Forums » Suggestions

Fix the Ion Storm exit location

Jun 11, 2014 abortretryfail link
Since October 2010, Ion Storm exits have been set to the sector origin (0,0,0) as a hack/workaround

This fixed the problem of NPC convoys and different players being given completely different exit points to the storm, but introduced a number of other problems.

- Storms are now trivially short. Before 10/2010, it was not uncommon to have to fly 10km+ through a storm to reach the exit point. Now they're almost always less than 3000m.

- You always jump in to the storm moving towards the exit. This compounds the above problem and makes it so really heavy ships like loaded 'moths and Tridents can just coast on jump-in velocity right to the exit.

- The exit point is right on top of the conquerable stations. That means you're jumping out in the center of the turret field. Up until a few weeks ago, this was only a problem for unfortunate bystanders, but now they'll kill you while you jump even if you have a key. Even worse, if you were pulled out of jump by the storm, you now have to fly directly into the turret field as your only way out.

- There are usually asteroids on the exit. For some sectors, this causes NPCs to pile and get stuck up on the side of a large roid where they're easily destroyed by bots (or players).

- If the storm ends while you're flying towards the exit, you're basically guaranteed to have to fly another couple kilometers to reach jump distance.

Suggested fix:
Ion storms are generated in advance, right? So why not compute the location of each storm's exit at the same time the server creates the storm schedule?

Possible exit point algorithm:
- Starting from the sector origin, draw a line pointing away in a random direction. (two random angles; pitch and yaw)
- Choose the first point along that line that is 3000m away from any large objects. Just re-use the code that the client uses to choose the jump point for in-system jumps.
Jun 11, 2014 greenwall link
*groans* Storms suck.

-1 to making them any worse than they are now.

The exit point in conq station sectors makes for very interesting gameplay when a battle is taking place in a storm - changing it would make those battles even more boring. And the extra risk when accidently hitting a stormed conq station sector you don't have a key for is a good thing.
Jun 11, 2014 abortretryfail link
Storms don't suck! They make travel less monotonous.

I think we need them in less predictable places like empty sectors and wormholes. Right now you can totally get by without ever needing a Storm Radar Extender just by plotting silly snaking routes that avoid every possible asteroid field. You know, if you just hate storms so darn much...
Jun 11, 2014 yodaofborg link
I agree with ARF 400%, maybe even more. Storms are annoying, but that's what they are for. The *hack* that was put in place makes them more annoying because it's such a short trip, it's now not even worth having them in-game.

Either make them more like they used to be or get rid all together. I used to love chasing traders into a storm, now it's just a little bit stupid, as it slows you down and gives 0 benefit if you know theres one there.
Jun 11, 2014 Death Fluffy link
Storms don't make travel less monotonous, they just piss me off. The absolute worst part of VO and one of the reasons I dread logging on is the f-ing travel. Besides which, myself and probably most everyone else either uses some tool to plot around asteroid sectors or does so automatically in order to avoid them.

There are many many things I do enjoy about the game, but I want to have a life outside of VO as well. Mining is great because you can set it and forget it. But for travel, you have to be in the habit of switching back into VO or you'll end up 80,000 km from the wormhole and have to start over.

Maybe I'm just not committed enough because I am certainly not looking forward to the devs forcing the issue with fogged sectors designed to create bottlenecks.

But since we already have the <assume a lengthy round of profanity> things, +1 to the OP. If they are going to be there, fix the damned things.
Jun 11, 2014 meridian link
+1 Long overdue
Jun 12, 2014 Pizzasgood link
+1

"The absolute worst part of VO and one of the reasons I dread logging on is the f-ing travel."

I have no idea what you're talking about. With any decent ship and a fast-charge, travel is pretty fast. The longest trip you can take is only like ten or fifteen minutes, and most trips are much shorter.
Jun 12, 2014 csgno1 link
+1 to the OP.

Plus I think they should be possible in ANY sector, just that different sectors should have different probability of storms. For example low in wormhole sectors, somewhat more in empty sectors, and somewhat more in roid sectors. Weather or not a station is in the sector should not matter.
Jun 12, 2014 Death Fluffy link
Perhaps my phrasing was a bit more negative there than was waranted. Mention ion storms and I go into an irrational blind rage.

While I still agree with what I said in that it is in fact my emotional repsonse probably due in part to burn out from the trident build(20 minutes Pelatus C12 to Verasi O12 in a lodded XC, I didn't time Latos I8 to Nyrius F6), it really is neither that bad nor off putting. Since most often what I want to do requires substantial travel in slow ships through boring sectors, I generally can't be bothered to log on at this point in time..

Travel could be made more entertaining if they would bring back the npc pirates. Ion storms just suck ass.

Ion storms in wormhole or station sectors would actually be a positive thing.
Jun 12, 2014 greenwall link
Storms don't suck! They make travel less monotonous.

I wholly disagree - storms enhance the monotony of travel. For people at the vet level, they are just a pain in the ass that makes everything take LONGER. And for people at the newb level, they just add confusion and apprehension. Why add more of either of those to either group????

Ion storms just suck ass.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Ion storms in wormhole or station sectors would actually be a positive thing.

Yes I agree, to a certain extent.

My biggest problem with this suggestion is it's framed around some ideal vision of what VO should be, and doesn't take into account the reality VO sits in, which is that VO badly needs more players. Anything added or changed in this game to create a slower, more boring and soporific experience is the worst thing the devs could do.
Jun 13, 2014 Shadowhawke link
I've only been playing VO since January, but have found the storms and the plotting around them one of the necessary hazards of space travel. However, the turrets firing on key holders in conq station storms is long overdue for a fix and also ever since they fixed the storm radars only working while equipped not from cargo the XC should now have built in storm radar as the storm radars have become useless due to the ship that needs them the most not being able to equip them.
Jun 13, 2014 abortretryfail link
No the XC shouldn't have anything more than it has right now. It's supposed to be a helpless slow piece of crap that does only one thing well.

There's lots of better ships. Use them. :P
Jun 13, 2014 incarnate link
The exit point is right on top of the conquerable stations. That means you're jumping out in the center of the turret field. Up until a few weeks ago, this was only a problem for unfortunate bystanders, but now they'll kill you while you jump even if you have a key.

This is being fixed tonight, was already in the pipe.

Maybe I'm just not committed enough because I am certainly not looking forward to the devs forcing the issue with fogged sectors designed to create bottlenecks.

I really don't think the perma-bottlenecks will be worse at all. If anything, it'll make the non-fogged systems much faster to cross (no hopping around), and the slower places a known quantity instead of a "surprise". There'll be other factors too, which are further off-topic for this thread.

Anyway, I'm open to continued feedback on the storm implementations and jump-out location and such.
Jun 13, 2014 Shadowhawke link
There's lots of better ships. Use them. :P

Really ARF? Name 3 ships then that are faster and better for moving a 160cu Trident part that are available to those w/o Tridents. :P
Jun 13, 2014 Pizzasgood link
Stop being such a wimp and get a BHMII.
Jun 18, 2014 Keller link
HM2 actually makes a better long range hauler anyway. It's get better acceleration and has weapons (not to mention a tail turret - that we can now man ourselves). Since the thing can infiturbo, it's not completely helpless.

However, you DO have to complete the Basic Miner II badge. ;)