Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the format Name#Password
Comment
[i]Italic Text[/i]
[b]Bold Text[/b]
[spoiler]Spoiler Text[/spoiler]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace Text[/pre]
[super]Superset Text[/super]
[sub]Subset Text[/sub]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


420chan is Getting Overhauled - Changelog/Bug Report/Request Thread (Updated June 12 [TaimaTV Update])

Now Playing on /vg/tube -

Elite: Dangerous Ignore Report Reply
Dregs - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 06:33:02 EST ID:qrPHyWe8 No.738637
File: 1560249182591.png -(1018458B / 994.59KB, 1360x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 1018458
Elite: Dangerous got some updates a couple months ago. With the 30 (canadian) dollar season pass you can now land on planets, use surface recon vehicles, and collect materials to upgrade your ships through engineer characters you can unlock. There's a lot more features but really the engineering is the biggest thing. It allows you to make any ship in the game viable for combat.

I played about 4 years ago and was turned off by the large grind to get enough credits to get whatever ship I wanted. But they also updated mining a few months ago and it's profitable enough to turn what used to be a 400 hour grind into a 5 hour one. I now own a fer de lance and an anaconda and I have 300 million spare credits. It's working out nicely.

Anyone else into Elite? If you have it and haven't played in a while, check it out. It's really going places.
>>
Ashley Graham - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 07:11:19 EST ID:sXv7y1cv No.738640 Ignore Report Reply
>>738637
You really going to try and advertise 4 year old content as new? Fuck off FDev. Start citizen is ahead of you and that game is a joke. Meaning ED may as well be erectile dysfunction considering you still can't stand up.
>>
Dregs - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 07:28:23 EST ID:qrPHyWe8 No.738641 Ignore Report Reply
>>738640
I'm a returning player to the game. I'm not Fdev. I'm Dregs. Been here a looooong ass time. Chill out, man. Smoke moar. Also 4 year old content? What? The massive update I'm talking about happened in april this year.

Also star citizen isn't even a game. It's barely a 3d ship model. It's a bundle of lies and promises. At least Elite works.
>>
Ashley Graham - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 07:48:49 EST ID:sXv7y1cv No.738645 Ignore Report Reply
>>738641
Sc is playable online and has been for a few years. But just because sc exists isn't the reason I'm shitting on ED, that game is just boring as fuck. I'd rather play ksp with out time warp on an interplanetary mission.
ED still doesn't have atmospheric planet landing.
Landings and engineering are old additions. ED still offers nothing new to the space genre that hasn't already been done in 1994. At least sc is trying even if it's most likely going to fail or fall drastically sorry of the goal but hey what AAA game or even indie game delivered 100%? none [/%[
>>
Ashley Graham - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 07:51:05 EST ID:sXv7y1cv No.738646 Ignore Report Reply
>>738645
Oh right and let's not forget fdev repeatedly started they wanted to do fool shop and stain interiors with fps components since the beginning of the kick starter... Still hasn't happened. SWG is a more complete space game than ED
>>
Ashley Graham - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 07:52:16 EST ID:sXv7y1cv No.738647 Ignore Report Reply
>>738646
God damned phone posting
Stated
Full
Ship/ station
Nb
>>
Scorpion - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 15:27:21 EST ID:qrPHyWe8 No.738666 Ignore Report Reply
1560281241649.png -(1483501B / 1.41MB, 1366x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>738645
>ED still doesn't have atmospheric planet landing

You can land anywhere you want on any planet as long as it's not a gas giant now. Honestly FPS components don't make a difference to me in a space fighter game. I want to fly ships and shoot things from those ships. Walking around isn't the part I want to do.
>>
Riku - Tue, 11 Jun 2019 15:47:09 EST ID:R8xVP9gf No.738667 Ignore Report Reply
>>738666
me and my friend flew out to SOL only to find out we couldnt land on earth

i was pretty fucking salty, but I did take some good pictures of our solar system
>>
Roger Wilco - Wed, 12 Jun 2019 07:05:16 EST ID:32kUXG6w No.738730 Ignore Report Reply
>>738666
I want to play as a space man and not a space ship.
>>
Roger Wilco - Wed, 12 Jun 2019 07:06:05 EST ID:32kUXG6w No.738731 Ignore Report Reply
>>738666
May have to check those m class planets tho. They are included in horizons right?
>>
Ickybod Clay - Wed, 12 Jun 2019 09:09:51 EST ID:4ImWGkVJ No.738737 Ignore Report Reply
>>738666
the fuck are you talking about? you can't land on atmospheric planets. why are you lying?
>>
Dregs - Wed, 12 Jun 2019 13:13:59 EST ID:qrPHyWe8 No.738745 Ignore Report Reply
>>738737
You're right. It's in the plans but not there.
https://elite-dangerous.fandom.com/wiki/Atmospheric_Landings#Current_situation

"lying" and being mistaken are two different things. Why are you a douche?
>>
Chuck Greene - Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:27:14 EST ID:4ImWGkVJ No.738845 Ignore Report Reply
>>738745
I dunno, was probably having a bad day. But it's a bit silly that you'd reply to someone saying there isn't atmospheric planet landing that "you can on any planet" when the original comment was in fact correct. I haven't played since January, but I would have been very surprised if they had somehow implemented such a big feature without advertising the fuck out of it. You even made me frantically check google.
I know they've been talking about implementing atmospheric planetary landings, but I've very very skeptical about their claims. Just look at the absolutely glacial pace of updates for ED. It's been 3.5 years since they released Horizons.

Think of all the systems they'd have to develop:
Aerodynamics. How would they simulate a spaceship designed for space flying through an atmosphere? Will they account for density and temperature? Speaking of temperature...
Atmospheric entry. Will they simulate burning up in the atmosphere like Kerbal Space Program? They'd have to, if they're going for a realistic "feeling" space sim.
Weather. Would they even bother with simulating weather?
Vegetation and life. Are they going to develop unique vegetation for every planet type and proceduraly generate the trees and shrubs like No Man's Sky? How many planets would even have life? Would they just handpick a handful of planets to have life on them? Or would they exclude all atmospheric planets with life from planetary landings?
Civilizations. Some atmospheric planets already have advanced civilizations on them, like for example all the faction homeworlds. Are they going to simulate an entire planet civilization with cities and megacities? Or are they excluded also?

If they choose to exclude all planets with life on them, people will be disappointed. But with the size of their team and the funds that Frontier have, I don't see how they pull it off without either half-assing it or without stealing all of Star Citizen's money.

TL;DR: I think Frontier isn't actually planning on implementing atmospheric planetary landings. The effort and money they'd have to put into it would not attract enough costumers to make it worth it to them.
>>
Dregs - Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:31:57 EST ID:qrPHyWe8 No.738847 Ignore Report Reply
1560540717787.png -(1311528B / 1.25MB, 1360x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>738845
Atmospheric planets with life are already labeled as such in the star map. I saw a gas planet with life just last night. Of course I couldn't land, but it seems like they've already procedurally generated what planets will be populated. Aerodynamics are already handled with the current planetary landing system. They'll probably just increase the difficulty for turning depending on atmosphere density. Burning up would likely happen if you enter the atmosphere going too fast, but that basically happens on any planet already if you ignore the speed limits.

I think it's vegetation and life that's holding them back. So far I haven't seen much of interest from planet landings. They want to make landings with life have cities and stuff like that and don't want to no man's sky it.
>>
Travis Touchdown - Mon, 17 Jun 2019 06:32:09 EST ID:4ImWGkVJ No.738979 Ignore Report Reply
>>738847
>it seems like they've already procedurally generated what planets will be populated
that's the point though. there has to be atleast a thousand planets with life on them already. that means they either exclude those planets from atmospheric planetary landings, or they have to come up with entire new procedural generation system for life on those planets. I don't see them doing this.

>Aerodynamics are already handled with the current planetary landing system.
>current planetary landing system
...
...
you mean the planets we can land on right now with no atmospheres? you're saying there's aerodynamics on those planets?
wat.

>They'll probably just increase the difficulty for turning depending on atmosphere density.
It's not that simple.
spaceships are inherently unaerodynamic. the (parasite) drag alone would make most of them unflyable in any atmosphere. and then there's mass...
>>
Dregs - Mon, 17 Jun 2019 23:16:37 EST ID:vvta9jFf No.739030 Ignore Report Reply
1560827797018.png -(991686B / 968.44KB, 1360x768) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>738979
When you drop out of supercruise during a planetary landing, it activates glide mode which takes your angle of entry into account and deals damage to your ship if it's too steep. If they continue to use and modify this same system for atmospheric planets, I'd expect them to make it so the angle of entry needs to be more on the horizontal plane, and I'd expect them to make it more difficult to stay aligned with your target either by making turning more difficult, or by adding turbulence to the equation. Mass is already included in the current equation. If your thrusters aren't good enough to handle the mass of your ship and extra g force added by the planet, you can easily end up bouncing off the surface, maybe causing death.>>738979
>>
Perry Saturns Hairpiece !!2yqTh/Za - Tue, 18 Jun 2019 20:55:27 EST ID:zbIbVjkG No.739076 Ignore Report Reply
>>738845
>Will they simulate burning up in the atmosphere like Kerbal Space Program? They'd have to, if they're going for a realistic "feeling" space sim.
I can't see hull temps being that big of an issue, if at all. And I base that on the fact that shields and shield tanking are a thing in Elite. Which isn't to say you'll be able to just dive into a planet's atmo at multiples of .c or hundreds of km/s, but a sane atmosphere dive shouldn't be that dangerous to the player and their ride.

Honestly, I look forward to the prospect of the raging inferno of re-entry against the shields from the vantage point of my cozy af Challenger cockpit.

>>738666
I just want to shoot vile xenos filth in the face. That, and being able to see my Cutter's interior. That's all I want from 'spess legs'.
>>
Big Daddy - Wed, 19 Jun 2019 05:27:06 EST ID:t5RwH1wV No.739096 Ignore Report Reply
>>738979
Fdev not doing this is why I can hardly even tolerate elite. I got back into it after calling it garbage early in the thread, exploring is a lot better now. But it isn't going to hold my attention for long. I'm still just a space ship. I want to be a space person. No new planets are added to the landing list. They did add surface features to go check out but they are all perfect square patches of procedural garbage. It's basically space engine but with one Galaxy and a grind. Good thing I've had my explorer for years I can just hop in a fuck off from the bubble when ever I want. Still though, elite is the laziest space game ever created. Even no man's sky tried harder though it's a worse game no questions.


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.