EGOSOFT and Deep Silver announce X Rebirth
Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum
-
- Posts: 1368
- Joined: Sun, 8. Feb 04, 16:28
@GuntiNDDS only 80km? need to get those skills up, last time i looked i think i was regularly pounding targets at 150 with lasers.
On topic, Most people seem to want capital ship battles to last longer, however without going to the complexities of eve and different races having different weapons and different defences against different weapons, the only way i could see XRebirth having longer lasting Cap Battles is by having weapons that maybe shoot frther, with faster speed of projectile, but have a longer reload time in them for the real heavy hitters, mid power weapons maybe have them fire faster, but not as fast as fighter based weapons. I have all sorts of ideas i could bring up, but I suspect that as has been suggested before that its now far to late in the develpoment cycle for that type of change. We will just have to wait and see what further info appears for us as and when its released.
Legionnaire
/Edit
@shadowrunner, youvbe totally got the scale of the EVE ships wrong there i'm afraid. they are far far bigger than that, just they dont seem that way from the players perspective.
/Edit
On topic, Most people seem to want capital ship battles to last longer, however without going to the complexities of eve and different races having different weapons and different defences against different weapons, the only way i could see XRebirth having longer lasting Cap Battles is by having weapons that maybe shoot frther, with faster speed of projectile, but have a longer reload time in them for the real heavy hitters, mid power weapons maybe have them fire faster, but not as fast as fighter based weapons. I have all sorts of ideas i could bring up, but I suspect that as has been suggested before that its now far to late in the develpoment cycle for that type of change. We will just have to wait and see what further info appears for us as and when its released.
Legionnaire
/Edit
@shadowrunner, youvbe totally got the scale of the EVE ships wrong there i'm afraid. they are far far bigger than that, just they dont seem that way from the players perspective.
/Edit
Mobo MSI Z270 Gaming M3 CPU i5 7600K @4.2
RAM 16Gb Corsair Vengeance
2x 1TB (RAID 0)+ 4TB SSHD + 3TB HDD + 500GB SSD (Windows and X4 install Locatrion)
Windows 10 PRO
8GB MSI 1070Ti
RAM 16Gb Corsair Vengeance
2x 1TB (RAID 0)+ 4TB SSHD + 3TB HDD + 500GB SSD (Windows and X4 install Locatrion)
Windows 10 PRO
8GB MSI 1070Ti
Depends of the ship and fitting. I have around 50mio skillpoints and most of the gunnary related skills maxed. i fly a cheap t2 armageddon fit with MPLII's and scorch crystals. With that fit my optimal is 77km.Legionnaire wrote:@GuntiNDDS only 80km? need to get those skills up, last time i looked i think i was regularly pounding targets at 150 with lasers.
-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Tue, 9. Nov 10, 14:33
a bit of topic, but i have to answerLegionnaire wrote:@GuntiNDDS only 80km? need to get those skills up, last time i looked i think i was regularly pounding targets at 150 with lasers.
On topic, Most people seem to want capital ship battles to last longer, however without going to the complexities of eve and different races having different weapons and different defences against different weapons, the only way i could see XRebirth having longer lasting Cap Battles is by having weapons that maybe shoot frther, with faster speed of projectile, but have a longer reload time in them for the real heavy hitters, mid power weapons maybe have them fire faster, but not as fast as fighter based weapons. I have all sorts of ideas i could bring up, but I suspect that as has been suggested before that its now far to late in the develpoment cycle for that type of change. We will just have to wait and see what further info appears for us as and when its released.
Legionnaire
/Edit
@shadowrunner, youvbe totally got the scale of the EVE ships wrong there i'm afraid. they are far far bigger than that, just they dont seem that way from the players perspective.
/Edit

-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Tue, 9. Nov 10, 14:33
GuntiNDDS wrote:Here you got it guys![]()
![]()
http://www.umluex.at/bilder/eve/EVE-ships.jpg
fly save o/ amarr ftw.
hahaha


btw. way to go, dwarfing my proud Chimera

-
- Posts: 1884
- Joined: Sat, 26. Nov 05, 17:54
The real problem I see with the capital ships in X is that when you have a rear turret that can fire forward, the range is small enough that your ship might be headbutting the other ship for the turret to fire. Otherwise we can't quite compare to the EvE system, not the same game type and mechanics.
Imagine trying to attack a capital ship with a carrier, your carrier would be slow enough taht the ennemy ship would start firing on it way before you can start the swarm attack.
Imagine trying to attack a capital ship with a carrier, your carrier would be slow enough taht the ennemy ship would start firing on it way before you can start the swarm attack.
SCUM : They may exceed you in number, but not in value.
-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Tue, 9. Nov 10, 14:33
Sooo, baselecy the problem can be fixed by boosting turret range, no? X is comparable with eve when it comes to scales and distance, but so is every 3D environment. I think way it was brought op, was to tell that short and long range combat can be combined. Didn't get your though of the carrier VS cap. Did you men that it would be unbalanced if a cap. Could start firing on a carrier before the carrier could bring it's fighters to battle? Carriers are a support ship, and should not travel alone. 1on1 a carrier is suppose to be outmatched. (following navy strategy, that space games are based on)StarTroll wrote:The real problem I see with the capital ships in X is that when you have a rear turret that can fire forward, the range is small enough that your ship might be headbutting the other ship for the turret to fire. Otherwise we can't quite compare to the EvE system, not the same game type and mechanics.
Imagine trying to attack a capital ship with a carrier, your carrier would be slow enough taht the ennemy ship would start firing on it way before you can start the swarm attack.
Sorry if theres any typos, writing from an iPhone.
-
- Posts: 1884
- Joined: Sat, 26. Nov 05, 17:54
The thing is I consider the size of the sectors, + the fact that your carrier comes through a gate, and the ennemy capship might be anywhere on the map, but if it was in the middle, if you increased too much the range, it could fire at you from there.
Well hard to put in words, but I feel that simply increasing range is not the thing to do. then again since we have no info on how the game will be, I won't try to think too much about what is what and how it should be done for now.
Well hard to put in words, but I feel that simply increasing range is not the thing to do. then again since we have no info on how the game will be, I won't try to think too much about what is what and how it should be done for now.
SCUM : They may exceed you in number, but not in value.
-
- Posts: 140
- Joined: Tue, 9. Nov 10, 14:33
Aaa, your right on the size on sectors and range, I see your point now. Then it's suddenly a harder nutt to crack to get all locking good and balanced. Increase sectors size, increase speed so travel time won't be to long, and then all is just one big mess.
Hmm, then it's just to wait and see if egosoft has come up with som genus system.
Egosoft!!! Hear us! Hear us! We need info.
Hmm, then it's just to wait and see if egosoft has come up with som genus system.
Egosoft!!! Hear us! Hear us! We need info.
-
- Posts: 1400
- Joined: Sat, 3. Jan 09, 15:48
-
- Posts: 2409
- Joined: Sat, 7. Mar 09, 18:29
-
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Mon, 14. Jun 10, 04:37
Engagement range...
Hmmm, Homeworld seemed to have good scale / ranges.
As a dogfighter what I most desire is good situational feedback. Quite frankly would like to see a space-sim make better use of 'technology'.
IE: watching a Battlestar Galactica engagement, there is an essentially an anti-fighter range where they spray-and-pray flak. No friendlies are to enter that range. Although not as spammy, large X ships have this range and just as deadly friend / foe. A warning, either HUD generated colored danger zone, wire frame, or simple audio cue of that risk (at least for friendly craft).
Another example is targeting. I'm more of a manual guy myself, but the AI could use some help sometimes. So maybe (for both AI and player) a targeting system that tracks the rate of acceleration. This would allow for accuracy vs. targets making simple turns or uniform changes in velocity. This would help with the pesky quick fighters that the AI always seem to have trouble shooting down and I have to get in the line of friendly fire to finish off.
As a dogfighter what I most desire is good situational feedback. Quite frankly would like to see a space-sim make better use of 'technology'.
IE: watching a Battlestar Galactica engagement, there is an essentially an anti-fighter range where they spray-and-pray flak. No friendlies are to enter that range. Although not as spammy, large X ships have this range and just as deadly friend / foe. A warning, either HUD generated colored danger zone, wire frame, or simple audio cue of that risk (at least for friendly craft).
Another example is targeting. I'm more of a manual guy myself, but the AI could use some help sometimes. So maybe (for both AI and player) a targeting system that tracks the rate of acceleration. This would allow for accuracy vs. targets making simple turns or uniform changes in velocity. This would help with the pesky quick fighters that the AI always seem to have trouble shooting down and I have to get in the line of friendly fire to finish off.
-
- Posts: 2259
- Joined: Fri, 6. Feb 09, 20:52
It actually seems to be this flipping semi-Newtonian physics thing that makes AI targeting in TC fail so horribly - play X2 and note the accuracy of projectile based turrets with, say alpha HEPTs in. Now put alpha HEPTs into a turret on X3: reunion or a HEPT in TC and note the accuracy. With the introduction of ships 'drifting', the outdated aiming system couldn't keep up and turret accuracy suffered.
This will probably be alleviated or fixed entirely with Rebirth's new AI routines.
This will probably be alleviated or fixed entirely with Rebirth's new AI routines.
Allergic to work.
If at first you don't succeed, delegate the job to a minion.
If at first you don't succeed, delegate the job to a minion.
-
- Posts: 2133
- Joined: Wed, 25. May 05, 14:38
-
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Thu, 15. Jan 09, 20:24
I read all the way to page 54 - but I couldn't make it any farther without replying
Its just too hard! 
Anyway, I'm really excited for X-Rebirth as well! First heard of it give or take a week ago; and I was shocked. I too heard all the talk really hinting that the X-Universe would be no more...a bit of a trick on ES's part
So far, just from the original trailer, it looks quite interesting. I have a few points I'd like to comment on.
1. I've heard (er...read) quite a bit of speculation on 'the supernova'. Some theorized that Earth's star, Sol, was to go nova. Some thought of the "Hub". However, I have a different theory - the Argon Federation was a staple in the universe. What if Sonra went nova? The core of the Federation...wiped out? That would certainly shift the universe around by a huge factor.
2. Really glad to see ol' Betty is likely to stay. As someone brought out - Betty is X. Not the same if its not there.
3. Some noticed that new gate design in the Trailer, with the blue artifactal lines, and speculated it was a Trans-orbital accelerator. However, that was dismissed as photos revealed that the old TOA model was still there. Hence, it must be something else. However, I have another idea - take a look at the X-Encyclopedia entry here:
3. Anyone care to speculate about the red mass in that energy stream at 0:54 in the trailer? What could this be? Some kind of new weapon, or something more? I tried to attatch pics...see If I can get em' working.
4. I noticed the "trade lane" type of movement as many others did. I hope this doesn't mean the elimination of free-roaming traders! That would remove a massive, massive aspect of the game. I hope they are only trans-factory transports, or something similar. Although ES probably realizes this. That "millions of people" quote as well - looks great!
5. I really don't understand the push for the removal of SETA. It is too late in development, of course, to make any changes into such a large engine facet, but I would absolutely hate to see it go! Even if there are new travel systems, SETA made the distances seem realistic. For instance - traveling 30-40km off the grid - or even many times more - in search of treasures, etc. seemed epically large. Removing that makes the distances seem comparativley small. Personally, nothing can replace SETA unless you want to tack TOA's all over the place. Although in-sector travel can be accomplished through something like that, I personally prefer by a massive factor the tried-and-true method - travel by SETA. No matter the navigateion complications. Was it really that big a deal in X2 and X3? Not that much. A bit of optomization could fix any issues.
6. I would also hate to see few massive sectors, or having a lot of in-sector travel and little transferring through gates. Gates are a critical part of the entire way X works - no matter what you changed it wouldn't be as good without them. The travel system was epic - large; and it should be kept that way imo. I hope a facet of the game is getting em' back up and running, after the Ancients shut them down.
7. This "old and battered ship" - looks like the AP Gunner. That would be simply legendary - getting back to the ol' ship. I'm curious as well who this "companion" is.
Regardless of all that it does look amazing - the graphics are great, and since it will likely (almost 100%) use multi-core, the gameplay mechanics can get even better! Can't wait to see what ES will do with an entirely new engine. I do know that it will be amazing, either way. X-Rebirth will be welcome addition to the series.
And to those upset it is an X-game - YOU ARE BANISHED!


Anyway, I'm really excited for X-Rebirth as well! First heard of it give or take a week ago; and I was shocked. I too heard all the talk really hinting that the X-Universe would be no more...a bit of a trick on ES's part

1. I've heard (er...read) quite a bit of speculation on 'the supernova'. Some theorized that Earth's star, Sol, was to go nova. Some thought of the "Hub". However, I have a different theory - the Argon Federation was a staple in the universe. What if Sonra went nova? The core of the Federation...wiped out? That would certainly shift the universe around by a huge factor.
2. Really glad to see ol' Betty is likely to stay. As someone brought out - Betty is X. Not the same if its not there.
3. Some noticed that new gate design in the Trailer, with the blue artifactal lines, and speculated it was a Trans-orbital accelerator. However, that was dismissed as photos revealed that the old TOA model was still there. Hence, it must be something else. However, I have another idea - take a look at the X-Encyclopedia entry here:
Couldn't this simply be another race's form of a TOA? It would make sense - still the same principle, but a different design. They recieved the tech well before the events depicted in X-Rebirth, so it is possible.Well before the collapse of the Community of Planets, the
Jonferson Space Dynamics Division had begun construction
of the first OLTA units in multiple Argon star systems, including
Sonra. Licences for the technology were purchased by
the Teladi Company, the Godrealm of the Paranid and the
Kingdom of Boron.
3. Anyone care to speculate about the red mass in that energy stream at 0:54 in the trailer? What could this be? Some kind of new weapon, or something more? I tried to attatch pics...see If I can get em' working.
4. I noticed the "trade lane" type of movement as many others did. I hope this doesn't mean the elimination of free-roaming traders! That would remove a massive, massive aspect of the game. I hope they are only trans-factory transports, or something similar. Although ES probably realizes this. That "millions of people" quote as well - looks great!
5. I really don't understand the push for the removal of SETA. It is too late in development, of course, to make any changes into such a large engine facet, but I would absolutely hate to see it go! Even if there are new travel systems, SETA made the distances seem realistic. For instance - traveling 30-40km off the grid - or even many times more - in search of treasures, etc. seemed epically large. Removing that makes the distances seem comparativley small. Personally, nothing can replace SETA unless you want to tack TOA's all over the place. Although in-sector travel can be accomplished through something like that, I personally prefer by a massive factor the tried-and-true method - travel by SETA. No matter the navigateion complications. Was it really that big a deal in X2 and X3? Not that much. A bit of optomization could fix any issues.
6. I would also hate to see few massive sectors, or having a lot of in-sector travel and little transferring through gates. Gates are a critical part of the entire way X works - no matter what you changed it wouldn't be as good without them. The travel system was epic - large; and it should be kept that way imo. I hope a facet of the game is getting em' back up and running, after the Ancients shut them down.
7. This "old and battered ship" - looks like the AP Gunner. That would be simply legendary - getting back to the ol' ship. I'm curious as well who this "companion" is.
Regardless of all that it does look amazing - the graphics are great, and since it will likely (almost 100%) use multi-core, the gameplay mechanics can get even better! Can't wait to see what ES will do with an entirely new engine. I do know that it will be amazing, either way. X-Rebirth will be welcome addition to the series.
And to those upset it is an X-game - YOU ARE BANISHED!

-
- Posts: 3445
- Joined: Thu, 8. Jun 06, 14:07
-
- Posts: 6191
- Joined: Sun, 3. Sep 06, 02:31
-
- Posts: 1354
- Joined: Sun, 20. Apr 08, 16:20
As predicted by myself on 10/10/10...
http://forum.egosoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=288660
I am also forcasting the next rapture sometime later this year, not the end of the world you understand but may be the beginning of a new (egosoft) universe!
http://forum.egosoft.com/viewtopic.php?t=288660
I am also forcasting the next rapture sometime later this year, not the end of the world you understand but may be the beginning of a new (egosoft) universe!
-
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Mon, 14. Jun 10, 04:37
[quote="Master of the Blade"]It actually seems to be this flipping semi-Newtonian physics thing that makes AI targeting in TC fail so horribly - play X2 and note the accuracy of projectile based turrets with, say alpha HEPTs in. Now put alpha HEPTs into a turret on X3: reunion or a HEPT in TC and note the accuracy. With the introduction of ships 'drifting', the outdated aiming system couldn't keep up and turret accuracy suffered.
This will probably be alleviated or fixed entirely with Rebirth's new AI routines.[/quote]
I pretty much mean any space sim I've played, a simple roll or high bank turn will pretty much avoid 99% of any incoming fire that [b]can[/b] be avoided. I don't know of a game that target uses anything but the predicted position based on current vector. This is submarine slide-rule warfare targeting tech targeting.
As for turret accuracy...well there is a point there, and a reason.
I agree the cone of fire on some turrets and weapons is a little ridiculous. IE: M1's firing anti cap weapons that vary by more than a fraction doesn't make sense.
But, it needs to be there a little bit. Many modern fighters are designed to not fix this problem (when dog-fighting was a little more prevalent). When you come up on an enemy aircraft doing combat maneuvers your ability to aim is quite limited by many factors. So the idea is to pepper the target with essentially a shotgun effect. It has a cone of fire so you don't have to be perfect and you are more likely to randomly hit something important (read engine).
So it serves a purpose IRL, but much less so in X games (so far). The only uses of it is to a) hopefully nick a fast target that you can't get a precise shot on or to b) induce missing. And it seems do more of the latter on smaller targets.
So, there can be a use for it in the new game...but it would have to be thought out.
+ Does it make sense for the projectile / weapon system physics?
+ Does it help with a certain engagement target?
So variance has its uses but I agree, they have not been used correctly, yet.
This will probably be alleviated or fixed entirely with Rebirth's new AI routines.[/quote]
I pretty much mean any space sim I've played, a simple roll or high bank turn will pretty much avoid 99% of any incoming fire that [b]can[/b] be avoided. I don't know of a game that target uses anything but the predicted position based on current vector. This is submarine slide-rule warfare targeting tech targeting.
As for turret accuracy...well there is a point there, and a reason.
I agree the cone of fire on some turrets and weapons is a little ridiculous. IE: M1's firing anti cap weapons that vary by more than a fraction doesn't make sense.
But, it needs to be there a little bit. Many modern fighters are designed to not fix this problem (when dog-fighting was a little more prevalent). When you come up on an enemy aircraft doing combat maneuvers your ability to aim is quite limited by many factors. So the idea is to pepper the target with essentially a shotgun effect. It has a cone of fire so you don't have to be perfect and you are more likely to randomly hit something important (read engine).
So it serves a purpose IRL, but much less so in X games (so far). The only uses of it is to a) hopefully nick a fast target that you can't get a precise shot on or to b) induce missing. And it seems do more of the latter on smaller targets.
So, there can be a use for it in the new game...but it would have to be thought out.
+ Does it make sense for the projectile / weapon system physics?
+ Does it help with a certain engagement target?
So variance has its uses but I agree, they have not been used correctly, yet.