies (with different gravities).
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Spacman posted:Come back after four months off to my worked Vulture.... I ran into a wing of Elite FDLs in a [Threat 0].
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
Dante80 posted:I'm really, really excited to see how Fdev will tackle atmospheric flight in their model. Different gravity and atmospheric density would be something very fun to play with if they do it justice. I'm curious, too, since most of the ships do not look even remotely aerodynamic.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
With a strong enough engine even a brick can fly.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
We've got some pretty bricks up in this bitch too. Corvette justification should be pretty interesting. e: I can't remember the specifics behind this. If I were to use an Asp to upgrade internals for use on an FDL, when I sell the internals back to the station after I've upgraded them in the Asp, will they still be there for rebuy once I switch over to the FDL and vice versa? The rebuy option doesn't go away until you've left the station, right? (now would be a good loving time for module storage, )
LCL-Dead fucked around with this message at 19:18 on May 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:I'm curious, too, since most of the ships do not look even remotely aerodynamic. All ships in the game can hover on their vertical thrusters at 1g and slow from reentry speeds to subsonic speeds in a matter of seconds using their warp (super cruise) drive. They can deal with atmospheres by brute force. If ships have to slow from escape reentry speeds then the shields can handle it. You can park in a star's corona which is anywhere from 3500K in "cold spots" to >1million K in the middle of coronal mass ejections. During "glide" a ship would "only" have to deal with about 2500K. (typical entry temperature for earth in K is approximately the craft's speed in m/s up until about 12km/s). You can probably get a lot of lift by adjusting the shape of a ship's shield (and it could present a nice blunt body during hypersonic flight). In short, magic.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:20
|
|
|
LCL-Dead posted:We've got some pretty bricks up in this bitch too. the corvette has "wings" 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
Is there any lore for this game? The wiki's I've seen tend to be awfully brief. Also, yay, on scaling back difficulty. I was considering selling my vulture.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:36
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:All ships in the game can hover on their vertical thrusters at 1g and slow from reentry speeds to subsonic speeds in a matter of seconds using their warp (super cruise) drive. They can deal with atmospheres by brute force. Shields could conceivably be modulated into any extremely aerodynamic shape imaginable. Now flying your Type-9 without shields might not be the best idea for fuel economy. Breaking your canopy in atmosphere is going to be cool as hell.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:Is there any lore for this game? The wiki's I've seen tend to be awfully brief. They didn't really scale back difficulty (even though a bunch of Brown Seamen keep whining about it), they just removed weapons. The AI tactics and abilities still remain, which is probably fine.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
They can fly planetside because Mass Effect FieldsMoraleHazard posted:Is there any lore for this game? The wiki's I've seen tend to be awfully brief. Unfortunately, not much. Our goon group in the otherthread is half ironically bringing back GalCop, which I think was the space UN from the old games. Other than that, there are weird rumours of ~something~ in hyperspace, weird alien probes that shut down starports if you bring them near, and things hanging around that look like human ships but have no sensor signature and don't respond to hails 
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
There's a timeline out there, but it's very loose. There's neat things hinted at in it, but with no details, I can't figure out if it's cool or not. I'm assuming it's from the original Elite manual or something like that. http://daftworks.co.uk/elite/index.php/Galactic_Timeline Or some dude made it up.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:There's a timeline out there, but it's very loose. There's neat things hinted at in it, but with no details, I can't figure out if it's cool or not. I'm assuming it's from the original Elite manual or something like that. It was made by the guy who wrote the official lore (and fate) of the original GalCop, for the devs of the current game. It's also what I have been going by writing lore for the new GalCop. There's lots and lots of material floating out there, not even counting the books and lol if you think I am buying those. Some of it is retconned but that never loving stopped me or my spite, which is why I play a character crossed between Kermit the Frog and Big Boss (and Raoul Duke) and technically remain lore-friendly.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 20:15
|
|
t
|
Mike the TV posted:Breaking your canopy in atmosphere is going to be cool as hell. Procedurally generated bird strikes?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
MoraleHazard posted:Is there any lore for this game? The wiki's I've seen tend to be awfully brief. If you haven't seen it, the original Elite from 1984 came with a novella called The Dark Wheel which you can read online at http://www.elitehomepage.org/dkwheel.htm
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
DancingShade posted:At this point you really have to wonder why they even bothered with a test server. BECAUSE they sell beta PATCH access for MONEY. You get to "test" their broken af game for just a nominal fee of 15 dollars!
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
Fishreds99 posted:BECAUSE they sell beta PATCH access for MONEY. You get to "test" their broken af game for just a nominal fee of 15 dollars! And you get the privilege of being ignored when you say poo poo like "Engineer weapons on AI is unbalanced, maybe don't do that."
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 05:53 |
|
|
Literally Kermit posted:It was made by the guy who wrote the official lore (and fate) of the original GalCop, for the devs of the current game. It's also what I have been going by writing lore for the new GalCop. that's all fine and dandy but you still have that horrible anime girl from the stream tests as an avatar, and it's really starting to lose its lustre.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2016 21:27
|
|
