1: Tractor beam to suck in nearby cargo.
2: Ability to name ships,or at least cap ships.
3: Name of Ship/Pilot appear when mouse xhairs are over a ship.
friendly or enemy.

1) I've often wondered whether cargo is going to continue to work with the current conveinent but somewhat arcadish powerup system, or whether cargo might eventually become an object that must be manipulated in some way and that merely crashing into it might not just cause it to bounce off or even be destroyed. Either way has its advantages, I'm just courious. (I suspect the former if only because almost all games choose convience over realism when it comes to tedious tasks like picking up objects and storing them in inventory.)

2) I haven't decided how I feel about this yet. Again, its a realism vs. playability thing.

3) I suppose. I would like limited range 'scanner' gizmos that when equiped on a ship can - for a small energy cost (just a couple of points depending on the range and quality of the device) and small time inventment (a second or three) - allow you to get detailed information about a vessel: who owns it, how much damage it has suffered, what weapons it has, what cargo it is carrying, etc.

I think the third one is already covered with the target selection region of the HUD. I'd much rather not see my HUD get cluttered up with everyone's names floating around everywhere, so if it is planned maybe it should be optional.

/me wants the second one
/me names his frig : "H.M.S. Titanic"

I think ships should have a constant pull on cargo 20 meters out, this way people won't complain 'bout it being stuck inside a roid, getting it stuck that far inside would be difficult to do.

Celebrim, your take on scanners is sweet, never even thought of that.

Most enemy's know almost of thier oppenant's ship names, and carry regestries. For cap ships, at least.

As for target xhair ID, in games like americas army the range was pretty short and wasnt a problem, it only popped up once or twice. Again, maybe a scanner issue.



3 more...

I would love a way to target/cycle nearest enemy *players*, maybe there is a way that I dont know. I always bring up npcs. "u" is a bit clumsy.

It would be cool if you could "tag" an enemy craft as friendly so you never target it with hostile targeting, untill you untag it .

I would like a "Fly the Flag" system to declare intent on the enemys hud - pirate, hostile to one color, at war, etc. Of course pirates may fly other flags, but thats been an issue throughout history. There are other flags to challenge and surrender...

Maybe there could be a way to form alliances with individual players. You'd select your target first, then press a key to form an alliance, and they will become unkillable. The other person can do the same so they don't kill you as well.

However, if someone decides to be bad and maybe lie about the alliance, so you do end up taking damage when they ambush you, they will automatically be marked as an enemy again. Or maybe alliances cannot be formed at all without the consent of both individuals. And once one person breaks the alliance, the other person automatically sees them as an enemy again. It's all or nothing. That way it can't be exploited or whatever. And maybe the transition between ally to enemy can have a five-second extended invulnerability period (for obvious reasons) as well.

This would help in announcing everyone your intention to be nonhostile as you go trading from sector to sector, rather than having to repeat yourself in chat.

Intresting, I was thinking more along the lines of target alliances, no change to damage, you jsut wouldnt target them with next target functions. They might also show as green on radar.

Im not really a big fan of any damage immunity - even to ones own nation. I see why it (Immunity to the same color) is nessassary for now, but maybe the immunity thing should be only for home sectors, to protect new players.

I think this game is awesome and I dont mean to step on any toes coming into the community and saying "This should be that" and "This should be that", my only wish is to open disccusions on new topics, not to critisize-sp-.

You don't step on my toes at all. You have good ideas and you articulate them well. Your ideas are provoking other ideas in people whose opinions I value above the average, and those ideas are themselves interesting. You spent some time playing the game and thinking before you decided to post, and you are willing to refine and reassess your ideas.

In other words you sound like a valued member of the community.

I'm not a fan of turning friendly fire off either. I hope it's turned on in the future. Doubtful though.

It's removes some of the realism from the game, but I think friendly fire has to stay off. If it was enabled I think there'd be a great risk of idiots attacking their own team. Also, accidental friendly fire in battle could strain team relationships.

Asp

I've wished for a "fly-the-flag" system as well. I end up typing "I'm peaceful" alot. This gets especially tedious when you're in exploration mode: i.e., you are flying around a sector, checking out how the 'roids look with different graphics settings, zooming in on things to see how they look up close, etc.

It's not a huge problem in the Test, because most people know each other now anyway, and can guess each other's intentions fairly accurately. But when the game evolves and more players come online, a flag of intent would be nice. More than nice, it will be necessary.

In my mind the "flags" are message beacons on some common and open channel. Some suggestions:

- "Authorized trade vessel for this sector operating under license #01534x23Uv4" (license granted by government based upon reputation system)

- "Non-hostile intent, please maintain a non-agressive proximity"

- "All ships approaching within 500m will be deemed aggressive and will be attacked"

- "Request Assistance, under attack"

etc...

These should be selectable from an available list (based upon reputation, etc.) and should also be customizable (e.g. "I am the Dwed Piwate Icawus")... but the ultimate goal should be to emulate the role of a ship's communication officer, so that you as a player can focus more attention on piloting.

These messages should appear in the target HUD in the upper right, as text. Optionally, beacons could be set to broadcast, maybe once every ten seconds to the in-game chat. However, unless the current in-game chat is updated or altered somehow, that would get messy fast. Maybe just limit the emergency beacon to team-only broadcasts...?

slappyknappy: Can't you do that already? Just bind some talk messages to the keys of your choosing.

No, what I'm looking for is a way to have that message appear in the HUD of someone who's targetting/scanning your ship. In other words, your declaration becomes passive rather than active.

So, instead of saying "I'm peaceful" every four seconds so that everyone knows it, you raise the "peace" flag, so that everyone who sees you can tell right away that you are peaceful. The differences are subtle but important. First, it takes no action on your part. Second, only those who really care will be bothered with it (i.e., those who can see you in radar, scan you, etc.)

As an option, the "flag" or "beacon" could output to the chat, every 15 seconds or so... but as I said, this would be for emergency use (i.e., mayday) and should probably be limited to team chat. Also, it wouldn't really work with the current chat system because it would generate amazing amounts of spam. The reason for this option would be to hit a toggle whhere you cry for help auutomatically every so often, freeing you to pilot/fight/flee.

Err... somehow I doubt that anyone that actually goes out and kills ships at random is going to be much bothered by your beacon, and I have to tell you the truth if I was that type of player having your 'peace sign bumper sticker' on your ship would translate to me as 'Get your free cargo here.'

Wouldnt it be a 'big' change to introduce a tractor beam? Unless the devs have already coded it up, it seems like it would take a serious effort to introduce one.

Kuvagh, every game with FF on runs that risk of having n00bs kills you. But that hasn't stopped many other game developers for keeping it on. A majority of the games on the shelves today allow FF to be turned on, and the players of these games didn't have problems learning how to deal with it. You need to understand that that's something which can be easily learned, and would probably only ever occur once or twice if the newbie has any intention of actually learning to play the game. Point is, it's been an option that's been in games for a long time now, and it has proven to work successfully without creating too much chaos. And besides, if a n00b does decide to act dumb, you're always free to blast him out of the sky also. Obviously players killing their own teammates would also result in some sort of penalty.

Celebrim: you're missing the point entirely.

The flag-of-intention idea is not a shield, or anything else other than just what it sounds like: a way to show others what your intentions are. The chat, and ultimately your actions, are still necessary to play the game. What I want is the same as what Nalar originally asked for:

"I would like a 'Fly the Flag' system to declare intent on the enemy's hud - pirate, hostile to one color, at war, etc. Of course pirates may fly other flags, but thats been an issue throughout history. There are other flags to challenge and surrender..."

Those that kill ships at random will still do so. Again, that's not the point. The point is more along the lines of giving those who *dont* kill ships at random a way to know who's who.

And, as I said, this would optimally be integrated into a reputation system. So if you were flying a trader's flag but had a warrant for arrest in several sectors as an enemy spy, people could use some deduction and act accordingly.

I have to say Celebrim, sometimes you seem very open minded and experienced and sometimes... well, you don't. You make me sound like I'm whining because of pirate kills, when in fact I'm making a fairly reasonable request for an enhancement to in-game communications.

I do understand you point, and I know you are not whining about pirate kills. But, my point is that I'm not sure that the ammount of information you are imparting is worth the effort and screen clutter (ei I agree with Arolte).

The reason I say this is I imagine myself inside the game you describe. I foresee the following problems:

1) Pirates will not fly the 'skull & crossbones' anywhere that it will get them in trouble, instead they will do whatever they think it takes to look respectable. The will certainly not be flying the 'skull and crossbones' if they think it makes the prey run away.
2) People flying 'peace' flags will be a particular target to pirates because the assumption will be that they aren't prepared for combat.
3) More people will be flying false flags than real flags which makes the ammount of information actually conveyed pretty insignificant.
4) Flags are less important than the reputation system anyway, and can't subsitute for it.
5) If the flags are customizable, alot of people will use them for signatures of various sorts - 'Suck on this.' or 'I came, I saw, I kicked your...' or even just a simple 'May the force be with you' or 'There is no spoon.'

What I'm suggesting would take up very little space in a HUD... just a line or two of text built in to the current target HUD would sufice. But I think we're crossing synapses again:

1) Agreed. Although the few "respectable" or "real" pirates in the game might. (you know who you are)*

2) Or you could use it to lure in pirates if you were a ounty hunter collecting legal bounty on known pirates*

3) Agreed*

4) Agreed*

5) Would that be so bad? If so, it could be restricted. But then, a lot of people have asked for signatures.

* As I said originally, this would have to be tied into a reputation system, not replace it.

When I say this I am envisioning a reputation system that goes beyond the "good/evil" value of some MMORPGs. I'm envisioning a system where you earn access privaleges, trade clearances, security codes, permits, warrants, restrictions, etc. all based upon your actions. Furthermore, all of that is relative to which government controlls the space you are currently in, so you might have top military clearance in your home nattion, and be under the space-aged equivalent of a restraining order in others.

"Intention" comes into things when you add role-playing into the reputation system. Based upon your privaleges and known hostility in a sector you would be able to declare your intentions, to allow you to act outside of a "pure" reputation system.

For example, if you owned a valid trade license, you could opt to broadcast them. If you had special permission from a government to do a certain thing, you could broadcast that. At the same time, if you had police privaleges, you might opt to bbe "off duty".

Another example: If you had a million-credit bounty, you might ***want*** to highlight that 3 governments have deemed you the most-wanted criminal and that the dwed piwate woberts weaves no suwvivows... it would scare away the pirate-killing bounty hunters.

All of these things could be used in a "Fly the Flag" system but only if the reputation system allowed it. So, if you had no warrants, you couldn't fly that flag. if you had no trade codes, you couldn't use them, etc.