test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

More Space, Less Asteroids please :)

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
I think that space should be less cluttered in general.
So many asteroids, i mean, nearly every space map i go into has asteroids!
What's the obsession with them Cryptic, is it because of Atari? :P.

Back to my point here, I would like to see more space, stark black with distant galaxies or what not, beautiful nebulas or even comets! But please, for the love of all that's good, either tone down the asteroids, or allow my tac officer to use quantums against every offending asteroid he sees. Hell, the asteroids i blow up could even drop anomalies, that would make everyone happy!
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I believe the main reason there are asteroids is for orientation purposes and such, since hte map is only 2d, its hard to tell if you are above or below your objective, meaning if you fly high up or way down low looking for anomolies and such, you could easily get lost, without asteroids you'd be searching for a needle in a haystack, especially if tis a "deep space" style space map with no planet's up close to you.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    qft, but without the q.


    basically, yes.. I agree. There was another thread some time back about the same thing. Something about how some of these planets would be vaporized with so many asteroids orbiting them and they wouldnt be able to support life-- for long.. or words to the effect.


    Yep.. space is awful crowded sometimes.

    Oh.. and for references, drop a couple bouyies or something. /shrug
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Yep it is ridiculous sometimes.

    if the large one's(which your objective's/target's are usually near)have to stay then fine, but the stupid amount of small one's in places just looks poor and as mentioned would annihilate any planet nearby.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I think the problem is that without some kind of terrain, space combat becomes really boring.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    They might do well to substitute some dust rings in for asteroids in some maps. But in general I do agree that it's great for orientation purposes. It's easy enough to get flipped around in a battle and disoriented. Having that ring of rocks there really helps.

    What people really need to start doing is considering game mechanics when they come up with complaints. A number of current complaints would be seen in a much more favorable light if people just realized it was to improve gameplay, such as 2D flight orientation instead of true 3D newtonian motion and inertial thrusters.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I am wondering if all these asteroids are by products of the deadly Supernova Spock tried to stop before it destroyed Romulus? I'm just saying.... and yes, I wish there were less of them.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    That could be remedied by allowing a scanner option, choose between anomalies / objectives
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Nobody thinks we should be able to blow them up? Like a certain game from atari's past? :p
    Seriously though, people, start the voting process now, for less clutter and more space.
    /signed
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Tenkari wrote:
    I believe the main reason there are asteroids is for orientation purposes and such, since hte map is only 2d, its hard to tell if you are above or below your objective, meaning if you fly high up or way down low looking for anomolies and such, you could easily get lost, without asteroids you'd be searching for a needle in a haystack, especially if tis a "deep space" style space map with no planet's up close to you.

    I feel constrained to point out that it's because of the asteroids that one can't see anything else.


    :rolleyes:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Out of all of the missions and patrols, I can only recall two that didn't have a ring or a large asteroid field. And how many exploration missions are there that are in deep space and start you at one end of an asteroid field?

    By far the best looking one was devoid of asteroids, had a couple moons, at great looking local star, and had a small nebula in the background. Wish we saw more like that.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    They should replace each asteroid with a directional beacon to reduce the asteroid clutter while still allowing us to see movement/position.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    wrote:
    I am wondering if all these asteroids are by products of the deadly Supernova Spock tried to stop before it destroyed Romulus? I'm just saying.... and yes, I wish there were less of them.
    The asteroids are somewhat dependent on different things. For example, there's a Doomsday Machine in Imago. If you notice many of the systems in the southern half of Sirius seem to have broken planets in them. One would have to wonder if that's because of the Doomsday Machine moving around down there.

    Ideally, though, the asteroids are just there to add some visual to the game, and to add some tactical challenge by moving and shooting around them. Space is quite boring when there's really nothing around you. Heck, if they made areas like planets appear as they really are - earth has over 8,000 man-made items in orbit around it - people would be complaining about how cluttered space really is. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I actually had a explore mission that involved empty space with my objective in the distance. We need space to be crowded so we have landmarks we can navigate by. The only way I could find my objective against the star field was use the scanner to find the direction the mission flowed, anomalies.

    In a previous space game, SWG:JTL, space was relatively empty except for large area of asteroids or nebula. To navigate we were given nav points. While this worked in that game, it might be a bit more difficult. Cryptic's current nav system is a bit hard to see. If you focus on the beacon it disappears, probably because of something in the distance blocking it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I am wondering if all these asteroids are by products of the deadly Supernova Spock tried to stop before it destroyed Romulus? I'm just saying.... and yes, I wish there were less of them.

    Off Topic: Unfortunately supernovas aren't that powerful. They can destroy solar systems but that's about it.

    If our sun was somehow able to nova only our solar system would be destroyed. There's nothing else close enough that the blast would affect outside of some charged particles and radiation.

    As for the debris around planets, perhaps one of the planets moons entered the Roche limit. :) It's entirely feasable, with the exception of open space where there's just a blob of rocks and no nearby planets/moons/stars etc. Something had to have happened to create them, but it's unclear what it was. The pull of gravity should cause the masses to coalesce into a proto-planetoid over time (granted it will be millions of years).

    On Topic: There are times where there's just too much stuff I agree. Maybe if they added something in the Genesis engine to adjust the amount of stuff in a zone randomly (say 100% / 75% / 50% / 25%) would make all the difference in the world. I like the idea of just having dust also similar to the way nebulae are, but with much less stuff. :)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I can't agree more - there are WAY too many astroids. It's comedic. Adding a few rocks for visual interest is fine, but that doesn't mean adding tons more is tons more interesting.

    I remember visiting 1 planet that had nothing in space and it was a real treat.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Kordis wrote: »
    That could be remedied by allowing a scanner option, choose between anomalies / objectives

    Or different color options and no toggles.

    Blue = anomolies like today.

    One you clear all those = green = mission objectives start displaying, as you've identified all the "unknowns".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    Zilag wrote:
    Or different color options and no toggles.

    Blue = anomolies like today.

    One you clear all those = green = mission objectives start displaying, as you've identified all the "unknowns".

    Awesome idea.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    JT26thES wrote:
    Awesome idea.

    Probably easy as pie to implement too, relative to some things.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited February 2010
    I can see the OP's point. But Asteroids have some strategic value (in pve at least) I've blind sided alot of bad guys by slipping in behind asteroids and flanking them. If that cover wasn't there it would have been a much much harder fight head on 5-1.
    I see why they put so many in there, but I will agree that some variation on that theme would be nice. I recall one mission recently where I was using nebula to mask my approach. I like that. Anything that makes the terrain more interactive. I've even noticed that a lot of times it's space garbage orbiting the planet too.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I definitely agree that asteroids are WAY to prevalent in mission maps. If around 1/5 of the maps had them that would be acceptable, but it's closer to 2/3 now. However, that wasn't my main problem with the asteroids. They could be used for interesting strategic purposes, ducking in and out of an asteroid field to avoid enemy fire, hiding behind larger asteroids, and I one time tried to use a doughnut shaped asteroid to split up a squadron of Klingon birds of prey. However, asteroids seem to do diddly against enemy fire. I couldn't lock on to them, but they could fire straight through any asteroid I hid behind. I'm hoping that this particular problem has been fixed, I have only played the beta and I'm installing the full game now, but I somehow doubt it.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    JT26thES wrote:
    Off Topic: Unfortunately supernovas aren't that powerful. They can destroy solar systems but that's about it.

    If our sun was somehow able to nova only our solar system would be destroyed. There's nothing else close enough that the blast would affect outside of some charged particles and radiation.

    Someone didnt read Star Trek Countdown..
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    The asteroid-intensive maps are the only ones that give me any performance issues with anti-aliasing. I'd rather leave anti-aliasing on and have a less cluttered map. Also, I never understood what the point of having us drop out of warp on one end of an asteroid field when we have to travel over / through the asteroid field to get to our destination. Wouldn't my navigator be competent enough to park us alongside of the mission point and avoid the field altogether? :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Did someone mention ASTEROIDS? <breaks out a roll of quarters> ;)

    The asteroids / space objects / clutter is there to give you a better sense of movement (and direction) when thrusting around a system in search of targets to scan or shoot.

    I've done a few missions where there was not a lot of clutter and without having the "exhausts" from the impulse engines / warp nacelles, I wouldn't have been able to tell if my ship was even moving at all. That could make for a very disturbing experience for a "casual gamer".
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Almost every planet is in or near a nebula and surrounded by asteroids. Many players complained about that since closed beta : it's pretty at first but since there is nothing else, you don't even notice it anyway. I wouldn't mind a little diversity.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    I think that space should be less cluttered in general.
    So many asteroids, i mean, nearly every space map i go into has asteroids!
    What's the obsession with them Cryptic, is it because of Atari? :P.

    Back to my point here, I would like to see more space, stark black with distant galaxies or what not, beautiful nebulas or even comets! But please, for the love of all that's good, either tone down the asteroids, or allow my tac officer to use quantums against every offending asteroid he sees. Hell, the asteroids i blow up could even drop anomalies, that would make everyone happy!

    Without some sort of space debris it is very difficult to gauge how fast you are going. My guess is that to foster a feeling of movement in space these asteroids and other debris are used widely. If space really was totally empty you might not be able to tell you are moving at all except for the streamers left behind by your engines.

    The asteroids also often work as a trail of breadcrumbs leading you in the proper direction. This was very useful before they added the current function of the Scan ability.


    :cool:
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    The astroids are fine, and it makes things interesting, and if they did get rid of most of the astroids you would then say its too open. So basicly it comes down to they get rid of them, then theres not enough stuff around and it feels to bland. If you stay with them you say it clutters things up too much lol. So the right thing to do is just leave the issue alone. Just my thoughts.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Sworoth wrote: »
    if they did get rid of most of the astroids

    Ask for a few systems without asteroids and instantly you have a genius who read that you want to get rid of "most" of the asteroids.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Personally, I want to get rid of most of them. Here and there is no big deal , but to see them every where I go, is just silly in my opinion.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Would have been cool if cryptic had added an option to turn them down (A more or less deal) or off, Would have even helped improve performance for a lot of people too.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited March 2010
    Do what you want to the asteroids, but leave my rings alone! I like flying through them and seeing my space dust trail behind me. :D
This discussion has been closed.