Extending on @hrobertson suggested, perhaps a spherical grid centred on the star would be a better way to convey movement?
Then you could scale the granularity of the grid according to your speed rather than using arbitrary moving lines like ED. This would give you a sensation of moving through space the same way “space dust” is used in most games (and the same way planet orbits are portrayed in ED). Also to clarify, I don’t mean the entire grid being visible from the sun to your position either…just enough within a certain draw distance like his example.
The faster you go, the smaller grid segments would give way to larger segments until you reach max warp and only see a few major segments.
This would also have the benefit of making warp travel a more unique experience versus regular flight (with the ability to toggle on/off of course).
Perhaps this could also apply to planets so that when you approach a gravity well you see a planetary grid radiating from it indicating that it’s time to adjust speed. This also has the added benefit of giving a good spatial reference for targets. The UI could highlight a certain segment of the sphere to show where a target might be…or when you are scanning an area, you get a virtual “heat map” of signals that a player can search. Similar to what Limit Theory was aiming for.
What you are describing with that grid is precisely the ED system, except for it taking up more screen-space, their ‘lines’ scale according to velocity, it’s not random.
It can be as accurate as it wants but the vertical bars do not succeed in conveying velocity relative to POI objects in space. The ED system is missing a frame of reference linking the vertical bars to a larger star system scale.
I’m not saying a grid is the solution but, for it to work in my eyes, it needs an improvement on EDs system.
I agree that is what @selbie is describing, however, that is not what I proposed.
The difference is the lines in ED are an abstract indicator of deceleration and acceleration. They could be replaced by a pulsing orb of light. They give a sense of movement, deceleration and acceleration, but not speed relative to anything because they don’t convey any distance information.
You could watch two videos of those lines, one taken at 500km/s and one at 5C and you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference.
The proposal is markers that remain stationary relative to the star or nearest body that are a known distance apart, and thereby convey a sense of speed relative to the reference frame.
As for the actual warp mechanic…
Do you have any ideas yet? As far as I see it there are 4 factors apart from the visualisations that are being discussed:
Player controlled rate of acceleration and deceleration
How the player controls their speed (eg desired speed/desired % of max speed/desired acceleration)
Automatic acceleration/deceleration (eg caused by gravity well)
Pitch/Yaw limitation
Currently:
Acceleration is exponential and is slower than deceleration
The player controls their desired % of max speed
Because of 2, acceleration and deceleration happen automatically.
Problem with a fixed scale grid system is that it breaks if you want to meaningfully convey velocity differences of 5 or 10 magnitudes, the range is so large that the grid will be moving too slow or too fast most of the time.
Of course. There would have to be various scales, but the vital thing is that the player can see the difference between scales. If one fades giving way to another, with nothing tying them together, then it’s pointless.
Ie, the player needs to be able to see how many of those smaller boxes are in the larger boxes, otherwise they’re just lines zooming past.
Space dust does not convey distance information, only a sense of movement.
Give the player visual distance information and let their brain deduce speed - humans do this naturally.
I think it’s too much to display and not essential for conveying movement, as for its use in actual navigation, a single time to intercept number is sufficient for my needs.
My use of the term space dust is very loose as I even include planets in that term due to the sheer scale it needs to cover.
When in supercruise in ED, you see the orbit paths of planets and stars, but you don’t see any intermediate lines or markers that might help better communicate a visual sense of distance or movement through that space.
Even just radial lines and concentric circles coming from a central point would tie everything together for me. I would love to be able to switch on a massive stellar sphere grid and have my target’s indicator show a connecting line to 1 or more reference planes.
Some may not like that level of clutter, but that’s easily fixed via a toggle. You can still have a time to intercept indicator as well. The more ways to view information the better IMO.
I agree, but of course there isn’t time to implement them all.
By discussing ideas we can hopefully arrive at the solution that gives the most bang for buck.
We can’t really know what will be effective until we see the changes to the warp mechanics and what they have as a basic HUD.
I am still of the opinion that less HUD elements is better! I don’t want to watch representations of stuff and data, I want to see the real things!
This whole “lack of sensation of movement” is only going to be a problem in deep space away from stations and planets. This is likely not going to a place players spend much time in! We may be streaking between planets so fast it’s not really a problem, with slower movement near the gravitational disruption of planets.
So will we actually need a reference? We’ll have to wait and see how the warping works and how fast it is.
My desire is simply for all players to be able to jump in and enjoy the game and not get annoyed with overshooting stations, crashing into atmospheres, etc.
I would love this to be achieved with great warp mechanics and for no HUD elements to be necessary.
A simple answer would be to have a toggle-able ‘auto throttle’.
Select a target while in warp and engage auto throttle. The throttle automatically will go down when you are close to the target, and displays an ‘exit now’ message when within a certain distance, perhaps depending on ship type.
Of course, for balance reasons, it won’t be as fast as doing it manually.
This will allow new players to avoid a steeper learning curve while training them what do to and how to be better.
If you are not willing to learn how to fly your ship to another place you should play some other game.
And the flying throught the system is part of this game.
I agree with the sentiment, however the issue of overshooting was the number one gameplay issue new players had during the pre-alpha weekend, from what I understand. Having a sort of primitive auto-pilot would not only teach the player how to fly, but also get rid of some frustration with constantly crashing into planets.
Just one suggestion, I’m not saying it’s a good one, just a possibility.
Don’t know if I’d use that word As long as respawn is relatively quick (which it is currently) I think the learning curve with the flying is pretty good! It doesn’t take long to pick it up.
In fact, that being the first challenge is pretty appropriate for Battlescape’s mood and certainly gives me lasting satisfaction whenever I now land successfully!
The new players are just need a tutorial to explain how fly and land on a planet…
The games are easier these days because the players want a easy and assist gameplay. It’s an error for me.
I agree with Sab concerning satisfaction whenever i land successfully ^^ You must find right balance but it’s ok.
I think that players must accept learning curve.
