Sensors

[CalenLoki]

I believe game could benefit from more sensors.
All those are meant to output yolol values, not UI elements.

It's debatable how much automation should be possible, and how much should be left for players invention.
So I'll just list all of them and leave it open for discussion and devs decision.

1. Safe zone detector. Outputs 1 when in safe zone. Use: mostly noob protection. Also useful to avoid cluttering UI with extra elements.
2. Gravity detector. Outputs angle difference between sensor and gravity. Two/three fields: pitch and roll and maybe magnitude. Outside moon gravity it could point at eos.
3. Accelerometer. Shows acceleration 4 fields: x,y,z, magnitude. Kind of redundant if we get speedometer.
4. Rangefinder. Already in game. Would be nice to have check frequency inversely proportional to length. I.e. at 1km 10 times per second, under 100m 100Hz, 5km 2Hz. Or scale power use by range.
5. Proximity sensor. Outputs distance to closest object within cone. Range*angle*frequency/power use=constant
6. Material detector. Single ray that outputs 4 fields: core and shell names and volumes. Or case of aiming at ship/station components type (i.e. plate), material, volume, mass (?)
7. Speedometer. 4 fields, showing direction x,y,z (relatively to the sensor, not normalised) and magnitude.
8. Gyroscope. Shows orientation relatively to universal orientation. Yaw, pitch, roll.
9. GPS. Shows universal position. I'm personally against it, but I'll leave it there.
10. IFF. Single ray. Point at ship with transponder to know the owner and ships name.
11. Laser sensor. Outputs pitch/yaw between the sensors front and object painted with laser designator. Same as the one on torpedoes,but for ships. Can be set to read only one laser frequency. Also an "laser decoy" that acts as part painted by laser. Useful for drone-ships seeing each other, ship-ship colision avoidance, automatic docking, ect.
12. Ship detector. Radar/sonar/heat/radiation. There's plenty of threads about these, so I'll just mention it.
13. Receiver. In game. Would be nice if they could receive some variables too. I.e. name, signal strength, frequency, var1, var2, var3. Could be enough to remotely control some drones.
14. Seat track-IR. Outputs pitch and yaw of seated endo head.
15. Radiation/corrosion detector. For those dangerous places in the belt. Should output magnitude, not only 0/1
16. Damage detector. Either switch to 1 when ship takes damage (reset manually/with code) or counts missed voxels since last reset. Could be for the entire ship, or only within certain distance.
17. Structural integrity. Outputs warp class of the weakest object. Could be localised or whole ship.
18. Mass indicator: displays mass of the whole ship.
19. Endo detector. Outputs 1 when there is endo within set distance. Use: alternative to lifeline, automatic doors, security.
20. Celestial body detector. Works as receiver, but treats Eos and moons as transmitters. Very long range (unlimited for Eos, tens of thousands km for moons). To make it funnier, they should have unique, unknown to players signal strength.

I've probably missed some. Feel free to suggest more, I'll add them to OP

 

[five]

1. Safe zone detectors should be implemented into the UI in my opinion, because having a seperate detector for that seems unnecessary. Maybe you could add as a side function to the receiver, like that you get a stations exact coordinates and data once your inside the safezone.
2. Gravity detectors would be very usefull in my opinion, as they would allow you to land a craft more safely and easily. Though I would also implement this as a function of the gyroscope, since I would want to reduce the overall amount of sensors having to be implemented into the game.
3. I dont know if you need an accelerometer if you want to implement a speedometer.
4. I like that idea of a change it would limit their potential in a good way, because I think there will be much more use of range finders for automation once the game hits EA or Release
5. Again a good idea for a sensor needed in Automation
6. I like the idea of this material scanner, though i would limit it to mining ores because it would make really easy otherwise to reverse engineer a ship
7. Speedometer is a must have for me since I want to test my ships speed, without having to add a quadruple ISAN System.
8. Gyroscope very much needed for atmospheric flights and maneuvering in general, a ship could also transfer its gyroscope data to a factory so the factory can work perfectly, even if the ship isnt placed perfectly.
9. I get why you would want to have a GPS sensor, but first of all we have ISAN and secondly we would have to build the satellites all around eos to manage that system.
10. You could also implemented into a function with the receiver and maybe make like a real life pilot radio system
11. Usefull for automation I dunno?
12. I NEEEEEED THAT SHIT
13. I think this is mandatory to be implemented into the game
14. I get why you would want that but I imagine those controlls to feel really wanky.
15. Definetly needed for mining
16. You know when you hit your ship, you dont or shouldnt need a sensor for that, I think it would be annoying, especially if you have an audio signal as output, like SHUT THE **** UP I KNOW I AM BEING SHOT AT!!! Its in my opinion like having a oversensitive parking sensor for a person that can park their car without one
17. There is a hand tool for that and how do you wanna access that mid flight???

Now for my own ideas:
1. I'd like to see a sensor that could detect an error within a system, like a debugging system for YOLOL you have to add, that tells you if what you are doing is done by the controlled device. If it doesn't work it gives you an error code for said system, like lets say you have a turret on your ship and it gets sabotaged, you'ld know that for example your guns arent responding to a firing order. This would also be helpfull to know what was hit during a battle. Like I said you know when you are hit, but you don't neccesary WHAT has been damaged on your ship.
2. A sensor for torpedos that tells you either if you have a successfull lock on your enemy or if you are being locked on.

 

[CalenLoki]

1. I'd rather keep UI to the minimum. Also it could be used for some sort of automation: change internal/external lights, turn on/off collision avoidance/silent mode/transponder/radar, turn on alarm lights and siren on station when safe zone drops during siege, ect.
2. Cramming so many functions into one engine isn't always good. You may end up paying for function you'll never use.
3. You're right. I'll keep it there just so the list is complete.
4. .
5. .
6. Don't see how you could use it for reverse engineering. It gives you material and type, but not rotation or precise position
7. .
8. .
9. I actually don't want built-in GPSGPS. I've put it there to have complete list.
10. True, receiver could do that too. Especially if it had some more data fields.
11. That one is already confirmed as planned. Same as the used for guiding torpedoes. Could be also used to remotely control drones (i.e. point at asteroid you want to be mined), or to aim turrets mounted on other ships. Or if you point it at your own ship, you'll know if someone is painting you as a target.
12. .
13. .
14. So far IMO that's the best way to implement mouse control. Especially when you're a gunner on a ship hosted by someone else, as it reduces imput lag.
15. .
16. On a big ship you may not notice that someone is shooting at your butt. But I'm not sure if we need it or should have it.
17. Hand tool can't automate stuff. I.e. you could turn on alarm/lock controls if you overload cargo crates/beams/frames. Or your drone may refuse to pick asteroid that would break it.
18. I can see what functionality you wan from that sensor, but I can't see a way to implement it. Maybe it'd output name of the most recently removed/added device field? It can be done with yolol: afaik it'll skip rest of the line if you refer to nonexistent device field. I.e.

    a=Turret1 goto 3
    Alert="Turret 1 destroyed"
    a=Turret2 goto 5
    Alert="Turret 2 destroyed"
    a=Turret3 goto 6
    Alert="Turret 3 destroyed"

    (not tested)
19. Afaik torpedoes are only manually guided with laser designator.

 

[Miha0.0]

I really like the idea the sensor 14. That would allow to make easier lots of things. Piloting and using turrets of all kind, plus, on a large ship you could make pop-ups with information, depending on where you look. That is like mouse control, but implemented through yolol, innit?

 

[mrchip]

Structural integrity. Outputs warp class of the weakest object. Could be localised or whole ship.

I need a robot voice in my cockpit saying "Warning: Warp class compromised"...

I like all of this. Except GPS, because we already have tools for that.

About the rangefinder updating more slowly depending on range: instead of that, there could be a randomness amount to the readings, the farther away the reading, the more randomness, therefore yolol would need to be created to average it over a longer time.
But maybe this is overcomplicated. Idk.

 

[CalenLoki]

Scanner-rays?
I hope im on the same page here, but pointing a device to read information is a generally preferred asset, and for a number of reasons.

We can go all out on this and maybe start a separate thread over "Information tools(?)" , but lets go ahead and list a couple other items we can toss in the mix since its still relevant to transponders.

Trasponders to give us a ship location(already here) its affiliation or group(as suggested) and maybe tell us at a glance its Status? such as if it is operable or not?

YOUR Idea, for a directionally aimed 'scanner' (my name for it, bear with me) can have a number of different routes to follow, even Multiple Variants.

Firstly, lets branch over Ship-mounted and Hand-held. Ship mounted scanners should be able to read *just* the basic glance over a broader area of data stats upon another ship. I'll go by category here, but bear in mind none of these have to be exact or on the point, Hand-helds can give us more specific information.

Movement:
Ship's available top speed/ acceleration/ current speed/ mass/ Bearing and Direction ---- And as a challenge to any Yolol Techie, see if you can find a way to steal someone's intended course or destination coordinates before I suggest that.

Armaments: -This one calls for a lot of heavy data; its a stretch and a daydream
Tell us if the ship we are scouting has mounted or active weapons. Does not need to include whether these weapons are functional or if they have ammunition, just " X number of Auto-cannons/ X Railgun mounted weapons detected/ X torpedo Bays." or even vaguer, and not tell us how many arms are found.

Integrity:
Expand on the Ship's current Mass is in relation to what it's base mass is. Is the Ship Powered/ low on reserves? How much further can it travel (flight-time) ?

* And for anyone that sees opportunity in just this category alone: If a ship is Heavier that its base mass, it has cargo. Lighter means damaged. Go Salvagers and Pirates!

And if we really want to push coding and information retrieval in the game:
Resource Scanners:
To tell us, at a glance, What resources can be expected inside a stowed cargo crate, or loose ammunitions/ fuel rods/ torpedoes.

No numbers or specifics necessary, just tell us if we can see it there or not.

Hand-held scanners can expand on these qualities and show more precise information over different areas, with the trade-off of having to be in close proximity to work. (If we can expect them as a seperate tool alone and not just another tab on the U-Tool, to cut down on universal use.)

Handheld scanners like this can also bring in some certain and underrated opportunities from their use. Especially in the case of Ship-boarding: Hijacking, piracy, blockades, military checkpoints, ship yards, and smugglers.

So far all movement and positional data in game is relative to the scanning ship. As there is no universal coordinate system. Sensors are also incredibly simple in their output: 1-3 data fields.
So I'd rather have different approach to checking someone's movement - via tracking beacons that you attach either by hand or via dedicated missile warhead. Or by manually painting them with laser designator. Then you get their position relative to your ship, and add it to your global position (that you need to first get, i.e. with ISAN or other player-made GPS)

With armament and resources I'd go even more vague. There is no logical explanation why a scanner could say what's inside a ship in a distance.
So I'd keep them to just displaying the radiation level and ship (current) mass.
Radiation would be leaked from running reactors, but also charged batteries, charged weapon capacitors, ect. So a ship with a lot of radiation for it's mass would be suspicious, but without any hard data.

There is no such thing as "base mass". You can modify your ship at will.

Material detector would be nice, but it should only show content of the crate you hit. So you need a longer scanning time or more sensors to check all the visible crates, and if someone plates them or hides valuables inside the ship you're limited to getting inside and checking by hand anyway.

Last but not least, I'd keep ship-mounted and hand-held scanners roughly the same in function. They have inherited unique traits that make enough difference:
Ship scanners can be built into bigger arrays, with multiple working at the same time, and can hook into yolol (automation). But are large, clumsy and harder to aim precisely.
Hand scanners are limited to 1 per person, but are easier to move around and aim precisely.

 

[GooseMan-HonkDealer]

I just want to clarify that 'Base Mass' of a ship is a figurative figure but i would imagine it as reading the Ship's initial total Mass as it is recorded when spawning in.

 

[PopeUrban]

1: Should be part of the basic UI. It is very difficult for a new player to stay in the safe zone and be broke if it costs them extra to know whether or not they are in the safe zone.

2: See no issue with this. Lots of interesting applications, no real balance issues.

3: Should be a basic output of the flight control IMO, as should speed. The point of the FC is to simplify thruster and piloting functions common to basically all ships.

4: Don't see an issue. More interesting variables to play with for automation.

5: I like this also, for more interesting automation options.

6: Against. Too much free information about things outside your ship removes the necessity to do hands on spying or prospecting. Removes critical player interactions from the game loop.

7: Again, should be part of the Flight Control.

8: Universal orientation while necessary for software design is a relativistic concept. We should be orienting against points in space, not universal constants. Codifying universal constants makes automating many things far too easy, removes tons of potenation sabotage/damage scenarios, and overall dilutes the function and design arms race of other more interesting navigational tools.

9: Against for basically the same reason as 8. Navigation should be a multi-vector handshake between various things that requires smart engineering, not an easy switch flip.

10: Yes. it only makes sense that one can have an easy to set up module to read the output of the easy to set up transponder

11: Hard no. This creates too much ease of automation, threatens to virtually overtake meta if used for weapons requiring all ships to mount fake/defensive systems.

12: No thank you. The function of a transponder is to announce ship position. Turning it off should allow effective hiding of ships. Visual stealth is off the table, and so output stealth and use of cover is the only option we have to sneak up on or away from one another. This should remain so.

13: No thank you. Allows too much offloading of critical computational and sensor mass. N+1 potential is too high. Automated systems should largely be required to run their own sensors and chips for balance purposes (more automation = more mass by default)

14: Interesting idea. I like this.

15: Of two minds about this. On the one hand players should have information about what is happening to them upfront for things like this. If I start taking damage I should know why if I send someone over near the part. On the other hand having such a sensor would add design and play space for intel ships. I'd say endos should be able to natively gauge such forces but ships should not without a detector. Makes space for some cool spindly armed exploration/pathfinder ships or whatever.

16: I like the idea of this as a customizable "within N range" device so there is a mass/power tradeoff for balance purposes. It will impact other parts of your design. You can run very high power to cover a massive area, or very low power at the cost of the mass of multiples for more detailed info from multiples, or you can cheaply cover just a few critical areas with only one or two at a relatively low mass and power cost.

17: I would make this part of the damage detector as the functions are very similar. "Structural integrity sensor" reading out both damage and warp capacity seems logical to me.

18: Sure. Would make checking cargo mass easier as well as thruster and power optimizations etc. Lets you cheap out on structural integrity sensors I guess but only if you are literally getting bits blown off the ship so that's OK.

19: Players should be able to be sneaky. This should by changed to RFID detector, coupled with an equipped RFID key. This would allow you to code detection of known endos (You check for specific RFID values) without preventing unknown endos or disquised saboteurs from operating in signal stealth. Also allows for fun "steal the key" gameplay if the RFIDs can be looted off dead endos.

20: Yes. Space is vast and to take any exploratory journey players first require a heading. This would provide headings. Without such a device space either has to be very densely packed or we are expecting players to fly in to potentially nothing for a potentially infinite amount of time to explore.

My sensors:

Microphone - detects endo vocalizations, small arms fire, impact sounds within a set range. Can output a 1 for each type detected.

Impact Detector - Detects impacts against the attached plate. Unable to detect very low frequency impacts like endos sneaking, but sufficient to detect heavy footsteps e.g. running/jumping as well as collisions or weapon impacts.

 

[Verbatos]

I think sensor 10 is a no-brainer, it would mean people would have to equip their ships with more components if they want to not get shot down by the first faction that spots their unmarked private ship. But it could also create interesting dynamics within play, people could create a setup that could use one of these to sweep an area to find players. Maybe if multiple are hooked up together they could form a wall between them, allowing a larger range of scanning with only a small amount more components relative to the area?

 

[Atsuい]

Rule of a thumb: If a sensor or device accomplishes not more than another endo (player) would in its place, then it's good in my book. However, the endos themselves are quite barebones compared to your average scifi humans represented in fiction. We've got a built-in flashlight eventually, sure. But where are binoculars? IR vision? Gyroscopes and voice synthetisizer?

People tell me they want to keep stealth intrusions in place but it would only be fair to have a better chance to prepare against it as well.

 

[anton_stezhkin]

There is a way to make an accurate quantum speedometr, and thertefor an accelerometer. A player from Japan found a way.

 

[pavvvel]

I believe game could benefit from more sensors.
All those are meant to output yolol values, not UI elements.

It's debatable how much automation should be possible, and how much should be left for players invention.
So I'll just list all of them and leave it open for discussion and devs decision.

1. Safe zone detector. Outputs 1 when in safe zone. Use: mostly noob protection. Also useful to avoid cluttering UI with extra elements.
2. Gravity detector. Outputs angle difference between sensor and gravity. Two/three fields: pitch and roll and maybe magnitude. Outside moon gravity it could point at eos.
3. Accelerometer. Shows acceleration 4 fields: x,y,z, magnitude. Kind of redundant if we get speedometer.
4. Rangefinder. Already in game. Would be nice to have check frequency inversely proportional to length. I.e. at 1km 10 times per second, under 100m 100Hz, 5km 2Hz. Or scale power use by range.
5. Proximity sensor. Outputs distance to closest object within cone. Range*angle*frequency/power use=constant
6. Material detector. Single ray that outputs 4 fields: core and shell names and volumes. Or case of aiming at ship/station components type (i.e. plate), material, volume, mass (?)
7. Speedometer. 4 fields, showing direction x,y,z (relatively to the sensor, not normalised) and magnitude.
8. Gyroscope. Shows orientation relatively to universal orientation. Yaw, pitch, roll.
9. GPS. Shows universal position. I'm personally against it, but I'll leave it there.
10. IFF. Single ray. Point at ship with transponder to know the owner and ships name.
11. Laser sensor. Outputs pitch/yaw between the sensors front and object painted with laser designator. Same as the one on torpedoes,but for ships. Can be set to read only one laser frequency. Also an "laser decoy" that acts as part painted by laser. Useful for drone-ships seeing each other, ship-ship colision avoidance, automatic docking, ect.
12. Ship detector. Radar/sonar/heat/radiation. There's plenty of threads about these, so I'll just mention it.
13. Receiver. In game. Would be nice if they could receive some variables too. I.e. name, signal strength, frequency, var1, var2, var3. Could be enough to remotely control some drones.
14. Seat track-IR. Outputs pitch and yaw of seated endo head.
15. Radiation/corrosion detector. For those dangerous places in the belt. Should output magnitude, not only 0/1
16. Damage detector. Either switch to 1 when ship takes damage (reset manually/with code) or counts missed voxels since last reset. Could be for the entire ship, or only within certain distance.
17. Structural integrity. Outputs warp class of the weakest object. Could be localised or whole ship.
18. Mass indicator: displays mass of the whole ship.
19. Endo detector. Outputs 1 when there is endo within set distance. Use: alternative to lifeline, automatic doors, security.
20. Celestial body detector. Works as receiver, but treats Eos and moons as transmitters. Very long range (unlimited for Eos, tens of thousands km for moons). To make it funnier, they should have unique, unknown to players signal strength.

I've probably missed some. Feel free to suggest more, I'll add them to OP

Are you suggesting that we rewrite the game entirely to turn it into the now completely dead "Elite Dangerous?"
Everything you suggest is an oversimplification of the game.
The fewer the mechanics, the less detrimental their use (abusing).

For example, right now there are 2 mechanics that break the game:
1) cheap stations that create a safe zone
2) a 1km lifeline that allows you to check if there are pursuers.

You de suggest a bunch more sensors. Why? You have eyes, use them.

 

[mrchip]

Are you suggesting that we rewrite the game entirely to turn it into the now completely dead "Elite Dangerous?"

I really dont get that...

• what in this suggestion makes it so similar to be called "entirely rewrite the game to transform it to elite"... the radar? what?
• even if it is... guess what... elite's core mechanics are actually quite solid, the game's failure is due to the rest of the game's "context" as a poorly executed MMO, the massive amounts of malicious grind, the abandoned features, the less than minimum effort from the devs that everyone lost hope in.

In general i'd say "if we have the tools to build it, let us do it" but only as long as its not excessively janky.
ISAN is quite polished and reasonably easy to install, plus once people can place transponders, that might give a small slice of players some content.
Cargo frame speedometers.... that's something i'd like an official replacement for. First of all because that clf lag probably has consequences for the CLF's main purpose, so it needs a fix regardless. But mostly because it's a clunky mechanism that breaks when you aren't flying straight, and it's framerate dependent.

While i'm here, here's my opinion list:

1. Safe zone detector: already implemented
2. Gravity detector: yes please
3. Accelerometer: maybe... not really necessary but it would be more accurate
4. Rangefinder, frequency change on distance change: kinda weird, you really don't need more than 5hz due to YOLOL anyways, and you really don't want less than 5hz due to YOLOL if you're looking for fast detection (anti collision systems...) I'd say no.
5. Proximity sensor. Cool sensor that i'd have fun playing with, but as of now i'm unsure of the implications, and don't see it as a necessity for something in particular. Maybe.
6. Material detector. already implemented. Did the devs read this thread?
7. Speedometer. Yes. We can get this information already anyways, but all solutions are janky and hard to set up and unreliable. Make it accessible.
8. Gyroscope(universal rotation) Yes. Good for alternative navigation methods where ISAN can't get coverage, and good for "artificial horizon" displays that can be activated basically anywhere (inside any asteroid belt...)
9. GPS. Maybe/no. More accessible, but ISAN / equivalents are fine, and this would remove the limit of needing transponders to get the data from.
10. IFF. Single ray. (Ship owner and name) Ymaybe. Having to put a laser on a moving ship sounds incredibly janky, besides that it sounds nice. But also i don't know if that information should stay hidden. What if you can build "decoy shields" with stolen transponders anyways? But also, if ships have that information... then how are people supposed to even get that. This would be a tool for it. Idk.
11. Laser sensor (but not as a torpedo) Yes please, i heard this was planned ages ago but.. who knows now.
12. Ship detector. Radar/sonar/heat/radiation. I'm biased towards any type of active detection, such as radar or sonar, where if you want to scan, you need to emit something that can be passively detected by anyone in its radius / angle, warning them and introducing a risk/reward element of tactics to think about. I also think a purely passive system like the planned Radiation Scanners is a bad idea.
13. Receiver. (Wireless datafields) No idea. This is huge and has massive implications.
14. Seat track-IR. Outputs pitch and yaw of seated endo head. YES
15. Radiation/corrosion detector, as a single number. I think radiation scanners are better (im against them only for PVP purposes). But a corrosion sensor would be great. Not that we have corrosive areas anyways.
16. Damage detector. Hehe, we already have that now. I really think they read this. Thanks, devs, very cool!
17. Structural integrity. ^^
18. Mass indicator: Yes, and why is this not a thing yet? Cargo detection...
19. Endo detector. Nah. Sounds a bit too easy, boarding is already impossible, don't beat the dead horse. But please give us a field that indicates if a chair is occupied or not.
20. Celestial body detector. Unsure. It would be the ideal replacement to ISAN's current architecture, giving it unlimited coverage. Is this desirable?

 

[CalenLoki]

Material detector. already implemented. Did the devs read this thread?

Yes, they did. Shortly after I wrote it I got reply from Lauri on Discord. And not late after that we got safezone indicator and material scanner.

Having to put a laser on a moving ship sounds incredibly janky

You need to just once glance over the ship and it keeps the name until you hit some other target or reset it manually. Should be much easier than i.e. hitting someone with a projectile.

Are you suggesting that we rewrite the game entirely to turn it into the now completely dead "Elite Dangerous?"
Everything you suggest is an oversimplification of the game.
The fewer the mechanics, the less detrimental their use (abusing).

For example, right now there are 2 mechanics that break the game:
1) cheap stations that create a safe zone
2) a 1km lifeline that allows you to check if there are pursuers.

You de suggest a bunch more sensors. Why? You have eyes, use them.

If the game was not meant for partial automation, we wouldn't have yolol in the first place. So more of iterating than rewriting.
So I'd like to ask you for examples of those possible abuses.

And the mechanics you mentioned are both artificial "magic" that has nothing to do with sensors. They're also more of a band-aid for some bugs (lagging out of a ship chair) and missing features (more elaborate safe-zone creation rules)

 

[pavvvel]

In your first post you wrote "ship detector".
you didn't describe that it's about doing it with your own hands, not passively.
...it looked like a description of a passive radar. structurally, a miner can install more sensors than a fighter. and it wouldn't be fair to player hunters.
that's why i wrote that this game doesn't need such a change.

Elite Dangerous problem - is that 99% of the online is in solo and private groups and the 1% who are in open mode can blacklist other players and can use "combat logging". it's killing the game...and when i see proposals here to add "ship disappearing timer" or "private warp" i clearly understand that its the same thing that killed Elite Dangerous.

 

[Recatek]

and it wouldn't be fair to player hunters.

A PvP encounter between a miner and a fighter is already overwhelmingly favored towards the fighter.

 

[CalenLoki]

In your first post you wrote "ship detector".
you didn't describe that it's about doing it with your own hands, not passively.
...it looked like a description of a passive radar. structurally, a miner can install more sensors than a fighter. and it wouldn't be fair to player hunters.
that's why i wrote that this game doesn't need such a change.

Elite Dangerous problem - is that 99% of the online is in solo and private groups and the 1% who are in open mode can blacklist other players and can use "combat logging". it's killing the game...and when i see proposals here to add "ship disappearing timer" or "private warp" i clearly understand that its the same thing that killed Elite Dangerous.

That's much more specific, thanks.

I intentionally omitted the detailed description of detection mechanics, because there's already several threads about this very same topic.

But ofc we can talk about it too.
IMO having any form of detection, even the most primitive, would be a huge help to dedicated pvp players. Nothing can be worse than having just 5km visual detection range. Even if it allows the potential prey to see the predator miles away.
I.e. in hypothetical situation where transponders are forced to be on all the time when the ship is active.

With any type of more sophisticated systems, where your visibility and detection range is based on ship design or even fleet composition, specialised ships will always have the upper hand over multi-purpose ships. A dedicated scout/radar ship will detect both miners and fighters before they detect the scout. So a "hunters" will not fly armed to the teeth meta-fighters with tiny radar slapped on, but something more suitable for the job. Or at least have such ship in the hunter fleet.

TL: DR radar->more pvp

On topic of private warp - there are ways to make it increase the chance of encounter without allowing using it to escape it.
Ship disappearing timer is just dumb. Just like endos disappearing when players log out.
But both of those topics are outside of the scope of this thread.

 

[mikan]

In your first post you wrote "ship detector".
you didn't describe that it's about doing it with your own hands, not passively.
...it looked like a description of a passive radar. structurally, a miner can install more sensors than a fighter. and it wouldn't be fair to player hunters.
that's why i wrote that this game doesn't need such a change.

Elite Dangerous problem - is that 99% of the online is in solo and private groups and the 1% who are in open mode can blacklist other players and can use "combat logging". it's killing the game...and when i see proposals here to add "ship disappearing timer" or "private warp" i clearly understand that its the same thing that killed Elite Dangerous.

I think fighters can use more sensors more efficiently than miners.

For miners, more than half of the ships are filled with ore. Fighters do not need to secure that location. It can be used for sensors.

For fighters vs. fighters, smaller ones may be better, but in this speed-limited game, the size of minor vs. fighters is not important.

 

[pavvvel]

A PvP encounter between a miner and a fighter is already overwhelmingly favored towards the fighter.

a miner can be made armoured, armed, fast and reliable. no one is stopping you from doing that. but when a player makes a defenceless miner, it's his fault.

 

[pavvvel]

I think fighters can use more sensors more efficiently than miners.

For miners, more than half of the ships are filled with ore. Fighters do not need to secure that location. It can be used for sensors.

For fighters vs. fighters, smaller ones may be better, but in this speed-limited game, the size of minor vs. fighters is not important.

By doing so, you immediately destroy small fighters as combat ships for finding and hunt for large ships. because the Amphitrite beams can house an entire stadium of sensors and sensors, while a small fighter can only have a few sensors.