1. Landing sequence machine for Base and/or CV. Something to assist landing the SV into a landing position. so that I'm not bumping into everything and over-correcting when trying to dock. 2. Terrain Decor Tool. After tearing up the ground, paint the landscape. 3. Finally, i don't have anymore original ideas. So, i agree with one of the earlier posts to be able to take over a Faction CV and add it to collection.
1) Cryo chamber CV - To be able to log out from game on a CV and friends can log in and play the game and move the CV to other galaxys and when you log in again you are still on that CV on te correct spot. 2) Group Mission - When in the same group the missions can be solved in group and not "one by one". 3) Spawn and repair easier - Spawn ship and repair pads without need of a big landing pad or that the outer frames must be on a buildt base. Should be enough to be "close".
1. Advanced Gravity Generator. Only one required for all blocks touching the Unit. 2. Advanced Gravity Generator. Configurable Gravity Field. 3. Advanced Gravity Generator. Place the Unit in Indiana, and all matter in the observable Universe receives 1 Earth-Gravity.
1. finally make the CV control panel 2. finally make the CV control panel 3. finally make the CV control panel
1: A list of what type of star is in the system. IE: A= This type of star, K= That type of star, M=The other type of star, etc. 2: If you fill in a hole, leveling it to the surrounding terrain. Currently, it just digs it back out. 3: Either WiFi that allows you to remote access an autominer OR a collector that, not only collects the ores from several miners, but also feeds them power sources(hydro cells, bio fuel, etc.
Please forget any suggestion I've ever added in this thread for one thing- a single key that always and consistently exits every and all modal user interface screens to return control of the avatar to the player. Nothing is more frustrating than being "caught" in a turret, piloting a drone, configuring ammo in an SV, reading PDA info off a terminal, chatting with an NPC, etc and suddenly getting attacked and trying to hit the "correct" key to exit a modal dialog. Is it "F" or "ESC" or "ENTER" or click on the X all the while a group of Z's use you as a target dummy or roaming predators mistake you for a chew toy. Please. Pretty please. With a cherry on top.
1 - different creatures, landscape, colors, based on the star class in the system, ie: desert planet on a red dwarf is different from desert planet on blue star I tried it myself and it was great, but the issue is that with every update I have to review ll the files and manually add all the new stuffs. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2201403582 2 - when you fully mine an asteroid make the marker disappear from map and radar, we dont need to know that a copper asteroid was there. 3 - moon distances from planet should be set to a range not a fixed distance. same for moon sizes different sizes.
1. Hyper-realistic lighting: the attention to things like lighting, bloom, DoF and skybox. Think Valheim! 2. Environmental: realistic "fluffy" clouds and layering of plants and rock textures (3d grass as well) instead of 1 layer (most of the time 2d texture) on top of the terrain map. For instance: grass plains would consist of grass, leaves, sticks, dirt clods, gravel & stones typically. Then you have your major flora: bushes, flowers, trees, boulders 3. More detail in terrain models with caves and caverns, deep cuts/cliffs with higher resolution
1. CP switches/signals possible to add to vessel toolbars 2. Vessel collision damage 3. Performance optimization. (Seriously, this game can and should run way better and with less hiccups.) OR 3. PROPER gamepad support with rebinding options/ better keybinding options overall/support for other input methods. Either one of the last two is fine by me.
Modding/Scripting. This would single handedly revolutionize the game. We have an amazing build system but the builds "do" nothing. It would be amazing to have the ability to create automation routines or custom blocks. Yes, I realize this is not SE, but it could be far better. Also modding allows the community to focus on the additions while the devs focus on making the core game better. I keep coming back to this game in hopes there is a proper modding api and after years, it's still not a thing. Modding prolongs the life of the game far after the vanilla content is mastered. More people playing = more content created = more buzz generated = more sales. Everyone wins. Just my two cents.
My idea is another way around: A "Drone spawnpad device" for CV (Drone Frigate). Players can lock on target ships and deploy drones within 3KM range. But I am guessing to make this possible, 4th vessel type "Drone" needs to be added to the game. And they need to be able to dock on Drone dockingpad(setting up signal).
The "self-repair" device. At launch, it releases a certain number of drones that repair the carrier ship or (this would be ideal) the specified target. This is not bad implemented in X4
The other guy mentioned "build an SV and make it controlled by AI." But I am guessing to make this possible, 4th vessel type "Drone" needs to be added to the game. And they need to be able to dock on Drone dockingpad(setting up signal). So either the developer add playable Drone with assault/repair/savage for selection, or players can build a SV with "drone core" and define with type of drone it would be. "Repair drone"... deployed to circle round main ship to seek nearest damaged outer hull block and device on ship surface. The drone can be configured which type of device gets repaired first. For example, thruster or turret. (Have to ignore inner block/device; otherwise, it would cause issues.) And there could be "Savage drone", deployed to seek for nearest wreckage/de-cored POI to salvage/retrieve blocks. And Multitool Ammo is required to refuel the drones.
1. Literal Factory mode. Virtual factory Mode (the present configuration) should be retained much as the massless/volume-less/infinite processing mode from the original game has been retained and the more constraining "Literal Factory Mode" only turned on with a toggle / config files for those users/server admins who want it on. What would a "Literal Factory" look like? It could take on numerous forms but the key changes from the present are best conceived in terms of the limitations they would impose on play (and which might manifest in many different specific operationalizations of game mechanics: (a) no ability to place resources into a "factory" without somehow interacting with an appopriate "factory interface" (b) factories should be represented by a device/place(s) in the game and that is where all vehicles should be spawned else where base placement tokens can be fetched once a construct is built. The most constraining version of this would be that players do not have a factory at all and only NPC factions have "factories," and thus having sufficient relations with a faction to pay for the use of their factory would be required. A somewhat less constraining version would be that there are both NPC factories (which players can pay to use given they have good relations) and also some "end-" or else "late-game" player devices which can serve the same purpose. The "Factory" device should be massive, and require enormous power and CPU. Another idea that has occurred to me to augment this sort of system would be if having achieved "Friendly" relations with an NPC faction, a player can buy "Cache Placer Blocks." These would resemble the starter blocks used for CV, HV and SV and would be effectively a new type of starter block which would place a new type of construct called a 'Cache.' It could be placed anywhere (space or on terrain) but have similar placement exclusion parameters to a base. The model to represent it could be quite simple and relatively small, say for example a 2 tall by 1 wide by 3 long model (referecing CV/BA sized blocks) that resembles a kind of cargo container. It would probably be best if it ahs wireless by default (or else if it can accessorized with wireless). Other than that, it would have no additional extensibility or modifiability whatsoever. A box with effectively infinite storage capacity and a standard wireless and with ownership locked to private / faction, completely defenseless and effectively useless for all but one task: caching resources "for pickup" by an NPC faction to be delivered to their nearest factory. The cache would function as follows: (i) only acquired by purchase from an NPC faction with whom one has friendly relations and which offers factory services (buying them from the factory quartermaster at the factory might be the best idea); (ii) as already described a model that looks like a cargo container with modest hit points that can be placed anywhere and with effectively infinite storage capacity (mass/volume) and no other functionalities other than wireless; (iii) exactly 12 hours (maybe allow user to configure for longer) in game after placement the cache *poof* disappears and the resources inside of it are placed in the players factory account (anything that didn't fit is set aside in a storage box at the factory). (iv) during the 12+ hours that the cache exists, it can be attacked and destroyed by hostile forces (and hostile NPCs should be scripted to take some interest in it though perhaps not to hone in on it like a base attack per se . . . more like: IF a random drone patrol happens to go by and the cache is not protected by the player(s) they will attack it and foil the players plans; (iv) if the cache is destroyed all the suff inside drops out in those luggage cases and despawns after the specified period. 2. Hard-core mode: aka "Death Matters," in sum: (a) no respawning by any means other than a clone chamber/biomedical chamber, if player dies without access to one of these, game over man, session is closed (it may be that deleting the file would be taking it too far, but the intent is to provide a framework for users to self-regulate by doing so themselves. On servers, the mode could be configured to trigger a CB:RESET if a death occurs without an available respawn chamber). (b) only "available" respawn chambers should be one's belonging to player/player faction or friendly NPCs. The point is that: many players use the tent, or the even more cheesy "respawn at current location" option and this makes death inconsequential. Given it is a survival game, a mode in which death IS consequential would be nice. Obviously no one should be required to play this way, and as I said above, "Hard-core mode" would be a toggleable mode just like all the other relatively new additions to the game mechanics (CPU, mass/volume, etc.). There is a lot more one could do with this, (for example Tiers of clone chambers with progressively higher tiers offering less and less debuffs from respawning and the lowest grade machines resulting in a fairly serious "Respawn Sickness" debuff (e.g., Health is at 30% for one real-time hour after respawn . . . something like that . . . . . . also the respawn chambers might require that they be "prepped" and "charged" by the player in order to derive maximim benefit, for example by adding materials to them such as: 5 (or 10) Elemental pentaxid 30 purified water 50 meat 2 (or 3) advanced electronics {not sure on this, check recipe) 1 trauma kit 1 fuel cell 3. Reserved for future consideration
Ah hold on . . . I do have a third "most desired" feature. 3. A new class of ship that sits sort of "in-between" CVs and SVs and with appropriate changes (perhaps including renaming) to CVs. The idea overall would be to have one type of large block space craft which are: really good at interstellar travel and space combat / space operations but TERRIBLE at going down to planets, the other type which are TERRIBLE at interstellar travel (and arguably not great for space combat, but that is more debatable) but REALLY GOOD at landing on celestial bodies (planets and moons) and also good at attacking POIs. The point of all this is to allow the removal of the "this weapon arbitrarily doesn't work in atmosphere" nonsense by instead making the platforms that said weapons are best for mounting on terrible at going there. So in sum, the Planetary CV type would be a terrible choice for mounting the weapons which are good for space combat, and the Interstellar CV would be terrible at going down to planets (even though it can mount the weapons that would allow it to vaporize most POIs The specifics of how this could be formulated are multifarious and impossible to summarize. It would be up to Eleon to come up with those.
Currently, the CV doesn't do well at all on planets, in terms of firepower. Wouldn't it be easier if developers add more planetary turrets for CV (and let the scenario itself limits the number of each type allowed on a vessel) and leave it to players to define which CV (space or planetary use) they like to build? Okay I kind of get what you meant. The idea I mentioned above would heavily break the balance. You want "only planetary CV" to have its own class. That means such CV will beat SV/HV/Base on the planet.
As my third "desired feature" it is the least coherent and the one I'm the least enthusiastic about. It kinda combines a number of different "wouldn't it be neat if . . ." notions: Wouldn't it be neat if there were CVs that were really good at space but terrible at planets? Wouldn't it be neat if there were CVs that were good at planets, okay at "space" but really bad at long-distance interstellar (or something along those lines) It irks me enormously that there are ANY arbitrary rules in the game which cannot be made sense of by even the most fanciful made up physics; the biggest example of this is that any of the CV weapons are "unable to function" inside celestial body playfields. This change was introduced long ago, and I cannot recall exactly why, but my suspicion is that it was done for two separate reasons that synergized: PVP balance and player versus POI balance. It is a delicate balance to be sure becaues the most obvious direct means of solving the problem (making BA constructs far more fearsome) very well might have made it impossible for players to ever take out NPC POIs except by means like sapping. They undersandably want BA to be tough enough that you cannot just pull up in a Star Desteroyer and vaporize them, but not so tough that players are unable to take them on and win. The relatively new idea that occurred to me is that multiple birds could be hit with one stone by the two CVs design concept. Assign moderator values to the two types of cores (standard "Interstellar CV" and "Planetary CV") that up or down specific ship parameters (shields, CPU, thrust, maneuverability, firepower, fuel consumption, etc., whatever) which apply in either both or one of the two playfield types (space sectors or on 'planets' [to include moons I presume]). Make the two constructs function distinctly and make it costly to put the most potent weapons on the Planet CVs by one means or another . . . ADDIT: the issue of HV "having a role" in the game . . . the developers have been groping this topic for years. The number of strange permutations of rules and arbitrary game mechanics they have imposed, tweeked, re-assigned, tweeked again, then finally removed could fill volumes. The synthesis of this topic is, IMO: HVS HAVE a place, they are cheap and easy to get at your first vehicle. They also mount the saw blades and in vanilla nothing else does. That is enough, it isn't like the quality of the game experience or the success of the product (which should be the PRIMARY focii of any sensible developer) are worse because one of the three main constructs has only limited importance. Nor would the game experience be enhanced or product success improved if some screw ball means to make HVs more important were concocted. Indeed, the plethora of arbitrary and incoherent game mechanics that have plagued the game for years-and still do to some extent--have arguably worked AGAINST what should be the developers primary agenda: optimize user experience and promote product success. With all of that said, assuming some good reason could be described for why HVs MUST be made more important, the best way to do that is to make them better at their most obvious role, not to simply apply arbitrary rules that eliminate functionality from some other construct. For example HVs might be made to be really good at attacking POIs, even better than a CV, or even better than a Planetary CV: a lot of this could be accomplished by simply tweeking values for parameters that are specific to HV builds, but some other simple methods could be used as well. Create a new device. Make it relatively expensive in materials and high in tech level. Encourage POI designers to put it into damn near every Zirax POI and call it a "Anti-Bombardment Energy Field" assign characteristics to it that make it a damn near impervious defense against anything that is flying. What characteristics? Innumerable are possible but the simplest would be that any weapon shots from higher than say 10 or 15 degrees above level have their damage reduced by 99%. Go one step further and create a neato particle effect: whenever one of these "high-angle" shots strikes the POI you momentarily see a glowy umbrella like shape spark into animation then fade out . . . That is just the most obvious solution I can think of, there are only about 500 others that do not involve arbitrary and incoherent limitations on what one construct or another can do . . .
