what i want in X-rebirth
Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum
-
- Posts: 405
- Joined: Sun, 21. Feb 10, 13:51
I just whant a hard game
with no ``i win button``
with no generic missions , or they change theme to be based one what is happening in the univers
a good A.I in combat
good trading A.I
a chalenging game remember ``think`` havent done a lot of that in vanila tc
and nice looking race heads
dark story
ego-soft FOR THE WIN!
with no ``i win button``
with no generic missions , or they change theme to be based one what is happening in the univers
a good A.I in combat
good trading A.I
a chalenging game remember ``think`` havent done a lot of that in vanila tc
and nice looking race heads
dark story
ego-soft FOR THE WIN!
Splits , for the better things in life...
-
- Posts: 193
- Joined: Tue, 1. May 07, 20:40
I want:
1) Optimized engine. No, really. Please, Egosoft. Pretty please.
2) Ability to target specific points on ships (capitals, at least), like in X-Wing series. E.g. you can destroy shields, turrets, engines etc. This will add a LOT of fun and strategic planning to boarding.
3) Ability to link forward-firing turrets with main guns.
1) Optimized engine. No, really. Please, Egosoft. Pretty please.
2) Ability to target specific points on ships (capitals, at least), like in X-Wing series. E.g. you can destroy shields, turrets, engines etc. This will add a LOT of fun and strategic planning to boarding.
3) Ability to link forward-firing turrets with main guns.
-
- Posts: 702
- Joined: Tue, 6. Jul 10, 13:05
I'm getting everything I could possibly want from Rebirth and the EGOSOFT team, a new X game 

Die-Hard...Suicidal Squid DiD
I was born free, but now I'm expensive!
I was born free, but now I'm expensive!
-
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Mon, 5. May 08, 00:00
-
- Posts: 466
- Joined: Mon, 7. Feb 05, 10:01
-
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Thu, 10. Feb 11, 02:23
-
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Thu, 16. Oct 08, 22:07
What I'd want:
Well not much, I've enjoyed the previous X games a lot and think they've done most things right. I just wished the combat had more "umph" to it! Loved the way FS2 did combat and the way ships handled.
And then I would just like graphical tweaks and such. Maybe shield effects and impact effects on ships. Better damage effects. Making traveling through gates more seamless and "realistic" instead of "go through, black screen for a couple of seconds, come out on the other end".
Oh, any I'd want there to be anomalies and stuff introduced, maybe have a black hole here are there.
Well not much, I've enjoyed the previous X games a lot and think they've done most things right. I just wished the combat had more "umph" to it! Loved the way FS2 did combat and the way ships handled.
And then I would just like graphical tweaks and such. Maybe shield effects and impact effects on ships. Better damage effects. Making traveling through gates more seamless and "realistic" instead of "go through, black screen for a couple of seconds, come out on the other end".
Oh, any I'd want there to be anomalies and stuff introduced, maybe have a black hole here are there.
-
- Posts: 90
- Joined: Sun, 7. Feb 10, 14:09
Well not to be 'forceful and demanding' but it would be nice to have:
- More varieties of Ships
- For there still to be a Sol System and a Terran Race
- More varieties of wares for each race
- A L-O-N-G campaign (Something longer than like 8 missions like last time.)
- More little Mini games; Like the Spy Drone thing in X3:R
- Cockpits
- More realistic AI
- Race wars in actual game without modding
- Sectors to have better defences rather than just 1 Destroyer and 1 Carrier. Something like a Core Sector should have like 6 Destroyers and 4 Carriers. And make more catergories rather than just Border and Core.
- Crew Members
And with the Multiplayer, you guys want to much, I'd be happy if there was something just like a death matches as a Multiplayer and each time you rank up you get more shields, weapons, ships etc. It doesn't have to have a dynamic economy in the Multiplayer. Sure it would be nice, but that would be quite a lot to ask.
- More varieties of Ships
- For there still to be a Sol System and a Terran Race
- More varieties of wares for each race
- A L-O-N-G campaign (Something longer than like 8 missions like last time.)
- More little Mini games; Like the Spy Drone thing in X3:R
- Cockpits
- More realistic AI
- Race wars in actual game without modding
- Sectors to have better defences rather than just 1 Destroyer and 1 Carrier. Something like a Core Sector should have like 6 Destroyers and 4 Carriers. And make more catergories rather than just Border and Core.
- Crew Members
And with the Multiplayer, you guys want to much, I'd be happy if there was something just like a death matches as a Multiplayer and each time you rank up you get more shields, weapons, ships etc. It doesn't have to have a dynamic economy in the Multiplayer. Sure it would be nice, but that would be quite a lot to ask.
-
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Tue, 26. Oct 10, 12:47
-
- Posts: 591
- Joined: Mon, 9. Feb 09, 00:46
AI's and such
I think a lot of these suggestions tend to ignore the gigantic technical challenge that they represent, so I'll make a few points in this area to hopefully steer conversation toward realistic desires.
(Please note that I am using the terms AI and script interchangeably, because they are one and the same)
In summary, we can greatly enhance the behavior of both enemy and player fleets by creating scripts that control the entire group and concentrating AI development there.
(Please note that I am using the terms AI and script interchangeably, because they are one and the same)
- The AI in X is not stupid. It is simply not up to the gigantic task presented to it by making multiple ships behave intelligently in a fully realized 3D environment. Hell, most humans can't pilot one ship in 3d, let alone dozens or hundreds.
- Create a hierarchal, objective-based intelligence/scripting in order to accomplish goals. The most beneficial places this can be implemented are in capital ships with lots of turrets, and in fleet engagements.
----For capital turrets: when the player (or the AI) gives a capital ship a command that involves turrets, the script will subdivide and delegate responsibilities to individual subsystems that have optimized scripts for accomplishing those tasks.
For example: when given the command "attack all enemies", the AI gets a list of the ships in its area of interest (definable), categorizes that list into threat groups based upon current range and firepower (fighters = close, low power, "gnats", while an m7 or m2 would be = edge of firing range, high power, "high priority"), and distributes turret instructions (and maybe even redistributes weapon loadout) in order to meet the assigned goals of A) killing off immediate threats, and B) killing off lower-priority threats. For a great implementation of this, consult the MARS turret scripts (Gazz, you are simply amazing).
----Fleet Engagements: Instead of the current method of simply sending everything out to attack and resulting in a fleet spread out based upon ship maximum speeds (Xenon incursions from a gate are a great example of this problem), the AI should be grouped under a commanding AI that can implement higher-order logic to increase its effectiveness. Examples:
1) Keep the fleet in close proximity to one another, meaning leash fighters to larger vessels and larger vessels to the flagship. This increases its deadliness by virtue of combined arms (a modern military concept).
2) Acquire and kill targets in order of threat. Again, to increase the deadliness of the fleet by not allowing its members to die unnecessarily.
3) Delegate tasks to the fleet members most able to accomplish them. For example, we use light scout-class fighters to chase down missiles aimed at our high-value targets. - Use this hierarchal system everywhere to minimize physical CPU cycles. Because the group is assigned to a single script for the majority of its existence, we can implement higher-order logic function calls that are only for use in a small number of script instances (the ones controlling fleets), while saving tons of CPU time because the actual instances running on the ships aren't doing anything but waiting for commands from the higher-up. See how this works? We're dumbing down the ships slightly in order to beef up the fleet's overall intelligence.
- Allow the scripts functions that can control ships' physical orientation and firing behavior. Basically, allow the script to behave "intelligently" by doing things like instructing capitals to "stand their ground" and let their turrets do the work, and adjusting ship positioning to maximize firepower in a particular direction (instead of 5 Boreas' trying to put their noses onto a Discoverer, or shooting through each other at a target).
- Automate moving ships (and their controlling script instances) from one commanding script (fleet) to another script (fleet), so that two fleets can exchange members to increase their survival likelihood. Example:
1) Two fleets are in sector Alpha, which is under attack by an array of enemies who like to use lots of missiles (aka the Player). Friendly Fleet A has more than enough fighters and capitals equipped with anti-missile weaponry to be safely operational in this environment, while Friendly fleet B just returned from a sector takeover and has no fighters left, with all anti-capital weapons. Because of this imbalance, Fleet B's command script realizes that it is poorly equipped for this environment, looks around for friendly assets to protect itself, finds them in Fleet B, requests support from Fleet B's anti-missile assets, and receives it. The relevant assets are reassigned to Fleet B (and their script instances are probably restarted in the Fleet B hierarchy due to scope issues).
- For the pathfinding problem: Instead of making every ship find its way around the collision meshes of stations and ships in a system, implement this in a hierarchal system:
1) For avoiding stations, have the script be executed by the station, instructing the ship's autopillock with (ostensibly pre-loaded) avoidance pathing. This way, the ships don't have to constantly call the station-avoid functions over and over. You could take this even further by implementing a sector script that handles all avoidance routines in the sector, and functions to minimize the need for station-based subroutines by herding ships into trade lanes.
2) For in-fleet avoidance, implement procedures into the fleet handler to quickly arrive at a stable, pre-computed flight configuration - currently, ships (fighters especially) often will end up oscillating between positions as they are kicked out by others following the same orders, which is non-desirable emergent behavior predicated upon having two non-communicating scripts.
3) For avoidance in battle: X3's fighters are basically worthless against capital ships because they inevitably collide with the ships' shields and die. If we used a fleet controller instead, we could create an instance of a fighter attack script, which has routines that can calculate an appropriate strafing run that all of the relevant fighters follow to avoid being eaten by shields.
In summary, we can greatly enhance the behavior of both enemy and player fleets by creating scripts that control the entire group and concentrating AI development there.
-
- Moderator (Script&Mod)
- Posts: 22433
- Joined: Sun, 14. Nov 04, 23:26
Re: AI's and such
tbh, it doesn't seem like that method would really work all that well, and u might be overcomplicating it abitbobxii wrote: [*]For the pathfinding problem: Instead of making every ship find its way around the collision meshes of stations and ships in a system, implement this in a hierarchal system:
1) For avoiding stations, have the script be executed by the station, instructing the ship's autopillock with (ostensibly pre-loaded) avoidance pathing. This way, the ships don't have to constantly call the station-avoid functions over and over. You could take this even further by implementing a sector script that handles all avoidance routines in the sector, and functions to minimize the need for station-based subroutines by herding ships into trade lanes.
2) For in-fleet avoidance, implement procedures into the fleet handler to quickly arrive at a stable, pre-computed flight configuration - currently, ships (fighters especially) often will end up oscillating between positions as they are kicked out by others following the same orders, which is non-desirable emergent behavior predicated upon having two non-communicating scripts.
3) For avoidance in battle: X3's fighters are basically worthless against capital ships because they inevitably collide with the ships' shields and die. If we used a fleet controller instead, we could create an instance of a fighter attack script, which has routines that can calculate an appropriate strafing run that all of the relevant fighters follow to avoid being eaten by shields.
[/list]
In summary, we can greatly enhance the behavior of both enemy and player fleets by creating scripts that control the entire group and concentrating AI development there.
sounds like u want every station to have precomputed paths around the station, so when the ship gets close it follows the path around the station ?
for that to even work, all models would need to have predefined paths in different directions to function, which would be a complete waste of time
there are better ways to do it
proper in sector path planning would be better, this is where the ship will plot the route its going to take before flying by computing waypoints around objects
it is a fairly expensive routine, but as your limiting it to in sector objects, and you can seperate it up, in shouldn't be a problem.
basically, u compute the straight line path from your current position to the destintation target, trace along the path until it intersects with the collision sphere of the station, then plot a way point on the edge of the sphere.
then starting from that way point, the process repeats until you reach the end.
then the ship simply fly between these way points avoiding all stationary objects in sector
-
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Thu, 10. Feb 11, 02:23
That would be great, I would pay double for that. I also want the improved combat though too, that me and others have mentioned. Although I would happily have no multiplayer content. Just an epic single player space experience.TRAT513 wrote:Well not to be 'forceful and demanding' but it would be nice to have:
- More varieties of Ships
- For there still to be a Sol System and a Terran Race
- More varieties of wares for each race
- A L-O-N-G campaign (Something longer than like 8 missions like last time.)
- More little Mini games; Like the Spy Drone thing in X3:R
- Cockpits
- More realistic AI
- Race wars in actual game without modding
- Sectors to have better defences rather than just 1 Destroyer and 1 Carrier. Something like a Core Sector should have like 6 Destroyers and 4 Carriers. And make more catergories rather than just Border and Core.
- Crew Members
-
- Posts: 591
- Joined: Mon, 9. Feb 09, 00:46
Re: AI's and such
Yes, but this isn't currently done, and it's obvious. Moreover, the current system is flawed because it doesn't consider momentum, the bane of both huge ships and tiny ones.Cycrow wrote:tbh, it doesn't seem like that method would really work all that well, and u might be overcomplicating it abit
sounds like u want every station to have precomputed paths around the station, so when the ship gets close it follows the path around the station ?
for that to even work, all models would need to have predefined paths in different directions to function, which would be a complete waste of time
there are better ways to do it
proper in sector path planning would be better, this is where the ship will plot the route its going to take before flying by computing waypoints around objects
it is a fairly expensive routine, but as your limiting it to in sector objects, and you can seperate it up, in shouldn't be a problem.
basically, u compute the straight line path from your current position to the destintation target, trace along the path until it intersects with the collision sphere of the station, then plot a way point on the edge of the sphere.
then starting from that way point, the process repeats until you reach the end.
then the ship simply fly between these way points avoiding all stationary objects in sector
The reason for moving control into a station script is that one can then implement algorithms for keeping ships from running into each other, as well as the station. In fact, it seems that having a sector-driven script to control all of these things (space traffic controller) would be most efficient because it'll keep ships from ever going near stations to begin with (unless that was their specific goal).
I guess the best analogy is airliners - pilots are simply told what to do, and they execute it. These scripts could actually compute optimized flight paths for each of the major paths (gate to gate, gate to station & reverse) once and save it for later, only updating when something in the sector changes.
From a programming and execution standpoint, this is also a much more efficient paradigm, as it concentrates memory and computational complexity into one script that will have only a single instance running, and therefore makes it easier to maintain the illusion of intelligent behavior.
EDIT: More simply, one could just write in a script that implements parabolic pathing around stations (to make it look good

-
- Posts: 57
- Joined: Thu, 10. Feb 11, 02:23
I hope they try to advertise it and hype it a bit more this time. I think most people have never even heard of the X series. Also, they made it a lot more friendly with Terran Conflict but that seemed to get released without much of a fanfare. I would love to see Rebirth get hyped all over the web, with big reviews on all the big websites.
-
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Tue, 14. Dec 10, 10:30
I'd really like to see "probing" style exploration. Yeah I know it's straight from EVE - but this being single player game, a great deal of complexity and intrigue could be added without having to worry about the multiplayer ramifications.
It just makes sense to be able to fit "science" equipment to a ship and fly it as, say, a flagship with a wing of fighter and destroyer support.
I don't know HOW it could be made more interesting than EVE's "exploration" but I'm sure it could be done. Probe down wrecks, hideouts... I know, I know it sounds too muh like EVE - but it's a notion deeply rooted in scifi. it would make exploring the x universe a lot more fun and interactive.
It just makes sense to be able to fit "science" equipment to a ship and fly it as, say, a flagship with a wing of fighter and destroyer support.
I don't know HOW it could be made more interesting than EVE's "exploration" but I'm sure it could be done. Probe down wrecks, hideouts... I know, I know it sounds too muh like EVE - but it's a notion deeply rooted in scifi. it would make exploring the x universe a lot more fun and interactive.
[ external image ]
Luck and profit!
Luck and profit!
-
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Wed, 22. Oct 03, 11:41
The interface needs to be vastly improved for me to consider X Rebirth.
The limitations of the original UI became very clear as the complexity increased.
X-BtF, X-tension and even X2 were fine, but X3 Reunion was an unwieldy mess. Too ambitious for the UI they had. I stared at menu after menu and thought this 'game' would be more like a chore to play. I have no problem with a learning curve since starting slowly and building up is a feature of space sims, but managing too much stuff with the godawful controls was not fun. I never bought Terran Conflict because of this.
Hopefully, the UI has had a complete redesign and the 'character driven' style sounds very promising.
The limitations of the original UI became very clear as the complexity increased.
X-BtF, X-tension and even X2 were fine, but X3 Reunion was an unwieldy mess. Too ambitious for the UI they had. I stared at menu after menu and thought this 'game' would be more like a chore to play. I have no problem with a learning curve since starting slowly and building up is a feature of space sims, but managing too much stuff with the godawful controls was not fun. I never bought Terran Conflict because of this.
Hopefully, the UI has had a complete redesign and the 'character driven' style sounds very promising.
-
- Posts: 132
- Joined: Tue, 18. Aug 09, 09:41
My post got locked so I have to move it here. I think we need a new thread for x: rebirth.
I just wanted to ask if people have heard anything about the possibility of empire building in X-rebirth?
I love X3TC but when I got to the end game I did not like it as much. I wanted to take over sectors and rebuild the economy. Claim the sectors for my own. Now, I know there are mods to do what I want but the NPC stations will always re-spawn.
I am not asking that X-rebirth change that much from X3TC because I love that game play. But I would like a better endgame model.
I just wanted to ask if people have heard anything about the possibility of empire building in X-rebirth?
I love X3TC but when I got to the end game I did not like it as much. I wanted to take over sectors and rebuild the economy. Claim the sectors for my own. Now, I know there are mods to do what I want but the NPC stations will always re-spawn.
I am not asking that X-rebirth change that much from X3TC because I love that game play. But I would like a better endgame model.
-
- Posts: 259
- Joined: Wed, 6. Apr 11, 03:28
X3TC has a much better interface, I think you missed out there, in fact I gave up on reunion because I heard TC had it improved, and it is a big step forward : ).Zable Fahr wrote:The interface needs to be vastly improved for me to consider X Rebirth.
The limitations of the original UI became very clear as the complexity increased.
X-BtF, X-tension and even X2 were fine, but X3 Reunion was an unwieldy mess. Too ambitious for the UI they had. I stared at menu after menu and thought this 'game' would be more like a chore to play. I have no problem with a learning curve since starting slowly and building up is a feature of space sims, but managing too much stuff with the godawful controls was not fun. I never bought Terran Conflict because of this.
Hopefully, the UI has had a complete redesign and the 'character driven' style sounds very promising.
That said it's still mostly the same old thing, and it needs a complete re-think, which is what I expect to see in Rebirth.
-
- Moderator (English)
- Posts: 28245
- Joined: Thu, 15. May 03, 20:57
No, we don't. And there is a rule about not discussing moderator actions on the forums, so I suggest you let it go.tianlongprc wrote:My post got locked so I have to move it here. I think we need a new thread for x: rebirth....
Have a great idea for the current or a future game? You can post it in the [L3+] Ideas forum.
X4 is a journey, not a destination. Have fun on your travels.
X4 is a journey, not a destination. Have fun on your travels.
-
- Posts: 723
- Joined: Mon, 25. Apr 11, 12:05
The abiltiy to take over sectors (in someone elses name at elast).
immageine clearing a sector of Xenon and then inviting the Argon in, for a huuge relations boost. The nthe Argon build a outposts there and from there on, the civies slowly build in it (unless yo ubeat them to it that is).
Not necessarily like that, but the gist is that things can change in the universe. Sectors can change, even without player imput.
No magic respawning stations out of nowhere.
immageine clearing a sector of Xenon and then inviting the Argon in, for a huuge relations boost. The nthe Argon build a outposts there and from there on, the civies slowly build in it (unless yo ubeat them to it that is).
Not necessarily like that, but the gist is that things can change in the universe. Sectors can change, even without player imput.
No magic respawning stations out of nowhere.
- Burning with Awesomeness
- Pontifex Maximus Panaidia Est Canicula Infernalis
- Pontifex Maximus Panaidia Est Canicula Infernalis