Frequently Suggested Ideas, Targeting Docking? You don't say...

Some people won't be happy without full motion turning, which would require a 3D engine.

In addition, more facings means that the AI would need to be rebalanced (it would torch the player far too quickly). Think about it this way, ever had a swarm of angry Zulus chasing you in Eridani? Imagine if they didn't miss.

Full motion turning doesn't require a 3D engine. You could use the same image for angles 64 to 72 (assuming 45 images).

Obviously you've never seen the fireAccuracy tag.

Even just adding a couple more turning angles would help solve the problem.

Why would it? The bigger ships would still turn raggedly, and people would just want more. As has been pointed out, many times, the only true solution to the problem is full motion and that would change the game so much that George has chosen not to implement it.

It's your call, if full motion turning were introduced either you get rid of swarms, or dumb them down enough to prevent them from homing in and killing you instantly. The AI is pretty simple when it is in attack mode, it targets the player and then makes attack runs. If a swarm of fast enemy ships like hornets could set a course dead on target with the player, how would you prevent them from killing the player instantly?

Why would it? The bigger ships would still turn raggedly, and people would just want more. As has been pointed out, many times, the only true solution to the problem is full motion and that would change the game so much that George has chosen not to implement it.

It's your call, if full motion turning were introduced either you get rid of swarms, or dumb them down enough to prevent them from homing in and killing you instantly. The AI is pretty simple when it is in attack mode, it targets the player and then makes attack runs. If a swarm of fast enemy ships like hornets could set a course dead on target with the player, how would you prevent them from killing the player instantly?

The same way I do now. Let my shields take it and fend them off.

The extra turning angles will benifit the player a lot more than the AI.

Ah, just what I was describing above! Excellent... excellent.

Stop claiming that the "only" solution is full motion 3d, and you have to choose between that and doing nothing. That's a "false dilemma" logical fallacy and I'm really getting tired of hearing it. Also, you're the only person who seems to believe this.

You're like a broken record tuned to the wrong station. (And, yes, I do like mixing my metaphors!)

What can I say, I tried

George's thoughts on the matter

Comments on the issue even back in 2004

And again in reference to a bad review

When did I say that?

George only commented on increasing the number of pictures for each ship. Also, Transcendence saves don't take up 100mbs any more.

Burz, thanks for finally finding George's thoughts on this:

Owned!

I was thinking the same thing... that you could just add more directions for the player ships only. There are so many possible ways to implement this, but that would possibly be the easiest fix.

The main drawback of that method would be that any NPC ships, if modded into playerships, would still have only 20 turning directions, but that's not a big deal, as they'd be no worse off then they are now.

...but the important thing is that this is fixable, and is not exceptionally hard to fix. Kick ass!

just ude one picture and just rotate that one like in Equnox where there is only one sprite.








create a shortcut to transcedence and in the target box type -debug outside the " thing

I'd like an energy converter upgrade applicable to reactors that extends their usable fuels a couple of levels lower than normal.

The upgrade would apply to the reactor itself, so just like the "+Enhanced" reactors provide extra power, "+Converter" reactors would process additional fuel sources.

The "device picture" before you activated it could be the reactor picture.
The "unknown" caption might read,
"This device is a reactor part of some sort."
The "known" caption might say,
"This converter allows reactors to burn more diverse fuels."

Apologies if this is already in and I simply haven't found it yet.

Heh. Going over this thread I can't help thinking "Told you so Burzmali!"

I gather that you are referring to:

Transcendence version 0.98c:
- Player ships now have 40 rotations.
- rotationCount attribute in ship classes allows for more (or less) than 20 rotations.

***Dances***

That's still my favorite upgrade since I found the game. You gotta hand it to George. He even included backwards compatability in the turning upgrade.

How about Ringer (and perhaps Teraton) missions that could affect the storyline. The ability to change ships during the game(perhaps by buying/bartering/stealing) would be ideal. More ships avaiable at the start of the game would be better.
One idea I have is that you could hire wingmen or borrow ships(like a superfreighter to transport medical supplies to a CSC with an infirmery(i probably spelt that wrong). More bosses and weapons after the Iocyrm command ship. Thx guys I gotta go

My one and only bone of contention with Transcendence is the down arrow key.

One would think that that key would put on the breaks not accelerate the vessel.

I know that the . (period) slows down, stops the vessel (in a moment or a few minutes depending on the craft) so the ability to slow down/stop is there. I just don't get why that ability is linked to the period instead of the arrow down.

I have some ideas they may have been mentioned already though:

More arena battles

customizeable wingmen

storage depots

more of a story line

a Ringer Arena

Ringer and Teraton missions

being able to build your own stations

having crew members

being able to take over stations