What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

This forum is the ideal place for all discussion relating to X4. You will also find additional information from developers here.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

SpaceCadet11864
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue, 4. Dec 18, 02:14
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by SpaceCadet11864 »

Crimsonraziel wrote: Tue, 21. May 24, 21:26
SpaceCadet11864 wrote: Tue, 21. May 24, 20:05 3. Delayed Communication: Long-distance communication should take time. You shouldn’t be able to instantly command units several light-years away without the necessary technology. This would align better with how NPCs operate, as they don't have an omniscient view like the player. The player can eventually get this technology but there should be some trade-off, or risk/reward type of thing, at least in the first play through. New Game + could just turn it on I guess.
You definitely lost me here.
hah You and probably a lot of others judging by the other responses... :roll:
flywlyx
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by flywlyx »

SirLosealot wrote: Sat, 18. May 24, 18:54 That is unnless they fix the AI and make them reliably use their fixed gun in a fleet battle.
I still don't understand why capital ships in low attention are so much better.
Their physics engine is so basic, and there aren't any thrust or center of mass issues that might affect control. Why can't they just aim properly?
Good Wizard
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed, 9. Jun 21, 16:51
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Good Wizard »

flywlyx wrote: Tue, 21. May 24, 21:54
SirLosealot wrote: Sat, 18. May 24, 18:54 That is unnless they fix the AI and make them reliably use their fixed gun in a fleet battle.
I still don't understand why capital ships in low attention are so much better.
Their physics engine is so basic, and there aren't any thrust or center of mass issues that might affect control. Why can't they just aim properly?
Just watched your (?) video (two Ody E against Xenon I) from two weeks before: I think, the ships AI wants to go in a certain direction for whatever reason, and it turns the ships to do that. And this comes into conflict with aiming. It would be interesting (but not very enlightening) to test this in real low attention, i.e. without watching it on the map. The ships AI in general seem not to use strafing or backwards thrust. The Xenon destroyers always try to go above, to bring their turrets into play. This movement could be the reason for the constant maneuvering of the attackers, which destroys the aiming.

Just my speculations from watching a lot of such videos.
flywlyx
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by flywlyx »

Good Wizard wrote: Tue, 21. May 24, 22:21 Just watched your (?) video (two Ody E against Xenon I) from two weeks before: I think, the ships AI wants to go in a certain direction for whatever reason, and it turns the ships to do that. And this comes into conflict with aiming. It would be interesting (but not very enlightening) to test this in real low attention, i.e. without watching it on the map. The ships AI in general seem not to use strafing or backwards thrust. The Xenon destroyers always try to go above, to bring their turrets into play. This movement could be the reason for the constant maneuvering of the attackers, which destroys the aiming.

Just my speculations from watching a lot of such videos.
Capital ships have specific pitch angle limits, preventing them from aiming at enemies directly above them. However, even if I remove this limit, they still can't achieve this in high attention situations, for reasons unknown to me. It seems they can only do so in low attention scenarios.
You could check this video in 6.2: https://youtu.be/_SG-iJGtuUo?si=g9Mmf9UuE655jz-K&t=75
Even after removing the pitch limit and the minimum fire range limit, these two rattlesnakes still struggle to aim at the K above them. However, as soon as I teleport away, they suddenly know how to do their jobs properly.
If I keep low attention the entire time, the AI's performance is completely acceptable to me :https://youtu.be/ocPpSTzRfeA?si=7lOKBGdAljWG4AJe
User avatar
geldonyetich
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun, 18. Dec 11, 20:36
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by geldonyetich »

SpaceCadet11864 wrote: Tue, 21. May 24, 20:05 1. Limited Visibility: Players should only see what their ship's sensors can detect. To see beyond this range, players need to build the necessary infrastructure or architecture. No satellites. One compromise could be allowing players to "see" as far as their teleportation ability allows. When in "all-seeing mode," the ship becomes vulnerable, but they can hide in their HQ base for protection.

4. A more indepth sensor / detection system. One game I played called highfleet had a cool mechanic where the more sensors you used to "see further" the more noise you were sending out and thus the easier it was for you to be detected. If you wanted to be stealthy, you had to turn off sensors too.
To some extent this "fog of war" is already in, and I would not mind if Satellites were replaced with station modules.

What I like to think about when it comes to this is what the NPC factions see and how they react. Wouldn't your allies share their sensory data with you and vice versa? Perhaps information brokerage could be bigger.
3. Delayed Communication: Long-distance communication should take time. You shouldn’t be able to instantly command units several light-years away without the necessary technology.
This is true but, in the context of the X Universe, light-years are not involved. Instead, the gate network splits the action across many little pockets of space with only a few hundred kilometers between them.

I suppose the question is if you can transmit communication between the gates. If not, that would mean that you only have awareness of the current sector you are in. In the current implementation, if appears that is not the case.
The logistics would need to be as is or even better, where everything bought, sold, plundered and invented comes from raw materials that are mined and refined.
I thought this was already how X4 worked, except for mission rewards and natural resourxea referatubg over time.
SpaceCadet11864
Posts: 476
Joined: Tue, 4. Dec 18, 02:14
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by SpaceCadet11864 »

geldonyetich wrote: Wed, 22. May 24, 23:29 I thought this was already how X4 worked
Yes, I mentioned it to underline that I would want this to stay, but also I'd like to see this expanded to the trade goods that appear in stations. How that would work, would need to be explored a bit, but I think there is opportunity to expand it in many different ways.

I also think there is some opportunity to expand on how the mass transit / traffic ships work, bringing them into the logistics / economy of the game in some way - rather than them just being loot containers or eye candy.
User avatar
Crimsonraziel
Posts: 1083
Joined: Sun, 27. Jul 08, 16:12
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Crimsonraziel »

geldonyetich wrote: Wed, 22. May 24, 23:29 natural resourxea referatubg over time.
Looks like you had a stroke :D
Don't make me hungry. You wouldn't like me when I'm hungry!
#MakeNishalaGreatAgain #BoronLivesMatter :boron:
#LoveAldrin #FreeAlbion #ReturnOfMegalodon
User avatar
geldonyetich
Posts: 385
Joined: Sun, 18. Dec 11, 20:36
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by geldonyetich »

Crimsonraziel wrote: Thu, 23. May 24, 00:49
geldonyetich wrote: Wed, 22. May 24, 23:29 natural resourxea referatubg resources regenerating over time.
Looks like you had a stroke :D
There's times quickly sending a post on my cell phone doesn't work out particularly well.
SirLosealot
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri, 23. Dec 22, 22:58
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by SirLosealot »

Good Wizard wrote: Tue, 21. May 24, 22:21
Just watched your (?) video (two Ody E against Xenon I) from two weeks before: I think, the ships AI wants to go in a certain direction for whatever reason, and it turns the ships to do that. And this comes into conflict with aiming. It would be interesting (but not very enlightening) to test this in real low attention, i.e. without watching it on the map. The ships AI in general seem not to use strafing or backwards thrust. The Xenon destroyers always try to go above, to bring their turrets into play. This movement could be the reason for the constant maneuvering of the attackers, which destroys the aiming.

Just my speculations from watching a lot of such videos.
The distance afaik is 5km or less. And you are correct, they never use strafing or backwards thrust. If they can use those functions, it would be game changing for capital ship AI.

For example, if the enemy is more than 10km away, they would approach (which is already implemented). Then they would stop and fire at around 8km to 10 km (currently it is 5km to 10km afaik). If the enemy is <8km or less they would reverse and keep firing (this is not implemented and I don't know why the devs haven't done so already because that is what a player would do).
flywlyx
Posts: 1594
Joined: Sat, 15. May 21, 03:45
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by flywlyx »

SirLosealot wrote: Thu, 23. May 24, 16:03 The distance afaik is 5km or less. And you are correct, they never use strafing or backwards thrust. If they can use those functions, it would be game changing for capital ship AI.

For example, if the enemy is more than 10km away, they would approach (which is already implemented). Then they would stop and fire at around 8km to 10 km (currently it is 5km to 10km afaik). If the enemy is <8km or less they would reverse and keep firing (this is not implemented and I don't know why the devs haven't done so already because that is what a player would do).
It's not 5km but 50% of the weapon range, so ships with shorter ranges, like the rattlesnake, have fewer issues with it.
Since distance is the integral of velocity, monitoring the relative speed to determine forward or reverse will provide better accuracy.
However, using distance will also work—something is better than nothing.
Caldari Navy
Posts: 138
Joined: Tue, 18. Jul 23, 18:43

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Caldari Navy »

Dont see reason for X5 as x4 is still looking fantastic but ...
If x5 ...
COMBAT i want see actual combat of ships now honestly i got feeling im observing matematical equasions going very often bad way ..
Like Destroyer aim at other destroyer ( im like .. yeeh nows comes shooting ) ehm no destroyer start turning around and get shoot into engines and other destroyer shoting his engines stops shooting and start runinhg away ( commong fok side one more shoot to destroy ur target ) no and so on .
S and m ships are cool i like combat whith them. But L and xl pff
SirLosealot
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri, 23. Dec 22, 22:58
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by SirLosealot »

flywlyx wrote: Thu, 23. May 24, 17:39 It's not 5km but 50% of the weapon range, so ships with shorter ranges, like the rattlesnake, have fewer issues with it.
Since distance is the integral of velocity, monitoring the relative speed to determine forward or reverse will provide better accuracy.
However, using distance will also work—something is better than nothing.
TIL about the weapon range.
Any calculation to make them reverse and shoot is better than nothing but I suppose light calculations would be preferable because of the performance.
It's funny that currently, the best scenario when facing an opponent with main batteries would be if you can out range/out damage them. The second best scenario would be if you are literally in front of their face so that they would not use their main batteries and would run away instead.
ls612
Posts: 33
Joined: Wed, 2. Oct 13, 16:16
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by ls612 »

Two things;

1. I really hope X5 has a modern engine that supports path tracing. That will make it graphically almost future proof.

2. I would enjoy a real main story in X5, like X3 Reunion. Something to move the post-Shutdown Community of Planets along the path of history.
User avatar
Baconnaise
Posts: 766
Joined: Sat, 23. Nov 13, 15:50
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Baconnaise »

I would prfer if they stay sandbox ala X3 X4 that they do FSR/DLSSS of course. It would also be nice if they abandon the idea of missions/plots entirely. There is no such thing as a protagonist in this mode and custom start maps are sorely lacking in options. Do it right this time allowing the player full customization of map size randomness faction details and specifics relations between everyone the whole nine yards. I care very little about missions from a sandbox perspective. Stick to established lore regardless. I shouldn't have to use 50+ mods to customize my sandbox experience like turning off khaak or turning off builder ships or large and small asteroids mass traffic whatever. I should also not have mods that allow me to do female or male only runs or even terran or teladi ones. It feels like several steps backwards when you try to censor or prevent such things. Provide the tools for us to develop our fantasy settings or just put us back on rails.
User avatar
Hector0x
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon, 18. Nov 13, 18:03
x3tc

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Hector0x »

Sandbox options are the box of pandora. The community would probably love them so much that the entire series would steer away from the current curated universe approach.
I hope Egosoft eventually embraces this change. X4 was already heading into the right direction. A spin-off with no story would probably be feasible and successful.
alexthespaniard
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon, 13. Jan 20, 16:39

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by alexthespaniard »

I believe that, given how technology is changing with artificial intelligence, it's a mistake to rush into a new project that could quickly become obsolete. The coming years will bring many changes in areas like graphic design, programming... I think the smart move is to continue investing in X4. They can improve many things while observing these upcoming changes and developing a business plan for X5.

To address the points I have brought up several times, which I will summarize:

1 Diplomacy
2 Boarding of ships and stations, more inmersive events.
3 Sector management (planets, taxes, etc.)
4 Variety of ships
5 Piracy (possibility of evading taxes & to ask subordinates to doit)
6 Better management of the UI and ships on the map, as well as their behavior
7 Interiors of ships and stations, and immersion in these spaces.
8 Dynamic missions ->It's an exciting world where many things happen—why not take advantage of it? If an ally is attacked, the possibility of joining the defense in a mission where the cost of the eliminated enemy is doubled would be amazing. Similarly, in offensive missions, joining the attack on a fleet or station with rewards would be incredibly rewarding.
Zandros
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue, 9. Oct 07, 11:47
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Zandros »

alexthespaniard wrote: Tue, 10. Sep 24, 17:13 1 Diplomacy
2 Boarding of ships and stations, more inmersive events.
3 Sector management (planets, taxes, etc.)
4 Variety of ships
5 Piracy (possibility of evading taxes & to ask subordinates to doit)
6 Better management of the UI and ships on the map, as well as their behavior
7 Interiors of ships and stations, and immersion in these spaces.
8 Dynamic missions ->It's an exciting world where many things happen—why not take advantage of it? If an ally is attacked, the possibility of joining the defense in a mission where the cost of the eliminated enemy is doubled would be amazing. Similarly, in offensive missions, joining the attack on a fleet or station with rewards would be incredibly rewarding.
Yes to all but interiors of ships and stations, designing these would take a lot of, lets face it, limited resources and I don't think any more than what we got in x4 can be justified. Yes I would love to walk through my favorite ships from bow to aft but lets be honest you are not going to do that more than a few times before it gets boring and it would require a hell of a lot of time and work to avoid it looking all the same and actually be worth it. I think those resources are better spent on creating more awesome ship exteriors and general polishing of the game.
Or perhaps a captains chair on the bridge of bigger ships that gives you a good view if you want to just sit and watch and allows you to command the battle by giving more precise orders to your ships maybe a bit like Homeworld or hey Nexus the Jupiter incident (old game by now but if you haven't played it absolutely worth it).
alexthespaniard
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon, 13. Jan 20, 16:39

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by alexthespaniard »

That is why it is very important to add mini-games, for example, giving you the opportunity to boost battery power, shields, recharge, aim, or engines by 30% upon completing a task. Like any mechanic, it requires a limit. Therefore, this ability can only be used once every 10-15 minutes.

Therefore, the "lore" would consist of, for example, you stepping in to help the team responsible for shield maintenance, and your skill and leadership have resulted in a 2-minute +30% boost in shield recovery.
Imperial Good
Moderator (English)
Moderator (English)
Posts: 4933
Joined: Fri, 21. Dec 18, 18:23
x4

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Imperial Good »

I personally would like to see a larger focus on planet side aspects such as economics as well as a civilian economy that exists more than just a trade station making wares go poof. For example, planets consume rare resources from space. Being unable to supply those resources degrades the planets economy. A worse economy reduces the population of the planet, encourages piracy nearby, makes a planet more vulnerable to conquest and could possibly result in rebellions or government changes or other political events. The majority of basic good manufacturing would be done planet side, which would reduce the reliance on spamming thousands of modules and making a lag monster of a station.

Another aspect I would like to see is separating the player from their faction, allowing the player to partake in actions under another faction and having their reputation tied to that faction. For example, an Argon player start might have belong to the ARG faction and start without their own faction. Any assets they purchase will be controllable by them, but still be part of the ARG faction. Later on they could move them to their own faction, where they could start gaining or changing relationships with other factions. This would have a lot of role play advantage since players might choose to remain under 1 faction for an entire playthrough. It could also allow playing as a mercenary since for combat mission types the player could partake under that faction rather than their own so suffer no long lasting reputation changes for doing the mission.

I would also like to see a more complicated combat balance where certain ships are much more effective against other specific ships. Currently the existence of some ships can easily be questioned. For example, what is the actual use of a Frigate? In combat they die near instantly and they are certainly not a carrier and when personally flown they control horrendously. Same for fighter vs heavy fighter, where some have their stats seemingly swapped and usually fighter wins unless it is one of those rare heavy fighters with better than fighter agility stats so obsoletes all the other fighters. Something like heavy fighters being better against capitals while fighters are better against heavy fighters.
User avatar
Hector0x
Posts: 1052
Joined: Mon, 18. Nov 13, 18:03
x3tc

Re: What is Egosoft's vision for X5?

Post by Hector0x »

Imperial Good wrote: Tue, 17. Sep 24, 05:30 Another aspect I would like to see is separating the player from their faction, allowing the player to partake in actions under another faction and having their reputation tied to that faction.
A mercenary game mechanic for the player would definitely add some well needed earlygame action.

Right now there is a lack of “creep” enemies. Sometimes you just want to shoot something. The game discourages this too much because outside of missions these "creep" enemies are rare, often cloaked, too fast, or too tough because they come in groups. The rewards for hunting them are not really worth it and at least for the non SCA pirates you also lose reputation.

Cloaking the player as a merc for another faction would probably be one hell of an exploit. But it’d also be hella fun and also fit into the “strategic analyst, playing all sides” theme that they went for in the plots with Dal Busta.
Just a quick dopamin hit when the Argons pay you per kill.

Return to “X4: Foundations”